Further response to a video

[AlexBP]

Evidence is all around you. Hell, Bush Sr. himself said that atheists shouldn't be considered citizens of the United States of America, since, apparently, the USA is a theocracy

George Bush never said any such thing.  You've been suckered by a well-known fake once again.

[ZenZen]

He didn't? Well I guess this is fake, then?

George H. W. Bush
No, I don't know that atheists should be regarded as citizens, nor should they be regarded as patriotic. This is one nation under God.… I support the separation of church and state. I'm just not very high on atheists.

[AlexBP]

He didn't? Well I guess this is fake, then?

Yes, it's fake.  As the creator of the well-known reference page snopes.com has documented, the quote was first "reported" by Robert Sherman in American Atheist magazine over a year after the date when Bush was supposed to have said it, Sherman can provide not explanation of why he waited so long to "report" it, and none of the dozens of other people at the press conference in question remember Bush saying that or anything like it.  Even the Wikiquote page you linked to puts it as "attributed" rather than "sourced", meaning no good verification of it exists.  Further, since so many atheists define their identity through phony claims of victimization, it makes perfect sense that someone trying to harm him would try to take advantage of that bias by making up such a quote right before the election.

[ZenZen]

He didn't? Well I guess this is fake, then?

Yes, it's fake.  As the creator of the well-known reference page snopes.com has documented, the quote was first "reported" by Robert Sherman in American Atheist magazine over a year after the date when Bush was supposed to have said it, Sherman can provide not explanation of why he waited so long to "report" it, and none of the dozens of other people at the press conference in question remember Bush saying that or anything like it.  Even the Wikiquote page you linked to puts it as "attributed" rather than "sourced", meaning no good verification of it exists.  Further, since so many atheists define their identity through phony claims of victimization, it makes perfect sense that someone trying to harm him would try to take advantage of that bias by making up such a quote right before the election.

I'm off to bed now, I'll address this tomorrow if I have the time...

[ParkingPlaces]

I have a question.  What point do you think you are making by saying "atheist dictators killed all these people"? Even if you are right[1], what does that matter?  Are you saying all atheists are evil because of it?   Are you saying atheists are amoral?  Spit the marbles out of your mouth and say what you mean, boy.

1.	and I do not think you are

Well I never said "atheist dictators killed all these people" or anything about that until others dragged the issue in.  Recall in the OP I said that I wanted to discuss a particular video.  Others tried to throw the discussion off with claims about, for instance, the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina, saying that it was an example of violence by Christians, at which point I had to respond that the war was started by an atheist dictator intent on violently persecuting Christians and Muslims.  (At which somebody tried to mitigate it with a claim that the Catholics collaborated with the Nazis during WWII, so I had to debunk that as well.

And then I debunked you debunking, or at least made it clear that a) it isn't clear what they participation of the catholics was in WWII and b) the people with the guns thought it was true, and they were killing catholics indiscriminately, and others were killing muslims indiscriminately, and orthodox indisciminately. And it wasn't atheists killing the religious as you stated, but a whole bunch of religious types (mostly under the guise of various cultural groups, but each clearly identified with certain religions) that were killing each other. Whether you believe the catholics innocent or I believe that some people in WWII were guilty of teaming up with the nazis is no importance. People with guns thought it true, and they were pulling the trigger. Other people with other guns though the muslims needed to die, and they pulled triggers. The atheism part was minor. Most of Yugoslavia considered itself religious prior to the breakup, and it was old wounds and new desires that got people killed, not the rantings of someone who was atheist telling everybody to be atheist and kill believers. That wasn't the case at all.

But now, since we both agree that this thread should not be about historical issues, let's get back to what it should be about. 

In your OP you took the term "you" so literally that it meant the words in that video couldn't possibly apply to anyone else. And that was the biggest problem. The fact that you live in an open-minded lala land doesn't mean everybody does. And in fact many don't.

Is being an atheist actually as dangerous as being a gay in some areas? Probably not. I've never heard of "atheist bashing". But the problem is this. Any injustice in a country that bills itself as "the land of the free" is one injustice too many. And if there are people in this country suffering because they are atheists, it needs to be addressed just as suffering because of being a gay or a muslim or a black needs to be addressed. That you personally don't get shot too often doesn't mean that nobody does. That you personally don't get ostracized and disowned and fired and hassled doesn't mean that nobody does.

Was the video perhaps worded wrong? Maybe. If everybody thought it was made just for them and nobody else would ever see it and the word "you" was used with a very specific meaning, it could be interpreted that way. If the site was called WhyCantAlexBPBeAnAtheist then you would have every right to be upset that it didn't apply only to you. That's not what it is called.

So my suggestion. Don't take the generic so personal. And don't harass atheists in the process of trying to prove to them they are aren't harassed. It hurts you case.

[Agamemnon]

I have a question.  What point do you think you are making by saying "atheist dictators killed all these people"? Even if you are right[1], what does that matter?  Are you saying all atheists are evil because of it?   Are you saying atheists are amoral?  Spit the marbles out of your mouth and say what you mean, boy.

1.	and I do not think you are

Well I never said "atheist dictators killed all these people" or anything about that until others dragged the issue in.

...At which point you DID say that "atheist dictators killed all these people," is that what you mean?

If you didn't say it outright, did you imply it? Why even talk about it if not?

[ParkingPlaces]

He didn't? Well I guess this is fake, then?

Yes, it's fake.  As the creator of the well-known reference page snopes.com has documented, the quote was first "reported" by Robert Sherman in American Atheist magazine over a year after the date when Bush was supposed to have said it, Sherman can provide not explanation of why he waited so long to "report" it, and none of the dozens of other people at the press conference in question remember Bush saying that or anything like it.  Even the Wikiquote page you linked to puts it as "attributed" rather than "sourced", meaning no good verification of it exists.  Further, since so many atheists define their identity through phony claims of victimization, it makes perfect sense that someone trying to harm him would try to take advantage of that bias by making up such a quote right before the election.

Apparently you've been told by someone that snopes is always right. Don't know if they are or not. Robert Sherman posted this on his site in 2006 in an effort to prove that it occurred.

http://www.robsherman.com/advocacy/060401a.htm

He says there are documents in the Bush presidential library that back up his story.

Snopes doesn't even the story right. At first contributors claim it was from August of 1988, and then go on to say reference is made to that quote prior to that. Sherman's date has always been 1987. Not did he address or write about "President Bush" but rather then about the Vice President, which, unless Snopes has info to the contrary, he was.

Besides that, I don't see Snopes categorically stating that it is false. Unless you have a link to provide that goes to some other page than the one I found.

[Asmoday]

Well I never said "atheist dictators killed all these people" or anything about that until others dragged the issue in.

...At which point you DID say that "atheist dictators killed all these people," is that what you mean?

If you didn't say it outright, did you imply it? Why even talk about it if not?

Except that AlexBP's claim "I never said "atheist dictators killed all these people" or anything about that until others dragged the issue in" is a lie.

I think Alex forgets that people can simply go back to the beginning of the thread and actually read older posts. He wasn't dragged into anything that would somehow pressure him to make such a statement. That was all his own doing.
So let's just have a look at the older posts.

In my first reply to his OP I said at one point:

You should have tried that during the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina (a war that was all about religious beliefs).

(no further remark regarding this conflict was made)

In direct reply to this AlexBP wrote:

The war in Bosnia-Herzegovina was started by an atheist who proudly massacred tens of thousands of Christians and Muslims.  As you doubtlessly know, Josip Broz Tito, who took power in Yugoslavia after WWII was an atheist.  Like most atheist dictators, his reign was bloody, as he killed an estimated 250,000 people.  He had numerous Catholic clergy arrested or killed and he purged his government of Christians.  Tito died in 1980.  His successor, Slobodan Milosevic, largely continued his violent policies, but various regions of Yugoslavia had had enough and tried to break away from Serbia in 1991.  Milosevic, not happy about that, incited Serb groups to start the war.  His tactics throughout were famously brutal and he had a particular focus on cruelty to the Catholic clergy, as for instance when he ordered his troops to rape nuns before killing them.  Anyone doubting the facts can read about his trial for war crimes and genocide at the Hague.

So yes, the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina was about religious differences, specifically the differences between an atheist madman who ruled by mass murder and Christians who wanted freedom of religious practice.

Emphasis added.

I'd like to add that he was reminded by ParkingPlaces and myself that he completely ignored that the forces of the "atheist madmen" were Christians themselves (just not his favored brand of Christianity) and that the things that happened were by no means the result of atheistic persecution of Christians since all the religious factions had their very own grudges to settle with each other.
Yet he does not react to that. He even goes on to claim he "debunked" the claim of collaboration of the Catholic church with the Nazi and Ustasa regime when even devout Catholic historians after studying the archives of the Vatican are horrified of the extent of the involvement of the Catholic church and clergy in these gruesome happenings.

[jetson]

Does the video actually say "might" as the OP transcribes in the first four assertions?  If so, then WTF are we arguing about?

[12 Monkeys]

59million.....you left about a million

[Agamemnon]

Except that AlexBP's claim "I never said "atheist dictators killed all these people" or anything about that until others dragged the issue in" is a lie.

Yeah, that's what I thought.

I'd like to add that he was reminded by ParkingPlaces and myself that he completely ignored that the forces of the "atheist madmen" were Christians themselves (just not his favored brand of Christianity)...

Yeah, what about that? All the forces of these brutal atheist dictators are all atheists, or what? I find that very difficult to swallow. What does it say about all these Christians and Muslims that they can be so easily conned into committing horrific, unspeakable acts against one another and against people of other faiths?

I mean, considering that most of humanity claims some sort of religion means that it is more likely that these people were religious, wouldn't you agree, AlexBP? It would also mean that the people actually pulling the triggers and dumping in the Zyklon B were predominantly religious people.

[ZenZen]

He didn't? Well I guess this is fake, then?

Yes, it's fake.  As the creator of the well-known reference page snopes.com has documented, the quote was first "reported" by Robert Sherman in American Atheist magazine over a year after the date when Bush was supposed to have said it, Sherman can provide not explanation of why he waited so long to "report" it, and none of the dozens of other people at the press conference in question remember Bush saying that or anything like it.  Even the Wikiquote page you linked to puts it as "attributed" rather than "sourced", meaning no good verification of it exists.  Further, since so many atheists define their identity through phony claims of victimization, it makes perfect sense that someone trying to harm him would try to take advantage of that bias by making up such a quote right before the election.

Yes, well ParkingPlaces found it before me (Well done! ). Wikiquote sources to the website ParkingPlaces indicates.

Also "attributed" seems quite reliable.

Snopes - never heard of it. Did a little research. It's not run by experts as I thought, but by a couple; Barbara and David Mikkelson. So don't know how that can make it more believeable... They search the net themselves for the answers....

[pingnak]

Odd.  I can't find an actual ARTICLE on snopes.com about that.  Just opinions in forum posts.

There is a confirmed one for an official Jesus Day for Texas by HW's war-mongering, torture-loving, profligate son.
http://snopes.com/religion/jesusday.asp

[Agamemnon]

Snopes - never heard of it. Did a little research. It's not run by experts as I thought, but by a couple; Barbara and David Mikkelson. So don't know how that can make it more believeable... They search the net themselves for the answers....

Snopes is pretty reliable. In this particular case there is no way to conclude if Bush actually said that. I think it sounds plausible, but I don't reference it because it isn't reliable.

Here's an idea:

AlexBP, if you think that all this anti-atheist stuff is just a myth we have created, I challenge you to put that hypothesis to the ultimate test: You pretend to be an atheist for two weeks.

For two weeks' time, you act as if you are a vocal atheist to everyone you know. Tell your friends, your co-workers, your boss, your parents, grandparents, confess your atheism to your church leaders... Everyone that is important to you in your life. If any of them try to debate your views, debate back as best you can. Defend your viewpoint.

Be bold and fearless, because you know for a fact that no one is going to treat you any differently, right?

You don't actually have to stop believing for this expereiment--you are only putting your hypothesis to the test. After two weeks you can tell everyone it was just a phase and things will be back to normal... Maybe... Or then again, you might have lost a bunch of friends, maybe your job... But it all depends on where you live and the kind of people in your life.

Are you willing to put your money where your mouth is?

[ZenZen]

Snopes is pretty reliable. In this particular case there is no way to conclude if Bush actually said that. I think it sounds plausible, but I don't reference it because it isn't reliable.

Okay. Thanks. Now I know. 

Here's an idea:

AlexBP, if you think that all this anti-atheist stuff is just a myth we have created, I challenge you to put that hypothesis to the ultimate test: You pretend to be an atheist for two weeks.

For two weeks' time, you act as if you are a vocal atheist to everyone you know. Tell your friends, your co-workers, your boss, your parents, grandparents, confess your atheism to your church leaders... Everyone that is important to you in your life. If any of them try to debate your views, debate back as best you can. Defend your viewpoint.

Be bold and fearless, because you know for a fact that no one is going to treat you any differently, right?

You don't actually have to stop believing for this expereiment--you are only putting your hypothesis to the test. After two weeks you can tell everyone it was just a phase and things will be back to normal... Maybe... Or then again, you might have lost a bunch of friends, maybe your job... But it all depends on where you live and the kind of people in your life.

Are you willing to put your money where your mouth is?

Sounds like a fair challenge. Then we will all get the answers. I hope AlexBP answers...

[ParkingPlaces]

Excellent idea, Agamemnon. Though I assume he's gone. And I assume he again thinks he won the argument. And he's bragging to all his friends about how he mopped the floor with us. Ego distortion was strong in that one.

Oh well. Such is life. Someone else equally as sure of him or herself will show up soon. Be patient my friends...

[screwtape]

Here's an idea:
...
Are you willing to put your money where your mouth is?

Flipping brilliant.  +1

[velkyn]

In my previous thread, nobody was able to defend what the video said, so the responses mostly attacked me or changed the subject.  But I'm here to discuss this particular portion of this particular video, so please post if you have any defense of the video to make.  If no one can defend it, I guess I'll assume that the video maker resorted to these absurd lies because he knows that the truth always works against atheism and for Christianity.

I do love when Christians claim victory where none was won.  How amusing to see even more lies trail from their mouths.  Hilarious. 

and if this is the thread that Alex has declared victory in, http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,15728.174.html  Well, no victory here at all, just another little Christian who runs away from questions for a few months and then comes back telling the same lies as usual. Alex, did you pray for God to make us forget you and your actions or to make you a better warrior for Christ?  Seems that he's failed pathetically in both.

[One Above All]

So Alex is gone... I came here to reply to him/her but now I see it would be a waste of my time

[Dante]

So Alex is gone... I came here to reply to him/her but now I see it would be a waste of my time

A waste of your time even if he were still here.

[One Above All]

So Alex is gone... I came here to reply to him/her but now I see it would be a waste of my time

A waste of your time even if he were still here.

Even so, required by the rules if he was still here

[ZenZen]

He might read this thread, without logging in....?

[AlexBP]

Snopes is pretty reliable. In this particular case there is no way to conclude if Bush actually said that. I think it sounds plausible, but I don't reference it because it isn't reliable.

I think I can agree with that.  It all comes down to whether we place more trust in the word of Sherman alone, or in everyone else at that press conference together.  If we want examples of politicians denying rights to people on religious gorunds, how about Democrat Martha Coakley, who when asked whether Catholic doctors and nurses who don't want to perform abortions should be allowed to choose not to perform abortions responded: "You can have religious freedom but you probably shouldn’t work in the emergency room."  Unlike the Bush quote, this is one is certainly real and there's a video:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/weblogs/watercooler/2010/jan/14/martha-coakley-devout-catholics-probably-shouldnt-/

AlexBP, if you think that all this anti-atheist stuff is just a myth we have created, I challenge you to put that hypothesis to the ultimate test: You pretend to be an atheist for two weeks.

Okay, I take your challenge.  As a matter of fact, I've already taken your challenge for a lot longer than two weeks.  As I mentioned in this thread and others I was raised by atheist parents and was an atheist until age 23.  In all that time I was (a) not arrested (b) not beaten (c) did not lose my job (d) was not kicked out of boy scouts (e) not expelled from my family.

[Agamemnon]

AlexBP, if you think that all this anti-atheist stuff is just a myth we have created, I challenge you to put that hypothesis to the ultimate test: You pretend to be an atheist for two weeks.

Okay, I take your challenge.  As a matter of fact, I've already taken your challenge for a lot longer than two weeks.  As I mentioned in this thread and others I was raised by atheist parents and was an atheist until age 23.  In all that time I was (a) not arrested (b) not beaten (c) did not lose my job (d) was not kicked out of boy scouts (e) not expelled from my family.

Sorry, but if you haven't experienced any anti-atheist bigotry or discrimination then you didn't take the challenge.

[velkyn]

Okay, I take your challenge.  As a matter of fact, I've already taken your challenge for a lot longer than two weeks.  As I mentioned in this thread and others I was raised by atheist parents and was an atheist until age 23.  In all that time I was (a) not arrested (b) not beaten (c) did not lose my job (d) was not kicked out of boy scouts (e) not expelled from my family.

and because you were lucky, we should believe no one has any problems? Sorry, it doesn't work that way. 

as for catholics who want to work in ERs, they have a choice.  More than they would allow someone who disagreed with them.  Would you accept a JW who refused to give people blood transfusions in the position of an ER doctor?  I feel the same about having a doctor who refused to perform an abortion in an ER where the mothers life depends on it.   No reason to force one's religion on another in either case.  None at all.   Your rights end where mine begin.

[Alzael]

Alex, I couldn't help but notice that you never responded to the fact that it was pointed out earlier that you directly lied in the thread. In fact it was pointed out twice on two different issues.

Yes, yes, I know what we're all thinking. "Oooh, a Christian lied and when called on it pretended that nothing happened. What a bold defiance of established trends." But let's give him the benefit of the doubt. Maybe he just didn't notice that part. Maybe he's not actually completely dishonest. Though granted his record says otherwise.

So Alex, anything to say for yourself? I mean something honest, as opposed to what you usually roll with.

[Agamemnon]

To take the challenge properly, you will have experienced one or more of the following:

http://atheism.about.com/od/attacksonatheism/p/AtheistBigotry.htm

Discrimination Against Atheists in America:

Bigotry against atheists is not limited to theory and harsh language — anti-atheist bigotry can also lead to anti-atheist discrimination. After all, if bigots are convinced that atheists are immoral, untrustworthy, and perhaps even evil on some level, then it’s only to be expected that they will treat atheists unequally and as inferiors. Unfortunately, the reasons behind anti-atheist discrimination are no better than discrimination against Jews and racial minorities in the past.

Atheists are Discriminated Against in Politics:

Perhaps the most obvious example of how atheists are discriminated against is in politics: people are less likely to vote for atheists than they are for any other minority — women, blacks, Jews, Muslims, or even gays. No atheist is likely to be elected on any level anywhere in America and no politicians are likely to specifically appeal to atheists’ votes by defending their interests. Some even openly express bigotry against atheists, for example President George H.W. Bush.

Atheists are Discriminated Against in Child Custody Cases:

Some may find it surprising, but atheists are routinely discriminated against by judges deciding child custody cases. There is a common assumption that religion — any religion — is necessary for properly raising children and that atheists are incapable of seeing to the religious, moral, and social needs of their own kids. Parents who regularly attend church are given great preference over parents who don’t believe in gods.

Atheists are Discriminated Against in the Boy Scouts:

It is well known that the Boy Scouts of America excludes atheists both as members and as leaders. Not so well known is why: the Boy Scouts of America asserts that atheists are incapable of being sufficiently moral or patriotic to deserve to be involved with scouting. As a private organization this is their right, however bigoted it is; so long as they receive public assistance and funding, however, their discrimination should be as illegal as it is unethical.

This is how I know you didn't take the challenge-- if you had you would have been excluded from the Boy Scouts, since it is their policy and it is enforced. The only way to get around that policy would be for you to have lied about your atheism.

Continuing:

Atheists are Discriminated Against in the Workplace:

Religious discrimination in the workplace is illegal, but this doesn’t keep those who are prejudiced against atheists from acting. Atheists can be the targets of discrimination like any other minority unless others are unaware of a person’s atheism — one reason why many atheists keep their true beliefs a secret. Very rarely does one find people willing to admit to discrimination, but it does happen because some really don’t believe that bigotry and discrimination against atheists is wrong.

Atheists are Discriminated Against in Schools:

Discrimination against atheists in school isn’t too uncommon, unfortunately, and as a consequence atheists can feel very much alone. Just as some schools have tried to hinder the creation of groups for gay students, some have tried to hinder the creation of groups for atheists, agnostics, and freethinkers. Such discrimination is illegal, but that doesn’t stop school administrators who don’t want to be seen as supporting godless atheists.

Atheists are Discriminated Against in the Media:

When was the last time you saw an open atheist in the media — whether news media, movies, or television programs? It’s very rare, and often when we do see atheists they’re rarely portrayed as normal, well-adjusted people. Gay characters and individuals are far more visible than atheists, which is yet another example of how even gays are less despised in America than atheists.
Atheists are Discriminated Against in Families:

It’s a sad but unfortunate fact that many atheists have to keep their atheism hidden from their own families. Sometimes, not even spouses are made aware that one is an atheist — they go to church if they have to and participate in religious holidays but without really believing and without the ability to be truly honest. They feel this way because some families will simply disown and turn away from someone merely for being an atheist. Bigotry shouldn’t twist families apart like that.
Atheists are Discriminated Against in History:

Perhaps the most unusual place we find discrimination against atheists is in history — or the presentation of history, to be more accurate. There have been a number of known or suspected atheist philosophers, scientists, and political leaders throughout history as well as quite a few freethinkers who remained theists but rejected orthodox religious beliefs. How often, though, do we hear about these things? This is not unlike how the homosexuality of many famous figures is suppressed.

Atheists’ Fear in a Christian Nation:

A common theme throughout all these examples of how atheists can be discriminated against is the fear atheists can experience at the prospect of others finding out about them. The consequence of Christians’ anti-atheist bigotry can be quite severe, so of course atheists will do all they can to avoid revealing the truth. This, of course, only serves to underscore the courage of those willing to come out of the closet to stand up for what’s right and against illegal behavior.
 
Christian Right bigots who seem to revel in promoting anti-atheist prejudice commonly attack these same atheists verbally, accusing them of being anti-American and threatening to destroy the liberties which define America. Why? Because they dare to challenge what they see as improper government promotion of religion. These verbal attacks all too frequently encourage actual physical attacks: atheists who challenge issues such as school prayers or teaching creationism have had to contend with assaults, threats, and vandalism. They may be shunned by their community where neighbors will turn away and merchants will refuse to serve them.

Coming out as an atheist in any manner, but especially in a very public manner, is dangerous and made even more dangerous by Christians in America. They insist that America is a “Christian Nation,” which often appears to mean that atheists aren’t welcome and shouldn’t make waves by demanding equality. For many atheists, the idea of America as a “Christian Nation” is one that instills fear at the prospect of what Christians might do when they have even more power to discriminate than they currently do.

I would be surprised if there were any atheist on this forum who was fully open about their atheism that didn't experience one or more of the items above.

How does it feel to be a bigot, AlexBP?

[Alzael]

I would be surprised if there were any atheist on this forum who was fully open about their atheism that didn't experience one or more of the items above.

How does it feel to be a bigot, AlexBP?

In the interests of fairness, I have to point out that I fall into that category. Of course I probably don't count since I'm not American.

Besides, considering the record so far, I wouldn't count on Alex being entirely honest with that statement of his, Agamemnon. 

[Asmoday]

His schtick is getting old. "The video said "you" and that can only mean me personally and in no way could have possibly have been meant in a general way. So since XYZ did not happen to me personally, it never happens at all! The video is full of lies!"
In the same way he answers to the challenge. "I came out to my atheist parents that I was an atheist. They did not cut off their ties to me. It's all lies folks. People who come out to their parents about their atheism don't get shunned or thrown out. You make it all up, people!"

It should also be noted that given how little he cares about telling the truth (as he demonstrated in this very thread) and given his own words and actions in this thread that testimonials on the internet can be dismissed as fake and completely made up right away, I think it is safe to say that dear AlexBP is lying through his teeth when he says that a) he ever took the challenge in any way, b) he ever was actually an atheist (let alone an atheist for 23 years) and c) that his parents are atheists.
(Before I read him gloating how accusing him of lying is obviously a sign that he's "won" somehow: No, not at all. I'm merely applying your own methods and arguments on you.)