Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I'm Really Tired Of People Comparing Faith In God To Santa Claus

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:29 PM
Original message
I'm Really Tired Of People Comparing Faith In God To Santa Claus
That's really insulting to me and I imagine to people of faith.

I guess I should find it funny and go along with it?


No, I don't think I will.

I think that offending fellow DU'ers (who don't strive to offend those who are atheist or agnostic) is something that ought to be rethought.

So you came to your conclusions, I have come to mine.

My experiences are different.

I am a liberal. I vote as a Democrat. (Except in a primary once when I wanted Tim Hutchinson to get beat by a guy that had 16 kids who would be even easier to beat. Mark Pryor won anyhow despite the fact that he faced Tim Hutchinson)

I like DU. I just hate these comments that get thrown in, for what purpose? To attack the "fundies"? I'm not a fundie. I'm not a creationist. I believe in evolution. I believe in God. I don't feel homosexuality is a sin. I don't oppose two people who love each other from marrying. I don't believe that all who don't believe in Jesus are going to hell or anything like that. Heck, I'm not even sure I believe that the Jesus story is anything but an embellishment on the facts of the person of Jesus. (I know there will be someone who will say he didn't exist)

Just don't compare my faith to something like Santa Claus, or that I'm somehow stupid. I came to my faith honestly. I found it at the bottom of a short lived career of drinking too much. From there it has waxed and waned, and found its way to its current form.

Peace DU'ers
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:32 PM
Response to Original message
1. I believe God is a fairy tale.
In my opinion, God and Jesus and the Virgin Mary are the equivalent of Santa Claus, Theseus and the Minotaur, Sasquatch, and so on.

Now, if you want to believe in God, that's perfectly fine with me. I can respect your beliefs.

So respect my beliefs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lost-in-FL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Hum...
:popcorn: :yoiks:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr.Phool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #4
16. Wanna share some of that pocorn?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Ditto
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. Hey! Don't be dissin Sasquatch!
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:36 PM
Response to Reply #8
14. Ah...
but I've got much respect for people who believe in sasquatch.

The PNW just wouldn't be the same without them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Union Thug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:39 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. The Cryptozoology folks would argue that there is more proof
of Sasquatch than there is god.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. Absolutely.
I don't see people finding God's footprints out in the woods.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Champion Jack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. But, we do know for a fact that
the pope shits in the woods.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JerseygirlCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:46 PM
Response to Reply #1
28. Was there anything in the OP disrespectful of your beliefs? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #28
30. Disrespectful?
The OP mentioned being tired of my beliefs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JerseygirlCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #30
37. So your belief system consists of comparing God to Santa?
That's what the OP said he/she was tired of. I saw nothing disparaging toward atheism.

Perhaps I missed something, and you'll be kind enough to point it out to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #37
45. I'm an atheist.
Like I stated originally, I believe that God is a fairy tale. The OP mentioned that he or she finds that tiring and insulting.

I don't go around saying that people who believe in god are tiring and insulting. In fact, I'd think that would be disparaging.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:20 PM
Response to Reply #45
135. No, I Said That People Who Say That Belief In God
is like believing in Santa Claus is insulting

my Mother said "if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all"

I get tired of reading about how I'm apparently a silly person because I believe in God.

I DON'T insult those who are atheists or agnostics.

Re-read the original post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donald Ian Rankin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-23-06 06:53 AM
Response to Reply #45
408. I think you need to go and look up the definition of "fairy tale".

Cocteau and Grimm are fairy tales. Homer and Virgil aren't. The Mabinogian is a collection of fairy tales. The Bible and the Koran aren't.

Myths, yes, arguably, if you want to, although the only reason to choose that word in preference to another is to deliberately cause offence.

But "fairy tales" is simpy wrong. A fairy tale is not simply "any story concerning the supernatural".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:06 PM
Response to Reply #37
49. Mine is... it's all myth
There is nothing you can do to prove the existence of either, so, yes. They are in the same group as far as I can see.

Christianity, if real, has been so bastardized by man that what we have now is nowhere near real.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 05:02 AM
Response to Reply #37
246. More of an announcement atheists should shut up. For the record,
the Santa/God comparison is a common way of explaining to people why we do not believe, based only on two similarities: 1) Neither have any evidence for them in the slightest. 2) Both are something that others take on faith as completely true. Given, the former is believed only by children, but it is not declaring their beleifs invalid, merely pointing out that they occupy a null hypothesis.

It means "Christians are stupid" about as much as it means "With all the hunger in the world, how do you explain concrete"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unpossibles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #246
418. you forgot #3
both require you to be good to get your reward.

I look at it this way - I understand how it can be insulting, but if your belief is strong then such a 'silly' comparison should not bother you. Frankly I am bothered when people claim atheism is a religion, but only because I belief the comparison is less valid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #1
41. Ok, what are your beliefs?
So far, you have stated your opinion on the belief system of Christianity, which is fine, but doesn't say anything about whether you believe in anything at all (and I realize some atheists here have objected to even using the term "belief" to describe their system of thought), and if so, what it is. Example: I believe that science is a method of finding out about the world and the universe around us. I believe that scientific knowledge is ever expanding as we learn more and more. I believe there are still some laws of science that have not been fully explored, and that we may yet find out that even the Theory of Relativity is not as iron-clad in its limits as Einstein thought. Now personally, my concept of God is included in this belief system (God is Everything); your belief system might include believing in science but not God, which is ok.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:11 PM
Response to Reply #41
54. I'm an atheist.
So yes, I believe that science is a method of finding out about the world. In the same way that I believe that history is a method of finding out about the past, and woodshop is a method of making neat things out of wood.

Not sure what that has to do with religion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #54
77. Thank you!
My point is that you believe science is a method of finding out about the world. Well, my God concept is that science also tells us about God, Which is every molecule, every subatomic particle, every space between these particles, every scientific law that has been discovered, every law yet to be discovered, and stuff that is now beyond even the wildest imagination. My God concept is of an evolving Being that continues to expand so as to know and understand Itself. We are all included in this Only Being, whose attributes are unknowable in their totality.

I'm just showing you that some God concepts go along with science; to a mystic, there is no seperation between God and the self, just as there is no seperation, on a subatomic level, between two objects.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 01:42 AM
Response to Reply #77
213. Pretty close to my beliefs on the subject, actually...
Nice.

That said, I think revealed religion is, at best, questionable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Meshuga Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 05:18 PM
Response to Reply #54
343. Religion is...
Where you find your values. You can use the story in Genesis as a story of human dignity, showing that we humans came from the same root (not literally) but showing that we are all equals.

Now, if we use social Darwinism, for example, to teach values, then we are pretty much screwed because we are going to be part of a pretty ruthless society.

But Darwinism is a great theory to show how we humans actually came about.

To me, science and religion don't mix!

Science teaches how things work and how they came about. Religion teaches why we should conduct our lives in certain ways and that we should treat one another with respect and dignity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:11 PM
Response to Reply #1
53. You're not respecting his beliefs, you're mocking them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #53
57. Not at all.
I don't believe that Santa Claus is real. But I don't mock people who believe in Santa Claus. In fact, there are several people who believe in Santa Claus and I love them very much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #57
76. You're comparing them to the children you know who
believe in Santa Claus. That's mocking them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #76
84. I'm also comparing them to people who believe in sasquatch.
and they're adults.

No mocking at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #84
95. Yeah, right.
Edited on Wed May-17-06 08:36 PM by pnwmom
No sarcasm at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #95
99. Now who's mocking?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:41 PM
Response to Reply #99
104. No, I was merely reflecting back to you the tone of
your comments.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:42 PM
Response to Reply #104
106. What tone?
I was merely expressing my beliefs. No sarcasm, no mocking.

You know, if a person wants their beliefs to be respected, the least they could do is respect others.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-23-06 09:51 PM
Response to Reply #106
415. The Tone?
B flat I believe?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 07:37 AM
Response to Reply #84
263. Believers have a double standard.
Anything less than total admiration for thier beliefs is bad. Really bad.

Telling Athiests that we're wrong, out of line, disrespectful or insulting even for imaginary reasons is perfectly okay. Believers are very big on imaginary reasons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-20-06 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #263
397. I Don't Ask For Admiration, Just Don't Mock My Beliefs
I don't admire atheism

personally I don't believe in atheism
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dorian Gray Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-21-06 12:21 AM
Response to Reply #57
399. I hope not...
because then you'd be mocking children.

And saying that, I think that's what people object to. The comparison to a simplistic, childlike "faith" in something that is patently false. I know that's how atheists view faith in a higher being, but there is a nice way to discuss that belief and a rude way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proud_Democratt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #53
151. You love flame-type topics....otherwise you wouldn't be here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:17 PM
Response to Reply #1
133. How Can You Say I Don't Respect Your Beliefs?
You feel the need to tell me you think believing in God is like a fairy tale.

I think that I've said nothing of the sort about you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 07:38 AM
Response to Reply #133
264. Except that the FACT that religious belief
is like belief in faery tales gets you upset.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dragonbreathp9d Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #264
281. Now which side is using no facts to back up somthing?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #281
282. No fact on my side?
You believe in something that cannot be observed, documented or validated in any way. People have been trying and failing to prove the existance of God for thousands of years.

Isn't that fact enough?

If you choose to believe that Zeus or some other invisible sky-father sits up on his throne and looks down in judgement of your life, or that his agents will take you to an eternal reward of either paradise or torment, that's fine. But don't pretend there is any proof to support your views unless you can somehow present them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dragonbreathp9d Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #282
304. I already said there wasnt proof of, but there also is no proof against
therefore, neither side can claim to any facts
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #304
305. Failure to find proof Of is proof Against.
If there is no evidence that something exists, and all attempts to find such evidence have failed then that IS proof that it does not exist.

Proving a negative is impossible. Nobody can prove a negative. So the only standard for proving that something does not exist is the lack of evidence that it does exist.

Sorry. That's very basic logic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 09:51 PM
Response to Reply #305
364. You were right when you said "proving a negative is impossible"
That's basic logic. But lack of evidence doesn't logically prove that something does not exist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-19-06 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #364
381. By your logic
the existance of unicorns, ogres, and Santa Clause deserve just as much validity as the belief in God. Nobody can prove they don't exist either.

It's an argument that be extended ad-infinitum. Except that I think you want to reserve this special argument only for the existance of God, because you privilage the idea of God above everything else. That's a nice special rule if you can get people to buy into it. But it doesn't wash. God is only a privilaged concept to believers. The rest of us treat the concept of God just like the concept of anything else.

If there is no evidence that something exists, this is proof that it doesn't. Until such time as proof is found that something exists, it is logical and reasonable to conclude that it doesn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-19-06 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #381
385. It isn't "my" logic. It's standard, principle-based logic. The kind
that is taught in logic classes in college.

Your statement may be "common sense" but it isn't based on a principle of logic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-19-06 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #385
387. No, your logic is not taught in any deductive logic course.
Sorry, you're mistaken. Your position is a self-serving double standard: special rules to support your predetermined conclusion.

My position is not "common sense." It's text-book deductive logic.

By any deductive logic, there is no more proof of God than there is of Unicorns, Ogres or Tooth Faeries. None. In 2000 years nobody has been able to find any evidence, and many true believers have spent a lot of time, effort and money trying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donald Ian Rankin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-23-06 07:53 AM
Response to Reply #305
412. That's not logic at all.

The fact that all attempts to date to prove that something exists have failed is only proof that it doesn't exist if there is no way they could have failed if it did.

The idea that lack of proof for is proof against is just nonsense, I'm afraid - by that argument, most astronomical objects don't exist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cain_7777 Donating Member (417 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-22-06 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #305
427. I disagree with that logic
"If there is no evidence that something exists, and all attempts to find such evidence have failed then that IS proof that it does not exist." - ThomCat

All current attempts have failed but that does not mean that technology and our knowledge of the known universe might allow us to find things we previously thought were non-existent. I am atheist, but your logic is flawed and I would like you to tighten up your arguement when confronting these irrational believers. Aristotle's syllogism can be defective when there are formal defects within the system itself, over-estimation of the syllogism as compared to other forms of deductive arguement, and over estimation of deduction as a form of arguement. You might like Bertrand Russell's Why I am Not a Christian in his compilation, God and Religion. His logic is sound and full of great ideas that really get the mental gears moving.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
varkam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-22-06 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #427
429. Why I'm Not a Christian is an excellent compilation
and BTW - welcome to DU!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #264
336. It Isn't Like Fairy or Faery Tales
It is something that brings me peace and strength

I've never gotten that from Fairy Tales

maybe that's it

maybe those who've gotten that from Fairy tales feel that way?

I probably won't get it because my feelings are what they are.

Peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 08:10 AM
Response to Reply #133
269. Yes you did
You said you are sick of people saying that. So in other words, you are allowed to voice your beliefs but others aren't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 03:16 AM
Response to Reply #1
241. OKAY, all you ATHEISTS!!! Why are you wasting time here?
I think you missed my really important post today.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1219080&mesg_id=1219080
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 08:11 AM
Response to Reply #241
270. All you atheists?
All you people? Boy?


You condescend and have the nerve to tell others they are mocking... oh brother.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #270
359. Would you please, please, please take a look
at the post I was pointing to? I was just trying to give you something funny to laugh at, but I guess no one got past the subject line. Sorry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WritingIsMyReligion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #241
321. Wasting time?
One does not have to believe to want to take part in discussions on religion and theology.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 09:31 PM
Response to Reply #321
360. Sorry about the subject line, everybody misunderstood.
If you had looked at the website the post pointed to, you might have had a laugh. Sorry!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proud_Democratt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #241
346. You were criticizing someone's tone yesterday. Have you
noticed yours today?

Yesterday:

pnwmom (1000+ posts) Wed May-17-06 08:41 PM

104. No, I was merely reflecting back to you the tone of
your comments.


Today:

OKAY, all you ATHEISTS!!! Why are you wasting time here?
Posted by pnwmom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #346
358. I meant this as a complete joke. If you look at the website
I pointed to, you'll see.

Sorry I wasn't clear. No intent to offend anybody, just give everybody a chuckle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proud_Democratt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #358
362. okay...
I apologize for this error in judgement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #362
363. Proud Democrat, thanks for responding.
I don't know how to send a message to the other people I offended. Can you tell me how to send a private message? I've been looking all over the website -- I know there is a way to do this since people have sent messages to me. But I can't figure it out. Thanks if you can help.

P.S. Did you happen to take a look at the MIT website? I thought the photos alone made it worth the trip.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proud_Democratt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 10:01 PM
Response to Reply #363
365. Use the yellow envelope next to the username in the comment
block.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #362
366. I figured out the answer to my question, finally. Never mind.
But I hope you got a chance to look at that MIT student website. I still think you'd like it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wryter2000 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #1
285. I've been an agnostic here for years
And I've never seen a single incident of disrespect for skeptics. I have seen numerous, daily childish insults hurled at people of faith.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trotsky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-19-06 07:37 AM
Response to Reply #285
378. Oh, I have.
Generally it comes in the form of a derogatory, condescending attitude that we've simply closed our minds to the mystical side of the universe and there's so much more that we choose not to see.

Or special names created just to refer to us. "Skeppers" is one. It indeed does go both ways here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #1
292. Perhaps "myth" might
be a more tactful word, one that will lead to further dialogue and not stop it dead?

Just a suggestion from one crusty curmudgeon to another.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nemo137 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-19-06 01:39 AM
Response to Reply #292
375. TG, I agree heartily
Myth has informed my religious leanings more than I can really say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #1
373. Precisely how are God and Santa Claus equivalent?
Or Sasquatch and Theseus.

Other than stating each is a myth (which is a shallow assessment), do you see any differences whatever?

If you see differences, your assertion of equivalence is dishonest.

If you see (or claim) no difference, I'll be happy to point out the profound difference between Theseus and Santa Claus.

In my opinion, this post is complete bullshit, expressing arrogance and disdain in the name of respect.

The OP is all about respect.

For the record, you have expressed no belief I can respect or disrepect.

As to your opinion, it's dishonest crap.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:32 PM
Response to Original message
2. I think some people just can't leave well enough alone.
I'm sure I've crossed the line a few times into religious intolerance.

For the most part, I think people here do a decent job of respecting religions (with the exception of Scientology). There are people here and there that don't.

:hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zanne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. Sometimes, it seems that just disagreeing with a religious person
Offends them. That's why I find it so hard to talk or have a close relationship with a religious person. It seems they can go on and on about my "immorality", but if I criticize their religion at all, they say "How DARE you"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:36 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. I don't think that was the OP's point at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #9
43. There's one in every crowd
I know what you mean-the religious zealot who demands to know if you have been "saved" and doing everything in their power to make you feel very uncomfortable. But please don't think every religious person is like that. I present the Dances of Universal Peace, which is a moving meditation honoring all the world's spiritual traditions, including the major religions and the Native relgions and Goddess and Wicca. Everyone is made welcome-I've heard some people come who have said it is the only place where they felt they could truly be themselves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cushla_machree Donating Member (419 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:07 PM
Response to Reply #9
50. They don't mind telling you how they feel
But the minute you open your mouth, it is 'how dare you'

I tend to find there is a big differece between being spiiritual and believing in a higher power, and belieing in the bible.

Now i like jesus and all, but having to listen to people talk about how he knew that he was going to be sacrificed, how abraham was told to sacrifice his child..i just lose interest.

how jesus rose on the third day....I am sorry but that sounds kind of like a jolly man sliding down my chimmey. Could jesus really have ascended into heaven on the third day? Maybe. But having faith that that absolutely happend? the way it is written? that mary was a virgin?

I can't help but to think one who believes that has a neurological disorder. It is no different than believing that ra was the sun god, that athena sprang out of the head of zeus, etc. None of the religions you will find today are any different than the ones found thousands of years ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #50
295. Neurological disorder?
Wow. Now that's a new one.

80+ percent of the population has a neurological disorder? Dang, we'll never get insurance costs down. We're screwed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Finder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #295
302. More like 30 something percent.lol n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #302
313. Oh. I thought you meant all Christians
Okay, I'm with you there. More a neurosis, I think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cain_7777 Donating Member (417 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-22-06 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #295
428. Not a neurological disorder but a lack of education
College educated people have a higher percentage of atheism than the general population and America's educational system is complete crap. There is such a rise in christian fundamentalism because of the dumbing down of America.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-23-06 08:29 PM
Response to Reply #428
434. So You Say
I've got a master's degree

my wife has a bachelor's degree

most people I know have college degrees

yet I don't know but a few atheists

maybe it's regional

or maybe you pulled that idea out of thin air??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:14 PM
Response to Reply #9
59. No, it's the mockery that crosses the line, not simply
disagreeing or arguing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proud_Democratt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:43 PM
Original message
You despise mockery?...I despise scriptural quotations blasted
at me. I'm not saying you do that...and you haven't. But it happens many times.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 12:42 PM
Response to Original message
296. Where?
This is not a snark, but I am really interested to know where you experience this. Because it never happens to me. Now, maybe it is a geographical thing. But where are you hit with scriptural quotations?

I once had a lady who lives in the city tell me she can barely move her scooter (she is disabled) down the street in her neighborhood because of the street preachers. We don't have that here.

So please elaborate if you don't mind. Maybe our experiences are very different because of where we live and we need to explore this a bit more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proud_Democratt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #296
340. I can't remember what topic...but I can tell you two people.
I'll gladly PM the names. In fact I will.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
riderinthestorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 10:51 PM
Response to Reply #296
370. Wheaton Illinois
Self professed bible capital of the world. I get people telling me that my children, my husband and I are going to hell at least once/week, along with the various scriptures to "prove" it.

My latest renters left a week earlier than our agreed upon deadline (thereby missing the final walk through), after having scrawled bible verses in INDELIBLE INK across every single stinking wall of the house (that even Killz hasn't been able to eradicate) about what "sinners" my family and I are, as well as smashing the new stove we purchased a year ago. Did I mention the ketchup they threw all over the carpets???

And these were REAL fundies! A minister and his wife no less who were hired by one of the local baptist churches in our area. I would never have told him/her we were atheists if they hadn't insisted on trying to "save" us every single time I had to run them down for their overdue rent check. They would give me bible tracts with the check.

I am completely surrounded by religious insanity where I live (Billy Graham's lovely school, Wheaton College, is just a hop skip and a jump away from us).

I am completely looking forward to leaving this hell hole and retiring to (get this) South Carolina! It can't get any more backward, Rethug, bible toting, irritating than Wheaton Illinois.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-23-06 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #370
414. Get the heck out of there
it sounds horrible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #59
306. But believers take simple disagreement as an insult.
Stating that religion is all myth and faery tales is not in-and-of-itself insulting. It is athiests classifying all religious belief in the only categories that exist for such stories that are not true.

What we regularly see is believers saying, "if you don't agree with our belief then don't say anything." That's an attempt to lock us out of the discussion. It's saying that only beliefs that support your view can be spoken.

Sorry. You can go to religious boards to read discussions where only your views are allowed. This isn't a religious board. So expect to hear disenting views. Perhaps believers should grow thicking skins and stop getting so upset whenever someone disagrees with them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
raccoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-20-06 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #306
421. Yes, a lot of them do,
"take simple disagreement as an insult"

And some of them think if they're "saved" and you're not, they're better than you are and maybe they shouldn't even be associating with an untouchable like you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #9
293. Maybe we all need to just be more specific
and rather than get frustrated and write general posts, just call the individual on his/her perceived boorish behavior, as in "I am offended that you liken my faith to believing in Santa Claus" and THEN use that wonderful gift Skinner hath delivered unto us: IGNORE. It really, really helps.

The broad brush thing (although certainly there is truth in it, like there usually is truth in most broad brush strokes) gets hurtful and starts flame wars. Althought, frankly, reading them is a great way to get through a boring planning period. Sometimes I try to think of these flamefests as keeping our talons sharpened for the GOP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #2
137. Well I Wouldn't Have Posted It If I Didn't Feel That There Is
religious intolerance by some.

I see no intolerance of much else here.

But if you believe in God, and mention it, there is often someone who stops by to say Santa Claus, fairy tale, Sasquatch (now new one) etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:33 PM
Response to Original message
3. Ditto.
:hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karlrschneider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:33 PM
Response to Original message
5. Whaever floats your boat. I was raised a Christian and became
an atheist after having an 'epiphany', as it were. But I don't care what anybody believes unless they try to tell me how to run my life based on their beliefs. The only moral principle that means anything to me is what's commonly called the 'golden rule': Don't do something to anybody you wouldn't want them doing to you.
;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:15 PM
Response to Reply #5
60. Works for me, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frogbison Donating Member (699 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #60
115. I also think that the Golden Rule
when it says "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" includes taking care of my brothers and sisters in need, as that is what I wish they would do for me when I need.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karlrschneider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #60
123. I confess I did slightly paraphrase the usual version to more accurately
reflect the intrinsic intent...so as to include "lesser" animals that understand it more nearly in those terms. :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 12:44 PM
Response to Reply #123
298. In New Jersey where I grew up
we had another version of the Golden Rule: Do unto other BEFORE they do unto you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:34 PM
Response to Original message
7. You should be joyous, imho
Didn't the bible say you would be persecuted for his name's sake?


Oh ye of little faith.


People have the right to believe and the right NOT to believe. My youth was spent being intensely "fundie"... that experience has led me to be Agnostic. From that perspective I can easily see, and agree, that believing in God is like believing in Santa Claus. Sorry, that's my perspective.


There are no one-sided arguments... it takes two to tango. You have just opened yourself up for argument. Good luck with that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Howardx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #7
122. and she lives with a rock solid atheist
born and raised atheist, we seem to manage. i think you can too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #7
138. I'm Not Afraid Of Arguments
I said I'm tired of people comparing my faith to Santa Claus

and bringing the "persecution" card in is, well, never mind.

You are entitled to your opinion.

Being a fundie seems like it would eventually lead to total burnout of belief.

I'm not a fundie.

I don't insult others who don't believe in God, or say that their belief is akin to something insulting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 08:19 AM
Response to Reply #138
271. I made a valid point and you say never mind?
Edited on Thu May-18-06 08:20 AM by Juniperx
And then you go on to mock fundies. So, only your flavor of Christianity is the correct flavor? No Pentecostals allowed in your world? No Assembly of God followers? No Four-Square? Baptist?

Fundamentalist Christianity a taboo in your Christian world?


"I don't insult others who don't believe in God, or say that their belief is akin to something insulting."

That is exactly what you just did! And further, you insulted another branch of your own religion that DOES believe in God!

I guess insulting is only allowed when you are the insulter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-23-06 08:33 PM
Response to Reply #271
435. Blow It Out Your Peacepipe
you put out this sanctimonious I should feel good that I'm persecuted because the bible said I would

then you spout off that I'm insulting "another branch of your own religion"

just forget it man

you don't get it

you won't get it

neurological?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Finder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #138
303. How can you insult someone for being rational?
I guess you could compare us to Sagan or Einstein but other than the atheist=unamerican meme there is nothing that would offend most of us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:35 PM
Response to Original message
10. Honey, you should see what Bushco is doing to the country!
Lots more things to worry about than this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-23-06 09:02 PM
Response to Reply #10
444. I Know What Bushco Is Doing "Honey"
and I won't be dismissed that easily

this is important

if we are liberals and progressives, and even moderate Dems, we have to come together to defeat the BFEE

we start by practicing civility about each other's beliefs
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Why Syzygy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:35 PM
Response to Original message
11. If the label doesn't fit ..
Edited on Wed May-17-06 07:39 PM by votesomemore
then don't wear it. I didn't see anyone call you a fundie. Do you feel like a fundie? A fundie is a very specific species. If you are not one, do not be offended.

From your post, I don't get exactly what offends you anyway. You have your own questions.
Who cares what who says about Jesus? I can't go around asking people to please stop talking about this person that has never been proven to even EXIST as the LORD come to give glory. Or something. If your shaky 'faith' is important, then welcome to it. People think I'm a fruit loop on a regular basis because I do not believe in Religion. Eh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigjohn16 Donating Member (747 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:36 PM
Response to Original message
12. You're free to believe whatever you want.
Edited on Wed May-17-06 07:37 PM by bigjohn16
I'm free to believe that the world will be a better place when people stop basing their lives on fairy tales and superstition.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:38 PM
Response to Original message
15. Hear Hear Southpaw! I Think Some Take The Religion Bashing Wayyyy Too Far
as well.

They think they mean well, but in the end a lot of it is plain childish, intolerant and distasteful.

Have faith though that there are many, many of us here who have deep spiritual faith in whatever form of religion we choose. You definitely are not alone friend.

So God bless ya Southpaw!

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:39 PM
Response to Original message
18. why? why do you care. someone doesnt believe,
Edited on Wed May-17-06 07:52 PM by seabeyond
not only would you and i agree it is their right, wouldnt they come to the conclusion that it is fairy tale. if they dont believe, dont we know without them saying it out loud. so really you are saying, we get to say our belief out loud, they just are not to say their belief out loud?

why do you care. do you think it is disrespectful to christ. that you must stand up and protect. because i dont think that is what christ asks of us. he is in each and every heart, (if you believe) the believer and not. he understands why the person says what they do, feels what they do beyond what we ever could. beyond what the individual can understand.

the only way a person can be bothered by what another says about them is if they allow it to. if they own what the person gives them. why would you want to do that?

i personally feel everyone has the right to be angry at christianity right now. even the christian. i am. i am having a crisis of religion. never a crisis of faith, never a crisis with christ or god, but certainly a crisis with religion.

i prefer to embrace these people yelling in understanding that they do not believe the same as i,.... and we christians are demanding by law that they live our religion.

looking at it that way, would you be angry?

i know i would

would be like a catholic, lets say,.... telling me i am not allowed to use birth control because they dont believe in it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #18
29. Great post!
Those who believe in Christ know that God gave us free will. That's why we are here. If there were no need, we'd all still be in Heaven, right?

The problem is forcing others to give up their free will by imposing your own religious beliefs on them.


You can't force a person to believe in God or Santa Claus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #29
34.  God gave us free will.
Edited on Wed May-17-06 07:56 PM by seabeyond
and if god gives us free will, surely, i mean just surely , it is our obligation to give it to fellow man too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:02 PM
Response to Reply #34
42. Exactly! Thank you!
I have this conversation so much and so many just don't get it!

God gave us free will... who the heck are we to deny that free will to another? I think that is a sin.

Another thing people don't get is that God loves us all unconditionally. He may hate our sins and be disappointed in us, but we are God's children and he loves us all... even Bush... even Saddam Hussein... even OBL... and whatsoever we do to any of these we also do to God.

I'm mortified that so many churches have forgotten the commandments... they forget it's a sin to kill so they support this war. They teach hate against gay people (God loves gay people too!) and they teach hate toward people who support choice.

I'm sad for them. It's that kind of behavior and hypocrisy that has caused me to go from rabid believer to agnostic. It's too hard to tell how many lies I've been told.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Why Syzygy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:37 PM
Response to Reply #42
97. He doesn't hate our sins.
The only sin, I've become convinced, is the one where someone says, oh I'm better than YOU are, so your life means nothing, and I can and will take it. Does that sound like Bush? I thought so.

Sin is denying life, in whatever form it takes. And I believe there is no God and if there was, he? .. she would be neutral on the subject. A woman is the life giver. Men make mockery when they try to take the role upon themselves. Okay. I'm a pagan, goddess atheist. I don't believe in the HE God. Not in the present role as presented. My beliefs are mocked every day, for about the last 1500 years. Is that okay?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #97
116.  Is that okay? .... damn straight it is ok
again i will say, i differ with religion and christianity. christianity states we are all one. in my spiritual growth i have found all religion all beliefs so many things in life is just another extension to universal power, god, lite, .....

e it so many of the religions in essence speaks love... that is the ultimate of all religion, bible, music (sound), color, lite, sun, nature, animals, children...........i tink there are tons of unique ways of connecting with universal power

there is a lot to be said with feminine energy vs masculine and if the ultimate is not merging the two to one. merging all polarity to one. i see a game between satan and christ.... dark/lite..... and the end of the game, it is merging them all to stillness.....were there is no longer the movement back and forth, battling

i can go with whatever religion or belief is thrown my way and find a higher in it. that is why i am not afraid or challenged by any of it, including the non believer
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 08:22 AM
Response to Reply #97
272. Makes sense to me
Women give life... sorta like God, eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #42
111. who the heck are we
to deny that free will to another? I think that is a sin.


i say the same.

i have had conversation with ministers. they have such an obligation and responsibility, people spirituality in their hands and they lead them away from christs lite. i feel anymore i would be sinnin if i went to church honoring the church that doesnt walk with christ. there is no way i could be convinced to go to church or put my kids in that environment. they were going to a christian school as i watched these loving and kind people being directed in another direction. it peaked spring of 2004.

i agree with you
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #18
139. So I Don't Have Any Problem With Someone Saying
they are an atheist.

My Mother was an atheist at the end of her life.

I may be one some day?

Right now I'm not.

I have a problem with people basically making fun of someone who believes in God. Comparing it to believing in Santa Claus is making fun of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 05:07 AM
Response to Reply #18
247. A most excellent post. Thankyou.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #18
300. Wisdom in your words
When a person says "fairy tale" and "Santa Claus" just sigh and feel compassion for them. Because it is difficult to exist in the world without insight and tact. Then look for what you have in common, because you will find it.

Or put them on ignore and never deal with it again. I am told there are some folks here who are on so many ignore lists they are like trees falling in the silence of the forest!

And as another poster mentioned, Christ told you this would happen. At least he was right!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-23-06 09:03 PM
Response to Reply #18
445. It Is Demeaning, It Implies That Belief In God Is Childish
and immature

not too hard to understand is it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalVoice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-26-06 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #18
448. Wow
I just want to say of all the thousands and thousands of posts I have read on DU I have never seen someone put themsleves in someone elses shoes like you did. Great post!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rude Horner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:40 PM
Response to Original message
19. I live by the motto....
live and let live. If it doesn't hurt anybody, what difference does it make? Gay Marriage? Hey, I wouldn't do it, but I have no problem with it. Abortion? It's not my body so it's none of my business. The same thing with religion. It's not my thing but if it's yours, I respect that and more power to ya.

The only time I ever have problems with it is when it gets into the hands of the Falwell's of the world, who want to push their beliefs on me and everyone else. Then I have a big problem with it. But what Falwell does is not religion. He's a wolf in sheeps clothing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 08:28 AM
Response to Reply #19
273. The Falwell's of the world hold themselves above God
And try to take away the free will that God gave you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zensea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:40 PM
Response to Original message
21. I agree, but maybe not for the reason you think
Edited on Wed May-17-06 07:42 PM by Zensea
Santa Claus flies through the air bringing gifts from another world in a sleigh with flying reindeer wearing a red and white suit.
Do you know where that story may come from?
In the Mongolian steppes there is a psychedelic mushroom -- amanita muscaria -- that is red with white spots. The natives would feed it to reindeer and then drink the piss of the reindeer since the mushroom itself is somewhat poisonous but the psychoactive element which gives the visions of another world passes through the reindeer without losing its psychoactive effects while the poisonous elements get eliminated.
There is some speculation that the story of Santa Claus is a metaphor for this.
I bet people who diss belief in God by comparing it to Santa Claus don't realize this.

Draw your own conclusions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NC_Nurse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:55 PM
Response to Reply #21
36. Wow.
That was definitely the most interesting thing on this thread!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Why Syzygy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #21
113. I'm intrigued as well..
wow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #21
301. Whoa.
I just ate a Wendy's hamburger and I think I need to find a reindeer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StellaBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:41 PM
Response to Original message
22. Peace to you, too
But I agree with the previous posters who've said that, to them, religion is just another fairy tale. I find it heard to respect someone who believes such inanities. Just like I would have a problem with the credibility of someone who denied the holocaust, or global warming, or is a far-out conspiracy theorist, or believes they were abducted by aliens.

Read Carl Sagan's "Demon-Haunted World" and you'll sense where I'm coming from.

I bear you no ill will, I respect your right to believe whatever you want. But, to me, and to many others, these "anti-religion" comments come just as naturally, and logically, as the ubiquitous anti-* comments. It's just obvious to me.

And, I know it's been said before, but if you're the one making the claim that some deity exists, then the burden of proof is on you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JerseygirlCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #22
33. I don't get that "burden of proof" thing
I have yet to see anyone here attempting to persuade a non-believer to believe. (Ok, a couple of short-lived trolls, but no one serious). If that were happening, I might see a need for "proof" of some sort...

But all the OP is asking for is respectful language. If you don't share his or her beliefs, is there really a need to disparage them? What does that do for you? Is your own philosophy somehow strengthened by tearing another's down? Or does it only exist as the absence of someone else's?

It's one thing to say: I don't believe in God.

It's another entirely to say: Anyone who believes in God is irrational and possibly insane.

One is a statement of your own philosophy. Cool.

One is a needless attack on another's belief. Not so cool, IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StellaBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:21 PM
Response to Reply #33
67. I can see your point, yes
I think it's more a mass delusion (akin to 'The American Dream' myth, etc.) than pure insanity. But even religious believers would think I was insane and irrational if I professed to have been abducted by aliens... that's all I'm sayin'.

I also think that most believers miss the point (and I suspect that most DUers do NOT fall into this group, being mostly fundies!!!) that the usual religious concept of 'God' is ridiculously narrow. And insulting to the universe.

I am an atheist when it comes to the God of the Bible and the Qu'ran and many many others... blah blah blah... BUT that doesn't mean I have no reverence for life or the universe. It's just so much more wonderful than conventional religious thought has room for. I don't believe in a personal God, I guess.

Anyway, this is a useful discussion.

One thing that always makes me happy is when I see liberal religious leaders, embracing all people, and speaking truth to power. We need more of that. I'm thinking of some of the speeches I've seen at anti-war rallies and even the Si, Se Puede mass demonstration. Some powerful speakers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JerseygirlCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #67
78. I heartily agree that there's an unfortunate tendency to try
to fit God into a box.

I also agree that my conception of God is much closer to your sense of life or the universe. The name doesn't really matter. And I think that if God exists (and I do believe that's the case), God is far bigger than human capacity to completely understand. God just doesn't fit neatly into our brains. God sure as hell doesn't fit neatly into a nice little box. That's what happens with human involvement, in my estimation. We have this need to control, to tame, everything -- including God!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StellaBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #78
86. I can go along with that
This is why I think it's pointless to even talk about.

If I want to feel a 'soul' or a 'god', I go sit by a lake or a stream and just observe and absorb. Anything more is vulgar to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JerseygirlCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:34 PM
Response to Reply #86
93. I can understand that, absolutely!
It's just upsetting to me to see rudeness here, and a combativeness with people who are, after all, on the same side of this fight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #93
332. I'm sorry, aren't you the one who calls us Fundie atheists?
And your lecturing other people on rudeness and combativeness?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JerseygirlCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #332
355. To be more accurate,
I said "evangelical", not fundie. There is a difference, actually. "Evangelical" can be defined as: "Characterized by ardent or crusading enthusiasm; zealous". A fundamentalist is not necessarily evangelical, in the religious sense. The reverse is also true. Although colloquially they're thrown around as the same thing, they are not.

I also subsequently apologized. Perhaps you missed that response?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Why Syzygy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #86
117. Me too..
I'm in Austin, and if there is a god(dess), she made this place. Smiles all around.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #78
307. How true
we so long to make the infinite finite because that is all we can comprehend.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:19 PM
Response to Reply #22
66. This is the DU. Anti * statements have a place here.
But people don't come here to be insulted about their religious faith or lack of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:22 PM
Response to Reply #66
70. So? I don't come here to be preached to or scolded by whiners
Edited on Wed May-17-06 08:27 PM by beam me up scottie
who expect me to believe the vast majority of people who own, run and validate everything in this country are being victimized by atheists and the anti-god Democratic party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:26 PM
Response to Reply #70
74. The point is we're all here as Democrats or progressives,
right? So why can't we work together and try to be as polite as we would be if we were conversing with the person helping us to stuff envelopes at Democratic headquarters?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:29 PM
Response to Reply #74
81. Most of us do work together.
But I refuse to sit down and shut up because someone can't handle hearing my opinions.

Don't worry, we got the message.

It reads: "Atheists are welcome here as long as they don't say anything that might offend christians."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:33 PM
Response to Reply #81
90. Your ears aren't working. The message is: why can't
people have discussions about issues without ridiculing each other for their religious beliefs, especially when the subject being discussed has nothing to do with religion?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:37 PM
Response to Reply #90
96. Your eyes aren't working.
The op demands that we "don't compare (his) faith to something like Santa Claus".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 08:34 AM
Response to Reply #90
274. But some of us are being ridiculed because we believe
The belief in God is akin to the belief in Santa Claus.

If the OP had intended to have this discussion in a more Christian manner, he wouldn't have started out by hurling insults to those who have an opposing view.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-23-06 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #274
446. In A More "Christian Manner"?
hurling insults

re-read the OP

you've built a mythology about the OP if you think it was hurling insults, or maybe your skin is way too thin?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 12:04 PM
Response to Reply #70
290. WOOOO HOOOOOO
Scottie is back! BEAM ME UP, BABEEEEE!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StellaBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #66
75. My analogy stands. n/t
I mean no ill will.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #22
143. I Have No Burden Of Proof
I don't ask you to believe in God, or any other deity.

I just ask that you don't make fun of me because I do.

And since you don't respect me for my beliefs, then explain to me why it is that I can't be respected for what I believe, but if I kept my beliefs to myself I could be respected?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:52 PM
Response to Reply #143
192. I'll field this one: there's no obligation to respect your beliefs.
There IS an obligation to respect your RIGHT to your beliefs.

And I agree that believers shouldn't be ridiculed. That doesn't mean the beliefs themselves are free from ridicule, however.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-23-06 08:37 PM
Response to Reply #22
436. I Have No Burden Of Proof
my beliefs are my beliefs

I don't ask you to believe my beliefs

I asked in the OP to not mock my beliefs

I'm not mocking your beliefs, or lack of beliefs am I?

I'm not calling you intuitionally challenged, or some other idiotic thing am I?

No, I'm not

So I think that you should THINK before you let your "natural" comments spew out

If we are all liberals, then why should my liberal beliefs and your liberal beliefs be alienated by mocking statements about my spiritual beliefs?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrSlayer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:42 PM
Response to Original message
24. If that's what makes you feel good, by all means, go to it.
I prefer the Greek myths to the modern day myths. So much more fun to have a pantheon of gods that rule over different things and, to me, it makes more sense. The one god theory is boring and he/she would have to be a schizo to be good and evil at the same time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DearAbby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:44 PM
Response to Original message
25. Is your faith so weak
that you must have it handled with kid gloves by everyone including non believers?

Stand firm on your belief, who cares what others say about it, if you believe it is true, that is all that is needed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JerseygirlCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:46 PM
Response to Original message
26. Thanks, I agree. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MelliMel Donating Member (233 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:46 PM
Response to Original message
27. I always tell my kids to ignore those who mock them.
It's easier and healthier.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 08:39 AM
Response to Reply #27
275. Good for you, MelliMel!
I'm much more open to the Jewish belief system and I think Christians go out of their way to mock it. Judaism is so much more peaceful and respectful, no hell fire and brimstone and a lot less guilt. You have fortunate kids:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:49 PM
Response to Original message
31. Santa Brings Me Presents...


Mandy: Who are you?
Wise Man 1: We are three wise men.
Wise Man 2: We are astrologers. We have come from the East.
Mandy: Is this some kind of joke?
WM1: We wish to praise the infant.
WM2: We must pay homage to him.
Mandy: Homage!! You're all drunk you are. It's disgusting. Out, out.
WM3: No, no.
Mandy: Coming bursting in here first thing in the morning with some tale about
Oriental fortune tellers... get out.
WM1: No. No we must see him.
Mandy: Go and praise someone else's brat, go on.
WM2: We were led by a star.
Mandy: Led by a bottle, more like. Get out!
WM2: We must see him. We have brought presents.
Mandy: Out!
WM1: Gold, frankincense, myrrh.

(Mandy changes direction, smooth as silk.)

Mandy: Well, why didn't you say? He's over here ... Sorry this place is a
bit of a mess. What is myrrh, anyway?
WM3: It is a valuable balm.
Mandy: A balm, what are you giving him a balm for? It might bite him.
WM3: What?
Mandy: It's a dangerous animal. Quick, throw it in the trough.
WM3: No it isn't.
Mandy: Yes it is.
WM3: No, no, it is an ointment.
Mandy: An ointment?
WM3: Look.
Mandy: (sampling the ointment with a grubby finger). Oh. There is an animal
called a balm or did I dream it? You astrologers, eh? Well, what's he
then? WM2: H'm?
Mandy: What star sign is he?
WM2: Capricorn.
Mandy: Capricorn eh, what are they like?
WM2: He is the son of God, our Messiah.
WM1: King of the Jews.
Mandy: And that's Capricorn, is it?
WM3: No, no, that's just him.
Mandy: Oh, I was going to say, otherwise there'd be a lot of them.

(The WISE MEN are on their knees.)

WM2: By what name are you calling him?

(Dramatic Holy music... )

Mandy: ... Brian.
Three Wise Men: We worship you, Oh, Brian, who are Lord over us all. Praise
unto you, Brian and to the Lord our Father. Amen.
Mandy: Do you do a lot of this, then?
WM1: What?
Mandy: This praising.
WM1: No, no, no.
Mandy: Oh! Well, if you're dropping by again do pop in.

(They take the hint and rise.)
And thanks a lot for the gold and frankincense but ... don't worry too
much about the myrrh next time.

Sorry, LOL, couldn't resist...

:hi::evilgrin::hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:50 PM
Response to Original message
32. What does it matter, to Christians, my Gods are fairy tales as well...
in addition to Atheists believing the same of them. Yet, I don't feel offended by that, let's concentrate on REAL problems instead of imagining offenses for abstract beliefs and faith in general.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:55 PM
Response to Original message
35. A big hello and a hug from Newton County Arkansas!
I understand your feelings-I've had them and many others when confronted with atheists on this board. What I have found is that some atheists are polite and listen to my point of view and express their own problems with concepts and belief systems, while others merely like to spout off analogies that can be viewed as offensive to people of faith. And I was offended-for a while. Then I realized that whatever they said did not alter That which I know for a fact exists because of personal experience. The next thing I did was to look at the posts and posters themselves. I still wonder why someone would intentionally say a rude thing like the Santa Claus analogy. Perhaps they just like being rude. Or perhaps they are doing it because they really aren't sure-sort of like whistling past the graveyard at night-some sort of reassurance of their belief system. Either way, their posts really reflect only upon themselves, and not upon me and certainly not upon That Which Is Everything.

Frankly, I've learned a lot about atheists, both those who are willing to engage in polite discourse and those who are rude.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Why Syzygy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:57 PM
Response to Reply #35
121. What does Religion
have to do with Politics? Same? I actually admire DUer's who are faith based. I don't actually understand ya'll, but gotta give it to you, you do stick in there. Many of us have left the sinking ship and so, no offense, but we left it and don't expect us to mourn the passing. But feel free to bring your light side to the forum.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #35
144. Thank You Newton County
hello from Sebastian county
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:56 PM
Response to Original message
38. Fine. Easter Bunny it is.
All fairy tales are created equal.

When you can prove that what you believe in is real, it will no longer be considered a fairy tale.

And fyi, although I usually try not to use the fairy tale analogy unless provoked, I'm going to make an exception for you from now on.

I will continue to reserve my respect for believers who respect my right to have and voice a dissenting opinion.


rAmen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:05 PM
Response to Reply #38
47. You know what I don't get...
I don't understand why Christians are so oversensitive over this. Like you said, all fairy tales are equal, I believe in fairy tales myself, but you calling them that isn't offensive to me. The reason is because there is no impetus on me to PROVE anything, its not a requirement of my religion, so I don't even try. Such opinions as you hold neither breaks my leg nor hurts my feelings, to butcher a quote from a Thomas Jefferson. Personally I think a big part of the problem is the oddly Christian need to be OBJECTIVELY right no matter what, rather than just right for THEMSELVES.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:15 PM
Response to Reply #47
61. You've nailed it.
Their insistence that THEIR deity is legit begs the question.

Why should the christian god be revered by non-christians?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:24 PM
Response to Reply #61
72. That's the thing...
Gods, whether they exist or not, I don't think really care if people believe in them or worship them "properly". I guess, from my own beliefs, it depends on the God's personality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:33 PM
Response to Reply #72
91. "Who are you to question why your god made me an atheist?"
Saw it on a bumper sticker in Vermont.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #91
112. LOL...
Actually, that's somewhat amusing, I worship a God of Knowledge, so to me, I would say you used the gift well. ;)

As to the Goddess I worship, well, she's a Goddess of the Forge and Craft, so unless you are a hammer or some other tool, I don't think that bumpersticker would apply.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #91
309. You know
that about sums up my feelings! Great bumper sticker. We are what we are supposed to be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:32 PM
Response to Reply #47
148. Fairy Tales Are Make Believe Stories
the fact that you believe God is like that is your business.

But don't insult me by comparing my beliefs to that.

I'm not a stupid person by any means.

I happen to believe in God.

I don't push it on anyone, or insult someone who is an atheist.

I just don't like being made fun of.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:38 PM
Response to Reply #148
154. And I happen to worship Ogmios and Brigit...
Edited on Wed May-17-06 09:39 PM by Solon
both of which are fairy tales or myths to YOU, so really, what is your point?

ON EDIT: Also, for the record, I believe that Yahweh-El exists, I just don't worship Him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #154
165. I Don't Go Around Bashing Your Beliefs
that is my POINT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:53 PM
Response to Reply #165
170. I didn't bash yours either...
I was responding to the other poster using HIS words as context for my response, if you take offense to that, that is your problem. It wasn't meant as disrespect for YOUR personal beliefs, for I treated my OWN beliefs in the exact same context, and I have the utmost respect for them, they are my own, after all. Look at my post again, I SAID that I believed in fairy tales too, at least to BMUS I do. So I don't understand why you are offended.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #170
172. My Beliefs Are NOT Fairy Tales
If you think they are

keep it to yourself man
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:01 PM
Response to Reply #172
174. And again you tell another member to shut up. Who do you think you are?
Don't be surprised when DU atheists go out of their way to make that verboten comparison whenever they see you post in a thread in this forum.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #174
177. You know what?
I really give up, I mean, I was TRYING to say that I don't even think his beliefs were fairy tales, while also saying that I don't take offense at my own being called the same. I think our conversation went right over his head.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:11 PM
Response to Reply #177
181. That's what always happens in these threads.
Edited on Wed May-17-06 10:11 PM by beam me up scottie
They start with a straw man and defend it even after it's been exposed.

Then they claim our angry responses and refusal to agree with them is evidence that we ARE persecuting and/or offending them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #181
186. You know what's really funny...
we are able to have a decent conversation, without insults or negative vibes, and I'm a polytheist! I just don't understand his defensiveness, his God doesn't need it, and he doesn't need it either, not really. Neither Atheists nor religious Non-Christians are in any type of power or great influence in this country, and even if we were, the danger of us outlawing Christianity in any way, shape or form is nil to none.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:34 PM
Response to Reply #186
189. Some people are incapable of understanding what it's like to be
a non-christian.

Most of us would agree that the Santa analogy-while valid to us, is inflammatory and offensive to christians.

Knowing this, most of us would try to avoid using it.

But I do so hate it when I'm told NOT to do something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #189
191. Hey, that reminds me...
Dammit, I was OFFENDED that you called the Eostre's Bunny a fairy tale! C'mon! Don't you know that Eostre is the Goddess that commanded us all to get busy and have fun. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #191
193. I had no idea that was her message!
She had me at chocolate. :P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #193
194. What, the fact that the bunny, eggs, and time of year...
weren't a clue? ;)

BTW, the Chocolate did it for me too!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #189
310. You were BAD in school
weren't you! Very, very naughty.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #177
337. Solon
after re-reading your post, I'll admit that I didn't read it the same way the second time
so I apologize

it may have gone over my head

I'll have to admit I got pretty steamed over this thread last night

I thought I made a reasonable request, to not make fun of my beliefs and instead I got this thread.

Peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 07:09 PM
Response to Reply #337
348. Its cool...
I'm sorry you took offense, I guess, because of many factors, I just interepret things differently. For example, I'm a polytheist, because of this, if I was responding to a post about Christianity, I would use terms such as "Your God" or "Jesus Christ", or use the name of your God, Yahweh-El, as recorded in the earliest records of Judaic tradition. This isn't meant as disrespect or to demean either your beliefs or your God, just for accuracy's sake this is how I would comment on such subjects.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 08:54 PM
Response to Reply #348
356. I May Be Somewhat Of A Polytheist
I guess

I always think about the "they" in Genesis

I do think that the prophets in the bible may have been expressions of the divine, as I believe we all are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #174
334. Since You Seem To Think You Speak For DU Atheists
if not DU itself

I'll take that as a challenge

I don't understand coincidence theorists either.

so Peace Scotty
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 08:44 AM
Response to Reply #172
276. Again you prove so many points made here
You are free to voice your beliefs but others aren't. "Keep it to yourself" is just another way of saying FTFU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #276
335. FTFU?
WTF?

At least get it right

STFU

I haven't told anyone to shut up, just not to make fun of my beliefs

If you make fun of mine

I'll make fun of yours
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-19-06 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #335
384. That's all you got, eh? Snappy comeback... a typo
wow
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-23-06 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #384
437. Use Spell Check If You Can't Self Edit nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WritingIsMyReligion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-22-06 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #172
405. Maybe to you they aren't, but to others they are.
Always remember that.

Calm down, man. ;) Getting yourself riled up over this seems to prove that you are of weaker faith than you would like to admit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #47
308. I think that perhaps it is the childlike
nature of Santa Claus and fairy tales that is hurtful. It's a fine point sort of thing. I have no problem with myth or legend because they at least imply I am a mature person, but believing in SC or Fairy Tales implies I'm entering my dotage or am childishly simple.

But then I stop and think. Christ said (or maybe Paul..don't know) that we should believe as little children. So maybe we who do believe should ruffle our feathers and just say, "That's right. I do."

What do you think?

T-Grannie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #308
322. It would be a refreshing thing to admit...
actually, I would probably change it to something like: "we should LIVE as little children do." I'm not talking about throwing tantrums or stuff like that, no what I mean is look at a child, especially a young one, and the wide eyed wonder in which they view the world. They are sponges, ready to absorb all the knowledge the world has to offer, and they have the curiousity and will to discover it themselves if the answers aren't forthcoming. I think that too many times adults use their caution and skepticism a little TOO much, and close off that childlike wonder and curiousity entirely. What we learn can either make us wiser or misers depending on how we USE that knowledge. Approach life as a child, only using your adult wisdom to temper that curiousity only a little.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
riderinthestorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 11:00 PM
Response to Reply #322
371. Solon, I think you and TG are wise souls
who could easily sit by the beach, watching the sunset, discussing philosophy. I like to imagine you there. I hope someday it comes true.

Peace!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donald Ian Rankin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-23-06 07:30 AM
Response to Reply #38
411. You're misusing the words "fairy tale".
It doesn't simply mean "something not true"; it also has strong connotations of risibility and childishness.

(In fact, even that usage annoys me - Cocteau, Grimm and Lang are fairy tales; I think using it for "something silly" is still too loose).

As to your final point, two responses. Firstly, there's a difference between having a right to do something and being right to do something. Secondly, I respect your right to express your opinions only provided you choose the least offensive way of doing so.

Expressing *views that will offend people* is perfectly justifiable. Expressing *any given view* using choice language other than that which will cause the least offence is not.

If there were no other way of expressing the point of view "I believe that God is (like) a fairy tale" that would cause less offence and still contain exactly the same content then it would be justifiable to say it. Since "I believe that no God exists, and that believing that one does is credulous/naive", or similar phrasing, expresses exactly the same thought and is less offensive, I don't respect your right to express your opinion *in that way*.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:58 PM
Response to Original message
39. Looks like you need some defending Southpawkicker.
All you demons just beat it! We'll see how your knees bend when the mountains fall and the earth trembles. Waiting and watching.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radio4progressives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 07:59 PM
Response to Original message
40. I haven't seen that here, but isn't this subject supposed to be discussed
in the religious forums? As an athiest who is disrespected by the government in power from morning until night, and the media included, i'm really sick of christians complaing about being "attacked" for anything. You people have all the power and the government and the media. You have succeeded in destroying Separation of Church and State clause. Enjoy your power over others, but for goddess sakes, quit your whining and get over it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JerseygirlCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #40
83. Why do you do that, though?
Why "you people"?

I doubt you'd indulge in that sort of stereotyping with any other group.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Yossarian Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:04 PM
Response to Original message
44. ****Waaaah**** They insulted my beliefs!
Hey, the dude is all powerful? He don't need the likes of you or me to defend him.

He'll smite the motherfuckers down!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:15 PM
Response to Reply #44
62. It's not a matter of insulting beliefs
as much as insulting the person. If you weren't allowed to be free from religion, I'd be the first there to back you up and say it was your right. I don't like what the Talibornagains are doing in this country any more than you do, and I firmly believe in the seperation of church and state. If your path is one that is free of religion, that is fine with me. I do try and show all people respect and to rise above distinctions and differences like this. My comment is simply about rudeness. It reflects poorly on a person when they are rude to another, but especially so if the person is rude to someone who is trying to work with them on a cause.

Look at it this way-if you were in a campaign headquarters with a religious person who was helping man phone banks and setting up rides to the polls, would you say the things you say to religious folks here?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:21 PM
Response to Reply #62
68. Good point. I've wondered about that, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #44
149. That May Be True
But why do people feel the need to insult other DU'ers beliefs at all???????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:42 AM
Response to Reply #149
235. I agree with this but out of curiosity do you think a Pagen Du'er
ought to be insulted if a Christian calls their gods a "fairy tale"? or do you think the Christian or Judeo Christian Gos is entitled to more respect?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:05 PM
Response to Original message
46. "I know there will be someone who will say he didn't exist"
They're wrong to say he didn't exist - they don't have evidence he didn't.

But then, there's no evidence he DID, either. To people like myself, you believe an unsupported myth.

But I would never treat you differently for that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #46
56. "you believe an unsupported myth"
So do you...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:19 PM
Response to Reply #56
65. Not believing in the supernatural is an unsupported myth?
Who knew?
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:24 PM
Response to Reply #65
73. Absolutely It Is. Every Bit As Much As The Alternative.
Neither side is conclusive, and each side requires a certain amount of faith.

In my opinion believing that all that is here and all that ever was had just come to be just because, and that the big bang itself just simply happened, and all of a sudden all this stuff just appeared, is every single bit as much a leap of faith as believing otherwise.

Maybe it did happen that way. Who knows. Lord knows the theory isn't fact. Hence why it is theory.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:34 PM
Response to Reply #73
94. Well put, OperationMindCrime.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:40 PM
Response to Reply #94
102. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #102
108. He didn't say he believes in creationism.
But big bang theory makes no assertions about what caused the big bang. That's what I think he's saying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:57 PM
Response to Reply #108
120. He compared a scientific theory to "believing otherwise".
That particular tactic is used by the creationists when they claim their "theory" is just as valid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trotsky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:31 PM
Response to Reply #108
145. We can't even say whether the big bang NEEDED cause.
After all, cause and effect is a principle that we only know to exist within our universe. It says nothing about events that took place "outside" the universe, including its own origins.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #145
150. Hence Why It Is Theory.
And why believing that would be just as much a leap of faith as those that believe the alternative.

That's all I'm saying. My point is valid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #150
156. Your point is invisible and possibly non-existent.
Much like your deity.

Science is NOT the same thing as faith in the supernatural.

I can't believe we even have to explain this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:54 PM
Response to Reply #156
171. Yet Science Doesn't Say A Thing About Where The Matter For The Big Bang
came from, does it. So that theory isn't really science at all then. Only the after effects of the theory are science.

But believing that all of a sudden all of the matter in the world just came to be through a big explosion out of nowhere, is every single bit a leap of faith as those believing a form of God did the very same thing.

In fact, I've always considered them both to be identical. Both say that all of a sudden POOF! Everything came to be.

So there really is no difference. Whichever one chooses to believe is equally a leap of faith, unproven theory, and non factual.

Though I said below it had been my last post, I felt the need for this additional clarity.

That's all now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #171
178. Wow, you mean science doesn't make up stories???
Exactly the point I was trying to make.

Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:00 PM
Response to Reply #178
195. Science can't disprove religion any more than
religion can disprove science. They operate in completely different spheres.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:15 PM
Response to Reply #195
197. Oh brother.
What a ridiculous straw man.

Who said it could?

Atheists are very well versed when it comes to the differences between religious faith and science, thank you, but perhaps you could explain it to your friend.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:18 AM
Response to Reply #197
220. You don't make the argument, Scottie, but plenty of others
around here do. They're sure that it is just a matter of time before science explains absolutely everything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:30 AM
Response to Reply #220
229. Actually, just me. (pretty much)
No-one has managed to contradict quantum theory. When we get the UFT that will be everything.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>(Unless we do not get the UFT, but I will be trying to find it in future, so it would be counter-productive to hold that attitude)<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

So, as you can see, bmus and that will let well enough alone, I don't say it that often but I do beleive that. I beleive that with better understanding I can help more people. Thus I believe that.

There is more to it than that though. But that will do for an intro.

I don't, and challenge anyone if they say to the contrary to give quotes, say that any religious beliefs are valid. Logically, (Yes, I happen to be a very logical person), disproving God (which you are not allowed to do) would not even disprove God. So what's the problem?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 12:35 AM
Response to Reply #195
210. Yep...Science operates in the sphere of REALITY
Religion...well....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:19 AM
Response to Reply #210
221. Everyday reality, conventional reality, socially-constructed
reality. But ultimate reality? Sorry, no.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:26 AM
Response to Reply #221
224. What is ultimate reality?
I don't get it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:27 AM
Response to Reply #224
227. Some people call it
God.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:35 AM
Response to Reply #227
232. Anything real in ultimate reality?
Edited on Thu May-18-06 02:37 AM by Random_Australian
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:36 AM
Response to Reply #227
233. Your right....science can't study realities that don't really seem
to exist in any meaningful way. If you can't see, feel, touch, taste, hear something, or measure it with some instrument, then how do you know it exists? How do you know god exists?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 03:05 AM
Response to Reply #233
237. I've never said I KNOW. I just haven't ruled the possibility out.

That's why it's called "faith." Even a "leap of faith."

(And you know, don't you, that you were asking the old "if a tree falls in a forest" question? I love questions like that. Maybe some other time.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 03:14 AM
Response to Reply #237
240. But you have ruled out the possibility Santa is real?
Why take a leap of faith at all? If you don't know one way or the other, why not remain neutral on the subject. Why bother even believing in Jesus? Seeing as how the christian religion is just one in a brazillion religions, why cling on to that one if you don't know?

Making a leap of faith on something that has no proof makes no sense. I don't know whether or not unicorns exist, but if you have no proof that exists, the logical thing would be to just sit tight and not bother believing until you see a unicorn.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 03:30 AM
Response to Reply #240
242. Because of lots of reasons that obviously don't apply to you.
Because the words of religious language strike a chord in me. Because certain religious figures (Jesus, Gandhi, Martin Luther, Mother Teresa) model the kind of person I wish I could be more like. And because, once or twice, odd and wonderful things have happened to me that proved to me personally that science will never have an answer for everything (sorry, too personal to share).

So I haven't seen God. But here and there, once in a great while, I catch little glimpses that keep some hope alive. The God I want to believe in is the God of Love, so it hardly seems that I'm doing myself or anyone else harm in hoping that She's as real as anything we can perceive with our five senses or our instruments.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 03:44 AM
Response to Reply #242
243. Perfect
There we go...imagine that you had an explanation for those mystical experiences in your life. Imagine that religious language did not strike a chord with you, and in fact, made you feel more or less sick. Now your in my world.

I would be lieing if I said I definitely 100% know that god didn't exist. I'm more like 99.999 percent sure. I think of god no differently than a unicorn. Is it reasonable for me not to believe in a unicorn? Yes. In fact, I'm pretty damn sure they don't exist. It is also reasonable for me not to believe in god..I'm pretty damn sure he doesnt exist. And if he, or she, in the off chance, does exist...I'm almost certain its not the christian god, anyways.

Ah...but then I try to share my non-beliefs. I try to tell people my thoughts....and I get called a fundie atheist or an evangelical atheist. And those labels, I think, are worse then anything thats been said about christians on this thread. Because I have never called any christian on here a fundie or an evangelical or an extremist...I assume they are hear to share their beliefs and debate their beliefs. Which is what I'm here to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 03:57 AM
Response to Reply #243
244. I can totally imagine being in your world. I have spent years
wandering around in there, as a matter of fact. Even Madeline L'Engle, the Christian author of A Wrinkle in Time, has written about her beliefs as being a kind of tight-rope walk, with faith on one side and agnosticism/atheism on the other.

If you're not one of the people around here mocking Christians or trying to convince them that only ignorant people would hold such beliefs,or lumping all Christians or all people with a faith into some kind of fundamentalist basket, then I don't have any argument with you.

We probably actually agree more than we disagree, because we both like to think about things that matter. Even though they might not matter to a lot of other people. Right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:32 AM
Response to Reply #221
230. Other way around. Socially constructed reality has been and gone.
Everyday? Explain what part of Quantum Theory is 'everyday'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 03:07 AM
Response to Reply #230
238. Nah. Not tonight. I'm saving it for my major best-seller.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 01:45 AM
Response to Reply #195
214. "religion can disprove science" Lets hear this proof then!
Wow! I'm so excited! C'mon! Post already! Cool cool cool wow!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:20 AM
Response to Reply #214
222. I just said that it CANNOT. Not that it can.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:23 AM
Response to Reply #222
223. Damn, I misread! Damn! Damn! I was looking forward to that! Ok then,
I will claim that atheism is the most rational (highest statistical co-efficient to valid understanding) position for 1) research 2) Persons of critical perception.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:26 AM
Response to Reply #223
225. Religion is beside the point when you're doing scientific
research. And many persons of critical perception, including many scientists of my personal acquaintance, are persons who have a religious faith.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:35 AM
Response to Reply #225
231. Yeah? I put statistical in my definition for that very reason. In other
words.... I don't get what your post has to do with mine.

Actually, faintly different operation, I used 'can' with a reasonable probability to a large sample, and you said 'are', it is just before and after you collapse the uncertainty.

Was there something I missed?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 03:10 AM
Response to Reply #231
239. Huh? I'm too tired to have one of those "depends on what the
meaning of 'is' is" conversations." In other words, I don't know what you're talking about, but never mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 04:57 AM
Response to Reply #239
245. Ok then, peace for now, talk to you later when less tired.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:27 AM
Response to Reply #223
226. You always mis-read things man
How are we going to convert all these christians to our brand of Evangelical Fundie Atheism if you keep fucking up lol.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:29 AM
Response to Reply #226
228. yeah, really
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:37 AM
Response to Reply #226
234. Because of the Flourine we use as mind control.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:43 AM
Response to Reply #234
236. Yes, the fluorine
one mind at a time. All will fall before the fluor......wait a second, you just gave it away. I'm going to talk the the grand council and get your membership revoked!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kierkegaard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 07:06 AM
Response to Reply #171
258. On the nose...
No matter how you believe life came to exist, there is some point within that belief system that can only be labeled 'magic happens here.' Anyone who argues that one purely speculative idea is right while others are wrong is wasting their time. There is and never will been any proof...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trotsky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 07:16 AM
Response to Reply #150
260. Really?
It does not take the same "faith" to sit in a chair without worrying whether it will support your weight as it does to believe an invisible, undetectable, all-powerful personal force created the universe.

So in that regard, no, your point is far from valid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #260
311. You have no idea
what faith it takes for me to sit in a chair. Especially those little white ones at weddings. If the damned thing doesn't break, then it squishes into the grass and I'm half up and half down, looking around for rescue.

Sometimes it helps to say "Please, Jesus, let this chair hold all 350 lbs. of me." But sometimes I think he wants a good laugh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TransitJohn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #150
283. gravity is theory
I get so tired of people who toss the word around like it means "guess"... WTF.........doesn't anyone like to be correct in their use of language??? AAAARRGHHH!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:39 PM
Response to Reply #73
100. Sorry, there is no "faith" required to not believe in any fairy tale.
If you are inferring that all atheists actively disbelieve in your deity you are both arrogant and ignorant about the subject.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #100
109. Are You For Real?
Edited on Wed May-17-06 08:45 PM by OPERATIONMINDCRIME
"If you are inferring that all atheists actively disbelieve in your deity you are both arrogant and ignorant about the subject."

By the very fucking definition atheists don't believe in my deity. Arrogant and ignorant? Methinks you actually need to learn the meaning of what an atheist is.


a·the·ist ( P ) Pronunciation Key (th-st)
n.
One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:53 PM
Response to Reply #109
118. Nice misuse of the dictionary but I think I'll ignore the xian definition.
I prefer to use the original and untainted one.

Arguing from ignorance helps me prove my point you know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #118
125. LMFAO!!!!!!!!!! Yeah, How DARE I Post The FACTUAL Definition
:rofl: :rofl::rofl: :rofl::rofl: :rofl::rofl: :rofl::rofl: :rofl::rofl: :rofl::rofl: :rofl::rofl: :rofl:


My god, my wife's sitting here wondering why I just laughed out loud so hard. Then I showed her. She's not wondering anymore LOL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WhollyHeretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #125
126. Dictionaries also list immorality as a definition
The bias is pretty obvious. I guess critical thinking would be too much to ask...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donald Ian Rankin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-23-06 07:19 AM
Response to Reply #126
410. Yes, but
any decent dictionary will list that definition as "archaic".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #125
128. Wow, you guys just love to cherry pick whatever info you want to believe.
Like the bible.


What Is the Definition of Atheism?
Dictionaries, Atheists, Freethinkers, and Others on Defining Atheism

There is, unfortunately, some disagreement about the definition of atheism. It is interesting to note that most of that disagreement comes from theists — atheists themselves tend to agree on what atheism means. Christians in particular dispute the definition used by atheists and insist that atheism means something very different.

The broader, and more common, understanding of atheism among atheists is quite simply "not believing in any gods." No claims or denials are made — an atheist is just a person who does not happen to be a theist. Sometimes this broader understanding is called "weak" or "implicit" atheism. Most good, complete dictionaries readily support this.

There also exists a narrower sort of atheism, sometimes called "strong" or "explicit" atheism. With this type, the atheist explicitly denies the existence of any gods — making a strong claim which will deserve support at some point. Some atheists do this and others may do this with regards to certain specific gods but not with others. Thus, a person may lack belief in one god, but deny the existence of another god.

Below are links to a variety of references pages to help understand how atheism is defined and why atheists define it the way they do.



Definition of Atheism:

What is Atheism?
Explanation of the "strong" and "weak" senses of atheism and why the latter, weak atheism, is both broad in what it means and common in how it is applied. Most atheists you meet will probably be weak atheists, not strong atheists.

Standard Dictionaries
A look at how standard dictionaries have defined atheism, theism, agnosticism, and other related terms. Included are definitions from dictionaries from the early part of the 20th century down through the modern Oxford English Dictionary.

Online Dictionaries
When debating atheism online, one of the most common resources used will probably be various online dictionaries. These are references which everyone has equal access to, unlike printed dictionaries which people may not have at all or may not have immediate access to (because, for example, they are currently reading/posting from work). So, what do these online sources have to say about the definition of atheism?

Specialized References
Specialized reference works have also provided definitions of atheism, theism, agnosticism and other related terms. Included here are entries from sociology dictionaries, encyclopedias of religion, and more.

Early Freethinkers
Atheists and freethinkers have defined atheism relatively consistently over the past couple of centuries. Although a few have focused solely on the sense of "strong" atheism, many more have differentiated between "weak" and "strong" atheism. Included here are definitions of atheism from nonbelievers and freethinkers from the early 20th century and before.

Modern Freethinkers
A few modern atheists have also insisted on restricting atheism to just the sense of "strong" atheism, but most have not. Most have, instead, pointed out the difference between "weak" atheism and "strong" atheism, arguing that the former is the broader and more commonly found form of atheism. Included here are quotes and definitions from nonbelievers from the latter part of the 20th century and later.

Theologians
Although misunderstandings about the definition of atheism have tended to come from theists, it is a fact that many theists have recognized that atheism has a broader sense than simply "denial of the existence of gods." Included here are quotes from a few of them.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #128
140. LMAO! This Is Killing Me! You Still Prove My Point Correct LOL
Now you say "The broader, and more common, understanding of atheism among atheists is quite simply "not believing in any gods." "

Hey, doesn't take a genius to figure out that "not believing in any god" and "disbelieving in a deity" are the same fucking thing. And since your original post said "If you are inferring that all atheists actively disbelieve in your deity you are both arrogant and ignorant about the subject", I'd say that you are arguing even against YOUR OWN Goddamn definition, and that it is not me being arrogant and ignorant. :rofl:

You leave me scratching my head in disbelief at your attempts to justify the inaccurate and misguided attack which I quoted above. You said you don't disbelieve in my Deity, yet post a non standard definition saying that atheists simply don't believe in any god. That's one of the most contradictory things I've seen on DU in quite a long time.

So based on the real definition, and even your alternative definition, your original statement I quoted is still false on its face.

Goodnight. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:32 PM
Response to Reply #140
147. I don't think scratching your head will help-might I suggest an education?
You obviously didn't read any of the educational material I posted.

That whooshing you heard over your head was the sound of a clue.

Hint: disbelief is not the same thing as no belief.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #147
153. LOL. Let It Go. The Semantics Are Tiring. Goodnight And God Bless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:43 PM
Response to Reply #153
160. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #153
167. The Problem:
The problem:

Most adults in North America are Theists: they have a definite belief in one or more deities. Jews and Muslims generally believe in a male God who is viewed as a unity. Most Christians believe in a Trinity which is composed of God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit -- three personalities who are simultaneously viewed as a single entity. Others believe in a Goddess, a pantheon of male Gods, a group of female Goddesses or an array of Gods and Goddesses.

But there are other possible beliefs concerning deity among some non-believers:
A definite belief that no deity exists. The individual is solidly convinced that no supreme being exists in any form.
No belief in a specific deity. Faced with a wide variety of conflicting beliefs about deities, the individual has not accepted any of them as true.
A belief that the existence of a deity is unlikely, but not impossible. No certainty exists. However, if the person had to make a decision based on the existence or non-existence of a deity, they would probably assume that no deity existed.
The inability to reach a conclusion about deity. The person may have investigated proofs about the existence and non-existence of a deity and has not accepted any of them. They remain undecided, at least for the present, because of insufficient data.
A belief that we cannot know anything about a deity, including whether one exists or not. The person may have concluded that there is no possibility that we can ever know whether a deity exists.
A person may never have ever considered whether one or more supreme intelligences exist.

There is a general consensus that:
A person who believes in a specific God, Goddess or combination of deities is a Theist.
A person who actively denies the existence of any and all deities is at least one form of Atheist.
A person who feels that we have no method by which we can conclude whether a deity exists is an Agnostic.

But there is no consensus on how to classify the other possible belief systems about deity/deities listed above. Some have suggested the use of modifiers, like:
"Strong Atheist," or "Positive Atheist," or "Hard Atheist" to refer to a person who asserts that no deity exists.
"Weak Atheist," "Negative Atheist," "Soft Atheist," "Skeptical Atheist" to refer to a person who simply has no belief in a deity because there are no rational grounds that support his/her/their existence.
Peter Berger suggested that the term "methodological atheism" be used to describe theologians and historians who study religion as a human creation without declaring whether individual religious beliefs are actually true.
The terms "Noncoherent Atheist" or "Noncoherentism" have been suggested to cover the belief that one cannot have any meaningful discussions about deities, because there exist no coherent definitions of "god."
"Apathetic Atheism," or "Apatheism" have been suggested to cover the individual who doesn't really care whether Gods or Goddesses exist. They probably live with the assumption that no deity exists.


"Atheist" according to most modern dictionaries:

Most dictionaries define an "Atheist" as a person who either passively believes that no God exists, and/or who actively asserts this belief. For example:
Webster's New World Dictionary®, Third College Edition defines an Atheist as "a person who believes that there is no God." 1 This definition implies that Atheists have investigated proofs and for the existence and non-existence of God, and have decided that no God exists or that the probability of one existing is phenomenally small. It seems to include a "closet" Atheist: one who believes that there is no God but does not assert this belief to others. This definition would seem to imply that a person who believes in the existence of a Goddess, but not a God, is also an Atheist. This definition will probably not satisfy many Goddess worshipers. Webster Dictionary, 1913 had a more inclusive definition that includes non-male deities: "One who disbelieves or denies the existence of a God, or supreme intelligent Being." 2 So did Webster's 1828 Dictionary: "One who disbelieves the existence of a God, or Supreme intelligent Being." 2
Websters Collegiate® Dictionary defines an Atheist as "one who denies the existence of God." This is a particularly vague definition, because it does not define which God is being referred to. If Websters means the Christian God, then it would seem to imply that anyone who does not believe in the Trinity is an Atheist -- including Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Wiccans, Sikhs, and Atheists. The word "denies" would seem to imply that the individual actively promotes their belief.
Other definitions: 2
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition: "One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods."
The Cambridge International dictionary of English: "someone who believes that god or gods do not exist."
The Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd edition: "Disbelief in, or denial of, the existence of a god."
The Masonic Dictionary: "One who does not believe in God."


More inclusive definitions of "Atheist" from some sources:
The Barnes & Noble Encyclopedia defines Atheism as "The denial of the existence of God or gods." The Encyclopedia goes further and includes within Atheism both:
"The rejection of any specific belief in God or gods."
"skepticism" towards "claims about divine existence..." 3

The term "God" and "god" usually imply male deities. Whether a Goddess worshiper is also an Atheist is not clear.

This definition covers a lot of ground:
The primary definition includes a person who actively denies the existence of all Gods.
Some might find the secondary definition confusing. One "specific belief in God" is promoted by Christians who believe that God is a Trinity. That is rejected by Muslims who believe that God/Allah is a unity. If one is to literally interpret the secondary definition, this would seem to imply that Muslims can be considered Atheists -- a charge that Muslims would strongly reject. Similarly, Christians reject the pure monotheistic concept of God as taught in Islam; so Christians could be considered Atheists by this definition. This would anger them as well. One wonders if the writers of this definition intended to use the word "all" in place of "any." If so, then this definition would include only persons who reject all Gods.
The third definition would include those who have reached no conclusion about the existence of a deity, and remain skeptical -- i.e. undecided -- about whether a God exists.
The World Almanac and Book of Facts lists "adherents of all religions" in six continental areas of the world. The list includes adherents of 15 specific religions, New-Religionists, Other Religionists, Nonreligions and Atheists. They define Atheists as a catchall group, including: "Persons professing atheism, skepticism, disbelief or irreligion, including antireligious (opposed to all religions)." 4


Definitions according to some Atheists:

It is important to realize that most dictionaries attempt to reflect the general public usage of the terms that they define. Since the vast majority of adults in North America are theists -- that is they actively believe in at least one God and/or Goddess -- the dictionary definitions follow their beliefs. Dictionaries do not necessarily reflect the meaning by those who consider themselves to be Atheists.

The Atheism Web has collected some definitions of "Atheism" from authors who consider themselves to be Atheists: 5
Dan Barker: "There is a difference between believing there is no god and not believing there is a god -- both are atheistic, though popular usage has ignored the latter..." 6
Antony Flew: "I want the originally Greek prefix 'a' to be read in the same way in 'atheist' as it customarily is read in such other Greco-English words as 'amoral,' 'atypical,' and 'asymmetrical'. In this interpretation an atheist becomes: someone who is simply not a theist." 7
Michael Martin: "...an atheist would simply be someone without a belief in God, not necessarily someone who believes that God does not exist." 8
Gordon Stein, Ed., "To be without a belief in God merely means that the term 'god' has no importance or possibly no meaning to you. Belief in God is not a factor in your life. Surely this is quite different from denying the existence of God. Atheism is not a belief as such. It is the lack of belief." 9

Other definitions include:
Al Case," webmaster at www.2think.org/: "If you answer the question, 'Do you believe in god?' with an affirmative, then you are a theist. If your answer is 'no' or 'I don't know' then you are an atheist due to your lack of an affirmative belief." 10
George Smith: "Atheism, therefore, is the absence of theistic belief. One who does not believe in the existence of a god or supernatural being is properly designated as an atheist. Atheism is sometimes defined as 'the belief that there is no God of any kind,' or the claim that a god cannot exist. While these are categories of atheism, they do not exhaust the meaning of atheism--and are somewhat misleading with respect to the basic nature of atheism. Atheism, in its basic form, is not a belief: it is the absence of belief. An atheist is primarily a person who believes that a god does not exist, rather he does not believe in the existence of a god." 11
Dean W. Austin: "...no belief in God. This definition is logically tenable. It is in full accordance with Occam's Razor in that it discards the more complex hypothesis (A supernatural consciousness exists and is responsible for all other existence, we just have no evidence.) for the simpler one (Existence is most likely explained by natural processes which we know exist and have evidence of such workings.)." 12
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalVoice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-26-06 02:32 AM
Response to Reply #153
451. Wow
Edited on Mon Jun-26-06 02:32 AM by LiberalVoice
:wow: I love when people gloat their asses off and look completly clueless in the process. Read the hint BMUS gave you again: "disbelief is not the same thing as no belief." ok, now read it again "disbelief is not the same thing as no belief." If you still dont understand read this part again.

What Is the Definition of Atheism?
Dictionaries, Atheists, Freethinkers, and Others on Defining Atheism

There is, unfortunately, some disagreement about the definition of atheism. It is interesting to note that most of that disagreement comes from theists — atheists themselves tend to agree on what atheism means. Christians in particular dispute the definition used by atheists and insist that atheism means something very different.

The broader, and more common, understanding of atheism among atheists is quite simply "not believing in any gods." No claims or denials are made — an atheist is just a person who does not happen to be a theist. Sometimes this broader understanding is called "weak" or "implicit" atheism. Most good, complete dictionaries readily support this.

There also exists a narrower sort of atheism, sometimes called "strong" or "explicit" atheism. With this type, the atheist explicitly denies the existence of any gods — making a strong claim which will deserve support at some point. Some atheists do this and others may do this with regards to certain specific gods but not with others. Thus, a person may lack belief in one god, but deny the existence of another god.



Get it yet?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #140
152. More info from religioustolerance.org
verview:

Most of the North American public defines an "Atheist" is a person who believes that no deity exists: neither a God, nor a Goddess, nor a pantheon of Gods and Goddesses. This definition is reflected in American dictionaries -- not just because most publishers are Christian, but because it is the purpose of dictionaries to follow the public's word usage. Some individuals who consider themselves Atheists mesh well with that definition. But they may be in the minority. Most Atheists simply have no belief about deity. For them, Atheism is not disbelief in a deity or deities; it is simply a lack of belief.


Conflict over religious terms:

In the fields of medicine and engineering, precise definitions of terms are of paramount importance. Otherwise, misunderstandings can cause disasters. Bridges may fall down and patients can die from excessive or insufficient medication. However, the field of religion is very different. There are probably more religious terms with multiple, conflicting meanings than in any other area of human activity. We have detected at least 17 meanings to the term "Witch" -- mostly negative, and some mutually exclusive. There are at least eight meanings for the word "cult," and six for "Pagan."

There are also many different and mutually exclusive meanings to the term "Christian," among the over 1,000 religious groups in North America which consider themselves Christians:
Public opinion pollsters, census offices, and some other groups and individuals define "Christian" to include 75% of the adults in America -- i.e. those who sincerely believe themselves to be of that faith.
There are groups and individuals who consider those denominations who share their wing of Christianity to be fellow believers. So, a Fundamentalist Christian might consider a Pentecostal to be a Christian, but not a member of the United Church of Christ.
Others consider their own denomination to be the only Christian group in the country, and may define all other Christian denominations as non-Christian, sub-Christian, or quasi-Christian. Some consider Roman Catholicism to be a form of Paganism and/or the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the Mormons) to be Gnostic. They might consider fewer than 1% of Americans to be actual Christians.

All of these groups are correct, within their own definition of terms. But the meaning that they assign to "Christian" and "Christianity" radically contradict each other. There is no way to estimate the misunderstandings and hurt feelings generated by this confusion. More info.

This type of confusion extends to Atheism as well. There are many disagreements about the precise definition of the term "Atheist."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:15 PM
Response to Reply #140
196. They are not the same thing. Are you really not seeing that?
Disbelieving in something means that the something exists, from the point of view of the believer stating that atheism is disbelief, and not lack of belief, in gods.

Saying we atheists believe there are no gods (which, at least in my case, is absolutely not true, and I know my own mind better than any believer) is just another way for the believer to say their god(s) exist(s) and we just 'deny' him/her/it.

That's not at all the case - I just happen not to believe in any gods, because there's no conclusive objective evidence for them. Sure, believers have feelings/experiences/whatever, and WHO KNOWS what those represent, but since I can't be inside a believer's head, I have no clue what caused the alleged experiences, and so cannot accept those subjective feelings as evidence for gods.

I mean, that's pretty simple to grasp, isn't it? I'm not a mind-reader, and there's no other evidence for the 'truth' of holy books' stories, so why on Earth would I believe them?

Quite different from 'denying the truth' asserted to be found in those books.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:21 PM
Response to Reply #140
199. The fact that multiple definitions exist totally escapes you, doesn't it?
So I guess the fact that the American Heritage Dictionary is correcting their definition will also be beyond comprehension.

COMPLAINING THE RIGHT WAY

While we’re on the subject of reference books, reader David Frederiksen has expressed his concern – in writing to those responsible – about an entry appearing in The American Heritage Dictionary under “atheism.” He wrote the publisher:

I find the definition that you listed in your dictionary for atheism to be prejudiced, bigoted and offensive. Since I have unfortunately made the mistake of purchasing a copy of your dictionary I would like to know if I could get a full refund of my money. I see no reason to pay for such trash.

a•the•ism n. 1. a. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods. b. The doctrine that there is no God or gods. 2. Godlessness; immorality.

There is nothing immoral about atheism and atheists most certainly are not in "denial.” Obviously your dictionary is not an authoritative source on the English language if you allow such unfounded bigoted definitions to be included in it.

David received a prompt response from Joseph Pickett, Vice President and Executive Editor of The American Heritage Dictionary, Houghton Mifflin Books:

Thank you for your email regarding one of the definitions of the term atheism in The American Heritage Dictionary of the English language. We feel your point is well-taken, and we think the definition is misleading as phrased and should be reconsidered.

We will change this entry as soon as production processes allow us to accommodate your concerns.

Thanks again for contacting us.

http://www.randi.org/jr/200512/122305hallelujah.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donald Ian Rankin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-23-06 07:15 AM
Response to Reply #199
409. While it's true that multiple definitions exist,

One has sufficiently much more authority behind it that it's correct and all the others are wrong.

When presented with the question "Does a God exist?", (having been provided with a definition of a God beforehand if necessary), if you answer "yes" you're a theist, if you answer "no" you're an atheist, and if you answer "I don't know" then you're an agnostic.

That definition has sufficiently more weight of usage behind it that it is correct, and all the others are wrong.

The "invincibly ignorant", e.g. babies who have never thought of asking the question or don't understand it, arguably form a fourth category, but the usage there is much less well defined, and as anyone who is discussing the subject is ipse facto not one of them it's not terribly important.

The "Godlessness, immorality" definition is archaic, if it was ever correct at all. I have a vague feeling, although I'm not certain, that the protagonist of "The Atheist's Tragedy" was an atheist in that sense rather than the modern one, but I don't know if it was technically correct usage even then.




Side note: if anyone reading this post has read/seen "Travesties", by Tom Stoppard, then compare this discussion with the exchange between Joyce and Tzara about "an artist is one who makes are mean the things he does". I am firmly on Joyce's side. If you haven't, please ignore this paragraph.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #125
129. More
Atheism, in its broadest sense, is an absence of belief in the existence of gods. This definition includes both those who assert that there are no gods, and those who make no claim about whether gods exist or not. Narrower definitions, however, often only qualify those who assert there are no gods as atheists, labelling the others as agnostics or simply non-theists.

Although atheists often share common concerns regarding empirical evidence and the scientific method of investigation and a large number are skeptics, there is no single ideology that all atheists share. Thus, atheism is not a religion. Additionally, there are certain individuals whose religious or spiritual beliefs some might describe as atheistic, though those holding such beliefs do not normally describe themselves as atheists.

Atheism includes, but is not equivalent to, the position of antitheism, the active opposition to theism.

Etymology

In early Ancient Greek, the adjective atheos (from privative a- + theos "god") meant "without gods" or "lack of belief in gods". The word acquired an additional meaning in the 5th century BCE, expressing a total lack of relations with the gods; that is, "denying the gods, godless, ungodly", with more active connotations than asebēs, "impious". Modern translations of classical texts sometimes translate atheos as "atheistic". As an abstract noun, there was also atheotēs: "atheism". Cicero transliterated atheos into Latin. The discussion of atheoi was pronounced in the debate between early Christians and pagans, who each attributed atheism to the other.

A.B. Drachmann (1922) notes:

Atheism and atheist are words formed from Greek roots and with Greek derivative endings. Nevertheless they are not Greek; their formation is not consonant with Greek usage. In Greek they said atheos and atheotes; to these the English words ungodly and ungodliness correspond rather closely. In exactly the same way as ungodly, atheos was used as an expression of severe censure and moral condemnation; this use is an old one, and the oldest that can be traced. Not till later do we find it employed to denote a certain philosophical creed. (p.5)

In English, the term atheism is the result of the adoption of the French athéisme in about 1587. The term atheist in the sense of "one who denies or disbelieves" actually predates atheism, being first attested in about 1571 (the phrase Italian atheoi is recorded as early as 1568). Atheist in the sense of practical godlessness was first attested in 1577. The French word is derived from athée, "godless, atheist", which in turn is from the Greek atheos. The words deist and theist entered English after atheism, being first attested in 1621 and 1662, respectively, with theism and deism following in 1678 and 1682, respectively. Deism and theism exchanged meanings around 1700 due to the influence of atheism. Deism was originally used with a meaning comparable to today's theism, and vice-versa.

The Oxford English Dictionary also records an earlier irregular formation, atheonism, dated from about 1534. The later and now obsolete words athean and atheal are dated to 1611 and 1612, respectively.

Types and typologies of atheism

Many people have disagreed on how best to characterize atheism, and much of the literature on the subject is erroneous or confusing. There are many discrepancies in the use of terminology between proponents and opponents of atheism, and even divergent definitions among those who share near-identical beliefs.

Among proponents of atheism and neutral parties, there are two major traditions in defining atheism and its subdivisions. The first tradition understands atheism very broadly, as including both those who believe gods don't exist (strong atheism) and those who are simply not theists (weak atheism). George H. Smith, Michael Martin, and (formerly) Antony Flew fall into this tradition, though they do not use the same terminology. (Flew has recently adopted a form of deism.)

The second tradition understands atheism more narrowly, as the conscious rejection of theism, and does not consider absence of theistic belief or suspension of judgment concerning theism to be forms of atheism. Ernest Nagel, Paul Edwards and Kai Nielsen are prominent members of this camp. Using this definition of atheism, "implicit atheism", lack of theism without the conscious rejection of it, may not be regarded as atheistic at all, and the umbrella term nontheism may be used in its place.

A third tradition, more common among laypeople, understands atheism even more narrowly than that. Here, atheism is defined in the strongest possible terms, as the belief that there is no god. Such usage is not exclusive to laypeople, however--atheist philosopher Theodore Drange uses the narrow definition.<514>

Atheism as lack of theism

Among modern atheists, the view that atheism means "without theistic beliefs" has a great deal of currency. This very broad definition is justified by reference to etymology as well as consistent usage of the word by atheists.

However, this definition of atheism has not gone unchallenged. Although, over the last few hundred years, atheism has evolved and broadened beyond the narrow meaning of "wickedness", impiety, heresy and religious denial, as well as pantheism and similar beliefs, it is less commonly understood to include everything not explicitly theistic. Whether a writer's definition of atheism as an "absence" or "lack" of theistic belief is in fact intended to mean "not theistic" in the widest possible sense, or just refers to particular forms of the rejection of theism (see below), is often ambiguous.

However, while this definition of atheism is frequently disputed, it is not a recent invention; this use has a history spanning over 230 years. Two atheist writers who are clear in defining atheism so broadly that uninformed children are counted as atheists are d'Holbach (1772) ("All children are born Atheists; they have no idea of God"<515>) and George H. Smith (1979).

According to Smith:

The man who is unacquainted with theism is an atheist because he does not believe in a god. This category would also include the child without the conceptual capacity to grasp the issues involved, but who is still unaware of those issues. The fact that this child does not believe in god qualifies him as an atheist.<516>

One atheist writer who explicitly disagrees with such a broad definition is Ernest Nagel (1965):

Atheism is not to be identified with sheer unbelief... Thus, a child who has received no religious instruction and has never heard about God, is not an atheist - for he is not denying any theistic claims. (p.460-461)

For Nagel, atheism is the rejection of theism, not just the absence of theistic belief. However, this definition leaves open the question of what term can be used to describe those who lack theistic belief, but do not necessarily reject theism.

The obsolete word atheous, first recorded in the Oxford English Dictionary as a synonym of atheism or impiety, is sometimes used to mean "not dealing with the existence of a god" in a purely privative sense, as distinguished from the negative atheistic. This 1880 coinage captures some of what is intended by the broad definition of atheism, though it is hard to sustain the claim that the philosophical rejection of theism can be characterized in such terms.

Implicit and explicit atheism


A chart showing the relationship between the weak/strong (positive/negative) and implicit/explicit dichotomies. Strong atheism is always explicit, and implicit atheism is always weak.

The terms implicit atheism and explicit atheism were coined by George H. Smith (1979, p.13-18).

Implicit atheism is defined by Smith as "the absence of theistic belief without a conscious rejection of it." Explicit atheism is defined as "the absence of theistic belief due to a conscious rejection of it", which, according to Smith, is sometimes called antitheism (see below).

For Smith, explicit atheism is subdivided further according to whether or not the rejection is on rational grounds. The term critical atheism is used to label the view that belief in god is irrational, and is itself subdivided into a) the view usually expressed by the statement "I do not believe in the existence of a god or supernatural being"; b) the view usually expressed by the statement, "god does not exist" or "the existence of god is impossible"; and c) the view which "refuses to discuss the existence or nonexistence of a god" because "the concept of a god is unintelligible" (p.17).

Although Nagel rejects Smith's definition of atheism as merely "lack of theism", acknowledging only explicit "atheism" as true atheism, his tripartite classification of rejectionist atheism (commonly found in the philosophical literature) is identical to Smith's critical atheism typology.

The difference between Nagel on the one hand and d'Holbach and Smith on the other has been attributed to the different concerns of professional philosophers and layman proponents of atheism (see Smith (1990, Chapter 3, p.51-60 <517>), for example, but also alluded to by others).

Everitt (2004) makes the point that professional philosophers are more interested in the grounds for giving or withholding assent to propositions:

We need to distinguish between a biographical or sociological enquiry into why some people have believed or disbelieved in God, and an epistemological enquiry into whether there are any good reasons for either belief or unbelief... We are interested in the question of what good reasons there are for or against God's existence, and no light is thrown on that question by discovering people who hold their beliefs without having good reasons for them. (p.10)

So, in philosophy (Flew and Martin notwithstanding), atheism is commonly defined along the lines of "rejection of theistic belief". This is often misunderstood to mean only the view that there is no God, but it is conventional to distinguish between two or three main sub-types of atheism in this sense (writers differ in their characterization of this distinction, and in the labels they use for these positions).

The terms weak atheism and strong atheism (or negative atheism and positive atheism) are often used as synonyms of Smith's less-well-known implicit and explicit categories. However, the original and technical meanings of implicit and explicit atheism are quite different and distinct from weak and strong atheism, having to do with conscious rejection and unconscious rejection of theism rather than with positive belief and negative belief.

People who do not use the broad definition of atheism as "lack of theism", but instead use the most common definition "disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods" <518> would not recognize mere absence of belief in deities (implicit atheism) as a type of atheism at all, and would tend to use other terms, such as "skeptic" or "agnostic" or "non-atheistic nontheism", for this position.

Atheism interpreted as immorality

The first attempts to define or develop a typology of atheism were in religious apologetics. These attempts were expressed in terminologies and in contexts which reflected the religious assumptions and prejudices of the writers. A diversity of atheist opinion has been recognized at least since Plato, and common distinctions have been established between practical atheism and speculative or contemplative atheism.

Practical atheism

Practical atheism was said to be caused by moral failure, hypocrisy, willful ignorance and infidelity. Practical atheists behaved as though God, morals, ethics and social responsibility did not exist. Maritain's typology of atheism (1953, Chapter 8) proved influential in Catholic circles; it was followed in the New Catholic Encyclopedia (see Reid (1967)). He identified, in addition to practical atheism, pseudo-atheism and absolute atheism (and subdivided theoretical atheism in a way that anticipated Flew). For an atheist critique of Maritain, see Smith (1979, Chapter 1, Section 5).<519>

According to the French Catholic philosopher Étienne Borne (1961, p.10), "Practical atheism is not the denial of the existence of God, but complete godlessness of action; it is a moral evil, implying not the denial of the absolute validity of the moral law but simply rebellion against that law."

According to Karen Armstrong (1999):

During the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the word 'atheist' was still reserved exclusively for polemic... In his tract Atheism Closed and Open Anatomized (1634), John Wingfield claimed: "the hypocrite is an Atheist; the loose wicked man is an open Atheist; the secure, bold and proud transgressor is an Atheist: he that will not be taught or reformed is an Atheist". For the Welsh poet William Vaughan (1577 -1641), who helped in the colonisation of Newfoundland, those who raised rents or enclosed commons were obvious atheists. The English dramatist Thomas Nashe (1567-1601) proclaimed that the ambitious, the greedy, the gluttons, the vainglorious and prostitutes were all atheists. The term 'atheist' was an insult. Nobody would have dreamed of calling himself an atheist. (p.331-332)

On the other hand, the existence of serious speculative atheism was often denied. That anyone might reason their way to atheism was thought to be impossible. Thus, speculative atheism was collapsed into a form of practical atheism, or conceptualized as hatred of God, or a fight against God. This is why Borne finds it necessary to say, "to put forward the idea, as some apologists rashly do, that there are no atheists except in name but only 'practical atheists' who through pride or idleness disregard the divine law, would be, at least at the beginning of the argument, a rhetorical convenience or an emotional prejudice evading the real question." (p.18)

Martin (1990, p.465-466) suggests that practical atheism would be better described as alienated theism.

Other pejorative definitions of atheism

When denial of the existence of "speculative" atheism became unsustainable, atheism was nevertheless often repressed and criticized by narrowing definitions, applying charges of dogmatism, and otherwise misrepresenting atheist positions. One of the reasons for the popularity of euphemistic alternative terms like secularist, empiricist, agnostic, or bright is that atheism still has pejorative connotations arising from attempts at suppression and from its association with practical atheism (godless is still used as an abusive epithet).

Mynga Futrell and Paul Geisert, the originators of the term Bright, made this explicit in an essay published in 2003:

Our personal frustration regarding labels reached culmination last fall when we were invited to join a march on Washington as "Godless Americans." The causes of the march were worthy, and the march itself well planned and conducted. However, to unite for common interests under a disparaging term like godless (it also means "wicked") seemed ludicrous! Why accept and utilize the very derogatory language that so clearly hampers our own capacity to play a positive and contributing role in our communities and in the nation and world?<520>

Gaskin (1989) abandoned the term atheism in favour of unbelief, citing "the pejorative associations of the term, its vagueness, and later the tendency of religious apologists to define atheism so that no one could be an atheist..." (p.4)

Despite these considerations, for others atheist has always been the preferred name. Charles Bradlaugh once said (in debate with George Jacob Holyoake, 10 March 1870, cited in Bradlaugh Bonner (1908)):

I maintain that the opprobrium cast upon the word Atheism is a lie. I believe Atheists as a body to be men deserving respect... I do not care what kind of character religious men may put round the word Atheist, I would fight until men respect it. (p.334)

For more on repressive definitions of atheism, see Berman (1982), (1983), (1990).

Weak and strong atheism
Main articles: Weak atheism, Strong atheism

Weak atheism, sometimes called soft atheism, negative atheism or neutral atheism, is the absence of belief in the existence of deities without the positive assertion that deities do not exist. Strong atheism, also known as hard atheism or positive atheism, is the assertion that no deities exist.

While the terms weak and strong are relatively recent, the concepts they represent have been in use for some time. In earlier philosophical publications, the terms negative atheism and positive atheism were more common; these terms were used by Antony Flew in 1972, although Jacques Maritain (1953, Chapter 8, p.104) used the phrases in a similar, but strictly Catholic apologist, context as early as 1949.<521>

Although explicit atheists (nontheists who consciously reject theism), may subscribe to either weak or strong atheism, weak atheism also includes implicit atheists - that is, nontheists who have not consciously rejected theism, but lack theistic belief, arguably including infants.

Theists claim that a single deity or group of deities exists. Weak atheists do not assert the contrary; instead, they only refrain from assenting to theistic claims. Some weak atheists are without any opinion regarding the existence of deities, either because of a lack of thought on the matter, a lack of interest in the matter (see apatheism), or a belief that the arguments and evidence provided by both theists and strong atheists are equally unpersuasive. Others (explicit weak atheists) may doubt or dispute claims for the existence of deities, while not actively asserting that deities do not exist, following Wittgenstein's famous dictum, "Whereof one cannot speak thereof one must remain silent."

Some weak atheists feel that theism and strong atheism are equally untenable, on the grounds that faith is required both to assert and to deny the existence of deities, and as such both theism and strong atheism have the burden of proof placed on them to prove that a god does or doesn't exist. Some also base their belief on the notion that it is impossible to prove a negative.

While a weak atheist might consider the nonexistence of deities likely on the basis that there is insufficient evidence to justify belief in a deity's existence, a strong atheist has the additional view that positive statements of nonexistence are merited when evidence or arguments indicate that a deity's nonexistence is certain or probable.

Strong atheism may be based on arguments that the concept of a deity is self-contradictory and therefore impossible (positive ignosticism), or that one or more of the properties attributed to a deity are incompatible with what we observe in the world. Examples of this may be found in quantum physics, where the existence of mutually exclusive data negates the possibility of omniscience, usually a core attribute of monotheistic conceptions of deity.

Agnosticism is distinct from strong atheism, though many weak atheists may be agnostics, and those who are strong atheists with regard to a particular deity might be weak atheists or agnostics with regard to other deities.

Ignosticism
Main article: Ignosticism

Ignosticism is the view that the question of whether or not deities exist is inherently meaningless. It is a popular view among many logical positivists such as Rudolph Carnap and A. J. Ayer, who hold that talk of gods is literally nonsense. According to ignostics, "Does a god exist?" has the same logical status as "What color is Saturday?"; they are both nonsensical, and thus have no meaningful answers.

Ignostics commonly hold that statements about religious or other transcendent experiences cannot have any truth value, often because theological statements lack falsifiability, because of an epistemological view that renders the ontological argument nonsensical, or because the terminology being used has not been properly or consistently defined — the latter view is known as theological noncognitivism.

The use of the word "god" is thus solely a matter of semantics to ignostics, dealing with word use and technicalities rather than with existence and reality.

In Language, Truth and Logic, Ayer stated that theism, atheism and agnosticism were equally meaningless, insofar as they treat the question of the existence of God as a real question. However, there are varieties of atheism and agnosticism which do not necessarily agree that the question is meaningful, especially using the "lack of theism" definition of atheism. Despite Ayer's criticism of atheism (perhaps using the definition typically associated with strong atheism), Ignosticism is usually counted as a form of atheism; Ayer (1966) was clear on his position:

I do not believe in God. It seems to me that theists of all kinds have very largely failed to make their concept of a deity intelligible; and to the extent that they have made it intelligible, they have given us no reason to think that anything answers to it. (p226)

The ignostic position is mentioned (though the term ignostic is not used) as one of the three forms of "critical atheism" (in Smith) or "rejectionist atheism" (in Nagel). Active disbelief in god or supernatural beings is one other type of critical/rejectionist atheism. Finally, the third type is the positive claim that deities do not exist. Since critical/rejectionist atheism is a type of explicit atheism, if follows that ignosticism is a type of explicit atheism. There is some debate over whether it should be classified as weak atheism or strong atheism.

Ignosticism is distinct from apatheism in that while ignostics hold questions and discussions of whether deities exist to be meaningless, apatheists hold that even a hypothetical answer to such questions would be completely irrelevant to human existence.

Gnostic and agnostic atheism
Main article: Agnostic atheism

Agnostic atheism is a fusion of atheism or nontheism with agnosticism, the epistemological position that the existence or nonexistence of deities is unknown (weak agnosticism) or unknowable (strong agnosticism). Agnostic atheism is typically contrasted with agnostic theism, the belief that deities exist even though it is impossible to know that deities exist, and with gnostic atheism, the belief that there is enough information to determine that deities do not exist.

Agnostic atheism's definition varies, just as the definitions of agnosticism and atheism do. It may be a combination of lack of theism with strong agnosticism, the view that it is impossible to know whether deities exist to any reliable degree. It may also be a combination of lack of theism with weak agnosticism, the view that there is not currently enough information to decide whether or not a deity exists, but that there may be enough in the future.

Gnostic atheism is a more rarely used term, because often anyone who is not labeled as agnostic is assumed to be gnostic by default. Gnostic atheism also has varying meanings. When nontheism is combined with strong gnosticism, it denotes the belief that it is rational to be absolutely certain that deities do not, and perhaps cannot, exist. When it is with weak gnosticism, it denotes the belief that there is enough information to be reasonably sure that deities do not exist, but not absolutely certain. The term should not be confused with Gnosticism.

Gnostic atheism is also sometimes used as a synonym of strong atheism, and thus agnostic atheism is occasionally a synonym for weak atheism. This is similar to the more common confusion of the terms implicit atheism and explicit atheism with strong and weak atheism.

Apatheism often overlaps with agnostic atheism, such as with apathetic agnosticism, a fusion of apatheism with strong agnostic atheism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:15 PM
Response to Reply #125
132. And still more...
Atheism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Atheism, in its broadest sense, is an absence of belief in the existence of gods. This definition includes both those who assert that there are no gods, and those who make no claim about whether gods exist or not. Narrower definitions, however, often only qualify those who assert there are no gods as atheists, labeling the others as agnostics or simply non-theists.

There is no single ideology that all atheists share, nor are there any institutionalized rituals or behaviors.

Atheism includes, but is not equivalent to, the position of antitheism, the active opposition to theism.

*******

Types and typologies of atheism

Many people have disagreed on how best to characterize atheism, and much of the literature on the subject is erroneous or confusing. There are many discrepancies in the use of terminology between proponents and opponents of atheism, and even divergent definitions among those who share near-identical beliefs.

Among proponents of atheism and neutral parties, there are two major traditions in defining atheism and its subdivisions. The first tradition understands atheism very broadly, as including both those who believe gods don't exist (strong atheism) and those who are simply not theists (weak atheism). George H. Smith, Michael Martin, and (formerly) Antony Flew fall into this tradition, though they do not use the same terminology. (Flew has recently adopted a form of deism.)

The second tradition understands atheism more narrowly, as the conscious rejection of theism, and does not consider absence of theistic belief or suspension of judgment concerning theism to be forms of atheism. Ernest Nagel, Paul Edwards and Kai Nielsen are prominent members of this camp. Using this definition of atheism, "implicit atheism", lack of theism without the conscious rejection of it, may not be regarded as atheistic at all, and the umbrella term nontheism may be used in its place.

A third tradition, more common among laypeople, understands atheism even more narrowly than that. Here, atheism is defined in the strongest possible terms, as the belief that there is no god. Such usage is not exclusive to laypeople, however--atheist philosopher Theodore Drange uses the narrow definition.<1>


Let me know if any of this sinks in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #125
136. more enlightenment:
Atheism is traditionally defined as disbelief in the existence of God. As such, atheism involves active rejection of belief in the existence of God. This definition does not capture the atheism of many atheists, which is based on an indifference to the issue of God's existence. There is a difference between disbelief in all gods and no belief in God. I'm not sure there is even any meaning to the former. Before one can disbelieve in something, that something must be intelligible and it must be understood. Since belief in new gods may appear in the future and it is impossible to know what will be meant by reference to those gods, it makes no sense to say one disbelieves in all gods. Likewise, some conceptions of God are so confusing as to be little more than gibberish. How can one disbelieve in the "ineffable ground of all being"? The expression has no meaning for me and I suspect that those who claim it is meaningful to them don't know what they're talking about.

However, since there are many concepts of god(s) and these concepts are usually rooted in some culture or tradition, atheism might be defined as the belief that a particular word used to refer to a particular god is a word that has no reference. Thus, there are as many different kinds of atheism as there are names of gods or groups of gods.

Some atheists may know of many gods and reject belief in the existence of all of them. Such a person might be called a polyatheist. All theists are atheists in the sense that they deny the existence of all other gods except theirs, but they don't consider themselves atheists. Most people today who consider themselves atheists probably mean that they do not believe in the existence of the local god. For example, most people who call themselves atheists in a culture where the Judeo-Christian or Islamic God (JCoIG or Jaycolgee) dominates would mean, at the very least, that they do not believe that there is an Omnipotent and Omniscient Providential Personal Creator of the universe. And, people who believe in the JCoIG would consider such disbelief tantamount to atheism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WhollyHeretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:13 PM
Response to Reply #109
130. Gee look another definition, whodda thunk it
http://www.websters-online-dictionary.org/definition/atheism

"A lack of belief in the existence of God or gods."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #130
141. Funny...he doesn't seem to be laughing anymore.
All I hear are crickets.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 01:39 AM
Response to Reply #73
212. Wrong, OMC. Theories are supported by evidence. In fact science
is one step away from it not even bieng theory.

Believing in something wholly unsupported or unpredicted by any evidence requires faith, not believing it does not require that faith.

Big Bang is faith as much as inertia. It is not a leap of faith to believe that something that always happens happens.


No, FYI there is no proof of any infinite God.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalVoice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-26-06 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #73
449. Ummmm
Filling up holes with ideas that not only cannot be proven but for which no proof is even possible is not the same thing as knowing you dont know. NOT EVEN CLOSE. Theories that have never in the thousands of years that they existed ever ever EVER showed even the tiniest hint of proof. Not even that they MIGHT be true.

It is illogical to think that man was created by god/s. Not the other way around.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:26 PM
Response to Reply #56
185. Tell me what I believe.
Here's a hint: I most emphatically DON'T believe it's been proven there are no gods - I just don't believe in things, like gods, for which there is no evidence.

So use your mind-reading ability. Tell me what I believe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sarah Ibarruri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:06 PM
Response to Original message
48. I think many of us are tired and beat of Christianity
and of having it forced on us via Republican governments. It's beyond tiring. Perhaps if the non-Republican Christians had spoken up...

:rant:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:39 PM
Response to Reply #48
155. "Perhaps If The Non Republican Christians Had Spoken Up"
I believe that we are in the same boat as you are as I voted for Gore, and then for Kerry.

I think that the criminals stole at least one of the elections, if not both.

I speak up, I worked for the Kerry campaign, I speak out when I can, I go to a Church that is very liberal, I'm active in my professional organization (NASW) who are very liberal and politically outspoken.

So, I don't get the statement that if the non republican Christians had spoken up.

There are lots and lots and lots of non repuke Christians in this country that got ripped off the same way you did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sarah Ibarruri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #155
354. Sojourner Magazine is very left-wing and it's strongly Christian
I love the magazine and the people that are associated with it. However, in the mainstream, I only know 2 Christians that are left wing. One used to be a right winger and now doesn't go to church because churches are right wing. The other doesn't go to either because churches are right wing. I have come to believe that American Christianity is of a brand that lends itself too easily to fascism. Am I wrong in this?

And by the way, thank you for pointing out that not every Christian is right wing. It's true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:08 PM
Response to Original message
51. I don't see it as mocking at all
The Santa Claus analogy is just used by atheists to descibe their own feelings in a way that people of faith can understand.

It was never intended to be mocking or disrespectful.

I saw an article about one atheist's life where he described the pervasiveness of religion everywhere in his life. In almost every facet of his life. And he described the incredulity and open hostility of people who discovered that he wasn't a believer.

In his essay, he described an almost Kafkaesque world where people surrounding him had the most incredible beliefs.

But he used the Santa analogy to describe their faith. It was just his way of pointing out that as a non-believer, there were incredible pressures on him to accept what he considered ridiculous.

But he didn't disparge them their faith and never ranted at them, he was just... disappointed that no-one could see things his way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #51
157. To Me, Santa Claus Is Insulting (The Analogy)
to say that my belief is like believing in Santa Claus is insulting.

I don't care if someone doesn't believe in God. Why go out of your way to insult someone who does?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 01:47 AM
Response to Reply #157
216. My point was that it's not aimed at you
It's only an attempt to illustrate how we feel.

We atheists have no interest in insulting or denigrating anyone's beliefs. A live and let live attittude is almost universal among us (from what I've experienced). If anyone uses this example for purposes of feeling superior in any way, that's plain wrong.

I do agree that the Santa Claus myth is a trivial example to use. After all, it's what we tell innocent, trusting, uneducated children, so I understand on that level how you'd feel insulted.

But I personally wouldn't use that example to explain exactly how I feel. It's far more complex than that.

I apologize for the attempted rationalization of the "analogy" and I hope we can agree to disagree amicably.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 06:08 AM
Response to Reply #51
252. Exactly
Edited on Thu May-18-06 06:09 AM by Warren Stupidity
I was scrolling down looking for somebody to reject the OP's thesis for what it is: a strawman argument that totally misstates the original 'santa claus' post's position. We agnostics and atheists are compelled to put up with and defer to theistic ideology on a regular basis. It is shoved down our throats, and when we object in the slightest we are condemned as intolerant of the religious who, it seems, are so uncertain of their beliefs that any hint of skepticism is considered threatening.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 06:33 AM
Response to Reply #51
255. Sure, it's just used by atheists to describe their own feelings.
Those feelings are mocking and disrespectful.

Oh, I suppose there are those that really can't tell the difference between a santa claus story and, say, a coherent world view and complete set of ethical norms, and those people wouldn't be mocking and disrespectful, just willfully ignorant. There's a difference, in my opinion, between somebody who believes in an item for which there is no evidence one way or another, and a person who can't figure out what's before his very nose. The former may be wrong but is harmless in and of itself, and the latter is the R/T section.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 06:58 AM
Response to Reply #255
256. The Santa Claus story is a coherent world-view.
Be good and you will get presents. Simple.

Let me clarify:

You could make up some story about flying badgers, expand it to a world-view, call it a religion, and then expect atheists not to say it was made up.

That is what you are saying: "Atheists: Don't provide an illustration or analagy to allow other to understand your beleifs in the interests of creating empathy and preventing conflict, because your world view is different to 'theirs' so if you use an analagy it will potray their beliefs as something different to what they beleive, WHICH WAS THE POINT.

I LIKE PARSLEY!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 07:27 AM
Response to Reply #256
261. You could say it's made up.
You can't call it simpleminded or childish, though, and one has to wonder why that's so important. It's not enough to observe, dispassionately, that there's no evidence for god, because that doesn't annoy believers. Nobody in DU asks anyone else to believe. They just ask not to be called childish, stupid, fearful, dupes, closet rightwingers, intolerant, and not to be presumed one of those things. I don't think that the request is out of line merely because they believe in a divinity. Last I knew, everyone on DU voted for a devout christian as president, so anyone who wants to argue that point can tell me who they voted for.

Fact is, religion isn't either childish or simple. Your santa claus analogy, for example, conveniently ignores that religions put a shitload of time into what it means to "be good". For that matter, it puts a ton of time into what it means to be rewarded.

All one has to do is ignore what religion really is and really does, and sure, it looks childish and simple. I'm wondering why that sort of dishonest and intentionally insulting appraisal should get MY respect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 07:39 AM
Response to Reply #261
265. Look, downthread I explain why it does not call it simpleminded or
childish. Let's continue there, I have difficulty finding this bit. But rest assured, in no way is it dismissive of religion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
not_nameless Donating Member (69 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:08 PM
Response to Original message
52. /
>> That's really insulting to me and I imagine to people of faith.

and...? Should we stop it because your feelings are hurt?
Believe all you want, however other are free to believe that you're strange.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TechBear_Seattle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:11 PM
Response to Original message
55. God, Santa... both have the exact same objective evidence
When someone can prove the existence of God using objective evidence, and provide backup evidence from which one can reasonably conclude that other gods such as Vishnu, Allah and Amaterasu do not exist, I will change my own beliefs to coincide with established fact. Not until then. Nor will I continue to point out the total lack of objective evidence merely because it makes other unconfortable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:19 PM
Response to Reply #55
64. Ah, but they all do
in my concept of God :)

But to get on to your other points. I don't mind you pointing out your cereberal way of looking at religion-but it was done politely. You did not imply that someone who does believe in a God concept is a fool, and some posters use words to that effect.

I do have a question for you--what do you think of Bhuddist philosophy? There is no god in Buddhism, but there are very practical ways of living. What do you think of those ways?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TechBear_Seattle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:09 PM
Response to Reply #64
127. I always try to be respectful, although I occasionally miss the mark
As for your question, I have issues with Buddhism, too.

While gods are irrelevant to to Buddhism, it is still based on ideas with absolutely no objective proof. From my point of view, I see no difference between eternal salvation through Christ Jesus and final release from a cycle of death and rebirth. Until I see evidence that reincarnation exists and that all people will continue to be born, live, die and return in a different life, I have no reason to accept the existence of such a cycle.

My main problem with Buddhism, though, is the moral stance that arises out of the doctrine of karma. Outside of the idealistic Buddhist schools that have become fashionable in western society since the 60s (meaning, within the vast majority of Buddhist cultures around the world), the concept of compassion actually has a minor role. The Buddhist's regard for the world is supposed to be one of total disinterest; too much concern for the state of others leads to attachment to the world of illusion and thus endangers one's own salvation. And anyway, that beggar would not be sick/homeless/begging if it weren't for bad karma carried over from a past life; if one were to try and cure him / build and staff a homeless shelter he could go to / give him a job so he could support himself with dignity, one would be preventing nature from balancing his karma, thus prolonging his suffering. Compassion, in the end, simply means not kicking the beggar as one passes him by. If one does give a few coins, it should be done as an act to generate good karma and not out of regard to the beggar's needs.

And before you protest, please note again: I am speaking of Buddhism as it is taught and practiced in most of the world. While American Buddhism is generally more in line with what I would call a moral and ethical stance, American Buddhism has very little to do with Buddhism as it is taught in India, Thailand, Burma, China, Tibet, Nepal and other Buddhist countries and societies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arugula Latte Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:13 PM
Response to Original message
58. We're supposed to prioritize the fairy tales, I guess.
People say God this and God that and everyone is expected to nod along.

But why should we pretend that we think belief in a god is any more legitimate than belief in a sky fairy or the Great Pumpkin? They are all equally ridiculous to many of us. Why are we always expected to defer to the believers' opinions, and they are NEVER expected to defer to ours?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:22 PM
Response to Reply #58
69. I know for a fact that many here do
Were you in on the discussion a while back about whether atheists "believe" in anything? I recall it well, because it was then that I found that some of the atheists here object to the term "belief". I've tried my best to be polite and find a substitute when I'm talking with atheists. I don't expect you to suddenly believe in something you obviously don't think exists-and I hope you realize that you are very unlikely to suddenly see people of faith coming wholesale over to your side; the point of the OP was that at times the discussion gets rude, and rudeness simply gets in the way of understanding and in trying to help each other with a common objective, like getting the rwingers out of office.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:39 PM
Response to Reply #69
101. Exactly. We all have the same major objective.
Edited on Wed May-17-06 08:40 PM by pnwmom
Gratuitous insults only get in the way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Howardx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #58
85. well said
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:41 PM
Response to Reply #58
158. Ha Ha
Edited on Wed May-17-06 09:41 PM by Southpawkicker
thank you for your disrespect of me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal Veteran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:19 PM
Response to Original message
63. I don't believe others should be forced to put your faith on a pedestal
Edited on Wed May-17-06 08:22 PM by Liberal Veteran
I have faith. It is mine and mine alone. It takes nothing from me if someone doesn't share it. It takes nothing from me if someone thinks my belief is not any better or worse than believing in Santa Claus, alien abductions, the Flying Spaghetti monster, or Plumus (the Goddess of the Municipal Water Supply).

What you are really saying, when you boil it all down to what really bothers you, is that you believe people shouldn't be allowed to say they think God is no more real than Zeus or Odin or Santa Claus.

You are indulging in a form of religious persecution by demanding they put your particular belief on a pedestal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:24 PM
Response to Reply #63
71. I took the OP another way
it was the rudeness. I don't mind if an atheist says God doesn't exist any more than those creatures you named-but there have been times they have gone beyond that and said that the believer himself obviously must be stupid, etc. That is rudeness, and it simply isn't polite.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal Veteran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:37 PM
Response to Reply #71
98. To a true atheist, it is distinction without a difference.
The same poster would likely have absolutely no problem with referring to Santa Claus as a "myth" or putting the tooth fairy and Odin in the same category.

And believe me, I have had more than one run in with a few Du'ers who go out of their way to find offense about someone not paying homage to their particular brand of faith.

If someone calls Jehovah a myth, a person will get all bent out of shape and demand apologies for someone belittling their "privileged" faith by comparing it to a believe in Zeus or some such other thing while never realizing that they are doing EXACTLY what they are pissed about.

I'm very uncomfortable with people having to sugarcoat every single word to express how they really feel about a subject. If a person thinks God is no more real than Santa Claus, then they should be able to say that's EXACTLY how they view religion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:41 PM
Response to Reply #98
105. which is fine
but don't go on to say something like "and since you believe in it, you are a childish fool." Again, what I was pointing out was that sometimes, (and not always) observations go from generalities to personal attacks. And again, they don't relect poorly on the attacked but on the person that attacked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #105
134. I agree - perhaps it is just whistling past the graveyard -fear they might
be wrong - but observations go from generalities to personal attacks in every thread and indeed in almost every post -but on DU best not to say that lest you be called a bigot and what you thought was tolerance and tolerant behavior rules becomes censorship of the right to speak your mind.

I believe Tolerance does not including mocking the other person, and

Tolerance does not including responding to a polite objection by saying the equivalent of screw you - I don't need to use kid gloves - if you feel mocked your faith must be weak, and

Tolerance does not mean responding to a polite request to not mock my beliefs with a statement that you do not want to be preached to or scolded by whiners, and

Tolerance does not mean a blackmail attempt of saying I will deny your credibility on other issues if you do not agree with me on non-belief, and

Tolerance does not mean you can loudly deny that rational people can both be sane and be religious, and then you get to say that those that speak aloud that they feel you are wrong or have misunderstood the logic or mis-stated the facts are bigoted, and

Tolerance is not playing word games that attempt to convert a statement that mocking is tiring and insulting into an attack on your own beliefs that requires more mocking from you, and in contrast

I do believe that Tolerance IS realizing that many of those on the other side from me will reject my thoughts above and simply conclude that I am a hateful bigot, and put me on ignore - and realizing that that reaction, which is probably out of fear they might be wrong but the reason really does not matter, in terms of my own life does not matter, and in terms of advancing the progressive cause, I must remember wisdom is knowing what you can not change and accepting it. So I think, and hope, I am tolerant.

And if I am not seen as such by someone, then I accept that they have a right to their view, and I move on - or try to at least.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #134
169. I thought you said you weren't posting in here anymore, papau.
"Indeed I do not post in R/T because the atheist crowd owns it via the mods, and allows the atheist no tolerance attitude - and their just posting insults claiming they forgive you for being stupid.

I doubt they would have changed just because we tried to show some love.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #169
203. Gee, do the mods know they're the puppet of atheists?
:rofl:

Man, he's said some ridiculous things, but that's just about the funniest post I've EVER seen here!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:47 PM
Response to Reply #203
205. What?
Edited on Wed May-17-06 11:48 PM by beam me up scottie
You don't feel the love?

So whose job is it to collect the...uh, "donations" to the mods this week?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 05:44 AM
Response to Reply #203
251. That which can not be changed - BMUS and Zhade's posting manners
The quote as a prediction appears to be accurate.

Although the GD posts now do seem to be moving to R/T.

"ridiculous" "funniest" - - feel the love - - why the fear of a discussion of tolerance, or if you prefer, the rejection of a discussion of tolerance by asserting you are tolerant or that the poster is ridiculous?

TG has the ability to get her posts in R/T answered with replies that are not offensive - I obviously do not - at least not from certain folks.

Whatever .. what will be will be .. peace :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-23-06 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #98
447. Fine
and if I say that atheism is narcissistic, then I should be able to say EXACTLY what I think
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalVoice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-26-06 02:53 AM
Response to Reply #447
452. You'd be wrong...But go ahead.
The notion that big brother is up in the clouds watching your every move and actually cares what you do...now THATS narcissistic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:28 PM
Response to Original message
79. I usually compare it to the faith of the ancient Greeks in Zeus instead.
After all, not many ADULTS ever believed Santa Claus. Unlike Zeus. It's a better analogy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-24-06 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #79
416. That's a good point.
I was surprised when I first saw people on DU comparing the belief in "God" to the belief in Santa Claus - because of the obvious rude and obnoxious intention inherent in the idea.

I used to think that liberals were generally more interested in tolerance and respect than what has be shown - esp. in R/T. Many have proved that notion wrong (assuming these people consider themselves to be liberals).

Some insist that they are not proselytizing - and yet - it sounds to me like some people are insistent on shaming others for their ideas. It seems pretty similar to me - only trying to get converts in a negative fashion. Some religious proselytizing is positive (based on rewards) - some is negative (based on repercussions).


Some might still find the Zeus analogy to be over the top. But at least it puts the idea in the context of religious ideas - along with other supernatural beliefs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Howardx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:29 PM
Response to Original message
80. im real tired of xtians whining
go to church and complain about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ariana Celeste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:30 PM
Response to Original message
82. Don't wear your faith on your sleeve.
I'm an Atheist. I don't give people shit for what they believe in. I don't think anyone here could find a reply or post by me, criticizing believers without specifically saying "Fundies".
That said.....

Don't talk about your faith if you are not willing (or capable) of handling argument (whether civil or not). It's that simple.

What you need to realize is that Atheists and Non- Christians are treated like crap in this country. I wasn't always an Atheist. I was raised a Non-Denominational Christian, then became a Fundie, and then discovered Paganism. Eventually I said to hell with it all.

You think *you* have it bad? Try telling people you are a pagan. LOL.

You'll think that's bad. And then after that, try explaining what LaVeyan Satanism *really* is without people staring at you like you are some kind of animal raping piece of shit.

Seriously, you get a bad comment once in awhile, let it roll off of you. Because the religious minorities in this country have it a lot worse, and that's why many of us have *zero* sympathy when it comes to posts like this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arugula Latte Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #82
87. Yep.
We've had it -- and the people of "faith" don't understand what we put up with on a daily basis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ariana Celeste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #87
124. Exactly.
I can honestly say though, that it is easier for me to say to someone, "I'm an Atheist." Than it is for me to say to someone, "I am a Wiccan." The response I get now compared to back then is a little less hateful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StellaBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:32 PM
Response to Original message
88. So... how bout that AL GORE?!?!?!?!
|
|
|
|
\ /
V
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #88
312. I love him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pitohui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:32 PM
Response to Original message
89. your experiences don't actually sound different tho
Edited on Wed May-17-06 08:34 PM by pitohui
you say your experiences are "different" but then acknowledge they came as the result of a problem with alcohol

well that's the old story isn't it, people are in trouble and don't trust themselves to get out of trouble so they put their trust in the invisible cloud being

if people are on the offensive abt god and religion, it is because god and religion are crammed down our throats and everyone with a problem is swarmed by the herds of the borg trying to assimmilate that person back into some religion

no one respects the atheist or the agnostic yet we are supposed to eternally tiptoe around the faithful

do you honestly not see the unfairness operating here?

religion is everywhere bowed down to even though most of us know it damn well ain't true -- faith itself is "belief" in things that ain't so, ask any five year old

i honestly don't see what respecting delusion is going to get any of us except more of the same

we've had thousands of years of respecting faith and the result, as you see, is not v. positive, the world is being destroyed before our eyes

i'm sick of it frankly

you're right, quite unfair to compare god to santa claus, santa claus actually did something for me more recently than 2,000 freaking years ago

sorry for the lack of tact, but if god could be arsed to exist, he might have given me more social skills to work with for starters

look i've seen hundreds of miles of towns and cities destroyed, god doesn't deserve to even show his face around here, if he does exist, there is absolutely no excuse for him
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #89
114. Ahhhhhhhhh, siddown and shaddup
you godless commie or we'll throw you off the bus again.:sarcasm:

The disconnect is stunning.

It's just like listening to the heterosexuals whining about the gay "agenda".

Or white people whining about how the Mexicans have it so much better than they do.

I get enough of that shit at work and I resent being subjected to it here, no matter which minority is being told to shut up because they might create a mass exodus from the party by opining on DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:08 PM
Response to Reply #89
180. Wow
Okay

Peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoneOffShore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:34 PM
Response to Original message
92. Back when I was in Sunday School
a looooong time ago, I remember asking the teacher, " Doesn't Superman have more powers than Jesus? Superman can fly, see through walls and bullets can't hurt him. So that would make him stronger than Jesus."

I got thrown out of Sunday school. Never went back.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texanwitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:41 PM
Response to Reply #92
103. Me too, I got thrown out of a lot of Sunday School classes, just asked
to many questions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pastiche423 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:15 PM
Response to Reply #92
131. Your story reminds me
of the look on a Sunday school teacher's face when I asked, what I thought at age 8, to be an intelligent question.

I wanted to know where the women came from that Abel and Cain got with to begat other children. (This was after I asked what "begat" meant and wanted to use my new word.)

lol. I can still see her persimmon mouth and raised eyebrows in my mind's eye.

She stammered and stuttered, never giving me an answer.

Lordy, I was confused. She could talk about all of these men that begat hundrens of children, yet could not talk about the women that got begotted.

On that day, wearing my Sunday dress over my five tiered ruffled petticoat, my white anklets and Maryjanes, I decided it was a bunch of hooey and my journey to Agnosticism had begun.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Finder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:43 PM
Response to Original message
107. I'm Really Tired Of People Comparing Faith In Zeus To Santa Claus...
Do you realize your statement is no different? Personally, I do not care if you believe in one, three, or no deities...as long as you keep it out of discussion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:44 PM
Response to Original message
110. suck it up
your faith should be strong enough to endure it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:42 PM
Response to Reply #110
159. I Don't Have To Suck It Up
God gave me a brain and hands to type and a mouth to speak

I will keep speaking

you suck it up

I won't!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #159
163. You were the one who demanded that other DUers stop opining about faith.
I have yet to see an atheist here bark out orders like that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #163
166. I'm Not The One That Posted "Suck It Up" First Scottie
and I'm just asking that people stop making fun of my beliefs

I don't make fun of theirs.

What is with people here?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #166
173. No, you demanded we shut up.
There's a difference.

A plea for tolerance would exhibit some.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #173
175. I Never Said Shut Up
I said I was tired of having my beliefs compared to believing in Santa Claus

quite a difference

I have no control over you

I respect your beliefs whatever they may be

Do you respect mine?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #175
179. "don't compare my faith to something like Santa Claus"
My Beliefs Are NOT Fairy Tales

If you think they are

keep it to yourself



You brought this on yourself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #179
184. You Believe What You Believe
and I'll believe what I believe

good luck
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:38 PM
Response to Reply #184
190. Nice. First you make up a straw man and use it to tell us to shut up.
Then you cry about our intolerance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #190
333. If I Were To Say Shut Up
I'd say it plainly

I've asked instead over and over btw, to not insult my beliefs.

I understand that you are intuitionally challenged, but that's not my problems!!

Peace Scotty
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
riderinthestorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 11:09 PM
Response to Reply #333
372. It's not an insult
It's an analogy.

Personally, speaking from the heart of fundie-land, it's an extremely valuable analogy.

Would you prefer I use Zeus or Odin? Perhaps Solon's Gods?

My daughter who is actually a folklore and mythology major at an Ivy League university tells me that you should be more insulted if I were to compare belief in God to a myth. I am trying to understand the distinctions since she is pretty insistent that "myth" is the "bad" analogy. She keeps telling me I need to be specific that you believe in "creation tales". Does that definition make you feel better?

What DO you want us to use as an analogy for our lack of belief? I really want to know. No snark intended.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-19-06 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #372
383. Why Do You Have To Refer To It As Anything?
I don't talk about atheist's tales

If you read my OP, I probably have a lot more in common with most atheists than I do with fundies by a long shot.

So, what offends me is comparing my beliefs to anything other than my beliefs.

Why should I stand still while an atheist tells me that his/her beliefs are correct and mine aren't?

Or compares my beliefs to childhood fantasies?

You can do what you want to with that information. I guess I would really like for people just to respect that I have beliefs that are no less valid than anyone else's beliefs, not to be compared to childish fantasies, or other ways of insulting those beliefs.

I will refrain from the same.

As I said before, I have a lot more in common with an atheistic progressive than I do with a fundie Christian.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
riderinthestorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-19-06 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #383
389. Because I get asked
:shrug:

Or I get provoked. It can be used as an insult although on DU you will see I have NEVER once used it.

For whatever it's worth, as far as I can tell, nobody's asking you to 'stand still' if you feel anyone is telling you your beliefs are "incorrect".

Frankly it seems as though you are the one demanding compliance from those of us with differing beliefs.

I'm sure we have more commonalities than differences.

Peace!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-19-06 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #389
391. I Am Asking To Not Have My Beliefs Mocked
I believe in God, period.

don't make fun of that.

I don't know how to make it any clearer.

I don't go around saying Atheists are morons, or idiots, or going to hell, or anything else.

Atheists might or might not care if I said that.

although obviously a lot of atheists are quite sensitive on this whole subject. (not you I don't think)

So, I guess I don't know what to tell you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-20-06 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #391
393. "don't make fun of that."
You don't get to demand that. Sorry, we have no obligation to respect your beliefs.

Making fun of you FOR believing is wrong. But your beliefs are not off-limits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 08:55 PM
Response to Original message
119. It's just an analagy as to what the atheist position is. Not an attack.
As far as I can see.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trotsky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:29 PM
Response to Original message
142. What pretty much destroys your plea for respect...
is how viciously Scientology usually gets attacked on DU - quite frequently by Christians - as a brainwashing cult, etc.

I do happen to agree - but then I think that about all religions. I'm not the one demanding respect for my religion while turning away when another gets "bashed" because it's not as established or mainstream.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #142
161. I Don't Attack Scientology
although it seems pretty silly

but I see your point.

However, don't make fun of my beliefs and I won't make fun of yours I think is my new motto after seeing this thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #161
204. "...although it seems pretty silly."
Uh, you just DID attack Scientology.

And there's nothing saying you CAN'T. You have no more obligation to respect Scientology than I do to respect Christianity.

The only obligation we have is to respect each others' RIGHT to believe, or not, as we each see fit.

You can demand people not call your beliefs ______, but you have no right to expect us to comply with your demand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:51 PM
Response to Reply #204
206. What's the best way to get people to go out of their way to piss you off?
Demand that they don't.

Like I said, I try to avoid using that analogy unless provoked.

And this thread was nothing but one giant provocation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 05:14 PM
Response to Reply #206
341. Oh Scottie
Bless your heart

I know you are a liberal DU'er like me

and you love to dish it out about religion

provocation?

I thought I made a simple request

you seem to want to turn my words into something that isn't there like "shut up", now provocation

why would it provoke you??

-------------------------------------------------
Southpawkicker (1000+ posts) Thu May-18-06 12:29 AM
Original message
I'm Really Tired Of People Comparing Faith In God To Santa Claus
That's really insulting to me and I imagine to people of faith.

I guess I should find it funny and go along with it?


No, I don't think I will.

I think that offending fellow DU'ers (who don't strive to offend those who are atheist or agnostic) is something that ought to be rethought.

So you came to your conclusions, I have come to mine.

My experiences are different.

I am a liberal. I vote as a Democrat. (Except in a primary once when I wanted Tim Hutchinson to get beat by a guy that had 16 kids who would be even easier to beat. Mark Pryor won anyhow despite the fact that he faced Tim Hutchinson)

I like DU. I just hate these comments that get thrown in, for what purpose? To attack the "fundies"? I'm not a fundie. I'm not a creationist. I believe in evolution. I believe in God. I don't feel homosexuality is a sin. I don't oppose two people who love each other from marrying. I don't believe that all who don't believe in Jesus are going to hell or anything like that. Heck, I'm not even sure I believe that the Jesus story is anything but an embellishment on the facts of the person of Jesus. (I know there will be someone who will say he didn't exist)

Just don't compare my faith to something like Santa Claus, or that I'm somehow stupid. I came to my faith honestly. I found it at the bottom of a short lived career of drinking too much. From there it has waxed and waned, and found its way to its current form.

Peace DU'ers

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Really provoking?

I thought it was a reasonable request and I think that the people who love to jump on made this a flamefest
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #204
338. I Don't See Scientology In The Same Vein As Christianity
Christianity has survived 2000 years of history

Scientology has survived L. Ron Hubbard, the Science Fiction writer's life

It is a pretty small group

It is for those who are into it, their life I suppose, so I shouldn't call it silly.

But I wouldn't put it in the same league with Christianity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greyl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-22-06 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #338
404. "Christianity has survived 2000 years of history" ?
How old do you think humanity is?
Intelligent rational human thought is a hell of lot older than Christianity.

That's not important, however, because I don't intend to play along with your fallacious argumentum ad populum and argument from age.
Using your logic, one whose gestalt is older than Christianity may rightfully claim that Christianity is silly. In that way, you differ from Christian missionaries significantly.


argumentum ad populum - This fallacy occurs when an argument panders to popular passion or sentiment. When, for instance, a politician exclaims in a debate that his opponent "is out of step with the beliefs of everyone in the audience," he/she is committing the fallacy. The legitimacy of a statement depends not on its popularity, but on its truth credentials.


argument from age (Wisdom of the Ancients) - Snobbery that very old (or very young) arguments are superior. This is a variation of the Genetic Fallacy, but has the psychological appeal of seniority and tradition (or innovation).
Products labeled "New! Improved!" are appealing to a belief that innovation is of value for such products. It's sometimes true.


http://www.philosophicalsociety.com/Logical%20Fallacies.htm
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#age
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-23-06 08:41 PM
Response to Reply #404
438. Ummm, This Was In Regard To Scientology
not rational thought

and I don't think that rational thought is mutually exclusive from spiritual beliefs, I know you do, but that doesn't make it so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greyl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-26-06 01:46 AM
Response to Reply #438
450. Please don't put words in my mouth.
My point is that it's hypocritical to give Christianity a benefit because of its age while ignoring religions that are much older than Christianity and calling younger religions "silly".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalVoice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-26-06 03:06 AM
Response to Reply #338
453. Leagues?
Maybe we should categorize them instead by how many lives they've taken. I wouldn't put Scientology in the same league as Christianity either.

Not being disrespectful. Just pointing out the double standard is all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ArbustoBuster Donating Member (956 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 01:59 AM
Response to Reply #161
219. So...Scientology is silly?
You've completely demolished your argument in your original post with this one reply.

You can't require that others not compare your religion to Santa, and then call Scientology silly. It's completely unfair.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proud_Democratt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:31 PM
Response to Original message
146. I'm really tired of seeing the same old posters moan and groan
about "flame-type" topics, but that's the only type of topics they post comments on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:45 PM
Response to Reply #146
162. If You Are Talking To Me
speak plainly man

cryptic bullshit won't be tolerated anymore

Don't make fun of my beliefs and I won't make fun of yours
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proud_Democratt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #162
168. I wasn't thinking of you, nor any cryptics used. I won't name
who I think either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proud_Democratt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 09:47 PM
Response to Original message
164. I'm really tired of Christian posters...quoting scriptures at me
KNOWING that I'm an Atheist. Also....saying "I'll pray for you". If you want to pray for me, why tell me??????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #164
176. I Haven't Seen That, But I Agree With You
I don't quote scripture

If I pray for you, I probably won't tell you unless you ask me to pray for you, then if I say I will, I mean it.

But I won't push my beliefs on anyone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proud_Democratt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #176
182. I noticed that there are some that only attend "flamefests"..
Edited on Wed May-17-06 10:14 PM by Proud_Democratt
believers and non-believers. You're not of those that I noticed.

I've posted many neutral topics in R/T, and there was little response from some people. I've noticed this and mentally noted a few posters that tend to follow the flame.

Replied to wrong comment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proud_Democratt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:16 PM
Response to Reply #182
183. We can post where and when we want......but please don't cry
and bitch about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Why Syzygy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:31 PM
Response to Original message
187. Do you read?
http://www.alternet.org/story/36195/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MelliMel Donating Member (233 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:16 PM
Response to Reply #187
198. Haven't some countries attempted to force that?
As bad as the state forcing religion, IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #198
200. Force what?
Force people to read the book?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MelliMel Donating Member (233 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #200
201. No.
Force people to give up religion.

You knew what I meant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:33 PM
Response to Reply #201
202. That's what you think the author is doing?
Perhaps if you read it you'd be able to understand the distinction between having an opinion and advocating forcing others to give up religion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MelliMel Donating Member (233 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 12:29 AM
Response to Reply #202
209. I read the interview linked.
It seems like one of those "saving people from themselves/for the children" type of thing. And too many times, the "for the children/we know what's best for you" crew do not mind tapping the government to help them do their bidding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NMMNG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 08:56 AM
Response to Reply #209
278. You mean like James Dobson
Jerry Falwell
Pat Robertson
Concerned Women of America
American Family Association
et. al.
?????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MelliMel Donating Member (233 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #278
319. Yes and anti-religion despots too like Stalin
Edited on Thu May-18-06 03:24 PM by MelliMel
Life in the USSR was not good for those who were religious at all. Life in China ain't so great for Christians either - though I don't know about Jews. Many of those anti-religion despots think they are doing what is best for people by "relieving" them of their "superstitions".

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NMMNG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 10:40 PM
Response to Reply #319
369. Forbidding religion in communist nations had nothing to do with
Edited on Thu May-18-06 10:43 PM by BuffyTheFundieSlayer
"doing what was best for people". It had to do with preventing divided loyalties. If people were religious and loved a deity, they might put that deity first, and the State second. The despots certainly couldn't have that, so they implemented laws against religion. Absence of religion was not the core of any of those regimes, but merely a tool.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-23-06 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #369
439. Or, It Could Have Been The Cause Of Those Regimes
like many seem to believe

I don't particularly think that to be the case, I think like you do about people like Stalin and Mao, they wanted to eliminate any competition, or divided loyalty.

But some believe that atheism is inherently evil (like Raygun I guess)

I've never given it much thought

I have read of the horrible treatment, torture, and murder that religious people suffered under Mao and Stalin though. It is enough to make one think that evil existed there as it did when Hitler perverted Christianity to his own devices and killed and tortured millions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
catbert836 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 10:31 PM
Response to Original message
188. If you're secure in your belief in God,
that is if you KNOW that God exists in your heart (sorry for the cliche) then you shouldn't be bothered by the fact that others compare your belief to belief in Santa Claus. If you're really bothered by that analogy, then I suggest you reexamine your beliefs about God and the supernatural.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NMMNG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-17-06 11:55 PM
Response to Original message
207. Who then?
Who would be an acceptable for the sake of comparison? Hyperion? Prometheus? Zeus? Poseidon? Nut? Ra? Anubis? Allah?

Comparisons aren't meant for derision. They are meant simply for illustrative purposes, to denote the fact that we don't believe in your god any more than we believe in the being(s) to which we are comparing him. It is pretty much the same way you believe in your god but not the thousands of other gods and beings others believe(d) in. We just believe in one less than you do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 12:28 AM
Response to Original message
208. Um...but thats how I feel
Edited on Thu May-18-06 12:28 AM by Evoman
To me, Santa Claus and God are the same. No proof for either.

Let me repeat that...TO ME SANTA CLAUS AND GOD ARE THE SAME.

Lets say you believed in Santa Claus...and I told you...believing in Santa Claus is like believing in god. Thats my opinion. Its not an insult. If you take it as an insult, then your taking your problems and trying to place them on me.

For example...I do not believe in Jesus. If I told you that when people say "Jesus died for your sins", I get insulted because I don't believe in Jesus and I don't want to be obligated to someone who doesn't exist, would that be your problem? No...you would call me sensitive and tell me to quit getting upset. If I then told you to shut up and stop saying Jesus died for my sins, you would think I was intolerant. Well?

Heres the thing: You don't understand my position. You don't...and maybe the reason your upset when I compare Jesus to Santa is because, for a brief moment, you understand how I think and it threatens you. You understand that there is no proof for Santa. You understand that just because someone who raised you told you Santa existed, it doesnt meant he did. You understand that Santa is a fabrication...a story propogated over many years, a story that is nice and makes you feel good as a kid. If your good, you will get a present. If your bad, your gonna get coal. Santa puts you on his list, he knows if your naughty or nice. But he doesn't really, does he? You understand that he is not real.

And it scares you that we can think the same of Jesus...that you can think the same of Jesus. Jesus to me IS as Santa is to you.

Santa doesn't exist. He doesn't have a list. I can be as good as I want or as naughty as I want, but Santa will never judge me. Because hes fake. Jesus is fake.

This is not an insult. An insult is telling you your stupid. An insult is telling you that all christians are morons. All christians are apes. And I don't think that...I would never think that, because most of the people I love are Christian. My girlfriend is christian. She knows my opinion, she respects my opinion...if she has the right to tell me Jesus loves me, then I have the right to tell her Jesus is like Santa Claus to me. She is not insulted, because she respects my opinions. She does not tell me to shut up or hold my tongue.

I'm sure that if we ever met in person, we would get a long great. We could have a barbeque, I would make my special Buffalo Ranch sauce chicken wings. I'm sure your a nice guy. But I would have no problem telling you here, or to your face, that Jesus is a fairy tale. I would never ask you to hold your tongue about your beliefs (again, we all reserve the right to walk away from people who disagree) and I ask for that same respect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iconoclastNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 01:22 AM
Response to Original message
211. Poor Christian......your faith is so tenuous.
Edited on Thu May-18-06 01:23 AM by iconoclastNYC
It really ought to be a crime to write anything that challenge people's faith in the supernatural.

When people tell me the Flying Spaghetti Monster isn't real it makes me cry.

:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-23-06 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #211
440. Your Sentiments Are So Kind
I thank you from the bottom of my heart

:sarcasm:

really I can't say what I think of your kind words
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 01:47 AM
Response to Original message
215. I just don't understand why it matters to either side
This is supposed to be a political discusssion board, right? Ethics in the public sphere and all that? Ethics matter; faith or lack of faith does not.

Granted, many people ground their ethics in some traditional religious faith, but when you get to the specifics of their ethics it turns out that people with very different faiths or none at all share the same ethics. So why the constant fuss? If you share the values of most Dems, you want separation of church and state regardless of whether you are a believer or a non-believer, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 01:52 AM
Response to Original message
217. No offense meant, but this was my rant on the subject...
I'm tired of religion. There, I said it. I'm tired of those who claim to have inside information as to the nature of the universe to which the rest of us aren't privvy...or don't believe. I'm tired of those who pretend that they're somehow better because they think some higher power has revealed to them (or us) the truth behind the illusion.

Fuck that.

We can't expect some higher power to come down and fix all the things we've broken. The reason our world and lives are fucked up is because WE humans fucked them up. And we were given (by nature or some mysterious creator) the brains, talent, and manipulative tools to fix a lot of them. If we can set aside our greed and lust for power long enough to bother. Disease? We can take care of that. Hunger? Ditto.

If we stop arguing about whose God is better and what country supposedly deserves his favor the most.

We have the tools, the intelligence, and the talent. We just don't have the drive.

We hand our power over to a bunch of fools who think there's some transcendent spirit that's going to come down and wave his hand and fix everything and then wonder why the world continues to be fucked up.

Stupid.

I know I'm supposed to give lip service to other peoples' beliefs and, for the most part, I do. I DO respect those who understand that this is our world and we're responsible for the welfare of our fellow humans. Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed, and god knows how many other "prophets" have said so. And some of their followers listen and understand. Good for them. The ones who don't are the ones that raise my ire.

God's not going to fix everything. As long as we allow these dickheads to act as though that's what they expect, they're going to stumble around like a drunk troll in a glassmaker's shop, busting things and expecting someone off-stage to fix it all.

But you can't blame infant cancer on God. You can't expect him to wave his hand and fix it. All these exist because they're OUR problems. Even if some deity exists, all of our troubles are just that...OUR troubles. We were given the tools we have to fix them ourselves.

Science shouldn't be used to find better and more efficient ways to kill one another. That's NOT what it's for. We're not given the tools and talent to allow some folks to make obscene profits and live in houses so large that they have to hire dozens of servants just to clean them.

People can only LIVE in one house, and drive one automobile at a time. Why should some folks have ten cars and five houses, while some people sleep in cardboard boxes in alleys and under bridges? Because "God" likes it that way?

Nonsense. It's because we are entirely missing the point.

We can fix all of this, as long as we understand that it's OUR job. Taking care of one another...not trying to acquire as much shit as we can before we die.

Our troubles are human troubles, caused by human mistakes, and fixable by human ingenuity. I truly believe that.

And before you ask...I'm not an atheist, or even truly agnostic. I'm a pantheist/humanist. Or humanist/pantheist. I think the universe is a wonderous place, and possibly the only thing that deserves to be recognized as God. But, if this is indeed the case, each and every one of us, and every creature that walks, crawls, or swims, and even the trees through which the wind is blowing right now, and the wind itself, are ALL part of God and are therefore sacred.

"That which you do to the least of these" and all that.

"God" is too big a concept for anyone to have a handle on. Bible or no. Koran or no.

Science is what we call the act of trying to understand God. It's slow, and sometimes confusing. But it seeks to understand. It questions. It reveals. It learns. It grows.

Carl Sagan, in his book Contact, suggested a little something I found very intriguing. Maybe WE (intelligent beings) exist in order to someday explain God to itself.

For, as far as we know, and as far as we can prove, WE are the minds and hands of God. Not just us, but anything out there in the great unknown that can also think and build.

If this is the case, we've been mighty irresponsible deities, haven't we?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 05:09 AM
Response to Reply #217
248. Nice rant! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ariana Celeste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #217
328. What a beautiful rant!
I think you look at things in the right way, man. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalVoice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-26-06 03:16 AM
Response to Reply #217
454. Ditto, ditto, and ditto!
Holy fuck ditto!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stand and Fight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 01:55 AM
Response to Original message
218. Recommended! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
electropop Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 05:20 AM
Response to Original message
249. It is an odd comparison, because ther's a lot more evidence
for Santa's existence than God's. :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 05:31 AM
Response to Original message
250. After all, one watches your life, judges you, and rewards you
with good things after that, if you've lived by his standards, while either not giving anything to the bad people, or inflicting them with nasty gifts. He does this observation and rewarding through supernatural means. While the other ... does exactly the same thing. Yeah, why should any comparison be made at all?

Belief in Santa Claus comes to children 'honestly', too. They listen to their parents, and, as humans tend to do, especially when listening to kind and caring people, they trust what they have been told.

And strangely, Santa Claus is named after a prominent Christian. Perhaps the Christian churches thought the story, apparently derived from north European or Siberian pagan stories, was worth comparing with the ideals of Christianity?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 06:17 AM
Response to Reply #250
253. Indeed Santa Claus is clearly a Deity.
So why exactly is belief in Yahweh on a different and higher pedestal than belief in Santa?

Is the complaint that lesser deities such as Santa must not be in any way elevated to equality with the Big Gods?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #250
317. Sure. Now tell us what Santa Clauses's standards are.
Edited on Thu May-18-06 03:10 PM by Inland
Ooooopey. Wow, there's an analogy that tripped up right out of the starting gate, because religions put huge amounts of effort and argument into developing, defending, and even adhering to, standards of behavior. "Let's all do good" is Santa. "What does it mean to be good, and how do I do good" is religion. Admonishing a child is Santa. Pulling at the consciences of a nation in the civil rights movement is religion.

Even the rewards in religion show it to be teh complicated, adult, serious topic that the analogy pretends it isn't. Santa gives you what you want. The christian god doesn't. He gives you what you should want. As his reward, the buddhist gets to not want anything at all. Wow, how complicated. I bet there's big books of discussion on the subject, none of them written by or for children. But has anyone read a good theological tract on Santa lately?

No. One's for grownups. One's not. Comparing the two is an insult.

It's easy enough for atheists to forget that the belief in a deity is the starting point, not the ending point, but a few moments of examination of what religion does pretty much confirms that there's a lot more to it than the mere "just another belief in a nonexistent being" analogy allows. Heck, don't ask the religious, look at what the usual suspects say in other threads, where religion is the bane of mankind. Whether you like religion or hate it, only a complete and utter ignorance would put it in the same category as a childrens' story. People don't kill or become martyred over the childish and inconsequential. Religion can't be both the boogeyman stalking the race and gaining mind control over the masses and also something silly and childish like not stepping on cracks.

By the way, anyone vote for John Kerry last time around? Just asking who thinks he's a believer in fairy tales and still should be president.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #317
347. I don't think you understand the meaning of 'compare'
It doesn't mean 'equate', it means to measure one thing against another, noting similarities. Part of Christianity, and other religions, is comparable to the story of Santa Claus. Jesus judging mankind is an important part of Christianity. It's in the Nicene Creed, though you won't find any details of his criteria there. Some churches may have developed, over the millennia, precise lists of things that stop you being rewarded, but many believe you are rewarded for generalised 'good' behaviour, and then discuss what they currently regard as good behaviour. Some religions havew positive lists to. Parents have their ideas of good behaviour, and encourage their children to follow them. They put effort into them too. Don't dismiss what parents do.

I presume you are discounting any theological works about Saint Nicholas. The merging of that saint into the 'Old Winter' tradition indicates that many earlier Christians must have thought the comparison was valid.

I must admit I don't generally see belief in a deity as the starting point; but perhaps that is a basic difference between typical theists and atheists - theists are people who assume there must be something more powerful than us, and then try to find evidence for what it is; atheists just look at evidence. I've only tended to think that people pre-judge the issue of the existence of a deity when they've had too much indoctrination as children, but perhaps you're right - it's just natural for some people.

"Religion can't be both the boogeyman stalking the race and gaining mind control over the masses and also something silly and childish like not stepping on cracks."

Oh yes it can. It's when silly things get control over people's minds that we're in the biggest danger, and also when people argue about them. There are many sensible concepts that control our minds, but, being sensible, they don't cause problems, and we all accept them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 07:18 PM
Response to Reply #347
349. I most certainly do. And "insult" too. It can be both.
I can list all the things that make you and a goat similar. After all, you can't deny the many similarities? A goat eats garbage and smells, and you also eat and have a scent about you of some sort. A goat humps any animal that stands still, and you have sex. Hey, it just came up in conversation. You have to realized my impression of you is, well, similar to the impression made on me by a goat.

Of course, you know I'm just kidding around, whereas we also both know that the fairy tale, tooth fairy, santa claus people aren't.

Now, as to Saint Nick, please, please, please don't insult me by saying that both Santa and God are "judges", referring to the Nicean Creed. That's exactly the fucking POINT. There IS no creed for santa, no ethical rules, nothing of the sort. It's just parents telling toddlers what is their speed, and it's got zip to do with adults. It's really too ironic, that the same people who are talking about "looking at the evidence" can't resist ignoring it in order to make a slap at religion.

And comparing stepping on cracks and religion shows you going down the exact same road again. "It's when silly things get control over people's minds....." You compare them as "silly beliefs". But the former doesn't "get control" of people's mind, because the former, unlike religion, doesn't provide a fully formed worldview and ethical system. For better or worse, religion is bigger and different from a fairy tale or superstition. But rather than take on the task of arguing that it's worse, or bad, it's dismissed as silly and childish and simpleminded as any old thing a child might say, in this thread. Of course, in the other it will still be the huge boogeyman threatening the race, but I don't expect the bashing to be fair or intelligent in part or in toto.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #349
350. I'm glad to have helped you believe you're being insulted
even though I wasn't actually insulting you; you take offence so often that it must be a deep seated need of yours.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #350
352. And finally, the dismissive capper...
Instead of addressing why it IS insulting, you add to it by making it my fault for being insulted by it.....which I wasn't. It's not about what I felt, it's about the inherent nature of the analogy/comparison made. Now, the OP felt it, as he was meant to and could be expected to, and he got precisely, oh, zero apologies for any misunderstanding, because in fact there WAS no misunderstanding. It was meant to piss him off, it did, and that provided another reason to dismiss him, now as an angry person. His fault for rising to the flamebait.

By the way, people who note that the analogy/comparison insults religion are supposed to be dismissed with the comment they are "whiney", in keeping with the theme of dismissing them as childlike and simpleminded. Please do it right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #352
353. Like I said, only two properties were carried, therefore religion is not
disparaged. Simple.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 06:25 AM
Response to Original message
254. It's meant to dismiss you as childish or simpleminded.
By placing a label of "fairy tale" on it, and then, of course, calling you a whiney cry baby for rising to the flame bait. That way, you are dismissed, and then dissed and dismissed, all in one post.

Problem is, religious belief is bigger, more complicated, more relevant, than a fairy tale. THat's an objective, observable fact, even as a deity is not. One doesn't build huge ethical systems around something small and childish. Reinhold Niebuhr isn't small and childish. Gandhi wasn't small and childish. Martin Luther King wasn't small and childish. Religion is bigger, for better or worse, than can be dismissed with a snarky post.

I know it's easier to simply dismiss someone one doesn't agree with by labelling, and fun when it's an insult, but it's pretty ironic that the same people who pretend that rationality and hardheaded empircism and gracious unity with all humanity is their touchstone pretend they can't discern any evidence distinguishing between a belief in santa and roman catholicism, all for the purpose of a snotty little slam.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 07:03 AM
Response to Reply #254
257. Wow! You sound really angry. Did you not understand that it
was an analagy, to aid your understanding? I have seen many committed posters trying to bring together atheists and non-atheists in this manner.

A pity that you took it the wrong way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 07:15 AM
Response to Reply #257
259. Of course, "oh, you're just angry" is another form of dismissal.

Sure, it's an analogy....meant to analogize religious faith to a childish and simpleminded belief. I made it clear that I think it's a false analogy, used for the purpose of dismissing religion as childish and simpleminded, a point you don't bother to address, preferring to dismiss me as "angry".

Instead of actually addressing whether the analogy is accurate, or even put forward in bad faith, you dimiss me as angry, just as the OP is dismissed as whiney. What fucking ever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 07:29 AM
Response to Reply #259
262. Not dismiss. When do I ever dismiss? It was framed so that it allowed
Edited on Thu May-18-06 07:37 AM by Random_Australian
the possibility that I was in error about anger.

I stated why it does not make religion seem simpleminded or childish... are you certain you have not missed something?

It's validity or veracity as an analagy is quite irrelevant. I point out what it attempted to do.

I said, IIRC, that you sound angry, not that your points were invalid, I should like it if you retracted you claim, that I dismissed you, to the contrary.

Like I said, only two properties are carried between the two, thus making it in that scope, a useful and helpful ananlagy.

Also, there seems to be some strange animosity here. I should like to make DU a big umbrella, for all theists and non-theists that fit into the Democratic Party. It seems that there is some flaw in our discussion. I seem to get on well with everyone else, pretty much, so it is quite the conundrum.

Do you not agree that in such limited scope the analagy is useful?

Edit: My apologies, I made reference to something I had said to another DU'er.

Here is a quote: {the Santa/God comparison is a common way of explaining to people why we do not believe, based only on two similarities: 1) Neither have any evidence for them in the slightest. 2) Both are something that others take on faith as completely true. Given, the former is believed only by children, but it is not declaring their beleifs invalid, merely pointing out that they occupy a null hypothesis.

It means "Christians are stupid" about as much as it means "With all the hunger in the world, how do you explain concrete"}

I fear that to avoid further antagonism I may have to further extrapolate. Indeed, please inform me if this is the case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 07:42 AM
Response to Reply #262
266. The validity or veracity of the analogy is irrelevant? Since when?
Seems to me it's relevant to everything. It's relevant to every post in which it is made; it's relevant to the OPs position; it's relevant to the intentions of the poster. The analogy is "useful" only in the sense that it's a zinger. How does that build a big tent?

My guess is that if one scrupulously sticks to truthful statements about the worldviews of people who are liberal and democratic, there's going to be a lot LESS anger and a much BIGGER tent than if shit is just thrown out there for the purpose of scoring points. One would think that could be said just once to people who fly the flag of rationality and empiricism, or liberalism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 07:46 AM
Response to Reply #266
267. Points? Anway, the reason the validity was irrelevant is that
if one attempted to use an innoffensive analagy, and it failed completely, it is still not relevant to what we are discussing, that is how offensive it is. That is, of course, unless you view validity as a function of ... actually, I'll let you answer that.

Would you stop swearing? Thankyou.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #267
297. What was being discussed was what was proper for discussion.
Edited on Thu May-18-06 01:01 PM by Inland
Unless someone wants to assert that nobody should be offended by an analogy that is false and submitted for the purposes of being insulting, then OF COURSE it's offensive. I'm not sure what human being could disagree that a false analogy made for the pupose of being dismissive and insulting should not be considered fair, or assert that those who object on those grounds be called whiney.

And when that someone appears, he can also tell me that the veracity of analogies is irrelevant, so I can tell him Hitler said the exact same thing about jews and watch him sputter in one of those delicious ironies that only R/T can bring about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #297
351. The difference between false and veracious analagy then.
of course it was not a false analagy, it was a warm-hearted attempt to bring understanding between people who were too ready to cleave themselves into group, but I disgress. The veracity of the analagy was dependant upon it's success in illustrating the point.
Whether it was false was more dependant upon intent, in this case, te intent was good, and the analagy only carried two values over between the two, preventing it from being offensive.

Your other point seems... a touch incoherent to me. I shall, of course, presume this is simply me not understanding you, and seek further clarification. However, in it's present form, it does sound to me like Hitler said "The ability & efficiency of an analagy to get the point to the mind of the receiver is similar to Jewish persons" - which of course makes as much sense as a hamster in a tumble dryer, so I most curious as to your response.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 08:01 AM
Response to Reply #266
268. The original santa post was an explanation
of how non-believers experience our overwhelmingly christian/theist society, not a disparagement of your personal religious beliefs. The fact that you are so insulted by the suggestion of any equivalence between santa and your god is in fact indicative of the problem itself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #268
299. Of course....if it wasn't true, nobody would be insulted!!! Perfect!!
What a marvelous theory. Perfect. Now only the most slanderous flamebait is considered true on DU, while dispassionate assertions are false. Posters wonder why there's so much diviseness, and now they know: it's because there's truth being told, not bullshit being slung.

That's idiotic, of course. I don't consider it insulting because I am insulted, I consider it insulting because it was intended to insult, to be dismissive and to equate religion with the childish and simple minded.

The only thing that insults me personally is your implication that I'm an idiot, in that I am going to believe that it's not intended as a disparagement just because you say so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #299
318. Perhaps I wasn't clear.
"The fact that you are so insulted by the suggestion of any equivalence between santa and your god is in fact indicative of the problem itself."

That is quite different from your strawman argument you made for me: "if it wasn't true, nobody would be insulted".

You seem to be outraged by all suggestions of any equivalence between santa-belief and yahweh-belief. You find the mere suggestion that there is some equivalence insulting no matter what the intent of the poster, even when the poster himself restates clearly that he had no such intention. I find that symptomatic of the problem that we agnostics and atheists face every day of our lives. I've learned to have a thick skin and not be outraged by the thoughtless bigotry of many theists in our society. Perhaps you should reflect a bit on how your reactions here in this thread look to us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #318
320. "You seem to be outraged...." is another form of dismissal.
"The mere suggestion to be insulting". Well, is it insulting? That, of course, is exactly what you don't address and I do.

But you, regardless of whether it really is insulting or not, think that being insulted is a sign of what's wrong. Yes, a person who is insulted by the insulting proves something, in your book. Bizarrely enough, he proves that he is worthy of being insulted, again, for having a "thin skin". The term of choice, by the way, is "whiney": it goes with the theme of religion being something childish. Please do it right.

I don't even need to address the assumption you make that my religious beliefs are insulted. They weren't. What was insulted is my intelligence, every step of the way. The analogy that a fairy tale and religion is valid is an insult to intelligence, the assertion that it isn't meant to be disparaging is an insult to intelligence, and the assertion that a failure to suck it up proves your points is an insult to intelligence. As with everything in R/T, the irony is that so much that is illogical and untrue is asserted to make snarky posts about religion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #320
324. "Yes, a person who is insulted by the insulting "
That is assuming your conclusion.

My statement about your apparent outrage was my observation of your emotional state, which seems to be 'outraged'. If you find that dismissive, sorry, that was not my intention. My intention was to communicate to you my reaction to the tone of your posts.

My point is simply that you have stated repeatedly that, regardless of intention, making any statement that includes an assertion of any equivalence between santa-belief and yahweh-belief is insulting. What I hear from you is that any such statement is automatically an insult. What I am saying is that your position here is intolerant of our belief systems. We atheists find few differences and many similarities between santa-belief and yahweh-belief but we cannot, according to you, express our belief in this particular matter without insulting you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #324
325. It's my conclusion. Yes, it is. Thanks for noticing.
But you'd have to backtrack to find all the posts that supported the conclusion. As it stands now, somebody might think that it appeared out of nowhere, unsupported by any argument whatsover, because your prior posts merely dismissed me than taking issue with the actual contention.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #325
326. I have not dismissed you.
And I find your repeated assertions that I and others have done this insulting. When I dismiss people here, which I rarely do, it is with the aid of the ignore button.

When you write posts with lots of !!!!! you communicate anger and outrage. I and others have noted the emotional content of your posts and you jump on us accusing us of 'dismissing you' by observing and commenting about the emotional quality of your posts. I suggest that you should stop doing that. Either stop with the highly emotional posts or stop complaining when the emotional content is noted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #326
339. Nobody minds you "noting" content. Any time you want to start is fine.
You are too busy characterizing my emotional state as the excuse to address any of my conclusions, and when I note the dodge, why, you explain to me why it's okay for you to note my emotional state, and once again not address any of my conclusions.

In sum, go ahead and note the "emotional content" while dodging the issue of whether one should be disgusted, just as you noted the taking of insult without addressing whether an insult was made.

There's a story from, I think, Anatole France, wherein a man kicks a sleeping dog and then says, "The dog is vicious, it bites." I say that you are kicking. You say that the dog is biting, and can't quite get yourself to address the kicking part at all. Is it okay if I note that, or can only my posts get the "we are giving this the gimlet eye" routine?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
riderinthestorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 11:33 PM
Response to Reply #339
374. I've asked others, and I'll ask you, what analogy would you prefer?
When atheists are confronted with believers who insist we define for them our lack of belief, the Santa analogy is convenient and readily understood.

But clearly it bothers you.

Who would you rather we chose? Odin, Zeus, Solon's gods?

My daughter, an Ivy League university student majoring in mythology and folk tales, tells me that comparing Christian belief in a God, to a "myth", would be wrong, wrong, wrong. She tells me the appropriate term is "creation tale". Would that suit you better?

What analogy would you suggest?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-19-06 07:14 AM
Response to Reply #374
376. Speaking of myths, tell me about this confrontation.
Edited on Fri May-19-06 07:24 AM by Inland
I'd love to hear the confrontation where questions are asked and the only correct answer is "Santa Claus' or "the tooth fairy".

Playing Jeopardy in a way, the answer is: "I think it's like believing in Santa or the tooth fairy".

The question is: "What would you say if you wanted to convey that you think religion is childish and simpleminded?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-19-06 07:26 AM
Response to Reply #376
377. Nope. I'm not really good at insults, bieng so mild-mannered myself,
but I would guess that "Any idea of God is so completely irrational that any who believe it must be childish and simplemined" would be the obvious answer.

In a strictly literal sense, it is irrational, but that definition does not change it's validity.

What say you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-19-06 07:40 AM
Response to Reply #377
379. I would say the obvious answer is obviously contrary to reality.
So obviously contrary to reality that anyone who asserts it is either a dope, or thinks I'm a dope, or isn't really asserting it for the truth of the matter but for the sole purpose of dismissing religion, and its adherents, as childish and simpleminded in order to score points in a snotty, snarky way. Which is what I've been saying from second one.

And that's why I keep asking who didn't vote for the conscientious believer John Kerry. Funny, nobody ever denies voting for Kerry because he is childish and simpleminded.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-19-06 09:33 AM
Response to Reply #379
380. You pretty much restated my point, it seems we agree after all.
Given that the santa analagy can have two meanings (Yes, ignoring the surrealist for the sake of expediency)

Then it could mean either:
1) All the characterisitics carry in the analagy, such that it would be derogatory to religous persons,

OR

2) The way it was intended, carrying only the properties that it is A) Something of common ground to deem untrue (for reasons of evidence), without offending persons of other religions, and B) It is something that others take on faith, and as such is a useful tool to allow comprehension between those who would otherwise place themselves into groups.

BUT: "So obviously contrary to reality that anyone who asserts it is either a dope, or thinks I'm a dope" is certainly true of the former. The atheists had counted on how obviously the first interpretation was wrong (unless you assume that the person bieng spoken to is stupid), so the interpretation would naturally shift to the latter.

However, it was not expected that there were those who would assume that the poster thought the responder foolish, therefore changing the analagy to the first situation.

This creates a discrepancy between what was rapidly becoming two sides, such that those who made the analagy saw it as the harmless second form, whereas those who took offense saw it as the not-so-nice first choice. That also explains both the 'whiney' comments, and the anger.

Well, I am glad that cleared that up. Good that we finally agree on something, at least (though, yes, as always I may be in error in my understanding of "So obviously contrary to reality that anyone who asserts it is either a dope, or thinks I'm a dope", so I cannot say for certain that we agree, but I sincerely hope so)

Cheers, will pass this on,
R_A.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
riderinthestorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-19-06 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #376
388. One on one, a typical question will revolve around whether I feel a "void"
in my life where religion used to be. I DO actually politely respond that for me, believing in God would be akin to believing in Santa. I then go on to ask them if they feel any kind of void now that they no longer believe in Santa.

My kids are beseiged with offers to go to church/Awana/prayer groups/teen nights-at-the-church etc because of the area we live in. The Santa analogy is easy to understand for the kids, who usually pass along the comment to their parents, and I am inevitably tackled sooner or later by the parents who want to "save" me. I'm polite about it here as well.

Going wider, I've used the Santa analogy when I've pulled into the local high school parking lot following the car wash signs thinking I will be supporting a school organizational fundraiser and discover it is a Youth for Christ or other religious fundraiser. Those kids get downright nasty when I try to explain that I'm not interested in my dollars supporting their org. Here I am sometimes polite and sometimes aggravated but one thing's for sure, everyone understands my position.

Beyond the personal, Wheaton College is right down the street from me which attracts a lot of very intense Christians who like to demonstrate their Christianity in big ways. For example, they will put up the anti-choice pictures of ripped-apart fetus' 10 feet tall, placed every 10 feet apart. On the main drag leading to my daughters' grade school! I always get into it with these people when that particular demonstration comes about. Sound bites work well, and the Santa analogy is an excellent soundbite when someone confronts me about my atheism during these types of confrontations.

Every Republican candidate has come to Wheaton to campaign and I've protested at every appearance from Reagan through GW Bush plus all of the Republican candidates in-between who run for governor/Senator/Congressperson etc. This presents another fine opportunity to run into ardent Christians who are desperate for a confrontation with a real separation of church/state supporter like me.

It's an analogy. It's just a simple, easy way to explain why I don't believe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-20-06 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #388
392. Oh, believing in Santa fills a void?
No, of course it doesn't. That's why you avoid the question of whether a void is felt, and how it is filled. It's a big question, which you dismiss by simply bringing up Santa Claus (childish and simpleminded) and people who, for some reason, get downright nasty when you pull a theological discussion out of your ass when all they asked was whether you want your car washed.

Yeah, it's an excellent soundbite. It's inflammatory and insulting, and then you get to comment on how people are so nasty if the rise to it. It's excellent for your purposes. In other words, I got it exactly right.

It's an analogy meant to be dismissive and insulting, and made knowing how false it is. You just explained why you think it's okay to be dismissive and insulting with a false analogy...you just don't like those people. No shit. But thanks for the long confirmation. Now all that's left is why you bring your smackdowns of wheaton college students into DU, and, if I may, I can already guess its because you don't like the people here, either, to the extent they have the bad taste to mention their religious beliefs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Random_Australian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-23-06 06:27 AM
Response to Reply #392
407. Y'know, I hate to be a stick-in-the-mud, but I will have to point out that
Edited on Tue May-23-06 06:28 AM by Random_Australian
"It's an analogy meant to be dismissive and insulting, and made knowing how false it is." isn't really true, unless of course points are presented contrary to this post: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=69094&mesg_id=69943
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
catbert836 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-19-06 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #257
390. Yo, R_A!
If you want to avoid having Inland take your posts the wrong way, then you might as well not post here. ;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suegeo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 08:52 AM
Response to Original message
277. I feel sorry for the Baby Jesus
Santa Claus hi-jacked Jesus' birthday and made the day into an orgy for greedy retailers.

I wonder if the Baby Jesus gets tired of Santa. Such a fancy pants, in that red suit and all. And if Jesus is pissed, I can only imagine how the virgin Mary feels.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mikelgb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 10:01 AM
Response to Original message
279. The story of Santa and the story of Jesus...
are alike in that they are both stories of Historical figures greatly embellished by oral tradition and then further hijacked by, in the case of Jesus, the Catholic Church, and in the case of Saint Niklaus the Holiday-Industrial Complex.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dragonbreathp9d Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 10:16 AM
Response to Original message
280. There is no proof,
That is why it is called faith. There is no proof tht God doesn't exist either. Saying that you beilieve in God, and saying that beliving in God is like believing in Santa Claus or inherently different. If you said you didn't believe in God and left it at that, there would be no quarrell.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 05:18 PM
Response to Reply #280
342. How is one imaginary being different from another?
And why should we (who don't believe in either of them) privilage one of them over the other?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wryter2000 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 10:39 AM
Response to Original message
284. I'm an agnostic
And I hate, hate, hate the "imaginary friend" posts. They're just as narrow-minded and arrogant as the "I possess the only truth about God" crap that comes out of the mouths of the Falwells and Robertsons.

My feeling is that I've never seen any evidence of supernatural occurrences. Lots of people of faith have no problem with that statement, and claiming that all people of faith believe in fairy tale creatures is simply not true.

I defy anyone here to find a single stupid, superstitious statement in the huge body of work of Bishop John Shelby Spong.

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?z=y&isbn=0060762055&itm=6
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Strong Atheist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 10:49 AM
Response to Original message
286. I think it is pretty clear that theists/atheists each think the other
side is missing the OBVIOUS big picture and making a FUNDAMENTAL (pardon the pun) mistake... really no differences there ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #286
291. I agree - indeed when one meets one that's obviously wrong, you
Edited on Thu May-18-06 12:09 PM by papau
feel a need to educate - evangelize.

And fundi evangelism, in my opinion, is not useful for DU.

But it seems the world outside DU is hard to take for some, and DU is used as a place to rant, and let the DU folks know how you feel, and if how you express that feeling offends, then it is a freedom of expression issue. Indeed I hear this not only on DU - 30% to 50% of any UU congregation on any given Sunday are atheists among whom are those that feel put upon, but feel a need to join with others in secular humanist discussion and events.

It just seems that DU has a great deal more of a mocking tone, and a denial that that tone implies intolerance or bad manners. Indeed disagreement is almost always seen as an attack requiring a down and dirty counterattack, all the while explaining that there is no attack on you, it is just on your stupidity. I have also concluded that my not seeing the hot button word posted by the theist does not mean it is not there, and that from the atheist side rage expressed as mockery is the only proper response.

I've concluded that the DU situation cannot be changed. I hope I am wrong. It would be fun to have real religious discussion, with the atheist point of view included so as to represent the secular humanist non-God variation - if there is one - and there usually is - of whatever the topic is.

But Du is and will continue to be into in your face assertions of religious lies (dubious to the religious based on studies not quoted on the atheist sites), which are cut and pasted from atheist sites, and “educational” comments like your dictionary is wrong, and I don't believe in Santa either, and Jesus never existed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Strong Atheist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #291
294. MOST of the time I try to avoid using the language the OP
is complaining about, to be polite, even if that is what I believe...



I usually reserve that type of language for someone I am pissed at ...


I think if you look at THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of my post in R&T (as opposed to A&A; hey, that's our clubhouse) that you will see I avoid that language most of the time....


Cheers, papau

:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #294
316. That is my recollection also - Cheers! :-)
Cheers!

:toast:

:-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CarbonDate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 11:03 AM
Response to Original message
287. Cast us out in the name of Jesus.
If it works on Satan, it'll work on us. Come on, try it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressivebydesign Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 11:13 AM
Response to Original message
288. Do you find it odd that so many found God after drugs or alcohol issues?
I've always wondered if it's one addiction replacing another? I don't mean that rudely, but most every fervent religious person I've met, under the age of 70, replaced booze or drugs with God. Is there a need in some people to have something to which they are driven by? I can think of one in particular that was a drinker in high school, then became part of a very strict christian thing when he had a family, then left that got into wife-swapping, left that, got into surfing and drinking, then is back to being a saved christian who believes his fight with alcohol is satan, and that if he just prays hard enough, he'll stop drinking.. but it's okay, cuz even when he drinks too much and yells at his family god forgives him.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #288
314. I've heard it said
That religion is the knot at the end of the rope for some people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ariana Celeste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 04:30 PM
Response to Reply #288
329. I know 3 who found God this way.
I do find it curious. Especially since all 3 became Evangelists.

One of them was an alcoholic & meth abuser.

The other two were just hard partiers that can't reproduce. Hmm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proud_Democratt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #288
344. Trade offs like booze for Jesus are quite common.
Alcoholics Anonymous(AA) and Narcotics Anonymous both use the Serenity Prayer. These programs promote a higher power, but use this prayer also.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-23-06 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #288
441. Alcoholics, Drug Addicts, Addicts Of All Stripes
are often very sensitive people, perhaps more sensitive to the spiritual realms than others. This may explain it.

Of course, I'm sure that one who doesn't believe in the spiritual realm will call poppycock on this.

but that is fine.

We'll all find out some day, and I'll either be dead and my spirit will cease to exist, or it will go on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goblinmonger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 11:45 AM
Response to Original message
289. Definition of Irony?
Someone who tells me that they don't want their beliefs ridiculed but MY thoughts on the issue should just be stuffed in a garbage bin somewhere.

:nopity:

We're buttressed, we're atheist, get used to it. (best rhyme I could come up with on short notice)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 02:33 PM
Response to Reply #289
315. Agreed
Maybe we should all become blind and mute so that we don't have a way to offend other people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-23-06 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #315
442. Maybe Just Learning Manners Would Help n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ariana Celeste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #289
331. No shit, man.
:hi: You're right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WritingIsMyReligion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 03:45 PM
Response to Original message
323. Why do people become offended by having their beliefs called "myths"?
Every religious belief is a myth. Every single one:

myth

A traditional, typically ancient story dealing with supernatural beings, ancestors, or heroes that serves as a fundamental type in the worldview of a people, as by explaining aspects of the natural world or delineating the psychology, customs, or ideals of society.

So Jesus sounds like a myth to me. So do Mithras and Zeus and Jupiter and Yahweh and Brahma and the Tao and every other thing such as that.

Myths are stories. What's wrong with having something called a story? Humans can't live without stories, and the power of stories.

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proud_Democratt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #323
367. Paul...who wrote the book of Titus, described Jewish practices
Edited on Thu May-18-06 10:07 PM by Proud_Democratt
as myths. It depends on the messenger.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CarbonDate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-20-06 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #323
394. The power of words
Bushies insist that the permanent bases we're building in Iraq be called "enduring" bases. The estate tax is called the "death tax". And Christians call their myths "Truth". Notice how Christians use the word "gospel" as a synonym for "truth". In each case, weasel words are used to obscure what the thing they're describing actually is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Czolgosz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 04:14 PM
Response to Original message
327. Think of the God = Santa posts as a test of your faith which faith demands
I was recently part of a heated discussion about God and someone suggested this approach to the religious person and it seemed to mellow everyone out. Certainly, the Bible is filled with stories of people whose faith was put to the test (generally by means more grueling than an internet dust up), and the people of faith generally come out of the ordeal better for having their faith tested.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-19-06 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #327
386. That's a fine approach when what you are worried about is
being personally insulted.

But my concern is , since I see anti-Christian posts almost every day on the "latest discussions page" that people new to DU, people who are looking for a new political home, are going to decide that maybe the Democrats are just as bad as they have been painted by the Repubs. (Not bad in the sense of being atheist -- I'm talking about the insults being hurled around.)

And it is also quite possible that a former Republican could come here to see what we are about and deliberately look at the Religion forum because that was something important to this person. And instead of finding friends of different religious or non-religious backgrounds to discuss issues with, he finds himself attacked by flame throwers.

It is easy to tell individuals that they should have a thicker skin, should "offer it up" or whatever. But that doesn't take care of the larger problem for me, which is that DU, if it wants to support the party goals, should be a welcoming place for everybody who supports the party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
godhatesrepublicans Donating Member (343 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 04:33 PM
Response to Original message
330. Thank you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dervill Crow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 05:32 PM
Response to Original message
345. When I found out my parents lied to me about Santa,
I figured they lied about Jesus, too. I thought all the adults who went to church were either (a) pretending for fun or (b) stupid. Since my parents didn't attend church, it never occurred to me that Jesus (or God) was real.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ulysses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 09:02 PM
Response to Original message
357. this shouldn't be so difficult.
Although I was raised in the church, I don't share your faith. So what? If you're not messing with folks on the basis of your interpretation of your faith, what's the problem?

Peace to you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 09:32 PM
Response to Reply #357
361. Wow
This thread is almost as long as the kudzu thread in the Lounge. In one day!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
checks-n-balances Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-18-06 10:27 PM
Response to Original message
368. Ever heard of "The Gospel as Comedy, Tragedy & Fairy Tale"?
I've got to cut to the chase & apologize for not having read all of this thread (because of time), but something about this whole idea made me think of a great book I read almost 30 years ago. I wish all DUers and other progressives had the time to read it, because the author looks at what is true in the world as it is told through STORY. A story can contain profound truth without being literally true. When this author talks about "THe Gospel", it's not necessarily defined in the way that evangelistic preaching defines it. It's more like the idea of Grace - the kind of unconditional love that goes beyond our abilities as human beings - something that comes from beyond ourselves. It's quite deep, but isn't that a great contrast to the simplistic crapola that the religious charlatans of our day have tried to pass off as the truth?

The complete title is "Telling the Truth: The Gospel as Comedy, Tragey and Fairy Tale" by Frederick Buechner.

Here's the only customer review from Barnes & Noble:

An instant classic
Few are the writers who combine traditional theological issues with the inconsistencies of daily life, esp. in the post modern age. This amazing book is rich in imagery from the story of Abraham up to 20th century America and draws a thread of meaning throughout. Like the magician Prospero in Shakespeare's Tempest, the author stirs up images of a storm that is the human condition and uses all the means at his command to give his readers a vision of Jesus as the one who stands with us and for us, despite our all too human qualities. The comedy section may be the only time you get to laugh at the heroes of the faith having their own humanity showing like an untucked shirt, and the comedy, of course foreshadows the best kind of ending that one can hope for.

And quite a few from Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0060611561/qid=1148007785/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-5630837-2543939?s=books&v=glance&n=283155
and here are 2 editorial review snippets from there:

This series of lectures explores these three ways of seeing the Gospel: first as tragedy, as honest sorrow and suffering--this must be faced before anything else becomes possible. From this comes the comedy of new life: a child born to Abraham and Sarah in old age, Lazarus raised from the dead. This is the folly of the Gospel--what Buechner will ultimately call the fairy tale. Drawing deeply from the well of The Wizard of Oz and other stories, he reminds us in this final chapter that "there is a child in all of us," a child in touch with a truth deeper than the logic of tragedy. --Doug Thorpe

"With profound intelligence, Buechner's does what the finest, most appealing literature does: It displays and illumines the seemingly unrelated mysteries of human character and ultimate ideas." --Annie Dillard, Boston Globe

Any and all who read this thread should read this great book!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-19-06 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #368
382. Buechner is a great read -but DU doesn't have serious religious discussion
Edited on Fri May-19-06 12:28 PM by papau
Buechner's Lyman Beecher lectures at Yale made a great little book - about 100 pages - and I love the title "Telling the Truth: The Gospel as Comedy, Tragey and Fairy Tale" - folks forget Paul tells us to be fools for Christ's sake! :-)

Per Buechner the whole truth has to be told "as a tragedy of men and women suffering more than even their own folly and wickedness seem to merit; as comic both in the sense of a terrible funniness and of a happy end to all that is terrible … and as a kind of fairy tale where everybody is disguised as something he is not and only at the end are all disguises stripped away so that all are revealed for what they truly are … with the possibility of being turned into human beings."

I thought it one of the best reads on the spirituality of preaching - and I wish all preachers, as suggest by Buechner, would as they preach face into the realities of peoples' lives and tell only the truth, replacing the usual shallow reassurances with real grappling with how God's grace moves in the midst of those realities of life, speaking of God's compassion, self giving and victory. Bruechner says the preacher must address the inner part of each believer - the part of us all where dreams come from … where thoughts mean less than images, elucidation less than evocation … and be less concerned with matters of form and good taste and nore concerned with telling the truth - something non-believers may not understand as they try limit the definition of truth to that which passes the test for being good science. …

Some quotes:

"It is our hopelessness that brings us to church on Sunday. Then the strange sound is heard-like the creaking of a rusty hinge, or like the ice starting to crack in a March pond.

Laughter comes where tears come from-out of the darkness where God is of all persons the most missed-and the laughter is so unexpected and preposterous and glad that we laugh in astonishment … as Sarah did when her baby was born in a geriatric ward with Medicare picking up the tab.

The comedy of grace is known as what needn't happen and can't possibly happen, because the Kingdom of God is like winning the Irish Sweepstakes… as impossible to enter as for a Mercedes to get through a revolving door… or harder than for Nelson Rockefeller to get through the night deposit slot …

But truth is more than truths, words: it is life with the sound turned off, so that for a moment or two you can experience it not in terms of the words you make it bearable by but for the unutterable mystery that it is …

The joke of it is that often it is the preacher who as steward of the wildest mystery of them all is the one who hangs back, prudent, cautious, hopelessly mature and wise to the last, when no less than St. Paul tells us to be fools for Christ's sake …"

Buechner is even part of some film making courses! The idea is that the preacher, the artist, and the film maker all must "tell the truth - speak the fundamental realities of human life to humanity, telling the story of where we’ve been, where we are, and where we are going.".

The course link below says that a variety of approaches could work well with film, but in the lecture at the link he uses Buechner, using the basic elements of tragedy, comedy and fairy tale.
http://clubs.calvin.edu/chimes/2004-02-13/AandE/AandE2.html

"Christian films, like all truly good films, must be tragedies. They must tell the truth about the messiness and brokenness and not-the-way-it’s-supposed-to-be-ness of the world and the people in it. Christian filmmakers cannot shy away from the dark side of life, nor from the harsh realities of death, war and injustice, nor from broken systems, broken families and broken hearts. Inevitably these films will delve into the messy issues of sex and violence, typically found on the brunt end of censorship, which means we may need a different sort of censorship altogether, or none at all. Christian films must throb with the ceaseless ache that arises from living in a world that is overflowing with rank, putrid tragedies. Yet they cannot, must not stop there.

Just as Christian films must be tragedies, so too they must be comedies. They must unflinchingly look evil in the eye, but not without a twinkle. Christian filmmakers must tell the joke of the universe – the majestically absurd cosmic comedy. Not a trick of the gods played on unsuspecting mortals nor a laugh that dismisses all meaning, this laughter remembers that evil does not have the first or the last word. The comedy that Christians must tell is one that recalls the beginning of the story and laughs at humanity’s amusing and pitiful attempts to make sense of things or make things right on its own. It is not a comedy of contempt, for it is often directed at oneself, but rather a joyful mirth that owns up to the darkness without forgetting who will have the last laugh.

Without an element of fairy tale, Christian tragicomedies would fall short of telling the truth. For, how can people stand to live in this world if there is not a hint of something else, some ultimate surprise to hope for? The fairy tale cannot be a fantastic escape from reality, but rather must harbor a sneaking suspicion that there is something else to life, a final ending where maybe, just maybe, the heroine gets the guy and it all ends happily ever after.

Christian film does not end under the overwhelming crush of evil, but neither does it too quickly resolve this dissonance into hope. Christian filmmakers must open their eyes like those of a child who sees things as they are and as they are becoming, filled with disarming indignation at the present and reckless anticipation of the future."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TreasonousBastard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-20-06 03:00 PM
Response to Original message
395. 375 posts I don't have time to read, but I bet...
at least half of them are from the poor, downtrodden atheists here who object to you objecting to them making fun of your faith.

How dare you! Don't they have every right to call you names and insult your God? And isn't it the height of bigotry to reply to those insults?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Strong Atheist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-20-06 10:18 PM
Response to Reply #395
398. Just for you:


Enjoy!

:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TreasonousBastard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-21-06 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #398
402. Touche! Now...
let's stop beating up each other and concentrate on the bad guys.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Strong Atheist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-22-06 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #402
403. Dang! Just when I thought I had another enemy (from another thread
earlier)...

I found another friend...

You shame my friend...


:yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-21-06 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #395
401. Ya Pretty Much Got It! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-20-06 07:33 PM
Response to Original message
396. Sasquatch?
Gotta laugh at that one man
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-21-06 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #396
400. K & R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
immoderate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-22-06 05:05 PM
Response to Original message
406. Does God know when you're sleeping?
Does he know when you're awake?

Does he know if you've been bad or good?

So what's your problem?:shrug:

--IMM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Strong Atheist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-23-06 08:46 AM
Response to Original message
413. On further thought:
Edited on Tue May-23-06 08:52 AM by Strong Atheist
You are complaining bitterly about a small number of posters on a website with 90,000 people, out of a country of 300,000,000. You have the option of not looking at certain posters (ignore). You are not continually surrounded by R&T. You are getting a MICROSCOPIC taste of what it is like to be a religious minority in this country ALL THE TIME, with no "ignore" option.

:nopity: :nopity: :nopity: :nopity: :nopity: :nopity: :nopity:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-12-06 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #413
417. Having Spent Time As A Religious Minority
Edited on Mon Jun-12-06 08:09 PM by Southpawkicker
when a child

growing up a non mormon in 98% Mormon town in Utah

I KNOW WHAT IT IS LIKE TO BE A RELIGIOUS MINORITY

I don't really know how I rediscovered this thread

I came on a list by the numbers (descending order) of posts or replies

Seeing my thread there with flames, I looked at it and found the post I'm responding to.

I realize

You are complaining bitterly about a small number of posters on a website with 90,000 people, out of a country of 300,000,000. You have the option of not looking at certain posters (ignore). You are not continually surrounded by R&T. You are getting a MICROSCOPIC taste of what it is like to be a religious minority in this country ALL THE TIME, with no "ignore" option.


I had no ignore option there

I found other ways to escape it

I now live in the buckle of the bible belt, surrounded by Southern Baptists. Some of whom are very nice, but the world here revolves around the Southern Baptist Convention.

So don't tell me I am now getting a "microscopic taste" of what it is like to be a religious minority.

My whole purpose in this thread in the first place was my frustration (at that time) with feeling like I had found a place (DU) where there were people that thought like me. Then realizing that they don't all think exactly alike (which is GOOOOOOD!)

However, it can also be a downer if someone is being intolerant of someone's religion, or lack of religion (I see it goes both ways here very clearly)

So I say let's all realize that at the end of the debate, we are all DU "brothers and sisters" (if you will) that are fighting for the same general things!

Strong economy
societal safety net
universal healthcare coverage
separate church and state
strong DEFENSE, not an imperialistic military and government
choice!
peace
jobs
safe streets and neighborhoods
and much much more!!!!



On Edit- I must have hit "replies" link at the top of the page to give this list to me. When I clicked the default it went right back. I was able to replicate it by clicking replies. I just don't remember doing it the first time.:crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
neebob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #417
419. God and Santa are still debating
Edited on Mon Jun-19-06 11:56 PM by neebob
what to do to you for kicking this thread after three weeks. Santa wanted to give you a lump of coal, but God said his repertoire's too limited. He has some very interesting ideas. If you see a dude in a Santa suit, run.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
raccoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-20-06 09:11 AM
Response to Original message
420. I can see where you're coming from.
Many people compare faith in God to Santa Claus because, unfortunately, people who do perceive God as a celestial Santa Claus seem to be very vocal.

I'm referring to people who say things such as:

"I prayed that I'd get that job at ABC Company--and I did!"

"I prayed the lump would be benign--and it was!"

"I prayed that I'd be selected as Miss Bumfvck--and I was!"

This kind of thing is a real big turn-off to a lot of people, myself included. It casts God in the role of a Magician in the sky, who, if implored to make something happen/not happen, will wave a magic wand and things will turn out the way the person doing the praying wanted them to.

For me, this kind of thinking is actually harmful. Because what about all the people who prayed for a certain outcome---and didn't get it? Was God p.o.'d at them? Or were they just less deserving than the one(s) who did?

As for the lump being benign or not, praying didn't affect it one way of the other. Either it was or it wasn't.

Little children are often taught to pray this way--for example, pray that Grandpa will live, or whatever. I was.

My personal belief is that it makes sense to pray to be able to deal with whatever the outcome is, not for a specific outcome.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cain_7777 Donating Member (417 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-20-06 05:03 PM
Response to Original message
422. How about the Easter Bunny, or Tooth Fairy?
You believe in superstition and we are always going to laugh at you. If you truly believe in that crap then it shouldn't bother you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-20-06 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #422
423. I'm Laughing At You
laughing at me

because your insults are so childish
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cain_7777 Donating Member (417 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-21-06 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #423
424. We can all laugh together
Believing in fairy tales is a little more childish than my jokes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-21-06 09:42 PM
Response to Reply #424
425. Naw, Your Jokes Are More Childish
because there is nothing childish about believing in a supreme being

the fact that you think it is a fairy tale, just shows that you are someone who either chooses not to believe, or perhaps, is not able to believe for whatever reason.

But it isn't childish to believe.

Maybe that's why the majority of people do believe in a supreme being.

But I guess, we're all just "childish" compared to you huh?

yeah, right

:rofl: :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl: :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl: :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl: :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
varkam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-22-06 04:51 PM
Response to Reply #425
430. Well I'm rubber and you're glue....
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-22-06 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #430
431. Whatever I Say Bounces Off Me And
sticks on you

:P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
varkam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-22-06 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #431
432. Whatever you say...
bounces off you? That's pretty impressive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-22-06 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #432
433. Yes, I'm Dried Up Rubber Cement (glue)
and it bounces off me

not that impressive

we used to make balls in grade school out of rubber cement

I'm just dried up rubber cement

that's what I've come to in this conversation
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dogmudgeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-22-06 07:12 AM
Response to Original message
426. Just tell 'em ...
... when they ask you about God 'n' all ...

... "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

You know, when people resort to clever clichés to advance their arguments, whatever their position may be, it really kills them. It's like the Libertarians with their tedious comparisons of the government to the Mafia, and social programs to bribery. Perhaps the Ayn Randroids (also atheists) moved in and spoiled all the good atheist thinking.

There's plenty of arguments both for and against the existence of God. They're not all good arguments, but there are enough good ones to keep an honest person well occupied. The topic has been a rich source of speculation and philosophical inspiration since the first glimmerings of civilization. In spite of the assertions of vulgar atheists, religion has more attraction as a mind-stretcher than a form of delusion; in spite of the assertions of vulgar religionizers, atheism demands a strong commitment to following the truth, wherever it leads, rather than a lazy hedonism.

The Santa Claus comparison makes me cringe. And the resurgence of "God didn't buy me a pony for Christmas, so I'm going to be an atheist now!" thinking is just pathetic. My own rejection of the divinity comes from my inability to even formulate a reality test for the existence of a god. I don't know where to start, and I sure don't have any evidence within my own scope of intelligence. But that's just me, and I don't knock other people for arriving at different conclusions.

As for Dawkins' spaghetti monster, Bob Dobbs was a whole lot more fun. When we had Bob around, we freakin' rocked. Nowadays, it's all this stiff-necked stuff that aims to strike back at the Vatican Pedo Squad and Fred Phelps, but ends up hitting Jim Wallis and Elaine Pagels instead. Atheism is in a sad state of regress these days. Madalyn Murray O'Hair was trés cool, and it just hasn't been the same since she ended up in that ditch in Texas.

Don't feel too bad. I'm not a person of faith, I'm a person of doubt. (A person of confusion, even.) I don't believe in God, and I don't believe that I'll ever have a clue either way. But when I hear my "fellow atheists" arguing like the way many of them have been lately, it makes me want to go out and worship something. Anything. Anything at all.

Maybe Britney's pert and shapely ass. Whadda ya think?

--p!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-23-06 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #426
443. No, Not Britney's Ass
maybe jessica alba

but not britney
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 03:50 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC