Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My problem with this situation is not "atheists" (in general, per se) …
I have some very good friends who are "atheists" …
I oppose the missionary zealot "New Atheists" …
There are like 3 or 4 people who I've seen self-identify with that term. You're the only one talking about them here. Perhaps you should start a new thread if you feel the need to continue to rant about them.
Who cares? Are they here in this thread? I don't see them posting. A neutral observer would wonder why you seem intent on discussing stuff no one in the conversation has said rather than actually engaging in a conversation here.
The reason seems clear: The poster realizes that deflection is the best way to try to distract attention away from substantive points the poster hates but to which the poster realizes there is no cogent and rational rebuttal.
It is simply that an acknowledgment of God is NOT an establishment of religion
Sure it is. Where else do you find god(s) but in the mythologies of various religious traditions?
Or talking an alternate approach and agreeing with your opinion, if talking about god(s) isn't a religious expression then there should be no 1st amendment protections for practicing your faith - after all the 1st amendment only protects religious freedom and talking about god(s) isn't a religious expression in your view. Funny how accepting some of your baseless assertions about the law tends to turn reality on its head. I guess that's what happens when you just make it up as you go along rather than actually researching the legal history of the topic you're discussing.
I do have a problem with the obnoxious zealot missionary "New Atheists" who try to "push their beliefs down my throat" ...
If Christians kept their religion private and stopped spouting off about it all the time they wouldn't have to be exposed to the scary fact that not everyone agrees with them.
The reason seems clear: The poster realizes that deflection is the best way to try to distract attention away from substantive points the poster hates but to which the poster realizes there is no cogent and rational rebuttal.
There are like 3 or 4 people who I've seen self-identify with that term. You're the only one talking about them here. Perhaps you should start a new thread if you feel the need to continue to rant about them.
The "New Atheist" movement is precisely the zealot group who want to eliminate, e.g., Gideon Bibles from public places …
That is the topic of this thread … which someone else already started ...
If Christians kept their religion private and stopped spouting off about it all the time they wouldn't have to be exposed to the scary fact that not everyone agrees with them.
In other words, you want to see religious freedom stripped away so we should just keep our faith hidden behind closed doors.
The "New Atheist" movement is precisely the zealot group who want to eliminate, e.g., Gideon Bibles from public places …
That is the topic of this thread … which someone else already started ...
The Gideons distribute Bibles in many ways besides in hotel room drawers. They pass them out on the streets to any who want them, for instance, usually near college campuses. I have no issue with this; I don't have to take one or engage with them and so far as I know they don't get in people's faces.
I am not aware of anyone with an issue even with the hotel room distribution, except in the uncommon case where the hotel is government operated.
This is hardly zealotry, nor is it limited to New Atheism. I'm sure opposition to a fuzzing of the church / state line existed prior to the year 2000, which is generally regarded as the start of the New Atheism movement.
It is telling that even though there is no opposition to what the Gideons are doing for the most part, even though the opposition is to a very particular and uncommon situation, that folks like you have to label it "zealotry" and imply that it's some sort of widespread persecution with the intent to destroy the entire work of the Gideons.
Again, though, this is all a tempest in a teapot. Distributing Bibles on college campuses will do more harm than good to the intended outcomes of the Gideons, as the greater the Bible literacy, the greater the unbelief, and the more education, the less ignorance and the less belief in invisible personal gods. Aside from which, the Bible has for some time been freely available online to anyone who is interested, and with the coming demise of printed books well underway, I don't even see a need for an organization like this anymore.
Of course you do. We would be fools if we didn't realize how unpleasant this all is for you believers. But you needn't worry. Nobody is pushing atheism down anyone's throat. It is simply an increasing requirement that the USA practice the constitutional principle of separation of church and state and stop the organized religions pushing their beliefs down the throats of society, and we atheists will go on suggesting to the rest that they don't have to put up with the religions pushing their beliefs down their throats.
Yes. I note the ongoing rumbles of discontent with "New Atheism", which is just like the Old except it can no longer be dismissed as a tiny minority with no voice.
I reckon you got it right in seeing the difference between being vocal and evangelical, even. Yes, we are that - and the religion objections to "anything that goes against what you believe, or trying to make sure the government stays out of the religion business ". And, if you can see the difference, I reckon you are not against us, even if you are not with us.
Yea, people seem to think that keeping the government out of religion is somehow "pushing atheism down their throat". Yet those same people think that we should teach creationism in schools, allow governments to endorse religion, and that is in no way pushing their beliefs down our throats. I don't even think they can see how hypocritical this is.
"New Atheism" is simply a term people use for the ones who no longer sit on the sidelines and let religion run rampant. I may or may not be a "New Atheist" but I fight for the same types of things. I have no problem with anyone speaking about their beliefs, but the moment you start trying to proselytize to me, I have a problem. This is less about their beliefs, and more about me. If you want to have a conversation, that is great. If you simply want to preach at me, not so great.
Now don't get me wrong here, I am not talking about people who are simply passionate about what they believe. There is a difference between being passionate and being preachy, if that makes sense.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
