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.
You totally missed the point - atheism doesn't need to do any of those things. It doesn't need to Be anything. It doesn't even need to exist as you said at the start of your post is it was not for theism. One the control of religion on society is no more that (as i use an example) Astrology - with the culutral stuff that, you mention, I and even Dawkins likes. Then we can top being atheists and just do the Other things that atheism isn't and doesn't need to be, despite your almost Dogmatic insistence that this is what it does.
You totally missed the point - atheism doesn't need to do any of those things. It doesn't need to Be anything. It doesn't even need to exist as you said at the start of your post is it was not for theism. One the control of religion on society is no more that (as i use an example) Astrology - with the culutral stuff that, you mention, I and even Dawkins likes. Then we can top being atheists and just do the Other things that atheism isn't and doesn't need to be, despite your almost Dogmatic insistence that this is what it does.
it doesn't need to be anything is correct. why do you try and make it something it is not?
This post,again, shows why i can't "just let you go by" You base everything you do on theist reaction. Look at how you answer so many poosts where you state "That theist people say this" and then you move onto why they are wrong.
Why don't you answer "this is what I think" and not not answer to religious people. Atheist like me base nothing on religion. We only address injustice. If its religious or not is not our primary concern. You are making choices solely on your opinion about religion.
why do you try and make atheism "needs to reject anything that you deem theist can use to make atheism harder to sell."
Oh right, you ignore me because you brand of atheism so far in a way less valid you have to hide from cross questioning and you have to report any science that exposes your brand of atheism as childish.
Without theism there is no need for atheists.
Without poverty there is no need for those that fight for the downtrodden class.
Without racism the racial justice crusaders are out of a job.
And so on;
There is another dimension to atheism that explores other topics or conversations or that even understands why religion was universal in all developing cultures. In this sense the old fashion atheists were superior and actually had more class.
exactly ... sort of that is lmao
(lmao means I am just talking and having fun. ... people at work always tell me"we like talking to you because you keep it light." here at cd these militants treat me like a monster. I consider it a compliment)
look at trans reason for his statement of belief about god. There are is no god or gods because ...
quantum woo
sortagod
apologetic
not a real atheist
report any science that he feels theist can use
reports science then says "I see no proof"
theist say ...
some of us feel religion is dangerous ...
5+6 are red flags.
not one of them is evidence for a god or not. so long as he can bamboozle people with this nonsense this god-no-god crusade of his will continue.
How would a person describe "how the universe works" based on an emotional reaction to religion? i mean they fit trans and gang exactly. and fundy theist like baptistfundy and jimmie.
Last edited by Arach Angle; 11-28-2019 at 04:45 AM..
Without theism there is no need for atheists.
Without poverty there is no need for those that fight for the downtrodden class.
Without racism the racial justice crusaders are out of a job.
And so on;
There is another dimension to atheism that explores other topics or conversations or that even understands why religion was universal in all developing cultures. In this sense the old fashion atheists were superior and actually had more class.
Like several people have been telling you, you seem to be totally clueless about a lot of atheists. May people who self-identify as atheists were once deeply religious people, some of them were members of very strict denominations and some will tell you that they were once fundamentalists. It was extremely painful for those people to cast off their religion. Once they were finished with religion, some of them became very angry at how they had been controlled, how they had been lied to, at how they allowed religion to waste much of their lives. etc. It's perfectly understandable that those people (not the people who have been without religion all their lives) speak out and denigrate religion and gods, or mock religious traditions and believers. Of course they feel victimized. Some of them are still being victimized, such as those who have been shunned by their families (we have at least two of those actively posting in these forums right now). The vast majority of atheists are loners about their lack of belief. Very, very few of them join any atheist organization.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER
You totally missed the point - atheism doesn't need to do any of those things. It doesn't need to Be anything. It doesn't even need to exist as you said at the start of your post is it was not for theism. One the control of religion on society is no more that (as i use an example) Astrology - with the culutral stuff that, you mention, I and even Dawkins likes. Then we can top being atheists and just do the Other things that atheism isn't and doesn't need to be, despite your almost Dogmatic insistence that this is what it does.
Of course he missed the point. He doesn't understand what you and others tell him, and when you do tell him, he ignores what you say and repeats his nonsense about levels and tribes.
Like several people have been telling you, you seem to be totally clueless about a lot of atheists. May people who self-identify as atheists were once deeply religious people, some of them were members of very strict denominations and some will tell you that they were once fundamentalists. It was extremely painful for those people to cast off their religion. Once they were finished with religion, some of them became very angry at how they had been controlled, how they had been lied to, at how they allowed religion to waste much of their lives. etc. It's perfectly understandable that those people (not the people who have been without religion all their lives) speak out and denigrate religion and gods, or mock religious traditions and believers. Of course they feel victimized. Some of them are still being victimized, such as those who have been shunned by their families (we have at least two of those actively posting in these forums right now). The vast majority of atheists are loners about their lack of belief. Very, very few of them join any atheist organization.
Of course he missed the point. He doesn't understand what you and others tell him, and when you do tell him, he ignores what you say and repeats his nonsense about levels and tribes.
exactly right. PTSD
how do these people react to being asked about something more not more gods? and is their perspective on equal footing as claims not associated with PTSD?
We are all for an outlet for these people. However, Some us do not feel its ok for these scar-ed people to tell us how the universe works based on what they feel. How the universe works isn't determined by how people got screwed. How the universe works resulted in them getting screwed.
Some of us even understand why guys like you don't talk about it. Because you are fully aware of where this ends.
yeah, we know we aren't totally correct in leveling atheism. But you are, at least, equally misinformed by ignoring the fact that when a group of like mined atheist form up it is just like a "level".
What is your reason for trying to minimize the classification?
He even has a point about that. But it sn't atheism as such but people and their 'level' as he says, that they bring to anything. Atheism icluded. They don't believe in any of the god -claims. They just do it a very basic level. They don't see a god around, they haven't had it fined into the, they don't care.
Fine - but these are the people open to being fed the very persuasive (and deceptive) evangelical package because they don't know the refutations to 'scientists believe in God', Historians all attested to Jesus', 'prophecy had been fulfilled'.
Others are aware of the discussions, the points and answers on both sides. That is a different 'level' - what I call "Thinking atheists" . They can decide to know that the apologetics aren'y really that god and be content to disbelieve. Others see how the system is geared to peddling Bible -belief and want to level it up a bit. A fifferent 'level' or 'Tribe' or 'Sect' as Arach calls it. This is just pejorative branding and is more to do with hostility towards vocal and activist atheists and is also seen in preferring the Good Old atheists who didn't try to change the world. In fact, they did but hadn't the ubiquitous voice of the Internet to help them succeed.
And our opposition will not listen to what is really going on because they want to demonise us with their fear and dislike of what we are aiming at doing. Either because of their affection for their favoured religion or fear and hatred of the Liberal thing. Or since the religion hi-jacked the republican party in the US, because linked to xenophobia in the UK and is there waving banners in the Right -wing anti- immigration movement in a number of other countries, the two together.
That they are never going to listen is par for the course. We can still keep undercutting their assertions, claims and smears of atheism every time they do it. The peanut gallery has always been the people we are really speaking to, not the Eternal Theist with fingers in ears, eyes screwed shut bawling denial.
He even has a point about that. But it sn't atheism as such but people and their 'level' as he says, that they bring to anything. Atheism icluded. They don't believe in any of the god -claims. They just do it a very basic level. They don't see a god around, they haven't had it fined into the, they don't care.
Fine - but these are the people open to being fed the very persuasive (and deceptive) evangelical package because they don't know the refutations to 'scientists believe in God', Historians all attested to Jesus', 'prophecy had been fulfilled'.
Others are aware of the discussions, the points and answers on both sides. That is a different 'level' - what I call "Thinking atheists" . They can decide to know that the apologetics aren'y really that god and be content to disbelieve. Others see how the system is geared to peddling Bible -belief and want to level it up a bit. A fifferent 'level' or 'Tribe' or 'Sect' as Arach calls it. This is just pejorative branding and is more to do with hostility towards vocal and activist atheists and is also seen in preferring the Good Old atheists who didn't try to change the world. In fact, they did but hadn't the ubiquitous voice of the Internet to help them succeed.
And our opposition will not listen to what is really going on because they want to demonise us with their fear and dislike of what we are aiming at doing. Either because of their affection for their favoured religion or fear and hatred of the Liberal thing. Or since the religion hi-jacked the republican party in the US, because linked to xenophobia in the UK and is there waving banners in the Right -wing anti- immigration movement in a number of other countries, the two together.
That they are never going to listen is par for the course. We can still keep undercutting their assertions, claims and smears of atheism every time they do it. The peanut gallery has always been the people we are really speaking to, not the Eternal Theist with fingers in ears, eyes screwed shut bawling denial.
1) but these are the people open to being fed the very persuasive
2)Others are aware of the discussions, the points and answers on both sides. That is a different 'level' - what I call "Thinking atheists" ... This is just pejorative branding and is more to do with hostility towards vocal and activist atheists and is also seen in preferring the Good Old atheists who didn't try to change the world.
3)And our opposition will not listen to what is really going on because they want to demonise us
4)That they are never going to listen is par for the course. We can still keep undercutting their assertions, claims and smears of atheism every time they do it.
again, his words not mine. exactly his words. We do not demonize atheism we demonize atheist that change what people say, insert their meaning, and try and tell people its either with or or against us hidden in "Then just get out of our way." we "demonize" them for being the exact same personality type as fundy theist.
his whole post is based on how some theist misbehave. The post is not based on how do we answer the question of how the universe works.
Last edited by Arach Angle; 11-28-2019 at 07:02 AM..
Without theism there is no need for atheists.
Without poverty there is no need for those that fight for the downtrodden class.
Without racism the racial justice crusaders are out of a job.
And so on;
Without illness, there would be no need for doctors and nurses. Now let us see you straw man the argument.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian658
One could easily conclude that atheists have a basic need to denigrate religion or deities to have some sort of relevancy.
THAT did not follow from your initial argument. News flash - 9/11 actually happened. And it was not because of teenage kicks. We have explained new atheism to you before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian658
That is why I advocate a higher plane for atheism.
Yes, you have a straw man you must beat to make yourself relevant. When will your cruelty to straw people end?
Now can we get back to talking about "something else" which is not god, and not Julian?
Without theism there is no need for atheists.
Without poverty there is no need for those that fight for the downtrodden class.
Without racism the racial justice crusaders are out of a job.
And so on;
There is another dimension to atheism that explores other topics or conversations or that even understands why religion was universal in all developing cultures. In this sense the old fashion atheists were superior and actually had more class.
I would just be crystal clear with "some atheist". I mean its implied but as you can see we have some atheist that change what is actually being said. For good reason too ... to them.
Most atheist actually believe that we are part of a larger more complex system. Just ask as many as you can "do you think we are surrounded by life or non life". the militant atheist call them sortagodders because the militant sect do not have actual evidence that points to that stance (we are part of a larger more complex than humans system)is less valid so they use "emotional"
Thats the start of a line of logic, not "bad religion. their is a difference. the anti-religious know it too. They know if we start with science anti-god stances look as stupid as my-god-only.
quantum woo
sortagod
apologetic
not a real atheist
report any science that he feels theist can use
reports science then says "I see no proof"
theist say ...
some of us feel religion is dangerous ...
straw man (meaning anything discussed outside of anti-god)
5+6 are red flags. 9 is just stupid.
not one of them is evidence for a god or not. so long as we can bamboozle people with this nonsense this god-no-god crusade of his will continue.
Like several people have been telling you, you seem to be totally clueless about a lot of atheists. May people who self-identify as atheists were once deeply religious people, some of them were members of very strict denominations and some will tell you that they were once fundamentalists. It was extremely painful for those people to cast off their religion.Once they were finished with religion, some of them became very angry at how they had been controlled, how they had been lied to, at how they allowed religion to waste much of their lives. etc. It's perfectly understandable that those people (not the people who have been without religion all their lives) speak out and denigrate religion and gods, or mock religious traditions and believers. Of course they feel victimized. Some of them are still being victimized, such as those who have been shunned by their families (we have at least two of those actively posting in these forums right now). The vast majority of atheists are loners about their lack of belief. Very, very few of them join any atheist organization.
Of course he missed the point. He doesn't understand what you and others tell him, and when you do tell him, he ignores what you say and repeats his nonsense about levels and tribes.
I grew up Catholic, but in retrospect is was just culture. I had ZERO trauma when as a young teen I realized that the bible was mythological. I felt NOTHING, this was perfectly logical to me. I have no trauma, but I realized other sects of Christianity were different. In fact, most do not even consider Catholics to be Christian. In other words I do not know what is like to grow up in a fundie home.
As for dealing with the trauma of being raised a fundie. Embracing victimhood is not the best way to deal with the pain. Blaming others only brings temporary relief from pain. Replace the blame game with indifference or even gratitude. Decide the whole thing was a learning experience.
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.
