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.
Religious forums? Seems like a waste of time and electrons. Why post on a forum of which is devoted to a subject of which holds no relevance to one. I don’t knit or fly airplanes. I don’t visit knitting or airplane forums. So why all the none-spiritual people on this forum? Uncertain about one’s belief system? Perhaps.
If I’ve asked this question before, forgive me. I am simply perplexed.
Oh you understand why. They are taking shots and you and I and sticking it to you, and I. Oh, and it has been working and continues to work. For them, it's about politics and they live as radical liberals. They, like terrorists, will use your virtue against you. Their reward is a couple of bronze coins or something like that. In the end, they will lose. Why? Because evil has a half-life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trobesmom
Some who post on the religion forums were once religious, like me, so we may have a different perspective on the subjects being discussed. I was deeply involved in fundamentalist Christianity for a majority of my life. Today I'm more of a pantheist or deist.
My comment re: educators or how one communicates was in response to your point regarding ‘teaching theists’ by way of this thread. You’re nonsensically forgetting the fact their religious bandwagon is relative to faith i.e. insults, criticism, arrogance, and ‘logical arguments’ will not teach/communicate anything to anyone other than intolerance and an assumption of inequality i.e. ‘atheism is better’. At the end of the day, it negatively affects atheism more than theism as we are severely outnumbered in this country. People fail to see the bigger picture, most notably relative to law and our fight to be an influential part of the mainstream; it won’t happen with anger/arguments against religion and those who believe, no matter how ‘logical’ you may think you are.
Your point would be valid if I actually argued about 'teaching theists'. An example, when I point out the flaws of creationism, I am not doing that to educate the creationists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorporateCowboy
That said, I never suggested anyone should/would stop posting.
Yet you claim it is a waste of time for atheists to post here, and that it effects atheism when we do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorporateCowboy
That said, there are those who are so wrapped in their group/forum-think they don’t understand the obvious: our individuality. I laughingly expect it from theists i.e. we are ‘the lowest of the low’; however, it’s bizarre when other atheists expect me (or anyone) to do as they say/act in a forum; else, in their mind, I’m not really an atheist. That’s the epitome of intolerance/immaturity i.e. ‘think as I do’; else, be harassed, mocked and ridiculed.
I do not expect you to do anything I say, but is that not what you are trying to do by pointing out our 'folly'?
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorporateCowboy
Sure, but I don’t care if they are dishonest or posting under ten different accounts; they can (foolishly) knock themselves out. Point being, it doesn’t mean anything relative to our atheism, does it? In fact, all the more reason to stop spinning on the hamster wheel.
That was just an aside to have a dig at a dishonest theist who certainly does not follow the golden rule, and usually I do ignore them. But sometimes they provoke hatred against atheists, and that needs to be addressed.
Oh you understand why. They are taking shots and you and I and sticking it to you, and I. Oh, and it has been working and continues to work. For them, it's about politics and they live as radical liberals. They, like terrorists, will use your virtue against you. Their reward is a couple of bronze coins or something like that. In the end, they will lose. Why? Because evil has a half-life.
That is exactly how Putin describes the genocide in the Ukraine.
I suspect that most times it goes toward paying the electric or heating bill.
Of course, but again there is the more macro consideration as to what is going on in the light and heating of all those churches (and mosques and synagogues and
...)
Permitted: Nonpartisan Speech
Federal law does not restrict a church’s nonpartisan speech. In practice this means that a church may freely encourage its congregation to vote. It may also do other things that touch upon political matters, including:
Providing members of the congregation with nonpartisan information about issues in an election.
Organizing voter registration drives.
Hosting candidates as speakers, provided that each candidate on the ballot is given an equal opportunity to participate.
Holding discussions about the relationship between church doctrine and ballot issues.
Curious as to why you think his visit isn't news. It is because while the horror of the residential schools in Canada (and the associated, more recent removal of indigenous children from their homes/dissociation from their culture in what is known as the Sixties Scoop even though it last into the Eighties) has been an issue for many years, in 2021 inspectors using Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) found numerous unmarked graves on the properties where these schools stood. It became obvious that what the indigenous have been saying for decades--that their brothers and sisters and cousins disappeared and died at these schools from abuse and neglect is true.
The news is because while at least one other pope made a formal apology from the Vatican on behalf of the Church's involvement in the deliberate destruction of these cultures, Francis received indigenous chiefs at the Vatican and then promised to come and visit the sites of some of the schools in Canada to apologize and try to do something to effect reconciliation. Then he did it, despite obvious poor health and the cancellation of what some would consider more important trips around the globe. The Catholic Church has a tradition of making a concerted effort to destroy cultures around the globe, but particularly in the "new world", and Pope Francis for the first time acknowledged this and said that it was wrong.
He showed up humbly and exposed his vulnerability to sit among thousands of marginalized people who have every reason in the world to hate what he represents instead of hiding under a big hat in a fortress on the other side of the ocean waving his hand and saying, "oh sorry about that".
In order to understand why the news, one must read the news...
But IS it their problem? How can someone be responsible for what specific others have done just because their name associates them in people's minds? How can your typical Mormon in Salt Lake do something to stop a follower of Jeffs in Short Creek from handing their 12-year-old daughter over to some grown man who wants her to breed his children?
I don't blame Muslims in general for what they did on 9/11. I blame the individuals who planned and carried out the attacks, including those who supported them.
I am sure the first reaction is "that has nothing to do with me/us". Wouldn't it be yours? But perhaps acknowledging the association in people's minds and then condemning the wrongful actions should follow.
What do people do?
Nones aren’t just leaving religion because of the Christian right.
People who leave Christianity often cite the politics of the Christian right turning them off.
Pope Francis, yes. Oops
Oh I love the man, and yes he is humble and a wonderful human being with a great personality. Have you seen The Two Popes? Wonderful movie.
Regardless what I think the Pope's visit is news. I just find this a curious intrusion of religion amidst dirty secular politics and with people dying in heat waves, increase in homelessness, children calling 911 while getting shot. Perhaps I just am not religious enough to find his visit relevant or as a blessing of some kind. However I can be moved by a community prayer to the Cosmos event asking for blessings and peace on earth for everyone.
"Dirty secular politics?"
This is a bit curious too, as if all politics doesn't tend to be "dirty," or is the notion here that theocracies are "clean?"
There is news of all kinds. Good/bad, significant and not so significant. Secular and religious. How a person ranks or concerns themselves with any news is obviously a personal matter, but generally speaking it all matters to someone. For me who follows the news fairly closely, it's not a pick and choose sort of thing. It's about being informed about what is going on around us and around the world. Of interest and importance for some people like me. Of no interest to others, and somewhere in the middle for everyone else.
Hello! You are welcome to address "these people" with your definition of gaslighting. In some circles gaslighting means saying one thing while doing the counter opposite. The official definition includes attempting to cause someone to doubt their reality usually to the benefit of the gas lighter.
Is it gas lighting to question what is real and what is not? Regardless how it might make anyone feel about "their reality?"
The problem is that simply refuting an argument, or pointing to data that shows the theists are wrong is seen as fighting by them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
No, it is about correcting the bad arguments theists post on the internet. And if they have the liberty to post their religious beliefs and claims on the internet, we atheists also have the liberty to refute their arguments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
Because bad arguments should be refuted if they are presented.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
Perhaps instead of blaming us for pointing out they have no good arguments, they should get some credible evidence for their beliefs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
Your point would be valid if I actually argued about 'teaching theists'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
Yet you claim it is a waste of time for atheists to post here, and that it effects atheism when we do.
You’re so wrapped in (your own) forum standard as to how you express what is ‘valid’ (and usually not) in your eyes, you have a tendency to attach a ‘claim’ (and want to argue) every minor point - even though I, too, am an atheist. As a result, you miss the bigger picture (relative to basic human rights, opinion and theists’ ‘faith’ as well). It’s logical/necessary to promote atheism and equality as opposed to fighting individuality or one’s own demons. Hence my point, it becomes about the defense of one’s ego (or personal anger) far more than it is relative to the recognition atheism deserves. Obviously.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
That was just an aside to have a dig at a dishonest theist who certainly does not follow the golden rule, and usually I do ignore them. But sometimes they provoke hatred against atheists, and that needs to be addressed.
You honestly believe your intention is to stop the spread of hatred, particularly relative to this thread? Or that you’re somehow improving our image (atheists) as a result of your posts? Come on, lol.
This is a bit curious too, as if all politics doesn't tend to be "dirty," or is the notion here that theocracies are "clean?"
There is news of all kinds. Good/bad, significant and not so significant. Secular and religious. How a person ranks or concerns themselves with any news is obviously a personal matter, but generally speaking it all matters to someone. For me who follows the news fairly closely, it's not a pick and choose sort of thing. It's about being informed about what is going on around us and around the world. Of interest and importance for some people like me. Of no interest to others, and somewhere in the middle for everyone else.
Secular,Politics. As opposed to sacred, religious. In my opinion they should not mix, although they do. While the visit by the Pope assuaged those who were abused, and sought reconciliation, in my opinion it is not a political matter. It is a Christian matter that needed a Christian resolution. Canada was not going to make a political move against the Vatican on the matter, which would be news. I dont have an issue that it is news, just that i find it curious. All kinds of acharyas and imams visit from other countries. They hardly ever make the evening news. Why is Pope news? I don’t know.
I understand that you have an opinion and how you digest news may differ.
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.
