Atheist!

[fieryjen]

Well, I have already been told that 90% of this forum disagrees with me even if 90% of the Americans agree with me. I know you are thinking that most Americans are stupid anyway. I could do a lot of work with that idiocy, to use your word and gentle spirit.

I'm so glad you know what I'm thinking. It means you should feel quite belittled right about now without me even having to say anything. Quite handy, that is.

My gentle spirit would pat you on the head for trying, but my word thinks you're much too ridiculous to bother.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Threadjack, dammit! Because this is too cute.
Even if it has shown up here a couple times already;
have some safe-for-work porn.

 

[fieryjen]

Threadjack, dammit! Because this is too cute.
Even if it has shown up here a couple times already;
have some safe-for-work porn.

Alright, have it your way.

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/funny-pictures-cat-applies-a-tree-to-his-forehead.jpg

 

[wmrs2]

Sources, please?

90% of Americans agree?

You're slinging bullshit.

Google it sweets.

 

[fieryjen]

Google it sweets.

Google what, exactly, sours?

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/funny-pictures-little-hedgehog-is-making-friends.jpg

 

[wmrs2]

Why is "atheist" a pejorative term to most Americans?

Let's try this again from the get go. Most Americans believe in God, even those who do not practice any religious orientation. The experiences most Americans have had with atheist has been with the late USSR, Red China. Southeastern Asia counties, and other small countries like Cuba. Many American families have suffered and died at the hands of the communist atheist. Of course not all atheist are communist and many atheist are great Americans.

Americans have not seen much good come from the camp of atheist. Generally every communist dictator in the world is an atheist whereas very few atheist rise to political power in the USA. Those atheist who achieve notoriety are generally very liberal politically and tend to reject American traditional values and would prefer to establish a humanist code of moral conduct in place of the Western Civilization's historical codes of conduct, all of which are based on theistic principles. In general. most Americans view atheist to be a threat to their traditional way of life. Can you really blame them?

Atheists generally do not believe in the American code of conduct and those of notoriety relish flaunting the fact that they are not required to follow the traditional religious values of the Constitution of the USA. Atheist appear to align themselves with extreme liberal, progressive, rebellious, far left. Agreed this image of atheists is harsh and may be only an appearance, so if any one would like for me to fall on my sward over this description of how Americans view atheist, I understand. I do share this opinion of atheist and do admit that this is profiling but I do view their philosophies as a threat to Western Civilization. I think history verifies this fact.

The question this thread asks is seen by me as intended to spark the flames of hate between atheist and the Western culture. I think that the question is a trap set for conservative thinking people and the response of name calling, unmerited insults, and distortion of facts are all examples of political liberals being given an opportunity to rage and proclaim their dialectic.

I really did not expect the type of response handed out by many of you, but, you guys are really pissed. As writer, I thought you would be broad minded and tolerant. You show no tolerance at all for different opinions.

Maybe that is just the nature of liberal writers. I know that liberal politicians can not understand how anybody could disagree with them and liberal journalist feel the same way. Liberals think they have a monopoly on reasoning and are quick to refer to idiocy, stupid, arrogant, etc., to any person that would challenge their way of thinking. Nothing has been said by me that could not have been challenged intellectually by an opposing point of view but the respondents have chosen to assassinate the message carrier.

I have read some of your responses on the threads so I know that I am not the only person who has been the object of your scorn. That does comfort me as it tells me that I am not the bad person you try to make me appear. Don't worry, my feelings are not hurt but I feel pleased that you have been drawn out into the open so that fair minded people can see how profiling your liberal slant is.

That being said, lets continue having fun and let the discussion of the topic continue. By the time we tire of the discussion, you should be well aware of why most Americans dislike atheists and their supporting liberal cast.

 

[john-the-author]

Let's try this again from the get go. Most Americans believe in God, even those who do not practice any religious orientation. The experiences most Americans have had with atheist has been with the late USSR, Red China. Southeastern Asia counties, and other small countries like Cuba. Many American families have suffered and died at the hands of the communist atheist. Of course not all atheist are communist and many atheist are great Americans.

Americans have not seen much good come from the camp of atheist. Generally every communist dictator in the world is an atheist whereas very few atheist rise to political power in the USA. Those atheist who achieve notoriety are generally very liberal politically and tend to reject American traditional values and would prefer to establish a humanist code of moral conduct in place of the Western Civilization's historical codes of conduct, all of which are based on theistic principles. In general. most Americans view atheist to be a threat to their traditional way of life. Can you really blame them?

Atheists generally do not believe in the American code of conduct and those of notoriety relish flaunting the fact that they are not required to follow the traditional religious values of the Constitution of the USA. Atheist appear to align themselves with extreme liberal, progressive, rebellious, far left. Agreed this image of atheists is harsh and may be only an appearance, so if any one would like for me to fall on my sward over this description of how Americans view atheist, I understand. I do share this opinion of atheist and do admit that this is profiling but I do view their philosophies as a threat to Western Civilization. I think history verifies this fact.

The question this thread asks is seen by me as intended to spark the flames of hate between atheist and the Western culture. I think that the question is a trap set for conservative thinking people and the response of name calling, unmerited insults, and distortion of facts are all examples of political liberals being given an opportunity to rage and proclaim their dialectic.

I really did not expect the type of response handed out by many of you, but, you guys are really pissed. As writer, I thought you would be broad minded and tolerant. You show no tolerance at all for different opinions.

Maybe that is just the nature of liberal writers. I know that liberal politicians can not understand how anybody could disagree with them and liberal journalist feel the same way. Liberals think they have a monopoly on reasoning and are quick to refer to idiocy, stupid, arrogant, etc., to any person that would challenge their way of thinking. Nothing has been said by me that could not have been challenged intellectually by an opposing point of view but the respondents have chosen to assassinate the message carrier.

I have read some of your responses on the threads so I know that I am not the only person who has been the object of your scorn. That does comfort me as it tells me that I am not the bad person you try to make me appear. Don't worry, my feelings are not hurt but I feel pleased that you have been drawn out into the open so that fair minded people can see how profiling your liberal slant is.

That being said, lets continue having fun and let the discussion of the topic continue. By the time we tire of the discussion, you should be well aware of why most Americans dislike atheists and their supporting liberal cast.

Didn't expect this response? Okay, kid, you're either dumber than I thought or you've forgotten about the last half-dozen times you've done this in other venues and gotten exactly the same response.

You know, as a retired priest (who's been a priest since October 1977), I actually have no problem with true Christians. They're awe-inspiring and amazing folks. And I tend to like intelligent, articulate people. I also believe that everyone has a right to follow their own path as long as they let everyone else do the same.

But I have no patience for people with sixth-grade educations who are trying to out-argue people who are smarter than they are, better educated than they are, better read than they are, and better writers than they are, solely because they have some fantasy about how their little peasant version of Christianity is supposed to work. I particularly have no patience for people of that ilk who also have behavior dysfunctions and think that they can prove their superiority by getting everyone irritated with them and thinking that they're then demonstrating how Christians are being maligned, slandered, and persecuted and feeling morally superior because of it. (FYI, this is the way Jehovah's Witnesses work, and they are one sick, unpleasant little group of people.)

For the most part, I think this group is actually surprisingly tolerant of American Christianity given how unpleasant and toxic it's become since the 1890s when the Revelationist doctrine was created by a pair of travelling tentshow preachers. I also think that pretty much everyone in this group responds well to people who act with respect and are articulate in their opinions, even if they disagree strongly with them. So, no, I don't believe that all of this response that's supposedly surprising you is caused by some big thing about liberals not liking Christians or by atheists who are unhappy because they feel "threatened" (Christ alone knows how, honestly) by the supposed brilliance of your point of view or anything as grandiose as that. In fact, I'm comfortable saying that this whole contretemps has nothing to do with how anyone in this thread feels about Christianity. We're generally fine with Christianity when it's actually practiced. It's just you that people don't like. You're a complete dick.

I'd say your work here is done, kid. You've proved once again that you can get people pissed at you by being obnoxious. Isn't it about time for you to vanish suddenly and hallucinate a reality about how victorious you were over the bad, mean liberals? The clock is ticking.

P.S. Hey, were you dumb enough to think that God said that priests can't swear? We can. So let me expand your cultural education: go fuck yourself.

 

[freshface]

You don't have to prove that God exists. Unless you start doing things that affects me, based on the assumption that God exists.

Good logic. That is exactly what the atheist in the old USSR used to think. Although there are no good examples of the state forcing religion on anybody in the USA, go ahead and cringe and live in fear of these terrible religious people in America.

Given the circular logic you employ so often, I'm sure you won't consider my examples to be "good," but I'll throw them out anyway. Have you not taken a good look at the Republican party recently? A good portion of their Platform is based on Evangelical Christian beliefs. In fact, a stated goal of the Religious Right is to encourage a government that reflects their values. The Republicans catered to their wishes when they were in power. It's why I'm no longer a Republican.

Prayer in school
Abortion rights
Gay marriage
Faith based (and government supported) social programs - "believe or we won't help you"
Creationism in science class
Government funding for religious schools
Preferential government appointments in the Bush administration for graduates of Christian colleges.

I really don't care what you believe. You can believe in the spaghetti monster if that works best for you. You can not control how I live my life based on your beliefs. The harder you try, the less religious I become.

 

[past_perfect]

You deliberately define logic incorrectly. That is a characteristic of the world view you represent. Logic is making correct inferences and requires a premise that does not change. That is the classical definition of logic. Self-evident truths are the only premises that do not change. This thesis statement is not a world view but it does originate and is supported by a world view. You see, a world view is prior to logic. Logic is a deduction, not a comparison as you contend.

You do not view science the way the Western World views it. Science does not tell us that logic does not exist outside of us. If we did not exist, logic would be here. I simply said that when be were born, logic, math, science, natural laws. etc. were already here. Man did not make logic any more than he created science or natural laws.

Science is out to get you. The job of science is to make truth that has always existed a knowable fact. Science did not create the atom but it did learn to manipulate the atom. I am not a clever philosopher but I do know both intuitively and scientifically that God does exist.You have failed to present any evidence that God does not exist and to keep saying God does not exist is indeed intellectually immature of atheist. Your denial of a world system originating from God is also irrational since you say you are a Christian. The Christian Bible tells us that we must believe that God is (Heb:11:6). In Christianity, belief that God is, is necessary before faith. Your world system clearly has you confused about what you believe; therefore, do not think you have made things clearer for me or other Christians that may be depending on your wisdom.

Thank you for responding to my previous statements. Be well.
wmrs2

The premises you talk about exist. They are called facts. They are verifiable. If you make a statement based on facts, like the Earth is round (well almost) then you don't need to have faith in that statement or be afraid that someone comes along and disproves you. I don't know if you remember that, but the Church maintained that the Earth was flat, until there really was no choice there anymore.

Classic logic? You mean as in Aristotelean? We have had the advent of science and a few hundred years of philosophy in between. The current model of logic has been laid out by Betrand Russell - which is still used in philosophy, mathematics, science - although Christian fundamentalists would have preferred to burn him at the stake.

Of course logic is a deduction. But you don't deduct from something you have to introduce with "I believe that". You can of course, but then you are making a statement about your faith. Nothing more. Nothing less.

That is a different statement from the one you have made before. The way you phrased it, it sounded like you believe you are born with a mind functioning on logic principles. It doesn't. That is what I stated.

Where did I misrepresent science though? Science is not drawing on self-evident truths or absolutes. It is drawing on data, facts. If the world really is the way we perceive it and if the little cage of our limited understanding is giving us an accurate impression of what there really is, is an entirely different question. Good scientists therefore tend to introduce new theories with "it would appear", or "in view of all available data" - simply because we are uncovering more layers of the natural world as we go along, as our ability to measure and define progresses and renders previous theories obsolete and sometimes plain wrong.

I have failed to... Huh? Why would I have to do that? I only stated that it isn't provable, unless you allow inferences from premises that are faith-based. Now you claim you can prove it scientifically? Go ahead then, I am all ears, especially since you said you can do that based on facts. Just to make that plain once more - a fact is objectively verifiable, not a subjective impression.

Confused about what I believe? I know exactly what I believe, thank you very much. Do our beliefs tally? Probably not. That is the thing about beliefs - they are subjective. I don't challenge people's beliefs. Maybe you should heed the quote from the Bible you gave there. It doesn't say you have to accept God's existence as a scientific fact - it says, you have to believe. It doesn't say, you have to claim you know. Knowing and believing are not the same thing. Read Christian mystics. They have a concept called "the unknowable" - for a very good reason. Expand your knowledge about your own religion, instead of trying to challenge or lecture others about how they have to view the world.

 

[past_perfect]

And somehow I am still hoping my dear friend amicus will drop in to prove that Jesus was actually a socialist and "moocher" in Rand's terms - that would make the discussion even more interesting.

 

[Guest]

*snicker*

Found this - made I larf.

http://www.squidlips.org/You_can_tell_a_christian.pdf

 

[rgraham666]

*snicker*

Found this - made I larf.

http://www.squidlips.org/You_can_tell_a_christian.pdf

Snerk.

 

[Guest]

Snerk.

It's quite good, isn't it?

When the family wakes up I'm gonna try it on the piano.

 

[sadangel]

*snicker*

Found this - made I larf.

http://www.squidlips.org/You_can_tell_a_christian.pdf

<snerk>
I laughed until I had tears! Thank you sarahh!

 

[john-the-author]

It's quite good, isn't it?

When the family wakes up I'm gonna try it on the piano.

Since there's not music specified, what tune are you going to do this to? Or are you just making something up as you go along?

 

[Guest]

Since there's not music specified, what tune are you going to do this to? Or are you just making something up as you go along?

I'm a solid Tom Lehrer officiando.

I can make do.

 

[wmrs2]

Didn't expect this response? Okay, kid, you're either dumber than I thought or you've forgotten about the last half-dozen times you've done this in other venues and gotten exactly the same response.

You know, as a retired priest (who's been a priest since October 1977), I actually have no problem with true Christians. They're awe-inspiring and amazing folks. And I tend to like intelligent, articulate people. I also believe that everyone has a right to follow their own path as long as they let everyone else do the same.

But I have no patience for people with sixth-grade educations who are trying to out-argue people who are smarter than they are, better educated than they are, better read than they are, and better writers than they are, solely because they have some fantasy about how their little peasant version of Christianity is supposed to work. I particularly have no patience for people of that ilk who also have behavior dysfunctions and think that they can prove their superiority by getting everyone irritated with them and thinking that they're then demonstrating how Christians are being maligned, slandered, and persecuted and feeling morally superior because of it. (FYI, this is the way Jehovah's Witnesses work, and they are one sick, unpleasant little group of people.)

For the most part, I think this group is actually surprisingly tolerant of American Christianity given how unpleasant and toxic it's become since the 1890s when the Revelationist doctrine was created by a pair of travelling tentshow preachers. I also think that pretty much everyone in this group responds well to people who act with respect and are articulate in their opinions, even if they disagree strongly with them. So, no, I don't believe that all of this response that's supposedly surprising you is caused by some big thing about liberals not liking Christians or by atheists who are unhappy because they feel "threatened" (Christ alone knows how, honestly) by the supposed brilliance of your point of view or anything as grandiose as that. In fact, I'm comfortable saying that this whole contretemps has nothing to do with how anyone in this thread feels about Christianity. We're generally fine with Christianity when it's actually practiced. It's just you that people don't like. You're a complete dick.

I'd say your work here is done, kid. You've proved once again that you can get people pissed at you by being obnoxious. Isn't it about time for you to vanish suddenly and hallucinate a reality about how victorious you were over the bad, mean liberals? The clock is ticking.

P.S. Hey, were you dumb enough to think that God said that priests can't swear? We can. So let me expand your cultural education: go fuck yourself.

An old country preacher told me once that telling the truth was like throwing a rock into a pack of bitch dogs. The one you hit would yep the loudest. You prove his correct.

I don't have to go fuck myself because you just fucked yourself before thousands of people. There are only a few wild dogs like you on this forum who project their own characteristic on others. I can handle that so move over smart man, I am here for awhile.

The topic of this thread stated by the OP was designed to allow liberals like you to blow out your suppressed libido and to pretend that you are so masterly informed. There are many liberals here who probably do not appreciate your making an ass out of them too, since they will not appreciate you making them look like weak minded fools. Many liberals show intellectual restraint and decorum and they are well respected by there peers. You fail to show the restraint that brings this type of respect.

When your only purpose is to insult the other party in a debate, it is universally accepted that lack of understanding is the source of your rage. Rage is what you demonstrate before your peers. Your rage is not a symptom of intellectual superiority but a sign that you are not well received by your own kind. True liberals do not want you speaking for them but they prefer a spokesman that can reason and present ideas in a humanitarian way.

Christianity has not been defended by me. The system of Christianity can take care of its own defense. Many liberals are Christians too. I will allow them to take care of rebels like you in their camp. I wonder if you see yourself as you showed yourself on this thread. Personalities like yours is an explanation why mental institutions are filled, don't you think?

When

 

[wmrs2]

Given the circular logic you employ so often, I'm sure you won't consider my examples to be "good," but I'll throw them out anyway. Have you not taken a good look at the Republican party recently? A good portion of their Platform is based on Evangelical Christian beliefs. In fact, a stated goal of the Religious Right is to encourage a government that reflects their values. The Republicans catered to their wishes when they were in power. It's why I'm no longer a Republican.

Prayer in school
Abortion rights
Gay marriage
Faith based (and government supported) social programs - "believe or we won't help you"
Creationism in science class
Government funding for religious schools
Preferential government appointments in the Bush administration for graduates of Christian colleges.

I really don't care what you believe. You can believe in the spaghetti monster if that works best for you. You can not control how I live my life based on your beliefs. The harder you try, the less religious I become.

I am not interested in your religious beliefs for these are your own concern. The belief that religious people are out to convert liberals to Christ is over rated. It seems to me that conservative living is the traditional way of life in the USA and liberals are out to change that. It is their right to work towards a more liberal society but to claim that Christians are the only ones out to convert the world is hypocritical. You must be able to see things from the other person's point of view if you seek peace in the world. All the above list you write are the concerns of many fair minded Christians as well as fair minded liberals. It is only the narrow minded on both sides that rage over these issues rather than discuss these issues, don't you think?

 

[john-the-author]

An old country preacher told me once that telling the truth was like throwing a rock into a pack of bitch dogs. The one you hit would yep the loudest. You prove his correct.

I don't have to go fuck myself because you just fucked yourself before thousands of people. There are only a few wild dogs like you on this forum who project their own characteristic on others. I can handle that so move over smart man, I am here for awhile.

The topic of this thread stated by the OP was designed to allow liberals like you to blow out your suppressed libido and to pretend that you are so masterly informed. There are many liberals here who probably do not appreciate your making an ass out of them too, since they will not appreciate you making them look like weak minded fools. Many liberals show intellectual restraint and decorum and they are well respected by there peers. You fail to show the restraint that brings this type of respect.

When your only purpose is to insult the other party in a debate, it is universally accepted that lack of understanding is the source of your rage. Rage is what you demonstrate before your peers. Your rage is not a symptom of intellectual superiority but a sign that you are not well received by your own kind. True liberals do not want you speaking for them but they prefer a spokesman that can reason and present ideas in a humanitarian way.

Christianity has not been defended by me. The system of Christianity can take care of its own defense. Many liberals are Christians too. I will allow them to take care of rebels like you in their camp. I wonder if you see yourself as you showed yourself on this thread. Personalities like yours is an explanation why mental institutions are filled, don't you think?

When

I agree that Christianity hasn't been defended by you. (Crappy literary construction, btw; passive voice is weak.) You're just not very bright. I love how you keep making these unwarranted assumptions about me, about liberals, about atheists, and about things you have no idea about from personal experience. But I distinctly recall when I was registering for this board that I had very specifically checked the box that said "Not interested in letting some 23-yo subliterate tool on the Internet dictate what I believe in." But anyone who's getting his rocks off on visions of young Christian women being crucified is hardly someone to be telling someone else about how their suppressed libido is a problem, ne c'est pas?

Thousands of people here... that is a lovely thought. It's yet another fantasy of yours, but I think not.

I'm perfectly willing to present ideas in a humanitarian way to many people. You're just not worth the effort. You honestly haven't made the cut for human status in my book. (It's an earned right with me.) And that's the honest truth.

I love that song that Sarah posted the link to. Yeah, it fits you to a T.

Oh, btw: it's "their peers," not "there peers." It's a common problem among poor writers. Just like "a while" vs. "awhile." And "yelp," not "yep." Check your English textbook. It'll help you a lot.

 

[john-the-author]

Drat! This has been mildly entertaining, but I just got a phone call that our accompanist is coming over an hour and a half early--concert tonight and tomorrow; hot damn!--so playtime is over. I've got to go warm up the voice and run over lyrics.

Talk to you in a few days when I'm done with all this. Should be fun!

John

 

[wmrs2]

<snerk>
I laughed until I had tears! Thank you sarahh!

Just a probing question. Do you not recognize that the faults you find with the lifestyle of Christians is not just traits found only in Christians? These are traits found in the complete human race. Liberals, conservatives, Democrats, Republicans, atheist, and old farts all have these traits. They are not unique to Christians. We could just as easily condemn the whole of humanity to hell as the Christians but that would just sink the boat for all of us.

To me narrow mindedness is failure to understand that we are more alike than we are different. There is nothing unique about you or me. I wish that the term Christian did not exist. It would probably be better if the term liberal did not exist in politics also. If these terms did not exist, then maybe there would be a tendency to evaluate each person on his own merits. That seems to be more objective about you and me, don't you think?

 

[Guest]

Perhaps you'd better kick out "conservative" while you're at it.

 

[Guest]

Drat! This has been mildly entertaining, but I just got a phone call that our accompanist is coming over an hour and a half early--concert tonight and tomorrow; hot damn!--so playtime is over. I've got to go warm up the voice and run over lyrics.

Talk to you in a few days when I'm done with all this. Should be fun!

John

We should sing together.

Did I ever send you a vid of me singing at church? I bored a few folks around here with it, I know.

 

[rgraham666]

We should sing together.

Did I ever send you a vid of me singing at church? I bored a few folks around here with it, I know.

I was hardly bored.

 

[freshface]

We should sing together.

Did I ever send you a vid of me singing at church? I bored a few folks around here with it, I know.

Now you've done it. wmrs2 will be along any minute now to tell you all about how you're not the proper sort of Christian.