Starboy

Seeker196, I really don't know if it will happen, but it is possible. And if few people speak out against it, the chances of it happening again are greatly improved. If there were not signs of intolerance rearing its ugly head I would agree that my views would be alarmist, but look around you. These are not particularly tolerant times. We are persecuting an entire group of people based on religion and country of origin. These policies are comming from the highest political office in the land. When I see it happening to one group it is my duty to speak out against it lest somewhere down the line they come for me.

Starboy

Starboy

tdekeyser, I have asked this question before without getting a good reply from the Christians that frequent this board. I will keep asking it until either Christians admit that their religion is busted or they act according to their supposed convictions.

WHERE IN THIS PICTURE ARE ALL THE TOLERANT CHRISTIANS OPPOSING SUCH INTOLERANCE?

Starboy

Blake

I have to admit, my thinking has been getting closer to tdekeyser's lately. If certain people are already waging war on you, I find it very hard to argue against the right to self-defense.

However, I still think that there's intolerance and then there's intolerance. You can fight directly against people, or you can fight against their ideas. Though I haven't studied it enough yet to understand how to effectively practice it, I think the best techniques come from "militant nonviolence"--successfully challenging noxious ideas & actions, *not* the people holding the ideas or making the actions.

If you fight back directly against the person, then even if they started it, they will rationalize that they are then entitled to "self-defense." Responding directly with violence has to be a last resort. In the case of the biggest picture, changing the government, violence is simply not an option; they've amassed force so overwhelming that only the other option (killing the state via legal mechanisms) is feasible.

wildernesse

Starboy:

Christians and other tolerant believers weren't invited to participate in the Godless March--it was strictly for those Americans who declare themselves godless not for things that everyone can support, like church-state separation. Since we weren't invited, we stayed at home--so these people could be considered rude gate-crashers if you wish.

I know that if the march had been for an issue that most reasonable people can support (like church-state separation), then I would have loved to have gone. However, I didn't feel like tagging along on the sidelines, taking pictures of my husband marching. And since he's more of a homebody, there wasn't anything to urge us on.

But, some non-believers don't want to have anything in common with believers. Also, these are people who have a right to free expression, even if I don't like it. ****Wait, I feel my Christian-sense kicking in--there's a Catholic in Seattle about to smack his sister--got to go stop him! Too bad I don't have any other super powers. Go Greyhound, go!

--tibac

**Please note this message is from an individual acting without authorization from Christian High Command. Make her show you her True Christian id and authorization before you take anything she says to heart.

Starboy

wildernesse, assuming you are a Christian, you make my point. Practicing your convictions should have nothing to do with atheists inviting you to join them. Christianity is an ethos that makes incredible claims but, from where I sit, doesn't deliver the goods. It is busted. It is time to throw it onto the trash heap of history.

Starboy

seebs

Yes, but there's a difference between trying to stop the Nazis, and trying to kill all Germans. Opposing *all* religion is more of the latter than the former.

Starboy

There is no difference if religion is indeed the problem. I could be wrong, maybe it isn't the problem, but it is obvious it is not the solution.

Starboy

seebs

I asked. I was told "fuck off, theist bastard".

In other words, you're giving the religious nutjobs just what they want - atheists who are dogmatic, hostile to other belief systems, actively evangelical, and believe that opposing beliefs are "evil". You've given them the "religion of atheism", just like they wanted it, and now, *please*, you guys and them go fight, and let the people who want to go about their lives in peace get on with it - theists and atheists alike. All of us can be friends; those of you who can't be friends, *PLEASE* leave us out of it.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't say "we don't want any theists", and then complain when the tolerant and polite theists leave you alone, and use this as evidence that there aren't any.

seebs

Intolerance is the problem. Tolerance is the solution.

If religion were the problem, either Wildy or Rufus would be dead by now. They're doing fine. Obviously, religion itself is not the problem.

wildernesse

I think that it's fine that people don't believe--but at a march that is to be evidence that there are godless people and that they have a voice, I'm not sure where my place would be except on the sidelines. I don't have convictions as a godless person.

The march was about showing that there were godless people--I'm not one. I wasn't invited and didn't think I would be welcome. There were several threads about the purpose of the March earlier, and that was the gist of it. IMO.

I don't know what kind of incredible claims Christianity makes that are proven completely false by Christians not going where they're not welcome. Don't people here get huffy about Christians being upset when missionaries are killed in places like Yemen? "Well, they know that they're not wanted, why should they be upset when they get killed?" Etc.


--tibac