Freethought & Rationalism Archive

rainbow walking · 10-14-2003, 05:41 AM

Originally posted by seebs
And Stalin could do the same thing because he believed something else.

It's not religion or irreligion that's the problem; it's zealotry.

rw: Of course. But when such personalities find the parameters of their zealotry pre-defined and packaged to go...what a convenience...yes?

There's an infinite supply to choose from.

However, I don't think the conclusion you state is "obvious" from the discussion; in fact, it doesn't seem to be even the slightest bit supported, except that we can rule out gods who consistently, immediately, and visibly, punish anyone who follows them badly. At least in Christianity, that's explicitly not the case.

rw: Since the indictment of the OP was based on religious belief, I think the conclusion is extremely cogent. Now if the OP had suggested religious expression was evidence for or against the literal existence of a god...then you might have an argument.

Stephen T-B · 10-14-2003, 05:53 AM

Seebs - you are posting in this thread on behalf of believers who think like you (which is perfectly reasonable); my OP, however, was addressing an issue raised in my mind by certain other sorts, especially as represented here in recent months by Radorth and theophilus. (I wonder if you were around at the time of David Mathews? His feelings were intense, and the way he expressed them got him banned.)

I was trying in my OP to see through to the fury which underlies the aggression: do you have another way of accounting for it?
Or did you not notice it?

rainbow walking · 10-14-2003, 06:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Stephen T-B
Seebs - you are posting in this thread on behalf of believers who think like you (which is perfectly reasonable); my OP, however, was addressing an issue raised in my mind by certain other sorts, especially as represented here in recent months by Radorth and theophilus. (I wonder if you were around at the time of David Mathews? His feelings were intense, and the way he expressed them got him banned.)

I was trying in my OP to see through to the fury which underlies the aggression: do you have another way of accounting for it?
Or did you not notice it?

What!?

David Matthews was banned? (sigh) And he was so intellectually stimulating...

Hopeful Monsters · 10-14-2003, 06:32 AM

Yeah - I read his abusive stuff in the archives. Then promptly hit the git with an e-mail attacking religion.

Jobar · 10-14-2003, 08:44 AM

Good people, when we mods move a thread, it isn't a value judgement unless we move it to ~Elsewhere~. Many times, a conversation will start out in the correct forum, then evolve into something better suited to some other forum. I see it happen all the time.

That said, I'm moving this to GRD. It's more about belief, than it is about God. Jobar.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-14-2003, 05:41 AM	#21
rainbow walking Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Erewhon Posts: 2,608	Originally posted by seebs And Stalin could do the same thing because he believed something else. It's not religion or irreligion that's the problem; it's zealotry. rw: Of course. But when such personalities find the parameters of their zealotry pre-defined and packaged to go...what a convenience...yes? There's an infinite supply to choose from. However, I don't think the conclusion you state is "obvious" from the discussion; in fact, it doesn't seem to be even the slightest bit supported, except that we can rule out gods who consistently, immediately, and visibly, punish anyone who follows them badly. At least in Christianity, that's explicitly not the case. rw: Since the indictment of the OP was based on religious belief, I think the conclusion is extremely cogent. Now if the OP had suggested religious expression was evidence for or against the literal existence of a god...then you might have an argument.

10-14-2003, 05:53 AM	#22
Stephen T-B Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Leeds, UK Posts: 5,878	Seebs - you are posting in this thread on behalf of believers who think like you (which is perfectly reasonable); my OP, however, was addressing an issue raised in my mind by certain other sorts, especially as represented here in recent months by Radorth and theophilus. (I wonder if you were around at the time of David Mathews? His feelings were intense, and the way he expressed them got him banned.) I was trying in my OP to see through to the fury which underlies the aggression: do you have another way of accounting for it? Or did you not notice it?

10-14-2003, 06:32 AM	#24
Hopeful Monsters Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: God is a Mind Loop Posts: 1,344	Yeah - I read his abusive stuff in the archives. Then promptly hit the git with an e-mail attacking religion.

10-14-2003, 08:44 AM	#25
Jobar Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: secularcafe.org Posts: 9,525	Good people, when we mods move a thread, it isn't a value judgement unless we move it to ~Elsewhere~. Many times, a conversation will start out in the correct forum, then evolve into something better suited to some other forum. I see it happen all the time. That said, I'm moving this to GRD. It's more about belief, than it is about God. Jobar.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.