Dominus Paradoxum

The way I figure, we ought to try to beat Christians at their own game. We could go door to door, informing people of the biblical passages their ministers don't want them to know about, telling them about the religious persecutions and religious wars of the past, explain how religion has constantly tried to bar progress, etc.; and spread the message of humanism:

"I have something to say to the religionist who feels atheists never say anything positive:
You are an intelligent human being. Your life is valuable for its own sake. You are not second-class in the universe, deriving meaning and purpose from some other mind. You are not inherently evil -- you are inherently human, possessing the positive rational potential to help make this a world of morality, peace and joy. Trust yourself."
-- Dan Barker, from his book "Losing Faith in Faith"

What do you say?

Philosoft

Nah.

dangin

If you want to have fun with the horrid bible verses. Publish your own line of kids bible stories, complete with cutesy pictures and everything. But only use the death and damnation verses.

Kind of like editing a Tarantino bloodbath with a Lawrence Welk soundtrack.

Grad Student Humanist

I vote "Nay."

I think it works best when I leave the Xtians alone and they leave me the hell alone as well.

Shake

Nope. I've got to vote against this, too. It just brings us down to their level. Besides, you know how bad it is when someone comes up to you and tries to tell you about Jebus. Well, they don't want to hear our side, either! All you're gonna do is piss them off. If you actually want to deconvert people, start simpler: go to UU church, or find some of what I like to call fence-sitters. These are folks who've had some falling out w/ religion and know aren't sure quite what to think! A good push will deconvert them! But you're not gonna deconvert a fundy with even the best logic or most damning Bible verses. Nah, there's better ways. This has been handled in another thread IIRC.

Corwin

Ok regardless of subject matter this is just the best line I've heard in a while.

braces_for_impact

I am not the one to go around kicking people's crutches out from underneath them. I am not implying that all theists use god as a crutch. I just do not think it is my place to change someone's beliefs, unless those beliefs are causing harm to others or themselves. Some may argue that religion does this, but the fact is there are many religious people who go about their daily lives without harming others. Since I cannot differentiate between these two types on sight, there is no point is prosyletizing.

Just my 2 cents.

Abacus

I think that proselytizing will make even more enemies for us.

Alonzo Fyfe

I am going to disagree with the near consensus apparent here and argue for a specific form of recruitment. Idea marketing.

Which means using resources in an efficient and focused manner. The mention of going to UU meetings and look for fence-sitters follows this principle. Though it is not the only option along those lines.

If we do nothing, simply sit back and don't bother anybody, we can well expect to be increasingly villified, marginalized, and alienated from society at large. We have to ask, not only, "Are they doing no harm?" But, "What are the chances that this will lead to harm?" Or, "Does it provide a shield to those who do harm?"

Many of these people who "do no harm" themselves still send give their moral, political, and economic support to those who do not have our best interests at heart.

lpetrich

I would prefer some sort of polite statement of our beliefs. Something like:

We believe that the Bible is entirely a human creation, which is what we believe about the Koran, the Vedas, the Iliad, and every other sacred book ever written.

We believe that some of the moral content of the Bible is good -- but that some of the moral content of the Bible is very wicked.

We believe that the Universe operates according to natural laws, and that if it had a creator, then that being is not making itself very evident to us.

We believe that if the Universe has to have had some outside cause, then that cause must also have had a cause, etc.

If we wanted to know why we were brought into existence, we'd ask our parents.

We accept evolution by natural selection because that's the kind of Universe we live in. But if it could be shown that our species was genetically engineered into existence by extraterrestrial visitors, we'd accept that.

Likewise, we expect nonexistence after death because that's the kind of Universe we live in; if we find out otherwise, then so what?

We believe that Pascal's Wager is a load of merde de taureau; one can easily construct Pascalian arguments for many belief systems, including ours.