beth

Well, golly dog! I never thought of this. You are so clever. Bet you're right!

Quote:

2. In certain segments of society (maybe most), men are considered to be the leaders and are expected to be a bit rebellious and strong willed. Most things that they do are accepted and if not are merely frowned upon and rarely condemned. Women, however, are expected to be meek and obedient, but most importantly their actions are considered reflections of their family. Your husband and/or father would be partially blamed for not raising/training you correctly or some such rubbish. So I guess what I'm taking a long time to say is that for some people image and familial legitimacy are extremely important.

Yes, I suspect this. You stated my suspicions much more elequently than I have been able to.

Quote:

3. I think a lot of it is either/or a combination of ignorance and insecurity. I think most Christians don't really know what an atheist is and only have misinformation about us. Many are not even sure what agnosticism is. However, I believe that most Christians are good intelligent people at heart, and once they realize that their view is incorrect quickly come around.

I also believe that many Christians are very intelligent at heart, as I was once one. Anyway, I think if we can just open communication, the stigma would be removed.

Quote:

4. And then there are those that believe you cannot be moral without some sort of religious foundation. They will probably always be suspicious and fearful.

Yes, my husband went through this period. He is still very wary that I talk to a board full of atheists, but it helps him to read everything, flirtation and all. He is coming to the realization that I am the same, but no longer mental, well sometimes I am. If others will just give me the chance, they will see that I am still good. I am even more careful of my actions, now.

Quote:

5. And last but not least there are those that think you really do know God but have chosen to reject him. You are spitting in the face of their beloved diety. And after all he's done for you. You horrid little atheist you. Just my two cents. Course I have always lived in the South among mostly fundies so I'm sure my opinions of Christians are skewed quite a bit. (hope I didn't come off as pompous or anything.....feel free to slap me around)

This is some of my family, and I suspect my mother, also. I see that you have also faced southern predudice. Although I am saddened that you have faced this, I am relieved that I am perceiving something that is nonexistent. *note, had to take medication, not sure if I spelled correctly*

fatherphil

there must be loads of 3rd century comentary on that, huh?

Walross

Originally posted by fatherphil:

I have no idea. Hence I said "I imagine...probably" rather than "I assert...definitely", or "it is the case that...". I was just trying to highlight the fact that, not only do the christians have no sole claim on the fish symbol (or indeed many others), but that it's highly hypocritical of them to complain about others co-opting it, when they quite shamelessly did so themselves. Regards,

Walross

fatherphil

words and symbols are co-opted all the time. i could rail against the co-opting of the word "gay" or the triangle by the homosexual community and start a campaign to denegrate their use. but out of respect i accept their use as a means of identity and pride.

fatherphil

while we are talking about symbols:

Walross

fatherphil...what the heck is that?

Badfish

It's an ugly thing whatever it is.

fatherphil

jain symbol
http://www.jainworld.com/education/jainsymbol.htm

Ronin

NonHomogenized

must... resist... urge... to make... necrophelia.... joke.

</shatner>