Freethought & Rationalism Archive

openeyes · 05-15-2003, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Muffinstuffer

Probably not. And I for one say that if you are happy with your life, then good for you. Of course as a Christian, I always desire 'better' for others, and from my point of view, you know what that means. But I respect others' points of view and lifestyles, and I will not shove my beliefs down anyone's throat.

You're thinking your way is "better" is the crux of the problem for me and my dealing with other Christians who inappropriately assume their practices should be applauded, even in public situations. I don't want a prayer at the athletic banquet; pray silently if that's your custom. I don't want the public high school promoting a religious graduation ceremony, even if it's voluntary. Doesn't that say to my atheist son, that you don't really belong despite your honor academic status, high test scores and athletic letters?

These situations aren't the "witnessing" you're discussing, just the daily grind that brings religion observance to our lives involuntarily. Believing is considered the default position.

I feel a non-religious approach to life is "better." I actually feel sorry for kids with drug problems who are placed in treatment programs that are based on religion because that may only add to their confusion in my eyes. But can you imagine the response if I told the parents of my feelings? It's not my place, just like it's not others' place to tell me the "right" way or favor a religious approach in non-private situations.

We non-believers are seldom just considered neutrally, but usually as a threat or as someone "lower" on the morality scale. Years of this sort of attitude tend to grind one down. Is it any surprise we aren't always the most civil when discussing our frustrations with religious beliefs on a board such as this one where we're the majority for a change?

Queen of Swords · 05-15-2003, 12:23 PM

Originally posted by Muffinstuffer
Sure, if you want to view all of this from the standpoint that Christians are ALWAYS going to be lacking possession of the full knowledge of the universe

But this is not inaccurate, is it? Christians don't have the full knowledge of the universe, and presumably they won't have it until they go to heaven, at which point they won't have anyone to witness to.

sure, we're always going to be wrong. But sometimes (from our point of view) we happen to be 'right,'

I don't think that a proselytizing Christian is always wrong in picking their targets, so to speak. When one uses the shotgun approach, some pellets may find their target. But some may strike the neighbor's child instead. To me, the danger of the one outcome is not outweighed by the positive aspects of the other outcome.

Perhaps from the christian's point of view, the christian is right to proselytize. But from the stalker's point of view, the stalker is right to pursue a woman who will someday see the light and believe, as he does, that a relationship with him will be good for her. I think that when one is trying to change someone's mind, it is safer to first see the matter from their point of view - which is admittedly difficult, if not impossible.

I have 'helped' people out before who have suffered from child abuse, because I was abused, and it happens that it was my faith that brought me through it. Does that mean it would have defiintely helped others? No, of course not. But it did help SOME, and for those who wanted none of it, I gave them exactly that after the first attempt - none of it.

This was admirable of you. For a slightly different take on the matter of "suffering reduced by faith", take a look at my thread "I was witnessed at", where I wasted my time listening politely to a long religious spiel, found out in the end that the other person was (uselessly) witnessing to me and was unable to vent my real feelings anywhere but here.

I will just point out that not all Christians would behave as you did - refraining from bringing up religion after they realized that the person in question did not want to hear it. Moreover, sometimes the person in question is not free to say, "stop, I'm not interested."

But we (and by 'we' I mean those who are religious and reaching out to those who are not) can at least give it one shot (or 3954 shots in a lot of cases ), and if it doesn't work, oh well.

If it doesn't work, and you have offended the other person, is the correct response still, oh well? I hope not.

First.....I think you misread my post. I did NOT say that it pertained ONLY to this board.

Sorry if I misread you - I spend so much time on the board that I have to recall there's a world outside it. I think you have a point about profanity and attacks on a person (as opposed to attacks on an argument), which are not the best forms of debate. Sometimes profanity can be funny - I remember when we had a poster called lds who claimed the Holy Spirit left him when he read a four-letter word, or even an acronym of one, such as WTF. But in a serious discussion of religion, I don't think profanity or name-calling has a place.

However, even if a person was kind and civil when answering, the response to that answer might depend on what the answer was, not what the tone of the answer was. For example, if a Christian said to me, "I'll pray and fast so that you change your mind and one day we meet again in heaven, where you'll look at me with so much joy in your heart and say, 'Thank God, I'm so happy now!'" Maybe the Christian says this in the nicest way possible, but that wouldn't prevent me from feeling condescended to.

But I myself would probably let loose with a BUNCH of biting retorts. *L*

You know, you're not bad for a Christian.

Again, I did say above that I may have had the misfortune of meeting a lot of the 'abnormal' atheists/agnostics who are bitter/unhappy/rude/blah blah blah.

I have the opposite problem, since I regularly dig up the worst fundamentalists for the Nutwatch and engage the slightly-less-than-worst on the board, so I have to remind myself that not all christians are like that. It helps, in that regard, to see someone who is willing to respect the boundaries of others. I hope you understand that the frustration shown by atheists may be due to their interactions with theists who are not as tolerant as you appear to be.

One example is the example I gave above.

My bad... for some reason I thought you were going to provide links to former threads. Note to self : sometimes things happen off the board.

And as I said two times, it's been my misfortune possibly to be with those I've been with, who have given me those stereotypes to go by.

I hope that at least some of the responses on this thread will challenge those stereotypes. IMO, unbelievers have a hard enough time already without alienating those people who might otherwise be friendly towards us.

Pyrrho · 05-15-2003, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Muffinstuffer
Very good points overall, and with a lot of them I agree. Obviously, how good intentions come across has an awful lot to do in this case with one's point of view. On the one hand, there's loads of Christians - or Mormons, or Buddhists, etc. - whose lives have been positively enriched by their experiences, and at the least, those positive experiences can't be discounted, even if the beliefs can. But on the other hand, there's also more than a few Christians/Mormons/etc. (the story about William Bennett and his gambling comes to mind) who are NOT perfect, and some who have claimed to be Christian and advancing 'God's will' (the Inquisition, David Koresh, etc.), that screw it up for the rest. And that's not even getting into the whole discussion about whether or not Christianity is supported by fact or not. So depending upon where one stands, will of course have a lot to do with how they feel.

But by the same token, there are many atheists I know that just flat out take NO effort to be civil in the least. I know just as many atheists/agnostics who will immediately launch into a string of profanity when they find out about what I believe in, or when they ask questions and I answer, as I know people who do respond civilly and with charity.

As for those who are "messing it up for others", that is really a matter that people disagree about. For example, you disagreeing with the Inquisition puts you at odds with many thousands of people. Please take another look at the quote in my original post.

Others have already addressed many of your other remarks, but just a few things anyway:

Does it bother you that there are many in our government who don't want to follow the Constitution, and promote religion instead? (Think of the Pledge, of "In God We Trust" on our money, etc.) Frankly, religious people CONSTANTLY FORCE their views on others, and there are many of us who are sick and tired of it. What kind of reaction do you expect from us? How would YOU react if our money said "In ALLAH We Trust", or "In SATAN We Trust", or "In THE POPE We Trust" or...? Think of prayer in the schools. How would you react to prayers to Allah, Zeus, Satan, or any other "god" that you don't worship? How would YOU react to YOUR TAX DOLLARS being spent to promote what YOU regard as pernicious, superstitious nonsense? And then one of them complains that you are being rude when you post a few remarks at II? Come on, it is ridiculous to expect everyone to be civil, when they have been force-fed this garbage all of their lives.

Do you vote for the people who keep the government promoting religion? If so, then you are actively forcing your views on others, and you deserve to be treated worse than some rudeness at II.

Pyrrho · 05-15-2003, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by scrumpy
Let�s say 90% of your countrypeople love gardening. Many of them love to share their love of their hobby with anyone in earshot. They think they are helping you; they have an honest desire to share with you the happiness that gardening brings them. They somehow think that you haven�t heard this from many others, or that if you have heard it, you haven�t heard it in quite this wonderful way before. They think that they have the key to unlock your love of gardening, and darned if they aren�t going to be the ones to put it in the lock.

You, on the other hand, already know that you live in a world where 90% of the people you speak to are gardeners. You have repeatedly heard their message about gardening happiness. You don�t buy it (even though you may have already tried it for yourself or may have been an avid gardener for years prior). Gardener after gardener has tried to engage you in conversations about how much happiness gardening brings into their lives and could bring into yours. There isn�t a message about gardening that you haven�t heard, repeatedly. It�s all around you � individual gardeners and gardeners on the T.V., in the newspapers, on the radio. Yet somehow every gardener who tries to engage you in a joys of gardening conversation thinks they are the first, or the best. Frankly, you�re sick of the gardening message. You can�t understand that gardeners can�t get it through their heads that the message is not new to you or anyone else like you, because it is very clear to you that you live in a country that is garden saturated - with gardeners and the message of the joys of gardening. Sometimes you get a little testy with those gardeners. It�s hard not to lose your patience when you�ve been gardened at once too often. Mostly, you just wish they�d realize that when it comes to the love of gardening, you�ve heard it about a million times before, and you�re frustrated to know that you will for at least a million more time to come. You try to be patient, but sometimes it wears thin.

If only they were talking about gardening instead of Christianity, it would be so very much better. (I don't have a garden, by the way.) At least then they would be talking about something real instead of something imaginary, and they would probably not be involved in all of those contradictions and gross abuses of language, speaking a great deal of nonsense. Even if it were boring and tedious, at least it would be about real things for a change!

Goliath · 05-15-2003, 01:35 PM

Muffinstuffer,

Quote:

My question is this....laying all the remarks and such aside, does anyone really take into account the fact that there is a genuine desire on the part of the believer to 'help' (I'm enclosing that word in quotes for y'all's benefit ) those who do not believe?

First of all, I don't believe that very many xians who do witness actually have "helpful" intentions in mind, but even if they do, I find such intentions to be irrelevant. Someone who spews forth bigoted, hate-filled dogma while having good intentions is still someone spewing forth bigoted, hate-filled dogma.

Sincerely,

Goliath

Goliath · 05-15-2003, 01:38 PM

Muffinstuffer,

You refer to xians.....

Quote:

who have claimed to be Christian and advancing 'God's will' (the Inquisition, David Koresh, etc.), that screw it up for the rest.

Irrelevant! David Koresh is just as much of a xian as you are, you are just as much of a xian as Hitler was, Hitler was just as much of a xian as my mother is, and my mother is just as much of a xian as the pope is: No more, no less.

Sincerely,

Goliath

Muffinstuffer · 05-15-2003, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by QueenofSwords
But this is not inaccurate, is it? Christians don't have the full knowledge of the universe, and presumably they won't have it until they go to heaven, at which point they won't have anyone to witness to.

True. But then again, NO one has the full knowledge of the universe.

Quote:

I don't think that a proselytizing Christian is always wrong in picking their targets, so to speak. When one uses the shotgun approach, some pellets may find their target. But some may strike the neighbor's child instead. To me, the danger of the one outcome is not outweighed by the positive aspects of the other outcome.

Well, the question begs asking, what constitutes a 'shotgun approach'? If you mean just witnessing to every single person I can possibly find, I don't do that. I choose my targets carefully and with a lot of thought.

Quote:

Perhaps from the christian's point of view, the christian is right to proselytize. But from the stalker's point of view, the stalker is right to pursue a woman who will someday see the light and believe, as he does, that a relationship with him will be good for her. I think that when one is trying to change someone's mind, it is safer to first see the matter from their point of view - which is admittedly difficult, if not impossible.

True, but the difference between a stalker and THIS particular Christian (I can't speak for them all of course) is that I try once, and if someone gets offended, I apologize, and then quit. Most stalkers do not.

Quote:

This was admirable of you. For a slightly different take on the matter of "suffering reduced by faith", take a look at my thread "I was witnessed at", where I wasted my time listening politely to a long religious spiel, found out in the end that the other person was (uselessly) witnessing to me and was unable to vent my real feelings anywhere but here.

I will just point out that not all Christians would behave as you did - refraining from bringing up religion after they realized that the person in question did not want to hear it. Moreover, sometimes the person in question is not free to say, "stop, I'm not interested.

Very true. And thanks for the compliment.

You're fairly correct that sometimes they are not free to say they're not interested. I will go out of my way to ensure that the person DOES want to hear it. Usually I will just live my life well, and let other people ask questions (and occasionally start conversations), and if I KNOW that a person is receptive to it I will then initiate a conversation. Otherwise, I don't step on toes too much, because while I DO feel that SOME people need to hear it, I don't feel that using the 'shotgun approach' as you described it will bring in loads of interested listeners.

Quote:

If it doesn't work, and you have offended the other person, is the correct response still, oh well? I hope not.

Well, to be honest, yeah it is, at least in my case. I do hope you understand that when I talk to someone about my faith, a) if I am the initiator, I usually do so ONLY after getting to know that person AND finding out if they are receptive to it. By that time, they know that a) I'm not out to hurt or alienate them, and b) even if I did, it would not be intentional. On top of that, sometimes you can not help offending people. If all Christians sat around trying to witness BUT refrained from doing so because they were worried about offending people, well, there'd be one whole heck of a lot less Christians around. (Which, I am sure, is a good thing from your point of view, heheh.)

Quote:

I remember when we had a poster called lds who claimed the Holy Spirit left him when he read a four-letter word, or even an acronym of one, such as WTF.

What?? *ROTFLOL* I DON'T think that's the case. I can, however, see God looking at the sky and going "Why me?" *L*

Quote:

However, even if a person was kind and civil when answering, the response to that answer might depend on what the answer was, not what the tone of the answer was. For example, if a Christian said to me, "I'll pray and fast so that you change your mind and one day we meet again in heaven, where you'll look at me with so much joy in your heart and say, 'Thank God, I'm so happy now!'" Maybe the Christian says this in the nicest way possible, but that wouldn't prevent me from feeling condescended to.

Very true. Course, usually when I pray for someone, I do it on the sly.

Quote:

You know, you're not bad for a Christian.

Haha! Thanks, I think. I didn't say I'm PROUD of it, but it happens. Quite a bit, I'm afraid. I'm fairly sarcastic in real life.

Quote:

I have the opposite problem, since I regularly dig up the worst fundamentalists for the Nutwatch and engage the slightly-less-than-worst on the board, so I have to remind myself that not all christians are like that. It helps, in that regard, to see someone who is willing to respect the boundaries of others. I hope you understand that the frustration shown by atheists may be due to their interactions with theists who are not as tolerant as you appear to be.

Thanks. And I do understand. It appears that both of us have been subjected to the opposite extreme. Condolences. *L* Obviously I have to point out the fact that by virtue of what I believe, I'd be one of those 'fundies.' (D'oh!) But as you said, and as I've said, stereotyping is bad. I admit that I was getting ready for a lot of huge arguments, and after your very first post, I thought "Great...I'm going to get tarred and feathered." But such is not the case. Can it be that I'm actually being *gasp* TOLERATED?

As far as tolerating goes, as I'm SURE you've heard before, and as the saying goes, "Christian's aren't perfect....just forgiven." Holding the title 'Christian' doesn't really set people apart as far as their humanity, their screwups, their actions, go. I know plenty of atheists that tend to employ AND uphold moral standards much better than a lot of Christians. By virtue of the fact that the Focus of Christianity claims to be the Way/Truth/Life, and by virtue of the fact that I follow that Way/Truth/Life, of course when it comes down to brass tacks, I'm going to be seen as intolerant. I can't escape that. But does that mean that my responses and actions toward others have to be intolerant? Of course not.

I would like to go on record here and now and state before everyone here that I do not believe Tinky Winky is gay.

Quote:

My bad... for some reason I thought you were going to provide links to former threads. Note to self : sometimes things happen off the board.

I hope that at least some of the responses on this thread will challenge those stereotypes. IMO, unbelievers have a hard enough time already without alienating those people who might otherwise be friendly towards us.

Well, you're challenging them as we speak, so thank you.

southernhybrid · 05-15-2003, 02:21 PM

I am usually polite to Xians unless they are rude to me. One thing I don't understand about Xians is the following. Most of us grew up in Xian homes in the US and most of us have heard the Xian message thousands of times. When Jesus said go ye into all the world, yadayada, the world was a very different place that it is today. The philosophy of Xianity was new and unknown. It's old, outdated and widely known now. What is the purpose of trying to teach it now? We've all heard the message and yet the Xians won't shut up. Doesn't that make you wonder just what the motive is now?

I think the motive is neener, neener, neener. I'm going to heaven while you're going to burn in hell. Come to my way of thinking and then I'll accept you. If not, I look forward to watching you burn in hell. I realize that not all Xians go around doing this but the ones that do probably deserve to be treated poorly.

Muffinstuffer · 05-15-2003, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pyrrho
Does it bother you that there are many in our government who don't want to follow the Constitution, and promote religion instead? (Think of the Pledge, of "In God We Trust" on our money, etc.) Frankly, religious people CONSTANTLY FORCE their views on others, and there are many of us who are sick and tired of it. What kind of reaction do you expect from us? How would YOU react if our money said "In ALLAH We Trust", or "In SATAN We Trust", or "In THE POPE We Trust" or...? Think of prayer in the schools. How would you react to prayers to Allah, Zeus, Satan, or any other "god" that you don't worship? How would YOU react to YOUR TAX DOLLARS being spent to promote what YOU regard as pernicious, superstitious nonsense? And then one of them complains that you are being rude when you post a few remarks at II? Come on, it is ridiculous to expect everyone to be civil, when they have been force-fed this garbage all of their lives.

First....NO it does not bother me that there are many who do not want to follow the constitution. Although it does bear pointing out that the original intent of the Constitution, Bill of Rights, etc., was to PROTECT the rights of Christianity, and put a wall of separation between church and state as far as the REGULATION of Christianity went. If you would like more information on that, go read 'The Myth of Separation' by David Barton. I believe some of the facts in that book are inaccurate, but that's some of them...not all.

Second, my tax dollars ARE being spent on things that I regard as being pernicious, superstitious nonsense. I can't count the number of times I've had to read culture books (for my anthropology class) that surreptitiously downed Christianity while lifting up other faiths, or the times that I've seen a college advance a certain religious book or text as required reading for a class, or what have you. I can't come up with 29347 examples on the spot, but suffice to say that yes, my tax dollars ARE being spent on this I do not agree with. But I am not going to go build a compound, load it with guns and women and kids, and seal myself away from the world.

As far as money saying whatever on it, and as far as praying prayers...well, the Bible says "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and render unto God what is God's." I don't care if my money says "Bozo is God." That doesn't mean I have to worship it. And if I'm at a football game where everyone is yelling "Insh'allah!" I simply won't yell it. And YES I have been in situations where I was the one dissenter. I simply did my dissenting quietly.

Quote:

Do you vote for the people who keep the government promoting religion? If so, then you are actively forcing your views on others, and you deserve to be treated worse than some rudeness at II.

Why is this? Polls that have been recently taken indicate that the majority of people in the United States profess faith in God, at the least (I think the number was around 68 percent or so) - specifically, in the Christian God. If you want my honest opinion, I have not voted in the last two elections because I had problems with all candidates, but I would have voted for Bush.

But why do I deserve to be treated worse? I do not see my views being forced on schoolchildren who get kicked out of schools when their friends are wearing pentagrams and getting away with it. I don't see my views being forced on people at the court where the statue of the Ten Commandments was torn down. I don't see my views being forced on people in hundreds of graduation ceremonies that are no longer allowed to have communal prayer because it might offend someone.

My point is that yes, I vote for those whose beliefs coincide with mine but NO I do NOT force my views on others ANY MORE than someone who votes for an atheist or agnostic presidental candidate, or votes for measures that suppress Christian or other religious freedoms, forces their views on me. I get suppressed every time I go to work and try to read my Bible at MY desk on MY lunch hour. But that's ok, because it doesn't mean I have to stop believing in God, because I can read it when I get home. It doesn't just happen to non-Christians.

Muffinstuffer · 05-15-2003, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by southernhybrid
I am usually polite to Xians unless they are rude to me. One thing I don't understand about Xians is the following. Most of us grew up in Xian homes in the US and most of us have heard the Xian message thousands of times. When Jesus said go ye into all the world, yadayada, the world was a very different place that it is today. The philosophy of Xianity was new and unknown. It's old, outdated and widely known now. What is the purpose of trying to teach it now? We've all heard the message and yet the Xians won't shut up. Doesn't that make you wonder just what the motive is now?

I think the motive is neener, neener, neener. I'm going to heaven while you're going to burn in hell. Come to my way of thinking and then I'll accept you. If not, I look forward to watching you burn in hell. I realize that not all Xians go around doing this but the ones that do probably deserve to be treated poorly.

And I would agree with you. I sincerely hope that you do NOT think that the majority of Christians hold themselves superior to those who do not believe in Christ. If you do, I am sorry.

I truly am. I can honestly tell you that when I DO share my faith, it is because I want them to have the happiness that I have, NOT because I am BETTER than they are. I'm no better than any other person out there, and if I AM, I'm only better THROUGH the One I believe in (as a proxy 'good person.') I hope that I don't ever give you cause to look on me with any distaste.

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

05-15-2003, 12:23 PM	#32
Queen of Swords Contributor Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Canada. Finally. Posts: 10,155	Originally posted by Muffinstuffer Sure, if you want to view all of this from the standpoint that Christians are ALWAYS going to be lacking possession of the full knowledge of the universe But this is not inaccurate, is it? Christians don't have the full knowledge of the universe, and presumably they won't have it until they go to heaven, at which point they won't have anyone to witness to. sure, we're always going to be wrong. But sometimes (from our point of view) we happen to be 'right,' I don't think that a proselytizing Christian is always wrong in picking their targets, so to speak. When one uses the shotgun approach, some pellets may find their target. But some may strike the neighbor's child instead. To me, the danger of the one outcome is not outweighed by the positive aspects of the other outcome. Perhaps from the christian's point of view, the christian is right to proselytize. But from the stalker's point of view, the stalker is right to pursue a woman who will someday see the light and believe, as he does, that a relationship with him will be good for her. I think that when one is trying to change someone's mind, it is safer to first see the matter from their point of view - which is admittedly difficult, if not impossible. I have 'helped' people out before who have suffered from child abuse, because I was abused, and it happens that it was my faith that brought me through it. Does that mean it would have defiintely helped others? No, of course not. But it did help SOME, and for those who wanted none of it, I gave them exactly that after the first attempt - none of it. This was admirable of you. For a slightly different take on the matter of "suffering reduced by faith", take a look at my thread "I was witnessed at", where I wasted my time listening politely to a long religious spiel, found out in the end that the other person was (uselessly) witnessing to me and was unable to vent my real feelings anywhere but here. I will just point out that not all Christians would behave as you did - refraining from bringing up religion after they realized that the person in question did not want to hear it. Moreover, sometimes the person in question is not free to say, "stop, I'm not interested." But we (and by 'we' I mean those who are religious and reaching out to those who are not) can at least give it one shot (or 3954 shots in a lot of cases ), and if it doesn't work, oh well. If it doesn't work, and you have offended the other person, is the correct response still, oh well? I hope not. First.....I think you misread my post. I did NOT say that it pertained ONLY to this board. Sorry if I misread you - I spend so much time on the board that I have to recall there's a world outside it. I think you have a point about profanity and attacks on a person (as opposed to attacks on an argument), which are not the best forms of debate. Sometimes profanity can be funny - I remember when we had a poster called lds who claimed the Holy Spirit left him when he read a four-letter word, or even an acronym of one, such as WTF. But in a serious discussion of religion, I don't think profanity or name-calling has a place. However, even if a person was kind and civil when answering, the response to that answer might depend on what the answer was, not what the tone of the answer was. For example, if a Christian said to me, "I'll pray and fast so that you change your mind and one day we meet again in heaven, where you'll look at me with so much joy in your heart and say, 'Thank God, I'm so happy now!'" Maybe the Christian says this in the nicest way possible, but that wouldn't prevent me from feeling condescended to. But I myself would probably let loose with a BUNCH of biting retorts. L You know, you're not bad for a Christian. Again, I did say above that I may have had the misfortune of meeting a lot of the 'abnormal' atheists/agnostics who are bitter/unhappy/rude/blah blah blah. I have the opposite problem, since I regularly dig up the worst fundamentalists for the Nutwatch and engage the slightly-less-than-worst on the board, so I have to remind myself that not all christians are like that. It helps, in that regard, to see someone who is willing to respect the boundaries of others. I hope you understand that the frustration shown by atheists may be due to their interactions with theists who are not as tolerant as you appear to be. One example is the example I gave above. My bad... for some reason I thought you were going to provide links to former threads. Note to self : sometimes things happen off the board. And as I said two times, it's been my misfortune possibly to be with those I've been with, who have given me those stereotypes to go by. I hope that at least some of the responses on this thread will challenge those stereotypes. IMO, unbelievers have a hard enough time already without alienating those people who might otherwise be friendly towards us.

05-15-2003, 02:21 PM	#38
southernhybrid Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: heavenly Georgia Posts: 3,862	I am usually polite to Xians unless they are rude to me. One thing I don't understand about Xians is the following. Most of us grew up in Xian homes in the US and most of us have heard the Xian message thousands of times. When Jesus said go ye into all the world, yadayada, the world was a very different place that it is today. The philosophy of Xianity was new and unknown. It's old, outdated and widely known now. What is the purpose of trying to teach it now? We've all heard the message and yet the Xians won't shut up. Doesn't that make you wonder just what the motive is now? I think the motive is neener, neener, neener. I'm going to heaven while you're going to burn in hell. Come to my way of thinking and then I'll accept you. If not, I look forward to watching you burn in hell. I realize that not all Xians go around doing this but the ones that do probably deserve to be treated poorly.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.