enemigo

I'm not sure whether this post is appropriate for this forum, but I like this analogy.

I have been debating the recent pledge with in some other forums and I've found that people are taking this as an attack on theists.

So I have been trying to make clear that it is not an attack on theists. There are many theists that support the separation of church and state; though for reasons quite different than my own. I have no problem with them, or their beliefs, even though I disagree with them.

Atheists' problems are with McCartheists. They are the people who insist on putting their religion in the government. Its not theism in general, its McCarTheism.

Now the analogy:

Its like they are taking a dump in the community well. And that analogy is not an attack on theists' personal religious beliefs. From their perspective, it would be the same if atheists put "one nation, without God" in the pledge. That would be like an atheist taking a dump in the community water source. And they would be right to think that, and to support removing the turd from the well.

The Establishment Clause is the sign on the well that says "Thou shalt not shit in the well."

Also I've seen it suggested that atheists' "deep hatred for theists" is our motivation for these "attacks."

I do not hate theists. Almost every single one of my friends are theists. I only have a problem with the McCartheists who try to crap in the community well. I don't have a problem with their actual crap, just where they crap. Atheists are not trying to stop theists from crapping everywhere; just in the community well, which belongs to everyone. If we were trying to stop theists from crapping altoghter, that would be an attack.

Furthermore, we don't want to drop a load in the well ourselves either. We just want all crap out of the well. Is that too much to ask?


richard

[ July 05, 2002: Message edited by: enemigo ]</p>

TooBad

"Foul-mouthed atheist compares religion to excrement!"

Alonzo Fyfe

The method of argument that I have used has been most effective at deflecting any sort of "attack" rebuttal. Though, I admit, I put my neck on the line when I use it.

"The phrase, 'under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all' takes 4 groups and claims they are all equivalent. These 4 groups are: atheists, Confederate soldiers or separatists, tyrants, and perpetrators of injustice.

If you truly believe that I am no better than a Confederate rebel, a tyrant, or a perpetrator of injustice -- if you truly believe that I ought to be identified as an enemy of the United States and want to pledge allegiance against me -- then perhaps the phrase 'under God' is appropriate.

If you do not think of me as you would a tyrant or a pertetrator of injustice, then don't say that I am -- don't pledge to treat me as you would treat them."

enemigo

Heheh.. I should have added this disclaimer:

Please don't take the shit analogy as saying theistic religious belief is shit. In this analogy, a belief that there is no god has the same status as shit, and doesn't belong in the well either.


Theists need to reserve their crap for their little porcelain temple at home.


richard

[ July 05, 2002: Message edited by: enemigo ]</p>

Berenger Sauniere

Keep in mind the Jewish/Hebrew word for Genesis is Bereshit. So maybe the analogy is dead-on.

[ July 05, 2002: Message edited by: Berenger Sauniere ]</p>