Biff the unclean

In order to change them we need to change ourselves

The people that your approach would work on have a problem with us in only the academic sense. They have learned from their preachers that Atheists are mean and nasty people. But this never goes past an intellectual curiosity. They are a decent people and would not consider doing us harm. Fortunately this is the majority of Christians.
The ones that are the problem are ones like the guy in the OP. He wants to get rid of us. He feels that it's his right to tell us to stop being who we are.

We have no reason to change ourselves. We are not now, nor have we ever been, the aggressor. All we want is to be treated like anyone else.

I look at other groups that have wanted the same thing we do, Blacks, Gays, and of course women. They each tried being gentle and mild. They tried being polite and "lady like." The decent people who never thought to do them harm anyway thought this was pleasant. The bullies, like Mr OP, took it as a sign of weakness and an invitation to bully them all the more.
Each of these groups was forced to more dramatic "pro active" action. It worked for each of them.

Why, when we have seen the same scenario played out time and again, would we think that our case was any different?

Nowhere357

Sounds like you are accusing M-W of unethical behavior. Do you have evidence, or do you just assume a church-owned business must of necessity be biased?

Anyway, atheist is not capitalized:

Dictionary.com
a�the�ist
Chris�tian

Biff the unclean

Of course it did. You are simply mistaken.
I don't think so, I was there

Civil rights and additionally civil respect for blacks was forwarded best by MLK Jrs non-violent direct action. In his own words the movement was both militant and proactive. It was not meek and passive.
No it was not.
But it had been before King. "Yas sah I'z a comin' Be there any thin else I'z can do for ya?" That didn't work at all. It left the impression that even they thought that they were second class citizens.

My neighbors aren't bullies. Nor our most of the family members of atheists who simply don't understand why their loved ones can't believe in god.
Mr OP is. The ones who "Let me take you aside and tell you why you should stop being a goddamned faggot" are. The "Whadaya ecpect from her, she's only a woman" are

Do you seriously think this view changed because someone carried a protest sign? No they did it because of the direct (albeit gradual) recognition of their humanity.
Yes, I seriously think that the action that all these groups took to insure their equal treatment under law did not happen because they changed or because they were polite. It happened only because they raised hell.

You are basically making the same mistake as Christians. You are casting that people are permanently "fallen" and no amount of work can change it.
No I'm taking to point of an animal trainer. If you want to teach a beast a behavior you do not give it a treat for poor behavior. If a dog bites you and you give him a cookie he will bite you again to get another cookie. If Christians treat you like crap and you return it with kindness it makes their treating you like crap a positive experience for them.
If every time a black wanted to drink from my lily white water fountain and I sent him away and he said Yas Sah, right away Sah I would continue to do so. However if two thousand screaming and singing blacks showed up and stopped my business cold�I would be forced to reconsider my actions.

I'm not talking about changing the far extremist bigots whose minds will never change.
I don't really care if their minds change. I want their actions to change.
That mass being the mass of the semi-indifferent middle who do not have their minds invested in hate but instead are led to it as if its good.
That's nice, but these aren't the people who are causing the problem.
It's that mass that changed to move blacks to civil respect and its that mass that is now moving for gays.
But these are all changes that happened for the first time in human history, and they all happened recently. None of them were the result of servility.
It could be that mass if people like would accept the facts of history and not forward defeatist, cynical and negative attitudes... attitudes which are no different that those fundamentalists we are supposed to oppose.
Oh give me a break.
If someone strikes thee upon thy cheek and you turn the other one you will have two struck cheeks and a striker who is ready to try again on you or on somebody else's cheek.
But if someone strikes your cheek and you haul off and cold-cock them you will still have one good cheek and the added bonus of this person being less likely to try that stunt again on you or anyone else.
Women, Blacks and Gays let it be known in no uncertain terms that they had ceased to be victims. We should follow their lead.

Biff the unclean

Then I say we change that right now

Rusting Car Bumper

This is the fundamental disagreement.

As I have said.. Our problems are not political at the root. They are not because laws are passed. That is very superficial thinking.

Our problems are social at the root. Any political and thus legal institutional problems FOLLOW from the social ones.

To try to play the politcal and "let's file a lawsuit" game is to hide behind a paper tiger. You'll never win in the end until your neighbor is willing to stand with you.

Atheist and non-belief groups are primarily concerned with CSS and complaining about other people's religions. That is precisely what I think must change. My life (nor the life of my children) is not fulfilled by carrying a protest sign or knowing why the cosmological argument fails.

I frankly consider the acumen of the attitude that "they will never change unless we ram it down their throat" or worse "none of them will ever change" unobservant of history, human nature, past success, and not much different that the base bigotry you claim to be fighting against.

DC

Nowhere357

Even the word "human" is not capitalized, nor "freethinker" or even "secularist".

I know, put in at the front of the sentence!

Nowhere357

Yin/yang. You're both right. The direct action should be done with respect for the self, the hell raising should be done with respect for the oppressor.

Biff the unclean

christian could be given a lower case "c" in that case (pun unintended) Though they tend to get angery when you do that

Biff the unclean

As I have said.. Our problems are not political at the root. They are not because laws are passed. That is very superficial thinking.
The laws that are in place right now are fine. But only if they are enforced

Our problems are social at the root. Any political and thus legal institutional problems FOLLOW from the social ones.
The social problem is that for 2000 years Christians have seen Atheists as their natural prey, inhuman, undeserving of pity. The stuff bonfires are made of.

To try to play the politcal and "let's file a lawsuit" game is to hide behind a paper tiger. You'll never win in the end until your neighbor is willing to stand with you.
This is not what the blacks, gays or women did.

My life (nor the life of my children) is not fulfilled by carrying a protest sign or knowing why the cosmological argument fails.
Nobody said that getting our rights would be easy.

I frankly consider the acumen of the attitude that "they will never change unless we ram it down their throat" or worse "none of them will ever change" unobservant of history, human nature, past success, and not much different that the base bigotry you claim to be fighting against.
Well I've already said the same things about your stance only leaving out the word bigot. I well remember Martin Luther King being called a bigot because he refused to be servile. And we all know about the "Gay agenda"
Frankly I see the attitude of "you shouldn't hit back when you have been hit because that will make you as bad as the hitter" as a thinly masked lack of courage pretending to be PC.

Doctor X

Return to the Point:

It is generally considered rude to set up situations which make a guest uncomfortable.

For your host to allow this is inappropriate. You have the right, then, to ignore the questions and jibes. You may even condescend, "I find it rude to insult the beliefs of a guest, therefore, forgive me if I do not wish to behave in a rude fashion by engaging you in this conversation."

Now if they persist, you have every right to leave at that point.

However, if you wish to actually engage in a debate, the best defense is a good offense. There are quite a number of topics to raise that do not lend themselves to spin control. They will, most likely, piss-off the other guest.

--J.D.