Captain Pedantic

I am unnecessarily entertained by the idea of being "inside" Christ. Still, I'm an atheist. Who else would have such a filthy mind?

Panta Pei

On a similar note, I was raised Roman Catholic and had a man put the body of Christ in my mouth every week

I even swallowed...I feel so cheap

echidna

Now what I never understand in these conversations, is what exactly is being achieved here.

While I don’t disagree with your opinion, your obviously confrontational approach just seems to be a loud piece of self-indulgence.

None of your correspondents are going to change their minds from anything you have said. To the contrary, it simply seems to be an excellent way of proving how aggressive and anti-social atheists are. Hell, if I were neutral I’d pay the Xians for at least patronising politeness over angry frustration.

I think it actually proves the opening statement rather true actually.

Is there anything at all constructive being achieved here, other than perpetuating animosity and building resentment ? (other than self-satisfaction of course)

OK, I should add that I know they started it with their irritating opener. But the least constructive way to respond IMO is with a clear illustration. By already sacrificing the high moral ground, there’s a clear opportunity to claim it, and instead many atheists seem much happier stepping down with them to simply engage in a slanging match.

I suppose that’s OK so long as no one’s pretending the conversation is supposed to be constructive.

[ February 13, 2002: Message edited by: echidna ]</p>

Amulet

Yes, atheists and other freethinkers often seem aggressive and angry. Well, dammit, we are angry! Trying to be nice doesn't work, either. You get the condescending nods and smiles, but religionists still think we just haven't found religion yet, or we're going to hell.

We're frustrated that they don't get it. We want respect! We're not amoral, and nothing seems to get it through their heads! They also think we don't believe in anything (at least they think that about atheists; other freethinkers are just confused), when we believe in ourselves. Or, they think we believe in God and Christianity, but we're just denying it to ourselves.

Now, all this wouldn't be such a big deal if they would make laws that allowed non-theists to have equal rights. Making laws based on religion doesn't allow everyone to follow his or her beliefs. But when the laws remain open to all, religionists can believe as they wish, and so can freethinkers.

b@rtleby...I'm an ex-Christian, and the basic response I get when I reveal this is as you describe with the "no true Christian" and "you didn't ask sincerely enough" comments: I'm told, in one way or another, that I "didn't do it right." I wasn't saved, I didn't believe strongly enough, I hadn't really accepted Christ, etc. I assure you, I had. I really believed. But there were too many questions, and I eventually lost that belief and became agnostic.

Agnosticism, atheism, and any other beliefs you have aren't choices. What convinces you, convinces you. What doesn't, doesn't.

echidna

So what ? People disagree with you, big deal, some people agree. What do you want ? Are you so righteous ? Is this so upsetting that we need to launch chatroom warfare ? Does this mean your anger will continue until everyone agrees with you ? Not a physiologically healthy state of mind for me anyway. And you’ve got Buckley’s anyway (an Aussie term for no chance).

By amoral you include engaging openly in bitter unproductive disputes ? Deliberately irritating, insulting ? Why ? Because it feels good ? Why else ? This is moral behaviour ? Am I supposed to respect this ? I’m afraid I don’t.

So our laws make references to god etc. So what ? You’re still free to be an atheist & I’m free to be agnostic. So we’re in the minority, whoopee, life’s tough at the top. It’s irritating but so what ? So’s bad weather, you just don’t hear me whining about it all the time. Constructive discussion about our differences, now there’s something I respect.

In threads about life philosophies "live and let live" is a popular one. This doesn’t appear to be yours.

Amulet

I don't care if people disagree with me, as long as they don't infringe on my rights. But there's nothing wrong with a spirited debate, either...keeps the mind healthy.

I never claimed to be more or less righteous than anyone. What warfare? Expressing anger doesn't mean there's warfare. I was responding in part to your previous message.

My anger isn't about disagreement. My anger is about lack of equal treatment and discrimination.
Where am I insulting? Expressing opinion is one thing, name-calling is another. But I come to these forums to chat with like-minded people. If you jump into a chat where the majority disagree with you, you have to expect debate. And I never asked for your respect.

I have no problem being in the minority and have not claimed otherwise. The problem is the discrimination and treatment freethinkers often face. And you didn't read my post very carefully...I didn't say I was an atheist; I said I was agnostic. I don't really care if you disagree with my opinions, so feel free.

echidna

Apologies if I read you as completely supporting the tone of the quoted thread, including insults.

I hope "spririted debate" does not necessarily include insults.

If one follows The Cause of converting the world away from theism, for me the first step is at least acceptance that atheism etc is moral social behaviour.

Aggression and such only prove to theists how immoral and unpleasant atheists really are. They do The Cause no good IMO. Of course there are many who don’t believe in The Cause. But it does seem strange how one can enthusiastically engage in animostity, and then complain about being described as anti-social.

Amulet

Oh, no, I was only speaking for myself. I agree with many opinions posted on these boards as a whole, but I also differ. Apologies accepted, and please accept mine if I seemed hostile.

No, I simply meant two sides challenging each other with fervor.

I agree being vicious doesn't make others want to see your point of view. That's one reason I use these forums; I let off steam. But I prefer respectful debate over Jenny Jones-style fighting. As I often point out when it comes up, you can't have free speech without respect. In other words, interrupting and shouting down others is free speech, but don't expect your speech to be protected if you do that. Listen to what others have to say, even if you hate it. If they have any maturity, they'll also hear what you have to say.

echidna

Cheers.

Jamie_L

You know, a person who chooses to turn away from God to engage in the "pleasure of wickedness" is not an atheist. That person is a theist. They believe in the God, but choose to ignore the teachings.

People don't choose to not believe in God. It's not like you get tired of going to church and say "I choose not to believe in God today." You stop believing because you stop believing. There's not choice involved. I can't choose to not belive in the supernatural anymore than I can choose not to belive in the chair I'm sitting on. I believe or I don't believe. In the case of the supernatural, I don't believe. Just as I don't believe there is a tiger in my desk drawer.

Some theists seem not to be able to handle the thought that people can examine the world and conclude there is no God. So they have to invent these other reasons to keep their worldview intact.

Ugh.

Jamie