Because they're weak-ass pussies who are afraid of offending anyone.

Because opinions are like assholes - everybody has one.

I do understand their point, but as much as they may not want to admit it, the RRS is doing a lot of work for them.  They rattle cages and make noise and get people to think.  If those people want to go play with the "nice" kids, that is fine but if nothing controversial is ever said, no one would pay any attention and the US would be MORE of a theistic country than it already is.

Sometimes speaking up and standing your ground really ticks people off and if you think those people are going to stand idly by and say "ok" when someone objects to say, prayer in school, then you are wrong.  They scream, they file lawsuits, they hurl insults....so why exactly should we be respectful to those people and their beliefs? 

Did they give any specifics why they feel this way?  I can see their point in some aspects but ultimately the positive outweighs the negative.  Being passive hasn't gotten us very far, has it?  Do they suggest we allow them to continue to infringe upon our rights rather then stand up for them?

Let me be the first to say: lol myspace.

And the fact of the matter is, the internet's opinion in general of the RSS is not incredibly high. I don't think that should bother them, however. I mean, if Bush and other crazy thiests are going to ignore criticism and poor public opinion, then the only rational answer is to fight fire with fire.

My advice to those people is to turn on the TV and see what theists are allowed to spout off about us on any major network, then come back and tell me who isn't playing nice.

Weak ass pussies?

Oh please.

I make no secret of the fact that I regard militant atheists (or angstheists as we call them over at GameFAQs) as no better than religious fundies.   I believe it is right to morally challenge the religious - or indeed any other - extremists and keep those mad, crazy bastards under control and, funnily enough, so do most theists.  I certainly do not believe that it's right to tell people what their religious beliefs should be because that would make me no better than those irritating evangelists who knock on the door to talk to you about Jesus.

If someone with a religious agenda is plotting to impinge on your human rights and freedoms then rise up.  If someone is quietly exercising their right to believe in what they want then mind your own damn business.

 Oh and as for being afraid of offending anyone, if you don't like my opinion then fuck you.

 Thank you.

Your tongue is not in your cheek, young man.

Illustrative point FTW! 

There is a differance than the "Jeffersonian" "duke it out" verbaly and have a beer afterword. And the "millitant" Christian/Jew/Muslim/atheist who'd litteraly kill over something.

You are using the same harsh words I use towards "fundies' who see it as their "goal" to play capture the flag with the world.

You said "fuck you" does that make you millitant? No more "millitant than when I say it to someone like Falwell.

I think all of us are capable of getting along with people we are diometricly apposed to on the issue of a deity. That is not the point.

Every time I see myself, someone implying or suggesting violence as a solution, I call them on it be they theist or atheist.

Wave and I for exampe do go after each other from time to time and for the life of me I dont understand why he claims what he claims. But I do not think that because he believes in a deity and I dont, merely because I say, "Wave, you are full of it" that he thinks that I want to stick him in an oven.

Some people on both sides of the diety issue are comfortable with verbaly duking it out and doesnt nessarly mean that one wants to opress or physically harm the other.

You used the same "fuck you" that I have used. And a militant to me is simple. Someone who wants to run law and policy without the consent of other where they and they alone are the one autority. That is a militant to me.

But a verbal boxing fight entered mutually by both sides without predudice is not militant. If both sides agree to the setting and no side is being forced to enter the "boxing ring" then that is not "militant".

It is presumptious of you to assume that two people yelling at each other automatically want to kill each other. Maybe they just want to "vent" and dont really hate each other.

Again, the only "militant" people I see can be any label, and they are the ones who seek goverment law and physical force to silence blasphemy, be it against a Christian, Muslim, Jew or atheist.

Only if you say "I want to" first!

There is a small  handfull of folks on myspace who bark loud and often.  I always get a kick of people who preach being moderate with such a radical vigor.  The hypocrisy is so easy and obvious.

If you want to write down specific objections they had that you would like to hear countered, we could cover it in our stickam room one night this week.

- Sapient

i c wut u did thar. 

See? These are the sentiments of a sandy vagina.  Had I bitten my thumb at the gentleman, I would have expected such a reply.  I, however, did not.  I merely expressed the view that moderate atheists would be repelled at the statement because no one likes a vagina full of sand.  I thought my view was illustrative about my views on the illustration. *shrug*

Not really they just think that your way is too extreme. They are mostly pretty young, maybe they think its cool to rebel or something.

haha, to me you always seem really polite and nice to everyone you talk to. Sometimes I think your maybe too soft but I can see why you are like that, I'm not swayed by them I was just really suprised that atheists would oppose atheists who are speaking out and trying to make changes it just seems a bit odd.