We should no longer try and prove we our "civil" and "nice".

jimmylosanto
Posts: 10
Joined: 2007-03-17
User is offlineOffline
We should no longer try and prove we our "civil" and "nice".

On MySpace and YouTube I post a lot of Christopher Hitchens links, and seem to have an unhealthy obsession with the man, but please let me explain why.

I don't have to tell any of you out there that we atheists as a whole are misunderstood, stereotyped, distrusted, and hated. There is ample evidence of this both personal and public for all of us I am sure. What has vexed me for some time now however, is how most of us react to it.

As the majority of us are more or less from the "Live and Let Live" school and are most likely left-leaning Liberals or Libertarians, I think it comes as no surprise that the largest portion of Atheists are not confrontational people. That doesn't mean we are spineless or will not stand up for ourselves and our beliefs, but it does mean that we generally don't get in peoples faces if it is not called for. Humanism/Confucianism principles dictate that tolerance and civility are inevitable results of being an open minded and informed person. Something most theists have no grasp of...

Admitting this "tendency" I feel that (and I am guilty of this also) many of us go out of our way to show that we really aren't bad people. As if, in a way, we are acting on some feeling of societal guilt to show that we are harmless, innocuous, stable, respectable people.

Richard Dawkins is the epitome of this approach. And while I think he is amazing and terrific human being and scientist, I can't help but wish he had a little more "pit bull" in him. Because when it really comes down to brass tacks, it doesn't matter a hill of beans what we try and present ourselves as to these Cretin Theists. I am finally full convinced, after almost 7 years of being an outright Atheist, that it is perfectly acceptable, perhaps even preferable, to be a Hitchenesque prick when it comes to theists.

Brian Sapient does a good job of it I must say....

No longer should we waste energy on trying to be "acceptable". We should simply be who we are.

I'm sure many of you may have watched the segment from Dawkins' God Delusion: Root of all Evil video wherein Pastor Buttstab Haggard gets in Dawkins' face. Dawkins performs the civil and respectable act of non-violence and simply leaves. That is fine. And in some manner, that probably is simply Dawkins' character. But you can't tell me you that you wouldn't have preferred it to be Christopher Hitchens in his place!

Because if it was, Hitchens would have taken a shot of scotch from his pocket canteen, grabbed Haggard by the head, and bitten his ear off ala Walter Sobchuk (John Goodman) v. The Nihilist at the end of THE BIG LEBOWSKI! Then kicked him in the nads, and quietly and calmly strode off into the sunset as he lit up another Marlboro.

And I can't help but think that all of us need more Brian Sapient/Christopher Hitchens piss and vinegar in us. People are going to hate us anyway.... Well fuck them. I'm tired of trying to accommodate them.

Enough is enough. Let us have the bravery to call it like we see it. Theists are simply either uninformed, ignorant, stupid, or intellectually stilted........and sometimes all of the above. The majority are simply morons, and I no longer feel like they deserve any "civil" explanation as to why they are.

-Jason, aka jimmylosanto


madisonthacker
Theist
madisonthacker's picture
Posts: 4
Joined: 2007-05-14
User is offlineOffline
You Don't Have to PROVE You Are Civil and Nice... but

Hello Jimmy,

I sense your great frustration... and it certainly seems to be justified. But please consider:

As I mentioned in an earlier post in response the ABC Debate,

"... thank you for promoting rational civilization. Secondly, thank you for taking life seriously enough to challenge beliefs that appear to you to be false and sometimes dangerously false."

Being civil is the only we can continue a RATIONAL dialogue. You don't have to PROVE you are civil and nice.

It is shameful and absolutely deplorable to see so many so-called christians posting mean-spirited and hate-filled rants. This is contrary to the teachings of christianity. In the apostle Peter's first letter he tells christians:

"Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander." [1 Peter 3:14-16]

Since this is supposed to be the aspiration of christians, and your own rules are in agreement with being civil and respectful, we have common ground to stand on. We can even be friends, and I daresay as christian that I love you. By that I mean that if you were about to be hit by a bus, and I was in a position to help you out of the way, I would do so even if it meant that I would be hit by the bus instead. So please don't stop being civil... and even nice. There are many of us out here, including some christians, who appreciate civil dialogue.  And we appreciate you as a fellow human being.


The Patrician
The Patrician's picture
Posts: 474
Joined: 2007-05-09
User is offlineOffline
Your post seems to be "We

Your post seems to be "We should be arseholes because other people are arseholes!"

 

Nah, no thanks.  Rational explanation first.  Fists only when it's necessary. 

Freedom of religious belief is an inalienable right. Stuffing that belief down other people's throats is not.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13660
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
jimmylosanto wrote: On

jimmylosanto wrote:
On MySpace and YouTube I post a lot of Christopher Hitchens links, and seem to have an unhealthy obsession with the man, but please let me explain why.

I don't have to tell any of you out there that we atheists as a whole are misunderstood, stereotyped, distrusted, and hated. There is ample evidence of this both personal and public for all of us I am sure. What has vexed me for some time now however, is how most of us react to it.

As the majority of us are more or less from the "Live and Let Live" school and are most likely left-leaning Liberals or Libertarians, I think it comes as no surprise that the largest portion of Atheists are not confrontational people. That doesn't mean we are spineless or will not stand up for ourselves and our beliefs, but it does mean that we generally don't get in peoples faces if it is not called for. Humanism/Confucianism principles dictate that tolerance and civility are inevitable results of being an open minded and informed person. Something most theists have no grasp of...

Admitting this "tendency" I feel that (and I am guilty of this also) many of us go out of our way to show that we really aren't bad people. As if, in a way, we are acting on some feeling of societal guilt to show that we are harmless, innocuous, stable, respectable people.

Richard Dawkins is the epitome of this approach. And while I think he is amazing and terrific human being and scientist, I can't help but wish he had a little more "pit bull" in him. Because when it really comes down to brass tacks, it doesn't matter a hill of beans what we try and present ourselves as to these Cretin Theists. I am finally full convinced, after almost 7 years of being an outright Atheist, that it is perfectly acceptable, perhaps even preferable, to be a Hitchenesque prick when it comes to theists.

Brian Sapient does a good job of it I must say....

No longer should we waste energy on trying to be "acceptable". We should simply be who we are.

I'm sure many of you may have watched the segment from Dawkins' God Delusion: Root of all Evil video wherein Pastor Buttstab Haggard gets in Dawkins' face. Dawkins performs the civil and respectable act of non-violence and simply leaves. That is fine. And in some manner, that probably is simply Dawkins' character. But you can't tell me you that you wouldn't have preferred it to be Christopher Hitchens in his place!

Because if it was, Hitchens would have taken a shot of scotch from his pocket canteen, grabbed Haggard by the head, and bitten his ear off ala Walter Sobchuk (John Goodman) v. The Nihilist at the end of THE BIG LEBOWSKI! Then kicked him in the nads, and quietly and calmly strode off into the sunset as he lit up another Marlboro.

And I can't help but think that all of us need more Brian Sapient/Christopher Hitchens piss and vinegar in us. People are going to hate us anyway.... Well fuck them. I'm tired of trying to accommodate them.

Enough is enough. Let us have the bravery to call it like we see it. Theists are simply either uninformed, ignorant, stupid, or intellectually stilted........and sometimes all of the above. The majority are simply morons, and I no longer feel like they deserve any "civil" explanation as to why they are.

-Jason, aka jimmylosanto

Lets clarify semantics here becaues I think the intent is there, but lets not paint ourselves as forcefull bullies like theocracies or dictators like Hitler.

We must be "Civil" in the comon law of not steeling others property or physically harming our neighbor or advocating physical harm. That is common law everyone has the ability to agree to whatever side of the issue they are on. Common law is what keeps the peace during dissagrements.

No one should advocate "Lets ban others from offending us". But if we want to call it like we see it, we should keep in mind, no matter how much we know they are wrong itheir claims, human empathy should show us that on a purely phycological standpoint, that they believe they are doing no different.

So, although we should not mince words, but we should not expect submission from our detractors. I think both sides merely need to take responsibility for how they react when they hear something they dont like.

I am not the boss of a Christian. I have the right to tell them their magical claims are rediculous. On that level I dont think we have to be "Civil". But unless someone tries to gass me, I dont think we need to solve humanities problems by really actually beating the shit out of someone simple because we think they are full of shit.

I think the best way to be "Civil" is to understand your own comfort level and not demand that others submit to polliticall correctness.

There are pleanty of atheists on other isssues than religion that I dissagree with and find just as rediculous as if I were adressing a claim of a deity.

There are pleanty of theists I love and call friend, family member and co-worker even though their claims of disimbodied brains pulling the strings of the universe is absurd.

So "Civil" in what sense? Yes we should not hold back. But be it us or them no matter what is said we should be "Civil" in agreeing not to censor each other or use government force or violence to obtain a goal. 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


jimmylosanto
Posts: 10
Joined: 2007-03-17
User is offlineOffline
The Patrician wrote: Your

The Patrician wrote:

Your post seems to be "We should be arseholes because other people are arseholes!"

Nah, no thanks.  Rational explanation first.  Fists only when it's necessary. 

No... I do not believe in being an asshole for no reason.  What I was putting forth was the idea that we should not concern ourselves so much with what "the other side" thinks of us.

 This may be a bad analogy, but there was once an old military saying that "the only thing a communist revolutionary understands is the barrel of a gun pointing at him" ...ie... that some people are so far gone and so theocratic, that the only way of dealing with them short of setting them ablaze is simple telling them in no uncertain terms to go FUCK THEMSELVES.  And more and more, it appears that there are less "rational" christians/theists around.


jimmylosanto
Posts: 10
Joined: 2007-03-17
User is offlineOffline
The Patrician wrote:

MOD EDIT {DELETE DOUBLE POST}


jimmylosanto
Posts: 10
Joined: 2007-03-17
User is offlineOffline
The Patrician wrote:


MOD EDIT {TRIPLE POST}


jimmylosanto
Posts: 10
Joined: 2007-03-17
User is offlineOffline
The Patrician wrote:

MOD EDIT {Delete Quad post}


jimmylosanto
Posts: 10
Joined: 2007-03-17
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote: So "Civil"

Brian37 wrote:

So "Civil" in what sense? Yes we should not hold back. But be it us or them no matter what is said we should be "Civil" in agreeing not to censor each other or use government force or violence to obtain a goal. 

 Well written.  Please understand that I am not advocating violent resistance or government intervention...  I guess my point was, don't be afraid to tell the deserving to "go fuck themselves" every now and then.

Furthermore, I simply cannot swallow the relativism you adhere to and attempt to disguise as empathy.  I do understand the necessity of empathy.  Lack of empathy may be the true definition of evil. So please understand...that I understand...where you are going with this.  But I used to be "one of them".  I used to be a Fundie.  I know how they think.  They DO NOT try and better the world out of any innate altruism.  They do it to win brownie points with the imaginary Santa Claus in the sky.  Very rarely do they do anything without a consideration of how good it makes them look for listening to the big pappy in the sky.  This does not constitute empathy.  There is no free will in this.  It is blackmail and obedience, and I personally have a difficult time respecting it.

What do we atheists want or demand from any individual ever?  Only that they liberate themselves...intellectually....for the betterment of not only themselves, but of society as a whole.  How is that oppressive?  How does that even compare to what they would require of us?

Sorry dude... I've passed the point of respect for these people.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13660
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
jimmylosanto wrote: The

jimmylosanto wrote:
The Patrician wrote:

Your post seems to be "We should be arseholes because other people are arseholes!"

Nah, no thanks. Rational explanation first. Fists only when it's necessary.

No... I do not believe in being an asshole for no reason. What I was putting forth was the idea that we should not concern ourselves so much with what "the other side" thinks of us.

This may be a bad analogy, but there was once an old military saying that "the only thing a communist revolutionary understands is the barrel of a gun pointing at him" ...ie... that some people are so far gone and so theocratic, that the only way of dealing with them short of setting them ablaze is simple telling them in no uncertain terms to go FUCK THEMSELVES. And more and more, it appears that there are less "rational" christians/theists around.

To the Kumbia Christians and atheists, keep this in mind. That certainly is cozy and certainly avoids conflict.

What the quote above is saying, and what I agree with is simple.

Saying "Fuck You if you dont like me" is normal. Those bigoted fundies say "Fuck you" to us as well, so it is equal and fair.

But that does not mean all Christians or all atheists are unwilling to get along. What we cant stand is a demand for submission without question because some Christians think that they own the sole rights to interpet the Constitution. Those types of thinkers are just as bad as Clerics in Islamic countries that think Allah gave them the right to rule by their religion alone.

Many Christians and atheists like the quite library debate. Many Christians and atheists dont take offense to a dirty verbal brawl. But what we object to are assholes who say, "Shut up and accept your place at the back of the bus or get the fuck out of the country".

That is who we are saying "Fuck you" to.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13660
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
jimmylosanto

jimmylosanto wrote:
Brian37 wrote:

So "Civil" in what sense? Yes we should not hold back. But be it us or them no matter what is said we should be "Civil" in agreeing not to censor each other or use government force or violence to obtain a goal.

Well written. Please understand that I am not advocating violent resistance or government intervention... I guess my point was, don't be afraid to tell the deserving to "go fuck themselves" every now and then.

Furthermore, I simply cannot swallow the relativism you adhere to and attempt to disguise as empathy. I do understand the necessity of empathy. Lack of empathy may be the true definition of evil. So please understand...that I understand...where you are going with this. But I used to be "one of them". I used to be a Fundie. I know how they think. They DO NOT try and better the world out of any innate altruism. They do it to win brownie points with the imaginary Santa Claus in the sky. Very rarely do they do anything without a consideration of how good it makes them look for listening to the big pappy in the sky. This does not constitute empathy. There is no free will in this. It is blackmail and obedience, and I personally have a difficult time respecting it.

What do we atheists want or demand from any individual ever? Only that they liberate themselves...intellectually....for the betterment of not only themselves, but of society as a whole. How is that oppressive? How does that even compare to what they would require of us?

Sorry dude... I've passed the point of respect for these people.

I think we are on the same page. I dont have respect for their claims. But I also know that 6 billion people will never agree on everything all the time. "Herding cats" ever heard that said about getting atheists together?

I dont expect anyone to respect me blindly. I have to demonstrate to them why they should. And the same goes with theists.

If a bad idea on any issue is to be put to rest, it cant be done by emotioal blackmail by politicians, pundants, cults of personality, or religion. If an idea is bad, it is put to rest through critical thought and  honesty without fear of being wrong.

So I am with you.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


The Patrician
The Patrician's picture
Posts: 474
Joined: 2007-05-09
User is offlineOffline
Chaps - let me

Chaps - let me reiterate:

"Rational explanation first. Fists only when necessary."

But when they are necessary you hit hard, you hit with anything that hurts and you keep on hitting until they don't get back up again. Then you hit them some more just to make sure.

Now that statement can be taken metaphorically or literally depending on what you're applying it to (I used to do a lot of bar fighting when younger - yeah I was a dick, so sue me). My point is that the vast majority of theists are inoffensive people who are open to reasoned dialogue. There are of course exceptions and that's when the gloves come off.

Don't mistake me for a kumbaya atheist. I am anything but. However, neither am I going to start any wars when they're not needed either.

Freedom of religious belief is an inalienable right. Stuffing that belief down other people's throats is not.