excellent response, brian

Nice.  Did we ever hear of his retarded paper turned out?

 Hear him! Hear him!  Ambassadorial Legate Hamby has a point.  Perhaps mollycoddling ignorance is better than shaking it like a downs syndrome baby.  If we use a sweet voice and dulcet tones, perhaps the uninformed will cleave to us and fall into our order.

On the other hand, perhaps they will take our kindness for weakness and attempt to erode our resolve.  Perhaps they will behave as if they are one of us, while actually attempting to gain information for other reasons.  Perhaps the issue is a little more byzantine than what is being suggested.

Then again, perhaps we should assume the world is filled with puppies and rainbows and assumed that people's heads are filled with wonder and curiosity.

Hamby, you are obviously a really nice guy.  Here I slam you with as much sarcasm as I can muster in print, and you just turn and smile at me.  It is damned unsettling.  I come from a long line of WASPs, and you're supposed to curl up in a ball and weep when you read this stuff.

Oh well, I must admit though that your faux naivete brought a startlingly vivid image to mind.  I see your mother crying quietly over a cup of tea as she watches you get on the bus for your first day of school.  As the doors close, she whispers to herself, "I'm sorry I didn't tell you about the world, my little darling."

Only now are you coming to realize the full power of a Hambydammit.

Oddly, I'm pretty sure that's exactly how it happened.

Does this mean you approve being rude while being rational ?  There could have been a measured response.

However also I sense that maybe Kyle is really not an atheist. He was trying to pose as one. 

In that sense maybe the reply needed to be a bit curt. 

 I mean if a guys says he is a theist and he wants to write a paper for his class about it and then raises some basic questions to me as a skeptic , I guess I will also not be very nice to him.

All said and done. Maybe we could still be nice to people in true Gandhi style 

People can call themselves whatever but it doesnt mean that they have in depth knowlege of how to defend their position.

This kid uses the word "atheist" to discribe themselves. But as an atheist myself, it bothers me when newbies use it but have no clue how much in depth knowlege of why one should reject a claim.

There is alot more than just simply saying, "I am an atheist". If you are going to hold that position it should have a solid foundation, and should not be used merely to "be different".

It sounds to me that this kid sees problems with theism, but has no clue how much education is needed to reject theism. You need to know things like "infinate regress" "pascal's wager" "Occham's Razor", the history of monotheism coming from polytheism, not to mention sceintific method.

I think most atheists do not want the word used in ignorance simply because someone wants to be different. This kid is the theist version of "atheist", not rooted in a solid foundation of critical thinking skills or reason. It is comming out of the mouth of someone who seems to simply want to use the word without understanding what it takes to have a solid foundation to use it and justify it.

If this kid reads this post, here is my advice.  Educate yourself, it is the only way you can use that label. Study religious history including prior polythism before the Abrahamic religions. Compair the claims of all holy books such as the Koran and Bible and OT and the magical claims within to actuall science.

 Don't write this paper about RRS from the perspective that it's owners are cootie spreaders out to barbaque kittens. RRS is not out to forcably end religion. Brian Sapient, if I am not missquoting him, takes a Jeffersonian libertarian view that answers come through the ability to question any and all claims. 

This site does not promote dictatorships or purging theism. It promotes self thought and asking questions HARD QUESTIONS of one's own beliefs regardless of where the answers may lead and to do so without fear.

"Question with boldness even the existance of God, for if there be one, surely he would pay more homage to reason than to that of blindfolded fear" Thomas Jefferson.

It is true that RRS wants to see the end of theism. But most atheists I know are not seeking some goverment forced opression of theism. Most atheists I know would say that when theism is exposed to questioning it cannot hold a candle to reason. 

RRS and I would agree with them, would say, that open debate and questioning will lead to a natural death of theism. Look at it this way. People today do not believe in Isis or Thor as real deities. Atheists simply apply the same logic in rejecting Isis and Thor, to modern popular gods such as Allah, Yahwey, and Jesus.

You unfortunatly by vertue of your writing have baught into a very bad unfounded negitive stereotype of atheists. If you are going to call yourself an atheist, then you need to reject their bullshit immage of us by refraining from allowing them to define you.

Atheists are pro reason and pro critical thought. We are positive that one can lead a decent life without superstition or a magical puppeteer in the sky. We are positive that whatever we dont know about the unverse can be researched without incerting ancient myth into it.

We are positive that the word's problems, such as famine, polution and war, can be adressed without the tribalism and divisive nature of theism.

We are positive that mental crutches can be discarded where one takes personal responsibility to scrutinize everything to insure better choices. You wouldnt buy an invisable pink lamborginni because someone claimed to have one to sell, so why would a deity be any different?

In conclusion, your letter to RRS shows your amature status as an atheist. Indeed you may be one, but you are on shakey ground and would be easy pickings for an elaborate con artist who uses apologetics to defend a magical bearded man in the sky.

You are unarmed and could potentially end up bringing a knife to a gunfight(intelectually speaking). You have a lot of learning to do. 

A Hambydammit?!?  That would imply that more than one exists.  That is even more unsettling than your resilience to pure, concentrated sarcasm.

This was my first visit to this website.  Sorry to say it will be my last.  In reading Kyle's inquiries to you I was left with the impression that he is a young person.  You could have responded in a way that made us antitheists sound rational, reasonable and intelligent.  Instead you crafted a response that was angry in nature, rude and certainly put me off.  While I share your beliefs I don't want to listen to your curses and abrasiveness.  You represent us poorly.

I love it when people visit the site 'for the first time' ~ find one of the ancient posts and base their entire experience on that one thread. Way to be critical and logical there, sassy pants.

Is that you, Kyle?

I believe that I would like another cup of coffee.

Hahaha! *love*

Hey , it wasn't the thread I had a beef with ~ it was a person stating that one thread caused the end of any further browsing through the forum.

yeah, but you know as well as i do that that person came here looking for an excuse to say, "you heart my feelings!  i'm never coming back!  then you'll be sorry!"

Awww. You thought about me. How sweet.

Civil, mature discussion runs two ways. Otherwise, it winds up being some solipsistic rant about wanting a troll label.

For the record, one cannot ad hom a post.

I apologize if I've hurt your precious feelings sometime in the past. Perhaps you'll be capable of building the metaphorical bridge to get over it. Ad Hom courtesy of this discussion.

Love ya. Mean it.