New to the site... But whats the point?

NiallStynes
Posts: 35
Joined: 2009-12-04
User is offlineOffline
New to the site... But whats the point?

Hello everyone, my name is Niall and I am from Dublin, Ireland.  I just looked at the NightLine Debate on youtube and I thought that I'd stop by.

I felt very sympathic to the Atheist couple whom although had much more logical, educated and sensible answers...  I felt that because the debate was taking place somewhere in America, these two people would be seen as the nutjobs!

I got over my sympathy pretty quickly however, cause I really don't see the point of the Atheist Movement!  I unlike the couple on the show don't see any need to advertise the fact that I am an Atheist, its not because I am afraid, its because I don't think of it as any kind of identity.

When I was 16 or 17, I read the bible and thought to myself "Nahhh, I don't buy it.  It doesn't make sense.  Its not a reasonable thing to believe." and on that day, I put the book down and haven't picked it up since and with exception to the odd debate here and there, I haven't given religion or christianity another thought.

To me, thats what it means to be an Atheist, am I wrong?  When your an Atheist, you don't believe in intelligent design?  Essentially you don't have any religious belief's at all so why is it necessary to run a poster campaign to advertise your lack of belief's? I get it if its a religious faith trying to persuade people to turn to whatever God they believe in, but if your an Atheist you don't believe in God so what is the point of this poster campaign, promoting your lack of beliefs is kind of like a Rock Band releasing a CD with no songs on it and then touring to promote their lack of new material....   Its stupid, I don't get it.

Furthermore the whole concept of going to the supreme court to have the pledge of allegience changed?  Thats just silly, yeah I don't believe it which is why I wouldn't say it but why have Christians take it out of their pledge?  Its suppose to be their pledge so as Atheists why do you care if they are making their pledge to God or to their country or to some other cause...  Why try to change the inauguration?  If Obama was an Atheist I'd agree with you, because the act of him putting his hand on the bible and pledging to God to uphold the constitution would be a meaningless act if he didn't believe in God, but because he is a God Fearing man... the act surely has some merit, right???

I personally think that we have different idea's of what it means to be an Atheist.  I personally believe that everyone has to discover it for themselves, the act of trying to convert someone is completely against the point of it all, afterall we are atheists because we don't believe in God or Organised religion so why act like an organised non religion if there is such a thing.  When I became an Atheist I didn't feel any different that day than I had felt the day before, my daily routine hadn't changed, I merely had a different belief structure.

On the ABC show the lady states that she had read the Bible several times...  Why would you bother?  If you don't believe why would you read it a second time?  Its not exactly the most enjoyable of books, its certainly not light reading...  Why would you read it again?  If I don't like a movie, I turn it off. I certainly don't watch it over and over again and I don't study up on the actors and writers/directors so that I can some day write a book about how full of shit said movie was.

 

Its a shame cause the two of them were really well informed but I don't have any time for this "respect our lack of believes mentality"  It doesn't make any sense, because I am Atheist myself, I felt that I must be a different kind of Atheist to the two people on the show and in the end I found myself believing that even though the God Squad had very poor answers, they were smarter than the Atheist couple because atleast they believed in what they were debating about...  studying up on something that you have no belief or interest in makes you a bit of a dumbass as far as I am concerned.


bpwaddell
bpwaddell's picture
Posts: 46
Joined: 2009-10-29
User is offlineOffline
New to the site... But whats the point?

This is an excellent post...


It is truly turning into a major fight for common sense and reason...

I do not think it will be won by converting people of  faith, for once bitten,  they seem to become delirious, and stubborn to the point of absurdity..
How can anyone argue with a person who's total reasoning is based on ONE book.. 

" self destructive...   and seeking the destruction of others "  is a better way of describing this state of mind..

40% of Americans think that Evolution is a lie.. and that the planet is only 6,000 years old....

NO atheist will ever become President of the United States... this mere fact is so damning it is frightening

I think these facts alone , indicate the immense  struggle ahead of us,  who rely on reason and understanding..

I am very concerned.....

thank you for  your great post ...

 



 


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
NiallStynes wrote:I found

NiallStynes wrote:

I found myself believing that even though the God Squad had very poor answers, they were smarter than the Atheist couple because atleast they believed in what they were debating about...

 

Wow... buddy, dont ever reproduce

 

What Would Kharn Do?


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5939
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
I understand Obama got

I understand Obama got something in his oath slightly wrong, so redid it back in the White House, but didn't bother with the bible in that non-public situation.

Religious requirements are inconsistent with the Constitution. Does that not matter?

There are no good arguments for God.

I have this 'stupid' compulsion to seek Truth.

But then I live in Australia, and while we do have religious crazies, we are still nowhere near as messed up as the US in that respect.

The State I live in. Queensland, had a religious nut case for a leader for a long time, (roughly equivalent to your state governor), but we eventually got him out. At one point the guy in charge of education was talking about letting Creationism into our public schools (shudder).

Current govt at our state level is average, Federal is at bit too religious leaning for my taste but could be a lot worse.

Unfortunately our opposition just kicked out a relatively intelligent and open-minded guy and put in a Roman Catholic, Global Warming denier. Ugh!

 

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


ClockCat
ClockCat's picture
Posts: 2265
Joined: 2009-03-26
User is offlineOffline
:3

 Um. Right.

 

The pledge was only changed 50 years ago to include God.

 

These changes are not really "historical" or "cultural". They are pretty new. 

 

If it was a cultural thing important to the nation's development I would be fine with it. But adding "God" into things in the country constantly gets kind of annoying. It's somewhere between christians tossing rubbish about and expecting you to read it off for them, and tagging gang signs, where the tag is "God". Like it is a game to try and put "God" into as many things as possible. 

Theism is why we can't have nice things.


Unrepentant_Elitist
Science FreakGold Member
Unrepentant_Elitist's picture
Posts: 105
Joined: 2009-07-15
User is offlineOffline
As a preface, I am

As a preface, I am responding as a citizen of the United States; as such, I am replying from the perspective that I have come to known in my country. Speaking only for myself, I have felt that non-believers of all stripes have been turned into ancillary characters in our national play. While it's admittedly anecdotal evidence, I sometimes believe that atheists are the most hated minority in the United States. Does this mean we should hide in shame at not buying a fraudulent story foist upon us by half-wits and charlatans? I would submit that perhaps the democratic foundations of my country require that I voice my opinion without fear of repercussion or being ostracizing. Therefore, I intend to seek like-minded individuals who are capable of rational thought untinged by the influences of super-naturalism. To be honest, I am not a particularly "rabid" atheist so often portrayed in the media; rather, I am a decent, hard-working person who defies marginalization and will no longer tolerate the second-class status afforded me. I will speak, and some will listen; some will not- but I will not be shouted down in the name of mindless, amalgamated belief structures.     


bpwaddell
bpwaddell's picture
Posts: 46
Joined: 2009-10-29
User is offlineOffline
I disagree doomed soul

Wow... buddy, dont ever reproduce <-- kinda unfair , I thought the  guy from Ireland made a very good point.. 

I saw the you tube video when RRS went to battle with the likes of Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron.. 

I thought they (RRS) should have demolished both Kirk and Ray.. but I realised that they (RRS ) were arguing
with  people who do not even believe in basic Science and this is extremely difficult to combat in a debate.
I do not  believe that just because someone believes in God that they are  unintelligent , quite the reverse.
Their arguments can be very very convincing and often they out- manoeuvre atheists because we are required to
understand some very complex facts.
 

example:-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INV2LeUuuDY&feature=PlayList&p=1ABE732D38BF1EB6&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=2

In this encounter Tagget is very patronising  and uses very slippery prose to out wit an Oxford Professor.. (Richard Dawkins)

However I am glad to see during the discussion  that Richard looks at Taggart as if he just has just given birth to a giraffe
when taggart declares that some Evolutionary supporters think that the eye happened by accident .
but it is a a very good example of being flanked.. theists do it so well..

 

Another atheist , Chris Hitchins is the best at destroying theists arguments, even though he is just  a Journalist..
he , Hitchins  is  truly  master of the debate..
he needs to be elected , not  going to  happen though,  he is  an atheist

Smiling Peter


 

 


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5939
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
That shows Taggett using a

That shows Taggett using a couple of tricky tactics.

Asserting that some person accepts his position, that the other guy (Dawkins) would not expect to is marginal at best to proving his case, whether true or not.

Crudely misrepresenting the argument ("Strawman" ) is the other dishonest tactic: the eye has evolved by a combination of 'accident' and 'deterministic' selection.

No wonder Dawkins was at a loss as to which of several misleading or erroneous points to address in the pressure of the debate format.

Intelligent Theists have to be very skilled at skating over or around logical fallacies, they have to do it all the time to maintain belief, without letting themselves fully acknowledge what they are doing.

 

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
bpwaddell wrote:Wow...

bpwaddell wrote:

Wow... buddy, dont ever reproduce <-- kinda unfair , I thought the  guy from Ireland made a very good point.. 

 

You may want to re-read what was said;

NiallStynes wrote:

I found myself believing that even though the God Squad had very poor answers, they were smarter than the Atheist couple because atleast they believed in what they were debating about...

 

Niall, here, thinks that Kirk & Ray had poor answers, yet are SMARTER because they BELIEVE in the topic.

This is why the term "Facepalm" was coined, comments that are just so... stupid, you cant believe they were said...

 

 

What Would Kharn Do?


Wonderist
atheist
Wonderist's picture
Posts: 2479
Joined: 2006-03-19
User is offlineOffline
NiallStynes wrote:I unlike

NiallStynes wrote:
I unlike the couple on the show don't see any need to advertise the fact that I am an Atheist, its not because I am afraid, its because I don't think of it as any kind of identity.

Niall, most of us don't see it as an identity either. Being an atheist is like not collecting stamps -- it's not much of a hobby.

However, your position only makes sense if theists keep their theism to themselves.

You mention the US pledge, as if the atheists are trying to change something from the original. But actually, they are only trying to change it *back* to how it was originally. The 'god' thing is a recent insertion by politically motivated theists.

Now, you may not appreciate the importance of keeping church out of government, but I'm curious if you're aware that theists in your own country have recently limited your freedom of speech and expression.

Ireland has recently passed a blasphemy law:

Quote:

As Michael Nugent of Atheist Ireland has pointed out:

The proposed law does not protect religious belief; it incentivises outrage and it criminalises free speech. Under this proposed law, if a person expresses one belief about gods, and other people think that this insults a different belief about gods, then these people can become outraged, and this outrage can make it illegal for the first person to express his or her beliefs.

So Irish law has now enshrined the notion that the taking of offence is more important than free expression. If something might cause a motivated group to be "outraged", rather than, say, cause them to live in fear, then it is illegal, with a fine of up to €25,000 payable.

Note the ease with which a prosecution could be brought, and the punitive nature of the fine: this is not legislation that simply serves to tie up a few loose ends.

When atheists fail to stand against religious incursions on our rights and freedoms, this is the crap you end up with.

The question is not, "Why are we angry?" The question is, "Why aren't you?"

Wonderist on Facebook — Support the idea of wonderism by 'liking' the Wonderism page — or join the open Wonderism group to take part in the discussion!

Gnu Atheism Facebook group — All gnu-friendly RRS members welcome (including Luminon!) — Try something gnu!


Deadly Fingergun
atheist
Deadly Fingergun's picture
Posts: 237
Joined: 2009-11-19
User is offlineOffline
NiallStynes, it is a shame

NiallStynes, it is a shame you missed one of the most salient points:

What is being defended isn't an absence of a belief: It's the right to not have to hold a belief that is irrational.

It's not about "identity". Nor is it a matter of a disbelief. It is about being rational and facing reality without the crutch of a fictional overseer.

It's about facing down idiots like Comfort and Cameron not because they "believe in something" but because they "believe in spite of no evidence or  contrary evidence" and would have everyone do the same, by force if necessary.

Big E wrote:
Clown
Why, yes, I am!


MrPal
Superfan
MrPal's picture
Posts: 67
Joined: 2009-11-30
User is offlineOffline
I can't help but believe

I can't help but believe this is an attempt at trolling?  I'm sorry if that's not true.  It's extremely obvious that anti-intellectualism is pushed upon the masses in most every facet of our lives and it's a pity if you do not realize this.  Don't take that as an insult, I don't wish you insult you...  But when things like creationism are forced upon little children in the public school systems, there must be a push back.  If we stand idly by and do not challenge irrationality and what stems from it, we're guilty too.  We're guilty of watching people rain down destruction on the minds of others; plundering their good thoughts and replacing them with nonsense and insanity.

 

They're the ones guilty, we're only guilty of self-defense and trying to do what is truly good and not based on hateful and irrational thought processes.  I hope it doesn't appear that I'm frothing at the mouth or anything, I don't have a problem with certain sects of theism...  But (to take Christianity as an example) liberal and accepting churches are quite the rarity when compared to the treacherous ones.  

 

I never thought there were corners in my mind until I was told to stand in one.

I have learned so much, thanks for keeping it real RRS.


NiallStynes
Posts: 35
Joined: 2009-12-04
User is offlineOffline
Hey everyone good responses

Hey everyone good responses so far, except of course for the guy that said that I shouldn't reproduce.  When you win a debate against someone whom is clearly not your intellectual equal, does that make you feel all warm and cozy inside???  Speaking only for myself, it wouldn't give me any kind of superiority complex, it would only make me feel like a moron for getting into it with them in the first place. 

Someone else made a point about freedom of expression being limited in Ireland, perhaps I don't have the experience to comment on freedom of expression in America but in Ireland we had huge problems seperating Church and State up until the 80's but since its been a pretty good environment, so good infact that I can't remember the last time someone asked me what church I go to, or what religion I am or if I even believe in God.  It just doesn't come up in everyday conversation.  Religion is taught in School, Ireland is a Catholic country but we all wind up having to go to these classes up until we are about 15 years old and then we can decide whether want to continue with our religious studies or not. 

I made a decision that it doesn't make sense, and if I can come to that conclusion then so can others and 15 years later I am yet to find myself being discriminated against, I don't get offended at religious symbols in schools or politics.

I suppose I just don't get the idea of making a stand for something that you don't believe in.  You know when you hear religious nutjobs complaining about sexual content on TV and wanting to have it banned regardless to what time of day or night its on?  Well how is looking to remove something from the classroom because of its religious content any different?  They are both radical ideals obviously in opposite directions but surely if you are an atheist then the concept of being a radical is complete nonsense to begin with.

Take Dawkins for example, he's got to be the most outspoken atheist in the world....  But he's all for the search of truth without being hindered by religious idealists, and I completely get that and I think that its a fantastic and noble pursuit, but I think that atheists trying to have religion taken out of school is every bit as damaging.  If you have kids in school, you of course have every right to take them out of a religious class, but you don't have the right and shouldn't have the right to have the class abolished, even if Atheists were a majority, that right shouldn't exist because it is hindering the will or other family's.

You can make the argument that we are discriminated against and its in the constitution but the reality is that you can't make something right out of something thats wrong and telling someone that they can't say "One Nation under God" in their pledge, is bullshit...  I wouldn't let anyone tell me what I can or can't say.  If the Theists were trying to tell you that you have to say the above in your pledge, then you'd have a point but thats not the case.

Regarding never having an Atheist president, never say never...  50 years ago who'd have thought that you'd have a black president?  But in fairness I think that its perfectly fair that America doesn't have an Atheist president at the moment, for what is a presidential election if not a popularity contest?  Two guys throw their names into the hat and you get to decide which one runs the country, you can make your decision based on whatever credentials you want, maybe its harsh...  but one thing it definately isn't is, unfair.  But like I said, perhaps it will change when the attitude of the country changes.


Deadly Fingergun
atheist
Deadly Fingergun's picture
Posts: 237
Joined: 2009-11-19
User is offlineOffline
NiallStynes wrote:You can

NiallStynes wrote:
You can make the argument that we are discriminated against and its in the constitution but the reality is that you can't make something right out of something thats wrong and telling someone that they can't say "One Nation under God" in their pledge, is bullshit...  I wouldn't let anyone tell me what I can or can't say.  If the Theists were trying to tell you that you have to say the above in your pledge, then you'd have a point but thats not the case.
See, you have this dichotomy going on here.

You would not tell people what they can and can't say? Well, I agree. That is exactly why it's inappropriate for a public entity to require people to say "under God" in a mandatory pledge.

Religion class? Why, I do have every right to want that abolished from a publicly funded school. Why should my tax money be used to indoctrinate anyone in something I don't have a stake in? Why should the Presbyterians allow Baptist dogma taught to their kids? Why should the Catholic parents allow their children to be taught that the Pentecostals are really the ones with the direct line to God?

Freedom of religion means no one gets to choose for us, we get to ourselves. It may be very different in Ireland, if so please get to know the situation before you criticize it.

Big E wrote:
Clown
Why, yes, I am!


NiallStynes
Posts: 35
Joined: 2009-12-04
User is offlineOffline
From what I understand. 

From what I understand.  They don't require you to say anything.  They are perfectly happy for you to stay silent during that part or to say something else to yourself or indeed to not say your pledge at all.  Your the one saying "NO" take it out, I don't want it in my kids school and essentially making the decision for everyone else.

 

Regarding why should you allow public schools to teach religion?  Why not?  Most communities are happy to have several religion classes thought in their school, I honestly don't see a problem with it and as a parent its your job to guide your child in the right direction as you see it.  Having them do a double English Class instead of a religion class would be perfectly appropriate and I don't imagine the school headmaster having a problem with this either, however telling the rest of the community that they can't have religion taught in the school because of your belief's or lack thereof, is hypocritical to say the least.


MrPal
Superfan
MrPal's picture
Posts: 67
Joined: 2009-11-30
User is offlineOffline
 NiallStynes wrote:From

 

NiallStynes wrote:

From what I understand.  They don't require you to say anything.  They are perfectly happy for you to stay silent during that part or to say something else to yourself or indeed to not say your pledge at all.  Your the one saying "NO" take it out, I don't want it in my kids school and essentially making the decision for everyone else.

 

Regarding why should you allow public schools to teach religion?  Why not?  Most communities are happy to have several religion classes thought in their school, I honestly don't see a problem with it and as a parent its your job to guide your child in the right direction as you see it.  Having them do a double English Class instead of a religion class would be perfectly appropriate and I don't imagine the school headmaster having a problem with this either, however telling the rest of the community that they can't have religion taught in the school because of your belief's or lack thereof, is hypocritical to say the least.

 

I try not to dig my feet in the mud when debating something.  I like to do my best to see what it's like in the other person's shoes and even empathize with their cause.  Okay... Okay.  What do I say now?

 

You didn't even address what Deadly Fingergun said.  At all.  I'm trying to be polite and I hope you're not insulted, but how was your reply a rebuttal in the least?  You seem to let your convictions be what is driving your reasoning instead of your logic.  He mentioned at least three key clash of interests in his post and to use a baseball term, you struck out!

 

With all due respect I make this post.  I don't want to see this devolve like any kind of forum often does which is a big reason why I said what I did.  Please don't take it personally.

 

I never thought there were corners in my mind until I was told to stand in one.

I have learned so much, thanks for keeping it real RRS.


NiallStynes
Posts: 35
Joined: 2009-12-04
User is offlineOffline
I'm not taking it personally

I'm not taking it personally and if I am misunderstanding then please clarify but if the point is, why should I allow religion to be taught in school if it goes against my believe's?  Right?

My rebuttal is, why is it about you and only you?  Why don't other parents have the right to have their kids learn about their religion and perhaps maybe even other religions in school.  You can have your kids do another lesson during this class.  And if the response is why should my tax dollars pay to have an arcane subject taught in my kids school particularly when I believe it to be detrimental to my pursuit of truth, then my response is why should the parents of Christian family's pay their tax dollars to have science taught in school when they believe that subject to be detrimental to their faith?

I know what your gonna say, its a rediculous argument and to be quite honest I agree with you, but its not my argument, its yours....  I believe that both religion and science can be taught in schools in every Country.

 

 

 


MrPal
Superfan
MrPal's picture
Posts: 67
Joined: 2009-11-30
User is offlineOffline
I'll keep it short.  I

I'll keep it short.  

I never said anything about "why should I allow religion to be taught in school if it goes against my beliefs".  I'm approaching it from an intelligent point of view.  It's not all about me and my kids either.  If parents want to indoctrinate their kids there are several things these parents can do, such as teaching them at home/sending them to a class outside of school, or going so far as homeschooling them, or sending them to a private school where their theist beliefs are enforced.  

Why should tax payers accommodate every belief system?  That's very much not possible, financially and theoretically otherwise as well.  I'll abstain from listing some of them.  But, I will wonder why a school system should "spend money on not teaching science".  (A paraphrase but an accurate one imo.)  Where's the smiley face that commits suicide when you need one?

I too believe theology can be taught in schools but you better damn well believe there's going to be an outcry against it, even if the teacher and curriculum were absolutely perfect in every way.  In this country if a public school so much as taught the 4 Noble Truths of Buddhism, a lot of parents would pull their kids out for that class.  How is that doing the children justice?  Fuck their backwards irrational parents.

 

I never thought there were corners in my mind until I was told to stand in one.

I have learned so much, thanks for keeping it real RRS.


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4259
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Niall, if you find religious

Niall, if you find religious people like kirk and ray so obtuse that you believe it's not worth your or anybody else's time to address them, why bother addressing people you apparently find even more obtuse?  if what the people at this site are doing is such a waste of time, aren't you wasting your time posting here?

btw, i'm surprised no one has said this yet because usually it comes up pretty quickly, but if you want to be taken seriously here and not suspected of trolling or being a theist in disguise, it's usually a good idea to let the community warm up to you before coming out with "what you guys are doing is fucked up."

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


Deadly Fingergun
atheist
Deadly Fingergun's picture
Posts: 237
Joined: 2009-11-19
User is offlineOffline
NiallStynes wrote: I'm not

NiallStynes wrote:

I'm not taking it personally and if I am misunderstanding then please clarify but if the point is, why should I allow religion to be taught in school if it goes against my believe's?  Right?

My rebuttal is, why is it about you and only you?  Why don't other parents have the right to have their kids learn about their religion and perhaps maybe even other religions in school.  You can have your kids do another lesson during this class.  And if the response is why should my tax dollars pay to have an arcane subject taught in my kids school particularly when I believe it to be detrimental to my pursuit of truth, then my response is why should the parents of Christian family's pay their tax dollars to have science taught in school when they believe that subject to be detrimental to their faith?

I know what your gonna say, its a rediculous argument and to be quite honest I agree with you, but its not my argument, its yours....  I believe that both religion and science can be taught in schools in every Country.

Did you even read what I wrote? How is my set of examples "me and only me"?

My argument is: Religion should in no way be enforced by a public entity. For the sake of everyone, including the religious.

"Religion" isn't one thing. It's a huge mess of things - it is nigh impossible to "teach religion" without setting someone aside as "not important enough to cover" - to turn them into a second-class citizen. To treat them unequally under the law.

Science is not religious in nature. and is thus exempt from being a matter of equal treatment under the first amendment. Removing it from the curriculum would only result in even more ignorance in the public sphere. A disaster for citizenry.

Meanwhile, leaving religion out of schools has little effect on knowledge of religion, given the well-established private religious entities.

Big E wrote:
Clown
Why, yes, I am!


NiallStynes
Posts: 35
Joined: 2009-12-04
User is offlineOffline
Yes I read your post and I

Yes I read your post and I didn't mean you personally, I meant anyone whom thinks that their opinion matters more than that of the rest of the community, its one thing if the community is made up of hate mongers whom are oppressing you in some way, but thats not the case and particularly in the interview on ABC it was the lady (I didn't take down names) that said something very insensitive about going to hell rather than going to a racist meglomaniac blah blah blah.  Like I said I am also an Atheist (by the way this trolling bullshit is just pathetic, so you lot can debate theology all you want but when someone brings it to your doorstop your all up in arms about it?) however both my parents are very religious and they say a prayer everyday before having their dinner, I would never be crass and obnoxious enough to say anything like what the lady said in the interview to a religious person because it is very important to them and that was just plain simple rude.

If this is indeed about being in a minority then the problem is pretty much the same problem that America has struggled with since its founding, INTOLERANCE...  But from where I was sitting, the two believers were pretty polite and courteous to the RRS and it was the RRS whom were belligerent and intolerant.

Like I said, I'm Irish.  I live in Dublin but grew up in Belfast and where I grew up you didn't tell anyone that you were Irish Catholic not for fear of someone making you pledge allegiance in some unsavoury manner, but for fear of getting your fucking head blown off, I think I might know a little something about segregation, where I grew up segregation was a lifestyle not an unfamiliar word and if you think that pissing all over someone's moral and spiritual belief's is OK just because you think you know something that they don't, then perhaps you are the one who needs a lesson in morality and intolerance rather than the other way around.


Deadly Fingergun
atheist
Deadly Fingergun's picture
Posts: 237
Joined: 2009-11-19
User is offlineOffline
NiallStynes wrote: Yes I

NiallStynes wrote:

Yes I read your post and I didn't mean you personally, I meant anyone whom thinks that their opinion matters more than that of the rest of the community, its one thing if the community is made up of hate mongers whom are oppressing you in some way, but thats not the case and particularly in the interview on ABC it was the lady (I didn't take down names) that said something very insensitive about going to hell rather than going to a racist meglomaniac blah blah blah.  Like I said I am also an Atheist (by the way this trolling bullshit is just pathetic, so you lot can debate theology all you want but when someone brings it to your doorstop your all up in arms about it?) however both my parents are very religious and they say a prayer everyday before having their dinner, I would never be crass and obnoxious enough to say anything like what the lady said in the interview to a religious person because it is very important to them and that was just plain simple rude.

If this is indeed about being in a minority then the problem is pretty much the same problem that America has struggled with since its founding, INTOLERANCE...  But from where I was sitting, the two believers were pretty polite and courteous to the RRS and it was the RRS whom were belligerent and intolerant.

Like I said, I'm Irish.  I live in Dublin but grew up in Belfast and where I grew up you didn't tell anyone that you were Irish Catholic not for fear of someone making you pledge allegiance in some unsavoury manner, but for fear of getting your fucking head blown off, I think I might know a little something about segregation, where I grew up segregation was a lifestyle not an unfamiliar word and if you think that pissing all over someone's moral and spiritual belief's is OK just because you think you know something that they don't, then perhaps you are the one who needs a lesson in morality and intolerance rather than the other way around.

So, in short, you're just here to be self-righteous.

Because you have twice entirely failed to address what I've said in favor of knocking down straw-men.

 

Big E wrote:
Clown
Why, yes, I am!


NiallStynes
Posts: 35
Joined: 2009-12-04
User is offlineOffline
Yes as you can tell from the

Yes as you can tell from the HALO over my head I am entirely about being self righteous and with regards to failing to answer your post, I don't claim to be a PHD theologist and I did say in my reply that if I misinterpreted your question then please clarify, you didn't clarify so I didn't bother to follow up and answered the question as I understood it.

I am not here to start some break away Lutherian style Atheist movement whom believes that lack of faith alone is worthy enough to send you to Hell and that all this research and bible bashing is meaningless, it is but thats just my opinion.

I came here to merely stir up a lively debate and say "I DON'T GET IT" it was everyone else that turned it into a screw you we have every right to believe in nothing if we want to, type of thread which has been humorous seeing as I never said otherwise.

And if we are going to talk about failing to reply to any questions...  How many have I asked that are yet to be answered?


Deadly Fingergun
atheist
Deadly Fingergun's picture
Posts: 237
Joined: 2009-11-19
User is offlineOffline
NiallStynes wrote:I came

NiallStynes wrote:
I came here to merely stir up a lively debate and say "I DON'T GET IT" it was everyone else that turned it into a screw you we have every right to believe in nothing if we want to, type of thread which has been humorous seeing as I never said otherwise.
You have put your finger on the problem.

Debating and not understanding a topic are mutually exclusive conditions. Understand first, debate second.

Big E wrote:
Clown
Why, yes, I am!


NiallStynes
Posts: 35
Joined: 2009-12-04
User is offlineOffline
So whats the problem, my

So whats the problem, my unintellect to understand you, or your incompetence to explain yourself?


Deadly Fingergun
atheist
Deadly Fingergun's picture
Posts: 237
Joined: 2009-11-19
User is offlineOffline
NiallStynes wrote:So whats

NiallStynes wrote:
So whats the problem, my unintellect to understand you, or your incompetence to explain yourself?
I vote: Your unwillingness to listen.


 

Big E wrote:
Clown
Why, yes, I am!


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4259
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
what the hell is an

what the hell is an unintellect?  i know what self-pwngage is, but never heard of unintellect...

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


NiallStynes
Posts: 35
Joined: 2009-12-04
User is offlineOffline
There are 26 posts, 8 of

There are 26 posts, 8 of them are mine.  I am pretty sure if you did a word count you'd find that most of the input is from me.  That combined with the fact that I started the thread rather than hijack someone else's thread and start spewing all kinds of ignorant bullshit, suggests to me that I am very interested in this discussion and furthermore I am completely open to be proven wrong and I'll be the first to mention that some valid points have been made, In Ireland there are pretty much 2 religions and in the Republic that is even narrowed down to marginally 1 religion which of course makes it easy to have a religion class in school, I oversimplified, having not grown up in America I didn't understand the logistics or having "a religion class" having said that I still think that alot of points that I made were valid.  You can say that phrases like "In God we Trust" and "One Nation under God" are highly offensive to you, personally I think thats just being over sensitive, for non believers then all they are is empty words.

 


NiallStynes
Posts: 35
Joined: 2009-12-04
User is offlineOffline
Why is there always someone

Why is there always someone who thinks that a typo or a mispronunciation or grammar mistake is some sort of proof of someone being a moron?  If you are the type of guy who thinks that your keyboard skills are what make you an all round genius then perhaps this conversation is too grown up for you.


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
I used to think that people

I used to think that people were overreacting to saying "one nation under god" but then I found out that in American public schools it's basically compulsory. People have to pledge 5 times a week for 12 years, and if they don't then school officials will get involved and it's considered to be a problem.

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4259
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
NiallStynes wrote:Why is

NiallStynes wrote:

Why is there always someone who thinks that a typo or a mispronunciation or grammar mistake is some sort of proof of someone being a moron?  If you are the type of guy who thinks that your keyboard skills are what make you an all round genius then perhaps this conversation is too grown up for you.

hey, that wasn't a typo.  that was a nonexistent word.  look, i'm not a grammar nazi, but it's best to cover all your bases before you strut in out of the blue and pop off about how futile others' efforts are.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4259
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Gauche wrote:I used to think

Gauche wrote:

I used to think that people were overreacting to saying "one nation under god" but then I found out that in American public schools it's basically compulsory. People have to pledge 5 times a week for 12 years, and if they don't then school officials will get involved and it's considered to be a problem.

actually, not in my experience.  there were several students in my school who refused to say the pledge, ironically enough usually for religious reasons.  i myself only stood and nothing more, some even refused to stand.  none of the teachers ever said a word.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


Deadly Fingergun
atheist
Deadly Fingergun's picture
Posts: 237
Joined: 2009-11-19
User is offlineOffline
NiallStynes wrote: There are

NiallStynes wrote:

There are 26 posts, 8 of them are mine.  I am pretty sure if you did a word count you'd find that most of the input is from me.

Yes, most of the input is from you. That's a problem, since you don't seem to understand what you're discussing, and refuse to listen to those who've tried to point out your misconceptions.

NiallStynes wrote:
That combined with the fact that I started the thread rather than hijack someone else's thread and start spewing all kinds of ignorant bullshit, suggests to me that I am very interested in this discussion and furthermore I am completely open to be proven wrong and I'll be the first to mention that some valid points have been made, In Ireland there are pretty much 2 religions and in the Republic that is even narrowed down to marginally 1 religion which of course makes it easy to have a religion class in school, I oversimplified, having not grown up in America I didn't understand the logistics or having "a religion class" having said that I still think that alot of points that I made were valid.  You can say that phrases like "In God we Trust" and "One Nation under God" are highly offensive to you, personally I think thats just being over sensitive, for non believers then all they are is empty words.

You don't get it, do you. It's a "Pledge of Allegiance". It's not a "whatever speech given by whomever". It's a Pledge of Allegiance.

Not only is it impossible to pledge allegiance to something that does not exist, the words "under god" were inserted into the pledge via politically motivated anti-communist propagandists. The intent was to make the US the "Godly" nation compared to the (evil) "Godless Communists". It still carries that connotation. If you fail to say the pledge, your life will be made to be uncomfortable by those around you. It's a self-supporting system - all social stigma.

 

Understand first, criticize second.

Big E wrote:
Clown
Why, yes, I am!


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:Gauche wrote:I

iwbiek wrote:

Gauche wrote:

I used to think that people were overreacting to saying "one nation under god" but then I found out that in American public schools it's basically compulsory. People have to pledge 5 times a week for 12 years, and if they don't then school officials will get involved and it's considered to be a problem.

actually, not in my experience.  there were several students in my school who refused to say the pledge, ironically enough usually for religious reasons.  i myself only stood and nothing more, some even refused to stand.  none of the teachers ever said a word.

Well, the US is a large nation and I'm sure it varies from place to place, and technically because of the first constitutional amendment students can't be compelled to pledge. But I have seen news reports where students say they were coerced by school officials in more subtle ways.

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


Deadly Fingergun
atheist
Deadly Fingergun's picture
Posts: 237
Joined: 2009-11-19
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:actually, not

iwbiek wrote:
actually, not in my experience.  there were several students in my school who refused to say the pledge, ironically enough usually for religious reasons.  i myself only stood and nothing more, some even refused to stand.  none of the teachers ever said a word.
Of course in a country this large, you're going to have a tremendous amount of variety in reactions to any social stimulus.

Not saying the pledge 'round these parts - back when I was in high school - was nigh unto treason.

Now-a-days the pledge isn't any big deal here. Kiddos are as likely to nap during the pledge as to recite it.

I think such unpredictability just makes it worse.

Big E wrote:
Clown
Why, yes, I am!


NiallStynes
Posts: 35
Joined: 2009-12-04
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote: hey, that

iwbiek wrote:

 

hey, that wasn't a typo.  that was a nonexistent word.  look, i'm not a grammar nazi, but it's best to cover all your bases before you strut in out of the blue and pop off about how futile others' efforts are.

 

Well pardon my ignorance but isn't that what the RRS guys where doing on the show that this whole thread is based on?  Were they not telling the two lads on the opposing side how futile their efforts of worshipping God are?

Plus who's to say that I am strutting in out of the blue, perhaps I will become a continuous contributor, atleast my first post didn't go unnoticed which is always a good start.


Deadly Fingergun
atheist
Deadly Fingergun's picture
Posts: 237
Joined: 2009-11-19
User is offlineOffline
NiallStynes wrote:Well

NiallStynes wrote:
Well pardon my ignorance but isn't that what the RRS guys where doing on the show that this whole thread is based on?  Were they not telling the two lads on the opposing side how futile their efforts of worshipping God are?
A prime example of your inability to comprehend.

It is simply absurd to compare a prepared and negotiated debate with simply appearing on a forum. Also, the debate topic was whether or not god could be proven without using the bible. The topic was introduced by Cameron and Comfort (the religious twits).

Understand first, criticize second.

NiallStynes wrote:
Plus who's to say that I am strutting in out of the blue,
Anyone, as that's what anyone does on a web forum. No one invited you, thus you "strutted in out of the blue".

NiallStynes wrote:
perhaps I will become a continuous contributor, atleast my first post didn't go unnoticed which is always a good start.
Being noticed is not necessarily a good thing. I know I always notice it when someone makes a total fool out of themselves.

Big E wrote:
Clown
Why, yes, I am!


NiallStynes
Posts: 35
Joined: 2009-12-04
User is offlineOffline
Deadly Fingergun wrote: You

Deadly Fingergun wrote:

 

You don't get it, do you. It's a "Pledge of Allegiance". It's not a "whatever speech given by whomever". It's a Pledge of Allegiance.

Not only is it impossible to pledge allegiance to something that does not exist, the words "under god" were inserted into the pledge via politically motivated anti-communist propagandists. The intent was to make the US the "Godly" nation compared to the (evil) "Godless Communists". It still carried that connotation. If you fail to say the pledge, your life will be made to be uncomfortable by those around you. It's a self-supporting system - all social stigma.

 

Understand first, criticize second.

 

You think that I don't understand?  You think that America is the only country to have religion shoved down their throat and church propoganda camouflaged as patriotic duty?  If I was to take full stock of Amhrain NA BhFiann, I'd be out killing as many English people I could find, but times change and now when I'm at a match and the marching band belts it out, I don't sit down with my hands in my pockets and I don't look around to see who is sitting down with their hands in their pockets.  Sing it, don't sing it... No one is forcing you to do either.

The problem isn't that I don't understand, the problem is that you think that you are the only person who has something worth listening too.


Deadly Fingergun
atheist
Deadly Fingergun's picture
Posts: 237
Joined: 2009-11-19
User is offlineOffline
NiallStynes wrote:You think

NiallStynes wrote:
You think that I don't understand?  You think that America is the only country to have religion shoved down their throat and church propoganda camouflaged as patriotic duty?  If I was to take full stock of Amhrain NA BhFiann, I'd be out killing as many English people I could find, but times change and now when I'm at a match and the marching band belts it out, I don't sit down with my hands in my pockets and I don't look around to see who is sitting down with their hands in their pockets.  Sing it, don't sing it... No one is forcing you to do either.
So what if there are other countries where religion is forced down throats? Why does that mean I have to tolerate it?

NiallStynes wrote:
The problem isn't that I don't understand, the problem is that you think that you are the only person who has something worth listening too.
Projection is fun, isn't it?

Big E wrote:
Clown
Why, yes, I am!


NiallStynes
Posts: 35
Joined: 2009-12-04
User is offlineOffline
What exactly is the

What exactly is the difference between a debate online and a prepared debate on TV, its the same thing and I wasn't trying to be condescending in my text, I was merely saying that thats what a debate is, atleast thats what a good debate is, one side showing the other that their attempts are futile.

With regards to being uninvited, thats what a public forum is, are you seriously saying that your forum is not open to new members whom may have a contribution, if you look back at the thread the very first reply was someone saying that my thread was pretty good and that he enjoyed reading it, so why am I not welcome?

With regards to making a fool of one's self, I sympathize but sometimes one can't help themselves.


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4259
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Deadly Fingergun wrote: Not

Deadly Fingergun wrote:

 

Not saying the pledge 'round these parts - back when I was in high school - was nigh unto treason.

 

of course this happens sometimes, but i think in most cases if the student pursues the issue, the teacher will be punished, by public embarassment if nothing else.

still, where are you from?  because i'm from kentucky, which is not typically considered an open-minded place.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4259
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
NiallStynes wrote: With

NiallStynes wrote:

 

With regards to being uninvited, thats what a public forum is, are you seriously saying that your forum is not open to new members whom may have a contribution, if you look back at the thread the very first reply was someone saying that my thread was pretty good and that he enjoyed reading it, so why am I not welcome?

 

oh, let's not get melodramatic.  if you weren't "welcome," a mod would have booted you by now.

all i'm saying is that, if you want to avoid being lambasted, the best strategy is to hang around a bit and get friendly before you call the whole relevance of the rrs into question.  if you're bothered by being lambasted--which it seems to me you are--then you have only your lack of tact to blame.

but you're very "welcome" in that you have total freedom to tell us we're going about being atheists the wrong way.  and we have total freedom to treat you like a dick.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


Deadly Fingergun
atheist
Deadly Fingergun's picture
Posts: 237
Joined: 2009-11-19
User is offlineOffline
NiallStynes wrote:What

NiallStynes wrote:
What exactly is the difference between a debate online and a prepared debate on TV, its the same thing and I wasn't trying to be condescending in my text, I was merely saying that thats what a debate is, atleast thats what a good debate is, one side showing the other that their attempts are futile.
You shift your stance to fit your needs. You said:

NiallStynes wrote:
Well pardon my ignorance but isn't that what the RRS guys where doing on the show that this whole thread is based on?  Were they not telling the two lads on the opposing side how futile their efforts of worshipping God are?
Which you clearly did not mean "Wow, that's a good debate".

Can you actually not see the difference between a prepared and negotiated debate and ad-hoc arguments on-line? Really?

NiallStynes wrote:
With regards to being uninvited,
Which is not what I said.

NiallStynes wrote:
thats what a public forum is, are you seriously saying that your forum is not open to new members whom may have a contribution, if you look back at the thread the very first reply was someone saying that my thread was pretty good and that he enjoyed reading it, so why am I not welcome?
I never said nor implied that. I said you were "strutting in out of the blue" - as we all did. You were denying that, and I was correcting you.

NiallStynes wrote:
With regards to making a fool of one's self, I sympathize but sometimes one can't help themselves.
I'm made of rubber, you're made of glue...

Big E wrote:
Clown
Why, yes, I am!


Deadly Fingergun
atheist
Deadly Fingergun's picture
Posts: 237
Joined: 2009-11-19
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:of course this

iwbiek wrote:
of course this happens sometimes, but i think in most cases if the student pursues the issue, the teacher will be punished, by public embarassment if nothing else.

still, where are you from?  because i'm from kentucky, which is not typically considered an open-minded place.

New Mexico.

Supposedly an open-minded place.

I'd say places rarely are whet they're made out to be. We humans generalize too much.

 

BTW, it wasn't the teachers doing the stigmatizing, it was the students.

Big E wrote:
Clown
Why, yes, I am!


NiallStynes
Posts: 35
Joined: 2009-12-04
User is offlineOffline
And I have total freedom to

And I have total freedom to say that your all acting like a bunch of sissy's who think that the world should be tailor made for them.

My entire thread was about... Whats the point of trying to promote the Atheist View.  Which no one has bothered to even tackle yet by the way.  Whats the point of a poster campaign to promote the fact that you don't believe, your the one's acting like a bunch of kids throwing your toys out of the pram cause no one will share their Christmas Cheer with you.

I get Religious groups having a poster campaign, but atheism???  Its like me advertising the fact that I can't cook, when you have nothing to promote then why bother?

 


Deadly Fingergun
atheist
Deadly Fingergun's picture
Posts: 237
Joined: 2009-11-19
User is offlineOffline
NiallStynes wrote:And I have

NiallStynes wrote:
And I have total freedom to say that your all acting like a bunch of sissy's who think that the world should be tailor made for them.

My entire thread was about... Whats the point of trying to promote the Atheist View.  Which no one has bothered to even tackle yet by the way.  Whats the point of a poster campaign to promote the fact that you don't believe, your the one's acting like a bunch of kids throwing your toys out of the pram cause no one will share their Christmas Cheer with you.

I get Religious groups having a poster campaign, but atheism???  Its like me advertising the fact that I can't cook, when you have nothing to promote then why bother?

Ok, you are an idiot.

This has been responded to:

BobSpence1 wrote:

Religious requirements are inconsistent with the Constitution. Does that not matter?

There are no good arguments for God.

I have this 'stupid' compulsion to seek Truth.

But then I live in Australia, and while we do have religious crazies, we are still nowhere near as messed up as the US in that respect.

The State I live in. Queensland, had a religious nut case for a leader for a long time, (roughly equivalent to your state governor), but we eventually got him out. At one point the guy in charge of education was talking about letting Creationism into our public schools (shudder).

Current govt at our state level is average, Federal is at bit too religious leaning for my taste but could be a lot worse.

Unfortunately our opposition just kicked out a relatively intelligent and open-minded guy and put in a Roman Catholic, Global Warming denier. Ugh!

Unrepentant_Elitist wrote:

As a preface, I am responding as a citizen of the United States; as such, I am replying from the perspective that I have come to known in my country. Speaking only for myself, I have felt that non-believers of all stripes have been turned into ancillary characters in our national play. While it's admittedly anecdotal evidence, I sometimes believe that atheists are the most hated minority in the United States. Does this mean we should hide in shame at not buying a fraudulent story foist upon us by half-wits and charlatans? I would submit that perhaps the democratic foundations of my country require that I voice my opinion without fear of repercussion or being ostracizing. Therefore, I intend to seek like-minded individuals who are capable of rational thought untinged by the influences of super-naturalism. To be honest, I am not a particularly "rabid" atheist so often portrayed in the media; rather, I am a decent, hard-working person who defies marginalization and will no longer tolerate the second-class status afforded me. I will speak, and some will listen; some will not- but I will not be shouted down in the name of mindless, amalgamated belief structures.     

natural wrote:

NiallStynes wrote:
I unlike the couple on the show don't see any need to advertise the fact that I am an Atheist, its not because I am afraid, its because I don't think of it as any kind of identity.

Niall, most of us don't see it as an identity either. Being an atheist is like not collecting stamps -- it's not much of a hobby.

However, your position only makes sense if theists keep their theism to themselves.

You mention the US pledge, as if the atheists are trying to change something from the original. But actually, they are only trying to change it *back* to how it was originally. The 'god' thing is a recent insertion by politically motivated theists.

Now, you may not appreciate the importance of keeping church out of government, but I'm curious if you're aware that theists in your own country have recently limited your freedom of speech and expression.

Ireland has recently passed a blasphemy law:

Quote:

As Michael Nugent of Atheist Ireland has pointed out:

The proposed law does not protect religious belief; it incentivises outrage and it criminalises free speech. Under this proposed law, if a person expresses one belief about gods, and other people think that this insults a different belief about gods, then these people can become outraged, and this outrage can make it illegal for the first person to express his or her beliefs.

So Irish law has now enshrined the notion that the taking of offence is more important than free expression. If something might cause a motivated group to be "outraged", rather than, say, cause them to live in fear, then it is illegal, with a fine of up to €25,000 payable.

Note the ease with which a prosecution could be brought, and the punitive nature of the fine: this is not legislation that simply serves to tie up a few loose ends.

When atheists fail to stand against religious incursions on our rights and freedoms, this is the crap you end up with.

The question is not, "Why are we angry?" The question is, "Why aren't you?"

Deadly Fingergun wrote:

NiallStynes, it is a shame you missed one of the most salient points:

What is being defended isn't an absence of a belief: It's the right to not have to hold a belief that is irrational.

It's not about "identity". Nor is it a matter of a disbelief. It is about being rational and facing reality without the crutch of a fictional overseer.

It's about facing down idiots like Comfort and Cameron not because they "believe in something" but because they "believe in spite of no evidence or  contrary evidence" and would have everyone do the same, by force if necessary.

etc. etc. etc.

 

 

Big E wrote:
Clown
Why, yes, I am!


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4259
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
NiallStynes wrote:Its like

NiallStynes wrote:

Its like me advertising the fact that I can't cook, when you have nothing to promote then why bother?

 

yeah but if you can't cook jamie oliver doesn't picket your fucking house or try to warp your children's minds.

but once again, if you really think this, then why the fuck do you bother posting here?

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


NiallStynes
Posts: 35
Joined: 2009-12-04
User is offlineOffline
With regards to the shift in

With regards to the shift in stance, Yeah OK maybe... I didn't actually mean my original post to be as aggressive as it came across but on the other hand, the particular debate in question was kind of one sided, I could hardly say that the Christians were trying to tell RRS that their attempts were futile because the point of being an Atheist is that you are not attempting to worship anything.

No, I don't see a difference in prepared debate and online debates, its basically the same thing, two different opinions trying to disprove eachother, you can take a republican and a Democrat of similar intelligence a manuscript and ask each of them to interpret it, I guarantee you each one will come back with a different conclusion, thats not because one is smarter than the other, its because they are both on a different wave lenght.

You said something to the effect of me coming in uninvited, I was merely asking why I need to be invited its suppose to be a public forum.

Strutting in out the blue, I was trying to say that maybe I will be back on other threads, probably not but maybe I will, I would usually associate that phrase with people whom turn up make a cavalier statement to get everyone's goat and then leave and you never hear from them again.

Rubber/Glue...  I don't get it, what does that mean.

 

WITH regards to me being an idiot because I don't consider any of the stuff thats been posted a decent reply... I hold my ground, someone said that my point would only hold water if theism stopped advertising their belief's that was probably the best reply but I still wouldn't agree, I think that religions have something to promote, atheists don't.  i.e.  A)  Hi, I'm a Catholic and I have a book its called the Bible, would you like to read it? B)  Hi, I'm an Atheist and as such I have no belief's or document that you might be interested in hearing.  Only one of them marketing campaigns has any chance of a follow up. 


NiallStynes
Posts: 35
Joined: 2009-12-04
User is offlineOffline
Its late, I gotta go get

Its late, I gotta go get ready to get my drink on.  Its been fun though...


MrPal
Superfan
MrPal's picture
Posts: 67
Joined: 2009-11-30
User is offlineOffline
  I think you have an

  I think you have an inability to critically read.  I'll just make a point on one thing you said...

 

Who said atheists don't have anything to promote?  Just because there is a lack of belief that doesn't believe atheists are nihilists.  RRS for one promotes science and ethics, and points out that many organized religions try to tear down facts that can be proven with the scientific method etc.  Also, there are very many organized religions (arguably all, I "disagree" with that though) who are very unethical.

 

There is a group in America of fundamental theist elitists called "The Family" which has ties to the bill regarding homosexuals in Ugandan parliament.  That bill is in every way revolting to human rights and any rational ethical thought.  And that is just a single example out of countless ones.

 

So anyway, to believe that Atheists are nihilists and have "nothing to promote" is presumptuous.

I never thought there were corners in my mind until I was told to stand in one.

I have learned so much, thanks for keeping it real RRS.


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5939
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
A very important aspect of

A very important aspect of an Atheist billboard, or other publicity, such as was gained by that televised debate, is to re-assure those people, especially the young, who are surrounded by religious people - parents and others - but have realised that there are serious problems with belief. It doesn't make sense to them, they see the logical flaws as we have, but they are afraid, intimidated, even worried that there is something wrong with themselves.

By making it public that there are others who don't believe, who see things the same way, we are reassuring them that they are are not crazy or evil because they cannot accept the religious nonsense that all around them do, and even may be trying to shove down their throat.

 

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology