War on Christmas 08

[Demosthenes11]

I refuse to believe you are serious

[Neosutra]

I refuse to believe you are serious

I have to believe you guys are serious about a fucking flying super hero ultimate power dude that also has emotions and shit out the universe 6000 years ago, so why cant you believe that 2 symbols of torture are offensive?

[Demosthenes11]

I have to believe you guys are serious about a fucking flying super hero ultimate power dude that also has emotions and shit out the universe 6000 years ago, so why cant you believe that 2 symbols of torture are offensive?

because while you have the ultimate power of logic when it comes to divinity, we have the ultimate power of logic when it comes to analogies

[Galkaeater]

Funny how athiest and christian extremists seam to be the only ones who take all of the bible seriously nowadays.

[Galkaeater]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure you can't simultaneously believe the truth is unknowable and believe you have it anyway.

you can still believe the truth is unknowable and believe in god because you do not need to know the truth in order to believe

[Tristam]

There are so many strawmen in this thread.

1. Atheists do not get "pissed off" at christmas, we get pissed off that gov't institutions set up displays that are explicitly religious in nature and use christmas as an excuse. Everyone should be pissed off at this.

2. Atheists are not grumpy liberals who hate nativity scenes. We have a message that has every legal right to be heard in a public forum, and this message was taken down and tossed in a ditch by some christians. Everyone keeps missing this fundamental point.

3. Everyone is assuming atheists take great personal offense to religion, when it appears to me that the christians are taking great personal offense to an atheistic message. If you don't like what we're saying, don't listen, we still get to say it and search for people who agree with us. Bitching about our bitching is about as silly as it gets.

Finally, there is no polite way to bring up atheism in the context of the religious climate of the USA. Every message we put out there is going to be something to the effect of "there is no god", that being the whole point of atheism. We can't tap dance around that, nor can we tap dance around the belief that religion "hardens hearts and enslaves minds." It does, it really does, and your personal warm and fuzzy experience has nothing to do with the history and current examples of religious "extremism" that are out there. We have every right to criticize and make examples of something we consider silly and people continue to slaughter each other over. And you'd better believe that we're going to argue against all of the legislation that the religious right tries to push through, declaring obedience to the abrahamic god on our currency is an explicit violation of the separation of church and state, so while some of you think it's no big deal, it is if you respect our constitution and a government that was founded in such a way to prevent the sort of theocratic BS that people seem to want so badly.

[Bingbong]

Funny how athiest and christian extremists seam to be the only ones who take all of the bible seriously nowadays.

My point exactly.

[Galkaeater]

2. Atheists are not grumpy liberals who hate nativity scenes. We have a message that has every legal right to be heard in a public forum, and this message was taken down and tossed in a ditch by some christians. Everyone keeps missing this fundamental point.

it was clearly an act of god

[Bingbong]

1. Atheists do not get "pissed off" at christmas, we get pissed off that gov't institutions set up displays that are explicitly religious in nature and use christmas as an excuse. Everyone should be pissed off at this.

If the gov't didn't set up displays, they would be promoting atheism, and that would piss me off.

amidoinitrite?

2. Atheists are not grumpy liberals who hate nativity scenes. We have a message that has every legal right to be heard in a public forum, and this message was taken down and tossed in a ditch by some christians. Everyone keeps missing this fundamental point.

I would guess that your message would be tossed by Muslims, Jews, Bhuddists, Pagans, and Agnostics as well.

3. Everyone is assuming atheists take great personal offense to religion, when it appears to me that the christians are taking great personal offense to an atheistic message. If you don't like what we're saying, don't listen, we still get to say it and search for people who agree with us. Bitching about our bitching is about as silly as it gets.

Like I said in my previous posts, Atheists may get a more sympathetic ear if they didn't take offense to things that people actually like.

We can't tap dance around that, nor can we tap dance around the belief that religion "hardens hearts and enslaves minds." It does, it really does,

I actually appreciate more things around me and in my life due to my religion. I also appreciate the fact that others might not agree with my thoughts on religion. The only thought I can't get behind is the one that says there isn't one.

[Neosutra]

There are so many strawmen in this thread.

1. Atheists do not get "pissed off" at christmas, we get pissed off that gov't institutions set up displays that are explicitly religious in nature and use christmas as an excuse. Everyone should be pissed off at this.

2. Atheists are not grumpy liberals who hate nativity scenes. We have a message that has every legal right to be heard in a public forum, and this message was taken down and tossed in a ditch by some christians. Everyone keeps missing this fundamental point.



3. Everyone is assuming atheists take great personal offense to religion, when it appears to me that the christians are taking great personal offense to an atheistic message. If you don't like what we're saying, don't listen, we still get to say it and search for people who agree with us. Bitching about our bitching is about as silly as it gets.

Finally, there is no polite way to bring up atheism in the context of the religious climate of the USA. Every message we put out there is going to be something to the effect of "there is no god", that being the whole point of atheism. We can't tap dance around that, nor can we tap dance around the belief that religion "hardens hearts and enslaves minds." It does, it really does, and your personal warm and fuzzy experience has nothing to do with the history and current examples of religious "extremism" that are out there. We have every right to criticize and make examples of something we consider silly and people continue to slaughter each other over. And you'd better believe that we're going to argue against all of the legislation that the religious right tries to push through, declaring obedience to the abrahamic god on our currency is an explicit violation of the separation of church and state, so while some of you think it's no big deal, it is if you respect our constitution and a government that was founded in such a way to prevent the sort of theocratic BS that people seem to want so badly.

This.

[Stiker]

Ok Neo, it is getting over the edge.

You missed the part about non believers going to hell?...
Or the part where everyone but the chosen ones are casts into the inferno?

Save for parables or the dream in Revelations, where exactly does it say this? Parables were analogies and Revelations was a divine dream, both of which should not be taken for literal truth.

I think you should read my above post as far as the afterlife goes. There isn't a soul alive that has it 100% right.

Or the part about god killing all of mankind because they were too bad?

I assume you mean the flood? Did you miss the part where He promised to never do it again? Also, keep in mind Genesis was written by Moses and he likely did not have anything more than a word-of-mouth account of the story of Noah and the flood.

Or the part where jesus tells the woman that she is unworthy of his help because she is a dirty non jewish dog("but even dogs get scraps from masters tables").

IIRC, He does end up helping her. However, you missed the point of the story. The point was to illustrate the sharp contrast that Jesus was supposed to demonstrate. Jewish people were not supposed to associate with those not of their own religion, Jesus included; however, Jesus was the one to abolish this divide, commanding his disciples to go out and "make disciples of all nations."

You're correct in saying the bible has no passage stating a christian should kill any given group (If we dont count revalations or the old testament..). The problem is that their deity (the one they aspire to be like) condems everyone that doesnt believe to hellish torture for all eternity. How much respect for a person's life do you think people have if they believe that person is an abomination to god himself and even their loving god wants them dead? Oh wait, he doesnt want them dead, they "chose" that for themselves.

Again read my above post. You are venturing into a grey area that people still debate within Christianity. Just because you have fundamentalist/extremist Christians preeching hellfire and brimstone does not mean every last one buys that line of preeching. The images of Hell are just that, images as far as anyone knows. No one knows for sure the factual truth and that should not be used as a means to convince anyone to become a believer. Just because some Christians have missed the message, doesn't all of them have.

A cross, a nazi symbol, they are one in the same. Just because you like one side doesnt mean it is any less offensive...I have to believe you guys are serious about a fucking flying super hero ultimate power dude that also has emotions and shit out the universe 6000 years ago, so why cant you believe that 2 symbols of torture are offensive?

Now that is completely crossing the line. The cross is a symbol of the sacrifice of Jesus and the fact that his death redeemed everyone from sin. The swastica was a Native American peace symbol IIRC, was adobted as the symbol of the Nazi party, and unfortunately is now the symbol of the horrible acts of that party. Saying the Holocaust is the same as a belief that 100% Christians do not completely agree with is a horrible comparison.

Look, don't believe in God, fine. You are entitled to your belief. Shitting all over a religion though isn't needed at all. Even if you do think we are all out of our minds.

[Tristam]

If the gov't didn't set up displays, they would be promoting atheism, and that would piss me off.

amidoinitrite?



I would guess that your message would be tossed by Muslims, Jews, Bhuddists, Pagans, and Agnostics as well.




Like I said in my previous posts, Atheists may get a more sympathetic ear if they didn't take offense to things that people actually like.



I actually appreciate more things around me and in my life due to my religion. I also appreciate the fact that others might not agree with my thoughts on religion. The only thought I can't get behind is the one that says there isn't one.

Wait, so what you're saying is you support state-sponsored religion, and we should tone down our message until you approve it? You want to censor people because they don't agree with you? How odd. And I don't care if our message would be tossed by Zoroastrianists, that dosen't make censorship of a minority group based on a theistic disagreement acceptable in our country.

Also, I seriously don't care if you can't get on board the atheist train, you're quite free to disagree. But we're not advertising to you, we're advertising to the people who want to meet other atheists and foster a sense of community that the freethinkers in this country lack.

[Stiker]

Wait, so what you're saying is you support state-sponsored religion, and we should tone down our message until you approve it? You want to censor people because they don't agree with you? How odd. And I don't care if our message would be tossed by Zoroastrianists, that dosen't make censorship of a minority group based on a theistic disagreement acceptable in our country.

Also, I seriously don't care if you can't get on board the atheist train, you're quite free to disagree. But we're not advertising to you, we're advertising to the people who want to meet other atheists and foster a sense of community that the freethinkers in this country lack.

Completely agree.

As I said earlier, government getting involved with religion is not a good thing. Everyone deserves a voice to be heard.

Plus, your beliefs can never be strengthened unless they are challenged. You can't grow unless you are able to see and understand all views.

[Neosutra]

The cross is a symbol of jesus's alledged sacrifice for mankind (although I think a soldiers death for his country is more real and admirable, but i digress), but it is also a symbol of the message of that specific religion itself. A message of salvation and love, but it also carries with it damnation and theocracy. That message is fine and dandy, but it becomes offensive when it is state sponsored. I have no problem with a cross in a church lawn, however I am horrified of a cross on the lawn of a court house.

[quannum]

it seems to me, when someone says "extremist" when referring to their own religion, that they are basically saying that they know that some/most of the fundamentals are wrong.

[Furtwangler]

it seems to me, when someone says "extremist" when referring to their own religion, that they are basically saying that they know that some/most of the fundamentals are wrong.

Not necessarily, said 'extremist' is just interpreting them incorrectly.

[Blarg]

Those who 'interpret incorrectly' also just so happen to be those who believe more of it. Would true interpretation then be to believe none of it?

[Neosutra]

And "correct" interpretation is completely different depending on what theist you ask.

Also, as Bill Maher would say: "Any person that believes in an invisible man in the sky that tells them not to touch themselves is an extremist".

[Eratosthenes]

you can still believe the truth is unknowable and believe in god because you do not need to know the truth in order to believe

So, you don't see a conflict when somebody who knows they can't draw a conclusion does it anyway?

[Demosthenes11]

So, you don't see a conflict when somebody who knows they can't draw a conclusion does it anyway?

do you get pissed at someone that looks down at their pile of change and says "I have about $3.50" ?

"THERE IS NO WAY YOU CAN KNOW THAT WHY WOULD YOU SAY THAT?"

It's not a rock solid conclusion of "I know for a fact it is this." It is more of "This is the evidence before me, this is my conclusion."

Please don't make this a normal religion debate because there are way too many here