What is this forum for: A Rant

[Goblinmonger]

I know this will piss some people off, but I need to say it and I hope a good discussion comes from it. I have decided that I am not going to go back and edit this. So there may be spelling errors, grammar errors, and word choice that I wish I hadn't used, but, hey, it's a rant.

:rant:

This forum is called Relgion/Theology. It is here for people to discuss religion. It is not called "Christianity is Groovy." It is not called "Don't Say Anything Bad About Anyone." It is "Religion/Theology." If you want to only hear good things about your religion and get warm fuzzies from like-minded people, then go to that specific religion's forum. I'm not mocking that process; I like to do it myself. Atheists/Agnostics is a cool place for me to hang out. I'm sure Christians like their forum. If you can't take the heat then don't come here. Go there and you will get all the warm fuzzies you need. I am sick and tired of people bitching about "Christian Bashing" anytime something is said that is negative about the religion. Suck it up for Christ's sake (pun intended). There are plenty of people in the world that were/are atheists and were pricks. Pol Pot was a complete bastard. Should I talk about how you are atheist bashing if you even mention his name. Grow up. This is a place for discussion about religion. It is not a back-slapping "atta boy" place. And that is as it should be. And I'll walk the walk, too. You don't like what I have said, have at it. I enjoy the discussion. I have no problem with people calling me out for my bullshit. I can be a prick at times. I know this. And more importantly I'm ready to defend what I think whereas too many people in here seem unwilling, unable, or inept at doing the same thing and would instead like to just bitch about "Christian Bashing" or hit the alert button or both. It's time to put on your big girl panties and face the real world. And if you can't handle that, then there are forums for that, too. Go there. I do when I need to get away from here.

:rant:

[sui generis]

1. I believe a thick skin is a requirement for happiness here

Unlike money, success, fame, and fortune, if you seek offense you will ALWAYS find it.

I am of the mind that real discussions of atheism have no place next to real discussions of christianity - they're polar. Besides a neutral explanation of each subjective worldview (without judgement of other worldviews), there's not really any consensus to reach.

From an academic perspective the study of belief systems does not require belief, though, and we should be able to discuss those things academically without giving or taking offense.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Goblinmonger]

3. You touch on something I didn't include in the rant

and that is the concept of "uppity atheists." Why is it that we are the thing that is "contrary to liberal democratic values"? Is it that you are tolerant of only those that are theist, but my thought do not garner the same protection? Is it that I voice my thoughts rather than keep them to myself in the midst of this great theist forum?

"outright made up shit, the lies, the forthright declarations of intolerance." Wow, I could lick the irony off of that statement like an ice cream cone.

I read the prejudice thread. You are misrepresenting. The point was that we are all prejudice. It is the nature of induction which is the main reasoning by which we think and learn as humans. The question becomes how we check that prejudice and how we act on it.

Secondly, there has never been a discussion where an atheist tells a theist that they really believe something (though theists do it to atheists all the time, again, ironically) But I have told people (hey, wasn't that you) that the belief of the church actually says something. That is different. Even you can realize that.

The "kumbaya moment" that you talk about interests me. You bitch about it when it happens. But then, during our apostate discussion, you used the fact that nobody else was jumping in as proof that I was wrong. Which one is it? Should be jump in and high five or not? Seems like you enjoy bitching about it either way.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Goblinmonger]

13. I said it was a rant, which seems to imply whining

Again, what is the made up stuff? Don't know if you ever told me that.

Second, I didn't chase you around. It was a sub-thread. I never said that you believed I was going to hell. I told you that the catholic church condemns apostates to hell. That was my position then, it is my position now. In case you forgot.

Apostasy = mortal sin
Dying with a mortal sin = hell

When have I ever complained about someone calling me out? Never. The problem I have with this rant is with people that do bitch about being called out. I have never asked for pity in this thread. I have never said I am oppressed. Stop looking for things that don't exist.

And if you are not a Christian, then you have a pretty big pair of balls to talk about all the shit you do like you are an authority. You are still pissing about the apostates in hell thing and yet of the two of us, I am the only one that has ever been Christian. Nice of you to tell me what my former religion believed. Seems like a nice bit of hypocrisy for you there.

[sui generis]

4. as I recall all sides are guilty here

I've seen complete assholery on both sides.

But I agree with the OP on this one. If one can't speak of one's feelings about religion here whether pro or con without being accused of "outright made up shit, the lies", then one should go participate in conversation with like minded people.

My personal thinking is intolerant of religion. I can give you a hundred essay reasons why I despise it, but that's not to say that I act on that intolerance, or that I consider someone's faith or lack of faith a point of judgement in someone's performance. If that honesty is considered "bigotry", then so be it.

Why come here? I would like to understand why the directive to proselytize exists. I would like to discuss the impact of charismatic christianity (or any religion) on politics. I want to understand those things to help prevent them from becoming entrenched in politics.

This isn't social hour for me here; and so people blowing up and posturing and taking and giving offense is just childish. I'm not a persecuted atheist even though there are people here who despise atheists, and I can't think of a single christian on DU who is persecuted either, except in their own mind. We're all adults here, not victims of words.

I don't think politics should have ANYTHING at all in the tiniest bit to do with religion, and I would think that even if I were a person of faith. That's what I'm here for - not to have a kumbaya, as you say, on religion or atheism.

[Inland]

9. No, if one can't come here without TELLING

outright bullshit, he shouldn't come here. There's no free fire zone for the made up stuff. If he doesn't like getting corrected and what's to be coddled, HE can go somewhere else.

My politics depends telling the truth about people, and not pissing off huge portions of the electorate out of a fun hobby.

[trotsky]

11. Who gets to decide what's "outright bullshit"?

Some folks right here in this forum would call the mere presence of atheists here "outright bullshit" - even if we didn't make any critical comments about religion. This is not the Inland party, this is the Democratic Party, and atheists get a voice too.

[moobu2]

5. “like calling religion a form of psychosis”

don’t think religion (Christianity for example) is always psychosis for all the believers, although it certainly is for some. It’s more like a mass delusion built on the psychotic fantasies and hallucinations of others.

for example..

Burning bushes talking to people.
People coming back to life after they’ve been dead for quite some time.
Hallucinations of winged characters visiting them in the night giving them messages from some higher being.
Large bodies of water splitting into, on command, allowing a mass of people to walk through.
Men walking on water.

And so forth.

Most people who say they believe such nonsense never claim to have personally witnessed anything remotely similar, so they couldn’t be “psychotic”. Religion is more like mass delusion.

[Inland]

19. You mean they are wrong.

But that isn't provocative, is it, calling believers "wrong"? Saying that their beliefs are baseless, wrong, even silly? They don't care that you think so, so it's gotta be racheted up a notch.

So it's got to be put in terms like "psychosis" or "delusion" that sound like a pyschological analysis. Psychosis for the saints, but the run of the mill believer, hey, just suffering from some sort of mass delusion. Different diagnosis, but same practical effect: nobody has to put up with something clinically abnormal like that, it doesn't matter if they fail to listen to you then, and they can be dismissed.

Well, if it isn't a provocation, it's not R & T. Just like I said.

[Goblinmonger]

24. OK, I'll bite

I'll make a distinction for you. I could go deeper, but this is a first reaction to your post.

You are wrong if you believe in something that isn't true.
You are delusional if you believe in something that isn't true but use that belief to create public policy, physcially harm someone else, or otherwise push that belief onto someone else.

In short, believe whatever the fuck you want in the privacy of your own home and/or church. Worship whatever make-believe fucking thing you can come up with. I could give a shit. Start using that to decide who you vote for, to take up my time at my front door trying to get me to believe your nonsense, to make laws and then we have a problem.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[arwalden]

6. Oh Man... It Must Be Difficult Being You.

[kwassa]

7. Too true.

It is about time I gave an "attaboy" to Inland.

It is a difference between the two sides, however, that the believers don't generally go around slapping each other on the back in agreement with one another, but many atheists often do. And, yes, this practice is both tiresome and adds nothing to the discusson of any substance.

One of those culture differences between the two sides. Perhaps there is more unity and agreement among the atheists than there is among the believers.

In general, I think much of the trouble comes from people on both sides who haven't been edjumacated in this forum yet as to the arguments that have already taken place, ad nauseum, and think that they are posing an incredibly original argument when in fact it is probably both extremely superficial and discussed to death already. It is a type of newbie affect in this forum.

I've been around long enough to see things go past so many times that I don't even engage much of it. Been there, done that.

[trotsky]

10. Backslapping

Perhaps if you were a member of a minority group that has the chance of losing friends, family, and even jobs if we speak up about our lack of religious beliefs, you'd understand where this "backslapping" comes from. Many of us don't get chances to speak our minds in the "real world," and so you'll have to pardon the camaraderie here. You get to backslap for a couple of hours every Sunday, with hundreds of your fellow believers, affirming your mutual belief that you're right. And then come here and tell atheists they're wrong.

[arwalden]

12. Atta-Boy!

"thumbsup:

[Goblinmonger]

15. High-five n/t

[Desertrose]

16. Oh dear...is it time to call the "waaa-ambulance"?

.....poor poor persecuted minority. (cue tiny violins)

Get over it. You're not the only persecuted minority on this planet -not even talking religion here.

Why the big whiny deal if others tell you you're wrong. Don't you feel comfortable in your belief ( or is that "nonbelief...I'm never sure)?? .....yet somehow you manage to turn that all around and tell everyone else they are wrong. Hmmm...
Well of course, that makes perfect sense...do just what you condemn others for doing.

So because you don't get to "speak your minds" in the real world you naturally come here to "get it all out of your system",eh?




BTW- good rant Inland.

[trotsky]

17. Whoa, where did that come from?

A drive-by from Rosie?

Did I say atheists were the only minority? Nope. Don't know why you attacked me for that.

This isn't about others telling us we're wrong, this is about the real-life prejudice that atheists face when they "come out" to friends and family. I can handle being told I'm wrong, I don't care if someone thinks I'm going to hell, but many Christians (and members of other religions) have a huge problem with non-believers, and you bet your ass it affects our lives. If you don't care about the atheist perspective, fine. Doesn't mean that we don't have one, that's at least as valid as yours, though.

BTW - looks like we aren't the only ones who engage in a little bit of backslapping. Heh.

[Goblinmonger]

18. So if I say what you said

to a Christian in another thread, you will have no problem with that. You will come to my support and let everyone know it is good to say that. Nice to know. I'll be looking for your support in this forum from now on. It's great when atheists and theists can agree on something.

And how many times do atheists need to say that we, definitionally, do not have a belief system in god? I mean seriously, if I told you that you worshipped Wotan and you told me you worshipped Jesus, how many times would you take someone telling you that you worshipped Wotan before you got a little pissed?

[Evoman]

31. Idea

You know what you should do. Next time someone is complaining about christian bashing, you should cut and paste one of these type of responses and see what happens. Hehe...it might open some eyes.

Evoman

[Inland]

14. I wonder if it's a lack of any institution.

YOU'VE got CHURCH to have a reinforcing moment with true believers. But I sure don't know where militant atheists get together and slap each others' back, besides here.

Unfortunately, it seems that some atheists don't have any activity, or any insitution, outside of conflict with believers. Instead of having a bake sale and congratulating themselves on sending the kids to youth camp, they engage in hostilities with believers and congratulate themselves on the conflict.

[trotsky]

20. What's a "militant atheist"?

Could you define that term, please? Because the only pattern I've been able to discern among the people who use it, is that it's referring to an atheist who volunteers an opinion about religion.

[kwassa]

21. This might be true

If being an atheist is being defined by the void called lack of belief, then there is nothing to draw them together other than confronting believers. There is no other common purpose than that.

[Goblinmonger]

22. Are you Inland's lap dog today?

Anyway. How nicely judgemental of you. "Void"? Nice word choice. Fits nicely into your theistic world view of where we will end up for sure (yes, that jab is in there for Inland, but you gotta admit, that word choice does ring of hell--if you didn't mean that, deconstruction analysis would say that it was subconscious).

"Nothing to draw us together other than confronting believers" Yeah, we do that all the time in the real world. Trotsky and I get together for some weekend fun of breaking into churches and shitting on altars. Give me a break. Do you even know what happens if we tell friends we are atheist much less "confronting" random believers? I am quite sure that would be a recipe for me getting my ass kicked by some fundie redneck up here in wisconsin (notice I didn't say all Christians would do that). How about getting together to discuss the world and gain some knowledge based on reasoning and fact instead of faith? Is that concept so foreign to you that you cannot wrap your head around it?

The funny part is that you will probably never fully realize the bigotry toward atheists that is present in your post.

On edit: Trotsky, was it this Sunday or next Sunday that we were set to get drunk and masturbate on the tabernacle in St. Paul?

[trotsky]

26. Gotta be next Sunday.

I'm booked this weekend, Seventh-Day Adventists on Saturday and the Evangelical Free Church down the road from me on Sunday.

Fascinating, isn't it, that the people who couldn't be more judgmental about atheists and what it is we "believe" are the same ones who so loudly condemn us for supposedly judging and slandering Christians. :eyes:

[Goblinmonger]

29. that's fine

because I have sacramental wine to piss in on Sunday and some ham to add in to the buffet at the local temple on Sunday.

Yeah, the irony is astounding.

[kwassa]

40. Nice rant. Now, would you like to talk about something?

"Void" isn't a judgment, it is a description, really.

How would you describe a lack of belief as anything other than a void? If it isn't a belief, it is nothing. A lack. A void. If it is a belief, it is something.

You completely misunderstood, or choose to misunderstand my post.

Where exactly is the bigotry in my post?

goblinmonger:
"How about getting together to discuss the world and gain some knowledge based on reasoning and fact instead of faith? Is that concept so foreign to you that you cannot wrap your head around it?"

Everyone does this, though. There is nothing unique to atheists in using reasoning and fact. It happens everywhere, in all kinds of groups.

[Inland]

23. It might explain something.

One would hope that there WOULD BE a more purpose. Yet, there seems to be a more concerted effort in being "not something" and finding nothing in common with believers, so much so that it's tough to get a concession that there really are liberal democratic believers from the militant fundie athiests. If the concession comes that there are believers who are liberal democrats, then as a price for being on DU they get they have to eat whatever shit sandwich gets offered with a smile, the kind of shit nobody else has to eat for the JOY of being on DU. The OP was basically such.

It's really a shame that in the same section that atheism is defined as "not believing", it sometimes going so far as to sound as if some say "I don't believe in anything". It's the latter, which I think is just a way to score debating points but sure sounds like a form of nihilism, that makes it seem empty aside from the conflict.

[Goblinmonger]

25. Nice high fives between you and kwassa

I thought you gave that stuff up for lent? :rofl: I would never come into the Christian forum and make anyone eat a shit sandwich. That would be rude. But come into R/T and it is a different story.

But sorry for being an "uppity atheist" Inland, I know you hate that.

BTW, did you ever define what a militant atheist is? Cause it is sounding more and more like you just mean one that speaks their mind.

[kwassa]

41. Inland and I are studying you guys for backslapping technique

Have to learn it somewhere.

[Evoman]

27. Let me see if I can remember

A militant atheist is a person who straps a bomb to themselves and kills innocent people. Oh wait..no it isn't. A militant atheist is a person who attempts to get their beliefs made into laws. No...wrong definiton. Hmn...I got it! A militant atheist is a person who goes around killing gays. No...no..hmm..
Ahh....A militant atheist is a person who collects lots of guns and goes on christian shooting sprees. Huh..no, thats never happened.

Here let me check the dictionary.

Oh, I got it.

A militant atheist is an atheist who expresses an unfavourable opinion about religion on a discussion forum which was designed for that very reason.

Thats a bit anti-climactic

[trotsky]

32. If ever there was a post worthy of a backslap,

this is it. Thank you.

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[moobu2]

34. Wasn’t Jesus more like a leftist communist

Than today’s Christians are led to believe by church pastors? Jesus was head of a small community of followers who were, first of all, devout law abiding Jews (not Christians). But my point is that they shared all property between them -food, housing and so forth. Wasn’t Jesus living and advocating social justice and a utopian society where neighbors loved, cared and fed each other much like any typical communist would advocate today?

I seriously doubt Jesus would even be a Christian if he were to return today and see what his life has been twisted into.

[trotsky]

36. Yeah, pretty much.

Plus for some reason, the people who bring up Stalin to bash atheists like to attribute every death in the Soviet Union to him, as if he personally pulled the trigger to execute everyone. What they fail to realize is that while Stalin certainly had many of his political rivals killed, the vast majority of deaths during his regime were due to the piss-poor management of the country's economy. In other words, it's about as valid as blaming FDR for the deaths during the Great Depression.

Won't stop them from bringing up the boogeyman, though.

[kwassa]

43. For someone named Trotsky, a study in Russian history is requested

trotsky:
"What they fail to realize is that while Stalin certainly had many of his political rivals killed, the vast majority of deaths during his regime were due to the piss-poor management of the country's economy. "

This is completely false. Stalin actively killed people in his country, through the great purges of the 1930s, through the forced starvation of the Ukranian kulaks, where six million starved, to the gulags where millions disappeared forever, to forced labor projects of various kinds that carried with them huge death tolls. The estimates vary, but the death toll median runs about 20 million.

Here is a highly detailed version of things:
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm#Stalin

This does not include the 20 million that died during WWII due to Stalin's complete misunderstanding of Hitler and lack of defense preparation.

And Stalin had Trotsky killed in Mexico City with an icepick.

[trotsky]

44. For someone who didn't know that my choice of username...

had nothing to do with the historical Trotsky, this reply is expected.

Oddly, your examples merely served to back up my point - his incompetence with the economy (and the war) is what led to the deaths of so many people. Whether he was an atheist is irrelevant to those examples - he was a terrible leader.

[Inland]

45. LIHOP or MIHOP? nt

[Goblinmonger]

35. You really want to argue Stalin?

I mean, OK, I'll take him because I have to, I guess. But did he ever declare he was an atheist? Got a source on that?

Oh, and you may want to look to the Orthodox church as the source of his black and white view of the world. Why would that influence him, you may ask? Because he went to seminary.

But hey, that's fine. Stalin is my asshole to deal with as an atheist. Are you ready to play this game? For how long? 'Cause here's my first entry (I'll save the best for last unlike you).



Christian, asshole, sending thousands to their death as we speak.

Your turn.

[Evoman]

37. Oh, good one. Hit and Run, huh Inland?

I don't get it. Why do we alway have to play these stupid games. Is Stalin all you have? Stalin and pol pot. Pol pot and Stalin. Geez, I wonder if there is more than two examples of people who have strapped a bomb to their chest or blown up a building. Not only that, but by responding to my post the way you did, you basically just defended militant theists. If your point was to show that Stalin was a miitant atheist, then by calling us militant atheist, you have basically just said that we are as bad as Stalin.

If I were to call every christian person in this forum a militant christian because they are arguing with me, and then say that Hitler was a militant christian, would I not then be saying that all christians are nazis or Hitler sympathizers? Would that be cool with you? I don't share any characteristics with Stalin except that neither of us believe in god. I have never been a communist, I have never been the leader of the soviet union, I have never been to the same non-church as Stalin. I have also never advocated killing christians, nor have I made people conform to my beliefs.

I did not equate christians with Hitler in this thread or any other. I have never referred to you as a militant theist. I have never stopped you from expressing your beliefs (though I have no problem arguing with you..thats fairly easy). I have never told you to shut up. I have never ignored you, despite the fact that I basically disagree with everything you have ever said. What you just posted actually disgusts me.

Evoman

[Goblinmonger]

38. Sorry. Couldn't wait for my second entry.

WAAAAYYY Christian. Innocent III: "Hand me my wallet. It's the one that says 'Crusadin' Mother Fucker' on it."

Goblinmonger 2 Inland 1

[Goblinmonger]

39. I just can't stop myself--My third entry

William Stoughton. Prosecutor and judge at the Salem Witch Trials. Appointed because of his legal training? Nope, nice guess though. Appointed because of his Christian theological training. Good Christian of his time. Gigantic asshole. Sent nearly 20 innocent people to their death.

Goblinmonger 3 Inland 1

You better get going buddy.

[Evoman]

42. He won't respond

He's pulling what I call an "O'Reilly"

CUT HIS MIKE. CUT HIS MIKE.

Your being ignored. heh

[Moderator]

46. Locking

Although we realize this is a rant, this post is flamebait.