I'm so sick of the religion bashing on here

[davidinalameda]

you have posters on here that use Palin and her church as tools to bash anyone who believes

there's a thread on speaking in tongue and the original poster is calling her psychotic because she speaks, or has spoken in tongues

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6968427

this is news to me-I know that speaking in tongues is common in some Pentecostal churches but i have yet to hear that Palin has experienced this

these posters are so anti-religious it's not funny; they attack anyone of faith and make fun of them

these people are the reason that I will not donate to DU-my star was given to me

I've alerted on these posts time and time again and they are rarely ever pulled

[Kajsa]

1. I agree, Dwickham, and it bothers me also.

We have some great people here, some not so great and everyone
in between.

There is a small but extremely vocal faction of DU that is, what is the term
coined here?- jihadist atheists.

They are by no means the majority among non- believers, but they shout it from the rooftops
ad nauseum just how messed up we, people of faith are.
You hear it all, the "fairytales" " make believe God" " speaking in tongues", etc.
It's a friggin obsession with them.

The only thing that separates them from the Fundies is the belief/non- belief identity, imho.

Keep on alerting, as will I when it goes over the top.

Hang in there.

:pals:

[Hidden Stillness]

2. The Same Abusive Attacks, Over and Over--Pretending to be "Debate"

Hi. I am also glad that you posted this here; I have just started thinking this evening of starting a thread on this topic here, and here it is. This is a long-standing problem on DU, and of course, they do nothing about it.

The most recent one for me was on a still-current thread on General Forum, that was a good thread but is not now, on "How Anti-Intellectualism is Destroying America." There were many posts giving lots of opinions on many different angles of the problem, and I posted one with references to media, electronic devices, etc., taking people away from reading, etc., and referred to the phony way some of the posters were taking their standard tack of blaming Christians, when that could not possibly explain the whole problem. The thread continued with other good responses to the subject, then suddenly one of these posters who never seems to post anything with any thought to it at all, launched an attack on me that had no relation to anything, but hatred of Christians as a target group. Claiming that "Christianism" is most of the problem, this idiot then claimed I "fervently believe in an invisible sky daddy with absolutely zero proof," that I am "the problem," that I claim anyone who doesn't agree with me is "going to Hell," blah blah, if they do anything I don't like, and all the rest of the usual tirade, (from the people who claim they invented logic and science). I am not going to bother to respond, because it will only escalate, as always. It only shows yet again, that the most intolerant group on this website, I think, are the atheists. They fume the most hostile stereotypes at you--never having ASKED what any of your opinions actually are--with some of the most offensive presumptions, like Christians who "do not think," "damn everyone to Hell," "follow authority," "believe the Bible literally," like these idiots are just decades, even a century, behind popular mainstream Christian thought. Worst of all, they quote, word-for-word, these asshole atheists and their stupid hateful jargon, ("religiously insane," calling ALL Christians "fundies," like they make NO distinction at all, etc., which is just so stupid), all while making an argument against "literalism" and "following authority"!

Have you noticed that on DU, when you quote a Bible passage and give chapter and verse, sometimes this website puts an offensive "happy face" where one of the numbers is supposed to be, and which you did not put there? It is DU's way of slapping Christians in the face. There are also at least two posters who do little other than post anti-Christian hate-threads, yet they are never even warned about anything. Try that with any other group. I don't know if the atheists here are just more stupid and hysterical than others generally, or if this is the increasing viciousness of society, but it is really getting depressing, and there seems little or no change or improvement on any of it.

[Rabrrrrrr]

3. "DU's way of slapping Christians in the face" - ??? - bullshit.

Sorry, but that line is pure ignorant bullshit.

The problem is that a lot of smiley codes are a colon and a number, so when you cite chapter and verse, more often than not is one is posting a smiley code, since chapter-verse citings always include a colon followed by a number.

I agree with the rest of your post, but please - let us not seek for conspiracy where it clearly and utterly does not exist. Makes us all look like fucking morons.

If you want to make sure your citation remains, put a space after the colon.

And so Luke 4:7 becomes Luke 4: 7

[Hidden Stillness]

4. Thank You for the Reply--I Did Not Even Realize That

Wow, that is really wild--I actually did not know that. I'm so glad you responded to that part of the message specifically, because I do not spend a lot of time on the computer, and did not even know that that was a "computer code" that makes a smiley-face picture. I was not being conspiratorial, exactly, but just pissed off when over and over, it does that and I didn't know why--and when often, it doesn't do it! That actually clears it up for me; put a space, which as you know, is not standard. I'm also glad you put that you agreed with the rest, so I know what I'm dealing with here. I think there is a lot of atheist intolerance that is not dealt with on this website, but know I understand that the other thing is not it at all; thank you.

[Kat45]

5. Yup, there are a lot of rabid atheists on DU.

I can't quite understand why they seem so obsessed with the subject of religion; I would think they'd ignore it.

[R. P. McMurphy]

6. There is also a lot of intolerance for people who...

suggest a more middle-of-the-road poiltical philosophy. Also, people who are new to the site or people who may not be as proficient on the computer who make the mistake of asking a neophyte question are often treated shamefully.

There are a lot of good people here but there are also some who are incredibly impatient, arrogant, smug and narrow-minded. I just donated to the DU to post in this thread. I'm hoping I've found a subgroup where things can be discussed on a less-obnoxious and more mature level.

Dwickham - I hope you don't mind this tangential vent in your thread.

[hvn_nbr_2]

7. If you think they're tough on religion and make inaccurate conflations...

of all religion with Palin's church, try advocating vitamins in the health forum!

Not disagreeing with you; just saying we have lots of fanatics about lots of things.

[Az]

8. Some perspective

(FYI I am an atheist. I like to think I am a friendly atheist. But if my presence here and advice are unwelcome please let me know and I will desist)

When people experience religious acts such as those exhibited by some Pentecostal factions it can strike one as very odd behavior. Extreme even. The fact that it does not constitute insanity and is well within the range of explainable human behavior does not change the fact that people do not experience it every day. And when you combine this with the fact that it is based on ideas that the observer may not agree with they often come to the conclusion that it is insane. At the very least it is shocking. This is the nature of ignorance.

Unfortunately the right has dragged religion into the political arena. They often seek to place their faith and beliefs on display as a sort of badge to garner votes unwarranted by secular positions. In doing so they expose their faith to political examination. Any oddity that would cause discomfort to voters becomes grist for the mill due to this. This is why for a very long time fundamentalist sects tended to avoid politics. Because it has a contaminating effect on their faith. But with the right dragging Jesus into the center of the public square and demanding that he be acknowledged they bring about the corruption themselves.

Unfortunately because the more moderate theists tend to keep their faith out of the public arena the only voice heard are the trumpeting of the fundamentalists and those with an axe to grind. Because the moderates and left leaning individuals recognize the peril of mixing their faith in their politics this goes unchallenged (relatively speaking). So those who do not share Christian beliefs do not distinguish between the puppets of the right and other more tolerant representations of Christian faith.

Those who do not share Christian beliefs feel as though they are under attack and that their rights are being stripped away. And that is something worth fighting for. Unfortunately many Christians who are on the wall defending our rights along with us are caught in their broadside attacks because they do not see or experience any significant presence of moderate or liberal Christians arguing for tolerance. And the matter becomes even murkier when the left attempts to raise the voice of tolerance in the name of Christianity because it ties politics and religion together again. Its a conundrum as to how to deal with this. If a liberal Christian raises their voice to extol the value of their faith in the political arena as a counter to the right they draw the ire of those they are in essence defending because of the perceived dangers of mixing religion and politics. But if they do not oppose the right then the right effectively speaks for all Christians.

You have my empathy in regards to the perception of bashing that you and your fellow Christians receive here. I do not envy you the matter of charting a path through the thorny minefield that is mixing religion and politics. I cannot help but see my path as easier because my beliefs and politics are both secular in nature. Thus I do not have to walk between two worlds. And I appreciate the wisdom of those believers that can see the value of secular governance and the patience to walk their path.

[Kajsa]

16. Thank you,Az.

You have an open mind and an open heart.

:)

I hear what you are saying, and you've made many
good points here.

Thank you.

:D

[JerseygirlCT]

19. Coming way late to this, AZ, and don't even know if you'll see it

but your analysis makes a great deal of sense.

[MrsBrady]

9. fwiw

my husband is an atheist, and I am not.
{Personally, i think he just doesn't get the idea that it's man that does bad things, not God.
He thinks that if God existed that bad things would not happen. I told him it didn't work like that...anyway (didn't mean to go off on that one right now).}

In fact, he's stopped his Christian bashing (at least around me).
I pointed out to him that I was Christian, and that I was not to the "right", so he needed to not talk that way around me.

And in fact, before we got married (we've been married about 18 months), he was trying to convince me that I was not seeing things rightly because I believed in God.
(I couldn't be atheist now even if I wanted to be. I've had a few "burning bush" experiences, and you just can't go back after that. In fact, I never planned to be a part of organized religion.)
I told him that he could have his beliefs and I could have mine...but I would not "try to convert him" (in fact my church prohibits that because we know you can't force people to believe). But I also told him I would not tolerate any kind of prejudice at home or in my country...and that everyone's ideas had to be welcome so that NO one person or group could be "made wrong". I told him don't make me choose between him and my God, because he wouldn't probably like the result. I wouldn't do that to him, and he was not being fair. And to his credit, he did come around. And he apologized for trying to put the pressure on me to believe like him. I think he realized he was being unreasonable. I think it even surprised him that he could be so one sided.

Now, having said that...all of us Christians know that even within our group, not all of us even belive the same.

I don't like religious intolerance of any form. I won't go into my specific beliefs on a public forum like this, because again, I don't want to give the appearance of proselytizing.

But what does REALLY bother me are people who call themselves Christian, but seem to completely ignore the actual teachings of Christ. Do they actually try to live their life like the suggestions on the Sermon on the Mount? I mean, I didn't read anything about Christ saying take rights away from people, hate them, scorn them, put them in their place. Are they actually giving to the poor? Are they trying to feed people? Are they trying to heal the sick? And don't even get me started about Bush when he kept saying we were justified in going to war because "eye for an eye". I mean, come OOOONNNNN...has he ever read Mathew 5-38,39? I mean geeeeeeeeez. I'm not a perfect Christian, but at least i TRY. I can have faith all day, but have I tried to BE a Christian, not just say I am.
And to me, that means LOVING EVERYONE...even when I don't want to. Still working on that one.

ok that's my two cents.

[Critters2]

45. And a fine $.02 it is! Thanks! And welcome to the Progressive Faith group!

I was married to a UU once upon a time. He was a Christian Universalist, but his UU buddies were mostly atheist or agnostic humanists. I put up with a lot of "you're too smart to be a Christian" crap, until I'd finally had enough and would confront them with their intolerance. That usually ended it.

What was interesting to me was that my husband was Christian, but UU, so they were okay with him. It was my belonging to an explicitly Christian church that seemed to annoy them.

[TreasonousBastard]

10. I've railed against the militant atheists here for years, but...

little seems to stop them. They don't get that they are just the other side of the fundie coin. Some of them are thick or deliberately disruptive-- after telling me what I believe, they screamed at my even mentioning definitions taken directly from atheist websites and demanded I not tell them what they believed. Go figure.

A few have been nuked after a bit of real nastiness, and that calmed down at least one group that had a fun time coordinating attacks on certain threads and posters, but they were a specific problem, not the general background noise of some fanatically hating religion in any and all of its forms. And the crying about how THEY are discriminated against makes me gag.

I still think that a lot of them see DU as a safe place to vent, so they go overboard. You get tombstoned a lot faster by saying your Lord and Savior forbids you to have an abortion than you do making fun of that belief.

But, hate speech is hate speech. I don't think I have ever seen a post calling atheists idiots.

[elocs]

11. Because you will never see an idiot who is an atheist held up to represent all atheists.

That is routinely done with Christians where the fundamentalists and the evangelicals and extemists are held up to represent all Christians and so that gives license to bash and ridicule all Christians. The hate of Bushco and the rightwing hardly holds a candle to the bitter vitriol shown to Christianity here at DU.

[Peggesis1]

14. "Militant" athiests often...

..are, in my experience, people beginning their recovery from a scary or even abusive religious past. Some of them swing from militant fundie Christianity to militant athiesm without putting much thought into it.

Of course, other atheists are like our friend who posted above, thoughtful and compassionate. These folks are our progressive allies. Thank you, Az!

Occasionally, I'll bother to tell a fundie militant atheist that I don't believe in the god that he doesn't believe in either. Sometimes I'll patiently explain that no one "stole" Christmas from the pagans. Sometimes I'll just let their posts go because they can't hear anything that would challenge them.

It's good to find a home here where I can discuss these things. Other than the ignorance and meanspiritedness of a few fundie militant athiests, I find this a very welcoming place. Most athiests I know are not like that, and they, more often than not, have had problems with discrimination themselves.

I know of at least one case of a wonderful progressive mayoral candidate who was defeated in large part because he was an atheist. Some people in this day and age simply will not vote for someone who openly acknowledges that they do not have a religious faith. That's a terrible problem that cost, among many other things, my city having a wonderful mayor. (I won't tell you what we ended up with instead. Not good.)

[DainBramaged]

12. Christian bashing, bloodsport on DU, but God forbid you bash anyone for their

lack of belief, their lifestyle, or their race and it's instaban.


Hypocrisy.

[DollyM]

13. Sociology 101 should include Christianity . . .

Oh wait, it does, maybe these people just slept through class that day! I get sick of Christians getting bashed on DU also. It is my belief system that makes me a better person and gets me through the day. Just because someone else chooses not to understand it, doesn't mean they have the right to go bashing it. Christianity is a culture in itself with its own language and if you do not understand that culture or language, don't throw stones. You are right , it is hypocracy to bash Christians for their beliefs just because someone doesn't understand them. What is that big word we learned in sociology . . . lets see if I can spell it, ethnocentrism. We can't judge a culture based upon our own beliefs or lack therof or by the standards of our own culture.

[Peggesis1]

15. ..."It's what they think they know that just ain't so"

Yeah, you're right. Sometimes with militant fundie athiests, though, they *think* they know the culture and language of Christianity. Some have been raised in Christian families. Some haven't had any exposure to anything labeled Christianity except the way the popular culture serves it up. Some think that the TV preachers speak for us. For some, we are the stand ins for parents they don't dare to insult.

A distinct disadvantage for progressive Christians is that there are few places in the popular culture where people see us. Dr. Martin Luther King has been turned into a poor imitation of himself. Can you name another famous progressive Christian these people would have heard of?

What causes the most trouble in the world? "It ain't what you don't know...it's what you think you do know that just ain't so..."

Just my two-cents.

Oh, and MERRY CHRISTMAS!

[Lydia Leftcoast]

17. Sigh, they're at it again

:-(

[JerseygirlCT]

18. It's so tiresome

and predictable. And childish.

There are few indulging in this who have any depth of information on the topic(s). Usually the same old knee-jerk responses, again and again and again.

[davidinalameda]

20. Just put another one on ignore

I'm so freaking sick of these people

[JerseygirlCT]

21. I'm considering it for the first time ever

I hate to do it, but I'm so tired of the same arguments and the nasty tone. Why is it impossible to disagree civilly? Why the name-calling and finger-pointing, and stereotyping?

[davidinalameda]

22. I put two people on ignore during the height of the Warren issue

and I just put another on today, actually back on ignore

that poster is a hard-core leftist who is quite vocal about her support for Hamas in the current conflict but she's comes across as a hard-core atheist who blames pretty much everything on religion

she has some serious issues and I'm tired of her attacks

she'll never be kicked off the site because it's okay to attack people of faith on here

[JerseygirlCT]

23. Well, that's the other issue currently that's causing me agita

And I think there's a link, as you show... simplistic, one-sided, black and white thinking. "Religion is bad" "Israel is bad"

Therefore, Hamas must be a bunch of freedom fighters and we should all fall in line and support whatever they do to fight the big bad Israelis... Stupid. Just stupid.

Same with religion - it's just evil, and the cause of all evil on the planet, and those superstitious idiots who claim a belief are just holding mankind back from truly evolving into the great thinking atheists we all should be.

:sarcasm:

[regnaD kciN]

76. I just used my first-ever "unrecommend"...

...on one of the most amazingly brain-dead bits of religion-bashing I've ever seen. Part of this "logic" included, and I kid you not, something like "Don't say Christians are good people, if 78% of this country is Christian, that means 78% of all the evil done in this country is done by Christians" and concluded that this proves "Christianity is a disgusting piece of shit." (The only difference between my summary and the original is that my grammar is correct -- the original had so many errors, I first thought it might be the work of a Freeper mole)

Hmmm...Democrats are currently a majority of this country, so I guess a majority of all the evil done in this country is done by Democrats, so..." :crazy:

[GirlAfire]

79. Will Anyone...?

...be so kind as to post here (or PM) the name of "the usual suspects." I'm new, and I don't really know, just yet, which posters enjoy the God- or Christian-bashing. So I don't know which ones to ignore. Or do you just come by these nasty posts while browsing any of the boards?

[Critters2]

84. Staying out of the Religion/Theology forum is the first, and most important step. nt

[jwirr]

87. I do not put them on ignore because of the simple fact that when

not bashing religion they often have good ideas and interesting posts. When the bashing starts I exit the post.

[rrneck]

24. I was a

liberal tractor jockey in the south until me, my guns and my accent went to graduate school and got an art degree in the north. I've been called everything in the book by everyone from both sides of the issue. It isn't fun. But then again, I feel like I have gained a lot of perspective, even at the price of a thrashing about the head and shoulders.

Right now there are a lot of religious jerks out there who are giving religion a huge black eye. They are damaging the very warp and weft of this country and have been for several decades. I have to admit that I have very little tolerance for organized religion in general for that reason. But I also have to admit that, while they seem to be the majority right now, they won't be forever. The notorious Charles Colson once said (as I recall, this is a paraphrase), "Churches are either being corrupted or persecuted, and right now they are in a corruption phase". That is not to imply that all churches are corrupt, or all people of faith mindless sheep brainwashed by corrupt organizations. But enough of them are to make everybody look bad.

Does that mean that it makes sense to judge organized religion obsolete, unworkable, useless or just plain wrong? Of course not. It is impossible to be human and not have faith. Impossible. Where people of similar understanding of their faith gather, they will create a religion. It is as fundamental to humanity as breathing.

If I could offer some explanation for the guff people of faith get from those who think they don't have it, try to remember that atheists have been a persecuted minority in this country since its founding. This appears to be a sort of haven for them. You're gonna have to listen to a lot of crap. But I would like to think that's not an entirely bad thing. We, to my mind, should have our beliefs challenged. Religion, to my mind, should challenge us more than anything else. Especially our own religion. And we should challenge it right back. As far as I am concerned religion is not a panacea, a refuge, or any source of comfort at all. Those are too easily turned into products. Religion is hard work, if it's done right. It's a fair bet the more uncomfortable it is, the better it's working.

At least that's my two cents. Now if you'll excuse me I'll just put on my asbestos underwear...

[kwassa]

25. well, I bashed back at the religious bashing and killed a thread in the lounge

I didn't mean to, I was hoping for a good argument.

It started off with an OP about the worst invention in mankind. The author's opinion was that religion was the worst invention, and he is an author I respect on other topics. The usual folks came out of the woodwork, I proceeded to argue, and they apparently couldn't rebut.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

26. I just saw that thread

Ugh. It's the kind of ignorance I used to see in Oregon a lot, although since 2/3 of Oregonians have no religious affiliation and 17% are self-declared atheists, people assume that you're irreligious unless you say otherwise, and it's no big deal. I never felt as attacked in 19 years of living in Oregon as I have on DU. The two largest non-Catholic churches in Portland were Unitarian and Episcopal, so the whole climate was pretty liberal, but on the whole, most people knew nothing about religion.

Two striking examples of ignorance: I was invited to a Thanksgiving dinner, and someone asked me if I had slept in that morning. I told her that I had had to get up early because my choir was singing at the 10AM service. Her response: "I didn't know churches were open on Thanksgiving."

A couple of years later, I was scheduled to help arrange coffee hour on Easter, so I went to the local Fred Meyer store's bakery section on Holy Saturday to see if they had any hot cross buns. I didn't see any on display, and I asked the young man behind the counter. His response: "No, Passover was last week."

I'm not making these two examples up.

Now take that kind of ignorance and stir in a media culture that spotlights only the charlatans and crazies.

[kwassa]

27. Why is ignorance about religion considered a virtue by progressives?

and with what other subject is it acceptable and normal to express bigoted and uninformed opinions?

and to be proud of such ignorance? So many do it on this forum.

It is an interesting anomaly.

[elocs]

28. Anti religious bigotry is worn as a badge of honor by far too many here at DU.

It seems they believe it somehow establishes their credentials as a Liberal. Their vitriol against religion goes so far over the line that it makes one believe they are nurturing some bitterness in their hearts. I see these people as being both sad and pathetic.

[JerseygirlCT]

29. I find it sort of funny that the same people who nearly break their arms

patting themselves on the back for their adherence to strict "rationality" (that is, bigotry against any and all religious belief) often do so based on a stunning degree of ignorance.

[polmaven]

30. Since the "Warren affair"

it does seem to be open season on religion and on people of faith. How liberal or conservative we, as individuals, are apparently makes no difference. They don't even care to KNOW if there are liberal churches, synagogues, etc.

The pride taken in making slurs about religion in general is astounding. There is absolutely no attempt to be the least bit sensative toward the people of faith at DU.

We used to see it less frequently, but now it is running rampant.

[Kajsa]

31. You make a valid point there, Polmaven.

"They don't even care to KNOW if there are liberal churches, synagogues, etc. "

That is the trademark of a bigot.

Like I said before, the extreme atheist jihadists remind me of Fundies
in so many way.

[polmaven]

32. And now it isn't being

confined to the Atheist/Agnostic FORUM anymore!

There is a new one today in GD. The ONLY reason for the thread is to bash religion. There are no political or current events issues...only religion.


It is really now going completely unchecked.

'Course, if one of them should "drop in" here, and see THIS post, I'm quite sure it would be deleted in a minute!

[Kajsa]

33. NO, it's been allowed in GD as long

as I can remember.

Did you see the outrage by some yesterday,
that the US Airways plane landing on the
Hudson was being called a miracle?

Yes, calling it a miracle pissed some of them off.

Criminey- I've almost laughed at that one.

How friggin nit picky, so what's the big deal?,
can they get!

Who CARES what the hell it was called?!?

It was an incredible landing done by the most skilled pilot
I've ever seen
AND

it was a miracle, too, ihmo.

[JerseygirlCT]

34. Discrimination!

Someone used a word sometimes used in a religious context! Can you believe that even happened?!!!

This is hugh!


I know. I saw that, too. Geez, louise.

What I just cannot understand is why any mention of religion is seen as some sort of affront to them. Private people, newscasters, whatever - to some of people, any hint that there are religious people out there, any hint of religion's existence... that's a personal affront to them.

They need to get the heck over themselves, and begin to face the world as it is. Then start acting like grownups when they demand their own rights. Tolerance has to go both ways. Secular does not mean atheist.

[Kajsa]

35. Right you are, Jerseygirl!

This ' no mention of anything remotely connected with faith'
just isn't real.

[JerseygirlCT]

36. Honestly

I'm among the first to scream when I see real discrimination, or when I see the creep of religious preference or influence into gov't. I understand that in the larger society, it's got to be tough to hold beliefs outside the majority. I don't like the assumption that Christianity or Christians are the defaults, that everyone ought to just bow to that...

In short, I'm definitely not the enemy. I suspect almost all of us fall into that category, too. So it's just really hurtful and tiresome to be treated as such all the time. And treated in just the way that some complain they're treated IRL.

[Meshuga]

37. The thing is...

We all have our way to see the world and to process what we experience. We all give meaning to what is around us. If one believes the plane landing on the Hudson River was a miracle, or no miracle was involved in the event, that should not be the end of the world or be a reason for overreaction. I personally think the reaction to people believing in a miracle are excessive while I don't believe it to be a miracle in the religious sense. The people who demean a believer for his/her world model (as being full of fantasy and silly superstitions) forget their own "silly" ways of giving meaning to things they see and experience.

For example, if a person perceives an event as a miracle or evidence of the supernatural there are many who will imply that it is the wrong way to perceive such event. Don't get me wrong, I believe an atheist has the right to express why (in his/her own world view) he/she doesn't find belief to be useful. Some might not like the point of view and see it as bashing but it is a position they hold and they should not apologize for their lack of belief. But my beef is with the ones who don't seem to think that believers should not believe. The reaction to the "airplane miracle" is an example of that.

Our brains could be the culprit in how we process our experiences and believers could be living a fantasy. That's fine and dandy but if that is the case then aren't we all (including believers and non-believers) living a fantasy when we participate even in our secular society? If someone doesn't believe in God, gods, and the supernatural, and think religious experiences are nothing but consequence of brain chemistry, then so are all the relationships they hold. Non-believers also give meaning to love, family, relationships, life cycle events, etc. to meet their own happiness, self-worth, and world view. It is easy to classify believers as delusional if you lack beliefs but aren't non-believers delusional as well when they give meaning to their own relationships and play along with what our culture and society sees as valuable and sacred (and I say sacred without the religious connotations)?

I have my own beliefs and superstitions that I can sometimes turn off and think they are silly. I sometimes think "how can I believe in that stuff?" but then I turn it back on and go back to my own world. I have no shame of my beliefs because it is all part of who I am and what makes me happy. I don't see myself as a mystical person but if I make fun of the world view of a mystical person, where would that leave my own world view since (in my world) I am certain that my relationship with my son, my wife, my parents, close friends, etc. are meaningful? Especially when these relationships can be easily dismissed as cultural influences and brain chemistry? Why not just say fuck all they are all delusions anyway?

Sorry for all the babbling and I don't even know if what I wrote makes any sense but I feel that the bottom line sometimes is that some of the people here attack the idea of someone wanting to hold on to their religion and beliefs but are unaware of their own delusions, perhaps because such delusions do not require the belief in a deity or the supernatural? In any case, in my point of view, religion or non-religion, belief or lack of beliefs, being theist or an atheist or agnostic or ignostic or whatever, are all acceptable world models. In my opinion, a world view is only unacceptable when a person imposes their world view on to others and when a world view leads to the compromising of the freedoms and happiness of other groups and individuals.

That's my two cents. :-)

[Why Syzygy]

38. meh

Modern man fancies that he has escaped the myths through his conscious repudiation of revealed religion in favor of a purely rational natural religion (read: Natural Science). But consider his theories of human origin. In the beginning, there was a Big Bang, a cosmic explosion. This is an image from which reason may begin to work, but it is not itself a rational statement. It is a mythical construct. Consider the theory of biological evolution. Man's ancestors emerge from the seas, and they in turn emerged from a cosmic soup of DNA. The majority of creation myths also begin with the same image of man emerging from primordial oceans. See Genesis 1 or the Babylonian creation epic. Consider the Modern tendency to call ourselves persons from the Latin persona. The term derives from the "mask" of Dionysus. Moderns are the wearers of masks! The reality is concealed in the darkness of mystery. This too is a mythical construct.
http://www.iloveulove.com/psychology/jung/jungarchetypes.htm

[Why Syzygy]

39. My above post is apathetic.

But, now that I've been there, I'm all the way in your corner. It should really be called the "Atheists Bashing Religion" forum.

I've had enough. A small handful of antagonists degrade all of DU. That's the way corruption operates.

[JerseygirlCT]

40. I'm just getting tired of trying to

rehash the same arguments over and over again. They usually start with some definitive statement about "Christians" - usually using the most restrictive, exclusive and literal brand of Christianity that can found at hand - and then challenging all of us on the basis of that.

No, I don't think the Bible is meant to be read as a rule book. There really aren't that many ways to say that, over and over again.

No, don't judge me and my beliefs according to Fred Phelps' please. There's a world of variety out there, and I'm pretty sure we'd end up on different sides of that spectrum.

Repeat ad nauseum.

I'm just venting... but I saw this came up to the top again, just when I was feeling particularly run down by the job of it all!

[Why Syzygy]

41. I have no idea

how one could equate the Wing essay as being the same as Phelps. Yet it was.
No. I don't hang with abusers IRL, and DU isn't so special as to tolerate it here. There really is a small group that ruins the DU experience for some of us. Every night I tell myself that I'm finished posting here. There are still some good people here. They just don't hang out in gangs. I told my roommate, who has nothing to do with computers at all, that there are some really mean people here. He said, "just don't go there". :rofl:

I've only started using hide thread the past month. There are over 20 from just that one forum.

[JerseygirlCT]

42. Yeah. But the good ones keep me coming back... nt

[Why Syzygy]

43. I know.

:blush: Just when you think it's the ropes, someone offers better.

[Critters2]

44. Given the opportunity, non-religious people will be just as brutal

in crushing dissent as religious people have been. Mob mentalities have nothing to do with faith. R/T is just proof of this.

[Why Syzygy]

46. They seek nothing less than world dominion

in the name of "science"; forgetting that nothing exists in the natural world to sustain the idea of a Supreme ruler.
(other than themselves and the Sun)

[Lydia Leftcoast]

47. Wow, Critters, I saw your most recent experience in that minefield

It's a perfect example of why I tend to stay out of there unless someone asks a factual question.

[Critters2]

49. Yeah. I need to stay away from there.

I thought the correct response was so obvious and reasonable. That's what I get for expecting reason from people who spend all their free time boasting about how rational they are.

[Critters2]

50. I just glanced over there, and on top of the "And she's a pastor, too!"

posts, there's one that says "And you should hear how she feels about Islam". WTF? I feel fine about Islam, and don't remember every engaging in any discussion about it on DU. But I probably said I'm not Muslim, so that makes me a hater, I suppose. Why did I even go there again?

[JerseygirlCT]

51. I was wondering about that

I don't think I've read your posts for all that long, but from what I have read, that would certainly have been out of character. I thought, "what gives with that?"

I think you had a good point - I also think that you have two posters in the mix now who are very deeply and personally involved in the story and it's awfully hard for them to look at any of it objectively.

I think the parents ostracizing a child behaved terribly, regardless of their religion. But I also think you're right in that expecting public school rules from a religious school is a bit much. That's what you trade in - they can run the school as they see fit, nice or not, smart or not.

That one is a strange thread(s).

[Critters2]

53. The OP wasn't terribly bright imo, and then add a perceived offense

against a family member, and she was off and running. No amount of logic was gonna stop that locomotive.

[Why Syzygy]

56. That was probably a canned stereotypical

response. Not personalized.

It's boggling to me that they can defend "morality" so vehemently, and at the same time wantonly inflict unrelenting verbal pain on others. Their morality stops at your nose.

I can't help but think that life has greatly damaged them in some way to result in such disregard for other's feelings.
They despise that theory.

I'm really glad you were there, in my own selfish way.

[Coyote_Bandit]

48. During the ugliness of the primary season

I made liberal use of my ignore list. A habit I have continued. I used to periodically purge the thing until I realized many of the same folks kept making appearances there.

Life is too short for me to entertain the commentary of bigots. Yes, it's a form of censorship but in real life I also censor and monitor the speach I entertain.

Add the jerks to your ignore list. You will not miss them or their commentary.

[JerseygirlCT]

52. I haven't done that yet - I use my "manual ignore", lol

but I don't see a thing wrong with that. This is something we supposedly do for entertainment and enlightenment. If a poster doesn't further that for you, then why not pass him/her on by?

[Critters2]

54. I've recently become acquainted with "hide thread".

Thank God and Skinner for that great gift!

[Coyote_Bandit]

55. I kinda wish

there was a hide forum option. There are a couple of forums here that require a great deal of self-discipline for me not to lurk and/or post. And I ***always*** regret venturing into them......

[Why Syzygy]

57. Customize your forums.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=my_forums

Only the top seven "big" forums are standard. The rest are optional.
Is that what you need?

[Coyote_Bandit]

58. I've done that

and I try to limit myself to visiting ONLY those forums. But I still know that those other dangerous forums are only a click away.

Thanks for the suggestion though.....I sometimes find that sort of advice quite helpful.

[Why Syzygy]

60. oh, yeah.

I click through to a couple of them that aren't on my menu sometimes. I wouldn't dare post there.
In that case, hide forums would be the ticket.

I adore hide threads! My ignore list has only two, both added just this year after I left my cozy group and ventured into the general population. If there are any more disturbances like the recent one, I'll use ignore sooner rather than later.

I was glad to see you there, as well as Critters and Jerseygirl. You know how to hold your own. I admire that.

[Coyote_Bandit]

66. You are more restrained than I

Every time I find myself beating my head against a wall trying to make a point to someone who clearly doesn't want to listen I wish I had more of that restraint. Sometimes I walk away but it's hard to do.

There are some topics I try to completely avoid here at DU. And occassionally I take a DU sabbatical and completely avoid DU for awhile.

If I do indeed know how to hold my own then you can thank my father. When I was a kid the evening dinner table sport was discussing current events. He used to take great pleasure in getting me to talk in circles arguing both sides of an issue. Because of those exercises I learned how to argue for and remain steadfast in defending my views.

I have a mental list of DUers whose commentary I value. You'd be one of 'em.

[Why Syzygy]

67. That means a lot.

I've always picked you out of the crowd as listen worthy.

Likewise, I have a short list of those I refuse to engage. Maybe one or two exchanges, depending.
I'm not in need of racking up my post count, which is all it ever amounts to!
Getting the "last word" or "scoring" seems way more important to some than it is to me.

My dad was a minister, and he and I usually discussed his sermons at Sunday dinner.
He never expected me to sit down and shut up either.
When people talk about religion putting women in their place, I am without reference.
Although I respected his opinions, he encouraged independent thinking.
Good dads. :toast:

[Critters2]

59. I've customized my forums, but occasionally get hooked by

something on the greatest or latest page, and don't even realize what forum I'm in at first. It's best to just go to the groups you know you're interested in. Or welcome in.

[Why Syzygy]

61. Well..

I've come back here, even though I'm not sure I'm welcomed.
I hope to be forgiven impetuousness.

[Critters2]

62. You're absolutely welcome here!

Well, I mean, if I have anything to say about it.

[Why Syzygy]

63. That's good enough for me!

:bounce:

[Critters2]

64. Well, I'm not exactly the Queen of the Christian Liberals/Progressives

Group, but if you think my opinion matters, that's good enough for me!

[Kajsa]

69. You are welcome here,Why Syzygy.

I enjoy reading your posts.

:)

[Coyote_Bandit]

65. Yeah that happens to me too

More than once I have regretted posting in a thread I saw on the latest page. It is all too easy to venture into unfriendly territory that way. Or to get caught in the crossfire between warring factions without even knowing who is at war.

[davidinalameda]

68. amen to that!

[spoony]

70. Today I'm not sure which is more disgusting

The quasi-blasphemy, and awful taste, of cheapening Jesus into a license plate cartoon, or the hateful response to it:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5546382&mesg_id=5546382

Btw, it's maybe worth noting that the only other time I'd ever heard "dead Jew on a stick" was from a filthy neo-nazi skinhead. That poster had it deleted once before in another thread about the issue, because it was apparently so funny to him he HAD to repost it.

[davidinalameda]

71. don't know which is worse

the plate or the suggestions

and I just alerted on it but I doubt it will be pulled

crap like that rarely is

[pnwmom]

72. Some atheists are just as fundamentalist in their non-belief as some

people in organized religions.

[supernova]

73. Understandable since many

of the really noisy ones have come from fundie childhoods.

They didn't stop being fundies, just changed the subject about which they are fundie.

[HopeOverFear]

74. 72 & 73...you are exactly right nm

[Kajsa]

75. Bill Maher comes to mind here.

He devoted his first movie to the subject,
and he's completely obsessed with it.

[demosincebirth]

77. I've never heard of him degrade or disparage the koran or muslims

like he does Christians and the Bible.

[dcsmart]

78. it is always easier for people to criticize than to engage in productive discussion

i think much of the atheism is just knee-jerk antagonism. many people have not spent time studying the variety of religious thinkers regardless of denomination. i would like to see Bishop N. T Wright, one of the most important Christian new testament scholars writing today, debate some of these people. they would experience a real intellectual debate from a real intellectual christian, not the straw-man examples they use.

[phasma ex machina]

80. Atheism that seeks truth invites dialogue ...

fire and brimstone atheism does not. - http://www.jewishjournal.com/articles/print/atheism_du_jour_20070330/">Rabbi David Wolpe

[TreasonousBastard]

81. The rabbi speaks wisely-- an excellent article.

[Critters2]

82. I can never understand why atheists get two forums--

the atheists/agnostics group, and R/T. But somehow, that's how it works.

[supernova]

83. No, they don't

get two forums officially. It's just that many of us left R/T when we realized useful dialogue wasn't possible, either with the non-religious or with each other across faiths because the non-religious would question both to the point of hair-tearing out.

Consequently, R/T has become a sort of perverse mirror.

[Name removed]

85. Deleted message

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

[davidwparker]

86. You would think this forum would be for those who are liberals and believers

-- just like what it says.

But, it sounds like an opportunity for you to share what you believe.

It is always possible for you cause someone to think, if not now, then later in life. You never know.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

88. I swear, some of the regulars in R/T just have a permanent mad on

If their atheism has made them so happy and free, I'd hate to see what they look like when they're unhappy.

[RevCheesehead]

89. If their atheism makes them so happy and free,

why do they spend so much time in a forum for religion and theology??? I mean, shouldn't they just be able to let it go already? :P

:hi:

[Shadrach]

90. I don't post a lot but I read a lot of posts here in DU

So I can see that some of those guys won't let it go because they were damaged by their upbringing. Some even admit that is the reason why they need to vent. The only problem is that they are barking at the wrong people.

Actually, some of the anti-theists (and don't call them atheists because atheists are not necessarily anti-theists) come from religious background where the parents and/or close relatives have the characteristics of the "ugly religion" that they fight around here. It is kind of hard finding religious people here in DU who are like their relatives or religious people who would not agree with them on the issues so they have to try change the characteristics of DU Christians to fit the characteristics of fundies in order to argue with a religious person and fulfill the need of letting their frustrations out at the expense of that person.

So we often read the overly repeated charges blaming religion with being the reason for all the harm in the world in the religion can do no right posts. Consequently, DU Christians (and anybody else who is fair) will recognize that atrocities indeed occur in the name of religion but that there is a lot of good work done in the name of religion as well. This defense is immediately used to claim that those defending religion are silly apologists and blah blah blah. Then, of course, the nature of the discussion takes on a different shape to support the "why aren't you non-religious like me, stupid?" as if it is planting a seed of doubt in the believer's head. But their own stubbornness won't allow them to understand that doubt is already part of belief. Seeds are already planted without their aid. The only seed they plant is a seed that makes believers view anti-theists as huge douchebags.

You also see the charges that Christians nitpick the bible to see only what they want to see. But the same people who charge Christians with doing this nitpicking will nitpick the bible to prove that Christianity is eeeevil and also nitpick statistics to prove that religious people (including liberals) are the cause of all our problems and if we rid the world of everything religious then we are all going to be alright.

Attacking liberal Christians so anti-theists have some readily available adversaries to take down is pretty dumb and it seems like a waste of time.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

91. That's more or less my take on it, too

I've inferred things about the backgrounds of the regulars in R/T, especially the cases in which they obviously grew up with toxic forms of religion, but if you say that they're reflecting their backgrounds, they'll jump down your throat.

My (atheist) clinical social worker friend refers to such people as "black and white thinkers." If they find weaknesses in some position that they once held, suddenly it's all bad.

The first generation of neocons, most of whom were Communists in their youth, would be prime examples. Khrushchev denounced Stalin, and oops, they had to become hard-right conservatives, as if there was nothing in between Stalinism and McCarthyism.

[RevCheesehead]

92. Can you please explain to me the difference between atheist and anti-theist?

And where does the agnostic lie in that distinction?

Thanks! :)

[Kat45]

93. I would take it as being that atheists don't believe but

don't really care what other people do. Anti-theists are strongly against believers of any stripe, they're the folks who rail against religion as being the cause of everything bad that has ever happened. I'm guessing that the folks I tend to call the "rabid atheists" are the anti-theists (and I guess those are the folks everyone refers to in the r/t forum, which I never visit for that reason alone).

[Shadrach]

94. I think Kat45 explained it very well

An atheist is a person who lacks belief in God. But holding an atheistic position does not mean that the person is anti-theistic.

There are atheists who obviously do not believe in God and do not really care if others have their faith. But at the same time, there are anti-theists who see everything religious as evil. So religion and religious people (no matter how liberal) are their opponents no matter what. You have no way out as a person of faith since anti-theists must view you as an opponent or their crusade is not worth fighting.

So if you read the Religion/Theology forum you will see language like, "religion is the outright theft of our innate human goodness" and posts claiming that we need to rid ourselves of "the scourge of Christianity" for our problems to go away. I disagree with these positions and I also don't think these are atheistic positions. Instead I would classify them as anti-theistic positions.

What is the agnostic position as far as anti-theism? I don't know. It all depends on how the specific agnostic views believers and their faith.

I hope I was clear. I hate to write in forums because I'm not a good writer and what I write is not always clear.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

95. There's nothing wrong with your writing, Shadrach

In fact, you're quite clear and concise.

[Shadrach]

96. Thanks!

I always make sense to myself when I write, of course, but sometimes I don't make sense to others. So I am usually cautious about the quality of my writing. :-)

[TreasonousBastard]

97. Also known as "soft" and "hard" atheists...

Soft atheists simply see no evidence of God and therefore have no belief in the existence of God. A rational conclusion, and a valid use of the unicorn argument.

Hard atheists take it one step further and claim absolutely there is no God. This is irrational, since it is impossible to prove either the existence or nonexistence of God. These are the ones who often scream the loudest when accused of having a belief system of their own.

Agnostics, simplistically, just don't care one way or the other. I've seen attempts to further categorize modern agnosticism (it was once a philosophical school) but at some point making all these distinctions becomes silly.

I suppose one could argue that there is another group of "anti-theists" who take the hard atheism a further step and are at war with religion. There's plenty of those around here, and they pop up right on cue whenever a religious topic is mentioned.

[kwassa]

100. and so many who claim to be soft atheists behave like hard atheists

They are dogmatic about their lack of belief. Quite a contradiction.

[wryter2000]

99. I was an agnostic for a long time

The people in my church get a real kick when they find that out. I still have a foot in the agnostic world, I think, as I try to figure out what I believe.

I finally decided between atheism (the reasonable kind, not anti-theist) and agnosticism when I realized it was just as arrogant to say I knew for sure there was no deity as it was to say there was a deity and I knew that mine was the right one to the exclusion of others.

What was the question...? :)

Oh, yeah. My position as an agnostic was to be tolerant of all faiths and non-faiths (although not of all behavior) because I was humble enough to know that I don't have any good answers on the question of faith versus non-faith.

[TreasonousBastard]

98. Well said, and as I have said before, many of the most belligerent...

often claim they are hounded and discriminated against here, but the truth is that this is one of the few public places where they can vent.

I am often amazed at the depths of hatred some of these people claim to have for religion. It's not just the usual "Your invisible sky pilot" posts, but the claims that people are offended by the mere existence of a creche at the mall. Or a church ringing its bell at noon. There have been threads about people here boiling mad over the horrid offense of sales clerks saying "Bless you."

Note that it's Christianity that offends, not Judaism or Buddhism or Islam (lest they be accused of bigotry, perhaps).

[demosincebirth]

101. They dare not criticize Islam. You are right...theyre afraid of being called bigots