Page 17 of 18 FirstFirst ... 715161718 LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 175

Thread: Atheists becoming more vocal and outspoken

  1. Top | #161
    Contributor DrZoidberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    7,686
    Archived
    5,746
    Total Posts
    13,432
    Rep Power
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian63 View Post
    Will do, especially when it is bad advice from an incompetent and ego-driven advice-giver.
    Look, you created this thread to generate some sort of discussion. I noted holes in your argument, that I pointed out. At no point did you acknowledge those flaws in your own arguments. Instead you leapt straight to getting offended, and in a desperate attempt to cling to being right you tried to characterise my arguments as straw men. If you aren't interested in people giving you feedback, then why are you asking for it? Why are you even here at this forum? And why not stop saying that my arguments are straw men, when they obviously aren't? And try to engage? Making this forum a fun and nice place to have conversations?

  2. Top | #162
    Senior Member Brian63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    995
    Archived
    8,911
    Total Posts
    9,906
    Rep Power
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post
    I noted holes in your argument, that I pointed out.
    You are in error there. You pointed out flaws in strawman-versions of my arguments, but not my actual arguments.

    You can keep repeating again and again though that you pointed out flaws in my real arguments, if it may make you feel better to have your ego inflated. Just please take that to some separate thread, and maybe the mods can move it to the Elsewhere subforum, while we remain on the actual points in this thread.

    Instead you leapt straight to getting offended, and in a desperate attempt to cling to being right you tried to characterise my arguments as straw men.
    Brilliant analysis of what really is going on here. Well done.

    If you aren't interested in people giving you feedback, then why are you asking for it? Why are you even here at this forum? And why not stop saying that my arguments are straw men, when they obviously aren't? And try to engage?
    Why are you asking those straw-shit loaded questions? If it turns out your premises in those questions were actually wrong, that would be a massive backfire on your face. Maybe the reason you keep repeating your strawmen instead of correcting your strawmen is that because your own ego is too fragile and sensitive, and you could not handle the thought of having been wrong all this time? Especially to someone like me that you refer to as being dishonest, defensive, whiner, you have condescended towards and been dismissive of, etc. What if it was actually you who has been wrong, but are afraid to admit it? That is too high a price to pay. Instead, just keep trying to portray yourself as being interested in civil and friendly conversation, all the while you are condescending and sarcastic and demeaning and insulting to them. When they call you out on it, accuse them of "attacking" you. Either way, you set it up so your own ego does not have to admit that you were in error. Big save.

    Making this forum a fun and nice place to have conversations?
    I'm on board. Just cut the crap first. If you are going to throw out insults to the conversations, do not then go on to say you are being "attacked" when they are thrown back at you. Several of your early posts in this thread seemed to have a hint of arrogance and condescension in them, but I may have just been misinterpreting you so did not respond in kind, and even if arrogance was the case then we still have to allow for peoples' prides to enter into discussions, otherwise we would not have discussions. You had brought the tone of the thread to a new low, though, when you made the accusation of "dishonest."

    https://talkfreethought.org/showthre...l=1#post662378

    Instead of ever correcting or apologizing for that new degradation of tone, you went onto pile onto it and all the while present yourself as being very meek and super-humble and just wanting to have a civil and friendly conversation. Well, bullshit. When you want to have civil and friendly conversations with people, do you insist that means that you can bully them with insults while they are "attacking" you if they call you the same?

    So put the ego aside and apologize for that initial downturn and insult. Do not do it for the sake of show here either. Be sincere and realize it was something you should not have done. Once you do that, sure we can get to the next step towards civil and friendly conversation (correct your erroneous strawman posted below, or provide evidence such as a quote or a link that it is not a strawman, and is actually what my real position is. You have not demonstrated any willingness so far to do either. Just keep repeating the strawman, and ignore requests to back up your argument.).

    If you want to have an insulting exchange with me, admit that you want to have an insulting exchange with me. If you want to have a civil and friendly exchange with me, then practice what you preach. Just do not try to have it both ways---where you *say* you want a civil and friendly exchange, all the while you *are* insulting and condescending.
    Last edited by Brian63; 04-15-2019 at 02:29 PM.

  3. Top | #163
    Senior Member Brian63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    995
    Archived
    8,911
    Total Posts
    9,906
    Rep Power
    68
    In an earlier post there was a brief exchange with DrZoidberg and me:

    If you only focus on the belief in God,…
    Who ever advocated (I certainly never did) that we should “only focus on the belief in God?” Please provide the exact quote and exact reference. If you cannot find it, please at least retract this strawman you are arguing against, repeatedly.
    Note that DrZoidberg never cited any quote or reference for me actually espousing that view, and also never retracted the strawman or acknowledged the error.

    If DrZoidberg wants to keep beating up strawmen while ignoring my actual positions, I cannot stop him. I will expose him though. This post will serve as one demonstration to the viewers of these red herring and strawman game tactics. It will continue to be posted again each time he continues to argue against the same strawmen.

  4. Top | #164
    Contributor DrZoidberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    7,686
    Archived
    5,746
    Total Posts
    13,432
    Rep Power
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian63 View Post

    You are in error there. You pointed out flaws in strawman-versions of my arguments, but not my actual arguments.

    You can keep repeating again and again though that you pointed out flaws in my real arguments, if it may make you feel better to have your ego inflated. Just please take that to some separate thread, and maybe the mods can move it to the Elsewhere subforum, while we remain on the actual points in this thread.



    Brilliant analysis of what really is going on here. Well done.

    If you aren't interested in people giving you feedback, then why are you asking for it? Why are you even here at this forum? And why not stop saying that my arguments are straw men, when they obviously aren't? And try to engage?
    Why are you asking those straw-shit loaded questions? If it turns out your premises in those questions were actually wrong, that would be a massive backfire on your face. Maybe the reason you keep repeating your strawmen instead of correcting your strawmen is that because your own ego is too fragile and sensitive, and you could not handle the thought of having been wrong all this time? Especially to someone like me that you refer to as being dishonest, defensive, whiner, you have condescended towards and been dismissive of, etc. What if it was actually you who has been wrong, but are afraid to admit it? That is too high a price to pay. Instead, just keep trying to portray yourself as being interested in civil and friendly conversation, all the while you are condescending and sarcastic and demeaning and insulting to them. When they call you out on it, accuse them of "attacking" you. Either way, you set it up so your own ego does not have to admit that you were in error. Big save.

    Making this forum a fun and nice place to have conversations?
    I'm on board. Just cut the crap first. If you are going to throw out insults to the conversations, do not then go on to say you are being "attacked" when they are thrown back at you. Several of your early posts in this thread seemed to have a hint of arrogance and condescension in them, but I may have just been misinterpreting you so did not respond in kind, and even if arrogance was the case then we still have to allow for peoples' prides to enter into discussions, otherwise we would not have discussions. You had brought the tone of the thread to a new low, though, when you made the accusation of "dishonest."

    https://talkfreethought.org/showthre...l=1#post662378

    Instead of ever correcting or apologizing for that new degradation of tone, you went onto pile onto it and all the while present yourself as being very meek and super-humble and just wanting to have a civil and friendly conversation. Well, bullshit. When you want to have civil and friendly conversations with people, do you insist that means that you can bully them with insults while they are "attacking" you if they call you the same?

    So put the ego aside and apologize for that initial downturn and insult. Do not do it for the sake of show here either. Be sincere and realize it was something you should not have done. Once you do that, sure we can get to the next step towards civil and friendly conversation (correct your erroneous strawman posted below, or provide evidence such as a quote or a link that it is not a strawman, and is actually what my real position is. You have not demonstrated any willingness so far to do either. Just keep repeating the strawman, and ignore requests to back up your argument.).

    If you want to have an insulting exchange with me, admit that you want to have an insulting exchange with me. If you want to have a civil and friendly exchange with me, then practice what you preach. Just do not try to have it both ways---where you *say* you want a civil and friendly exchange, all the while you *are* insulting and condescending.
    Well. I tried. Enjoy talking to yourself.

  5. Top | #165
    Senior Member Brian63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    995
    Archived
    8,911
    Total Posts
    9,906
    Rep Power
    68
    I love you too.

  6. Top | #166
    Senior Member Brian63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    995
    Archived
    8,911
    Total Posts
    9,906
    Rep Power
    68
    In an earlier post there was a brief exchange with DrZoidberg and me:

    If you only focus on the belief in God,…
    Who ever advocated (I certainly never did) that we should “only focus on the belief in God?” Please provide the exact quote and exact reference. If you cannot find it, please at least retract this strawman you are arguing against, repeatedly.
    Note that DrZoidberg never cited any quote or reference for me actually espousing that view, and also never retracted the strawman or acknowledged the error.

    If DrZoidberg wants to keep beating up strawmen while ignoring my actual positions, I cannot stop him. I will expose him though. This post will serve as one demonstration to the viewers of these red herring and strawman game tactics. It will continue to be posted again each time he continues to argue against the same strawmen.

  7. Top | #167
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    159
    Archived
    66
    Total Posts
    225
    Rep Power
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by Rhea View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruth Harris View Post
    You are probably not going to like what I have to say now – this is the same mistake that a lot of Christians make by trying to read the Bible literally. It actually has nothing to do with basic intelligence.
    To hold onto unintelligible passages that require controrted explanations to weasel out of the pretty clear insult they deliver is a rather profound indictment of the poor validity of the bible, don’t you think?

    I’ve heard some Christians try to explain away, as you did, the clear words that are used by other christians in far greater numbers to demean, vilify and oppress non-believers.
    I am sorry that you have been subjected to that kind of behavior from other Christians. And I think that they are very wrong to do this.

    My point in explaining this particular passage of scripture was to show you that many people make the mistake of thinking that they can read something from 2,000 or so years ago and understand it based on today's language. That is simply not the case. Ancient literature has to be read with the viewpoint of the author in mind as word usage has changed dramatically over the centuries. What do you think people 2 millennia in the future will take away from our usage of certain words or phrases if they don't bother to understand how we used colloquialisms?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rhea View Post
    So, I say what I said at the beginning. If you honestly want a religion that does not call all atheists fools, criminals, evil and “other,” you need to tear out those pages and preach against them.

    But, since they’ve been in these english version for hundreds of years, and in other language versions even longer, one can quite clearly deiscern what christians like to do with them.

    The difference between what you say and what you do, is what you do. And if you carry around a bible that has these damaging passages, you do a thing; as outlined.

    Yeah, I’ve heard 1 in a hundred chrsitians try to explain to **ME** how it doesn’t mean what it says, it’s just misunderstood. I would prefer if you would come tell me that after you have finished convincing the 99, mmkay? Until then - it means what it means to today’s christians, and what it means to them is how they treat us. And your scholarly disagreement does not actually change that one bit.

    Indeed, when you “defend atheists” to these people you know - do you really think they believe you over their bible? Do they walk away changed and preaching the new love to other hating christians? Or do they nod their heads and go back to the bible that they interpret in plain language.

    (Corrollary: a real “god” would not have so much trouble being understood.)
    I actually do think I have changed some minds, given the thanks I have received and seeing the difference in how they approach understanding Bible texts. I explain these passages to them just like I did to you. It is not a matter of believing me over the Bible; it is a matter of showing them that they need to think about the author's language usage as related to the time it was written. Of course I have not changed everyone's opinion - but then I don't know of anything that there is no disagreement over when it comes to interpreting ancient literature.

    Ruth

  8. Top | #168
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    4,398
    Rep Power
    11
    While many Christians can be tolerant and try to live by 'hate the sin not the sinner', in my experience Christians have a general disdain for others, even hate and anger.

    You only have to look at VP Pence and his history of gay hate speech. He is symbolic of many Christians.

  9. Top | #169
    Contributor DrZoidberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    7,686
    Archived
    5,746
    Total Posts
    13,432
    Rep Power
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by steve_bank View Post
    While many Christians can be tolerant and try to live by 'hate the sin not the sinner', in my experience Christians have a general disdain for others, even hate and anger.

    You only have to look at VP Pence and his history of gay hate speech. He is symbolic of many Christians.
    But do you really think it's the religion that makes them such? Isn't this the Euthyphro dilemma? Since religious people don't get their morals from their religion, doesn't it follow that they also don't get their hate from religion?

    People who are more in-group and out-groupy are more likely to be religious (and conservative). These are the same people who are more likely to hate anything that's different.

  10. Top | #170
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    South Pole
    Posts
    8,449
    Archived
    3,444
    Total Posts
    11,893
    Rep Power
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by skepticalbip View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian63 View Post
    How little or far should we atheists (or nontheists, skeptics, whatever) go in trying to advance our views? Should we hold more of a “live and let live” attitude or be more outspoken and vocal in criticizing religion in the public sphere?
    I'm all for the "live and let live" idea but only if it is mutual. Any religious group attempting to force their beliefs on others through law or even through personal actions need to be openly opposed.

    For example, I have no problem with the Amish who are happy to practice their rather weird (to me) beliefs without imposing it on others unwilling to accept those beliefs.
    I am with you on this, but only regarding adults. I feel bad for some Amish kids.

Similar Threads

  1. No Atheists in Fox Holes - Atheists Brainwashed by Religion2
    By Ramaraksha in forum General Religion
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 06-29-2016, 06:13 PM
  2. Atheists are the Key
    By Ramaraksha in forum General Religion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-01-2016, 07:18 AM
  3. Vocal Fry on NPR
    By repoman in forum Media & Culture Gallery
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-20-2015, 03:37 AM
  4. Vocal feminist murdered after months of threats
    By Underseer in forum Political Discussions
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 05-18-2015, 12:47 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •