Atheism

That's because atheism is the belief there are no gods. How else can atheist discuss the subject?

Here's the opening post. Even people as dull-witted as ranting christians shouldn't find that so hard to understand.

I am not offended by this thread, and my contributions to it have been both constructive and respectful. They didn't meet littlek's proscription in the opening post, but I joined only at about page 28 and hadn't read the opening. A fault to be sure, but a very small one by the norms of A2K.

I posted a comment on a particularly well-stated idea offered by Spendius, that is all. Your collective sensitivity to a level of criticsm and disagreement that is entirely typical of all other discussions on this site suggests something unusual .... sensitivity, insecurity, anger.... something odd.

In any event I will survive having my name entered on the bad boy's list. It's not really bad company after all.

By the way .. best wishes for a happy new year to all !

You did read the word dig, did you not? Taking digs at theists is how you discuss atheism? But, of course, that is your way.

Spurious' ideas were, arguably, well-stated, but they were not to the point of the thread, and like everything else he has posted here for years and years, were contrarian and intended to make him the subject of discussion.

It is pathetically childish, and all too typical of comment at this site that you allege that people here are motivated by anger. It is the kind of comment, beneath the level of debate of a high school debating team, which attempts to suggest that those with whom you disagree are motivated by emotion, while you--devotee of nothing but sweet reason--are just trying to respond sensibly. Spurious' screed was a blatant and puerile slander of those who dissent from his phony devotion to christianity--a devotion which he has only evinced since he found his great contrarian gold mine of anti-evolution blather in professing a religious fervor which stinks of hypocrisy.

It does not surprise me at all to think that you believe you are in good company to join Intrepid and Snood in attempting to trash a discussion to which you have added nothing worthwhile.

If you spent more time discussing atheism and less time taking shots at anybody who is not one, your time might be better spent.

I'll be happy to leave you to your whining rants now.

You start digging when you think you're not making any headway. Of coarse, it's okay for christians to go around trying to save everybody with their "god is love" message. Absolutely nothing wrong with that! Dig? LOL

I just looked back at my contributions on pp 27-33. I think they were pretty good, addiing some constructive and meaningful elements to the conversation. I'll agree they didn't fully meet littlek's "mutual back-scratching only" standard, but, as I noted, I was then unaware of it.

I have not attempted to trash this discussion, though I do consider Snood, Interpid and even Spendius to be pretty good company.

We do discuss atheism, and we only take shots at snotty, hateful people like you who can't leave well enough alone. It would be wonderful to think that you won't bother us again, but i suspect that, as is the case with most christians, you are lying, and you'll be back again.

Well, folks, i've broken my own resolution not to respond to the christian haters who come here. My apologies to the others with a genuine interest in this topic, and i'll do my best to ignore the hateful christians and focus on the subject.

Please do not judge all atheist by the works of Setanta, This person may come across as smart in many subjects but is lacking in the field of ethics!

It matters not of your iq when it comes to a persons ability to be a pedifile, rapist, serial killer or having any other immoral behavior. Not all of our neurological or psychological abilities are the same.

Just as some theist have these problems of behavior so do all other groups including atheist, but I can asure you that the the majority of atheist are more well behaved when it comes to other view points other than their own.

There is one thing that neuroscience and religion can agree on and that is, "there needs to be some sort of moral code.
neurosciencs and other fields of study are working on that as we speak.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hj9oB4zpHww

Setanta and I and, if I remember, some goodly number of other a2kers, disagree with you, CI. Atheism is not a belief, it is a lack of believing, no matter what whatever dictionary says. Sans theism, which is my translation of the word atheism, a-theism, is simple and doesn't involve a whole new belief system, except for those I consider as only a minority of atheists.

I'm no fan of digging at theists here either; it is as beside the context of the thread as are theist digs.
I don't mind theists posting, given respect for the thread premise.
I understand Snood's and other's take that atheists and agnostics have marched into theist threads. I've posted on them, but usually to correct what I take as bizarre views of everyday atheists. I can see that reasonably coming back from the other side.

All that said, I grasp Set's views of Spendi's modus.

I agree about the minority atheists. Unfortunately, the strident, militant so-called atheists (who actually do make a religion of what passes for atheism at their respective houses) are the ones whom the public remembers.

Yeah.

How many times do you see me over there, unless it is a thread set up expressly to argue about it, which makes it fair game?

Sigh - Here we are right back where we started.
If atheists did not meet with such negativity from religion, if religion would not inject itself into politics and science to effect retrogression, if the religious truly did not mind atheists' existance - - We might have a different sort of thread here.

I am now going to go back and thumb down most of the deist "contributions" and and wait to see what happens next.

Do you think anybody cares ed? Thumbing me down has no power over me. Thumb away. I hope it makes you feel better as there is no point to it if it doesn't.

I'm not sure what the difference is between "atheists do not believe in any gods," and "atheism is not a belief, is is a lack of believing..."

Maybe, you can clarify that for me?

Where do you see that your post have not been in context with littlek's proscription in the opening post?