Atheism

No, I don't believe that.

I am simply without believing in gods. How hard is that?

And what are you doing here, posing? I've posted my view for many years.

I have the same answers as you But I do some what care not that I see where it makes a difference!

OK, a "constructive discussion" that does not include debate. That's certainly a rare thing for A2K on any subject, contentious or not. Certainly it calls for a standard that folks interested in religion - or for that matter, almost any other topic - have not enjoyed here.

I take it I am one of the "ridiculously obnoxious" posters who have, at times, "had interesting things to say". Forgive me, but I get the impression here of the princess and the pea - one who cannot be satisfied with any realistic outcome.

It is also an observable fact that much of the discussion among like atheistic believers here - the part that you might characterize as "interesting and constructive" - has involved a very considerable effort at mutual badmouthing of those who question their views or are themselves believers in a creator. Don't you think that this in some way reduces your collective moral authority with respect to "ridiculously obnoxious" outsiders? Doesn't it make you look a bit ridiculous in their eyes?

You seemed to have answered the first question but did not seem to give a yes or no for the second. I do apologize if I came across the wrong way as that was not my intent!

George, get a horse.

RL, I'll go back and look at that.

However we may eventually agree or not, even total opposites, I appreciate your posting style.

I am not sure that littlek is the bad person here and I hope that she can see that anything can be read into her reply even though she may have not intended it that way.
I can only hope that she did not as that is not how I took it to be.
What is wrong with giving a person the benefit of the doubt?

I don't think anyone - well, maybe I missed it - goes off on littlek. She is easily among our most loved.

Indeed, it is a pleasure to see someone be for her, as the rest of us are sort of used to it.

I don't think she is a bad person at all, and I have not characterized her in any way (except for the princess and the pea remark). I did make a mild exception to the way in which she characterized me. However, I don't think that makes me a bad person either. The benefit of the doubt is a virtue that, like many others, works best in both directions.

I have no doubt of littlek's good intentions here. However the fact remains that her silence over the "reasonable, interesting and constructive" badmouthing of believers by the stalwarts of this thread somewhat diminishes her moral authority in criticizing others.

Georgeob1 - you are correct in your surmise of how I would characterize you. I think that religion (and the lack thereof) are 'charged' topics. It is easy to get heated when discussing differences here. I'd hoped for more. <shrug>. Rare for A2K or not I prefer discussion. Debate tends to make people defensive and when people are defensive no understanding will happen between opposite stances. Given such a hot button topic, debate seems a pointless means to any kind of constructive end.

I would wager a small sum that atheists did not cast the first stone here.

Thankee Osso, that's sweet.

Don't call me sweet..











(I say, laughing)

<grin>

I think you would lose. Look at page 1.

Why don't you go ahead and be a little more specific.

Right from the first post the "discussion of atheism" was about the folly of religion and believers, and not about the experience of believing in nothing but the observable world. Indeed, that and subsequent complaints about "ridiculously obnoxious" theist interlopers, have dominated almost all of the discussions among your key posters here. Scan a few pages and see for yourself. There are some direct references and discussions of the experience of atheism, etc. , however they occupy, at best, less than half of the acerage here.

I'll also note that, apart from a few expressions of skepticism and incredulity about the denial of a creator, or the foundation for a system of morality or ethics in the absence of one, I have not made an unkind characterization of atheism, atheists or anyone posting here. That is not something that your key claques here can truthfully assert.

While we have the theists here, it might be useful to know about their atheist relatives and how they deal with them, what concessions they make to their lack of belief, if any. Are we universally annoying?

I've been reading along on this thread for awhile, entertaining at least.
There is one thing of which I've become aware, as a result, which I'd be interested to hear about.
Having grown up with an exposure to christianity, an often fanatical mother, and some considerable doubts of my own. I am become aware of a certain prejudice toward the very word atheist. By my own insight, I find atheist to be in the category of vampires and werewolves.
I am quite certain this is a prejudice instilled as a child raised in proximity to christian beliefs. Rather tenacious little bugger prejudice is, in spite of intellectual beliefs.
I am guessing that the atheist is victim to this prejudice from time to time. And I would venture that those who display this prejudice are rarely aware that they are being prejudiced.
It does explain the apparent impulse, on the part of theists, to drive a stake through the heart of the atheist.

I just re-read page one of this thread. I see no evidence of any immediate attack on religion. Rather, there is a discussion of how being atheist is viewed in a religioius society. There is a single member who makes unflattering remarks about religious adherence, and he doesn't get a response, and is generally not a regular contributor to this thread.

I have seen some of the religious whiners in this thread recently complain about invasions of religious threads by atheists. I'd be interested to see the evidence of that. The threads i've participated in recently have titles such as "Is any part of the bible true?" and "Scepticism and Atheism"--i've only seen one active religious topic running lately and that was the thread on trinity. I've looked in there from time to time, but i've not tried to put a stick in the spokes, and i don't see anyone else doing that either.

In fact, i'd say the only instances of what the christians here are whining about took place years ago in the "Mama Angel" wars, which were started by someone who quickly came to admit that she had lied and that she had attempted to flood the site with like-thinking christians (apparently not realizing the size of the site). I am reminded of the comments on page one about how christians love to see themselves as persecuted. In fact, most of the disruption being caused in this thread is from the two fools who attempted to play white knights in the Mama Angel wars. Wonderful christian charity, humility and kindness they display . . .