30
   

Why do atheist try to convert Christians

 
 
Thomas
 
  2  
Reply Mon 18 Jul, 2011 06:52 am
@Arella Mae,
Arella Mae wrote:
When YOU decide I am deluded because yout think you are right and I am wrong then you have become intolerant. I have never attacked any homosexual btw.

I never said you attacked any homosexual.

As to my alleged intolerance, you are probably using one of the words "deluded" and "intolerant" in a nonstandard way. According to Webster's dictionary, to be intolerant is to be---
  • unwilling or unable to endure, or
  • unwilling to grant equal freedom of expression, especially in religious matters, or
  • unwilling to grant or share social, political, or professional rights.
I'm perfectly willing to endure that you believe the way you do. I'm willing to have you say what you believe (I'll even listen). I'm willing to share equal rights with you. It is just my opinion that your belief in god and the divinity of Jesus is deluded, that it reflects your mind and your judgment being misled (Webster again). We can discuss if this opinion of mine is mistaken. But it's not intolerant by any standard you can find in a dictionary.
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jul, 2011 07:31 am
@Thomas,
I didn't say you said I attacked any homosexual. I was just letting you and others know because it was being mentioned.

I do not think you are delusional because you don't believe in God. I wouldn't think you were delusional if you believed in UFOs.

Calling a person delusional because they have a set of beliefs that you don't agree with or hold to yourself is essentially saying "I am right and you are wrong" no matter how you want to try to spin it.

So, I am sorry Thomas, but IMO calling me deluded or delusional is hurtful. But, I must say, you do it with a lot more class than some others.

I'm not angry about it. I'm sad about it.
Thomas
 
  2  
Reply Mon 18 Jul, 2011 08:22 am
@Arella Mae,
Arella Mae wrote:
Calling a person delusional because they have a set of beliefs that you don't agree with or hold to yourself is essentially saying "I am right and you are wrong" no matter how you want to try to spin it.

I'm not trying to spin it. I am saying that I'm probably right about god and that you're probably wrong. I just disagree with your point that it's intolerant to say this.

Arella wrote:
So, I am sorry Thomas, but IMO calling me deluded or delusional is hurtful.

I'm sorry you're hurt. And, leaving tolerance aside, I agree with you that in everyday life, it's rude to call believers deluded. It's rude in the same way as it's rude when children point at me in the subway and ask , "mom, why is this man so fat?" But just because these children are rude, that doesn't mean they're wrong. (I am, indeed, fat.) And just because it's rude in everyday life to call believers deluded, that doesn't mean it's wrong.

Anyway, A2K religion threads aren't everyday life, just as boxing rings aren't everyday life. When people walk down the street and someone hits them on the nose, they call the cops, as well they should. But when boxers enter a boxing ring and hit each other on the nose, they have nothing to complain about at all. It's what they came there to do, and if they don't like it, they shouldn't have come. The same logic applies to candidly speaking your mind about religion. In daily life it's rude; in an A2K religion thread, its what people come there to do. If you don't like nonbelievers calling believers deluded in threads about atheism, what did you join them for?
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jul, 2011 08:32 am
@Thomas,
I see, it's my fault that YOU and OTHERS call me deluded because I choose to post on A2K? So, it's rude to do it in real life but if you are hiding behind a computer monitor you can be rude? Shouldn't we be the same person on and off the computer? It's okay to be rude to someone because you aren't face to face with them?
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jul, 2011 08:35 am
@Arella Mae,
Arella Mae wrote:

? Shouldn't we be the same person on and off the computer?


Not at all, in real life I'm a 48 year old Englishman. On the computer I'm a 25 year old Tahitian ballet dancer called Delores.
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jul, 2011 08:40 am
@izzythepush,
So, assuming that is true, you are deliberately deceiving people?
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jul, 2011 08:42 am
@Arella Mae,
Ballet lessons aren't cheap you know. Trying to get a tu tu in my size is a bloody nightmare.
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jul, 2011 08:42 am
@izzythepush,
I can imagine! Perhaps you could google "discount tutus."
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jul, 2011 08:45 am
@Arella Mae,
They don't do them in my size. I'm better off with discount marquees.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  4  
Reply Mon 18 Jul, 2011 08:49 am
@Arella Mae,
Arella Mae wrote:
So, it's rude to do it in real life but if you are hiding behind a computer monitor you can be rude?

It's not about the computer monitor, it's about dedicated places for doing particular things.

When someone on the street walks up to me and calls me fat, that's rude. When my doctor calls me fat during my physical, she's doing her job. Likewise, when someone on the street walks up to a boxer and hits him, that's a crime. When the same person does it in a boxing ring, he's simply doing his job. Notice that both these examples are set in the real world.

The same distinction applies online. If I you were in a thread about gardening or cooking, and I was to waltz in and call you deluded because of your Christian faith, that would be very rude of me. But in this thread, which is specifically dedicated to discussing the motivations of atheists, it's merely germane and sincere.
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jul, 2011 09:03 am
@Thomas,
I am sorry, Thomas. But I believe if it's wrong to do it in one place, it's wrong to do it in another. Of course, your doctor scenario is different and I get that. But A2K is not my doctor and neither are you. If I get out of line I know it and I will take responsibility for it. I'm not going to tell you or anyone else "Well, you shouldn't have come here" to try to explain away my bad behavior. They aren't responsible for my actions. I am.

Can you imagine if I was on A2K and said I was a Christian but continually called everyone names, cussed and was rude to everyone and then tried to justify my bad behavior by telling them they shouldn't have come? Who would believe I was a Christian if I continually did that?
Thomas
 
  3  
Reply Mon 18 Jul, 2011 09:15 am
@Arella Mae,
Arella Mae wrote:
But A2K is not my doctor and neither are you.

That's not the proper analogy. The proper analogy is that A2K religion threads are dedicated to discussing religion candidly. By choosing to join those threads, you make them your threads for discussing religion candidly. If you don't want to read what nonbelievers say about religion, I suggest you stay out.

Arella Mae wrote:
Can you imagine if I was on A2K and said I was a Christian but continually called everyone names, cussed and was rude to everyone and then tried to justify my bad behavior by telling them they shouldn't have come? Who would believe I was a Christian if I continually did that?

That depends on what you mean by "names" and "rude". I would have no problem if, in an A2K religion thread, you called my atheist views misguided and deluded. I would have a problem if you did it in a running thread, or in the "What made you smile today?" thread, or in any other thread to which religious discussions are not germane.
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jul, 2011 09:32 am
@Thomas,
You win, Thomas. I'll just stay out.
0 Replies
 
Krumple
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jul, 2011 09:58 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
This may be unfair because I am not sure of the position you have taken relative to tolerance and Muslims, but quite a few people who would applaud your reply to Arella Mae have ranted long and hard against the perceived intolerance of Americans towards Muslims.

But I suppose Krumple's and your intolerance for Christians is OK because it is fueled by reason, whereas intolerance of Muslims in America is fueled by irrational racism.


Islam doesn't have as strong as a grip on political issues as christianity does in the US. But beyond that both are still trying to claim things that have nothing to support those claims. Some of the harsher rules that muslims live by I see them as unjust and would gladly oppose them vocally. I would never want to live under their imposed code of law as they are managing to get Britain to accept.

Am I intolerant of christians and muslims? I am because they impose their religious morality onto others who are not followers. If you want to be a believer that is fine by me, but keep it to yourself and keep it out of politics.
0 Replies
 
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jul, 2011 03:07 pm
@Arella Mae,
Quote:
I am sorry, Thomas. But I believe if it's wrong to do it in one place, it's wrong to do it in another


I agree with your moral consistency!

It seems logical to me but I can only guess that there could be exceptions to the rule. I think that some times it may be OK to be rude if you think it could offer moral or other insights, but other than that I am not so sure!

It would be my last result and I would prefer not to use rudeness.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jul, 2011 03:29 pm
@reasoning logic,
As Thomas pointed out it is not rude to be very direct at challenging someone beliefs on this type of thread.

It is AM job if she care to take part in such a thread discussion to defend her positions.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jul, 2011 03:38 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
Thomas pointed out it is not rude to be very direct at challenging someone beliefs on this type of thread.


That is why I also added that some times it may be OK to be rude if you think it could offer moral or other insights, but other than that I am not so sure!

I can think of way worse rudeness than what has been demonstrated on this thread and still fall under the category of sharing logic, morals and other insights!
0 Replies
 
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jul, 2011 03:41 pm
@BillRM,
By the way what do you have against homosexuals getting married?
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jul, 2011 03:52 pm
@reasoning logic,
reasoning logic wrote:

By the way what do you have against homosexuals getting married?


Might be all the Streisland.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jul, 2011 04:02 pm
@reasoning logic,
I cover that in other threads but a short version is the society as a whole have no interest one way or another in promoting long terms stable gay relationships or licensing them for that matter.

The society have an interest in promoting and licensing such relationships for heterosexual couples because as a class that is where the vast majority of the next generation of citizens will be raised best by all studies.

Unions of gay couples no matter how loving do not produce children without outside aid.

 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/19/2024 at 02:28:37