Atheists... Your life is pointless

Do you mean that everything we say is nothing but a mewl or a bark or a squeak or a growl or a purr or a tail wag or an ear cock?

No.
An oxymoron is a self-contradictory term.
What I wrote is a truism, or a tautology.

Well kinda, at least initially...
http://able2know.org/topic/207665-1#post-5246135
http://able2know.org/topic/207665-1#post-5246203
A little off topic, but there is where I've discussed this.

Here you go, harping on hatefulness. In a post above you claim that i'm being hateful when i say you're incoherent. You are incoherent and if you find it insulting to be told that, then you need to learn to express yourself coherently.

It is a matter of indifference to me if others here take me seriously, and that is especially true of people who are wrapped up in delusions, such as that god chats with them or has given them a "gift" of prophecy.

I have no respect for you because you haven't earned it. You still prate about your special relationship with "god," and your "gift" of prophecy. You usually do so by going on and on and on and on . . . with almost opaque writing which is often indecipherable. I don't see you contributing anything worthwhile to these discussions, so, no, i have no respect for you.

I agree that saying "I'm an atheist", should not be confrontational.
Because atheist is a short hand description. The problem is that it can become perceived as a label.
Who's ruining our schools?.... The Athiests, that's who.
Why can't I put the Ten Commandments up in courts of law? .... Those damn Athiests.
Etc.
There is even some danger of atheists adopting an offensive posture out of defense against persecution. I've been tempted in this regard. I left facebook recently (in part) due to some hurtful comments by someone (Christian) who I consider to be otherwise a very standup person.
The problem with labels is that they can be dehumanizing. You can attack an "atheist" more easily than you can attack Matt (at least I would hope, on a psychological level).

The interesting thing for me is that I hardly ever know whether or not someone else is religious until they make an unsolicited announcement about it. Nine times out of 10 (generous estimate, it's probably 100%) it's a prelude to trying to convert me to whatever version of theism that they've bought into. How do I respond? I just mildly say, "Thanks, but I'm not interested in religion."

THEN the confrontation begins. From them. "Why aren't you...?" "Why don't you...?" "How can you...?" "You're not an atheist, are you?" Gasp!

I just excuse myself and walk away. I think they are just genuinely -selectively - oblivious to how hard a time they've been giving non-believers and believers in other denominations/religions for so long. I read somewhere recently that there are still US states where atheists are legally prohibited from holding public office of any kind. And theists have the nerve to accuse us of being militant, repressive and confrontational! Think "Salem Witch Hunts" and then talk about how badly atheists have treated believers!

I notice the same thing about atheists. They are reluctant to make such a statement, or to discuss religion, precisely because of the reaction you've just described. These days, i just close the door in their face with no comment.

I was raised in the US South (Bible Belt), so I can't bring myself to be rude. I say, "No, thank you" and then close the door before they can respond.

Actually, these days I have a sign on my door that reads (in Korean) "Buddhist's home." I'm not a Buddhist, but it keeps the door-knockers away.

I understand the part about the Bible belt. I was at my brother's house in North Carolina more than 30 years ago when the Watchtower crew came to the door. I told the lady that i'd been up all night driving (absolutely true) but that if she would leave her literature, i'd look it over. I treated her with that smarmy-sweet courtesy that so characterizes the southerner who wishes you would just fall down dead, but intends to be polite about it. She responded appropriately and i went back to bed.

Another reason I'm polite over here is that I'm a foreigner and I want them to know that not all of us are Christians or similar believers. They've stereotyped Westerners, particularly Americans, as believers.

It is patronizing and not humble on their part, but I think often these attempts at conversion are (in their mind) well intentioned.
They want to convert because they care.
(I'm assuming your primary missionaries are some version of Christian).

Oh I think I misunderstood where you now reside. The United States or South Korea?

There's a big Korean church a few blocks away here in Toronto for some flavor of Christian, and the Salvation Army down the street from us has been largely taken over by a different flavor of Korean Christian. I could never make out why Christianity was so much more popular among the Koreans than among other east Asian nations.

I'm American and grew up there, but I've been in Korea for quite a while now.

You know, on the one hand I can see the possibility that maybe at least some of the evangelists are trying to be helpful, but that's counter-balanced by the suspicion that maybe they're just trying to earn their spot in heaven and want to use you as a feather in their cap.

That's pretty simple, really: $$$. Missionaries bearing food gifts invaded decades ago and told them how God will reward them materially for conversion. At that time, Korea was desperately poor, and they wanted the well-fed, well-heeled lifestyle the American missionaries represented.

I am only familiar with the feather in your cap thing from Mormonism.
As a former evangelical Christian (as a child) I would not characterize the drive to convert for some "reward" in heaven. Who wants to see people go to hell? That seems like plenty enough reason for me, if you happen to believe in hell, and you happen to believe that faith delivers you from it.
If you thought someone was going to be tortured for eternity if you didn't help them, wouldn't you? Even if it was socially uncomfortable.

Yeah, I didn't mean it was formal doctrine, just private motivation. The Bible and its reps are contradictory about that. On the one hand they say you can't earn your way into heaven, but on the other hand, if you don't do certain things you'll go to hell. So the threat is always there, whether it's spoken aloud or not.

Faith without works is dead.

Martin Luther called the book of James "the gospel of straw". He would have like to have had it removed from the canon. It made the whole salvation through faith doctrine a little less "Biblical".