Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

An atheist in Congress? Say it ain't so!Follow

#52 Mar 14 2007 at 7:25 AM Rating: Good
*****
18,463 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
Again, it's only mutual from the side of 'believers' because they hold the position that requires an intentional willful ignorance. Christians and Wiccans can have mutual respect, asking atheists to have mutual respect for a position that's clearly just plain wrong is ridiculous.
I thought you didn't believe in hyping up a gross assumption. You're assuming that some sort of adherence to spirituality didn't travel the same path as the lack thereof. Automatically negating others' thought process as ludicrous is what you do, but it's still a gross assumption that your conclusion is the only one.

Quote:
Do you have 'mutual respect' for other things where the opposing opinion is clearly wrong to you? Do you have 'mutual respect' for people who think homosexuality is an affront to god or that abortion should be illegal, etc? Do you have 'mutual respect' for people who argue that the poor deserve to be poor because they don't try hard enough?

Why not?
I respect anyone's right to think as they please, even yours. I don't have to agree with it, or think that it's directed at me, personally. It can cause me sadness and regret on their behalf, as it does in the case of gays in the military, for example, but I don't see the need to impose my concept of what's right on people.
#53 Mar 14 2007 at 7:26 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Smasharoo wrote:
Of course the actions aren't different. The actions of a KKK march on Washington wouldn't be any different than the actions of a civil rights march on Washington, but you wouldn't equivocate those.
I would if I was replying to a statement such as "KKK people don't march".

Yossarian said, again...
Quote:
I have personally never had an atheist try to convert me. I've had craploads of Christians try to do so.

Your mileage may vary.
I've personally had atheists try to convert me. Lots of times. You can keep trying to redefine it if it makes you feel better but it won't become less true just because it bristles you to be told that you do the same thing those wacky Christians do.
Smash wrote:
both were two sides of the same coin and equally tiring, right?
In the case of Christian v Atheist, I do. Which goes for either side. Folks like you are as tiring and boring in these conversations as the fire & brimstone types. I'd feel the same mixture of ennui and amusement if I was having this conversation with an evangelical Baptist.

You keep saying it's all because of my faith though Smiley: wink2

Edited, Mar 14th 2007 8:29am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#54 Mar 14 2007 at 7:33 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Oh, and I suppose that if I knew people who went on lengthy screeds about gay rights or the right to an abortion every time the word "gay" or "baby" came up, I'd find them equally tiresome despite our shared views.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#55 Mar 14 2007 at 7:37 AM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

I thought you didn't believe in hyping up a gross assumption. You're assuming that some sort of adherence to spirituality didn't travel the same path as the lack thereof. Automatically negating others' thought process as ludicrous is what you do, but it's still a gross assumption that your conclusion is the only one.


Obviously some sort of adherence to spirituality didn't travel the same path as the lack thereof. The path to the lack thereof travels the path of Scientific Method and Objectivity. It's impossible to adhere to that path and arrive at 'some sort of adherence to spirituality' at the end. The very concept of 'spirituality' REQUIRES arbitrary belief in unprovable things for which there is ZERO evidence.

I'm not 'negating' someone's thought process. I'm 'negating' the idea that one can equivocate two conclusions, one arrived at through willfully ignoring evidence and one arrived at through observing it.


I respect anyone's right to think as they please, even yours.


I'm not sure what this even means. You respect people's right to think as they please? You respect people's right to believe whatever they want? So you respect homicidal racists right to think killing black people is ok because they're black and you repect NAMBLAs right to think what they do, etc.

Bully for you. I don't. I respect their right to say whatever they like. I refuse to respect people's right to think things that are clearly wrong to me. I wouldn't expect other people to respect my right to think things that are clearly wrong to them. What I would expect is that they explain to me why they think I'm wrong. To not do so is much more disrespectful to me.



I don't have to agree with it, or think that it's directed at me, personally. It can cause me sadness and regret on their behalf, as it does in the case of gays in the military, for example, but I don't see the need to impose my concept of what's right on people.


You do, though. It's what human beings do. You argue for what you think is right, you teach those around you what you think is right.

ARe you seriously telling me that if Joph Jr. shows up one day saying "All women are ************* that you'll just shrug your shoulders and say "Oh well, you're entitled to think what you like."

Please.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#56 Mar 14 2007 at 7:38 AM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

Oh, and I suppose that if I knew people who went on lengthy screeds about gay rights or the right to an abortion every time the word "gay" or "baby" came up, I'd find them equally tiresome despite our shared views.


So, Martin Luther King then, equally tiresome as KKK leaders in the early 60's, right?

Solid argument.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#57 Mar 14 2007 at 7:43 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Smasharoo wrote:
So, Martin Luther King then, equally tiresome as KKK leaders in the early 60's, right?
If I had to hang out with him and he sniped over and over and over every single time something vaguely connected to civil rights or blacks came up? Probably.

Keep trying to come up with tougher and tougher comparisons! You'll corner me yet!

Edited, Mar 14th 2007 8:43am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#58 Mar 14 2007 at 7:43 AM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

In the case of Christian v Atheist, I do. Which goes for either side. Folks like you are as tiring and boring in these conversations as the fire & brimstone types. I'd feel the same mixture of ennui and amusement if I was having this conversation with an evangelical Baptist.


Yes, this argument is 'special' because you've chosen a position unsupported by evidence, and have reconciled that with yourself. I have no illusions that you're going to ever change your mind, but at least be honest about it.


You keep saying it's all because of my faith though


Because it blatantly is. I'm not sure why you're so invested in thinking it's not.

Does it somehow cheapen your faith if it impacts your rhetoric?

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#59 Mar 14 2007 at 7:46 AM Rating: Good
*****
18,463 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
Obviously some sort of adherence to spirituality didn't travel the same path as the lack thereof. ...I'm not 'negating' someone's thought process. I'm 'negating' the idea that one can equivocate two conclusions, one arrived at through willfully ignoring evidence and one arrived at through observing it.
Sure you are. You're using your concept of what's valid to negate anyone that hasn't arrived at your conclusion. It's the very essence of intolerance.

Quote:
I'm not sure what this even means.
Oh, I'm sure. Smiley: lol I won't respond to the rest because, again, it's a gross extrapolation of a line of thinking that doesn't apply.

Quote:
Bully for you. I don't. I respect their right to say whatever they like.
What a frustrating life you must lead. See, I have learned through experience that people will all think what they like. They will look at me and judge me in their mind for whatever reason, but as long as that judgement is kept between their two ears and not force-fed to me by laws or dictates, I'm jim dandy with it.

Quote:
You do, though. It's what human beings do. You argue for what you think is right, you teach those around you what you think is right.
You can say it's what I do all you like. Even now, if that were true, I'd be trying to convert you, but I've attempted no such thing. I simply have no interest in it.

Quote:
ARe you seriously telling me that if Joph Jr. shows up one day saying "All women are ************* that you'll just shrug your shoulders and say "Oh well, you're entitled to think what you like."

Please.
Are you equating me and anyone else to a child? Really, how neocolonialist of you. Just for kicks, here's my view:I'm not sure if you are a parental figure to anyone yet, but let me tell you, I can teach him in his childhood, with Joph's permission, all I like to try to respect women, but if he turns out to be a chauvinist pig once he's an adult, there's precious little I can do about it. Same with religion, same with anything else. Once a person is an adult, they can recant or adhere to any teaching, and they're within their rights to do so.
#60 Mar 14 2007 at 7:47 AM Rating: Good
Gurue
*****
16,299 posts
The best part of this thread is the fact that I'm reading it while I'm putting together our yearly Church Special Section for our paper.

Wonder if I should put some of Joph's and Smash's arguement in one of the ads?
#61 Mar 14 2007 at 7:47 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Smasharoo wrote:
Does it somehow cheapen your faith if it impacts your rhetoric?
Smiley: grin Does it cheapen your atheism to admit that you try to convert others to your mindset, same as the Christian folk do?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#62 Mar 14 2007 at 7:47 AM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

If I had to hang out with him and he sniped over and over and over every single time something vaguely connected to civil rights or blacks came up? Probably.

Keep trying to come up with tougher and tougher comparisons! You'll corner me yet!


It's not a matter of cornering you. It's a matter you just making sillier and sillier statements. The idea that if this board was around in '63 and someone posted about blacks having the right to vote and me rabidly arguing that they should be able to would lead you to the same arguments you make in this thread is ludicrous and you know it.

Again, I don't see why you're so invested in it. It's a 'special' topic to you. Big deal.

It's not like I, and everyone else doesn't have particular hangups about certain issues.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#63 Mar 14 2007 at 7:48 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Nadenu wrote:
The best part of this thread is the fact that I'm reading it while I'm putting together our yearly Church Special Section for our paper.

Wonder if I should put some of Joph's and Smash's arguement in one of the ads?
Have any atheist ads? Smiley: laugh
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#64 Mar 14 2007 at 7:49 AM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

Does it cheapen your atheism to admit that you try to convert others to your mindset, same as the Christian folk do?


Cheapen it? No. It's false, because it's not a situation that can be equivocated any more than me trying to 'convert' someone to the mindset that they can't dig a hole to China in their backyard.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#65 Mar 14 2007 at 7:50 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Smasharoo wrote:
It's not a matter of cornering you. It's a matter you just making sillier and sillier statements. The idea that if this board was around in '63 and someone posted about blacks having the right to vote and me rabidly arguing that they should be able to would lead you to the same arguments you make in this thread is ludicrous and you know it.
Again, I'm not sure why you're so invested in redefining the argument away from "people from both sides actively try to change the mindsets of others to match their own". Oh, yeah I am. It's because you can't admit that your actions are the same as those of Mr. Watchtower.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#66 Mar 14 2007 at 7:53 AM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

Are you equating me and anyone else to a child?


No, I am, however, stating plainly that believing in some sort of defined mythos, for the sake of arbitrary example, Christianity, is exceptionally childish.


Really, how neocolonialist of you. Just for kicks, here's my view:I'm not sure if you are a parental figure to anyone yet, but let me tell you, I can teach him in his childhood, with Joph's permission, all I like to try to respect women, but if he turns out to be a chauvinist pig once he's an adult, there's precious little I can do about it.


Yes, but your argument is that you wouldn't TRY. That if he grew up to think ill of all women that you'd just shrug and be tolerant.



Same with religion, same with anything else. Once a person is an adult, they can recant or adhere to any teaching, and they're within their rights to do so.


Obviously they can. That doesn't mean you'd ignore it and tolerate any belief blindly out of 'respect' for them.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#67 Mar 14 2007 at 7:54 AM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

Again, I'm not sure why you're so invested in redefining the argument away from "people from both sides actively try to change the mindsets of others to match their own". Oh, yeah I am. It's because you can't admit that your actions are the same as those of Mr. Watchtower.



No, Gbaji, I ALREADY admitted it many posts ago. The actions are the same. They just don't stem from positions that can be equivocated. I'm not sure why you choose to focus on that and ignore the bulk of my posts.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#68 Mar 14 2007 at 7:57 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Smasharoo wrote:
I ALREADY admitted it many posts ago. The actions are the same.
Good. I'm glad we had this talk. Smiley: smile
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#69 Mar 14 2007 at 7:58 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
4,593 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
No, Gbaji, I ALREADY admitted it many posts ago. The actions are the same. They just don't stem from positions that can be equivocated. I'm not sure why you choose to focus on that and ignore the bulk of my posts.


I don't know what you're trying to prove. He didn't equivocate the positions, he equivocated the actions of the people in those positions. Two completely different things.
#70 Mar 14 2007 at 7:58 AM Rating: Good
Gurue
*****
16,299 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Nadenu wrote:
The best part of this thread is the fact that I'm reading it while I'm putting together our yearly Church Special Section for our paper.

Wonder if I should put some of Joph's and Smash's arguement in one of the ads?
Have any atheist ads? Smiley: laugh


It could...
#71 Mar 14 2007 at 8:01 AM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

Good. I'm glad we had this talk.


Yeah, thank god.

:)
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#72 Mar 14 2007 at 8:11 AM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

I don't know what you're trying to prove. He didn't equivocate the positions, he equivocated the actions of the people in those positions. Two completely different things.


Oh ********* they're not completely different things. Equivocating the actions as 'equally tiring' essentially equivocates the motivations, as does other specific language he used. I'm not going to get into a third person parsing of Joph's posts, but this isn't the same as 'Atheists and Theists both talk to people to advocate'

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#73 Mar 14 2007 at 8:14 AM Rating: Good
*****
18,463 posts
Smasharoo wrote:

Are you equating me and anyone else to a child?


No, I am, however, stating plainly that believing in some sort of defined mythos, for the sake of arbitrary example, Christianity, is exceptionally childish.
So you are. Got it.

Quote:
I can teach him in his childhood, with Joph's permission, all I like to try to respect women, but if he turns out to be a chauvinist pig once he's an adult, there's precious little I can do about it.


Yes, but your argument is that you wouldn't TRY. That if he grew up to think ill of all women that you'd just shrug and be tolerant.
Oh, I could state my opinion, but to believe I could convert an adult to my way of thought about women's rights based on undermining their intelligence and ability to rationalize is simply not my way. I try to teach more by example.

Quote:
Obviously they can. That doesn't mean you'd ignore it and tolerate any belief blindly out of 'respect' for them.
Sure I do, if they don't bother me. This isn't a hypothetical to me. I've been denigrated as a christian, a woman, and a hispanic. You live with dignity and you do the best you can. I've never had the kind of power a white-upper-class male has, so I know I can't win 'em all.
#74 Mar 14 2007 at 8:20 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

Oh, I could state my opinion, but to believe I could convert an adult to my way of thought about women's rights based on undermining their intelligence and ability to rationalize is simply not my way. I try to teach more by example.


Well, it's a noble effort, but I'm not going to start making contradictory arguments based on self righetousness, nor will I attempt to portray myself as serenely tolerating other points of view while ridiculing those I disagree with.



So you are. Got it.


Equating people who, as adults, still believe in Santa Claus or Christ to children in terms of that specific belief, yes. Yes, I am.

I'm not sure what the other option is, to be honest.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#75 Mar 14 2007 at 8:25 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Well, "equalling tiring" is subjective. I'll admit that your threshold for listening to people dither on about how God is fake may be much greater than your threshold for listening to evangalizing. Mine are about equal, depending on mood.

*Shrug*
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#76 Mar 14 2007 at 8:25 AM Rating: Good
*****
18,463 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
Well, it's a noble effort, but I'm not going to start making contradictory arguments based on self righetousness, nor will I attempt to portray myself as serenely tolerating other points of view while ridiculing those I disagree with.
I wouldn't expect you to. As I said, I'm not trying to convert you to my way of thought. I'm simply addressing your comment on how I choose to handle things, so, should you ever address this comment to me in person, you understand why I excuse myself and leave the room.


Quote:
Equating people who, as adults, still believe in Santa Claus or Christ to children in terms of that specific belief, yes. Yes, I am.

I'm not sure what the other option is, to be honest.
Well, it's nice to hear you admit it. Turth is, when you start out on such a narrow premise, you aren't leaving yourself a wide array of variety when it comes to your conclusions. I have a brother who is an atheist. To listen to the story of how he came to that point was very moving for me. At no point do I mean to imply that I don't think you arrived at your conclusion from a legitimate thought process.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 274 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (274)