What has happened to you, ATS?

originally posted by: ProfessorChaos
So, I was just having lunch with my family, and while eating, I was thinking about some of the responses on this very young thread.

It's occurred to me, that though my post was not a post specifically about Christianity, nor one calling for other viewpoints to be silenced (as has been implied by some), that this battle is one that will not be won on ATS. Just the use of the word 'Christianity' in an example (based on my most recently read thread), has already caused what could have been a simple discussion, to devolve into the very same tit-for-tat that I posited was harming the community of ATS.

Some members shut down intellectually the very moment their eyes fell upon that word, and accused me of whining, and essentially wanting to ban any worldview that didn't support mine. That's really discouraging. Not only is it discouraging, it's sad.

In order to avoid the same kind of vitriol that I was speaking against in my OP, I will be removing the proverbial gloves, not to go 'bare knuckle', but to place my hands in my pockets.

Have at it, guys. Get it out of your system, so that we can all move on, and actually edify each other. After all, that was the point of this thread to begin with.

I get your point.

But as long as Christian problems and influence over our Western society continue, and are not resolved, people are going to continue "bashing" Christianity.

You can't complain about anger towards Christians until you acknowledge the real problems it has caused to others or on our society.

Until Christians stop trying to change history and science textbooks for schools. Until Christians stop trying to erect public monuments on public property. Until they don't try to base laws on Biblical passages or beliefs, laws which affect non-believers.

originally posted by: CaptainTwig
It appears that ATS is in ... General Disarray.

a reply to: ProfessorChaos

-
OPINION: ATS is a ... Reflection-of-General-Disarray
( i.e. don't blame it on ATS )

And I really didn't want to get Drawn-In to ... THIS.


For a ... Few-Examples:

1. Last Februry CIA went into Lockdown ... AND ... Last week the CIA announced a Significant-Regorganization.
( and/or Hmmm, did they admit ... 'Disarray'? )

2. 26 U.S. States are in a immigration lawsuit.

3. U.S. stopped sharing intelligence with israel

4. Etc. etc. etc. ... easily a neverending-'disarray'-list.
( ex. obamacare, middle-east, us-eu-ukraine-russia, ... )

-
ATS: A Reflection of the ... Disarray-(bizzaro?)-Reality
.

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

So, you no longer want to have spring or winter breaks?

DIdn't say that. But holidays need to be (and are being) unhinged from religious roots. And, again, we have Christians that want to retain the privileged place that Christianity held in our laws, holidays, schooling, etc. It is this that is being deconstructed. Non-believers want their government, schools, and laws free from religious prescriptions. People of other religions don't want to be subjected to Christianity.

This is what Christians misperceive as "persecution" of Christians in the West, when in reality it is others simply wanting freedom from Christianity and real equality for other beliefs.

OK, that's fine. Then what it your response to the Mayor of New York declaring that the schools will be out for two very specifically named Muslim holidays?

Now, I have no problem with them recognizing the religious practices of others. However, you cannot call the winter or spring break Christmas or Easter break to recognize the reason those breaks were originally instituted whether or not all the students receiving the benefits of those breaks actually celebrate them. However, in this case, you will have two breaks labeled for the religious holidays they were instituted for when only about 30 to 35% of the student body will actually be celebrating the holiday they are receiving the benefits of.

If you have no problem with the Muslim holiday label, then it would be hypocritical to have a problem with the Christian holiday label.

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
What would be the point in making threads about Hinduism and Buddhism when most ATS religious folks are Christian?a reply to: ketsuko

There are problems in those religions too, but not to the same degree.

Both Buddhism and Hinduism are far more respectful theologically of other religions. For example Hindu yogis respect Jesus as a prophet, enlightened being, and maybe even another incarnation of the divine.

Neither say if you don't follow them you will go to hell.

In Hinduism generally all people are already part of the divine, nobody is "unsaved," and eventually all will return to the godhead, Christians and atheists both.

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

So, you no longer want to have spring or winter breaks?

DIdn't say that. But holidays need to be (and are being) unhinged from religious roots. And, again, we have Christians that want to retain the privileged place that Christianity held in our laws, holidays, schooling, etc. It is this that is being deconstructed. Non-believers want their government, schools, and laws free from religious prescriptions. People of other religions don't want to be subjected to Christianity.

This is what Christians misperceive as "persecution" of Christians in the West, when in reality it is others simply wanting freedom from Christianity and real equality for other beliefs.

OK, that's fine. Then what it your response to the Mayor of New York declaring that the schools will be out for two very specifically named Muslim holidays?

Now, I have no problem with them recognizing the religious practices of others. However, you cannot call the winter or spring break Christmas or Easter break to recognize the reason those breaks were originally instituted whether or not all the students receiving the benefits of those breaks actually celebrate them. However, in this case, you will have two breaks labeled for the religious holidays they were instituted for when only about 30 to 35% of the student body will actually be celebrating the holiday they are receiving the benefits of.

If you have no problem with the Muslim holiday label, then it would be hypocritical to have a problem with the Christian holiday label.

I am of the view that just as the Constitution says, there should be zero merger of any government actions/orgs with religion. Neither Muslim or Christian.

However, we do have breaks and holidays built in to school and work now, so keeping the positive and needed benefits of these breaks is a good thing.

originally posted by: EternalSolace
a reply to: ketsuko

That I can't argue with. There does appear to be a sheer hate for Christianity and Christians that even I can't say isn't prevalent. But that too was accounted for in the Bible with Mark 13:13. But it can't be denied that a lot of the contempt for Christians is because of the judging.

Well, there is plenty of judgmentalism to go around on all sides. It isn't restrained to Christians. However, if there was one bit of scripture that has been abused and sorely misused over and over to the great detriment of all in the faith, it would be that bit about judge not lest ye be judged.

It's been used over and over to simply tell people who object to something to sit down and shut up when perhaps they should be raising objections.

And of course, now the pop-culture meaning is that no one should object to anything anyone else decides to do. That is simple wrong.

Bashing religions seems to be the new fashion

I try to stay out of it but according to ATS all Christians are paedophiles, the Muslims are all terrorists and the Jews were responsible for 9/11 and everything else bad that's ever happened.

If i had my way religious discussion would be discouraged.

If I were to talk about some ones race or sexual orientation with the same venomous hate that some spew out towards religion I would be banned and rightly so.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
If i had my way religious discussion would be discouraged.

But then the religion-bashers would have won, because religion could not be presented positively either.

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
What would be the point in making threads about Hinduism and Buddhism when most ATS religious folks are Christian?a reply to: ketsuko

There are problems in those religions too, but not to the same degree.

Both Buddhism and Hinduism are far more respectful theologically of other religions. For example Hindu yogis respect Jesus as a prophet, enlightened being, and maybe even another incarnation of the divine.

Neither say if you don't follow them you will go to hell.

In Hinduism generally all people are already part of the divine, nobody is "unsaved," and eventually all will return to the godhead, Christians and atheists both.

Hindus still have their caste system and Buddhists also have their problems.

There have also been incidents of violence in the name of both religions ... quite recently too.

The main reason we don't tar and feather those religions with the same brush we do Christianity is mainly because we weren't raised in societies colored to the same degree by them as this one is by Christianity. Grow up in a Buddhist or Hindu nation and learn the history of those places like we learn the history of Western Civ, and your perspective might change somewhat.

The simple fact of the matter is that human nature is human nature. No religion can change that only seek to moderate it.

Francis Collins said it very astutely when he said that people seek to blame faith when the truth is that you are always pouring the pure water of faith into the rusty vessel of humanity. When the water comes out of mankind tainted, it isn't the fault of the water but the fault of the vessel.

Even atheism has been linked to some of the worst human monstrosities in history.

My simple conclusion is that it is our human nature that leads us to be jerks to each other, and anything else is simply the window dressing through which we enable ourselves and excuse our @sshattery.

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
If i had my way religious discussion would be discouraged.

But then the religion-bashers would have won, because religion could not be presented positively either.

Very true.

But I personally do not think that religious discussion has any place on ATS just like race, age, sexual orientation and other such things.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

If I were to talk about some ones race or sexual orientation with the same venomous hate that some sprue out towards religion I would be banned and rightly so.

But race is not a choice, and many say sexual orientation is the same way.

Not a fair comparison.

Religion is a delusional choice.

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
What would be the point in making threads about Hinduism and Buddhism when most ATS religious folks are Christian?a reply to: ketsuko

There are problems in those religions too, but not to the same degree.

Both Buddhism and Hinduism are far more respectful theologically of other religions. For example Hindu yogis respect Jesus as a prophet, enlightened being, and maybe even another incarnation of the divine.

Neither say if you don't follow them you will go to hell.

In Hinduism generally all people are already part of the divine, nobody is "unsaved," and eventually all will return to the godhead, Christians and atheists both.

Hindus still have their caste system and Buddhists also have their problems.

There have also been incidents of violence in the name of both religions ... quite recently too.

The main reason we don't tar and feather those religions with the same brush we do Christianity is mainly because we weren't raised in societies colored to the same degree by them as this one is by Christianity. Grow up in a Buddhist or Hindu nation and learn the history of those places like we learn the history of Western Civ, and your perspective might change somewhat.

The simple fact of the matter is that human nature is human nature. No religion can change that only seek to moderate it.

Francis Collins said it very astutely when he said that people seek to blame faith when the truth is that you are always pouring the pure water of faith into the rusty vessel of humanity. When the water comes out of mankind tainted, it isn't the fault of the water but the fault of the vessel.

Even atheism has been linked to some of the worst human monstrosities in history.

My simple conclusion is that it is our human nature that leads us to be jerks to each other, and anything else is simply the window dressing through which we enable ourselves and excuse our @sshattery.

I said there were problems. And yes Buddhists and Hindus have committed violence in the name of religion. Yes there are castes, etc.

My theological statement stands true, that those two religions are less judgmental, and that is demonstrable by putting side by side their views of other religions and salvation compared to Christianity.

Nobody is "condemned" in Hinduism or Buddhism. There are just actions that are more or less aware. And, negative actions will come back to you possibly as karma. In Hinduism everybody is already a child of god, because they are "drops in the ocean." Non-believers too. This isn't true in Christianity.

Note my post, however, a page back where I said that ethical behavior has no correlation with religiosity for most. Whether or not someone acts ethically appears to have no correlation with their stated religion.

So we agree there. However, this DOES raise questions for Christian believers. Where is the transformation? If the claims of Christianity and "being a new person" after being born again are true, then there should be SOME kind of signifiant difference between believers and not. Yes?

originally posted by: woodwardjnr

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: woodwardjnr

Plus science...look at all the evolution threads made by religious folk attempting to push their religions agenda.
And people wonder why many fight back?.
Boo Hoo.

The death cries of outdated philosophy can be the most dangerous

Evolution needs to take its place beside Christianity as incomplete and CERTAINLY outdated.

I get as sick reading the evolution believers as any other religion, none of them are even remotely accurate, and none of them are actually interested in finding the truth.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
If i had my way religious discussion would be discouraged.

But then the religion-bashers would have won, because religion could not be presented positively either.

Very true.

But I personally do not think that religious discussion has any place on ATS just like race, age, sexual orientation and other such things.

That doesn't really make sense. All of those things are very central and important areas of current events and history, and need to be discussed at various points.

a reply to: roth1

Not always a choice....you seen Jesus camp?.
Brainwashed since birth and they don't even know it.

originally posted by: roth1
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

If I were to talk about some ones race or sexual orientation with the same venomous hate that some sprue out towards religion I would be banned and rightly so.

But race is not a choice, and many say sexual orientation is the same way.

Not a fair comparison.

Religion is a delusional choice.

Some would argue that Sexual orientation is a choice

Even your the race you identify with can be a choice, I for example identify my race as "White British" but some might call it "White Scottish".

Some might even say that religion is only a choice for those who have yet to revive the gift of faith, once you have faith in God their is no longer any choice.

Its not all black and white

Even if you do believe religion is a choice who are any of us to judge another for the life choices they chose to make?

Maybe the Christians should stop Muslim bashing. Not like that is going to happen. Grow up. Mo other group is saying quit bashing, non-believers, Muslims ect.. Christians are the biggest, greediest cry babies war mongers out there. Aside from Israelis that is. Live and let live. Unless your cult likes confrontation and wars. Yes it does. We can do it but you can't attitude sucks.

originally posted by: ProfessorChaos
a reply to: EternalSolace

Some Christians take it upon themselves to judge, just as some non believers do the same. Not all of them.

That's all I'm saying.

Too bad, the way I see it, the way it is preached, none of this is even remotely possible if people had this amazing connection with GOD.

The fact is, inside not a one of them have the connection they desire, which is why they buy every book and never look for what is actually going on in the world.

They may seem harmless, but the damage done by these systems is often more unseen at first, but very dangerous patterns emerge.

Once one truly looks at this clearly, and sees that Christians are all about claiming they are better, and all powerful and no one can touch them, and yet they are hammered within their own communities all the time, we can see they are blinded WILLINGLY.

So close they seem to be able to create a better world, but all that is for not, since they need the world in turmoil to even exist........

They MUST be called out, even though they do not answer the call, for they cannot, and WILL NOT for they have no leg to stand on.

Better than any new version of MKULTRA, they have been had on the HIGHEST levels.

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
If i had my way religious discussion would be discouraged.

But then the religion-bashers would have won, because religion could not be presented positively either.

Very true.

But I personally do not think that religious discussion has any place on ATS just like race, age, sexual orientation and other such things.

That doesn't really make sense. All of those things are very central and important areas of current events and history, and need to be discussed at various points.

Yeah, ok I will give you that,

I think that topics around race, sexuality and religion are all very well and good but many members on ATS have demonstrated they are unable to do this with out causing offence. So perhaps rather than saying it should be discouraged i should have said it should be handled with more respect.

originally posted by: thesmokingman
Constructive, civil debates are healthy. Making fun of someone or demeaning them for their beliefs just points out ones own ignorance. I personally enjoy debating religious topics as much as any other topics. You know, point-counter point talk. On the other hand, for whatever reason,, religion is a very sensitive topic for some folks. Like that old saying you shouldnt talk politics or religion with friends. I guess some people are really just weak minded individuals and cannot have a conversation without snarkiness and rude comments. I will tell you one thing for sure, theses "internet warriors" would not have the balls to say these things to peoples face. Either way, I really just laugh off any rude comments I see. Give someone enough rope and....well, you know.

I agree with what you've stated; I couldn't have stated it better. I would only add that perhaps the altogether best thing would be if there weren't any "religious" OP type posts. No one has ever changed anyone's mind about politics or religion; to me the posts are utterly pointless except to 1) stir up controversy and to thus enjoy watching the mud fly and/or 2) to endlessly promote the PC Progressive anti-any-religion agenda which oddly enough, along with evolution, appears to have become a religion of its own.

So, I'd suggest that people who agree with either of us simply refrain from "taking the bait" as it were, and hence forth ignore the "religion/activist atheist" type OPs, threads, whatever, altogether. They are, for the most part a waste of electrons.