The conspiracy in the Conspiracies in Religions

I am hoping that some of you out there might be able to help me put my worries to rest . As of late it seems to me that the Conspiracies in Religions forum has turned into nothing more then one of two camps , those for a christian god and those against either the christians or the christian god .

These battles will often rage back and forth based on nothing more than an argument with one camp belittling the other with no end in sight . The debates will , as interesting they may be , have very little to nothing to do with the forums " Conspiracies in Religions " . Those types of threads would be more suited for BTS's religion forum , no ?

So please help , is it just me who sees this , or is there in fact a conspiracy in the Conspiracies in Religions forum to make it nothing more then a forum for those to do battle , those adamantly for christianity Vs those adamantly against ?

Actually, it's not just in the Conspiracies in Religions forums. These days it seems to happen with just about any topic that deals with Christianity even in the slightest capacity.

Seems like as soon as someone mentions Jesus or the Bible, people start going nuts and getting all angry, sarcastic, and argumentative.

It's very disheartening.

reply to post by Max_TO


It is the Evangelical Atheists that infest the internet.

The observed behaviors of the Evangelical Atheist is so similar to a religious fundamentalist that it is a religion into itself.

What is driving the Evangelical Atheist's zealousness? What is driving the motivation to attack faith in god at every opportunity? Who knows?

First, before the normal zealot crowd arrives and says "what is an Evangelical Atheist" or "there is no such thing" or "Atheist can't be Evangelical" let me define what we are talking about and you can associate whatever "title" that best fits this behavior or description.

What is an Evangelical Atheist:

www.urbandictionary.com...

1. An evangelical atheist is one who not only believes there is no god or other supreme being, but is obsessed with convincing everyone around them to become an atheist too, usually through hard-line intolerance (the kind they accuse other religions of). When cornered they usually try to put down their opponent's religion and bash them for 'blind faith', not realizing that their belief that there is no god is no more or less valid or provable than the other guy's belief that there is one. Not to be confused with normal atheists/agnostics, who for the most part just dont talk about religion and accept the beliefs of those around them as their prerogative. Evangelical atheists are particularly common on the Internet, as organized religion is generally accepted as part of 'the system' of global human society, and lately it's become cool on the Internet to hate 'the system'.


2. Evangelical Atheist: An Evangelical Atheist is a person that is an atheist and tries to spread atheism amongst theists. It is derived from Evangelism, meaning "Spreading Good News" as practiced by Christianity. Due to the rise of the Conservative Christian movement in the United States of America and the increase of humanistic thought, along with the increased blending other many different religions, Atheism has become more and more popular. Evangelical atheist usually seeks to "convert" borderline theists, often by engaging in debate with fundamentalists.

www.catholicleague.org...

Nevertheless, some of the brightest minds in the English-speaking world right now argue that religion is the problem. And we know they’re the brightest minds because they keep telling us they are. The New Atheists are positively evangelical. They want to make a convert out of you, although if you’re a “dyed-in-the-wool faith-head” they’ll settle for peppering you with insults and sarcasm instead.

What is most worrying is that the New Atheists seem to gain the most followers precisely among the most ambitious and intelligent young people—the people who will be actively shaping government policy in the years to come. Attracted by the intellectual rebelliousness of the movement, young people fall for its insidious message: join us and you can be one of the smart people.

In the 1800s, Karl Marx and other thinkers systematized this anti-religious hostility. When the followers of Marx gained power in Russia, they were even more ruthless than the French revolutionaries in their suppression of religion. Similar horrors followed dogmatic Communism wherever it came to power.

But most of the English-speaking world was spared this excessive institutional atheism. The United States, in particular, has always zealously guarded the freedom of anyone to practice any religion that does not seriously interfere with public order.

That’s why we’re so surprised and baffled by what we call the New Atheism. For the first time in our relatively tranquil history, we’re facing a determined attempt not just to keep organized religion out of government (which most religious Americans agree is a good idea), but to suppress religion completely.

What we call the “New Atheism” is a bit different than its predecessor. It’s more aggressive, and it has more power. The leaders of the sect are well placed in the academic world, and they have a strong determination to mold government policy.

And you wouldn’t like the government if the New Atheists molded its policy. Richard Dawkins has asserted that teaching your religion to your child is a form of child abuse and should be criminalized. Other New Atheists have argued that churches should have to post a sign reading “for entertainment purposes only,” since after all they’re no less a fraud than telephone psychics.

The New Atheists see religion as a disease to be exterminated. Their dream, in short, is not a government neutral to religion, but a government actively hostile to religion. The evangelical atheists assume that religion must inevitably breed mindless fanaticism. Countering that image means not just answering the atheists’ arguments against God, but also correcting their false impressions of religion.

[edit on 14-7-2010 by infolurker]

Good points raised by both of you

However we do see the other side of the coin as well and it seems to become a very self feeding thing .

I have always thought that God wants people to follow him based on faith , faith is the key word here . If God didn't see fit to leave " proof " of his existence then why do his " followers " try to " Prove " his existence ?

Either way , it would seem these two groups truly dislike one another quite a bit .

Has this dislike for one another spilled over and taken over the Conspiracies in Religions forum ? Has the Conspiracies in Religions forum become more a place to argue over nothing more then opinion ?



[edit on 14-7-2010 by Max_TO]

First of all, thank you for bringing this up. I couldn't agree with you more.

I think that CiR has always been looked at as the black sheep in the ATS family. Being a mod for ATS has to be an amazingly difficult job and I greatly admire the work that is done by the people in control here, but it seems that this subforum is left to its own devices.

What percentage of the threads here actually deal with a conspiracy? How many threads are just regurgitating what another thread discusses further down the page?

I don't think it's a conspiracy by the ats ptb, I think it's a benign neglect.

I would MUCH prefer to see any thread that is not involving a conspiracy moved to BTS and I'd love to see threads that cover the same subject merged if they aren't highlighting something new and revelatory.

The good news is that in my years of visiting ATS, I've seen it happen before. It seems cyclical, but usually requires someone behind the scenes to be a lot more draconian in the rules enforcement for a while.

On the other hand, maybe I'm wrong. Take the Islam is an Advocate of Peace thread. Although it provides an interesting debate and is certainly a worthwhile discussion, there is no conspiracy to be found there. At all.

Does ATS benefit from having a high volume thread here so they leave it regardless of whether it's appropriate or not? I'd like to think not.

Eric

Somebody is going to make the dumb mistake of saying that God, or Jesus, or anybody else does - or does not - exist and those of differing beliefs shall dispute them.
Now, I must ask, if atheists really aren't Hell-bent on converting people, then why do they always make a big show of it? That's what happens on every site I've ever been to: "No, I don't want to convert people, I just think you're an idiot for having an imaginary friend to whom you pray." There is sure to be a dispute to something like that!

reply to post by infolurker


Although I agree that Evangelical Atheists are an odd and irritating bunch, the (less frequent but still annoying) other side of the coin is the 'non-sequitur' Christian who will post in any thread, regardless of its subject, to interject something about Christianity or the Bible.

Eric

reply to post by EricD


Thanks for mentioning the Mod's here as I don't blame them either .

I tend to agree with you , what it is is what it has become based on a timed evolution .

Having said that , and assuming there is something to my OP I can say personally it is becoming tiresome and old .

Perhaps some regulation of the forum directives would be in order ?

reply to post by infolurker

Dude...The New Atheism came about because of freedom of religion and freedom from being persercuted for practicing the wrong religion.

First line says it all.

Originally posted by EricD
reply to post by infolurker

 

Although I agree that Evangelical Atheists are an odd and irritating bunch, the (less frequent but still annoying) other side of the coin is the 'non-sequitur' Christian who will post in any thread, regardless of its subject, to interject something about Christianity or the Bible.

Eric

Good point, I've noticed that a lot, three screens scrolling worth of bible quotes in a UFO thread, etc.

FWIW I'm not an Evangelical Atheist, or necessarily an Atheist for that matter. I don't preach and I don't like being preached to. If we're going to discuss ANYTHING, you better be ready to suspend your beliefs as much as you want me to suspend mine.

Edit: the "I" and "you" were generalizations.

[edit on 15-7-2010 by dlifesjrny]

I would have to agree that probably dozens of notes should not even be in this forum in the first place but should be on a regular discussion group on religious issues.

I'm not really interested in discussing individual religious issues as much as the conspiracy I am talking about in "Resurrection" & 'Rebirth'.

I have a certain interest in discussing elements of that Doctrine; but am most interested in explaining the large-scale implications of the conspiracy.

I've spent quite enough time establishing that the conspiracy exists.

Now I am more concerned about explaining the consequences if that conspiracy is not brought to an end.

And quickly.

I would suggest that, anytime anyone starts a thread, that is must contain a very precise explanation of the conspiracy aspect of the issue.

Who are the conspirators?

What is the specific reason for the conspiracy or the motivations of the conspirators?

On a scale of one to ten, just how serious is the conspiracy?

And why?

Michael Cecil

Unfortunately, it has been a problem since I first joined back in 2007 (and I am sure even before that). We even have 2 stickied announcement threads for CIR stating this forum is intended to be conspiracy-focused but it is still a daily battle to keep it that way.

We have similar problems in forums like breaking alternative news and current events (both get flooded with general news stories that really have nothing to do with conspiracies or the alternative). Another is the general conspiracy forum that is often mistaken for general thread topics.

So we feel your pain.

My pipe dream has always been for the 'Conspiracies in Religions' forum to be widened into 'Religious Issues & Conspiracies,' much like we have the 'Medical Issues & Conspiracies' forum.

Then CIR would be perfect for all things religious including religious conspiracies, religious issues, and religious-based current events.

reply to post by AshleyD


I would be interested to learn just what forum draws the most Mod warnings for personal attacks as found in some of the posted replies ?

If it isn't the Conspiracies in Religions forum I just might find myself surprised

Here is how it works.
Some cop shoots someone and a christian church is defending the cop= Conspiracy in religion
A child reads the bible= conspiracy in religion
666 happens to be the sum of 665 and 1 = conspiracy in religion
We get a new president = he is the anti-christ + conspiracy in religion
Fanatical Muslims act like fanatics= conspiracy in religion
Scientology exists = conspiracy in religion

It is a crap shoot 1/2 of them will get moved to BTS rant and the other 1/2 stay in CiR. I am not sure what the deciding factor is. For the most part CiR really only has a variation of 4-5 threads that come up over and over
1. Brainwashing children
2. There is no god/jesus (there is a variation of this which really is just "you guys are wrong"
3. Stupid question thread (like If there is a god then why don't...)
4. OMG look at them (usually just ridiculing some group)
5. The pro religion thread

There may be a few more but that pretty much sums up the CiR board. Oh yeah if forgot there is another one, a little more rare but the classic

jehovah's witnesses(or other group) came knocking on my door and i totaly told them off and asked them a bunch of questions and they could not answer and man im so bad

I would be interested to learn just what forum draws the most Mod warnings for personal attacks as found in some of the posted replies ?

If it isn't the Conspiracies in Religions forum I just might find myself surprised

It probably is not, when it comes to religion people are alowed to be a lot more insulting. For example saying that "christians are dumb" or "raising children in a christian household is child abuse" is pretty much fine but if you said "blacks are dumb" or "raising a child in a black home is child abuse" you would probably get a warning.

many Christians are in fact dumb as a box of rocks about everything including Christianity. Amazing but quite true.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Christians are dumb ignorant pathetic ppl because they believe the Bible is God's word
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I could go on but i think you get the point.


[edit on 15-7-2010 by zaiger]

reply to post by zaiger


Good points

So let me ask you , is the problem with the very name of the forum by being to broad , or could there be people with an agenda purposely posting the way they do as a means to simply " do battle " and be " the louder voice " ?

If that is the case then there just may be a Conspiracy here in the CIR forum .




[edit on 15-7-2010 by Max_TO]

OP, ya got my vote! People ought to stick to the topic at hand, embrace the spirit of debate, and not give way to the downward spiral of offensive posting.

Originally posted by Lightmare
Seems like as soon as someone mentions Jesus or the Bible, people start going nuts and getting all angry, sarcastic, and argumentative.

Mostly I see those types of responses, in regards to any topic, as a sign of fear within the poster. They fear there may be truth in that which they deny so vehemently. Otherwise, they'd be more likely to ignore those posts/topics, or as I mentioned above, enter into the dialogue with a spirit of debate (devoid of anger, sarcasm, and argumentative tendencies.)

Smile. You know who you are. No one can define you!

reply to post by Max_TO


I think the problem of the board is lack of enforcement, i remember a few months ago the mods were prett on top of things. But now it went back to the way it was. The mods have said that they are not perfect and can't watch every board and everythread but from what i have seen they are on top of things in other boards.
I believe that some do indeed just want to fight about it but i also believe that CiR has run its course. Like i said there are only a few varriations of the same thread over and over and none of them have anything to do with conspiracy. Look at the CiR board right now, how many of them really have anything to do with any type of conspiracy.

oh yeah S&F

Here i actually asked for them to ammend the T&Cs to limit name calling when it comes to religion.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
People were on board untill springer said no.

[edit on 15-7-2010 by zaiger]

reply to post by zaiger


You know , it's to bad really . Religion can be a very interesting area of conversation / discussion based on the many different beliefs , ancient scripts , symbolism and so on . But it seems " we " get caught up to much in the trivial and silly and tend to make all religious conversation end up the same way .

Thanks for your sharing your opinions , I tend to agree with much of what you said .

Originally posted by Max_TO

 

You know , it's to bad really . Religion can be a very interesting area of conversation / discussion based on the many different beliefs , ancient scripts , symbolism and so on . But it seems " we " get caught up to much in the trivial and silly and tend to make all religious conversation end up the same way.

Hmmm... maybe this occurs because the conversation drifts a lil' too close to the truth, and must be 'snuffed out.' ... Do I smell a conspiracy

reply to post by Max_TO


Since this thread was made, its been a problem with many people understanding what A conspiracy really means.

It comes in waves, sometimes people abide by the rules and only post real conspiracies relating to religion, and then it turns around and becomes a preaching thread.

I have seen it going on over and over again and as usual when you step in and try to make posters understand what conspiracies means many are gracious enough to agree but some just tells you right away to move on and stop posting.

Now when that happens, just make me laugh as you see how well many have read the rules of this site.