NEF on ATS Live to Atheists: Shut Up and Go Away!

Hiya Neformore,

I realize you're inviting persons to come in and talk about it ... It's just if ATS live knew before hand how one sided the topic was going to be, why choose it?

The presentation of organized Atheists was pretty heavily blasted without defense. I don't think it's particularly your opinion that's the issue but it was a bit like listening to the equivolent 100 lashes on a bare philosophical back.

For example:

Originally posted by neformore
I don't like the pettiness of "just because you've done something, we have to counter it with our own version".

There is a wider issue at stake here though, and religion has had a free ride for so long on it.

How often do we have to have the 'where do morals come from?' horse riding through the country side unopposed? You don't think it's a bit intimidating that the Ten Commandments are sitting right out side the place in America where justice is done?

Nearly half of those commandments are mostly to do with God being jealous, taking names in vain, drawing pictures of him or her, and avoiding doing your grocery shopping on a particular day. It isn't until half way down that we get into the 'do not kill' area. I think a human could come up with a perfectly adequate better list.

Letting the religious (all religions) take full one hundred percent unopposed credit for morality and the advancements there of is a dangerous precedent. To let any religious body claim that I rely on them is not acceptable to me. Religions didn't invent moral philosophy or free speech. In fact, an Atheist in the west was one of the first to make a case for free speech and thought and it was religious people that rejected it. Further to that, the first versions of freedom endorsed didn't extend to Atheists.

It isn't all petty or schoolyard. There's an element of it that's about truth or at least presenting a possible truth that should be acknowledged. The fact that the majority of Americans wouldn't elect an Atheist President shows that, whilst not perfect, movements such as New Atheism aren't entirely missing the point.

Without persons like Hitchens and Dawkins, I think things would be much worse. Even as Sam Harris distances himself from 'religious' like Atheists, the person still supports there being less emphasis on the requirement for religion quite vigorously.

What does that achieve, exactly?

The answer is simple. Nothing.

A simple poll response of the number of Atheists out and about in America would disagree with this.

I'll stop here because I'm actually not intending this to be a full on debate or a crucifying of poor Nef.

All I'm saying is, that in the last couple of thousand characters I've made more of a talking point than the entire of the ATS studio did in that five minutes.

I understand persons may not have time to prepare for topics / probably aren't being paid / may be addressing topics that aren't interesting to them ... but if that's the case, I'd suggest that there are plenty of ATS'rs who would be happy to show up to do some talking! Or find a topic that will warrant some better discussion back and forth, or the revealing of the topic in a fresh light.

Even as a confident Atheist I wasn't interested in taking the offered call-in discussion because I was expecting to be Bill O'Reily'd into next year.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


hmm. i couldn't hear the clip(site access denied) but.. if it was aimed at all atheist.. then that's BS....

____________

People just don't care about your friggin god..

But then you have religious people...

-LABEL US
-ASSIGN US WITH THE WORD BELIEF
-THEN CALL US A RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION

This is why their is a evangelical Atheism... because of the relentless religious folks running around condemning people for not giving a sht about their god.

reply to post by GAOTU789

"We get that you don't believe in God, yes you don't believe in God, if you don't believe in God that's fair enough. Why are you making a monument to tell people that you don't believe in God, 'cause that's just mirroring a monument that does believe in God. I mean, it's just silly, stop it, it's rubbish."

I stand corrected. My sincere apologies. But again - why make a monument because you do believe in a god? Why is that not silly? This isn't a monument in memorialization of belief in nothing - it's a demonstration. Of what? Ask the atheists who put it there. I know what it means to me, but I didn't put it there.

Originally posted by luciddream
reply to post by AfterInfinity

 

hmm. i couldn't hear the clip(site access denied) but.. if it was aimed at all atheist.. then that's BS....

Just to keep things clear, Nef is an Atheist himself.

reply to post by GAOTU789

And to add to clearness ... there was a statement that it wasn't referring to all Atheists on the show, but there was a fair amount of generalizing also. From listening to it I'm not sure where the lines were being drawn exactly, but there's only so much discussion you can get done in five minutes.

90% of the Atheist on this site have to spend MOST of the time on a thread explaining to religious people what is belief and why an atheist have NO BELIEF!

Atheist have NO BELIEF.

Not DO NOT BELIEVE in your god.

When talking a bout UNICORNS, do we tell people that don't believe in the unicorn as "People of the Non-Unicorn believing Organization"?


NO BELIEF is the DEFAULT!

Probably more out of frustration as just like bible thumpers,
even Atheists get carried away.
That's just my thought after reading the thread a little.

reply to post by intrepid


My opinion is that every time you do not challenge illogical beliefs you are liable for their effects and proliferation.

Christians want you to listen to the voice of god in your head until it tells a mother to kill her children. The religious rationalization is when your parroting words by genocidal desert dwellers who worship a god who's kindest act was in raping a virgin...you assume no responsibility for the effects of those words.

Well maybe society doesn't hold you accountable now... but they will soon.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


I tend to agree with you actually and think building monuments to one's religion, or lack thereof, especially on a courthouse( or any other government institution ) is wrong.

But I am a proponent that faith or lack of is a deeply personal issue and not meant for public displays such as these.

Originally posted by Wertdagf
reply to post by intrepid

 

My opinion is that every time you do not challenge illogical beliefs you are liable for their effects and proliferation.

As this isn't even the topic may I say that that is just as evangelical as any Christian? Yes.

Christians want you to listen to the voice of god in your head until it tells a mother to kill her children. The religious rationalization is when your parroting words by genocidal desert dwellers who worship a god who's kindest act was in raping a virgin...you assume no responsibility for the effects of those words.

Well maybe society doesn't hold you accountable now... but they will soon.

Well as an agnostic I think both sides are nuts but that is JUST MY OPINION.

Originally posted by GAOTU789

Originally posted by luciddream
reply to post by AfterInfinity

 

hmm. i couldn't hear the clip(site access denied) but.. if it was aimed at all atheist.. then that's BS....

Just to keep things clear, Nef is an Atheist himself.

I understand, but he does not speak for me as an atheist, all i want is not get involved in it... but im attacked for not believing in a god?

...see.. its like tennis player go into someone's house and tell owner that their are useless because they don't play tennis. It just doesn't make sense...

I despise any organized group..

In my life, i never started a debate by going to a person and saying "hey, Christians are dumb, you believe in a fairy".... it has always been... "how do you choose right or wrong if your an atheist?" or some other retarded non sense comment... these people are just ignorant... they are not doing it on purpose... but if i don't say something, i will be what they think i am.

the 2 yrs on ATS... the ratio of an angry atheist starting a thread is 1/10th of a religious person attacking on Atheism. Im sure you know it as well.

reply to post by Wertdagf

Well maybe society doesn't hold you accountable now... but they will soon.

And then what ? Lions ?

Originally posted by luciddream
When talking a bout UNICORNS, do we tell people that don't believe in the unicorn as "People of the Non-Unicorn believing Organization"?

NO BELIEF is the DEFAULT!

Even if correct, what difference does that make?

The issue at hand is an organization, the American Atheists, which is an evangelical organization that is seeking to support those who share their perspective, criticize those who don't, and sway public opinion in their favour.

It isn't simply someone having "no belief" and keeping it to themselves. It is a social movement, and those who disagree with it have every right to react negatively to them.

reply to post by intrepid


Would you say that implying a moral obligation to prevent children from running with scissors is evangelical too?

Challenging irrationality should be common sense, but with such logic you would probably say that such a term as common sense is a religion.

reply to post by neformore


If I could give applause to this, I would. Post of the year.

Originally posted by Wertdagf
reply to post by intrepid

 

Would you say that implying a moral obligation to prevent children from running with scissors is evangelical too?

Common sense.

Challenging irrationality should be common sense, but with such logic you would probably say that such a term as common sense is a religion.

What may be irrational to you may not be to another. Unlike common sense. Curious, do you listen to the show?

reply to post by luciddream

Atheist have NO BELIEF.

Belief is synonymous with opinion. In order to have no belief or opinion, one must be ignorant. If you have no belief, no opinion, and are thus ignorant, then what gives the you the right to say anything about the topic? Atheism is not a position of ignorance.

reply to post by luciddream


I appreciate that and agree with most of what you said. Nef wasn't trying to speak for you I don't think, but he was giving his thoughts about this group in particular.

As an aside, even if that isn't the approach you take, it is the approach this particular group takes.

reply to post by intrepid


I used to, but stopped.

Maybe if "ATS Live" took the same approach to conspiracy claims as "The Atheist Experience" radio show does to religious claims then it would be palatable.

Rarely is a claim put to the type of scrutiny it deserves.

reply to post by luciddream

I despise any organized group..

You see when someone is registering to this site and he(she) make an introduction,most of the welcoming phrases are "Welcome to our group",our organized group.

Can you despise that?

But you are a member of this organized group.