Fundamentalist Scientists vs Fundamentalist Believers

[friendly hardline atheist]

Hi El Peatieablo,

Originally Posted by El Peatieablo

5: Well I technically wasn’t forced to attend because I wasn’t graduating, but my public university had a couple hours of christian whatnot going on during graduation. Luckily the Pastafarian group got that kicked (I think the offer to have our Pastarrr give a service was the last straw). Again, this wasn’t forced on me, but this one was forced on an atheist in the Illinois congress: search youtube for Rep. Monique Davis (I don’t think I’m allowed to post the link in this forum, sorry).

Atheist cavalry comes galloping in:

YouTube - Today's Worst Person in the World: Rep. Monique Davis

Originally Posted by El Peatieablo

While you’re at it, do a Google search for “the american taliban.” Those are some pretty big names saying some pretty threatening things about atheists (including a former president seriously proposing religious qualifications for voting rights). I’m sure that this list is woefully incomplete (especially as I don’t have any specific resources to show you regarding government funding of religious institutions) but I think that you can see my point.

The Secular Coalition for America and the Freedom from Religion foundation monitor religious group putting their mouths in the government money troth (or under the present administration, simply take what is being offered to them on a plate). That includes the billions handed out under the Faith Based Initiative, the main thorn to both groups. And the real annoyance is, that Obama has announced he won't kill it if elected. He has merely mentioned putting in place performance monitoring (right now, some of the religious groups getting money don't have to show they are being effective, the way other groups have to).

Yeah, its a real money grab fest.

greets,
Peter

[Someday]

1: Ok, we've replaced one cliché with another one: what exactly is your definition of an open mind and how does faith pass this test.

Willing to consider new and different ideas or opinions. Much different from what many "free thinkers" would call freethinking. I do not claim all people of all faiths have a completely open mind.

5: Well I technically wasn’t forced to attend

So that means what exactly?
As far as Rep. Monique Davis goes, I won't apologize on her behalf. She is just one angry woman, not the whole government. The question is "when was the last time you were forced to participate in a church service by the Government, or was made to follow a particular religion?". The american taliban and the atheist taliban (Jerome Tuccille’s description of the followers of Ayn Rand) are not the government either. Isn't the term "taliban" intentionally extreme btw?

Aren’t non-atheist forums the forums where you might expect atheism to be preached?

Well, considering that Christian preachers preach to the choir, and Jewish Rabbis preach in synagogues, and the Muslim clerics preach in mosques.....are you seeing a pattern here? The answer is no, I might not expect it to be preached at non atheist forums.

I don’t preach atheism; I’m a Pastafarian. I may point out a few mistakes as I see them, but that doesn’t mean I’m preaching atheism.

Are you trying to convince me or yourself of this? Are you hiding behind a psuedo-religion now? Or are you truly a believer in the FSM?

8: You (Someday) seem to be angry that I am here: do you want me to leave (and if I don’t do you want me to be banned)? Do you want the same for others here with whom you regularly have disagreements? Do you find me particularly irksome (why)?
Reply With Quote

Lol, no. You have misread me. My intention is not to appear angry. It may come across that way, but I'm not. That's Commodore's territory. I like to respectfully talk about this stuff, honestly. I consider myself open minded...and I actually have thought about these very things before.

Blessings

[Someday]

The Secular Coalition for America and the Freedom from Religion foundation monitor religious group putting their mouths in the government money troth (or under the present administration, simply take what is being offered to them on a plate). That includes the billions handed out under the Faith Based Initiative, the main thorn to both groups. And the real annoyance is, that Obama has announced he won't kill it if elected.

I can solve this problem altogether. Get rid of the so******t policies that have made the government a goody bag to begin with. Why is the government handing ANYBODY any money that is not a direct government employee?????? No Preachers, no scientists, no banks, no hospitals, no social engineers, no charitable organizations,etc etc. If congressman smith thinks cause "a" is worthy of investment, let him/her invest their own money and let the rest of us decide as well where we would like to put our own money.

Blessings

[El Peatieablo]

All right, now the definitions are getting somewhere. I would have to say that most atheists are more willing to consider new/competing ideas than most theists (this is a very general statement and many exceptions will exist). Now let's turn our attention to the earlier mentioned scientists; they must, by definition of the word science, consider all proposed ideas in light of all of the available evidence and come to a conclusion that logically fits everything (of course they also can admit that they cannot tell which of the ideas, if any, are correct). So because scientists are willing to consider new ideas and opinions they are open minded. Because they have an open mind they are free thinkers. QED (hoozah!).





What I mean when I say that I wasn’t forced to attend I mean that nobody made me go to the thing (and I didn’t). Had I wanted to see my friends graduate (and had time permitted my to stay there for a few extra days) I would have had to sit through it all; I could not watch my friends graduate in a non-religious service. I didn’t personally get dragged into it, but other non-christians have in the very recent past.

Yes, Rep. Monique Davis is probably an outlier in this case but you were asking for an example of where I have been hurt, and this applied.

Yes, obviously calling the site “the American Taliban” is a rhetorical move but that does not undermine the validity of the rest of the site. That aside, that group is very similar to the Taliban in that they are religious extremists that would like to use government resources to impose theocratic rule on people. The main difference is that in America there is a much heavier moderating influence than there is in Afghanistan. Oh, and that group does contain members of the government (note the president).




I suppose you might have a point with the whole preaching thing. I just can’t really imagine trying to convince people of something that they already agree with me about. The other thing is that these religions have many beliefs whereas atheists only share a lack of a single belief (not really enough to preach about).





Why is my being a Pastafarian something that is to be questioned but your being a christianity isn’t? If we had two isolated individuals one of whom was a christian and one was a Pastafarian, would a completely neutral observer (either an atheist or a member of a different religion) have any reason to suspect that one of the individuals was more likely to be lying about their religion?








Ok, on to that last bit. I’m glad you don’t hate me. It’s sometimes hard to tell over the internet if people are really mad or what. I know I certainly don’t dislike you, I am very against many of your arguments, but I think that it is good that a christian will talk so extensively about his religion (most just seem to ignore any conversation on the issue and a lot of others just make stupid threats).







p.s. Why do you use asterisks in "so******t"? Is that a forbidden word on this forum? Do you think it is in some way profane? Do you just like hitting Shift+8?

[friendly hardline atheist]

Hi El Peatieablo,

Originally Posted by El Peatieablo

p.s. Why do you use asterisks in "so******t"? Is that a forbidden word on this forum? Do you think it is in some way profane? Do you just like hitting Shift+8?

That's not Someday, it's the forum server software. It's set to filter out various bits of bad swearing, sexually explicit stuff, etc. The middle of the word socia-list is the brand name of a via-gra pill. Hence it's cut out. But as shown, hyphens etc are an easy way to work around it.

greets,
Peter

[El Peatieablo]

... a lot.


I take it you have a lot of experience with this product?

[kmisho]

It's no wonder what Bush says about atheists, since he's a Texan. Blatant contradiction and total irrationality are practically considered a badge of honor there:

"The Texas Constitution
Article 1 - BILL OF RIGHTS
Section 4 - RELIGIOUS TESTS
No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being."

I'm not making this up. The above comes from the below link...which is the official state website where the Texas constitution is posted.

The Texas Constitution - Art 1 - Sec 4

Just so we're clear here. Article 1 of the Texas Bill Of Rights under Section 4 on Religious Tests states that there is no religious test to hold office in Texas...as long as you believe in god.

In the words of former Representative James Traficant (D Ohio) "Beam me up Scotty!"

[kmisho]

Isn't the term "taliban" intentionally extreme btw?

No, not when you want to make the 10 commandments the basis of American law, the same way they have sharia law in some islamic countries.

[Someday]

Originally Posted by kmisho

No, not when you want to make the 10 commandments the basis of American law, the same way they have sharia law in some islamic countries.

I don' t think these people are wanting to change the laws to be based on the 10 commandments. I am under the impression they believe the laws already ARE based on them.

Even if you are right and they want to write new laws based on them, it's still an extreme comparison. The taliban turned sports arenas into execution stadiums and practiced other very extreme forms of Sharia. You are making an assumption based on no evidence that these men would behave similarly. Such assumptions sound driven more by fear than they do rational thought.

Blessings

[friendly hardline atheist]

Originally Posted by kmisho

It's no wonder what Bush says about atheists, since he's a Texan. Blatant contradiction and total irrationality are practically considered a badge of honor there:

"The Texas Constitution
Article 1 - BILL OF RIGHTS
Section 4 - RELIGIOUS TESTS
No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being."

I'm not making this up. The above comes from the below link...which is the official state website where the Texas constitution is posted.

The Texas Constitution - Art 1 - Sec 4

Just so we're clear here. Article 1 of the Texas Bill Of Rights under Section 4 on Religious Tests states that there is no religious test to hold office in Texas...as long as you believe in god.

In the words of former Representative James Traficant (D Ohio) "Beam me up Scotty!"

Hmm, seems like a clear case, why has e. g. the FFRF not challenged that law article yet?

greets,
Peter