25 Apr 14
Originally posted by SwissGambit"As I read the blog, it isn't in defense of belief or non belief; rather it's focused on the "protests" and "attacks" that occur."
If I ever make an argument that bad on behalf of Christianity, feel free to correct me. 🙂
The two of you would take each other's measure immediately and then enjoy a great conversation.
25 Apr 14
Originally posted by twhiteheadOriginally posted by twhitehead
It is pretty obvious that the person in the OP is an atheist. He just pretends to be theist because he thinks it provides a moral framework. He doesn't actually think it has anything to do with truth.
It is pretty obvious that the person in the OP is an atheist. He just pretends to be theist because he thinks it provides a moral framework. He doesn't actually think it has anything to do with truth.
"Please note as background that I am a Catholic. Yes -- a reviled Christian. It's common to read attacks by Atheists on practicing Christians on Daily Kos -- and, indeed, on the Internet at large. These attacks often infantalize Christians, assault their sense of reason, slander them or level broad accusations that have little support in fact. The context of these attacks is usually the All-Seeing Eye of the Atheist, which is capable to seeing into the minds of Christians and instantly understanding their motiviations, even when such motivations are cloudy or obscure to the Christian himself." (OP)
You sure?
25 Apr 14
"Why Are Atheists Always Attacking Christians?" Do you feel threatened all the time? That says a lot about you, nothing about atheists.
Your worldview divides people into two mutually exclusive groups: a-group (the saved) and the b-group (the damned). For you, the essential issue is, who belongs to which group. Division is, by definition, divisive; when your worldview is divisive, it's no surprise that you find it populated with antagonists. That's your doing, not mine.
My world is inhabited by several billion unique individuals; groupings (religious, political, ethnic, etc.) are merely linguistic conventions or labels which do not touch the essential person. My world is therefore pluralistic without being divisive. My world is populated with interlocutors, not attackers.
25 Apr 14
Originally posted by moonbusOriginally posted by moonbus
"Why Are Atheists Always Attacking Christians?" Do you feel threatened all the time? That says a lot about you, nothing about atheists.
Your worldview divides people into two mutually exclusive groups: a-group (the saved) and the b-group (the damned). For you, the essential issue is, who belongs to which group. Division is, by definition, divisive; when y ...[text shortened]... ore pluralistic without being divisive. My world is populated with interlocutors, not attackers.
"Why Are Atheists Always Attacking Christians?" Do you feel threatened all the time? That says a lot about you, nothing about atheists.
moonbus, is the "you" the blogger, me or rhetorical? Same question with your reply on page one which begins with "Gp:"
25 Apr 14
Originally posted by twhiteheadOriginally posted by twhitehead
Fairly sure. If he thought religion was true, he would defend it as such rather than as a moral code. A number of statements in the OP make it clear that he sees his Catholicism as a tradition or code of conduct not a belief.
Fairly sure. If he thought religion was true, he would defend it as such rather than as a moral code. A number of statements in the OP make it clear that he sees his Catholicism as a tradition or code of conduct not a belief.
For a long time, I was really puzzled about why Atheists were so concerned with what is going on in my mind with respect to my religious beliefs. Yet, I have seldom found myself so exposed and criticized -- these telepathic mind-readers can, apparently, peer right into my brain and understand things about me that I find hard to understand about myself.(OP)
25 Apr 14
2 edits
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyIn both of my replies "you" refers to the person who asked the question "Why are atheists always attacking Christians?" And the person who replied "...And I saw Atheism for what it was." Are they one and the same person? Or was the opening question posed by someone else at some other thread?
Originally posted by moonbus
"Why Are Atheists Always Attacking Christians?" Do you feel threatened all the time? That says a lot about you, nothing about atheists.
moonbus, is the "you" the blogger, me or rhetorical? Same question with your reply on page one which begins with "Gp:"
25 Apr 14
Originally posted by moonbusVerbatim title and text from the blogger's site: one and the same; the title he chose. Is "Gp:" an abbreviation?
In both of my replies "you" refers to the person who asked the question "Why are atheists always attacking Christians?" And the person who replied "...And I saw Atheism for what it was." Are they one and the same person? Or was the opening question posed by someone else at some other thread?
25 Apr 14
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby* "10 Things I Wish Everyone Knew About Atheism March 18, 2014 Thread 158870
* "Why Are Atheists Always Attacking Christians?"
"Here is the answer. Please note as background that I am a Catholic. Yes -- a reviled Christian. It's common to read attacks by Atheists on practicing Christians on Daily Kos -- and, indeed, on the Internet at large. These attacks often infantalize Christians, assault their sense of reason, sland ...[text shortened]... eaction? Like? Dislike? Too Long to Read? Questions? Thoughtful Comments? Protest? Personal Attacks?
"Set your stereotypes aside and get to know atheists all over again. by Herb Silverman"
[Almost titled this thread: “Joey, this is very important..." -gb]
Has anyone noticed any similarities between these *two threads or realized I intended them as companion threads?
25 Apr 14
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby"GP" was my bad: typo error compounded by lack of proof-reading before clicking "post". How fallible of me....
Verbatim title and text from the blogger's site: one and the same; the title he chose. Is "Gp:" an abbreviation?
I could re-cast the entire tirade as: "if ONE'S worldview is divisive, ONE should not be surprised to find ONE'S world filled with antagonists...." How tedious, pedantic, how like ... (goodness, me?)
When I say "my world is pluralistic without being antagonistic," I do mean me, personally, moonbus (is there a dog?).
'Nuf said, I reckon.
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyYes, I did read the OP and was playing along. (given that the OP complained about having his mind read then proceeded to attempt to do exactly the same thing to atheists.)
For a long time, I was really puzzled about why Atheists were so concerned with what is going on in my mind with respect to my religious beliefs. Yet, I have seldom found myself so exposed and criticized -- these telepathic mind-readers can, apparently, peer right into my brain and understand things about me that I find hard to understand about myself.(OP)
What about your thoughts on the matter, or are you only capable of quoting others and have no original thoughts of your own?
Or should I read your mind too?
25 Apr 14
Originally posted by moonbusTruth itself is by definition divisive; it cleaves and separates individuals, groups and nations. OP: 'Let's live and let live.'
"GP" was my bad: typo error compounded by lack of proof-reading before clicking "post". How fallible of me....
I could re-cast the entire tirade as: "if ONE'S worldview is divisive, ONE should not be surprised to find ONE'S world filled with antagonists...." How tedious, pedantic, how like ... (goodness, me?)
When I say "my world is pluralistic withou ...[text shortened]... eing antagonistic," I do mean me, personally, moonbus (is there a dog?).
'Nuf said, I reckon.
Note: "I do mean me, personally, moonbus (is there a dog?)." I knew. -Gp
25 Apr 14
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadMy thoughts will follow a few thoughtful replies to my post two above yours:
Yes, I did read the OP and was playing along. (given that the OP complained about having his mind read then proceeded to attempt to do exactly the same thing to atheists.)
What about your thoughts on the matter, or are you only capable of quoting others and have no original thoughts of your own?
Or should I read your mind too?
"Has anyone noticed any similarities between these *two threads or realized I intended them as companion threads?"
Read my mind? Sure and be sure to peek in any and all of the nooks and crannies. Who knows what you may behold. lol
25 Apr 14
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyYes, I know; but I found the subject of 'attacks' rather uninteresting. I am more interested in weeding out bad arguments.
"As I read the blog, it [b]isn't in defense of belief or non belief; rather it's focused on the "protests" and "attacks" that occur."
The two of you would take each other's measure immediately and then enjoy a great conversation.[/b]