Scratch an atheist and you will find a skeptic!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Vera_Ljuba
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
minkymurph said:
Outcomes of polls and statistics compiled as a result of questionnaires are notoriously unreliable in terms of interpretation as they are open to manipulation.

Questionnaires are often compiled to gauge public opinion, but answers are not necessarily reflection of what people really think. I was recently a questionnaire on abortion law in Northern Ireland. One of the questions was would I support a law preventing women travelling to Scotland and England to have an abortion. My answer would have to be no as a result of the issues such a law would give rise to, but this answer in conjunction with answers I would have given to other questions would have been interpreted as I support expansion of abortion law in Northern Ireland, and I would not have wanted my answers interpreted as such.

It cannot be said because X number of people answered Y to this question X number of people think Z. Furthermore, there is no black and white ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer to the question should the Bible be read literally. I would say no one reads the entire Bible literally. Ask a Protestant fundamentalist what they think Jesus meant when he said drink my blood and eat my flesh and they will say this passage of Scripture is symbolic. They do not accept Peter was the rock on which Jesus would build his Church, and struggle with ‘the power to bind and to loose’ in terms of what it means. There are also passages of Scripture were it can be said the author never intended it to be read literally. What puzzles me about radical atheists is they don’t disagree with this, yet would still argue about the Bible based on a literal reading of it.

I would also say radical atheists are the new fundamentalists. I say this based on their words and actions. In my parents time fiery evangelical preachers stood on street corners shouting through megaphones, ‘Get saved or burn in hell.’ There has been a contemporary revival of this in my home town - though not on the same scale, and every week there are insertions in the local paper, ‘Remember the days of Noah and Sodom and Gomorrah.’ In other words - Godlessness (atheism) is to blame for all the worlds ills and homosexuality is an abomination. Current law prevents them from actually publishing this but they can cite Scripture so we know what they are getting at.

Radical atheists seem to have adopted a similar strategy in that they repeatedly publicly state, 'There is no God, I hate God and Religion, anyone who believes in God is a deluded fool, Religion is to blame for wars and many other ills in society.

Fundamentalists argue intelligent design should be taught in schools as a science. Radical atheists argue religion should not be taught in school at all.

Fundamentalists make no distinction between radical atheists and those who are not radical.
Radical atheists make no distinction between religious fundamentalists and those who are not fundamentalists.

Both deny there are any comparisons.
Click to expand...
Yes.
 
minkymurph said:
Further arguments radical atheists have presented to me:
Click to expand...
What attributes would cause you to consider an atheist “radical”?
minkymurph said:
In conclusion -

Atheists who have presented these arguments to me have not worked in years, go through life in a haze of alcohol and cannabis fumes and claim they are rational thinkers who contribute to society.
Click to expand...
What type of arguments do you hear from the atheist you’ve encountered that are employees and not on drugs?
 
minkymurph said:
Further arguments radical atheists have presented to me:

Christ should be taken out Christmas and it should be celebrated as a Winter Festival and nothing else.

Public funding should be withdrawn from faith schools - even though many of them sent their children to faith schools.

The Pope should make a public statement there is no God, the Bible is tosh and believe some day this will happen.

Telling your child there is a God and raising them in a faith is tantamount to child abuse.

If God appeared to them in person they would still not believe it.

Use of the phrase omg is met with, ‘There you go again! There is no God!’ Suggest they come across as angry they categorically deny it and claim they perfectly calm.

But - state they have no desire to convince you there is no God or dissuade you from practicing your faith. That is your choice - it just comes with a consequence.

Religious fundamentalists have their equivalents.

In conclusion -

Atheists who have presented these arguments to me have not worked in years, go through life in a haze of alcohol and cannabis fumes and claim they are rational thinkers who contribute to society.

In the past I have attempted to reasonably discuss the failings of the above arguments, but to no avail as apparently I’m just brainwashed.

All this said I am willing to be persuaded there are no comparisons between radical atheists and religious fundamentalists.
Click to expand...
:)👍
 
ThinkingSapien said:
What attributes would cause you to consider an atheist “radical”?

What type of arguments do you hear from the atheist you’ve encountered that are employees and not on drugs?
Click to expand...
You hear the arguments that Minky is articulating all the time. All the time.
What Minky observes is self evident.
 
ThinkingSapien said:
What attributes would cause you to consider an atheist “radical”?
Click to expand...
Someone who:
  • Is recusant to reason
  • Is obdurate about their opinions
  • Is unable to discern the nuances of a particular position
  • Is literalist in their readings of texts
  • Declares: “If you’ve seen only Abrahamic religion, you’ve seen 'em all”.
  • Is completely unaware that the world is not neatly divisible between moral absolutists and moral relativists
  • Thinks only of Either/Ors
  • Cannot apprehend the Both/And
  • Thinks that the Bible is supposed to be the Big Book About Everything
  • Believe that spiritual things and intellectual things are separate and opposed to one another.
  • Sees the Bible as an attempt to be a science textbook
  • Has a a flat-footed and simplistic approach to questions of faith, science, reason, and biblical interpretation
  • Professes some Alones (Science Alone, the Bible Alone) which cannot be proven by their Alones (Science cannot prove that it’s the only answer to life’s question; and the Bible does not teach the Bible Alone)
  • Is unable to say: you have made a good point, let me think about that
  • States: everything my opponent says is wrong. She has never made an utterance that is a good rebuttal
  • Cannot articulate the opposing side’s views and what she finds to be the best argument for the opposing view
 
minkymurph said:
Fundamentalists argue intelligent design should be taught in schools as a science.
Click to expand...
Yes, Catholic posters are arguing for exactly that right now on another thread.
minkymurph said:
Atheists who have presented these arguments to me have not worked in years, go through life in a haze of alcohol and cannabis fumes and claim they are rational thinkers who contribute to society.
Click to expand...
If another poster repeated your claim but substituted “Atheists” with “Black people”, “Jews” or “Women” then perhaps you would see how this comes over as classic cognitive bias. It’s very easy to fall into the trap, you say to yourself you’re an intelligent, rational, balanced sort of chap but them there Protestants/gypsies/left wingers/gays aren’t, no sirree, and pretty soon it becomes the norm. Parents teach it to children, and in Ireland they used to blow up people in bars in the name of Jesus. In America they segregated churches, school buses, even toilets. Today they use it to justify building a wall to keep Catholics out of America.

Of course, they don’t see the irrationality, instead they see it as self-evident truth, and all contrary evidence as obviously rigged. The temptation is built into us, just as it was in Adam. Dividing apart is way easier than joining together. But Jesus gave a better way. I know there are real-life Catholics who found that better way. And fundamentalists and yon radical atheists. Now don’t tell me you never found that better way bro.
 
Vonsalza said:
In this case, it would be incorrect to state “(X) percent of Christians are biblical literalists”.
What would be correct is “When forced to chose between ‘literal’ and ‘allegorical’, (X) percent of Christians felt ‘literal’ best described their overall view of the bible”…
Click to expand...
I think the above needs to be repeated and re-read and reviewed by folks here.
 
ThinkingSapien said:
What attributes would cause you to consider an atheist “radical”?

Radical attributes - militant, highly reactionary when confronted with opposing views, not open to negotiation concerning opposing views, embraces policies that benefit only one group of people and advocates their implementation irrespective of the cost to others.

I would categorize anyone who displays these attributes as a radical, not just atheists.

For example: radically right or left wing, radically conservative, radically racist.
ThinkingSapien;14732492:
What type of arguments do you hear from the atheist you’ve encountered that are employees and not on drugs?
Click to expand...
Much more reasonable one’s - with the odd exception.
Click to expand...
 
inocente said:
Yes, Catholic posters are arguing for exactly that right now on another thread.
Click to expand...
And they are entitled to do so, but Catholics are not bound to same ideology as a consequence of their faith. I did not say there are no fundamentalist Catholics. Every faith has their radicals, and as such fingers could pointed at any faith for this reason.
inocente said:
If another poster repeated your claim but substituted “Atheists” with “Black people”, “Jews” or “Women” then perhaps you would see how this comes over as classic cognitive bias. It’s very easy to fall into the trap, you say to yourself you’re an intelligent, rational, balanced sort of chap but them there Protestants/gypsies/left wingers/gays aren’t, no sirree, and pretty soon it becomes the norm.
Click to expand...
My claim is comparisons can be drawn between radical atheists and religious fundamentalists. Not all atheists and religious fundamentalists. Comparisons can be drawn between radicals or fundamentalists irrespective of what race or creed they are.

This is not my personal claim. It is documented. A few years ago I read an authoritative work compiled by history scholars that compared Stalin and Hitler, and their conclusions were the only distinction that could be drawn between Stalin and Hitler was their respective ideologies in that one was a communist and the other a fascist.

There are plenty of atheists who are intelligent, rational and balanced. I’m confident those following this thread know I was not suggesting all atheists are unintelligent, irrational and unbalanced simply because they are atheists. Nor one is intelligent, rational and balanced simply because one is Catholic.
inocente said:
Parents teach it to children, and in Ireland they used to blow up people in bars in the name of Jesus.
Click to expand...
Stop right there - No one blew anyone up in bars in Ireland in the name of Jesus. Given the attention Ireland received in the media I can’t believe someone would say people were killed in the name of Jesus. I don’t know if you genuinely think this, but for now I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt.

For historical reasons Catholics and Protestants found themselves on opposite side in a political war - not a religious one. That does not make blowing people up in bars more acceptable.
inocente said:
In America they segregated churches, school buses, even toilets. Today they use it to justify building a wall to keep Catholics out of America.
Click to expand...
What’s your point? Religious fundamentalists are worse than atheists? Comparisons should not be drawn between radical atheists and religious fundamentalist because they are nicer or don’t exist?
inocente said:
Of course, they don’t see the irrationality, instead they see it as self-evident truth, and all contrary evidence as obviously rigged. The temptation is built into us, just as it was in Adam. Dividing apart is way easier than joining together. But Jesus gave a better way. I know there are real-life Catholics who found that better way. And fundamentalists and yon radical atheists. Now don’t tell me you never found that better way bro.
Click to expand...
Now you’ve lost me - what are you talking about?
 
inocente said:
If another poster repeated your claim but substituted “Atheists” with “Black people”, “Jews” or “Women” then perhaps you would see how this comes over as classic cognitive bias.
Click to expand...
Sure. Because a chosen quality like atheism is comparable to non-chosen qualities like race and sex…

:doh2:
 
Vonsalza said:
Sure. Because a chosen quality like atheism is comparable to non-chosen qualities like race and sex…

:doh2:
Click to expand...
Whoa, now we have to be sensitive to atheists?? These liberals are something else…:mad:
 
Vonsalza said:
Sure. Because a chosen quality like atheism is comparable to non-chosen qualities like race and sex…

:doh2:
Click to expand...
If a woman publicly stated, ‘I hate all men’ it would be considered a very radical statement.

If a black person publicly stated, ‘I hate all white people’ it would be considered a very radical statement. Same applies to a white person who publicly states, ‘I hate all blacks.’

If someone publicly stated, ‘I hate all Catholics, Protestants, Jews Irish, Americans’ it would be considered a very radical statement.

Where an atheist states, ‘I hate God’ or I hate all religion,’ is this not making a radical statement and categorising it as a radical statement demonstrates cognitive bias?
 
Bradski said:
Partly to correct nonsensical ideas that some people have of atheists.
Click to expand...
Yes, but you should know by now that it is futile to teach some. 😉 Do you recall the words on the old pinball machines? They read: “For Amusement Only”. That is what my motto is. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top