Religious obsessed by Atheism

expectationlost

what is it with this people who claim to happy in their faith but are obssesed by atheism huh?

Kidchameleon

I find its the opposite

joseph brand

Kidchameleon wrote: »

I find its the opposite

Kidchameleon

Well its my experience that theists tend to keep themselves to themselves while you will always find an atheist moaning about something.*

*This is my experience and I understand there are exceptions.

Doctor Jimbob

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Well its my experience that theists tend to keep themselves to themselves while you will always find an atheist moaning about something.*

*This is my experience and I understand there are exceptions.

That's an outrageous generalisation.

iDave

Yeah theists have never interferred with those who are different to them

MrPudding

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Well its my experience that theists tend to keep themselves to themselves while you will always find an atheist moaning about something.*

*This is my experience and I understand there are exceptions.

You are fcuking joking, right? Have you ever walked past an abortion clinic? Have you ever walked past the gpo on a Saturday? Have you ever had a Jehovah witness at your door? Have you ever read a thread with JC on it? Have you ever been to a board of governors meeting at 98% of the primary schools in Ireland? Have you ever read any amicus briefs for any legal cases involving abortion or same sex marriage? Have you ever read any lobbying directed at the government when they are discussing same sex marriage or abortion? Have you ever read a John Water's article? Have you ever read anything published by the Iona institute?

MrP

freyners

Your going to have theists that are obsessed about atheism and visa versa. However it is theisms obsession with atheism that get far more attention on a nationwide scale and is seen as more acceptable

Brian Shanahan

joseph brand wrote: »

This is kidchameleon we're talking about whose every post is a variation on "I'm an atheist, but religion, it's the best!"

You're not going to get anything out of him.

Czarcasm

expectationlost wrote: »

what is it with this people who claim to happy in their faith but are obssesed by atheism huh?

I don't think it's fair to say religious people are obsessed with atheism, I don't think they give any more regard to atheism than any other philosophy that disagrees with their philosophy tbh. As an example, you could easily word your question another way and it'd still have the same meaning depending on your perspective -

What is it with <insert philosophy of choice here> people who are obsessed with <insert philosophy of choice here>?

I don't know if obsessed is even the right word tbh, people who take an unhealthy interest in the affairs of others perhaps?

Somebody is always going to feel that everybody else but them is wrong, it's human nature, no matter what subject you talk about. I mean, if you got some of the folks who post in the Christianity forum to go through "The funny side of Religion" thread in here, one might be given to form the idea that it is atheists be obsessed with religion.

I mean, sometimes "The funny side of Religion" thread has some genuinely funny crackers, sometimes it's just "point and laugh at stupid people", sometimes it's just "same old same old get over it already". I don't even bother reading the Hazards of Belief thread, that's just depressing tbh, but the Interesting Stuff thread, there's some great information in there that no matter what your beliefs or lack thereof, it's exactly what it says on the tin and shouldn't necessarily be seen as poking religion in the eyeballs or lauding the joys of being an atheist. It's stuff that is of interest to everybody.

I think with all due respect your argument is premised on a very biased perspective and comes off rather unfortunately like a flasher asking why is everybody obsessed with his mickey.

If you put it out there, people ARE going to question the sense in it. So if you're an atheist, yknow, it's not that people are generally obsessed with atheism, but if you make a point of it, people are going to ask you what the hell you're on about.


I'm not even sure what I'm on about now. It's late, I'm going back to sleep :pac:

Sheldons Brain

This forum seems obsessed with religion.

Kidchameleon

MrPudding wrote: »

You are fcuking joking, right?

No.

MrPudding wrote: »

Have you ever walked past an abortion clinic?

Yes. There are people from every walk of life against abortion, theist and atheist.

MrPudding wrote: »

Have you ever walked past the gpo on a Saturday?

Yes. Plenty of theists and atheists stand outside the GPO. Fair play to them. They only talk to people if approached.

MrPudding wrote: »

Have you ever had a Jehovah witness at your door?

Yep.

MrPudding wrote: »

Have you ever read a thread with JC on it?

Pretty much every thread on boards seems to get hijacked by atheists.

MrPudding wrote: »

Have you ever been to a board of governors meeting at 98% of the primary schools in Ireland?

No. God has no place inside school IMHO.

MrPudding wrote: »

Have you ever read any amicus briefs for any legal cases involving abortion or same sex marriage?

Could you share a notable example?

MrPudding wrote: »

Have you ever read any lobbying directed at the government when they are discussing same sex marriage or abortion?

I have. Theist and atheist groups are free to lobby the government as legislation they are passionate about arises. I'm frankly embarrassed the we don't have same sex marriage or abortion in this country.

MrPudding wrote: »

Have you ever read a John Water's article?

Ive read far more Richard Dawkins articles.

MrPudding wrote: »

Have you ever read anything published by the Iona institute?

They are scumbags.

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

This forum seems obsessed with religion.

Couldn't have put it better myself.

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

This is kidchameleon we're talking about whose every post is a variation on "I'm an atheist, but religion, it's the best!"

You're not going to get anything out of him.

Certainly not if your best contribution is to post an animated GIF :rolleyes:

MrPudding

So you have gone from:

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Well its my experience that theists tend to keep themselves to themselves [...]

to whatabouttery. Awesome.

Kidchameleon wrote: »

No.

Yes. There are people from every walk of life against abortion, theist and atheist.

Yes. Plenty of theists and atheists stand outside the GPO. Fair play to them. They only talk to people if approached.

Yep.

Pretty much every thread on boards seems to get hijacked by atheists.

No. God has no place inside school IMHO.

Could you share a notable example?

I have. Theist and atheist groups are free to lobby the government as legislation they are passionate about arises. I'm frankly embarrassed the we don't have same sex marriage or abortion in this country.

Ive read far more Richard Dawkins articles.

They are scumbags.

Couldn't have put it better myself.

So I give you a load of example of theists not keeping to themselves, after you having claimed your experience is that they do keep to themselves, and you response is to either confirm that you have experience examples of what I suggest, like Jehovah witnesses, in direct contradiction of you previous statement, or to engage in typical whatabouttery. So what if there might be atheists outside the GPO, your statement was that theists tend to keep to themselves. This is quite clearly not the case, that in some things atheists don't necessarily hide a home keeping their opinions to themselves is neither here nor there. Nor does that fact that you have not read much John Waters, or your opinion that Iona are scumbags take away from the fact that they are theists not keeping to themselves.

Are you now willing to admit that you earlier statement that theists, in your experience, keep to themselves, in fact, a load of sh1t? Please feel free to also admit that you knew this all along and only said it because for some reason you have an aversion to agreeing with anything that anyone says on this forum, whether it is objectively correct or not.

On the off chance that you are actually interested I have attached a copy of one of the Proposition 8 judgements from California. It is a fairly long document and you would need to be pretty interested to read it, but at the beginning, under "Counsel" you will find a list of organisations and people that submitted amicus briefs to the court.

MrP

robindch

MrPudding wrote: »

[...] whatabouttery [...]

The next update to the forum charter is likely to prohibit whataboutery. It's a unique irritating debating tactic, at least in places where honest debate is promoted.

Kidchameleon

MrPudding wrote: »

Are you now willing to admit that you earlier statement that theists, in your experience, keep to themselves, in fact, a load of sh1t?

If you bothered to read the thread you would know that I already agree with you. Have a look at post number 4.

What is whataboutery???

robindch

Kidchameleon wrote: »

What is whataboutery???

Google is your friend:

https://www.google.com.ua/search?q=define%3Awhataboutery

Google wrote:

[...] an informal fallacy which attempts to suggest that the opponent's argument should be ignored because there are more important problems in the world - despite the fact that these issues are often completely unrelated to the subject under discussion

MrPudding

Kidchameleon wrote: »

If you bothered to read the thread you would know that I already agree with you. Have a look at post number 4.

What is whataboutery???

I'm afraid I missed you agreeing, apologises if that is the case.

Although Robin has already helpfully given you a link, I would like to add to the explanation. I am not sure where the term originates, but for me my first experiences of whataboutery came form Northern Ireland politicians when I was growing up. They were, and likely still are, masters of it. In addition to this, apologist for the RCC, particularly when it comes to child abuse, tend to fall back on whataboutery, a typical conversation would go something like this:

Concerned Citizen: But the church has overseen some of the worst example of child abuse ever seen, and further, they tried to cover it up.

RCC apologist: But what about all the other people that abuse children that aren't priests?

Concerned Citizen: Well of course we need to address all abuse, but right now we are talking about clerical abuse specifically.

RCC apologist: But what about all the good things that the RCC does?

And so it goes on. So when I gave example of theists not keeping to themselves, and your response was "what about the atheists that do the same" that was whataboutery.

Awesome word, crappy argumentative tactic.

Anyhoo, enough of that.

MrP

Kidchameleon

MrPudding wrote: »

I'm afraid I missed you agreeing, apologises if that is the case.

Although Robin has already helpfully given you a link, I would like to add to the explanation. I am not sure where the term originates, but for me my first experiences of whataboutery came form Northern Ireland politicians when I was growing up. They were, and likely still are, masters of it. In addition to this, apologist for the RCC, particularly when it comes to child abuse, tend to fall back on whataboutery, a typical conversation would go something like this:

Concerned Citizen: But the church has overseen some of the worst example of child abuse ever seen, and further, they tried to cover it up.

RCC apologist: But what about all the other people that abuse children that aren't priests?

Concerned Citizen: Well of course we need to address all abuse, but right now we are talking about clerical abuse specifically.

RCC apologist: But what about all the good things that the RCC does?

And so it goes on. So when I gave example of theists not keeping to themselves, and your response was "what about the atheists that do the same" that was whataboutery.

Awesome word, crappy argumentative tactic.

Anyhoo, enough of that.

MrP

I see what your saying. It was not intentional.

Brian Shanahan

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Certainly not if your best contribution is to post an animated GIF :rolleyes:

Not only can't you post valid contributions to a topic, you can't even read what people write.

KC are you still in junior infants, or have you finally passed into senior infants this year?

Eramen

Kidchameleon wrote: »

I find its the opposite

Yes, it seems that nearly everyone knows 'that atheist' who even at the merest hint of anything remotely to do with religion, immediately flies into nonsensical tirades, bluntly refusing to desist in making snarky references to Christopher Hitchens and other similar moralists. You tend to just have to sit patiently while they blow off steam. It's okay, I'm used to it.. but, is this really the way society should work?

The above person typically belongs to the following demographic: White, male, 21-35, usually no girlfriend, dismissive of his own cultural heritage, moral relativist (except in the case where he is the subject of injustice), (supposed) interest in evolutionary science through which validation is found, emotional or metaphysical investment in society is lacking***

***I'm relating this to my own experience, it might not be your findings, but they are mine. I'm not trying to offend people. I think it's sad that people can find no unity in commonly head ideas anymore and insist on wearing their 'identities', 'loyalties', 'sub-culture' etc. on their sleeve no matter what they are. Its foolish and leads to tension and insecurity.

RDM_83 again

I presume its an age or zeal of the newly ""converted"" thing as a teenager/early 20's i had a lot more of the experience described above than i have had in the last couple of years. I am sure people that have newly discovered religion would be just as bad but I didn't know any born agains (thankfully!)

PopePalpatine

Eramen wrote: »

Yes, it seems that nearly everyone knows 'that atheist' who even at the merest hint of anything remotely to do with religion, immediately flies into nonsensical tirades, bluntly refusing to desist in making snarky references to Christopher Hitchens and other similar moralists. You tend to just have to sit patiently while they blow off steam. It's okay, I'm used to it.. but, is this really the way society should work?

The above person typically belongs to the following demographic: White, male, 21-35, usually no girlfriend, dismissive of his own cultural heritage, moral relativist (except in the case where he is the subject of injustice), (supposed) interest in evolutionary science through which validation is found, emotional or metaphysical investment in society is lacking***

Go on, say fedora and complete "atheist stereotype bingo". :rolleyes:

When "cultural heritage" means the iron fist of the Catholic Church, why wouldn't I dismiss it?

lazygal

Eramen wrote: »

Isn't that a very narrow interpretation of our cultural heritage? The Catholic church is not what I meant. The atheist identity I describe has no confidence in his own civilisation or being. His crusade extends far beyond the church, as he needlessly attacks all the long-standing forms of our society, the very reason for our success - the family, native traditions, history, institutions, cultural values, customs, way of life, and so on.

He instead prefers to appeal to culturally-extreme minorities who undermine the values of the productive majority of society at every corner. He indulges in such 'morally righteous' adventures such as helping every poor owl' sod gain their rightful 'equality' in a shameful display of ego-stroking and unsanctimonious back-patting. This is accompanied by some vague notion that he is somehow undermining the discrimination-haven of the evil religious patriarchy that is Western society. Yet he destroys his own national-cultural identity as he theorizes and questions his civilisation to death. This type of atheist is not metaphysically centered and represents an existential danger to general social well-being. He believes in nothing but his own preferences.

Apparently atheism lacks any inherent meaning whatsoever - this is why he feels obliged to undermine his very cultural identity in this way. Confidence in everything Irish, European and Western, and yes.. shockingly, Christian, teeters. How dare I say it.

It's no wonder that atheism is in demographic decline, with Christian Orthodoxy and Buddhism thriving in Eastern Europe and East Asia respectively, with atheism falling to only 1.8% of the world population by 2020. It signals that people can't go on like this, they need metaphysical meaning and soul. Material science can't provide this to the individual, the sciences are deigned to provide information on physical substances.

Yet, I like atheism. Pythagoras and the Buddha were awesome. But what is called 'atheism' today is not atheism, it's nothing more than a political-ideology and pseudo-religion used to undermine human values to further aid globalisation of resources, people and money by making people entertainment binging and culturally rootless. It's obvious when you trace where is came from and if you don't watch RTE/BBC etc.

What about the shes?

PopePalpatine

Eramen wrote: »

He instead prefers to appeal to culturally-extreme minorities who undermine the values of the productive majority of society at every corner. He indulges in such 'morally righteous' adventures such as helping every poor owl' sod gain their rightful 'equality' in a shameful display of ego-stroking and unsanctimonious back-patting.

Define these "culturally-extreme minorities". Are they homosexuals? Foreigners? Non-Christians? Oh, and I don't support equality to "stroke my ego".

B_Rabbit

Compare the front page of A&A and Christianity and you'll clearly see that Atheists are far more obsessed with theists than the other way around.

PopePalpatine

B_Rabbit wrote: »

Compare the front page of A&A and Christianity and you'll clearly see that Atheists are far more obsessed with theists than the other way around.

Apples and oranges: the Christianity subforum gets far less posts than here every day.

We'll stop "obsessing" about theists when they stop forcing everyone to obey their holy text.

lazygal

I think it's obvious that we atheist folk are obsessed with biscuits and pizza. Let us not get into the great pineapple debate again. Too many arguments.

Eramen

PopePalpatine wrote: »

We'll stop "obsessing" about theists when they stop forcing everyone to obey their holy text.

This is comedy. I see it now: "Quakers hold bearded atheists at gunpoint in Dublin video-game store - demand they convert to religion". Admittedly that would make a really good serial action-drama for the telly.


Why is 'atheism' continually trying to cash-in on the victim industry so badly? Yet another oppressed minority? Say it ain't so

lazygal

Eramen wrote: »

This is comedy. I see it now: "Quakers hold bearded atheists at gunpoint in Dublin video-game store - demand they convert to religion". That would make a really good serial action-drama for the telly.


Why is 'atheism' continually trying to cash-in on the victim industry so badly? Yet another oppressed minority? Say it ain't so

How can I cash in on my atheism? Iona style defamation demands?

PopePalpatine

Eramen wrote: »

This is comedy. I see it now: "Quakers hold bearded atheists at gunpoint in Dublin video-game store - demand they convert to religion". Admittedly that would make a really good serial action-drama for the telly.


Why is 'atheism' continually trying to cash-in on the victim industry so badly? Yet another oppressed minority? Say it ain't so

You've got a really caustic personality, you know that? You make David Quinn seem sound.

Maybe we're not "oppressed" as badly here as we are in the likes of the Middle East, but the Church still has its tentacles deep in this State through schools and hospitals.

eireannBEAR

I find its the opposite,Some Atheists are utterly obsessed with religion,The church may act on issues its against such as abortion etc,But that does not represent atheism,

As a non believer i find some atheists cringe worthy. For the most part atheists are passe down to earth people that dont even give the church a second thought,Its just that some hard core atheists tend to dilute the internet with their ''blame the church at all costs rants''

I said it before and i will say it again these kind of arguments only make the church appear relevant.

catallus

I think it is of paramount importance that the "tentacles" of the only organisation in the country which promotes moral and intellectual rigour remains, and hopefully becomes more firmly entrenched, in our society in the coming years and decades.

Notwithstanding the deluded propagandist pipe-dreams of immoral paganists the influence and moral guidance of religion grows stronger worldwide.

Benny_Cake

B_Rabbit wrote: »

Compare the front page of A&A and Christianity and you'll clearly see that Atheists are far more obsessed with theists than the other way around.

The Christianity and A&A forums can only be considered reflective of the people who post there, not reflective of Christians or atheists generally.

Why are theists obsessed with atheism?
Why are atheists obsessed with Christianity?
Why are Liverpool fans obsessed with Man United?

Who knows? I guess some people define themselves on the basis of what they are opposed to rather than what they are for. Bit of a blanket generalisation in this thread title though, to say the least.

lazygal

catallus wrote: »

I think it is of paramount importance that the "tentacles" of the only organisation in the country which promotes moral and intellectual rigour remains, and hopefully becomes more firmly entrenched, in our society in the coming years and decades.

Notwithstanding the deluded propagandist pipe-dreams of immoral paganists the influence and moral guidance of religion grows stronger worldwide.

So my family aren't moral because we're not of any faith?


Hahahahahaha. I won't be listening to a church that forced abused children who wet the bed into baths of jeyes fluid. Or a church that moved abusers on and then insured themselves against claims.

catallus

nobody can force you to listen; the important thing for your soul is only that you hear.

eireannBEAR

catallus wrote: »

nobody can force you to listen; the important thing for your soul is only that you hear.

What do you mean by this exactly?

lazygal

catallus wrote: »

nobody can force you to listen; the important thing for your soul is only that you hear.

I don't have a soul.

Brian Shanahan

Eramen wrote: »

Yes, it seems that nearly everyone knows 'that atheist' who even at the merest hint of anything remotely to do with religion, immediately flies into nonsensical tirades,

For every one of them there's c.1,000,000 John Waters'es.

Brian Shanahan

catallus wrote: »

nobody can force you to listen

So then why are you shouting your nonsensical rantings at us.

catallus [sic], I said it before, and I'll say it again, but you've nothing valuable to add to this debate or anything else debated in A&A.

catallus

eireannBEAR wrote: »

What do you mean by this exactly?

I'm glad you asked.

You see, the refusal to engage with or listen to the wisdom of religion is a symptom of the narcissistic and morally blind egotism which is caused by the modern cult of the individual.

Members of this cult find the idea of being answerable to any perceived "higher power" abhorrent. My own thinking on it is that it is a case of arrested development, the continuation of juvenile delinquency writ large into adult life.

And so we have grown adults declaring with glee that they have no soul; is there anything sadder than seeing one cut off one's nose to spite their face, for no better reason than they refuse to take responsibility for their society?

lazygal

catallus wrote: »

I'm glad you asked.

You see, the refusal to engage with or listen to the wisdom of religion is a symptom of the narcissistic and morally blind egotism which is caused by the modern cult of the individual.

Members of this cult find the idea of being answerable to any perceived "higher power" abhorrent. My own thinking on it is that it is a case of arrested development, the continuation of juvenile delinquency writ large into adult life.

And so we have grown adults declaring with glee that they have no soul; is there anything sadder than seeing one cut off one's nose to spite their face, for no better reason than they refuse to take responsibility for their society?

Hahahahahahahahah.
Hahahahahahahahah.


I'll concentrate on raising good upstanding members of.society who don't need a church to tell them how to be decent people. And they won't have any worries about souls troubling them.

PopePalpatine

catallus wrote: »

I'm glad you asked.

You see, the refusal to engage with or listen to the wisdom of religion is a symptom of the narcissistic and morally blind egotism which is caused by the modern cult of the individual.

Members of this cult find the idea of being answerable to any perceived "higher power" abhorrent. My own thinking on it is that it is a case of arrested development, the continuation of juvenile delinquency writ large into adult life.

The refusal to engage with or listen to the law is a symptom of the narcissistic and morally-blind attitude of "defend the Reich Church at all costs!" which is caused by the ancient cult of authoritarianism.

The hierarchy of this cult find the idea of loss of power and influence abhorrent. My own thinking on it is that it is a case of addiction to power.

Pherekydes

catallus wrote: »

I'm glad you asked.

You see, the refusal to engage with or listen to the wisdom of religion is a symptom of the narcissistic and morally blind egotism which is caused by the modern cult of the individual.

Members of this cult find the idea of being answerable to any perceived "higher power" abhorrent. My own thinking on it is that it is a case of arrested development, the continuation of juvenile delinquency writ large into adult life.

And so we have grown adults declaring with glee that they have no soul; is there anything sadder than seeing one cut off one's nose to spite their face, for no better reason than they refuse to take responsibility for their society?

How can one be a member of the cult of the individual?

The rest of your posts make even less sense, as per usual. I particularly like your assertion that the catholic church is the only organisation in the country which promotes moral and intellectual rigour.

Hilarious.

catallus

Whatever about the humourous value of my posts(I don't find them that funny, tbh, and I can only surmise that it is a desperate and futile search for a rational response to my reasonable statements that is provoking such forced hilarity among posters here, and I haven't even mentioned biscuits, which seems to be a kind of defensive trigger for some in these parts) I can't see how my main thrust can be denied. A man cannot live by bread alone; to say that a person can live a whole life without some idea of the transcendental is a vicious lie, and the realisation, which comes to some sooner than others, that religion is a part of humanity as unavoidable as breathing, is something that needs to be promoted and held as an ideal for our society.

That said, the valid point is that lust for power, and the greedy holding onto that power is perhaps as dark a stain as any other on organised religion; but the blanket denial of religious and cultural freedom which is being tried on due to those terrible sins is something which should be resisted by all right thinking people.

It should come as no surprise that any church would attempt to keep its power; whether such attempts are valid is a question which could be discussed until the cows come home; but the fact is is that those who profess no faith define themselves exclusively in contrast with pre-existing structures and openly attempt to take the righteousness deserved by ancient authoritarian (no, it isn't a dirty word) regimes.

robindch

catallus wrote: »

[...] the refusal to engage with or listen [...]

catallus wrote: »

[...] a case of arrested development [...]

Hey, catallus (sic), A+A is a debating forum where you are expected to interact with your fellow posters, much in the same was as they interact with you. A+A is not a place where you can continually foghorn your prepacked sermons regardless of what's going on around you.

BTW, in case you haven't noticed, some people are actually trying to speak with you. It would be considered polite for you to respond at some point. It might even give you a chance to dust off some of that moral and intellectual rigour that you keep going on about, but haven't yet had time to deploy.

catallus

I'm not foghorning or shouting at all!

I am interacting! I'm looking forward to the new charter where whataboutery is going to be banned; it is one aspect of free speech which I always thought was brought to silly extremes on this forum especially and condoned way too much for that matter.

It would make it ever so helpful for a consistent discussion to occur, where people could actually talk with open minds and hearts.

Kidchameleon

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Apples and oranges: the Christianity subforum gets far less posts than here every day.

They are probably too busy not giving a sh1t.

Pherekydes

catallus wrote: »

I am interacting!

How are you interacting with the members of this forum when you come up with this type of offensive tripe:

I think it is of paramount importance that the "tentacles" of the only organisation in the country which promotes moral and intellectual rigour remains, and hopefully becomes more firmly entrenched, in our society in the coming years and decades.

catallus

What the hell is offensive about that!?

Doctor Jimbob

catallus wrote: »

What the hell is offensive about that!?

Mostly all of it.

Dades

Kidchameleon wrote: »

They are probably too busy not giving a sh1t.

It's easy not to give a sh1t when you're on the pig's back.