12 Mar
2013
12 Mar
'13
11:40 a.m.
On 12 March 2013 18:00, Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> wrote:
On 03/12/2013 01:48 PM, Liam Proven wrote:
A fair point.
Talking to fundies, I have found that they are by their very nature
incapable of understanding and responding to rational argument -
because the essential nature of fundamentalist belief is irrational,
and therefore, they cannot be reasoned with. However, they are human,
and they can be shocked or startled.
So, for instance, they love their imaginary invisible friend and want
me to love the imaginary friend too. They are incapable of mentally
holding the thought that their imaginary friend does not exist - this
is why many fundies claim that all atheists /secretly/ believe in
their imaginary friend and are just /saying/ that said atheist does
not believe in him/her/it/them.
But if I tell them that I have read their magic book - which I have -
and studied their religion - which I have - and that my considered,
informed opinion is that their imaginary friend is an vindictive,
spiteful, hate-filled and overall evil and that even if I believed in
it - which I do not - that I would not worship it, then that tends to
shut them up.
And since fundies are too conditioned, too brain-washed, or just too
stupid to be persuaded or reasoned with, and since I do not want to
speak to them, hear from them, know anything more about their myths,
or have anything to do with them whatsoever, then shutting them up is
my primary objective.
I have communicated privately with "Chris Tofu". I know him to be a
nasty, bigoted, hate-filled fundamentalist - and really very stupid to
boot. So all I wish to do is shut him up.
As for other, less-fundamentalist religious people... well, according
to a number of leading figures from various religions, because I do
not share their myth, I am less than human:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/05/14/cardinal-cormack-murphy-oconn…
... or a criminal:
http://www.economist.com/news/international/21567059-ex-muslim-atheists-are…
So, when they ask me if I respect their views, the answer can only be
that I respect their views exactly as much as they respect mine.
The difference being, of course, that my views are based on evidence,
reason and logic.
I give as I get. I have been called evil, subhuman, a liar, a genocide
and so on. Why then should I be polite? Should I claim to respect
beliefs that I actually despise?
OTOH, I have a handful of deeply religious friends. We both think each
other to be wrong or deluded, but we can have a laugh about it. If one
is capable of having a sense of humour about deeply-held personal
beliefs, or openly discussing such things and not taking the answers
personally, then that person and I will probably get on just fine.
"Chris Tofu" is not so capable. If you are, Dave, then cool, we'll
have no problem.
But I'm not going to lie to you. I am not merely proudly atheist, I am
openly antitheist.
--
Liam Proven ? Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 ? Cell: +44 7939-087884
On 12 March 2013 17:19, Mouse <mouse at
rodents-montreal.org> wrote:
It's hate-speech. Short for "homosexual" and used as a generic insult.
His excuse being that his magic sky-pixie tells him to hate gay
people, making both him and his religion loathsome.
I have the same magic sky-pixie. Said sky-pixie doesn't tell ME to
hate gay people. Hating gay people is about PEOPLE, nothing more. Lots
of people use religion to justify all sorts of shitty behavior.
BTW...Religion is not the same as belief. Personally, I have the
latter, but precisely ZERO of the former.
So, please watch yourself, and your assumptions. "Homos" is no more
"hate speech" than "magic sky-pixie", etc. Also Home
Depot and Lowes, though Lowes insist on being homos lately.
"homos"? I'm having trouble thinking what that could possibly mean
here; none of the meanings I've come up with make sense in this context.