mj.scuba Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 You don't like people shoving their views down people's throats, I've no problem with that, but that's not exactly what you said. You implied that there are atheists who are just as bad because they do to theists precisely what they don't like being done to themselves. There is a subtle difference, but an important one because the suggestion you made, and is often made, is of hypocrisy. The atheists I know don't mind having religion "shoved down our throat", at least to a point. The atheists I know tend to value freedom of speech, so proselytise away. The line for me is my own doorstep, I think that is intimidating and rude, no matter how polite the door knockers are, and I would never go knocking on doors to shove atheism down people's throats. Another line for me is the school classroom. The line for others may be different, but to back up your statement with evidence you would need to show consistent occasions where atheists complain of behaviour from theists, and yet do the same in return. When atheists go knocking on people's doors, you might have a point. In which case I will assume it was just a throwaway remark, with no valid justification. If it's done with the specific aim of convincing a theist that there isn't a god (which is what I said in #54), that to me is the equivolent of religious proselytising, trying to convert them, just like some theists proselytise to convert people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 If it's done with the specific aim of convincing a theist that there isn't a god Are you writing with the specific aim of convincing us that proselytising is bad? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quisquose Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 If it's done with the specific aim of convincing a theist that there isn't a god (which is what I said in #54), that to me is the equivolent of religious proselytising, trying to convert them, just like some theists proselytise to convert people. But I don't care about proselytising, I don't know any atheists who care about proselytising, up to certain limits like my doorstep, or when it's done with my money or with government support. It's just debate, like any other. However, you said "I can't help but think atheists who vigirously attack and mock a believer with the aim on convincing them to the atheist point of view is not only a pointless and futile task, they're ironically engaged in the sort of behaviours they so dislike of the religious types" If atheists aren't concerned by robust arguments, and attempts to change our opinion, as I suggest, then your statement doesn't make sense. I'm inviting you to prove me wrong, but you can't. I put it to you that atheists don't object to arguments for the theist point of view at all, they object to some of the actions of the religious, which is totally different. They object to religion when it seeks to impose an ethical standard on society that is harmful. The only reason this "atheists are just as bad as the religious" nonsense keeps getting proposed in not actually that argument is bad, but simply that religion doesn't want to hear it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 Are you writing with the specific aim of convincing us that proselytising is bad? No. Regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 But I don't care about proselytising, I don't know any atheists who care about proselytising, up to certain limits like my doorstep, or when it's done with my money or with government support. It's just debate, like any other. However, you said "I can't help but think atheists who vigirously attack and mock a believer with the aim on convincing them to the atheist point of view is not only a pointless and futile task, they're ironically engaged in the sort of behaviours they so dislike of the religious types" If atheists aren't concerned by robust arguments, and attempts to change our opinion, as I suggest, then your statement doesn't make sense. I'm inviting you to prove me wrong, but you can't. I put it to you that atheists don't object to arguments for the theist point of view at all, they object to some of the actions of the religious, which is totally different. They object to religion when it seeks to impose an ethical standard on society that is harmful. The only reason this "atheists are just as bad as the religious" nonsense keeps getting proposed in not actually that argument is bad, but simply that religion doesn't want to hear it. What is it that I need to prove wrong exactly that you have supposedly proven right? You seem to have taken the post a bit personally as though it was aimed directly at you. I never suggested you give a damn about people proselytising. I said "atheists who..... " refering to atheists who may do certain things. That's an opinion on something very specific, and if you read it properly, refers specifically to people behaving in a partcular manner, but it is not a suggestion that all atheists behave the same way. Clearly if you are an atheist who does not behave that way or think like that, then it obviously does not apply to you, so no need to be offended chap A bit like if I said something about "atheists who go to Church for Weddings or Christenings", that is something I would be perfectly entitled to hold an opinion on and express it, without the need to prove that any atheist had ever attended a ceremony in a Church, and thankfully without needing your approval. Nor would it suggest that all atheists go to Weddings and Christenings in Churches, a conclusion by reason of your previous arguments that you would seemingly jump to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockjaw Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 I did mention the 'rationalists' old favourite i.e. entomology (i.e. the origin of words) in an earlier post and gave my reasons for not rating it as being all that relevant to the issue. I know this has already been flagged up by Chris but I'm going to point it out again as an illustration that we should all check our facts before arguing the toss. I'll wager that, prior to Chris pointing out his error, OWD was certain that he knew the meaning of "entomology". In this case a quick look at the dictionary will put him right and he has no counter argument. In the case of "atheist" it's not so simple because there are varying published definitions but OWD is certain that the Greek meaning is irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teddybare Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 Other. Atheism is a religion for people with no imagination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockjaw Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 Other. Atheism is a religion for people with no imagination. I thought I'd quickly quote this just in case the accidental implication dawns on you and you remove the post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 Atheism is a religion for people with no imagination. I'm glad that you note imagination is a factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teddybare Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 I'm glad that you note imagination is a factor. It was either that or mental deficiency/illness and I didn't want to offend anybody. "imagination" just seemed a nicer way of putting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.