Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Atheists Agonistes

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    I know lots of fundamentalist Christians who are pacificists...

    JM
    Jon Miller-
    I AM.CANADIAN
    GENERATION 35: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

    Comment


    • #17
      Religion doesn't kill people. Chuck Norris kills people.

      To us, it is the BEAST.

      Comment


      • #18
        Fanaticism can take many faces, included secularism. If God were somehow taken off the table, we'd still have much the same fanatics, just with some other cause.
        That's my opinion as well. Fanatics worry me, regardless of what they happen to be fanatical about (sometimes they bounce around).

        -Arrian
        grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!

        The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.

        Comment


        • #19
          Fanaticism is actually more often a symptom of weak faith, in my experience. My opinion of the almighty is not so low as to feel threatened by some bozo quoting Thomas Paine or pointing at fossils and talking about pink unicorns.

          EDIT: Is it Paine or Payne? I can't recall.
          1011 1100
          Pyrebound--a free online serial fantasy novel

          Comment


          • #20
            I guess some of us are just born with a sense of reason and some aren't.
            To us, it is the BEAST.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar
              Given the choice between lukewarm secularism or a potentially strong counterbalancing judeochristian belief vs. the alluded to fanatical islamicists I'll lay odds the judeo chrisitians stand better odds at resisting the advances of Islamic radicalism in the inevitable clash of civilizations. Sometimes rationality isn't the cure for irrational adversaries.


              Indeed. Why, maybe we should start a crusade....After all, illogical fanaticism clearly must be fought with illogical fanaticism
              Too late as the battle lines (of holy Jihad vs. Crusading Zionists) are already drawn at least from what Islamic Fundies would have you believe. Now given that why would you proceed to discount and diminish a portion of the western populace that has a belief system at least aligned with your world view in that it believes people should be allowed the choice of religion, believes (in its current reformed and now western liberal incarnation) that people of any race, sex and creed need to have the free will to find their own path, etc.

              Rather than deal with the issues from a rationale point of view namely attempting to promote the aforementioned reformations and/or dealing with a compartmentalizing policy for Islamic Fundamentalism you would rather equate Christianity in all its myriad and mostly liberal forms to that of Islamic Fundamentalism. Hmmm..... where have I heard that arguement before. Shades of the failed pretext for the Iraqi invasion arguement. Sadaam's Iraq = Islamic Fundamentlaism if only by tenuous association.

              Perhaps, though, I give to much credit to the tolerance of your world view in that I can only surmize your motive has something to do with the thing you find so abhorrent about Christianity (or any of the Abrahmic religions) the assurance of your correctness and the likewise assurance of the incorrectness and abject stupidity of an opposing world view.

              The point ultimately being either resistance to those ideals and confining it or conversion of ideology to something more palatable via some form of internal reformation of the islamic beliefs.

              The former requires a resolve I think incapable from the feckless rationalistas.


              Really? Why? Considering that the "feckless rationalistas" are ardently opposed to religious dogma (which would necessarily include fundamentalist Islam), I somehow don't think that they are going to oppose resisting forced conversion to Islam
              Why? What gives you any evidence that rational lines of thought provide ardent opposition to expansions of religious dogmas including Islamic Fundamentalism if faced with costs rational beings are unwilling to immediately bear. That assumes long term multigenerational cost benefit analysis which is not a strong suit of the rationalista crowd. Given this scenario one could easily envision a rational approach to be allowing an expansion of religious fundamentalism (even something as malignant as Islamic Sharia law) under the guise of its too expensive to combat or 'hey it doesn't impact me" arguements.

              Of course, they are also not likely to accept the "We must let Israel bomb the hell out of X (Lebanon, etc) because JEBUS will come!!!1" argument either. And that probably isn't an argument that should be driving US foreign policy in any way whatsoever, considering that it is generally ineffectual in in either resisting Islamic fundamentalism or causing an internal reformation within Islam.
              And no one of any real standing including teh EVIL Bush has ever used this as a meaningful arguement for foreign policy decisions. Nor would I expect anyone in any foreseeable future to do so.

              Given those two options if fight we must, fight with conviction and determination.


              One problem is that you are presenting the entire situation as either we fight against the Islamic world, or we stop opposing them and instead attempt to promote internal reform.
              Why can't we, instead of dogmatically clinging onto one doctorine or the other, instead choose the action that will be maximise our ideals in a given situation.

              For instance, perhaps promoting economic prosperity in the Islamic world in one instance is best (as improving material conditions will likely also result in social development, especially if the Islamic world can be tied to the international capitalist system), whereas in another situation using the military to defend our interests is best.

              If we just choose one or the other, because such an approach fails to account for the complexity of the situation (the complexity of religion, of the social dynamics within the various nations, of humans in general) then of course it will be doomed to failure: If we simply accept fundamentalist Islam, obviously our greater liberal and social ideals will not be promoted. If we completely ignore the "arab street" and instead attempt to bomb our way to victory, obviously we will only increase the gap between Islam and liberalism and radicalise increasing sections of the population.
              Neither approach is going to work solely on its own.
              I believe you misinterpret my meaning. I was never saying it was an either or proposition merely that as a realist/pessimist I think the likelihood ends up being we will be required at times to fight and resist the anticivilizational movements of religious dogmatics. A threat I see far greater in the form of Islamic fundamentalism an avowed enemy of western ideals as opposed to modern reformed Judeo Christianity an avowed ally in supporting western ideals in relative comparison/contrast.

              I of course would like to see all avenues opened for possible exploitation. (BTW my pessimism is rooted in the failed 'bring democracy to the ME' as much as it is the ardent and pre-emptive opposition from so called rational people to such a policy for reasons of petty short term political gain.)

              Given that struggle is likely, I see no reason to start an internal and counterproductive purging of those elements that would be most material in that resistance. I would of course be opposed to those attacks regardless of the above reason for reasons of tolerance alone.

              Furthermore to the opening post the point attempting to being drawn is that all religions are equal.


              Oh indeed not! For instance, the Dharmic religions as a whole tend to be somewhat better wrt/ violence than the Abrahamic religions.
              It's just that fundamentalist Christianity and fundamentalist Islam are extremely similar in that they are both hate- and violence-filled religions that call for the deaths of nonbelievers and the forceful conversion of society.
              Truly I should be refering to you as Aneeshm going forward.

              Seriously you again conflate rogue minority factions of Christianity vs. mainstream established and the vast majority of Christendom. Those rogue factions have over all our lifetimes engendered condemnations from the more established Christian denominations (even your beloved Mormonism).

              Christianity in its modern form is simply different because, again, it has largely been obliterated by liberalism.
              No it has over the years of reformation transformed itself not been obliterated by liberalism. In fact one could say liberalism owes as much to many of the philosphers of the reformation as modern Christianity owes to the secular liberal philosphers.

              This marks the stark contrast between modern Christianity and Islamic Fundamentalism.

              All one has to do is look to many African Christian demoniations to see what the lack of liberalism turns Christianity into: Something that is very difficult to seperate in principle from fundamentalist islam. Numerous crimes against humanity, as occur today in the Islamic world, were once condoned in the Christian world as the will of God.
              All one has to do is see the missions and soup lines to understand the great works of caring and giving the church does to understand it is a force for good as well. But I guess I could argue on the lines of that other great caring and giving religion, secular communism and all that communism turned into: Something not so different in principle from fundamentalist Islam. Numerous crimes against humanity, as occur today in the Islamic world, were once condoned and ordered in the communist world as the something done for the greater good of the party.

              We can praise liberalism and socialism and whatever other philosophical systems have turned us into a more open and free society. But lets not pretend that Christianity is somehow a pure religion as opposed to evil, hate-infested Islam. Fundamentalist Christianity, indeed any form of dogma that promotes illogical thinking patterns, holds us back far more than it propels us forward. Hence, embracing Christianity once again in order to fight fundie Islam seems, to me, to be turning into the thing we're trying to destroy.
              And here again is where you analogy fails because it is because Christianity has adopted and embraced a reformation and has adopted and even help shape the logical thinking patterns of liberalism to an extent(and no I don't agree with all views held by the Christian church by I do understand they offer them up for discussion and debate) while in stark contrast Islam has not shown that same tendency.

              Lastly for all your talk of fundamental christianity and its adherents you again conflate fundamentalism (a rapidly dying faction of Christianity) with evangelical Christianity. The latter rapidly growing and relying on powers of argumentative perusasion to promote its faith and relying on personal experience of conversion, the former relying on ancient dogmas instructing and its steadfast beleif that all nonfollowers/believers are destined to damnation if not holding their own specific interpretations.
              "Just puttin on the foil" - Jeff Hanson

              “In a democracy, I realize you don’t need to talk to the top leader to know how the country feels. When I go to a dictatorship, I only have to talk to one person and that’s the dictator, because he speaks for all the people.” - Jimmy Carter

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Sava
                I guess some of us are just born with a sense of reason and some aren't.
                Y'know, if you say your name backwards it sounds kinda like "half-ass." Quit Avas'ing your trolls, foo'.
                1011 1100
                Pyrebound--a free online serial fantasy novel

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Bkeela
                  The advent of Intelligent Design seems to have energised science popularists like Dawkins and the scientific community in general. With pseudo scientific creationism poisoning the minds of young people in schools, rational people had to get off their arses and fight back.
                  Jep,
                  the gentlemens agreement that we don´t mess with christian religion as long as the religious people don´t mess with sciencific education was broken by the christian fundamentalists.
                  Therefore it is justified to fight back
                  Tamsin (Lost Girl): "I am the Harbinger of Death. I arrive on winds of blessed air. Air that you no longer deserve."
                  Tamsin (Lost Girl): "He has fallen in battle and I must take him to the Einherjar in Valhalla"

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Proteus_MST
                    Jep,
                    the gentlemens agreement that we don´t mess with christian religion as long as the religious people don´t mess with sciencific education was broken by the christian fundamentalists.
                    Therefore it is justified to fight back
                    You're being rather indiscriminate attacking ALL religion, though. I don't care for ID or creationism myself. In fact, speaking for myself, I'd gladly tag-team the fundies with the atheists if they weren't being all pissy with us.
                    1011 1100
                    Pyrebound--a free online serial fantasy novel

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Elok


                      Y'know, if you say your name backwards it sounds kinda like "half-ass." Quit Avas'ing your trolls, foo'.
                      Sorry, but some people aren't worth a full ass.
                      To us, it is the BEAST.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Lastly for all your talk of fundamental christianity and its adherents you again conflate fundamentalism (a rapidly dying faction of Christianity) with evangelical Christianity. The latter rapidly growing and relying on powers of argumentative perusasion to promote its faith and relying on personal experience of conversion, the former relying on ancient dogmas instructing and its steadfast beleif that all nonfollowers/believers are destined to damnation if not holding their own specific interpretations.
                        Evangelicals seem awfully loony to me. Perhaps a different sort of loony, but still loony. Anti-reason.

                        By the way, I do consider "liberal Christianity" far preferable to radical Islam. But it's a lesser of two evils thang.

                        -Arrian
                        grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!

                        The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Arrian


                          Evangelicals seem awfully loony to me. Perhaps a different sort of loony, but still loony. Anti-reason.

                          By the way, I do consider "liberal Christianity" far preferable to radical Islam. But it's a lesser of two evils thang.

                          -Arrian
                          Thats cool. AS long as you and others here feel free to allow people to be loony without repercussion or recrimination, I'm down with that.


                          The constant haranguing some (not you per se) have to show OMFG!!111!! Look at teh stoopid Christian gets a tad bit tiresome.
                          "Just puttin on the foil" - Jeff Hanson

                          “In a democracy, I realize you don’t need to talk to the top leader to know how the country feels. When I go to a dictatorship, I only have to talk to one person and that’s the dictator, because he speaks for all the people.” - Jimmy Carter

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Absolutely. They can be looney for all I care. I reserve the right to argue against them when they seek to base policy decisions on their looney beliefs, of course.

                            As for the haranguing... it's a bit chicken & the egg. Christians take plenty of potshots at atheist/agnostics too. Both "sides" in such flamewars think the other started it.

                            -Arrian
                            grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!

                            The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              You'ld be hard pressed to find a relgionista "your all going to hell" person posting on these boards.


                              Save a few fanatical commies that were intent on burning all us capitalistic piggies.
                              "Just puttin on the foil" - Jeff Hanson

                              “In a democracy, I realize you don’t need to talk to the top leader to know how the country feels. When I go to a dictatorship, I only have to talk to one person and that’s the dictator, because he speaks for all the people.” - Jimmy Carter

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Elok
                                You're being rather indiscriminate attacking ALL religion, though. I don't care for ID or creationism myself. In fact, speaking for myself, I'd gladly tag-team the fundies with the atheists if they weren't being all pissy with us.
                                Yep, that´s often correct.
                                I think the devil lies in the design of the religions.
                                For example the three large abrahamic religions all share the idea of one god and even many of their religious books.
                                If you attack some/all books of the old testimony (or the existence of god) you cannot other than attack all of the three great religions at the same time.

                                It seems to be difficult to aim an attack the evangelical fundamentalists alone as they derive their faith from the same sources as the liberal christians, just as difficult as bombing a house (where a criminal is hiding) in a crowded street without hurting innocent bystanders.
                                Tamsin (Lost Girl): "I am the Harbinger of Death. I arrive on winds of blessed air. Air that you no longer deserve."
                                Tamsin (Lost Girl): "He has fallen in battle and I must take him to the Einherjar in Valhalla"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X