Do you like how Dawkins, Hitchens et al. represent atheists?

[Xev]

Q is an athiest, therefore right?
SWEET!
Q, what are some hot stocks right now?
Q, what are the winning lotto numbers for the MIchigan powerball?
Q, should I move in with my friend who is reliable but has a small place, or should I look for a roomate who might be crazy?

 

[(Q)]

Its an opinion, based on observation, you are free to refute it with your own observations.

No need. They are only opinions.

*based on fallacies*

 

[S.A.M.]

Q is an athiest, therefore right?
SWEET!
Q, what are some hot stocks right now?
Q, what are the winning lotto numbers for the MIchigan powerball?
Q, should I move in with my friend who is reliable but has a small place, or should I look for a roomate who might be crazy?

Sure, don't you know, he has all the answers; its his superior (male) brain of course, that theists like me can only watch in righteous envy and dismay as he demolishes our fallacious delusions with flourish. :bawl:

edit: see?vvv

 

[(Q)]

Q is an athiest, therefore right?
SWEET!
Q, what are some hot stocks right now?

Buy pork.

Q, what are the winning lotto numbers for the MIchigan powerball?

2 23 24 27 36 3

Q, should I move in with my friend who is reliable but has a small place, or should I look for a roomate who might be crazy?

Whoever has the biggest junk.

 

[S.A.M.]

:crazy:

Well under the presumption that all theists are delusional, of course.

Or have you changed your mind about that?

 

[Xev]

SAM:

In my opinion, atheism is a cult without a creed, so its proponents inevitably grab hold of an alternate ideology (living in faith being the default state of people),

I like how you progress from an opinion to treating the ramifications of that opinion as fact.

unfortunately, those ideologies tend to look to replace God in the community and hence end up becoming systems of power and oppression (since religion is not something that people will give up easily); hence the way I see it,

Duely noted. Did you want to address the historical facts that I presented, or should we continue the "I am SAM, therefore my opinion is correct" line of thinking?

all systems that stem from atheism are based on ridicule and suppression of the religious majority, which happens to be the one thing all atheists have in common

Again, please demonstrate that Marxism-Leninism is based on athiesm. Last I heard, Marxism evolved as a reaction to the excesses of 19th century industrial capitalism, not as a consequence of any athiestic argument. In any case, it happens to be compatible with religious thought - the Christians were doing communism before anyone else in Europe, and Saint (mark the word) More basically invented the damn word for it.

As for eugenics, the Nazis were rather fond of the notion, and they were certainly not athiests or rationalists.

(ie anti-theism); its interesting to see, for example, on this site, how the arrival of one "nutter"(devout theist), will bring all the atheists together in a group to "examine" their faith.

How, SAM, is one supposed to listen to a person threaten you with eternal damnation and not end up laughing like a treefull of monkeys?

it is arrogance to presume that, don't you think?

It is arrogance to assume that you know what "all" athiests think.

 

[Xev]

Sure, don't you know, he has all the answers; its his superior (male) brain of course, that theists like me can only watch in righteous envy and dismay as he demolishes our fallacious delusions with flourish. :bawl:

edit: see?vvv

(Q) has not implied any gender based superiority ANYWHERE in this thread - peripherally accusing him of sexism is not cricket.
At all.

Q:

Whoever has the biggest junk.

Inside they trunk?

 

[S.A.M.]

(Q) has not implied any gender based superiority ANYWHERE in this thread - peripherally accusing him of sexism is not cricket.
At all.

Come now, I am a monotheist from a patriarchial culture, surely you see the obvious logic in my appreciation of his superior maleness?

 

[Enmos]

I go by their anti-religious attitude and the fact that they destroyed several churches. And their sense of right and wrong was based on reason remember? Eliminate the weak and those who "bring down" society.

Eugeneics had strong supporters in prominent people like Alexander Bell and G B Shaw. It was the reason for the human experimentation of the Nazis.

And a lot of atheists are brought up in religious households, does that make them less atheistic?


The reds were atheist? The Chinese are atheist? That will be news to them. Last I heard they were both religious. The Chinese of course suffered under an oppressive anti-religious system, but that does not make them atheists.


Very nice, but fantasies are not the realm of the atheists; they are rationalists remember? The FSM? The IPU? .


They do? You mean all the theists are trying to deliberately override their biological instincts?




I think you'll find there was plenty of anti-religionism.





And yeah, fanatics all look the same, even the ones, that are a-theistic.

And that goes for the cognitive dissonance as well.

Dont you have any shame !?

 

[S.A.M.]

Dont you have any shame !?

Apparently, but nor do I have a clue.

Are you a dogmatic skeptic?

 

[Enmos]

Apparently, but nor do I have a clue.

Are you a dogmatic skeptic?

That was quite insulting SAM!
Whats next, comparing atheists to the nazi's ?

 

[S.A.M.]

That was quite insulting SAM!
Whats next, comparing atheists to the nazi's ?

I think I already did that, on a previous page. Did you miss it?

Wait...

Here it is

http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1496718&postcount=253

Anyway, the idea is to objectively recognise the faults in the system. Surely, you would not want to ignore extremists merely because they are atheists?

After all, if what Sam Harris says is true, its the moderates that provide fertile ground for the extremists to breed in.

Besides, as the atheists are so fond of saying, its not you I am insulting, its your belief system. Unless you happen to take it rather personally, that is.

 

[S.A.M.]

SAM:
I like how you progress from an opinion to treating the ramifications of that opinion as fact.

Everyone has to start somewhere *blushing modestly*

Duely noted. Did you want to address the historical facts that I presented, or should we continue the "I am SAM, therefore my opinion is correct" line of thinking?

Ok

Again, please demonstrate that Marxism-Leninism is based on athiesm. Last I heard, Marxism evolved as a reaction to the excesses of 19th century industrial capitalism, not as a consequence of any athiestic argument. In any case, it happens to be compatible with religious thought - the Christians were doing communism before anyone else in Europe, and Saint (mark the word) More basically invented the damn word for it.

I based it on what Marx himself says of course, about religion, I posted in in one of those longer posts. (Lenin shared those views) I'm sure that the Christians who were "doing communism" as you call it (sounds rather randy there), were not the ones in power, or are you saying it was the Christian communists who were behind the anti-religion movements in <insert communist country>?

As for eugenics, the Nazis were rather fond of the notion, and they were certainly not athiests or rationalists.

Sure, but they were no devout theists either, most of the ones performing those experiments were scientists, and surely you can't get any more rational and areligious than an evolutionary researcher? Or are you suggesting that their studies were based on the teachings of the church?

How, SAM, is one supposed to listen to a person threaten you with eternal damnation and not end up laughing like a treefull of monkeys?

Well, I take no offence at all the FSMers, or the pink unicorn in (Q)'s attic that keeps giving me the baleful eye. I come from a country with <1% atheism and my best friend there is a devout Catholic (moi being a Muslim, in case you did not know). Do you think if I handed her a jar of urine with a statue of Christ, it would enhance our friendship? Is that the rational road to mutual tolerance?

It is arrogance to assume that you know what "all" athiests think.

Here I have to post a disclaimer that redarmy11 ( who has returned from oblivion) is not included in any of my rants against atheists.

 

[Enmos]

I think I already did that, on a previous page. Did you miss it?

Wait...

Here it is

http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1496718&postcount=253

Anyway, the idea is to objectively recognise the faults in the system. Surely, you would not want to ignore extremists merely because they are atheists?

After all, if what Sam Harris says is true, its the moderates that provide fertile ground for the extremists to breed in.

Besides, as the atheists are so fond of saying, its not you I am insulting, its your belief system. Unless you happen to take it rather personally, that is.

I am offended by your generalization.

 

[S.A.M.]

I am offended by your generalization.

One works with what one has. Are you aware of any prominent atheists who did not succumb to ideological hubris? Please feel free to mention them and describe the differences.

 

[Enmos]

Sure some atheists are arrogant pigs, and so are some theists.
As for generalizations... im sure you heard a few. You should know better.

 

[Oli]

Here I have to post a disclaimer that redarmy11 ( who has returned from oblivion) is not included in any of my rants against atheists.

:bagpuss:

 

[S.A.M.]

:bagpuss:

And Oli, but that goes without saying, his sweet nature has him being frequently mistaken for a theist.

 

[(Q)]

Besides, as the atheists are so fond of saying, its not you I am insulting, its your belief system. Unless you happen to take it rather personally, that is.

How can anyone take it personally or otherwise? It's silly in the extreme.

Your insulting a lack of belief in theists claims for gods existence. hehe

Anyway, the idea is to objectively recognise the faults in the system.

Is it faulty to not accept your wacky claims of god, sam? hehe

KILLING ME!

:runaway:

 

[Oli]

And Oli, but that goes without saying, his sweet nature has him being frequently mistaken for a theist.

Ouch!