Jagella

So, you're saying there's some people who belong to a larger group of people who aren't behaving the way the whole group should behave? That's the focus?

Some atheists act much like the religious fundamentalists they criticize. That concerns me.

If this thread has any point; it’s that you need to try harder.

I'm not the topic of this thread. That's an ad hominem.

Jagella

 

You started a thread asking if atheists are picking on theists unfairly, and you're "exhorting them to act rationally and morally". Isn't that arguing that they are failing some benchmark test now? More than other groups and so needing specific focus?

I know that some atheists are falling short of rationality and morality. I decided to focus on them as a result.

And the strawman is when you ask "Do you object to being moral and rational?" Nobody, especially overtone, has suggested anything like this. But it's easier to attack a strawman you made up. No offense, I'm pointing out a very common fallacy because I think you're smarter than that, and don't need to go to the Dark Side to make your points.

To my knowledge the question was never answered. Dodging questions tends to make me suspicious.

If you're willing to stick by what I quoted you on here, then I'd say we're probably done with aiming at atheists. Every group and individual has probably picked on some religion or lack of religion at one time or another. Is there any discussion left on that aspect?

You may be correct, but I'd like to discuss the way some atheists have picked on the religious. If you don't like that topic, then move on to another thread.

Or is it possibly the case that religion has so many contradictions, errors, and interpretation that it makes an easy target?

Religion can be very easy to ridicule, but I generally don't take that route anymore. I prefer a fair, open assessment of religious claims to see what truth they may contain.

I could also argue that ridicule can be an effective tool when someone is being ridiculous. Not that that's the case with all religion, but it can be like a slap in the face for someone in hysterics. Ridicule is not a 100% bad option when someone needs to be shown they have no leg to stand on. Being "picked on" sounds like persecution though. If ridicule isn't immediately effective (despite the bucket of cold water, the dreamer still sleeps), it should NOT be continued.

Fine. Let's ridicule you and see how effective it may be it preventing you from being ridiculous. We won't continue it if it isn't effective, though.

Jagella

OK, I will read it.

Yuo said "I'm exhorting atheists to act rationally and morally. What exactly is wrong with that? Do you object to being rational and moral? "

And yes, you are still picking on atheists by singling them out.

OK, John, if it makes you happy, then go ahead and act irrationally and immorally. Don't let anything I say get in the way of that.

Whynot stop doing that?

Why not say

"I'm exhorting people to act rationally and morally"

rather than taking sides?

I already said that, but for your convenience--People need to act rationally and morally. All better?

If you bothered to read the OP, the topic of this thread asked if the religious are being picked on. I asked if religion has any place in modern science and discourse. Naturally, one group that might be picking on the religious are atheists. That's why I focused on atheists. It relates to the topic. If you don't like that topic, then move on to another thread.

Jagella

Please stop using this strawman.

I'm not making an argument.

As iNow mentions, the objection is that you're singling atheists out because of a personal experience, when your exhortations should apply to all equally.

I have already posted that everybody and not just atheists should act sensibly, fairly, and morally.

It does NOT make a good argument. You've made no case that atheists are less rational and moral than anyone else.

I never said they were!

Phi, please read what's actually posted rather than what you imagine to be posted.

Jagella

In every post on this thread, you have assumed that atheists are separate from religious people. You have likewise assumed that atheists form a group that is accountable for the behavior of its members.

I asked for a "copy and paste" direct quotation of anything I've said in which I referred to "all atheists." Do you have any such quotation? You assume too much.

You have also employed the phrase "we atheists" in describing what you present as your own stance - no category of belief describable by you as "we" includes even a large minority of the atheists on this planet.

Regarding my use of the term "we atheists," I'm simply referring to atheists, a group I belong to. I'm fully aware that atheists differ on many issues. I'm exhorting atheists to act rationally and morally. What exactly is wrong with that? Do you object to being rational and moral?

Jagella

But that's irrelevant to science. It sounds like you are suggesting that scientific journals should give equal time to non-scientific ideas like creationism or free energy. There is no value to science in that.

Actually, scientific journals have peer reviewed many ideas such as creationism that might appear to be fringe science. Those ideas were found to be lacking in scientific merit. They were not just dismissed with a wave of the hand.

Do you believe they ridiculed you because they thought your belief in faith healing was irrational and dangerous?

 

Why would they suggest what medical treatment you should seek? Are they doctors or medical professionals?

 

Could it be that they had considered you knew of the medical care and that you had ignored it because of your faith?

 

There seems to be a lot of context missing from this story. How did they come around to start insulting you for your faith? What led to it? Is there some background that you have left out?

 

What led him to say you are of this religion and therefore, tried to threaten you with eviction or lie about eviction?

I don't know the answers to these questions, so please excuse me if I'd rather not speculate.

 

I don't think you have mentioned faith healing before. If that is what was being ridiculed, then it is entirely reasonable. (Unlike some here, I don't approve of ridiculing religious people just for being religious. Only when they are ridiculous.) If you had said you were going for homeopathic treatment (which has no religious connotations) then I assume you would have been equally ridiculed.

Really? You would ridicule sick and desperate people for seeking healing through religious faith? I'd recommend caution because if there are any able-bodied people around, then you might be picking yourself up off the floor.

So you weren't being ridiculed because they were atheists, you were being ridiculed because they were rational.

I see nothing rational about ridicule. Ridicule is devoid of reason and has no capacity to arrive at the truth. I prefer calm, rational arguments backed up by evidence. If somebody seeks healing through faith, I would ask her why she is taking that route and try to steer her in what I hope is a more promising direction.

Jagella

Have you considered the possibility that they were responding with exasperation out of concern for your health and wellbeing?

I considered that possibility, and I have concluded that they did not ridicule me because they were concerned for my health. None of them suggested standard medical care or did anything else that would suggest that they acted out of goodwill.

That perhaps they were hoping to shock you out of your belief that God would heal you, if you were not seeking medical help or care for your cancer and if you were instead relying solely on prayer?

I don't have cancer (my example was hypothetical), but I do have an injury that I sought a remedy for.

Why would he say that? I find it strange that anyone would try to have someone evicted because of their religious beliefs. How did he even know what your religion was?

I don't know why he lied to me.

In any case, although faith healing may be harmful, ridiculing desperate people is also harmful because in addition to being disrespectful it probably won't dissuade people from seeking religious solutions to their problems.

Jagella

 

As you have already completely misrepresented one discussion on another forum (post #51), I would suggest people take this with a pinch of salt.

Trail the heretic! Denounce him wherever he goes.

Jagella

 

I'm not saying this is what happened, but is there a chance that these people, being atheists and hopefully rational thinkers, offered up reasons to support why they thought your faith was ridiculous (don't answer that yet, two-part question)? And you, being religious at the time and armed mostly with emotional appeals, doctrine full of contradictions and errors, and an abiding faith that absolutely won't allow you to be wrong about your religion, is there a chance you perceived that criticism as ridicule?

What they said was not what I would describe as constructive criticism. It was cruel considering that I was trusting in my Christian faith to heal me of a severe injury. Would you resort to ridicule if you are told by a person dying of cancer that she is looking to a god to heal her?

And because it's about your faith, it feels like it's about you. So here are these atheists, seemingly mocking you personally, but it might be that they were just using their knowledge of the natural world to explain where your doctrine failed the reality test, or to point out that strong faith means accepting a single explanation about a phenomenon without question even though you can't possibly know something like that.

One of those atheists had it in for me. For example, he lied to me saying that a petition was going around to have me evicted from my apartment. So I have reason to believe that it was about me.

Let's put you on the receiving end. If some Christians deem your atheism to be ridiculous and ridicule you, would that be OK for you?

Jagella

Exactly what didn't you like and was it anything to do with the fact that they were atheists?

I already posted that i was ridiculed by atheists when I was a Christian. They ridiculed my faith.

For example, could you have experienced the same issues with people from another faith or members of different branches of the same faith?

Yes. My mother, a Roman Catholic, called me an "asshole" because I attended an Assembly of God church.

Religion is rough!

Jagella

 

I don't remember you saying that. But in that case, why have had to put up with eight pages of you repeatedly saying atheists should do this, that and the other?

That's a very strange question. You don't know why atheists should be exhorted to act civilized? Is doing so an unfair burden? Is that what some people here mean by "picking on atheists."

In any case, I've already explained some of my negative experiences with some atheists. That's why I exhort them to be "good."

Just carefully read without prejudice what is posted That way you are more likely to understand the intended meaning of what is stated.

Jagella

 

So why aren't you insisting that everyone is more fair, polite, and rational?

I thought I already did say that everybody should be fair, polite, and rational. If not: Everybody should be fair, polite, and rational. All better?

Why pick on atheists? It hardly seems far or rational.

I will answer that question when you answer this one: Why do you cheat on your taxes?

Jagella

 

But only from atheists.

Another textbook example of a straw-man argument. It's hard to defend what I never said. Better reading comprehension is sorely needed on this thread.

Jagella

In other words, you have not established that there is a significant problem caused by atheism. People and groups attack other people and groups. This is a sad fact of human life. You have not established that atheists are a bigger problem than any other group.

I have already posted that I don't know if there is a "significant problem caused by atheism." I'd suggest you review this thread and more carefully read what I've posted. You seem to read into what I say resulting in numerous straw-man arguments.

So why are you picking on atheists?

Don't you think that's a rather loaded question? (e.g. Why do you kick your dog?) I don't like what some atheists have done including what they've done to me. I prefer more honest, polite, and rational behavior.

Jagella

Your repeated claim that the religious are being picked on by atheists. (Have you read the title of the thread and the posts by "Jagella"?)

That's easy enough. Here's what Wikipedia has to say:

 

Throughout the history of the Soviet Union (1922-1991), Soviet authorities suppressed and persecuted various forms of Christianity to different extents depending on the particular era. Soviet policy, based on the ideology of Marxism–Leninism, made atheism the official doctrine of the Soviet Union. Marxism–Leninism has consistently advocated the control, suppression, and the elimination of religious beliefs.

Not enough? The Library of Congress tells us:

The Soviet Union was the first state to have as an ideological objective the elimination of religion. Toward that end, the Communist regime confiscated church property, ridiculed religion, harassed believers, and propagated atheism in the schools. Actions toward particular religions, however, were determined by State interests, and most organized religions were never outlawed.

So there's the type of evidence you asked for. Strange, now you need to come up with some way to reject this evidence. You might try moving the goalpost by demanding evidence that has traits in addition to what you already posted. You can also try to attack the sources as not being credible. Finally, just say that my evidence is not in accord with "the facts" all the while not bothering to support your claim that you have the facts.

Jagella

 

You make it sound like have rejected facts; I have not. I accept all of the facts presented that were true, and rejected items that were not factual. (if it's false, it's not a fact) These facts simply do not support your claim. Partly because of the falsehoods peppered in the claims, and partly because it does not fit the definition of persecution, as I described above.

How do you know what is factual and what is not factual?

You need to provide facts that do support the claim, and situations that fit the definition.

 

What claim in particular are you asking for supporting evidence? In what ways might the evidence support that claim, and what definition are you referring to?

And again, will you accept that evidence if I present it?

Jagella

Do I have to put this in really big letters or something?

What evidence?

OK, what evidence will you accept that some atheists have harmed the religious? Do you promise to accept that evidence if I come up with it?

Jagella

 

Your "evidence" was rejected because it was not supported by the facts.

What facts will you then accept? Please let me know, and I will then try my best to come up with that evidence and present it in this forum. I want your promise that you will honor your word.

Jagella

We did point out that some stuff put forward as evidence was wrong or simply had no evidentiary value but as far as I can see we have not rejected any actual evidence.

You rejected the evidence because it does not support your predispositions.

Jagella

 

It was neither rejected or ignored. It was weighed, it was measured and it was found wanting. But rather than consider these objections you prefer to pretend that it was ignored.

What a coincidence: I have weighed and measured everything you have said and found it wanting.

Anyway, I hope that discrimination against the religious does not get out of hand.

Jagella

 

You provided evidence some religious people seek preferential treatment and will cry 'unfair' when held to the same standards as everyone else.

You are denying the evidence. Why ask for something you will refuse to take?

Jagella

 

So that is why you can't produce any evidence to support your notions?

I did post evidence, and it was summarily rejected. Religious fundamentalists often act the same way; they will demand evidence only to brush it aside upon presentation.

Jagella

(1) OK I will help you learn by pointing out an important aspect of it.

Thanks for the coaching.

Make sure you have evidence on your side.

That's generally a good idea, but often people don't want evidence.

(2)If you don't know something, don't claim it as truth. Otherwise you will lose the argument.

OK. Do you know this statement to be true? If not, then don't say it is true, or you will lose the argument!

(3) Leninism discriminates against other religions.

Leninism is a religion?

(4) get a mirror.

I will break it!

(5)Now, by way of practice at the best way to win arguments, perhaps you should cite some evidence for that claim?

I did post evidence only to have it rejected or ignored.

And, don't forget- you made the claim so the burden of proof is on you.

What claim are you referring to?

If you can't offer good evidence you are going to lose the argument.

I'm not really out to win any argument; I just want to know the truth.

So, sometimes, the only way not to lose an argument is not to start it.

I will give it some thought!

Jagella

He won the argument.

If it's OK with you I will stick around and learn how to win arguments.

The implication was that the discrimination against the religious groups was widespread.

I don't know how widespread discrimination against religious groups is, but it does happen.

he found nearly as many counter example as you cited example and, since atheists are a small minority, finding nearly as many example of them as theists being victimised shows that the discrimination is more common in the opposite direction to that suggested.

It may be the case that the religious discriminate more against atheists than vice versa. I don't deny that.

It is difficult to use a search engine to find examples of discrimination by atheists against religious groups.

trying to do so brings up lots of pages like the one I looked at earlier.

They don't actually show discrimination by atheists against religious groups. They show misunderstandings and dishonesty or stupidity by religious groups.

 

If you don't like websites, then here's a book about the topic: The Bear's Hug: Christian Belief and the Soviet State 1917-1986.

Anyway, John, we tend to believe what we wish to believe and disbelieve truths that we loathe. Evidence often counts for little if that evidence doesn't support our cherished notions. Evidently many members here don't wish to face the fact that atheists sometimes discriminate against religious believers.

Jagella

 

And here are five examples of discrimination against atheists:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/12/1401480/-Five-Examples-of-Discrimination-Against-Atheists-in-America

 

I know that atheists are discriminated against. How does that fact relate to the religious being discriminated against?

As atheists are in the minority, I win!

What did you win?

Have you not heard of the concept of "burden of proof"?

Of course. Do you need proof of religious discrimination? I thought that it was common knowledge. I hope you're not avoiding any truth that does not support your predispositions.

Oh, and could you please answer my question? Why didn't you use a search engine to find examples of religious discrimination?

Jagella

 

So that's what it comes down to. You had a bad experience with some people who disagreed with you and now you are taking it out on all atheists, on the false assumption that all atheists would treat you equally badly.

I am an atheist. Are you saying I'm taking it out on myself?

Those atheists didn't just disagree with me. They ridiculed me when I sought a healing of a severe injury through Christian faith. Don't you find it to be cruel to ridicule an injured person who out of desperation seeks healing through faith?

Anyway, you are twisting my words in much the same way that fundamentalist Christians will twist my words when I disagree with them. I never criticized all atheists--only the atheists that are no more open-minded and rational than religious believers.

Is that clear?

Jagella

Perhaps some specific examples would help. If the problem is as widespread as implied, examples should be plentiful and easy to present.

Here are seven examples of alleged discrimination against Christians. I don't know how accurate these claims of discrimination may be, but I don't dismiss them either. I do know that Christians can be mistreated by atheists because I was ridiculed by atheists when I was a Christian.

By the way, if you wanted examples of religious discrimination, then why didn't you just use a search engine?

Jagella

This whole tread is silly.

Do you dismiss the topic of the thread?

Jagella