(March 14, 2013 at 1:10 am)jstrodel Wrote: To tell the truth is to say whatever is true, whether it is popular or unpopular, whether it will win praise or condemnation, whether it will elicit interest or disinterest, whether is cool or uncool.
I will give you a rebuttle of your stuff if it makes you happy (which it wont)
But you can have the entire reply summed uup in short now, if you want, by simply klicking the spoiler button:
Quote:I saw someone on this thread say something about the democratic party. Liberalism is not the same as the left. I did not use the term "left" to indicate the democratic party, I meant it to indicate radicals. It is significant to point out that a substantial portion of atheists are radicals. This is not the same as being a democrat.
The definition of what is radical varies from which possition one has.
so what is a radical for you?
and can you prove that "a subtantial part" of the atheists are radicals?
Quote:People are entitled to their own political beliefs, if people believe that America is the moral equivalent of Nazi Germany, they are perfectly able to have that conviction. It is significant the number of atheists that have convictions like that though.
Can you prove that most atheist believe that?
Quote:And the number that are either openly Communist, Marxist, or so deeply influenced by radical leftism that they are more or less communist. This is what a substantial portion of America is like.
Can you prove that?
Quote:I am not going to say that radicalism is intrinsically evil, or that there have not been some Christian radicals.
What is radical for you?
Since as I have mentioned before: the definition of what is radical changes from possition to possition.
Quote:My point is that radicalism is a very serious thing and atheists commonly do not treat it seriously.
What is radicalism for you?
Can you prove that most atheists are like that?
Quote:They seem to be proud of their tolerance of extreme views for an easily discernable and praiseworthy motive, the free access to information, but at the same time tend to completely neglect the damage that radicals can cause.
Can you prove that?
Quote:They also will not accept the degree to which radicals use atheism to spread their beliefs.
Can you prove that?
Quote:As far as I can remember, I have never seen any atheist denounce the Marxists who use atheism to build their movement.
We have only one communist who is also an atheist on this forum. His username is craterhorus and if you would look up what he posts, you would notice that the others here actualy give him a pritty hard time.
On the other side: In my country of Germany 40% of the population are atheist, in Sweden it is almoust 80%.
Anyway, east Germany use to be a brutal communist regime, yet you dont find "non criticism" here. Actualy most people oppose what happened there and call for justice.
Being an atheist requires only one thing from the atheist - not believing in god.
Other than that an atheist can have various political views, since they are almoust all independent from atheism.
How do you explain the marxist Hugo Chavez - who was a very open catholic?
Quote:Someone said that atheism has no leaders, this is untrue, obviously some atheists have more influence than others and are de facto leaders, however if it was true, it would be the scariest proposition possible.
Can you prove that by showing me my "leader"?
Quote:Atheists are often accepting of virtually all behavior, regardless of how destructive or how risky it may be.
Look at the list of banned members.
Other than that, can you prove your point?
Quote:The average atheist will laugh at the suggestion that political radicals are anything to take seriously or worry about.
Can you prove that?
