(September 17, 2014 at 3:04 pm)Celestine Wrote:

(September 17, 2014 at 12:05 pm)Chas Wrote: You disingenuous cunt. You are no more an atheist than Islam is the religion of peace.

And why is that Chas? I am interested to know why you think this... and why you must insult me for the belief I hold on how others should be approached.

Because of statements like these.

Quote:I don't care what the pillars of atheism are.

Learn about Islam, talk with Muslims, before you presume to know about them. Have you done this? OR do you believe whatever the news tells you about these foreign people who live thousands of miles away from you whom you don't know anything about?

You're very narrow minded from what I can see, perhaps I am wrong, but at least I am not surprised or suffer from disappointment. After all... this is what I expected from my fellow atheists, pure ignorance.

The fall of education has nothing to do with religion, a stupid population is much easier to control than an intelligent one.

If a person is a murderer their religion should not be attached to them even if they claim they took such measures for their religion.

Religion has thousands of years of moral philosophies that all could benefit from,

but your government does a much better job at indoctrination than religion ever could hope to do! After all the government makes those textbooks and puts their own falsehoods that they present as truths in them.

And that's just from the first couple of pages.

(September 17, 2014 at 4:48 pm)Celestine Wrote:

(September 17, 2014 at 4:46 pm)Clueless Morgan Wrote: Because it's not just a belief you hold; if it were you'd've started a less confrontational thread, more like what Bibliofagus suggested.

Instead, you appear to actually think you have the right to come onto a forum and tell others that they should believe as you believe, which is just as bad as what theists do.

If you had wanted to have a discussion about what the best method is to talk to theists, you wouldn't have made all the unjustified assumptions about the members of this forum that you did in your original post (which alienated almost everyone) and you would have outlined you reasons for thinking militancy is not an effective method. In other words, you would have engaged in reasoned DIALOGUE, not simply flung insults at us and then fall back behind you confirmation bias shield. But no, you bitched and moaned about how your good atheist name is spoiled by all the mean, militant atheists like us and how we're all too thick-skulled to even consider what you had to say.

I'm beginning to conclude that you're problem with militancy is that you can't handle it when it's given back at you. You don't seem to have a problem dishing it out (reference your OP), but when you get a dose thrown back in your face you whine about why people are insulting you.

Now do you see what we can learn when we calmly discuss things with others? I have not tried this 'debating' for years. I did not realize at the time that I was being offensive, like rhythm, I thought I was only being 'innocuous'

Yes you are right, I should have broached this topic in a friendlier manner but I am relearning much of how I have engaged with people. You will notice however that while I was being subject to heavy ridicule and insults that I for the most part did not respond in the same way. Instead I have asked you why you have responded in such a fashion, and now I know that I myself was in part to blame.

So I apologize for the crassness of my opening post.

#1) You've violated Rule #14 of the forums by modifying my post (by changing "argumentation" to "dialogue") and not noting that you have made this change:

http://atheistforums.org/rules.php

Quote:14. Quoting Others Accurately
When using the quote function to quote other members, you may quote in whole or in part, but may not change the quoted text in any way. Breaking this rule may result in staff intervention. Depending on the circumstances surrounding the misquote(s), you may be warned, banned, or have your post edited to indicate the violation and / or amend the misquote. Adding to the quoted text for clarification (i.e. bolding, numbering, italics, etc.) is okay provided you indicate that the additions are yours and not the quoted member's, and provided it doesn't change the meaning of the quoted text. Use of textual alteration for the purpose of parody may be allowed, provided it is clear that the changes have been made to the original quote. In the case of ambiguity, staff will err on the side of preserving the author's original words rather than preserving your artistic license. If in doubt, include the phrase "Changes made to original quotation." at the top of your post. Staff reserve the right to consider misquotations on a case-by-case basis, weighing context and additional factors.

You are incredibly lucky that I am not the sort that reports people in forums, because this pissed me off. In fact, maybe I'll reconsider in this case seeing as this is a blatant violation of rules.

#2) My use of the word "argumentation" in my original quote (that you changed without noting it) is correct.

According to google:

Quote:ar·gu·men·ta·tion
ˌärgyəmənˈtāSHən
noun
the action or process of reasoning systematically in support of an idea, action, or theory.

Wikipedia

Quote:Argumentation theory, or argumentation, is the interdisciplinary study of how conclusions can be reached through logical reasoning; that is, claims based, soundly or not, on premises. It includes the arts and sciences of civil debate, dialogue, conversation, and persuasion.

Merriam-Webster

Quote:: the act or process of giving reasons for or against something : the act or process of making and presenting arguments

Whether you like the connotation of the word "argumentation" or not is irrelevant. I'm using it properly, and you had no right to change my quote. Just because people engage in argumentation doesn't mean they're screaming at each other or being, as you might say, militant.

#3) You're statement of "Now do you see what we can learn when we calmly discuss things with others?" is incredibly condescending.

#4)

Quote:You will notice however that while I was being subject to heavy ridicule and insults that I for the most part did not respond in the same way.

You didn't have to. You set the whole thread up so that you could retreat behind your confirmation bias shield, adopt a persecution-complex and exclaim, "See?! See how mean you're all being to me? You're giving me a bad name, stop it!!" then proceed to tell us how it's a waste of time talking to us and yet continue to post in complete contradiction to yourself. On top of that, you don't seem to realize that the defensive attitude of your posts is spurring the whole thread on because you continue to be condescending and holier-than-thou.

Fuck me.

PS. As a final note, maybe you should start a thread with a less confrontational OP outlining the reasons you think a militant approach is ineffective and, I don't know, actually outline a case for adopting your (supposed) better method? You know, seeing as how this thread really doesn't have a great chance of doing that all on its own.

PPS. On second thought, I've really enjoyed this thread, so don't do that other thing. Keep pissing people off here, it's much more fun to read.

Okay, I have some reporting to do.

Not every mind is ready to be unplugged.
And many will die not ready.

We are here to provide examples of unplugged minds that manage to get along just fine.
We are here to show that it can be done, that the newly unplugged are not alone, to show them how to unplug themselves... they must choose the red pill by themselves.... or be born unplugged from the start.
But those who are plugged in, which their children to be plugged in as well..

Ok, enough metaphors...
Outspoken atheists are required to let everyone know that atheism is a viable option. There's no need to hide, or fake belief.
The internet has put them at the reach of anyone with access.
People need to know that it will be ok.
People need to know that they are not alone in their disbelief.

As long as there are countries where free speech is heralded as a virtue, such atheists will continue to speak their minds and all new generations will grow fully aware that they can lack belief and live free from the shackles of religion.
Each of these outspoken atheists uses the medium with which they are more comfortable... mockery, humor, wit, reasoning, by writing, on stage, on tv, etc...
Some religious people will feel threatened by some of these media, some will feel insulted, some will understand the reasoning, some will see the validity of mockery.
You can't put the message out and appease everyone. Regardless of how the message is conveyed, there will always be some that have trouble with it.... and there will always be some that find some use in it.
The message is meant for the latter.
The former will kick back... they will become desperate as their numbers decline... they will call louder, make even more claims regarding their interpretation of the old writings, in the hopes of gathering more people around them... there will always be gullible people, there will always be superstitious people, there will always be ignorant people...
At best, we can look forward to making atheism the norm, unlike what it is nowadays. This is not a goal... just a hope.

Would be a great discussion.

(September 17, 2014 at 6:36 pm)pocaracas Wrote: Not every mind is ready to be unplugged.
And many will die not ready.

We are here to provide examples of unplugged minds that manage to get along just fine.
We are here to show that it can be done, that the newly unplugged are not alone, to show them how to unplug themselves... they must choose the red pill by themselves.... or be born unplugged from the start.
But those who are plugged in, which their children to be plugged in as well..

Ok, enough metaphors...
Outspoken atheists are required to let everyone know that atheism is a viable option. There's no need to hide, or fake belief.
The internet has put them at the reach of anyone with access.
People need to know that it will be ok.
People need to know that they are not alone in their disbelief.

As long as there are countries where free speech is heralded as a virtue, such atheists will continue to speak their minds and all new generations will grow fully aware that they can lack belief and live free from the shackles of religion.
Each of these outspoken atheists uses the medium with which they are more comfortable... mockery, humor, wit, reasoning, by writing, on stage, on tv, etc...
Some religious people will feel threatened by some of these media, some will feel insulted, some will understand the reasoning, some will see the validity of mockery.
You can't put the message out and appease everyone. Regardless of how the message is conveyed, there will always be some that have trouble with it.... and there will always be some that find some use in it.
The message is meant for the latter.
The former will kick back... they will become desperate as their numbers decline... they will call louder, make even more claims regarding their interpretation of the old writings, in the hopes of gathering more people around them... there will always be gullible people, there will always be superstitious people, there will always be ignorant people...
At best, we can look forward to making atheism the norm, unlike what it is nowadays. This is not a goal... just a hope.

*wild, sustained applause*

Boru

My thoughts on militant Atheism is that they still don't blow stuff up or are involved in anything militant.

(September 17, 2014 at 6:21 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: No worries, people get off on the wrong foot sometimes, happens to all of us at some point, I reckon. I'm glad I kept reading.

I've been starting off on the wrong foot for a long long time, many of these philosophies are new to me. That's why I chose to engage further in dialogue instead of leaving, so that I can learn how to properly speak with people.

Life is constantly a learning experience, and if we do not treat it as such, we will fall behind.

(September 16, 2014 at 11:50 pm)Celestine Wrote: By militant I mean the utter lack of respect and maturity offered by either side in a discussion.

Well, that's not what the word means. When you misuse it, it's kind of hard to have a meaningful discussion. The closest definition of militant to what you're using is "vigorously active and aggressive, especially in support of a cause".

There is nothing in there about disrespect. It's more about impetus and persistence.

Maybe his thoughts are actually on atheists ridiculing and mocking religion?

I shouldn't write long posts after a particular hour of the night...
So many mistakes... not necessarily spelling or typos.


Hopefully, this little correction will make this post a bit more understandable.