The Atheist Obsession with Insulting Christians

[Whateverist]

No, Randy.

You quoted another author and now you ran out of ammunition. Since you never have anything to say for yourself, if you can't copy paste and plagiarize. You're not a very interesting person in my opinion.

Apparently, although I'm "not a very interesting person", you sure spend a LOT of time reading and responding to my posts. Isn't that a bit like faithfully (sorry, almost forgot you're an atheist) regularly tuning in to watch a television show that you really don't like?

But I ran out of "ammunition"?

I have observed that many members of this forum are needlessly rude, and I came across an article on another site which shows that my experience may be more universal than not.

How much more "ammunition" do I need to express this opinion?

At least I had some!

Do YOU have any "ammunition" suggesting that atheists/"brights" are typically quite polite and pleasant in their online discussions with theists?

THAT is the sort of thing you need to refute the OP.

[My bold both in the quote from Abiris and Randy.]

Seems to me your response, Randy, feeds directly into Abiris' complaint (which I share).  I give no fucks what notable atheists have said.  I don't mine what they've written in order to find what I want to say.  In fact, I've never read an 'atheist' book.  Like Abiris, I respond to what you write as an individual and I would much prefer if you just spoke for yourself as an individual.  I'm not looking to impress you.

It seems you feel the responsibility to accurately and comprehensively represent the Catholic position as best you can.  I'm not sure who if anyone cares about that.  I take whatever you say on behalf of catholicism with a grain of salt anyway.  Why not drop the facade and simply speak for yourself?  Isn't that all any of us can really do?

[TheRocketSurgeon]

Nope, sorry Cath. I'm not gonna agree with you on this one.

This guy goes out of his way to come here and be belligerent, insulting, and self-righteous. He derives his pleasure from taunting and pronouncing himself superior to us because of his beliefs and our lack thereof. He willfully defies our requests to be courteous and to speak with us like human beings, and exhibits none of the traits we would expect someone espousing Christianity's tenets to display, yet demands that we respect his beliefs!

No. No, no, no. No!

This guy is what is colloquially known as an asshole. His kind is certainly not limited to those of the theist persuasion, but it does take the kind of blindness that only religious fanaticism seems to be able to produce for a person to reach his level of asinine abrasiveness.

We're not assassinating his character, we're listing the traits we have observed.

Character assassination would look like, "When he finally realizes what an asshole he is and kills himself, his wife and kids won't miss him." Now that is likely true, but I wouldn't normally say it.

[Catholic_Lady]

If that's what you think about him, then why not be the bigger person and walk away? Why stay around to verbally assault someone?

[TheRocketSurgeon]

Silence is violence, as the old saying goes. I have stayed out of most of this, but once someone steps over a line of belligerence toward the people on the board whom I admire (and that includes you, Cath!), then I will step in to defend them against a bully.

This guy is the equivalent of the type of bully who thinks he's bigger than he is, walks up and punches a weaker kid, and then when the weaker kid's six friends come in and start kicking the snot out of him, he complains that he's being bullied.

Nope. Not having it. Not allowing it. This guy deserves everything he has earned here. If he wants to play nice, we'll play nice.

Remember? We're atheists. We believe in being nice to people if possible, but we do not have a "turn the other cheek" rule.

[Whateverist]

Personally I have no problem with people like Randy setting up shop here. As I just posted, I'd be more interested in what he had to say if it was about his own views rather than a (sorry) attempt to be authoritative.

But I like the idea that, unlike most Christian sites - most assuredly including his own, we are a market place for conversation and ideas. The best response so long as Randy insists on being 'official' is simply not to engage. Besides I notice that there are some of us who enjoy haggling with him over what the bible and other doctrine really say. Why shouldn't there be a place for that here? No skin off my patootie.

I think we represent the site better by just doing as much or as little business with him as we want - without attacking him personally. Like us, he is who he is and is going to do what he wants. Why shouldn't he? He doesn't have to change so that I can enjoy interacting with him or like him more.

[TheRocketSurgeon]

Like us, he is who he is and is going to do what he wants.  Why shouldn't he?  He doesn't have to change so that I can enjoy interacting with him or like him more.

Agreed. However, if he comes here with arrogant belligerence (especially when he's just quoting stuff at us from others, as though we haven't seen it a million times before, and even though we're telling him we've seen it a million times before) and pokes at us from his own perceived position of moral/religious superiority, refusing to show us basic respect in these exchanges, he loses the right to expect to be treated in a kind fashion in return.

[Whateverist]

Meh, I'd rather just go look for the kind of interaction I want in greener pastures. From time to time I'll put effort into reasoning with him, but I have always been disappointed by his inability to listen well or try to understand a different perspective. Eventually I'll just quit trying. In the meantime. I can't really blame him if I keep looking for cheese down the same futile tunnel.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Ok ya'll, I get that you guys don't agree with the way Randy presents himself and his views around here, but this is just getting painful to watch. Ganging up on someone and calling them nasty names is never warranted, imho. A few of these posts are just getting to the point of being character assassination. This is a real person here, with a wife and kids, and other loved ones. Let's not forget that.

Randy has every opportunity to turn over a new leaf. I'll be polite to him when he is to me, and my friends.

So long as he is sanctimonious and condescending , he can find "courtesy" in the dictionary between "chump" and "cunt".

[Whateverist]

Ok ya'll, I get that you guys don't agree with the way Randy presents himself and his views around here, but this is just getting painful to watch. Ganging up on someone and calling them nasty names is never warranted, imho. A few of these posts are just getting to the point of being character assassination. This is a real person here, with a wife and kids, and other loved ones. Let's not forget that.

Randy has every opportunity to turn over a new leaf. I'll be polite to him when  he is to me, and my friends.

So long as he is sanctimonious and condescending , he can find "courtesy" in the dictionary between "chump" and "cunt".

But what if he is doing exactly what he came here to do.  If he wants to slap dash together the best 'official' catholic responses based on his internet research, don't we bear some responsibility for getting sucked in over and over?

I don't want to become like the Christian sites where we just prohibit what we disagree with or dislike.  I say let him have his soap box and if you don't like his show (can't really call it an interaction), move on.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Meh, I'd rather just go look for the kind of interaction I want in greener pastures. From time to time I'll put effort into reasoning with him, but I have always been disappointed by his inability to listen well or try to understand a different perspective. Eventually I'll just quit trying. In the meantime. I can't really blame him if I keep looking for cheese down the same futile tunnel.

I tried that approach, only to have him quote my posts and make snide insinuations about my morality, or lack thereof.

"You buy the boat, you get the leaks," as Pa Thump used to say.