(June 11, 2012 at 11:31 am)StatCrux Wrote:(June 11, 2012 at 11:23 am)Brian37 Wrote: I love the feigned indignity of believers. They want us to believe, but don't want to do anything to prove it.
Seriously, when anyone OF ANY LABEL says "don't pick on my pet god claim". I get the image of a midget standing spread eagle in front of the Terminator shouting "don't pick on my god, you might hurt him".
This is nothing more than their ego being bruised out of the fear of being wrong. Being wrong isn't the end of the world. When one accepts that, it is how humanity grows.
If a "fuck you" was the worst any human out of our 7 billion had to worry about, that would be an improvement over our stupid childish tribal beefs that do end up in death.
I'd suggest to those "offended" to stop worrying about word choice and worry about your own position and work on defending it, if you can and be willing to give up on it if you cant.
It has nothing to do with the subject matter, or "picking on God". Its about how people communicate with mutual respect. If a police officer stopped you and said "where the fuck are you going, show me your papers right now you moron!" that's not how people should behave towards one another. CIVILITY COSTS NOTHING
No, I started this thread. And I have made over 200 posts in my two weeks here, so anyone reading them knows already what they are getting into.
If I came into YOUR house and you don't smoke and started smoking you'd have every right to ask me to quit. But no one is forcing you to respond to this thread.
Now, please explain to me, why claims BY THEMSELVES should be given taboo status?
If I claimed that the moon was made of cheese should the claim be off limits, even if you agree with my right to claim it?
Go back and read WHY I hate the word "respect". Human rights should be respected. But civility is not based on forcing everyone only to say nice things and never offend anyone. That is what Iran expects from it's non Shiites and non-Muslims, but neither you or I would want to live there.
Civility is based on common law, not common likes or dislikes. Civility can only be the agreement that no one has the right to physically harm, or call for the physical harm of others. But I am as so any believer has the right to offend others and question others. I warn you that it is a bad idea to demand silence because you have an emotional reaction to what someone else says.
YES civility is a good goal, censorship is not the way to do it, because that gets into "who gets to decide" what is or is not offensive. As an atheist living in a theist world I am not going to hand the loaded gun of censorship over to my government.
Instead of making demands on me about what I say, stick to your own comfort level. No one is telling you how to deal with others and I wont judge you for taking a different approach. But do not speak for me.
I have met plenty of theists who don't mind the verbal boxing ring, and I have also met atheists who are just as well intended, but wrong headed with the "cant we all just get along" cry.
If you don't like my posts, you know what the options are, but do not assume because someone does believe, that they will always run screaming because of what I say.
If we want theists to see us as individuals then neither of us should demand the other be a clone of the other. You do your thing and I will do mine. There is nothing wrong with the "library" setting. But don't assume everyone, atheists or theists for that matter, cant take the heat.
I value more the believer that is secure in making their arguments than any atheist or believer that demands my silence because they merely got offended.
"Question with boldness even the existence of a god, for if there be one, surely he would pay more homage to reason than to that of blindfolded fear" Thomas Jefferson
"The first person to hurl an insult instead of a stone, started civilization" Freud.
I don't fear being offended by anything any theist has to say. I've been equated to Hitler, and Stalin, and been called immoral for not believing. They can shout that from the rooftops all they want. And I can, with the same venues counter their absurdities. And the only way I can maintain that ability is to value their rights as well.
When you demand that no one offend anyone else you give that society the ability to set up a taboo, and in the hands of history there are results that neither they or we should ever want.
No one here is advocating hate, especially not me. But I do have every right to hate a claim, ON ANY SUBJECT, not just religion, and still like the person, even if I don't like that particular claim.
