VICTORY

[Esquilax]

Humor is subjective and what some cultures and religions find offensive, others will find funny. So I fail to see any point you've proven here.

The point I'm making is that, before I'll accept that religions have any legitimate offense over these things, they've got a lot of evidentiary support to muster; I'm not about to bend over backwards to appease the whims of someone's imaginary friend.

I never said they were all Christian.

No, but you are either saying that all of them would be okay with the representation of their loss being a cross, or you're ignoring all those there who wouldn't.

Please elaborate further.

Your meaning, as far as I've been able to parse it, is that it's preferable to allow christians to get away with their habitual bad behavior rather than ruffling their feathers, because at least then we'd be able to go forward into debate in a spirit of mutual understanding. I submit to you that this is roughly similar to attempting to debate from a position of weakness, while allowing our opponents to continue on from a position of strength they've neither earned nor deserved in the first place.

Why would I give my opponent all the power, and then expect them to give it up voluntarily because it's the right thing to do, when that's never been the case historically? There are reasons that we conduct demonstrations like we do that have nothing to do with pissing christians off, and everything to do with showing them that the things they have taken for granted for so long aren't actually things they should start off having.

Would you conduct peace negotiations with a nation that continues the war while they're happening?

I agree wholeheartedly.

So why shrug when we ask for equal representation for them?

Yes. And I'm not adhering to favoritism. I have more reason to hate Christianity than most of the people here, I can assure you.

So then you'd understand why we wouldn't want christian iconography dominating the memorial.

"Scheme?" Those are some mighty interesting words you're using for this argument. It sounds like you're pretty emotionally charged.

I'm a writer, so I don't like repeating the same word over and over, but I do like using new ones. "Scheme," worked nicely, I thought.

And what's wrong with emotions?

How is this different from human nature in general? Will learning children not try and outmaneuver and outmatch their parents to get what they want? They don't understand it's being manipulative or unappreciative. Human nature and not seclusive to religions.

It's different in that religion finds a way to turn that greedy nature into something divinely mandated. I'm not saying it isn't a part of human thought processes, but the part where your analogy breaks down is that these aren't children, they're adults so used to getting their own way that they act like children.

It's not entirely about looking bad. It's about furthering understanding and merging the gap between different belief systems (or lack of). Which a bad reputation won't help.

What you're saying is that the emperor is naked and should put on some clothes, but that we should never say so to his face for fear of embarrassing him. Sorry, some of us care too much about what's right to kowtow to people doing wrong in order to be gentle.

I don't even know how to tackle this as it only sounds bitter and a subjective opinion.

I don't know what to tell you. If you've gone as long as you have without hearing about how America is a christian nation, and that if atheists don't like that they can get out (John Hagee said so most recently, I believe) then you're far more sheltered than I am. But your lack of knowledge on this subject doesn't make what I'm saying untrue.

And oh look, I was right about it being Hagee.

Is this not a land of freedom? As long as everyone is understanding and respectful of each other I see no problem in Christians and other religions being allowed to do magical rites and rituals wherever they please. I do not adhere to magical thinking and do not find it offensive.

Nor do I, but I'm not talking about their general practices. I'm talking about the insidious way they try to get prayer into schools, creationism into curricula, and religious monuments onto public land. You know, the stuff the constitution disallows, and yet they never stop trying?

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. But if we want to make nice with other religions we will have to make the first move. People are naturally religious and superstitious because it's a part of our evolution. When spiritual and religious people meet an atheist; it scares them. We need to be aware of that. And that any retort or harsh treatment is only a reflection of their fear and lack of understanding. Not a personal attack, which is a common misconception.

Couple things: one, I don't have a lot of a desire to treat people like they're cowering animals, and frankly I find it amazingly condescending for you to place the religious as some uncomprehending band of manchildren that require uplifting. They aren't; they're adults who know, in every other scenario, what is and isn't acceptable behavior. I can't imagine a single other case in which you'd excuse this shit, so why are you so willing to here?

There has always been discrimination of every kind. Religion is just one of them. As in any case, though, it takes one side to admit defeat or decide they want to be 'the better person' before a resolution can be found.

Your mistake here is in thinking that atheism and religion are coming into this discussion with equally valid positions. They aren't; religion has a hell of a lot of justifying and evidence building first, before they can even pretend like they're bringing something to the table. I'm not going to sit here and pretend that the christian side has some weight to their position; the emperor has no clothes, so I'm not going to sit idly by while he disparages my fashion sense.

Discrimination is bad, and I don't give a shit who thinks there's a resolution to be had; sometimes people can just be wrong, and other people can just be right.

Then how will we find a peaceful way of coexistence if one side does not attempt to make peace?

Let's be clear: I can live with the vast majority of christians just fine. Hell, I do exactly that every day. But you're asking me to make peace with the villainous ones too, and that just ain't gonna happen. I don't want a peace that begins with "you're allowed to keep attacking me for now, but..."

No. But if we want to make a real change and difference, taking the first step is a big way to do it. I'm taking one because I'm tired of a divided world. Religion is such an idiotic way to be exclusive because it's so primitive in nature.

I'd say that the first part of removing that divide is to stop treating theists like they need to be mollycoddled; you're just playing into the stereotypical elitist atheist image, if your position is that we've gotta make change slowly and with an ingratiating smile just to appease them.