My Thoughts On Militant Atheism

[Clueless Morgan]

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

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:

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

Wikipedia

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

: 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)

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.