Rant against anti-atheist agnostics.

[emilynghiem]

Don't get me wrong, I'm agnostic too. Very much so in fact.

But 'militant' agnostics, like a certain new member whose user name cuts a little close to home, tick me off. Please tell me what it is you think you know about what these god-things are that makes you argue so vociferously against non-belief in them.

I get agnosticism. I don't get anti-atheism. What is that about? Personally I have no more trouble with agnostic theists than I do agnostic atheists. These are my peoples.

Anti-atheist agnostics, like their brethren atheist anti-theists, carry around huge axes to grind. Both talk proudly of reasoned argument and evidence. But both are obviously more animated by emotional bile than any reason they actually own up to. Both are obviously working through issues which cloud their judgment.

[/vent]

Hi whateverist, I agree the best position is to stay neutral and centered enough where you can work with both people of theistic and nontheistic leanings. Because in life, you limit your options if you start getting anti- this or that. if you get in a conflict with a person or group you can't handles resolving things directly with yourself, you open yourself up to have a decision handed down to you by an outside third party who it does land on to intervene and settle it for you. And that usually ends badly.

The most powerful people I have met are often the most meek and unassuming, who can work with anybody, so they retain maximum free will and full respect to have direct authority in all that they do. Nobody fights or denies them because they don't threaten to impose on anyone.

as for anti-theists, there are different reasons I have found
1. if they suffered abuse or are projecting personal issues onto theists as representing this, and this is the anger or denial/projection phase of their recovery (and unfortunately that is a natural reaction and has to be worked through)
2. the rejection and imposition by theists creates a backlash, so these anti-theists serve as the equal and opposite reaction; and you can't disarm one side without disarming the other. they'd both have to agree to call a truce, or they both stay on the offense as the best defense against the other
3. some combination of personal internal issues and trying to correct bigger problems in society externally, usually both levels are connected.

it is an interactive dynamic. I don't see how you can address just one part of the puzzle without solving the whole thing as a consequence; and vice versa, sometimes solving the bigger problem means working internally.