Two Street Preachers Shot

[Zhalentine]

I disagree - the very statement you make about one giving others a "bad name" (or anything else, for that matter) implies a form of guilt by association - a thoroughly uncritical and repugnant action to take part in. And that act affects me - hence my actions in this thread. I am not defending Minimalist; I am fighting stupid statements idiots like you perpetuate. I would have hoped that you, in an environment that fosters critical thought, would have grown beyond the simplistic statements that "individual X influences the whole perception of Y" when it is subjective, not logical and usually used as a tool to apply the blame, pejoratives or some negative state of the whole onto the individual.

It is unfair to blame the people responsible for our negative label in society? Surely people don't have the negative perception of atheist from the ones who do community service and make positive contributions towards society. They see the idiots spouting their bullshit and label all atheists like that. You fail to recognize that it doesn't matter if it is logical or not that his ignorant comments make atheists look bad. You can claim it is illogical to form a negative opinion towards all atheists because of the actions of a few, and I agree with you, but the reality is that people do have bad feelings about atheists because of the few moronic ones.

I don't care if you're irked or not, it doesn't justify your childish behavior. You can argue like an adult without name calling and throwing a hissy fit.

You could have simply stated your distress at Minimalist's statement. Instead, you attempted to poison the well by blaming Minimalist for the current public's perception of atheism - as if that really affects that which he has said.

I most certainly did not blame Minimalist for the current public's perception of atheism, but he does contribute to the negative reputation we get with ignorant comments like the ones in this thread.

[Autumnlicious]

It is unfair to blame the people responsible for our negative label in society? Surely people don't have the negative perception of atheist from the ones who do community service and make positive contributions towards society. They see the idiots spouting their bullshit and label all atheists like that. You fail to recognize that it doesn't matter if it is logical or not that his ignorant comments make atheists look bad. You can claim it is illogical to form a negative opinion towards all atheists because of the actions of a few, and I agree with you, but the reality is that people do have bad feelings about atheists because of the few moronic ones.

I don't care if you're irked or not, it doesn't justify your childish behavior. You can argue like an adult without name calling and throwing a hissy fit.

I most certainly did not blame Minimalist for the current public's perception of atheism, but he does contribute to the negative reputation we get with ignorant comments like the ones in this thread.

Other people make their own perceptions. It is solely of their own creation. And one should not be responsible for the thoughts of others, neither a keeper or property of another.

You have not disproved my argument, and while I have laced it with invectives, my logic still stands at its base. People have the freedom to make bad abstractions of others - hiding oneself from the scrutiny of others is unreasonable and unnecessary due to the fundamental uncontrollable nature of others thoughts.

I am calling you out on illogical statements in a forum that uses logical thought to evaluate many claims.

And no, you incorrectly attributed the opinions of others to the statements made by Minimalist. In fact, you still insist on linking him to some unfounded "reputation" with your last sentence.

Furthermore, your statement on that "it doesn't matter if it is logical or not that his ignorant comments make atheists look bad" is meaningless. In a rational society, it is expected to consider the actions of one individual as opposed to the whole. Just because we do not live in a perfectly rational society only proves that we, in some fashion, failed to be rational. All your argument lies upon, is simply an argument that because some will act irrationally and make poor opinions upon a certain group, any one person should be judged upon as representative of a group and therefore the character of a group is to be held at stake.

I call bullshit. Just because some break form with rational thought does not mean rational thought is broken (please treat the previous iterations and current one of this as a metaphor, not a straw man, as I am trying to frame your statements accurately). It means that the few who broke with rational thought acted irrationally and the subsequent decisions they made in being irrational should be called into question and scrutinized.

[Minimalist]

I most certainly did not blame Minimalist for the current public's perception of atheism, but he does contribute to the negative reputation we get with ignorant comments like the ones in this thread.

But, Zhal, I don't care what you think, either. I am tired of these religious nutjobs who show up on atheist sites demanding respect for their superstitions and inherently insisting that we treat them differently than they treat us. Fuck 'em. I have found that they do not handle outright scorn for their beliefs very well and that is all they deserve.


What are they going to do? Run back to their churches and whine "an atheist was mean to me." Who cares?

[Zhalentine]

I don't know whether you're being intentionally thick, misunderstood what I meant, or arguing for the sake of arguing. Like I said, people don't look down upon atheists because of the good deeds we do. They look down upon us because of what a few among the majority do. The same thing can be observed with Muslims. Some people think all middle eastern people are Muslim terrorists because they see a few Muslims doing terrorist acts and think the rest hold the same beliefs. No where in my argument do I say that I support this line of thinking, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't happen.

It's a shame a handful of atheists make the rest look bad.

The fact that people hear the stupid things atheists say and think all atheists believe the same thing justifies my claim. You can claim that the line of thinking is irrational all you want, but sadly your opinion doesn't change how some people in the world think.

Irrational behavior does not invalidate rational processes - it merely means that one is irrational. And assigning blame and responsibility through the actions of irrationality is illogical, irrational and a failure on the part of a rational being.

Way to go from one childish act to another. This is the strawman of all strawman. I don't think you could have misrepresented my position any more, and to do it in a spot where I can't refute is cowardly.

[Gilligan]

I most certainly did not blame Minimalist for the current public's perception of atheism, but he does contribute to the negative reputation we get with ignorant comments like the ones in this thread.

But, Zhal, I don't care what you think, either. I am tired of these religious nutjobs who show up on atheist sites demanding respect for their superstitions and inherently insisting that we treat them differently than they treat us. Fuck 'em. I have found that they do not handle outright scorn for their beliefs very well and that is all they deserve.


What are they going to do? Run back to their churches and whine "an atheist was mean to me." Who cares?

Why do you like to help fulfill Bible prophecy which says men will get more wicked in the Last Days?

[Meatball]

I know many people find street preachers to be annoying, but what do you think should happen to the shooter? Should not hate crime laws cover those who do this if the victims were shot for being Christians?

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/crime/...11257.html

2 people were murdered. That's bad, and illegal. Jeriah Woody will be processed by the justice system, and depending on the circumstance, he may be charged with hate crimes.

Should they be charge with hate crimes? If the crime is proven to be motivated by the preachers' religion, then it will probably result in hate crime charges.

The discussion that's being skipped over here due to Minimalist being a dick is that hate crime laws are thought-crime and have no place in the legal system. The law, as is, allows for great variance in sentencing and this is where things like racism and hate should be handled.

If you are charged with killing someone, you'll be punished. If you killed someone because they are black and you don't like black people, I'd say that should make you eligible for a harsher sentence not because hating black people is a crime, but because you're fucking crazy.

[Autumnlicious]

I don't know whether you're being intentionally thick, misunderstood what I meant, or arguing for the sake of arguing. Like I said, people don't look down upon atheists because of the good deeds we do. They look down upon us because of what a few among the majority do. The same thing can be observed with Muslims. Some people think all middle eastern people are Muslim terrorists because they see a few Muslims doing terrorist acts and think the rest hold the same beliefs. No where in my argument do I say that I support this line of thinking, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't happen.

It's a shame a handful of atheists make the rest look bad.

The fact that people hear the stupid things atheists say and think all atheists believe the same thing justifies my claim. You can claim that the line of thinking is irrational all you want, but sadly your opinion doesn't change how some people in the world think.

Irrational behavior does not invalidate rational processes - it merely means that one is irrational. And assigning blame and responsibility through the actions of irrationality is illogical, irrational and a failure on the part of a rational being.

Way to go from one childish act to another. This is the strawman of all strawman. I don't think you could have misrepresented my position any more, and to do it in a spot where I can't refute is cowardly.

I emboldened the sentences of which I based the majority of my refutations on. In each successive post, you have further defended your statement, culminating in a form of argument that states that people will be irrational, so the previous actions taken are allowable.

Further, you claim I am childish and cowardly, but you neither specify where or even bother refuting what I've posted. So you throw out invectives yourself, but do not confront anything I have posted, nor have you refuted it. Please note in the final sentence of my previous post, I actually bothered to annotate it saying that I actually thought that is where you are going, and I honestly thought that is the underlying thought. I justified that statement with previous sentences and posts.

You have no refuted my final points, nor have you justified that the irrational opinions of irrational people are cause to take such an action that you took previously (in this case, blame). Yet you claim it is a strawman while failing to correct any misconception.

How terribly useful.

Why do you like to help fulfill Bible prophecy which says men will get more wicked in the Last Days?

Begging the question. Up yours.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

@Zhalentine

Because they no longer have their burning-at-the- stake-privileges,I really don't give a flying flunggle what Christians or any any other anonymous others think about anything.( and that includes you sunshine)

Meeting the expectations of people I do not know or care about is not even on my list of behaviours to consider.

Of course I modify my behaviour when it's in my interest to do so..EG obey traffic laws, obey the rules one internet forums to which I belong, don't grab loud stuffwits' cell phones in public places and stomp on them,that kind of thing.

[theVOID]

It's a shame a handful of atheists make the rest look bad.

Fuck you and your fucking fairy tales. If you want respect for them, go a xtian board.

Lmao Min, you were responding to an Atheist.

---

It's a shame a handful of atheists make the rest look bad.

That is an unfair statement to ever make. No one on this forum actually claims to represent atheists, and even if they did so, it would not be valid until a significant body of atheists verify that claim.

That said, it is a form of poisoning the well. Just because some atheist is patently offensive does not ruin what others have to say. Argue that it is simply the way people work, then I have a surprise for you - People are NOT LOGICAL. If they were, one could be offensive and be regarded as offensive with no judgement passed to one's peers.

Because you are legitimizing that train of thought for guilt by association with no other context to suggest otherwise, kindly fuck off and die.

No shit he doesn't claim to represent Atheism, but he does make an impression that is bound to be generalized. Pointless personal attacks like the one Min made only hinder progress, i feel Zhalentine was perfectly justified in his remark.

Also, telling someone to "kindly fuck off and die" over something so trivial makes you look like a complete fool, just letting you know.

[Autumnlicious]

No shit he doesn't claim to represent Atheism, but he does make an impression that is bound to be generalized. Pointless personal attacks like the one Min made only hinder progress, i feel Zhalentine was perfectly justified in his remark.

Also, telling someone to "kindly fuck off and die" over something so trivial makes you look like a complete fool, just letting you know.

Christians in the past have burned thousands of their kind for the unproven sin of witchcraft. Gee, it must be sad that a few of those people gave the rest of them a bad name!

See how ridiculous that is? It sidesteps the discussion and makes an ignorant statement that has NOTHING to do in a rational discourse on the nature of Christianity. Deal with the ideas, not the people.

Zhalentine's remark was of the same caliber - proving nothing except laying blame without examination of the offending ideas.

We all do foolish things. I let my vitriol overflow occasionally and appear into my posts.

That doesn't invalidate what I've said, however it does "make" me look like something I may not be. That lends credence to my argument that such vapid statements only serve to distract from the ideas at hand. Challenge the thought, not the insults, as insults are merely an irrational outgrowth of another's opinion.