It is never Ok, OP/ED

[Brian37]

In light of recent events in NC, and even had the label "militant" falsely hurled at me many times even prior. It should not have to be constantly repeated. People who falsely hurl that word at me, or the likes of Dawkins or Harris, or even the late Hitchens need to stop doing that.

You will not find one work of theirs recorded in print or video, or any post of mine that calls for violence toward non violent people. No one no matter the label, worldwide, deserves to be physically assaulted or murdered when they are not violent or criminals.

"Militant" is when you advocate violence over getting offended. Militant is when you use law to deny equality to others. It is NOT militant to attack or blaspheme or cuss out ideas.

There is also a huge difference between hating an idea, and ignorant bigotry of simply hating someone's mere existence.

No one should ever act out in violence to non violent people over claims or ideas or even when someone offends someone else. There are truly oppressed humans worldwide who are assaulted, murdered by mobs and or the state. Everyone here living in the west gets to go to bed at night without fear.

The Muslims were murdered for no good reason. Just like Mathew Sheppard was murdered for no good reason. Just like the Sikh after 9/11 was murdered for being mistaken for a Muslim. Just like the Kurdish Christians murdered by Isis whom also murder other Muslims. Just like gays and atheists and apostates who move to other religions in the east.

We are human beings first. And all of us can agree to non violence to non violent people, even with our blasphemy.

[wiploc]

dictionary.com's first hit for militant is

adjective
1. vigorously active and aggressive, especially in support of a cause:

To call someone a militant atheist is not to call him or her violent.

[Brian37]

dictionary.com's first hit for militant is

adjective
1. vigorously active and aggressive, especially in support of a cause:

To call someone a militant atheist is not to call him or her violent.

Bullshit. It is used as a slur a pejorative. There is a huge difference between being passionate and militant. A huge difference between being blunt and violent.

---

dictionary.com's first hit for militant is

adjective
1. vigorously active and aggressive, especially in support of a cause:

To call someone a militant atheist is not to call him or her violent.

You know why I am passionate about fighting bad ideas?

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/02/chair...x.facebook

Now you tell me how a "fuck you" to this asshole makes me "militant"? If anything his talk harms the rights of gays and spreads bigotry.

[Strider]

I don't know, Brian. I want to disagree with you in a way, but I think you're right because certain words take on a different meaning after people hijack them and twist them into something else. For instance, now it's racist to say "thug" even though I've used it in the past to describe criminals or bad people, regardless of their race. Now, you can't use it for fear of being labeled a hateful racist. When I still had a Facebook account last year, a discussion came up in a liberal group I belonged to about a white guy who had robbed an old man. I called him a thug. The members of that group came unhinged. It's ridiculous.

Anyway, even Dawkins has advocated before for "militant atheism" at a TED Talk, and I know he wasn't using the term to promote violence or anything. I understand where you're coming from with your line of reasoning regarding its usage. I tend to agree because I don't like the word either, nor its connotation, especially in the way that we tend to see it used nowadays.

tl;dr

I don't like the word either.

[wiploc]

dictionary.com's first hit for militant is

adjective
1. vigorously active and aggressive, especially in support of a cause:

To call someone a militant atheist is not to call him or her violent.

Bullshit.

Facts is facts. The dictionary and common usage are on my side. The principle of charity is on my side.

You doubtless have plenty of legitimate reasons to be pissed. There's no point in overreaching in the attempt to have another one. It just reduces your credibility.

It is used as a slur a pejorative.

True. But the suggestion is that atheists should be less strident, not that we should be less violent.

There is a huge difference between being passionate and militant. A huge difference between being blunt and violent.

True again, but that doesn't mean people are saying you're violent.

---

dictionary.com's first hit for militant is

adjective
1. vigorously active and aggressive, especially in support of a cause:

To call someone a militant atheist is not to call him or her violent.

You know why I am passionate about fighting bad ideas?

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/02/chair...x.facebook

Now you tell me how a "fuck you" to this asshole makes me "militant"? If anything his talk harms the rights of gays and spreads bigotry.

It's a good passion. Wallow in it. Be proud of your militancy.

[Dystopia]

In my country the word militant isn't even used in a pejorative or negative sense (sometimes) - When you are in a political party, you say I'm a member of X party, it mostly means that you are activist for a specific idea. I agree with everything else

I specially agree with the part of hating the idea but not the person. It's ok to insult and ridicule something as much as you please, as long as you don't incite hate towards the person (that's harmful). If the receiver feels offended he/she can counter-argue. If someone offends my atheist position I will not engage in violence, I will counter-argue and prove atheism is not what the other party says it is

[Brian37]

I don't know, Brian. I want to disagree with you in a way, but I think you're right because certain words take on a different meaning after people hijack them and twist them into something else. For instance, now it's racist to say "thug" even though I've used it in the past to describe criminals or bad people, regardless of their race. Now, you can't use it for fear of being labeled a hateful racist. When I still had a Facebook account last year, a discussion came up in a liberal group I belonged to about a white guy who had robbed an old man. I called him a thug. The members of that group came unhinged. It's ridiculous.

Anyway, even Dawkins has advocated before for "militant atheism" at a TED Talk. I understand where you're coming from with your line of reasoning regarding its usage. I tend to agree that I don't like the word either, nor its connotation, in the way that we tend to see it used nowadays.

I don't remember him ever calling himself a "militant atheist". If he referred himself as such, it would be the same context as Galileo telling the truth about the nature of our heleocentric solar system. But the truth is it is not "militant" anymore than telling someone "hey dipshit evolution is fact".

Hicks called himself a "anti theist" and outside his individual actions which were inhuman and cruel, I agree with that terminology. I am anti theist the same way I am anti unicornist. I simply do not see religion AS AN IDEA as a good way to attempt to view reality. It is not an indictment of believers in as much as it is indictment our species failure to accept it's own flawed perceptions.

His atom symbol on his page has "Atheists for equality". So I am having a hard time thinking that he was nothing more than a disturbed individual. I do not see anyone as being right in blaming Dawkins or Harris or Maher for his actions.

One thing our species does far to often is hid behind their own suffering to avoid criticism and no one should be allowed to do that. Suffering h as always been a part of our species evolution and depending on what part of the world we live in, all of us are both majorities and or minorities depending on geographics.

A Christian in America is part of a majority, but in Pakistan would be a minority. A Muslim in America would be a minority but in Iran would not be. But even within the same label a Sunni living in Iran would be a minority and a Shiite living in Saudi Arabia would be a minority.

Even within issues of race a black Nigerian who migrates here would have less in common with a black person born here.

And not even atheists are monolithic. We are all over the world. There are former Arab Muslims who are now atheists. Ayaan Hirsi Ali was a former Muslim. Jews in America, especially younger ones do not agree with the idea of blind support of Israel as say their parents might who migrated.

The point is ultimately we are still the same species and we need to get more people on board in humanity as seeing the individual first. Everyone suffers to some degree in their lives and some have it worse than others. But our evolution has never changed and our ability to be cruel or compassionate is still in us, not our labels.

[emilynghiem]

dictionary.com's first hit for militant is

adjective
1. vigorously active and aggressive, especially in support of a cause:

To call someone a militant atheist is not to call him or her violent.

Well, in TODAY'S world where there is more media hype attached to shootings, it is no longer a neutral/LITERAL term in political contexts
but has become loaded with connotations that someone is like a Jihadist terrorist or Vigilante.

It SHOULDN'T be that way, noted.

But with everything hyped up on the side of negative politics and violence,
it has become necessary to make distinctions we didn't need to before.

Just reality. Our culture has shifted.

I guess I would go with the word ardent or vigilant or outspoken.

P.S. for those from other countries, I even had to explain how the word FETUS
has become "politicized" in America to bring up negative associations with AGENDA attached to it.
Sad I had to tell someone that who used it in the title of an art sculpture and wondered why it got poor response.

[Brian37]

Bullshit.

Facts is facts. The dictionary and common usage are on my side. The principle of charity is on my side.

You doubtless have plenty of legitimate reasons to be pissed. There's no point in overreaching in the attempt to have another one. It just reduces your credibility.

It is used as a slur a pejorative.

True. But the suggestion is that atheists should be less strident, not that we should be less violent.

There is a huge difference between being passionate and militant. A huge difference between being blunt and violent.

True again, but that doesn't mean people are saying you're violent.

---

You know why I am passionate about fighting bad ideas?

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/02/chair...x.facebook

Now you tell me how a "fuck you" to this asshole makes me "militant"? If anything his talk harms the rights of gays and spreads bigotry.

It's a good passion. Wallow in it. Be proud of your militancy.

What the fuck was that last line about? "Pride" has nothing to do with why I employ the tactics I do. It is as stupid as expecting others to be proud you fucked and made a baby.

It is a pragmatic tactic, like putting a fire detector in your house, or aiming your penis at the toilet when you pee. Nothing to be "proud" of.

The word was "passion" not "pride".

Now considering that most of the world has some sort of belief, and all these competing countries that do not get along, all have weapons and believers that run them, tell me why I should not be passionate about the only planet I live on?

Yes, I have a passion to tell the religiously violent and those who would use law to deny equal rights to others. Yes I have a passion to question and provoke. But "wallowing" in what?

Wallowing is when you know better but still insist on clinging to bad claims, like religious homophobes and religious sexists. Wallowing is when science goes against your claims and you still insist on clinging to the past.

[robvalue]

I think it's one of those terms which is having its meaning twisted, as is so common with language. Personally I would have understood militant to mean very strong feelings and a proactive approach. I wouldn't automatically equate this with violence. I hope the term does not get hijacked, but if that's where society takes it then that's how it goes.