Wanting some feedback from the atheists

[CarveTheFive]

Do yall think an atheist trying to convince someone out of their faith is equal to a theist trying to convert?

Religious people are far worse and should stfu

Excellent feedback and many great points. I especially liked the 'stfu' part. Such great insight. It's just so helpful when people generalize entire groups of people, right?

Preciate it

---

To y’all baby bitching about my answers well she asked and I gave my opinion. And it’s true, I am around fucking religious people all the time I don’t need more on a goddamn atheist board. I don’t want friendly discussions with religious people. For just once, in one goddamn sphere, I want religious people to fuck the fuck off. I don’t want them persecuted irl. I just want a space where they do something incredibly uncharacteristic: shut their fucking mouths. Just here. I come on here it’s a bunch of fucking creationists.

So the OP is some kind of moderate non-condescending Catholic? Well, guess what? Catholicism is a huge institution of child fuckers. If you are Catholic you support child molestation. The numbers are THAT high. Do I go around giving Catholics shit irl? Fuck no. But do I want to see one in an atheist message board? Actually, no I don’t. Unapologetically.

[Homeless Nutter]

So these questions are for the atheists. Now that AF has this section for civil discourse, I feel I can ask this and get some honest answers from posters who are serious in talking this out.

What are your opinions about us theists in this forum?

Depends on the individual - it's not like theists are in any way a homogeneous group. You just form some sorts of uneasy alliances here out of necessity, because you're a minority.  However, I have a suspicion - based largely on observations of believers on this forum - that an atheist forum tends to attract certain types of theists more than others - either those, who wish to score points with their deities, by proselytizing, or trolling the infidels, or those who want to practice defending their faith in a debate, in order to  silence their own doubts and insecurities. And some, who are just bored, I guess.

Do you generally like having us here? Why or why not?

As a general rule - the presence of theists neither bothers me, nor gives me pleasure. Of course, certain believers seem to try really hard to be a nuisance.  

What can we do to improve and to make it easier/more enjoyable for you to have discussions with us?

I don't know... Develop a sense of humor, maybe? Or understanding of the basics of science?

Are you in favor of this civility section to have more productive discussions with theists and other people of differing views?

*shrug* I don't really care. No skin off my d*ck... However - calling it "civility section" seems unnecessarily inflammatory.

What do you hope to gain from productive discussions with theists?

A bit of fun. Of course, our ideas of what constitutes a "productive discussion" probably differ wildly...

[pocaracas]

Excellent feedback and many great points. I especially liked the 'stfu' part. Such great insight. It's just so helpful when people generalize entire groups of people, right?

Preciate it

---

To y’all baby bitching about my answers well she asked and I gave my opinion. And it’s true, I am around fucking religious people all the time I don’t need more on a goddamn atheist board. I don’t want friendly discussions with religious people. For just once, in one goddamn sphere, I want religious people to fuck the fuck off. I don’t want them persecuted irl. I just want a space where they do something incredibly uncharacteristic: shut their fucking mouths. Just here. I come on here it’s a bunch of fucking creationists.

So the OP is some kind of moderate non-condescending Catholic? Well, guess what? Catholicism is a huge institution of child fuckers. If you are Catholic you support child molestation. The numbers are THAT high. Do I go around giving Catholics shit irl? Fuck no. But do I want to see  one in an atheist message board? Actually, no I don’t. Unapologetically.

Present-day news-related perception may give you the impression that the "numbers are THAT high", but no.
There are some rather egregious incidents in a few places, with specific clergymen, yes. Honestly, I don't know the numbers, so feel free to educate me on them. But I'm pretty sure you'll find that they account for less than 0.1% of all catholic clergy.

If you want an online place where religious people are not welcome, then this forum is not for you. Everyone is welcome, here. At least, some of us try to keep it that way.

[CarveTheFive]

I don't know the numbers, so feel free to educate me on them

first hit on google
https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-44209971

more than 10,000 children - mostly boys.

That’s from the church

So yeah they’re kiddie fuckers.

[GrandizerII]

Don't know about overall, but in Australia, it's 7% of Catholic priests alleged to have abused children.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-38877158

"In one religious order, over 40% of church figures were accused of abuse."

That's not an easy percentage, considering we're talking about supposed men of God.

[pocaracas]

I don't know the numbers, so feel free to educate me on them

first hit on google
https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-44209971

more than 10,000 children - mostly boys.

That’s from the church

So yeah they’re kiddie fuckers.

10,000 in one billion people, or so... that's 10 per million, much less than my original guess of 0.1%.

Yes, any such event is deplorable, especially coming from where it comes, given their claim to moral authority.
But what the numbers say is that a very small minority is guilty of doing that. Hardly "a huge institution of child fuckers"...

I'm sure, if anyone was to account for how many child molesters there are among the atheists (or any other arbitrary large enough group of people), one would find a similar ratio, or worse!
It's a problem of humanity, not restricted to the Catholics.

[Peebothuhlu]

At work.

Sorry to wade in BUT it's not just a question of 'Percentages'.

The other factors are;

The amount of years, nay decades that said practices have been on going.

That pretty much the entire hierarchy knew about the events unfolding.

That said hierarchy simply moved problem individuals such as to hide any consequences or blame.

That when said claims did surface, the hierarchy fought more to protect itself and its image than appoint or investgate such to adress the issue.


That the church of Rome (Not sure how bad things are/were with the English protestants or other groups) hasn't collapsed due to patronage leaving the editice in droves shows just how much the 'Average Joe' has invested in said "Needs" that such behaviour is 'Appologized away'.


Sorry for comming across as a rant but.... geeze.

[Angrboda]

There is the well known example of street epistemology.

One of the prime tenets of street epistemology is that you don't go into with the intent to convert someone. It is, rather, an exercise in making people confront and define the source of their knowledge. I'm not sure this is the same

And something similar is stated about Christian witnessing. Perhaps that isn't the intent one has in mind, but what is prompting one to confront their source of knowledge, given the obvious belief that their source of knowledge is in some sense in need of correction (wink wink, nudge nudge), actually going to do? I think it's disingenuous to say it's not an attempt at deconversion. You may not go into it with that intent, but I think that's more of a 'how' aimed at making the intent more successful in execution than it is a disclaimer of the actual goal. If I want to hit a golf ball a long way, I shouldn't go into it with the intent to really smash the ball. But something along those lines is what I am trying to achieve. It's just that focusing on that interferes with my performing well on other aspects of the process.

[GrandizerII]

I saw a video on street epistemology just a short while ago. Yeah, this is just a subtle (and threat-free) "atheist" way to try to change the mind of the person being interviewed. It's certainly not for the love of debate or any such thing.

[Angrboda]

I saw a video on street epistemology just a short while ago. Yeah, this is just a subtle (and threat-free) "atheist" way to try to change the mind of the person being interviewed. It's certainly not for the love of debate or any such thing.

Notice, too, that theists aren't picking up on street epistemology as something useful to them. It's primarily 'an atheist thing'.