Freedom of Speech and Militant Atheism

Post Reply New Topic

Let me recapitulate: Anti-religion trolls shouldn't go unpunished. They take over threads, they harass, bully, ridicule, et cetera. This should only happen in PPR, so that members who don't want to deal with them don't have to. If religious topics are currently relegated to PPR, so should anti-religious topics. There should be equal and fair treatment of ALL parties.

I'm saying that it is a general phenomena that the anti-religious are overlooked and can post their anti-religious topics anywhere, but the religious must be relegated to PPR. That is wrong.

Do Christians have freedom to post Christian topics outside of PPR?

Can I raise a suggestion in good faith without being shot at?

In the spirit of live and let live perhaps there should be an additional separate forum specifically for religious believers? A place where they can explore their religions amongst themselves without us atheists attacking them? I'm a pseudo atheist myself and entertain a reasonable discussion about science vs religion etc and that sort of discussion could still continue on PPR. I'm just suggesting the religious people could have a sort of religious refuge - a virtual church so to speak, where they can talk amongst themselves in peace?

We atheists would not go into a church and harass the believers, but if the believers want to discuss their faiths with none believers then that should be in a different place.

Just my two pennyworth.

... Ducks back for cover before the bullets go flying...

There is another category, those atheists who aren't rude, but who must object to superstition. Like me and Dawkins and Hitchens, we do not like people objecting to scientific findings without any evidence. We don't like the intrusion of religion into secular government or public schools.

What would a non-fundamentalist atheist be? Would he be someone who believed only somewhat that there are no supernatural entities in the universe - perhaps that there is only part of a god (a divine foot, say, or buttock)? Or that gods exist only some of the time - say, Wednesdays and Saturdays? (That would not be so strange: for many unthinking quasi-theists, a god exists only on Sundays.) Or might it be that a non-fundamentalist atheist is one who does not mind that other people hold profoundly false and primitive beliefs about the universe, on the basis of which they have spent centuries mass-murdering other people who do not hold exactly the same false and primitive beliefs as themselves - and still do?

http://www.acgrayling.com/atheist/atheist1.html

I would never intrude on someone's ability to have Jesus as a role model. I happen to admire much of his teachings myself. But if you make pronouncements about physical phenomenon, those can and should be questioned. The universe was not created in 6 days, the Sun does not revolve around the Earth. All species did evolve from simpler ancestors. Religion is not the origin of morality. Prayer does not work.

it seem that this thread is threatening to become another atheist-believer free-for-all.

Unfortunately iamnotaparakeet, until the mods actually do do something about it, all one can do is kindly ask the miso-theists to go away. Unless a forum is specifically created for such discussions. (of course the words "go away" are probably discouraged as they would only serve to provoke (even if warranted))

So in summary, it's probably gonna continue as is unless the mods react quicker. Of course I have no idea of the mods policy or reaction times on such things.

It's not that I want them to "go away", rather have them just not play their games of rhetoric. But I suppose the way I defined it would say they have attitudes that make them unbearable conversationally.

You can see that it is one thing not to accept God whereas it's another not to accept the probability of God, right? Not only that but their tactics tend to ward off any real conversation whether between fellow believers or between believers and non-believers who aren't rude.

These current misotheists don't have to act the way they do, but they have zero motivation to change. And who changes their ways if they don't have to?