• In total there are 4 users online :: 1 registered, 0 hidden and 3 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
    Most users ever online was 709 on Tue Mar 19, 2024 1:09 am

"A movement needs a moral cause beyond glamorizing disbelief"

Engage in conversations about worldwide religions, cults, philosophy, atheism, freethought, critical thinking, and skepticism in this forum.
Forum rules
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.

All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
User avatar
Interbane

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 7203
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:59 am
19
Location: Da U.P.
Has thanked: 1105 times
Been thanked: 2166 times
United States of America

Re: "A movement needs a moral cause beyond glamorizing disbelief"

Unread post

What ultimately amounts to Amorality is to dedicate yourself to being an active critic of an institution that although not perfect has at the very least committed itself to something that has contributed to the greater good - flaws and all.
Flaws also? Witch hunts, crusades, terrorism, the inquisition? It's all good, but sorry about the flaws. Such criticisms aren't amoral or immoral, they are moral. Shouldn't we question an institution that hides its flaws behind the good it does? Isn't this similar to a father that hugs you and says sorry after beating you? Should we settle for an institution capable of creating bigotry such as WBC and stupidity such as Creationism? Perhaps we should, if we don't have anything to replace it with for the masses that need belief.

As Ive said before, this brand of atheism is ultimately self defeating.
There are many brands of atheism. Which brand were you referring to again? Instead of comparing the worst brand of atheism(whatever it is that has your panties in a bunch) with the worst brand of theism(ISIS/Al Quaeda/WBC), why not compare the best brands of each? Wouldn't that be more productive?

How about comparing Secular Buddhism to (what brand of theism do you think is the best?)
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams
User avatar
ant

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 5935
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
12
Has thanked: 1371 times
Been thanked: 969 times

Re: "A movement needs a moral cause beyond glamorizing disbelief"

Unread post

Are you kidding me? So I must be amoral too because I regularly criticize the Catholic Church, pointing out its hypocrisies, its institutionalized contempt of women and gays, its long history of violence and bigotry, turning the other cheek, as it were, while children are being sexually abused—all in the name of God and heaven and beliefs that fall apart under any kind of rational scrutiny.

The people who speak out against such stupidity are amoral?

Hey, I also criticize the kinds of institutionalized sports that turns the other way when you children are sodomized. That makes me amoral too!

Religion is pornography for the soul, as Robyn Hitchcock once said.
Once again we have the typical myopic, narrowly defined, broad characterizations of religion.


It's really no use having any discussions with ignorance as bright as this.

And of course there's no recognizing secular governments that publicly denounced and murdered "religious people" by the millions.
That's the beauty of no belief.
You get to be a chicken-shit intellectual coward and feel good about it.
User avatar
ant

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 5935
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
12
Has thanked: 1371 times
Been thanked: 969 times

Re: "A movement needs a moral cause beyond glamorizing disbelief"

Unread post

What's actually positively ghastly about discussions among some atheists (like Robert, Dexter, Johnson, and Geo) is the absolute absurd hypocrisy of their treatment of the word religion.

In some instances it's important to define terms before proceeding to discuss a concept.

But when it comes to "religion" there is no need to attempt to define what it is. Broad brush generalizations and oversimplifications are adequate to begin the discussion.


It's great riding yourself of intellectual integrity when you want to build a strawman of your own!
Last edited by ant on Fri Oct 24, 2014 11:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
geo

2C - MOD & GOLD
pets endangered by possible book avalanche
Posts: 4779
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 4:24 am
15
Location: NC
Has thanked: 2199 times
Been thanked: 2200 times
United States of America

Re: "A movement needs a moral cause beyond glamorizing disbelief"

Unread post

ant wrote: It's really no use having any discussions with ignorance as bright as this.

And of course there's no recognizing secular governments that publicly denounced and murdered "religious people" by the millions.
That's the beauty of no belief.
You get to be a chicken-shit intellectual coward and feel good about it.
You're calling me a "chicken-shit intellectual coward" because I dare to criticize bad things done by the Church?

Actually I've had a great deal of exposure to the Catholic faith. I was even an altar boy once and can tell you the precise moment when you're supposed to ring the bell during the liturgy of the Eucharist.

I also knew Father Mayer who worked in the Archdiocese of Chicago during the 1980s when I lived in the northern suburbs of Chicago. This was a guy who liked teenage boys. He was a real problem for the Church. But because the Church was more interested in protecting itself than innocent children, the Church kept moving him around to other dioceses rather than address the problem of boys being victimized.

Keep the faith.

And no, I wasn't victimized myself because I'm not the kind of person who can be victimized. I never did buy the holy rolly bullshit that the Church uses to elicit false beliefs. Even when I was a teenager I didn’t think that just because someone wears fancy robes and delivers sermons and spills the air with ritualized incense means that he has some kind of spiritual authority over others. It made no sense to me then and it makes no sense to me now.

The chicken-shit cowards are the people who don't speak up when horrible abuses are taking place. (See Penn State). Is it okay to criticize Penn State? Or is that okay, just don’t say anything bad about the Church. This is where Ant's contorted and confused thinking brings him.

Even today we see institutionalized bigotry in action as the church elders deny the Pope’s attempts to be more inclusive towards gays. But if you speak up against that, that makes you ignorant and myopic and a "chicken-shit intellectual coward.

Here’s the rap sheet on Father Mayer . . .

http://www.bishop-accountability.org/il_chicago/#mayer
-Geo
Question everything
User avatar
ant

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 5935
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
12
Has thanked: 1371 times
Been thanked: 969 times

Re: "A movement needs a moral cause beyond glamorizing disbelief"

Unread post

You're calling me a "chicken-shit intellectual coward" because I dare to criticize bad things done by the Church?
No I am not.

I am critical of those that broadly attack religion.
User avatar
geo

2C - MOD & GOLD
pets endangered by possible book avalanche
Posts: 4779
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 4:24 am
15
Location: NC
Has thanked: 2199 times
Been thanked: 2200 times
United States of America

Re: "A movement needs a moral cause beyond glamorizing disbelief"

Unread post

deleted
Last edited by geo on Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-Geo
Question everything
User avatar
ant

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 5935
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
12
Has thanked: 1371 times
Been thanked: 969 times

Re: "A movement needs a moral cause beyond glamorizing disbelief"

Unread post

geo wrote:
ant wrote:
You're calling me a "chicken-shit intellectual coward" because I dare to criticize bad things done by the Church?
No I am not.

I am critical of those that broadly attack religion.
That is absolute bullshit. You responded to my post, quoted my words, and called me a "chicken-shit intellectual coward." You can't deny it. It's right there. And it really pisses me off.
I get pissed off too around here.
Like when someone like Robert says I'm talking out of my ass and people thank him for it.

Welcome to the club.
User avatar
Chris OConnor

1A - OWNER
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 17016
Joined: Sun May 05, 2002 2:43 pm
21
Location: Florida
Has thanked: 3507 times
Been thanked: 1310 times
Gender:
Contact:
United States of America

Re: "A movement needs a moral cause beyond glamorizing disbelief"

Unread post


!
Ant, we all get pissed off at times but your verbal abuse is far beyond acceptable. I'm well aware that people "on the other side" of this discussion have insulted you but it is almost always in retaliation for your overall aggressive, abusive and condescending tone, and when they do rip into you it pales to the verbal abuse you dish out regularly.

I try to moderate in moderation, but when one of our most calm, intelligent and articulate members is being called a "chicken-shit intellectual coward" I have to step in and tell you to knock it off pronto. It is NOT acceptable and will not be tolerated. You would have received this message in private but something tells me you would have responded out in public so here you go right out in the open. Be nice or go away. You're causing BookTalk.org damage by your tone and communication style. I cannot stand for it any longer.

Please, everyone stop the name-calling and taunting. I cannot ask Ant to stop if you're not going to.
User avatar
ant

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 5935
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
12
Has thanked: 1371 times
Been thanked: 969 times

Re: "A movement needs a moral cause beyond glamorizing disbelief"

Unread post

Please, everyone stop the name-calling and taunting. I cannot ask Ant to stop if you're not going to.
:appl:



I would have responded in private if you had messaged me.

Thanks for warning the collective and not being biased about it.
User avatar
ant

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 5935
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
12
Has thanked: 1371 times
Been thanked: 969 times

Re: "A movement needs a moral cause beyond glamorizing disbelief"

Unread post

i didn't know this and found it shocking from someone who is supposed to value rationality:

The reaction to Oppenheimer’s story was swift and did much to support the claim that the atheist community protects sexual predators, much like the Catholic Church did during the priest pedophilia scandal. Richard Dawkins, possibly the most famous atheist in the world, immediately went on a tear on Twitter, blaming victims for their own rapes if they were drinking. “Officer, it’s not my fault I was drunk driving. You see, somebody got me drunk,” he tweeted, comparing being forced to have sex with the choice to drive drunk.

When called out on it, he doubled down by suggesting that rape victims are the real predators, out to get men put in jail: “If you want to be in a position to testify & jail a man, don’t get drunk.”

For someone who is a supposed rationalist, Dawkins refused to even acknowledge the basic difference between making the choice to break the law and being the victim of a crime. But only for rape, of course. It’s unlikely Dawkins would think it’s your fault if you are standing there minding your own business, while drunk, and someone hits you for no reason. But if the assault occurs with a penis instead of a fist, in Dawkins’ mind, suddenly the victim is the person at fault.
I can see why women would be outraged at this, especially when it comes from someone who claims that atheism has a monopoly on rationality.
Utterly repugnant.

:no:
Post Reply

Return to “Religion & Philosophy”