Be a good little atheist...

[slingblade]

"Prayer, how to do nothing and still think you're helping."

Mostly, yes. But honestly, many people feel comforted and supported knowing someone is praying for them. It does have, for them, some kind of positive benefit.

Telling them you'll be thinking of them has the same effect: comfort, support.
It does neither of us any harm to offer that.

 

[KoihimeNakamura]

Okay, try this: Will you stand by and allow stupid "stuff" to happen?

Don't quite think it's your job to stop people from doing stupid stuff, no.

 

[marplots]

Okay, try this: Will you stand by and allow stupid "stuff" to happen?

Sure.

But I thought of a platitude I think might represent my position: Choose your enemies wisely, for you will become them.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Sure.

But I thought of a platitude I think might represent my position: Choose your enemies wisely, for you will become them.

...if you allow that. (Or do you think I wear black pajamas and a straw hat?)

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

All that is required for evil to triumph if for good people to do nothing.

When you say "evil", how exactly are you defining "evil", and what exactly are you defining as "evil"? Seems somewhat like hyperbole.

And, yes, I know it's a quote, what I'm questioning is the aptness of the quote.

Okay, try this: Will you stand by and allow stupid "stuff" to happen?

Speaking for nobody but myself yes, depending on the "stupid 'stuff'" in question. If the "stupid 'stuff'" is letting a 3 year-old play with a loaded gun, then no. If the "stupid 'stuff'" is someone watching Jeremy Kyle, then yes. There's a whole spectrum in between that.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

But scientific evidence based reality doesn't care whether you support it or not. It just is.

Rocks don't care either.

I think you are confused about the nature of my position.

Fair point. But I'm here on a sceptics' forum discussing scepticism and subjects related to scepticism with other people on a sceptics' forum. That's not the same as walking around with a t-shirt emblazoned with the phrase "I don't believe in God". Which is, essentially, what the Darwin fish is. I honestly can't imagine why anybody would.

It's my conviction that promoting critical thinking, rational thinking, and essentially a scientific evidence based reality, the human race would be better off. I believe humans are moving in that direction, and I support that movement.

The Darwin fish in particular is a comment about the nonsensical disbelief in evolution theory. Creation believers are pushing bad science, so it behooves those of us promoting science to address the bad science.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

When you say "evil", how exactly are you defining "evil", and what exactly are you defining as "evil"? Seems somewhat like hyperbole.

And, yes, I know it's a quote, what I'm questioning is the aptness of the quote.

The point was to say that if we just sit on our hands the religious con artists have no reason to clean up their act.

Speaking for nobody but myself yes, depending on the "stupid 'stuff'" in question. If the "stupid 'stuff'" is letting a 3 year-old play with a loaded gun, then no. If the "stupid 'stuff'" is someone watching Jeremy Kyle, then yes. There's a whole spectrum in between that.

Yep. I never said it was appropriate to every situation.

 

[marplots]

...if you allow that. (Or do you think I wear black pajamas and a straw hat?)

That actually sounds pretty cool.

There's a type of proselytizing that more mellow Christians sometimes use as an understated, but effective way to transmit their meme. It involves living an admirable life and giving credit, but only when queried, to their religion. I like this method because it's a type of "not what I say, but what I do" thing.

My version of an atheist agenda would be to describe how I see the world and why -- but only to someone who is curious about it. I admire and respect Hitchens and I dig that he's out there pushing the envelope. But I'm not him. I do one on one so much better than en mass. I'd also have to say I admire the few Buddhists I've met online as willing to share but not jerks about it.

 

[bokonon]

Your strawman is on fire.

It was a question. The fact that you didn't want to answer it, even as an anonymous character on a skeptic's forum, suggests that you're probably not as obnoxious in real life as you like to pretend.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Rocks don't care either.

I didn't say they did.

I think you are confused about the nature of my position.

Evidently.

It's my conviction that promoting critical thinking, rational thinking, and essentially a scientific evidence based reality, the human race would be better off. I believe humans are moving in that direction, and I support that movement.

The Darwin fish in particular is a comment about the nonsensical disbelief in evolution theory. Creation believers are pushing bad science, so it behooves those of us promoting science to address the bad science.

How does a Darwin fish on your car address bad science?

The point was to say that if we just sit on our hands the religious con artists have no reason to clean up their act.

So hyperbole, then.

Yep. I never said it was appropriate to every situation.

So you too would allow "stupid 'stuff'" to happen? Does that mean that there are also situations in which you, too, would keep quiet while others expressed their religious views?

 

[truethat]

All that is required for evil to triumph if for good people to do nothing.

Belief in the supernatural is not evil. Anymore than atheist views are like being part of the KKK.

Your comment is rude and antagonistic. If you treat people like things that matter to them and that they care about and love are evil, then of course they are going to get upset.

I agree with the comments about shutting up for the sake of shutting up.

I have sat in silence many times in my life while people go on and on about their pets. I despise pets. Especially living n NYC. I think it is absolutely cruel and also quite disgusting that people have large dogs in NYC. I guess cats don't bother me as much except cat people always seem to be broke and have four cats at home. They also think nothing of using a fork to spoon out the catfood into the bowl and then toss it in the sink with people forks. Oh and the hair. Gross and the cat litter, don't get me started. I don't get it. I think it is enslavement of an animal for personal pleasure. I also have an Aunt and Uncle that allow their shoe dogs to eat at the kitchen table. The dogs nuzzle everyone's groin and I've seriously freaked out about being around them while I'm on my period.

However, when they go on and on about the love they have for their dog I listen and enjoy the conversation. Why? Because it's not about me, it's about what they love and their views.

However if they started going off in the middle of the conversation about how unfair it is in the world that they can't take their dog off the leash at public parks, (Something I am ferociously against) then I'm going to either change the subject or open my yap and say something.

Beyond that I'm being an ass.

 

[truethat]

I would like to see this more clearly myself. I am willing to admit that I may be an exception in that I haven't experienced this.

I'm also interested in how much you feel you are part of a class in this and how strongly you identify with the term atheist as a relevant descriptor. I'm asking because I don't get the emotional content here.

My wife is Baptist and I'm an atheist. Her side of the family is not extremely nutty about it, but they are certainly young earth creationists, born again believers and bible literalists. With this small sample, I find that being reasonable and otherwise a decent person seems to count more than whether I am prone to thanking Jesus every five minutes. From my perspective it is a very small, very circumscribed issue that is connected to personalities rather than a large movement thing or a general societal ill that needs fixing. I would like to hear about how I have mistaken the terrain though.

I posted about this earlier. I would agree with you for the most part. But what I said before is true. Most people don't care. But when someone does care, they really really really really care. It's like the difference between a Greek girl dating a black guy. Well most Americans here in the US would not really care. But a Greek father would lose his mind. It would be very ugly and in your face and unbelievable. Because the Greek racist father doesn't give a damn what you think of him as a racist. He thinks it's more important for him to be right. The same thing with a nut job believer. They won't try to be diplomatic about such things. They will put down Ghandi as a loser because he didn't accept Jesus. They don't care.

So the majority of people are not like this. But when you do experience it, it is very bold and ugly.


eta I am not suggesting all Greeks are like this. My hubby is Greek and most Greeks I know are quite open minded. I'm just using this example because I watched my big fat greek wedding last week.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

It was a question. The fact that you didn't want to answer it, even as an anonymous character on a skeptic's forum, suggests that you're probably not as obnoxious in real life as you like to pretend.

Or not. You shouldn't try to impress yourself, you don't do a good job.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Beyond that I'm being an ass.

Really.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I would like to see this more clearly myself. I am willing to admit that I may be an exception in that I haven't experienced this.

I'm also interested in how much you feel you are part of a class in this and how strongly you identify with the term atheist as a relevant descriptor. I'm asking because I don't get the emotional content here.

My wife is Baptist and I'm an atheist. Her side of the family is not extremely nutty about it, but they are certainly young earth creationists, born again believers and bible literalists. With this small sample, I find that being reasonable and otherwise a decent person seems to count more than whether I am prone to thanking Jesus every five minutes. From my perspective it is a very small, very circumscribed issue that is connected to personalities rather than a large movement thing or a general societal ill that needs fixing. I would like to hear about how I have mistaken the terrain though.

Let's clear up the straw man here, it is a minor inconvenience for me personally to keep my mouth shut about being an atheist in the situations I know better than to bring it up in.

That's different from saying those situations are not widespread because they clearly are.

And of course many people don't care. So your wife and you get along, that's nice. If you had kids or if you have kids, would your wife be comfortable flipping a coin to see if the kids should be theists or atheists? IE are both positions equally valued in your family? Is your atheism as valued as her theism? My guess is your belief is tolerated at best.

How many current leaders in the US government are admitted atheists? Is that proportional to the number of atheists in the country? Why should it matter one iota if a President is a theist? How is that a qualification to lead a secular country?


As for how I identify with atheism, I'm one of those strong atheists, meaning I am not agnostic. I have concluded the evidence is overwhelming that gods are mythical beings people invented. I have no need to prove gods don't exist.

But as a group, nah, I prefer skeptics to atheists. I'm glad for people who have figured out gods are mythical beings, but many atheists are not equally critical thinkers in other areas, and I have no need for those humanist religious organizations which have replaced church for many atheists and agnostics. I do support the move to make atheism more acceptable and I applaud groups who have put up billboards and other public notices declaring it OK not to believe in a god.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I didn't say they did.

No, you said an equally inanimate thing didn't care.

How does a Darwin fish on your car address bad science?

How does a billboard promote atheism? It says this idea is acceptable to people who only hear that it is not.

If all one hears is evolution is doubted, and that person hears nothing from the people who don't doubt the evidence, then one is likely to be negatively impacted. The fact is, advertising works.

 

[qayak]

Where do you live? LOL I'm not saying that Skeptic Girl is right but if Christians are so comfortable with their faith then why do they talk about their faith all the time? Why do they need to impose it on other people.

They talk about it because they are comfortable with it. It is only those who are uncomfortable who don't talk about it.

I know quite a few Buddhists who for a long time I thought were atheists. You know why? They usually don't talk about their "faith." They just sort of Zen. The same with Jews. Jews will talk about their faith with other Jews but for the most part they don't hoist it on other people.

I know a lot of Buddhists who do discuss their beliefs. I don't know many Jews so I can't comment beyond saying that all the ones I know make it clear they believe in God.

But Christians and Muslims never shut up about their faith. It's everywhere. Like the other person said. One of the number one things I see on just facebook daily are people asking for prayers for their friends or loved ones.

Gee, do you think that could be because converting people is part of their religion?

Are you serious?

Completely. Watch what happens when a discussion comes around to religion. Christians immediately push their beliefs while atheists squirm in their seats trying not to offend.

I stopped worrying about offending a long time ago and as soon as the topic comes up I point out their errors. Which, according to believers and many atheists on this list and in person, makes me a "militant" atheist. Which in my view makes them "militant" theists and I don't want to lose a contest in militancy.

 

[marplots]

That's different from saying those situations are not widespread because they clearly are.

I'm not clear on the clearly, but I grant that it might be me not paying close attention.

And of course many people don't care. So your wife and you get along, that's nice. If you had kids or if you have kids, would your wife be comfortable flipping a coin to see if the kids should be theists or atheists? IE are both positions equally valued in your family? Is your atheism as valued as her theism? My guess is your belief is tolerated at best.

This I can comment on. We have two children. One is as atheist as I am and the other graduated with a degree from Bob Jones University and is teaching at a Baptist church school. I can't say that the "positions" are equally valued, but the people who hold them certainly are.

I am careful to not infringe on my wife's ability to practice her religion. I have no "atheist practice" so there is an imbalance there. On the other hand, I am not expected to pray, or say grace, or any of a number of religious style things -- I suppose it does irritate her and her folks. I should point out that they are compelled to live in a world which is largely dismissive of their beliefs, so my particular lack isn't the focus of much effort. We tolerate each other for the greater good. This I could count as a win for atheism, couldn't I?

How many current leaders in the US government are admitted atheists?

One that I know of. Pete Stark, Democrat, Representative from CA, 13th district.

Is that proportional to the number of atheists in the country?

Don't know. Depends on the strong/weak, secularist/humanist and a host of other odd ways we categorize these things. Would someone who is not religious but didn't push an atheist meme count? I also found two Buddhists.

Why should it matter one iota if a President is a theist? How is that a qualification to lead a secular country?

I don't think it does matter much. At least not when I vote. I'm not expecting any religious authority to spring from the White House, either way. I hope that I wouldn't vote for someone solely because they were an atheist.

As for how I identify with atheism, I'm one of those strong atheists, meaning I am not agnostic. I have concluded the evidence is overwhelming that gods are mythical beings people invented. I have no need to prove gods don't exist.

I quite concur with this. I am also in that camp.

But as a group, nah, I prefer skeptics to atheists. I'm glad for people who have figured out gods are mythical beings, but many atheists are not equally critical thinkers in other areas, and I have no need for those humanist religious organizations which have replaced church for many atheists and agnostics. I do support the move to make atheism more acceptable and I applaud groups who have put up billboards and other public notices declaring it OK not to believe in a god.

This is probably where we differ. I don't think of my ideas as more than mine. I understand that others agree and that there are organizations who wish to express these ideas to the public. I don't see any problem with it, but I also do not feel any geis about it either. I might change my stance if I become more aware of detrimental bigotry directed at secularists as a class. On the other hand, I might not.

 

[truethat]

Let's clear up the straw man here, it is a minor inconvenience for me personally to keep my mouth shut about being an atheist in the situations I know better than to bring it up in.

That's different from saying those situations are not widespread because they clearly are.

And of course many people don't care. So your wife and you get along, that's nice. If you had kids or if you have kids, would your wife be comfortable flipping a coin to see if the kids should be theists or atheists? IE are both positions equally valued in your family? Is your atheism as valued as her theism? My guess is your belief is tolerated at best.

How many current leaders in the US government are admitted atheists? Is that proportional to the number of atheists in the country? Why should it matter one iota if a President is a theist? How is that a qualification to lead a secular country?


As for how I identify with atheism, I'm one of those strong atheists, meaning I am not agnostic. I have concluded the evidence is overwhelming that gods are mythical beings people invented. I have no need to prove gods don't exist.

But as a group, nah, I prefer skeptics to atheists. I'm glad for people who have figured out gods are mythical beings, but many atheists are not equally critical thinkers in other areas, and I have no need for those humanist religious organizations which have replaced church for many atheists and agnostics. I do support the move to make atheism more acceptable and I applaud groups who have put up billboards and other public notices declaring it OK not to believe in a god.

Erm pet peeve of mine. The President isn't the "leader of the country" as much as he is the representative of the people. So I can kinda sorta understand where the atheism comes into it.

It's like that movie with Jodie Foster Contact when they picked the other guy to go because they wanted someone to represent what most of the people in the world were like. Atheists do not do that.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

No, you said an equally inanimate thing didn't care.

Yes. That was the point I was making. You said that the Darwin fish was "a statement in support of a scientific evidence based reality". And now you agree that scientific evidence based reality is inanimate and doesn't care whether you support it or not.

So...why have a symbol that shows support for it?

How does a billboard promote atheism?

I'm not sure it does. Reasoned argument promotes atheism. Education promotes atheism.

If all one hears is evolution is doubted, and that person hears nothing from the people who don't doubt the evidence, then one is likely to be negatively impacted. The fact is, advertising works.

Are there really religious people out there who are unaware that Darwinism exists and that there are people who think it's the truth? That almost sounds like an inverse Jack Chick argument to me, where people in Chickland don't believe in Jesus because they've never heard of him. And would these people, if they do exist, understand what the Darwin fish was if they saw it?