Atheist center’s fence is blasphemy in town

TRIBUNE-DEMOCRAT ^ | August 31, 2003 | SUSAN EVANS

[Lady Jag]

Stupid idea. Stupid people. Stupid sign.

[tallhappy]

They haven't. Amish aren't atheist, yet they hold to a socialistic/communitarian view of property.

You are 1) wrong about the Amish, but moreso, 2) trying to compare the Amish to the Soviet Union, Peole's Repiblic of China and other regimes?

The only modern governments (Amish communities are not the government) that do not recognize property rights have been atheist regimes.

Religious governments or those founded on religious principles and allowing free expression of religion have protected property rights.

Why this dichotomy?

[tallhappy]

I personally may not agree about the "non Existence" of God, but your right not to believe is as worthy of defending as anyone else's right to believe.

This is a given.

Anyone saying otherwise would be beyond propriety and not worth discussing things with.

[xsmommy]

Why are you worrying about the atheists? they have to wrestle the demons of their own non-belief. i feel bad for them.

[Lord_Baltar]

Then Tall, why exactly do some around here feel it's OK to brand Mineral, and others who declare that they do not believe in God as somehow Anti-Christian.

The two aren't mutually exclusive, yet the charge continues.

[tallhappy]

Because Mineral is very clearly quite anti-Christian in his posts.

I've never seen his posts before, but from post one strong animosity toward "Christians" is apparent.

He groups people together and cast guilt by association on all of them.

My comment was going to be, yes, Christians vandalized her house. It was probably that lady from the National Council of Churches who is friends with Castro. Or maybe it was that new Episcopal Bishop. Maybe it was Mother Teresa. Maybe it was that guy who goes to funerals and holds up signs about who God hates.

His comments are classic bigotry of taking the worst actions of people part of a broad large group and ascribing their actions as representative of the whole group. He directs his irrational thought process at Christians. Other may do the same to atheists.

[Lord_Baltar]

"His comments are classic bigotry of taking the worst actions of people part of a broad large group and ascribing their actions as representative of the whole group. He directs his irrational thought process at Christians. Other may do the same to atheists."

Hmmmmm... Interesting theory.

However, Some might say the same thing is done here at FR toward "Liberals". Statements like "All Liberals do ..." or "All Liberals are in favor of ..." Lumping them all in with the "extremeists". How is it any different?

However, I have read Mineral's posts, and I've read the posts of many self proclaimed Christians around here, and to be honest, I've seen a level of Venom from the side that should be duty bound, by their Faith and beliefs, not to sling such Venom, that I've not seen in Mineral's posts.

I don't find him Anti Christian, nor do I find his posts offensive.

That's just my personal take on it.

[lawdude]

"It is settled case law here on FR that religious displays have a perfect right, per Judge Moore, to exist on public property, right?"

That is a stupid comment!

[Conservative Me]

Don't feel bad for us. We are perfectly content in our beliefs, otherwise we would consider ourselves Agnostic.

[Conservative Me]

...not that Agnostics are not content. What I mean is they allow for the possible existance of God.

[tallhappy]

Please please please, accept my apologies.

I was referring to jlogajan, not MineralMan.

Note in 160 I said I believed MineralMan.

So, I am very sorry for the mix up on my part. I was referrng to jlogajan, not MineralMan.

My comment to the MineralMan was about how certain of his comments can be perceived.

[xsmommy]

very easy to be content when life is hunky dory, and neither you nor a close personal family member is facing a life threatening situation.

[MineralMan]

"Why are you worrying about the atheists? they have to wrestle the demons of their own non-belief. i feel bad for them."

Well, atheists don't believe that demons exist, either, so you're incorrect. You needn't feel bad for atheists. They're none of your concern. Instead, ask yourself what you have done today to ease someone's suffering. That's what I do each day.

[Conservative Me]

When my uncle died of cancer, or when my mother had back surgery I was no closer to God. My life has not always been "hunky dory" but I was an Atheist through it. I realize you can not phathom it. I do not fault you for it, but do not mistake my lack of faith. It is as strong as your faith.

[jlogajan]

Religious governments or those founded on religious principles and allowing free expression of religion have protected property rights.

The Taliban???

Both Franco and Hitler were Catholics.

[tallhappy]

It is difficult to take you seriously. Either you are being deliberately disingenuous or are truly ignorant.

Bad as the Taliban was they did not negate property rights. Nor did Hitler or Mussolini.

Still, these groups were definitely not examples of what I described and had more in common with the communists in their control of religious belief than with the governments that respect property rights.

Only the communists who were a priori atheistic held such views and policy.

This is simply factual. It does not indicate that therefore all atheists are against propery rights.

[tallhappy]

Me: Religious governments or those founded on religious principles and allowing free expression of religion have protected property rights.

You: The Taliban???

In your fervor you fail to even read.

The Taliban did not allow free expression of religion. Nor did the Nazis.

[gcruse]

gcruse, you are in the latter category you realize?

"It was screaming  for attention."

Where did the "borough officials" indicate it was deserved?

Why did you put borough officials in quotes?  Do you disbelieve
they said the building was screaming for attention  or do you think
the officials were something other than what the article said.?

[jlogajan]

Only the communists who were a priori atheistic held such views and policy.

Not all communists are atheists.

[harmony]

"very easy to be content when life is hunky dory, and neither you nor a close personal family member is facing a life threatening situation."

Sorry to interject on you two, but I wanted to tell you a story:

When I was 11 years old I was enrolled in a Christian school, where I was introduced to Christianity, and soon after became 'born again'. A few months later, my father died from a heart attack. He was not a Christian. At 11 and half, I believed that my father was in hell. I still remember crying uncontrollably at a Christian Camp, in front of all of my friends, the teachers, the pastor -- everyone, when I `realised'.

For the next 10 years, I also had a few other `demons' to wrestle with. I had the happy task of reconciling genesis with the evidence, countless contradictions in the bible, sexism, etc. Now, as a recent(ish) atheist (thank JPDE for those contradictions!), one could say that the demons have disappeared, although I'm starting to think they were never there to begin with. I've also got a lot more spare time.

If your experience has been different, if you have found comfort during grief in your religion, that's great. I wouldn't wish that double burden upon anyone, not even my worst enemy. I just want you to know that, for me, and probably for others, your religion was the exact opposite of the solace. Believe it or not, the freedom to question without the fear of an impending paradigm shift, given to my by my unconversion, has brought more peace of mind than Jesus ever did.

But if you still want someone to feel bad for, there are plenty of impoverished and oppressed for you to take your excess empathy out on. At least they will be less likely to find your sympathies incredibly condescending :-)