Atheists Are Fools

[JoeyKnothead]

I see the Bible verse about 'the fool has said there is no god' bandied about by some of the forum members and it really does appall me. This kind of teaching is among the most insidious of all the Bible teachings, and it leads to the worst kind of beliefs. When a person holds this view, that those who disagree with you are evil, Satan, or fools, it really stops all attempts at understanding one another. To this atheist it is seen as a clear attempt to insult, and to slander. It prevents the theist from being able to accept new ideas, or ideas that clearly disprove a given biblical concept. It is no better than using the 'n' word, and no better than a child throwing a tantrum. When logic and reason can be short circuited by a simple phrase, then what is there left to debate?

What is even a bit sadder about the use of this term, its usually the ones holding the most foolish of ideas who dare claims someone else the fool. There is no shame in saying you think someone is wrong, and there should be no shame in being called wrong. But declaring an opponent in a debate forum a fool is the height of hypocrisy. What bigger fool could there be than one who would debate a fool?

The Christian religion uses these demonizing terms to stop debate. To stop honest discussion. To stop the honorable seeking of truth. Only a scared individual, or a scared ideology would use such tactics to defend itself. Only an ideology that knew it was questionable would dare try to stop someone's asking questions. A religion which has in itself a history of abuse, torture and murder of anyone who challenges it? And the atheist is the fool? What fool is there that would blindly adhere to something which he disagrees with?

I see often, in life and these forums, the Christian who will skirt around, under, or totally avoid discussion of the issue at hand. Many will resort to rhetorical trickery before they will discuss the issues, but they will call anyone who disagrees a witch. A fool. A demon. Who is so righteous they can make this declaration? Can we not agree that our differences are just that, differences, not demonic possessions? Why must someone who tries their best to understand this wonderful life we share always be a fool?

I'll tell you what a fool is. A fool is the person who has stopped learning. A fool is one who would declare they have the answers before they are even asked the question. They have stopped trying to understand people, and instead they want a chance to feel superior. How better to feel superior than to use the internet to call someone a fool. A faceless, otherwise anonymous debater, who comes in here to seek knowledge, and share their own. You would call them a fool? Have you never heard the expression, "You catch more flies with honey"? If you have, and you continue to call those you are debating with a fool, then really, what is there left to say to you?

What is it going to take the Christian religion to realize that differences of opinion can actually be a good thing? They can lead to new discoveries, to new ideas, and to better understanding. Even wrong opinions have value, because they allow us to discuss why they are wrong, how to correct them, and how to prevent them in the future. Why is it foolish to take the sum total of all available information and come to a conclusion based on that information? You are wrong about believing there is a God. But you're not a fool. You're not evil. You're just wrong. Surely we can get along long enough to debate why I am correct, or you are, without having to declare one another fools, or worse.

I will declare all who believe in a God wrong. But a fool? I have only been in these forums for a short time, but I will tell you this, there are some highly intelligent folks here, from atheist to theist, and I have learned from them. I learned from them because I know if I keep my mind open, I can learn. If I try to understand a person's point, even if I don't agree with it, I can learn about that person. And let me tell you, knowledge gained is good. It is good for the theist and the atheist alike. It is good because through understanding one another we can hopefully see that we are all wrong about something, we are all right about something, we are all bad for something, and we are all good for something. We are humans, each and every one of us, and we deserve a certain level of respect.

Atheists have families they love and care for. We have jobs we like, and jobs we hate. We have fears and dreams and wants and needs. We bleed red blood when we are cut. We have goals, and hopes, and we fail and we succeed. We do all of the things the religious do but one. Should the one single thing that separates us make us evil, or fools? Just because a book declares it? Just because one can hide behind a biblical passage, and deny a certain responsibility for declaring it? Are we really that bad that our lives are no better than a dog's? Really? Is there not some way we can be thought of as worthy of this life? Just because we don't believe a book? Just because we don't believe your book?

Ultimately I suppose I am here to 'preach atheism', but surely there can be a greater, more noble dialog.

[C-Nub]

I know that I'm a lot more likely to consider how valid someone's point is when they're insulting me.

Wait, no I'm not.

It's a counter-productive approach, and it's probably one that owes more to the author's desire to show himself superior than any honest attempt to 'enlighten' (subjective position) a theist.

If you are willing to be insulting to prove a point, then you should also be willing to admit you're not trying to prove a point, but rather that you're somehow better than whomever you're insulting.

[Thought Criminal]

I know that I'm a lot more likely to consider how valid someone's point is when they're insulting me.

Wait, no I'm not.

It's a counter-productive approach, and it's probably one that owes more to the author's desire to show himself superior than any honest attempt to 'enlighten' (subjective position) a theist.

If you are willing to be insulting to prove a point, then you should also be willing to admit you're not trying to prove a point, but rather that you're somehow better than whomever you're insulting.

Uhm, the whole point being proven is that calling people fools is insulting. The best way to prove this is to put the shoe on the other foot. It's not about actually thinking they're fools, just showing them that the words are bad for either side.

TC

[C-Nub]

If you watch children on the school yard trading insults, they don't learn that words hurt, they learn that fists hurt more and whoever hits hardest feels like a winner.

You don't prove someone is an ass by being an ass. All you do is prove that you can also be an ass.

If you want to insult someone, fine, but masking it in some sort of semi-noble point is either dishonest or delusional, because that's never why anyone insults anybody.

If you want to teach someone, impart what you feel is important knowledge, you need to earn their respect, so that they respect what you're saying, and you can only do that by offering them your respect before hand.

It seems very much like common sense to me.

[Thought Criminal]

If you watch children on the school yard trading insults, they don't learn that words hurt, they learn that fists hurt more and whoever hits hardest feels like a winner.

You don't prove someone is an xxx by being an xxx. All you do is prove that you can also be an xxx.

If you want to insult someone, fine, but masking it in some sort of semi-noble point is either dishonest or delusional, because that's never why anyone insults anybody.

If you want to teach someone, impart what you feel is important knowledge, you need to earn their respect, so that they respect what you're saying, and you can only do that by offering them your respect before hand.

It seems very much like common sense to me.

This is too abstract for me, so let's get specific.

The issue here is that a now-departed user had a Bible quote that called atheists fools. He pretended this wasn't just a simple insult. To disprove this, all we need to do is add a quote from some crude atheist that says theists are fools. Now that the shoe's on the other foot, their bluff is called.

TC

[JoeyKnothead]

I know that I'm a lot more likely to consider how valid someone's point is when they're insulting me.

Wait, no I'm not.

It's a counter-productive approach, and it's probably one that owes more to the author's desire to show himself superior than any honest attempt to 'enlighten' (subjective position) a theist.

If you are willing to be insulting to prove a point, then you should also be willing to admit you're not trying to prove a point, but rather that you're somehow better than whomever you're insulting.

Uhm, the whole point being proven is that calling people fools is insulting. The best way to prove this is to put the shoe on the other foot. It's not about actually thinking they're fools, just showing them that the words are bad for either side.

Which is exactly what I did, and I was told I was being insulting, and to quit doing it. Even after saying several times I did not believe what I had said, I was only trying to prove a point. But still I was over ruled, and the insult was allowed to stand specifically because it was in the Bible. As an atheist I don't feel bound to use the Bible to respond to the Bible. As stated before, I live in the real world, not the world of two thousand years ago. Language has changed, and if using the language of the here and now is wrong, then why the language of a bygone era?

One of the posters in this section alone wished to defend the insult, by pointing out I had done the same thing, yet they still wanted to defend using an insult. They just didn't like my insult.

As to respect, I don't feel bound by what this or that person subjectively thinks is respect. If an insult is allowed, even sanctioned, then what recourse in an online forum do I have? The only recourse is to either ignore it, which to me would be to agree with it, or to respond. I responded, I was censured, and the insult is still there for anyone to use merely because it is in the Bible.

As Carlin noted, words which have the exact same meaning are censored. What is up with that? It is usually the religious who wish to censor someone, while all along they declare others will burn in hell, are demon possessed, or some other such nonsense. But if anyone dare say a word which upsets their delicate sensibilities, then oh my god, we gotta do something. My poor ears are burning because someone said a naughty word. Damn them to hell for saying a naughty word, and may the fires of hell consume them. They are possessed by demons, they are evil. Oh my poor ears. Damn them Jeebus, damn them now! But do so in the name of the 'Loving God'.

Its a double standard, and pointing it out does seem to upset the apple cart.

[C-Nub]

Which is all well and good, my point, such as it is, is that you aren't 'showing' anyone anything. At all.

No one is going to be convinced that your right when you break the rules you want upheld in order to demonstrate a double standard, if there is one. Personally, I still don't see a biblical quote calling atheists 'fools' as the least bit insulting, it's from the bible. The only thing that's insulting about it is the fact that people think I'll (we'll) care about anything it says anywhere in the Bible. I've got things written on toilet paper that are more important than that which is written in the bible.

I think it's a good sign, myself. Theists have been backed into a corner, they're losing ground every step of the way in every single rational argument on the subject of God's existance, and the atheist position is only gaining strength and momentum. If they're now at the point that they're resorting to name calling, rather than being offended, we should sit back and look forward to them threatening our fathers with their fathers, or possibly refusing to let us play in their reindeer games.

Look around the boards here, I think we're doing very well for ourselves. If we let this one thing go, from a poster that apparently isn't even here anymore, then we're not exactly losing ground... Instead we'd be teaching Jesus' sheep (his term, not mine) a little bit about turning the other cheek.

There's a joke in there about the wool over someone's eyes, but I can't seem to articulate it.

I like the idea of atheists representing reason, logic and science. I think its very hard to do that when some of us are whinning about how unfair it is that the other children get to resort to name calling and we don't.

In recent years, I've come to think of 'faith' as something very akin to neurological disorder, in that it could and maybe should, in this case, be compared to tourrets syndrome, which I probably can't spell. People who accept the existance of magic in this world are, at least to some degree, a little bit off, and probably can't be held responsible for everything they say. We have no such excuse, nor should we really be seeking one. If there is a double standard, let it be, think of it more as a handicap in golfing or a free throw in a game against the Harlem Globe-trotters.



Basically, it boils down to this; It's the internet, lots of people are going to say lots of stupid things, and there isn't a lot that can be done to prevent it. The staff around here does a good job, and can't be expected to make every decision in a way that pleases every member present, it just isn't going to happen. This guy got away with something that we normally can't, and frankly, shouldn't need to anyways. It happens, it isn't good that it happens, but it happens. It certainly doesn't need seven pages of 'woe are we, the mistreated, maligned, second class citizen atheists.' We get treated very well here, we're given as reasonably fair a shake as anyone can expect to have in this sort of environment, and we're, I think, doing pretty well for ourselves over-all, representin' and... uh... big pimpin' and stuff.

If it happens again, sure, call people on it, but as a one time occurance, its ok to let this one go.

[JoeyKnothead]

Well said C-Nub.

I don't see it as whining at all when it comes to fairness and free speech. I do think it important to point out the double standard that exists. Am I losing sleep over the issue? Not a bit.

If we were to all remain silent when we think something is unfair, then where would that lead us? My complaint is about an inherently unfair situation where one side is able to use insulting language, and the other is asked to accept it. When I was told to stop using insults, I did so, because my point was made.

While the original guy with the biblical insult has apparently left, the double standard still remains for the next person who wishes to use it. Of course I am not particularly offended in being called a fool, I am offended at the double standard. Bringing an issue up as a matter of debate I see no problem with. The problem I have is folks being able to hide behind the Bible to insult me, through their signature, and I am asked to 'man up', 'quit whining' and what have you. I don't give two hoots about what I'm called, but I do respect the idea that what's allowed for one should be allowed for all.

So by pointing this hypocrisy out I endeavor to show all that some religious folks feel it their right to insult others, but they then expect to silence any language that calls them on it. This is part and parcel of an ideology that cannot withstand scrutiny, and is itself intolerant of others. I am asked to accept an insult because 'God said it, not me'. Problem with that though is when I respond in kind, I am looked at as intolerant or worse. Many religious folks hold their belief as somehow above the very insults they deal out to others. Call 'em on it and then they start screaming how mean you are.

Is this matter really that important? Maybe not to some. I can't help but wonder though what some of my idols would think if they were to know I accepted anything less than fairness for everyone.

[Thought Criminal]

Which is exactly what I did, and I was told I was being insulting, and to quit doing it. Even after saying several times I did not believe what I had said, I was only trying to prove a point. But still I was over ruled, and the insult was allowed to stand specifically because it was in the Bible. As an atheist I don't feel bound to use the Bible to respond to the Bible. As stated before, I live in the real world, not the world of two thousand years ago. Language has changed, and if using the language of the here and now is wrong, then why the language of a bygone era?

One of the posters in this section alone wished to defend the insult, by pointing out I had done the same thing, yet they still wanted to defend using an insult. They just didn't like my insult.

As to respect, I don't feel bound by what this or that person subjectively thinks is respect. If an insult is allowed, even sanctioned, then what recourse in an online forum do I have? The only recourse is to either ignore it, which to me would be to agree with it, or to respond. I responded, I was censured, and the insult is still there for anyone to use merely because it is in the Bible.

As Carlin noted, words which have the exact same meaning are censored. What is up with that? It is usually the religious who wish to censor someone, while all along they declare others will burn in hell, are demon possessed, or some other such nonsense. But if anyone dare say a word which upsets their delicate sensibilities, then oh my god, we gotta do something. My poor ears are burning because someone said a naughty word. Damn them to hell for saying a naughty word, and may the fires of hell consume them. They are possessed by demons, they are evil. Oh my poor ears. Damn them Jeebus, damn them now! But do so in the name of the 'Loving God'.

Its a double standard, and pointing it out does seem to upset the apple cart.

I agree completely. Allowing them to insult atheists with that Bible quote in their signature while complaining when you reverse this to prove a point essentially just proves your point. It is an example of admin bias.

For the record, if someone wanted to use that Bible quote in the context of a debate, I would certainly not object. Preventing someone from using a valid source would be the stupidest form of censorship. The problem here is that it was simply being used as an insult, but the mods are so in love with the Bible that they refuse to accept restrictions on users abusing it.

TC

[Beto]

Which is exactly what I did, and I was told I was being insulting, and to quit doing it. Even after saying several times I did not believe what I had said, I was only trying to prove a point. But still I was over ruled, and the insult was allowed to stand specifically because it was in the Bible. As an atheist I don't feel bound to use the Bible to respond to the Bible. As stated before, I live in the real world, not the world of two thousand years ago. Language has changed, and if using the language of the here and now is wrong, then why the language of a bygone era?

One of the posters in this section alone wished to defend the insult, by pointing out I had done the same thing, yet they still wanted to defend using an insult. They just didn't like my insult.

As to respect, I don't feel bound by what this or that person subjectively thinks is respect. If an insult is allowed, even sanctioned, then what recourse in an online forum do I have? The only recourse is to either ignore it, which to me would be to agree with it, or to respond. I responded, I was censured, and the insult is still there for anyone to use merely because it is in the Bible.

As Carlin noted, words which have the exact same meaning are censored. What is up with that? It is usually the religious who wish to censor someone, while all along they declare others will burn in hell, are demon possessed, or some other such nonsense. But if anyone dare say a word which upsets their delicate sensibilities, then oh my god, we gotta do something. My poor ears are burning because someone said a naughty word. Damn them to hell for saying a naughty word, and may the fires of hell consume them. They are possessed by demons, they are evil. Oh my poor ears. Damn them Jeebus, damn them now! But do so in the name of the 'Loving God'.

Its a double standard, and pointing it out does seem to upset the apple cart.

I agree completely. Allowing them to insult atheists with that Bible quote in their signature while complaining when you reverse this to prove a point essentially just proves your point. It is an example of admin bias.

For the record, if someone wanted to use that Bible quote in the context of a debate, I would certainly not object. Preventing someone from using a valid source would be the stupidest form of censorship. The problem here is that it was simply being used as an insult, but the mods are so in love with the Bible that they refuse to accept restrictions on users abusing it.

TC

I'll have to ask this again. What's the difference between that Bible quote, and quoting Hemingway on "all thinking men are atheists"? I brought it up before, and I haven't been told I can't quote Hemingway, so I'm assuming I can. How is it less insulting for a theist? Where's the double standard?

[Thought Criminal]

I'll have to ask this again. What's the difference between that Bible quote, and quoting Hemingway on "all thinking men are atheists"? I brought it up before, and I haven't been told I can't quote Hemingway, so I'm assuming I can. How is it less insulting for a theist? Where's the double standard?

When choosing a quote for your signature, it's one thng for it to express your views, another for it to do so in an insulting manner. The Hemingway quote claims that all thinking men are atheists, which is not only flatly false, but likewise suggests that only unthinking men are theists. That's a bit too close to an insult for my tastes.

Of course, since it's only Hemingway, not the Holy Holy Holy Book, I doubt the admins would give it the same free pass.

TC