Atheism

magicalfreddiemercury wrote:

What's so disturbing about these two stories - beyond the obvious - is how people continue to look up to these leaders (and those like them) and blindy follow them, believing their words and deeds to be of some higher value.

What's disturbing about you is your willingness to connect two wildly diverse issues and bind them together in a common theme that serves your bigoted mind rather than examine them as individual stories.

It can be very frustrating when a person does not understand your point of view but I know from personal experience that turning up the volume will not help to communicate ideas. I have a particular relative who is very political but who also is easily mixed up about facts and reasoning and what is relevant to any situation. This relative is firmly on one side of politics with what I would describe as a distrust or fear and possibly a hatred of ideas from the other side and maybe even hatred of the people themselves. You can't reason with this type of person unless you want to become a substitute for their usual target and take all sorts of arrogant verbal abuse and/or passive aggression (such as "I don't want to hear it" - similar to when little kids put their hands over their ears).

Bottom line is I have discovered certain people cannot discuss ideas in a rational reasonable manner. You can try with them - try to reason with them but their personality and mental functioning is limited to ideas they have already developed. It just causes frustration and anger without any positive outcome.

You don't seriously mean to suggest that you are a particularly open-minded person, do you?

Not that anyone here has the identical personality of my relative (ha), but there are common elements.

Anyway, I don't think Magical is a bigot. But I would say that due to her negative experience, she is not impartial on the subject because her painful emotions and memories will always be there as a form of self-protective caution with regards to the Catholic church. But she has intelligence and can see that others do get something positive out of religion. And she is not lecturing others in an attempt to get them to quit the church or stop believing. So I would say that despite her terrible experience, and her firm opinions, she is very accepting of others as is evidenced by what she said to Catqueen, and by her demeanor overall.

So I can understand and sympathize with her point of view.

Donna13 wrote:

Not that anyone here has the identical personality of my relative (ha), but there are common elements.

Anyway, I don't think Magical is a bigot. But I would say that due to her negative experience, she is not impartial on the subject because her painful emotions and memories will always be there as a form of self-protective caution with regards to the Catholic church. But she has intelligence and can see that others do get something positive out of religion. And she is not lecturing others in an attempt to get them to quit the church or stop believing. So I would say that despite her terrible experience, and her firm opinions, she is very accepting of others as is evidenced by what she said to Catqueen, and by her demeanor overall.

So I can understand and sympathize with her point of view.

Thank you, Donna. I truly appreciate this. The whole of it.

GratefulFan wrote:

magicalfreddiemercury wrote:

It did make sense, catqueen. And I’m happy to know you found a happy welcoming church after leaving the strict harsh one to which you had once belonged. I think yours is a beautiful example of how someone’s faith can be so much a part of who they are yet not overshadow the fact that others will/can/do feel differently.

And just when I thought you'd run out of ways to make me ill on this topic. Why don't you take a moment to explain to catqueen how her faith is a crutch? And perhaps a moment to explain to me why Catholicism should be overshadowed by your unprincipled willingness to drag around unjust characterizations of a Pope's words on AIDS in Africa for example, or subjected to inane stabs at the dearth of 'higher intelligence' back though hundreds of years such leaders.

Nobody who has been remotely paying attention thinks you have a single ounce of respect or regard for anybody's religious practice. Please. This entire thread has been an exercise in watching the masks slowly slip off a couple of bigots. Nice try on the tolerant long suffering reasonableness, but but your hair is a mess, your shirt is on backwards and you've got lipstick smeared down to your chin. My last internal defense of you on this topic was that you at least had the courage of your distasteful convictions.

I'll light a candle.

But it's very possible to be very much against something but to recognise that not everyone feels the same way... i don't think Magical is being hypocritical in respecting someone else's view even though she doesn't agree with it. She's just being a decent person.

Oh my gosh. I have no idea what's going on in this thread. I'm so confused that i'm not even going to try to read it all.

catqueen wrote:

But it's very possible to be very much against something but to recognise that not everyone feels the same way... i don't think Magical is being hypocritical in respecting someone else's view even though she doesn't agree with it. She's just being a decent person.

Thank you for this, catqueen. Many of the comments in this thread, as well as the intent behind them, have been distorted and maligned. It's good to know that hasn't masked the true intent for everyone.

magicalfreddiemercury wrote:
Thank you for this, catqueen. Many of the comments in this thread, as well as the intent behind them, have been distorted and maligned. It's good to know that hasn't masked the true intent for everyone.

Yeah. Sure they have.

A negative experience with religion (or anything else) provides all the necessary authority in the world for describing the reality of one's own life and for statements and beliefs that describe what faith and religion can be. They provide nothing for what religion objectively is for a billion and more people. Based on your narrow individual experiences you've decided the whole world needs to get rid of religion. Let's take a moment and absorb that, and its truly breathtaking arrogance. I can only imagine the reaction here if I expressed such sweeping global designs and conclusions based on my own personal positive experiences.

Religion, you said, can't become irrelevant quickly enough, and all its 'good' is effectively an illusion or at least external and unrelated. The worst of organized religion and religion are one and the same. Indeed the guilt and harm it causes are both integral and intentional. It's a 'crutch'. Or at best a 'lifeline' for your implicitly fanatical parents and people like them. Either a crutch or a lifeline: both conjure weakness, brokenness and and helplessness, a need for some kind of external rescue. Indeed that has been your recurring theme: believers are weak and stupid and not making reasoned autonomous decisions, they're blindly listening to their leaders, or slaves to their conditioning. You've stood in explicit and implicit agreement with statements that sweepingly and utterly indiscriminately malign the intelligence, reason, strength and autonomy of people that embrace faith. You're on the record as firmly supporting Bob the bigot as 'tolerant'. When I've asked you to care about fairness and fact in the name of my experiences and the experiences of others you've been avoidant, dismissive and flippant. Again: your 'respect' for catqueen and her faith is an utter absurdity for anybody paying attention. A couple of you latched on to her incomplete and frankly naive reading of this thread like parasites, drawing off her discernment between self generating positive and negative forces in religion like it was your own, when in reality you've done nothing but malign and dismiss every aspect of faith and every aspect of those who embrace it

If the thoroughness of your indiscriminate derision was applied to gender, race or sexual orientation you'd be a pariah. I'd invite anyone to try to fashion a statement about how some innate feature of homosexuality or femaleness or blackness makes you weak and insufficiently proactive in a terror attack. Really. Try it in your head. That still floors me days later. But religion is the subject so everywhere you go you'll find a trail of apologists and cheerleaders and bigots to prop up your opressed-turned-oppressor militance. They can worry about your demeanor. It's easy to be calm when you don't care about anybody but yourself. I'll worry about your poisonousness. As some point we choose what to do with our experiences and we are responsible for who we become. I'm addressing you, but like those who call out the homophobes and misogyists in other areas of Queenzone I'm really talking to the people of faith who may be reading this thread who simpy do not deserve your thoughtless, insensitve and thoroughly self-absorbed bigotry unilaterally defining their history and experience like you've got the slightest authority or wisdom to do so. Catqueen calls you a 'decent' person. I have no reason outside this topic to imagine that you're not. But I simply don't care. The world is full of great people, some of them on this very thread, and cutting you out of my online view like an ugly cancer gives a deserving nod to the many, many people who are irreligious or atheisist or who come through great trials without becoming wallowing bigots, here and everywhere. Power to them. Shame to you.

thomasquinn 32989 wrote:

You don't seriously mean to suggest that you are a particularly open-minded person, do you?

And lets take a moment to appreciate this. How far has 'normal' shifted when someone can imply Donna isn't fair and open minded. If one had to find a handful of words to distill her QZ essence you couldn't do much better than even, fair, open minded. I profoundly disagree with her in this instance, but that doesn't change who she fundamentally is. But when the topic is religion, anything less than savage isn't 'open minded'. Unbelievable.

All still irrelevant.

Prove god.

Still waiting.

Some militant atheists appear to think they're god. Does that help?

mooghead wrote:

All still irrelevant.

Prove god.

Still waiting.

There is nothing to prove - you either believe or don't believe. Personal experience will lead you somewhere.

I don't know whether this is relevant but I think you should read the rhyme of the ancient mariner by samuel taylor coleridge to get the idea.

You can find the poem here:

http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poem/173253

GratefulFan wrote:

magicalfreddiemercury wrote:
Thank you for this, catqueen. Many of the comments in this thread, as well as the intent behind them, have been distorted and maligned. It's good to know that hasn't masked the true intent for everyone.

Yeah. Sure they have.

A negative experience with religion (or anything else) provides all the necessary authority in the world for describing the reality of one's own life and for statements and beliefs that describe what faith and religion can be. They provide nothing for what religion objectively is for a billion and more people. Based on your narrow individual experiences you've decided the whole world needs to get rid of religion. Let's take a moment and absorb that, and its truly breathtaking arrogance. I can only imagine the reaction here if I expressed such sweeping global designs and conclusions based on my own personal positive experiences.

Religion, you said, can't become irrelevant quickly enough, and all its 'good' is effectively an illusion or at least external and unrelated. The worst of organized religion and religion are one and the same. Indeed the guilt and harm it causes are both integral and intentional. It's a 'crutch'. Or at best a 'lifeline' for your implicitly fanatical parents and people like them. Either a crutch or a lifeline: both conjure weakness, brokenness and and helplessness, a need for some kind of external rescue. Indeed that has been your recurring theme: believers are weak and stupid and not making reasoned autonomous decisions, they're blindly listening to their leaders, or slaves to their conditioning. You've stood in explicit and implicit agreement with statements that sweepingly and utterly indiscriminately malign the intelligence, reason, strength and autonomy of people that embrace faith. You're on the record as firmly supporting Bob the bigot as 'tolerant'. When I've asked you to care about fairness and fact in the name of my experiences and the experiences of others you've been avoidant, dismissive and flippant. Again: your 'respect' for catqueen and her faith is an utter absurdity for anybody paying attention. A couple of you latched on to her incomplete and frankly naive reading of this thread like parasites, drawing off her discernment between self generating positive and negative forces in religion like it was your own, when in reality you've done nothing but malign and dismiss every aspect of faith and every aspect of those who embrace it

If the thoroughness of your indiscriminate derision was applied to gender, race or sexual orientation you'd be a pariah. I'd invite anyone to try to fashion a statement about how some innate feature of homosexuality or femaleness or blackness makes you weak and insufficiently proactive in a terror attack. Really. Try it in your head. That still floors me days later. But religion is the subject so everywhere you go you'll find a trail of apologists and cheerleaders and bigots to prop up your opressed-turned-oppressor militance. They can worry about your demeanor. It's easy to be calm when you don't care about anybody but yourself. I'll worry about your poisonousness. As some point we choose what to do with our experiences and we are responsible for who we become. I'm addressing you, but like those who call out the homophobes and misogyists in other areas of Queenzone I'm really talking to the people of faith who may be reading this thread who simpy do not deserve your thoughtless, insensitve and thoroughly self-absorbed bigotry unilaterally defining their history and experience like you've got the slightest authority or wisdom to do so. Catqueen calls you a 'decent' person. I have no reason outside this topic to imagine that you're not. But I simply don't care. The world is full of great people, some of them on this very thread, and cutting you out of my online view like an ugly cancer gives a deserving nod to the many, many people who are irreligious or atheisist or who come through great trials without becoming wallowing bigots, here and everywhere. Power to them. Shame to you.

I don't remember who made different comments in this thread -- but i still think that it's possible to despise something on the whole and still respect individuals who support that ideology. I have american friends who i really strongly hate their political ideologies. Those ideologies affect a lot of their lives and how they live and perceive things. Yet, they are still my friends. I argue with them about it, but i still respect them as my friends. I have a friend who believes that men and women are not capable of the same thing. Obviously there are gender differences, but he feels that women are not physically capable of stuff that men are. I argue that women are socialised and raised differently, and that is where the difference lies. For example, he believes that a man will be a better soldier then a woman, and that he will be better at survival then a woman. Yet, he still respects women, even though his worldview contradicts that. But i know him, and he has a high respect for women and values what we contribute. It doesn't make sense, but even though his worldview doesn't appear to emphasise the strengths of women, he actually does value and highly respect the women that he knows as individuals. And even though i hate his views on this topic, and totally disagree with him, i still value and love him as a friend. I argue with him, but i still listen to him. I disregard his views, and disparage them to people, but i still value him and respect him as a person. So it is possible to strongly disagree and dislike someone's position but still be respectful and appreciate them as an individual.

catqueen wrote:

I don't remember who made different comments in this thread -- but i still think that it's possible to despise something on the whole and still respect individuals who support that ideology. I have american friends who i really strongly hate their political ideologies. Those ideologies affect a lot of their lives and how they live and perceive things. Yet, they are still my friends. I argue with them about it, but i still respect them as my friends. I have a friend who believes that men and women are not capable of the same thing. Obviously there are gender differences, but he feels that women are not physically capable of stuff that men are. I argue that women are socialised and raised differently, and that is where the difference lies. For example, he believes that a man will be a better soldier then a woman, and that he will be better at survival then a woman. Yet, he still respects women, even though his worldview contradicts that. But i know him, and he has a high respect for women and values what we contribute. It doesn't make sense, but even though his worldview doesn't appear to emphasise the strengths of women, he actually does value and highly respect the women that he knows as individuals. And even though i hate his views on this topic, and totally disagree with him, i still value and love him as a friend. I argue with him, but i still listen to him. I disregard his views, and disparage them to people, but i still value him and respect him as a person. So it is possible to strongly disagree and dislike someone's position but still be respectful and appreciate them as an individual.

"I think yours is a beautiful example of how someone’s faith can be so much a part of who they are yet not overshadow the fact that others will/can/do feel differently."

Let me ask you this catqueen: These ideologies and beliefs that you describe yourself as strongly hating, disagreeing with, arguing with, disregarding and disparaging - have you ever had occasion to address these friends with a sentence anything like that? "I think yours is a beautiful example of how someone's political beliefs can be.....anything?". It would at the very least suggest a regard and respect for not just the people but the beliefs that by your own evidence doesn't exist. Further, let's pretend your position extends to not only strong disparagement of the beliefs but you're also on the record as strongly advocating for the end of the entire belief/political system itself. It's evil, destructive, superfluous and full of stupid, weak people you think. So imagine you're at a party, and you spend a couple of hours disparaging the beliefs to some friends At what point do you climb up on a chair, clink your glass and call for a toast. "To Harry and Sally! I think yours is a beautiful example of how someone's political beliefs can be so much a part of who they are yet not overshadow the fact that others like me think you're weak and stupid, as I've just been explaining to Doug and Gloria here, and that the entire system in which they exist should be torn down to the ground because I think it's utterly evil and useless. To your political beliefs! To Harry and Sally!".

Please.

The respect for your beliefs doesn't exist. It was disrespectful to you to imply that it did. It was, as I have said, utterly insulting to the intelligence of anybody paying attention. She should be credited for nothing other than being self serving and disingenuous, deliberately or otherwise. Had she expressed her thoughts differently your comparisons might have been applicable, but unnecessary, as a simple expression of personal affection or respect for you in spite of your beliefs wouldn't have been an enormous steaming pile. This most certainly was. She got to present herself as 'moderate' and it was horse manure. Given the comments of some others however, it clearly worked.