In The Light Of This Desparation......
News1 min ago
Today, was Holy War declared on atheists?
72 Answers
We've all heard over the past couple of days that atheism is coming to the fore around these here parts. Now apparently atheism is being linked to Naziism. In fairness, it seems obvious that the more atheists there are, the less religious people there are, hence less money flowing into their(Vatican) coffers. These guys are just doing what any other gangster would do, protecting their own interests. The worrying thing is that their gang is bigger and, I would go out on a limb and say, more extreme than the atheist's gang. Should a fight break out, I wouldn't give atheists a hope in heck of winning what would most likely be a bloodbath(look at the history). Is this a declaration or war on atheists?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by flobadob. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
And yes, you are absolutely correct. An atheist is not a heretic, and Beso's caricature of religion brutally suppressing atheist thought and organisation through laws against heresy is technically misplaced. Heretics were usually, as I put it, coreligionists,,,in the wrong party. As they say in the playground, he started it 8-)
I sometimes think that religionists think that atheist are somehow all connected, maybe by some secret society or regular meetings to praise someone.
I really don't think that they can see that each atheist is totally (generally speaking) independent of one another.
We have no secret society, I'm not even aware of atheist clubs or meetings but I'm sure there are some somewhere.
There are a quite a few atheist websites which actually often based on humour as much as anything, well that cant be helped, if Christians don't want to be laughed at they shouldn't have such funny and weird beliefs.
I really don't think that they can see that each atheist is totally (generally speaking) independent of one another.
We have no secret society, I'm not even aware of atheist clubs or meetings but I'm sure there are some somewhere.
There are a quite a few atheist websites which actually often based on humour as much as anything, well that cant be helped, if Christians don't want to be laughed at they shouldn't have such funny and weird beliefs.
Ratter, what are you, as a lone atheist, going to do when, as we are constantly told by other, apparently disparate, nogodders, religion and Christianity in particular fade away and die under the unstoppable tide of secular thought? I mean, you'll celebrate I suppose - maybe loot some communion wine from your local disused cathedral. I sometimes think atheism and its fellow travellers are such a reactive "creed" that you'll be lost without Christianity to poke fun at.
Again let me point you in the direction of jomifl's challenge on "the Book of Ath". Come up with a positive contribution that doesn't just involve rubbishing another system. Go on, I dare you 8-)
Again let me point you in the direction of jomifl's challenge on "the Book of Ath". Come up with a positive contribution that doesn't just involve rubbishing another system. Go on, I dare you 8-)
AB Editor. In the interests of editorial impartiality, could you find and post a video on the threat of militant religion to secular society. It shouldn't be too difficult. Christians aren't alone in portraying the kind of paranoia shown in your clip. It would also be more in keeping with the theme of this thread. 8-)
Zabadak, if you weren't so busy rambling you might have time to try to comprehend the non-religious mind a little better than you do Whilst some will make a flippant observation in passing, no sincere atheist would seriously poke fun at Christianity - or at any other religion come to that. There's nothing funny about children being brainwashed from birth, or about babies being born with HIV/Aids, or about the subjugation of women, or about any human being voluntarily abandoning his intellect to the whims of other men.
Actually, Zabadak, I think you are winding us up. ;o)
Actually, Zabadak, I think you are winding us up. ;o)
Naomi, as always you are quite right, especially about the winding up. Not far above above this entry, though there's this comment: "There are a quite a few atheist websites which actually often based on humour as much as anything, well that cant be helped, if Christians don't want to be laughed at they shouldn't have such funny and weird beliefs." Is it OK for "atheists" to make the odd flippant comment, but no-one else?
I take the issues you quote very seriously, and most of my time, when I'm not rambling around here, is taken up trying to address some of them (and other unfunny things that we would both recognise) even if I can only make a small contribution.
I *still* think (back to this thread) that the concept of "atheists" having to gear up to resist the physical onslaught of a newly militant Church is an amusing one: I really can't take it seriously 8-)
I take the issues you quote very seriously, and most of my time, when I'm not rambling around here, is taken up trying to address some of them (and other unfunny things that we would both recognise) even if I can only make a small contribution.
I *still* think (back to this thread) that the concept of "atheists" having to gear up to resist the physical onslaught of a newly militant Church is an amusing one: I really can't take it seriously 8-)
Ankou, out of context, but good try. ;o)
Zabadak, I think you're being rather silly, not to say mischievous. Additionally, you're the only contributor here who has suggested that it's OK for "atheists" to make the odd flippant comment, but no-one else. In actual fact in saying that you're contradicting yourself because your posts are filled with flippant comments about atheists - or perhaps I'm misreading them and you actually intend your deliberations to be taken seriously?
If you feel that the pope's visit (or in the case of Cardinal Kasper, the boycott) didn't focus on the threat that atheism poses to the church then concede to your intuition, but don't mock others for taking the trouble to listen to and to comprehend what was said.
Zabadak, I think you're being rather silly, not to say mischievous. Additionally, you're the only contributor here who has suggested that it's OK for "atheists" to make the odd flippant comment, but no-one else. In actual fact in saying that you're contradicting yourself because your posts are filled with flippant comments about atheists - or perhaps I'm misreading them and you actually intend your deliberations to be taken seriously?
If you feel that the pope's visit (or in the case of Cardinal Kasper, the boycott) didn't focus on the threat that atheism poses to the church then concede to your intuition, but don't mock others for taking the trouble to listen to and to comprehend what was said.
No problem with mischievous on this thread, and I have said why. I don' t have a monopoly on flippant, example cited. I was asking a question, not making a statement: if "flippant" is ruled out for me, then it's ruled out for everyone.
What I am "mocking", attempting to draw attention to, is not whether or not the Pope encouraged his followers to take on secularism, of course he did, but whether he was encouraging his followers to do so with the physical violence apparently feared and expected by some on this thread. I think that expectation is nonsense. Perhaps if those apparently in fear for their lives are encouraged to take a good hard look at what was really said, they might be less fearful. Let me say it one more time: there is nothing in what the Pope said while in Britain that can be taken as a physical threat to secularist thinkers. Nothing. No bloodbath. No gangsters. No imprisonment or killing. Is that serious enough for you?
And while I'm at it: "no sincere atheist would seriously poke fun at Christianity - or at any other religion come to that." Ankou said it for me.
What I am "mocking", attempting to draw attention to, is not whether or not the Pope encouraged his followers to take on secularism, of course he did, but whether he was encouraging his followers to do so with the physical violence apparently feared and expected by some on this thread. I think that expectation is nonsense. Perhaps if those apparently in fear for their lives are encouraged to take a good hard look at what was really said, they might be less fearful. Let me say it one more time: there is nothing in what the Pope said while in Britain that can be taken as a physical threat to secularist thinkers. Nothing. No bloodbath. No gangsters. No imprisonment or killing. Is that serious enough for you?
And while I'm at it: "no sincere atheist would seriously poke fun at Christianity - or at any other religion come to that." Ankou said it for me.
Zabadak, I can see where the physical violence of history has been mentioned on this thread, but I can't see anything to indicate that it's expected in the future - and neither can I see where 'flippant' has been ruled out for you. I suspect that in a deliberate attempt to make mischief you invent it as you go along - and if Ankou said it all for you, that figures. You, like him, seem unable to comprehend that there really is nothing funny about religion.
On making fun of religion
"if Christians don't want to be laughed at they shouldn't have such funny and weird beliefs." (that's just on this thread)
On perceived future violence:
"Should a fight break out, I wouldn't give atheists a hope in heck of winning what would most likely be a bloodbath(look at the history)."
"The church does seem to be gunning for the atheists " (probably metaphorical, but a violent image nonetheless)
" It could come to a point were (sic) religious people are being given the okay to attack people who have no belief in a God. It's a sickening enough feeling to think I could be imprisoned or killed in the name of a mythical being."
"Batten down the hatches, it's going to get rough”
"the church would take out anyone and anything to survive."
"Truth is the light of the world." (I found that on another thread)
On these things, I did not speak false.
"
"if Christians don't want to be laughed at they shouldn't have such funny and weird beliefs." (that's just on this thread)
On perceived future violence:
"Should a fight break out, I wouldn't give atheists a hope in heck of winning what would most likely be a bloodbath(look at the history)."
"The church does seem to be gunning for the atheists " (probably metaphorical, but a violent image nonetheless)
" It could come to a point were (sic) religious people are being given the okay to attack people who have no belief in a God. It's a sickening enough feeling to think I could be imprisoned or killed in the name of a mythical being."
"Batten down the hatches, it's going to get rough”
"the church would take out anyone and anything to survive."
"Truth is the light of the world." (I found that on another thread)
On these things, I did not speak false.
"
Zabadak
"Batten down the hatches, it's going to get rough”
That was my comment...
http://www.theanswerb...3.html#answer-5188977
Why have you included it in a list of comments that supposedly foretell, “... perceived future violence...”?
It was made in the context of the current (and possible future) ideological clashes between Secularism and Religion. I was referring to the way the Catholic Church is (understandably) coming out fighting (in a figurative way) over the spread of Secularism in the UK. In no way was I making reference to actual physical violence. The fact that you read that phrase and made that assumption says a great deal about the way you see this subject.
"Batten down the hatches, it's going to get rough”
That was my comment...
http://www.theanswerb...3.html#answer-5188977
Why have you included it in a list of comments that supposedly foretell, “... perceived future violence...”?
It was made in the context of the current (and possible future) ideological clashes between Secularism and Religion. I was referring to the way the Catholic Church is (understandably) coming out fighting (in a figurative way) over the spread of Secularism in the UK. In no way was I making reference to actual physical violence. The fact that you read that phrase and made that assumption says a great deal about the way you see this subject.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.