why is atheism a hate group?
what if I said this?
Originally Posted by Diet Coke
yet what did this same guy say about my statement atheism is evil? To say Christianity is evil is not hate speech it's just wrong. But what about saying "atheism is evil?"
It would be wrong, I'm not sure on hate that would probably depend on the context in which your statement is made.
Something along the lines of "...will make you want to kill christians, so we should kill all atheist first" would make it a statement of hate.
"Christianity is Evil" should have said "Christianity can lead people to commit evil acts, they may be flawed in thinking Christianity supports what they do. This doesn't change the fact that they were inspired by christianity."
I would contend there is nothing about atheism that should lead people to hate non atheists, however, people being people tend to persecute those who are not a member of their group, this happens in almost all groups to a greater or lesser extent. Atheism doesn't stop you being human.
Also no doubt there are certain atheist philosophies which have persecuted other people, however people who don't subscribe to that philosophy can say "Sorry, not a communist. Doesn't apply to me." just as you could say "Sorry, not a satanist. Doesn't apply to me."
Somewhat reasonable. But he doesn't see the hate content in saying Christians are evil. That's obvious but he does try to be consistent. I have to give him that. No other atheist on the board was able to anywhere that consistent.
Not a single atheist said that saying Christianity is evil is hateful.
the first atheist answer on the htread "what If I said atheism is eivl." is this:
No, I'd ask why you thought there was some sort of unifying belief shared among people who don't believe in gods.
refuses to even answer the question. btw what makes them unified is they say the same things all the time.
If? You've already started threads that say more or less the same thing, with even flimsier logic behind them.
so they are not even going to try.
So, you think that the best way to get certain atheists to make sweeping, defamatory statements about Christians is to make sweeping, defamatory statements against atheists? Do you think it's working?that's in response to "why don't you denounce hate speech?" When I say atheist are making hate speech and it's odd that not one of them can denounce it they say this stuffs bout "defamatory statements" and even though they started it with the "Christianity is evil" thread, they blame me as though I started by saying my attempts at getting them to denounce hate speech are really attempts to make them utter more of it!
I'm sorry, but I don't buy that whenever you make your spite-filled posts attacking atheists, you're doing it as some part of a larger object lesson to show that it sucks when people do that. You do it far too often for me to think that you don't mean it. And if you actually don't mean it, and if you really are trying to make a point and care that we get it, I'm going to recommend that you reconsider your strategy because right now it just makes you look like a hypocrite.
Does anyone understand these idiots? why would my attempt to get them to denounce hate speech be an attempt to make them utter more?
then ther's this both by Valhekai
How can it not reflect on me if I call myself an atheist? I define "atheism" as "not having a belief in gods." Most definitions I hear are on par that (except for those who insist that it means "someone who believes that gods don't exist"). If you're going to cast atheism as an ideology, you're adding to the generally accepted definition, and when you do that, you're just begging for communication difficulties.
So, tell me, what are the tenants of this atheist ideology? If I disagree with them, I must not be an atheist in your eyes, so what would that make me?
Yea that's really important there. should have thought of that before you starting calling Christians evil.
Sot the totally reaosnable position of "we should denounce hate speech" enrages them agaisnt me. They equate my saying they have an ideology with hate speech but saying that Christianity is evil is not hate speech-- hu?
What's going on there is obvious. All the atheists on that board, even the reasonable ones. hate Christianity and want to destroy it and can't bring themselves to disassociate with the idea that Christianity is evil; even when they know its wrong. they are outraged by pointing out that they have an ideology becasue part of their ideology is that they don't have one, and they feel they are betraying the brain washing if they admit they do. They turn the attention to personal against any critic because they have no honor and that's the way they think. Anyone who is not in the ideology if the evil outsider. Any religious person is par to of the great evil they see themselves valiantly standing up to.
Their struggle is so valiant it justifies bulling, slander, lies, person insults, mocking, ridicule, hate speech ect ect.
look at what this guy says. this guy being "secularone"
According to your logic, I guess we wrongfully accussed Nazism of being evil. After all we shouldn't condemn Nazism just because a few Nazis murdered millions of people. That would be guilt by association. And as you seem to think, guilt by association isn't being fair.
I would be honored if you do not reply to any of my posts in the future as I find nothing in your intellect or character to admire. In fact, I observe that the only reason you post in atheist threads is to belittle and abuse as much as possible.
So He 's saying I'm on a par with Hitler because I said he should denounce hate speech and he thinks saying atheist use guilt by association is like denying the Holocaust. The worst thing I did was to say that atheism is an ideology and they are brain washed, they put that on a par with Hitler.
Most organisations have a serial bully. It never ceases to amaze me how one person's divisive, disordered, dysfunctional behaviour can permeate the entire organisation like a cancer."
"The truth is incontrovertible; malice may attack it, ignorance my deride it, but in the end, there it is."
"Lack of knowledge of, or unwillingness to recognise, or outright denial of the existence of the serial bully is the most common reason for an unsatisfactory outcome of a bullying case for both the employee and employer"
Here's one that describes message board atheits pretty well.
# displays a compulsive need to criticise whilst simultaneously refusing to value, praise and acknowledge others, their achievements, or their existence
# shows a lack of joined-up thinking with conversation that doesn't flow and arguments that don't hold water
# flits from topic to topic so that you come away feeling you've never had a proper conversation
# refuses to be specific and never gives a straight answer
# is evasive and has a Houdini-like ability to escape accountability
# undermines and destroys anyone who the bully perceives to be an adversary, a potential threat, or who can see through the bully's mask
# is adept at creating conflict between those who would otherwise collate incriminating information about them
# is quick to discredit and neutralise anyone who can talk knowledgeably about antisocial or sociopathic behaviors (Ibid.)