Go back
Fundamentalist overload

Fundamentalist overload

Spirituality

BigDogg
Secret RHP coder

on the payroll

Joined
26 Nov 04
Moves
155080
Clock
28 May 15

Anyone get the feeling lately that the fundamentalist voices (on both sides of the 'theism' debate) have drowned out any other kind of discourse in this forum?

It sometimes feels like a time warp. I could go back 3-5 years and it'd be the same posters making the same arguments.

twhitehead

Cape Town

Joined
14 Apr 05
Moves
52945
Clock
28 May 15
1 edit

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Anyone get the feeling lately that the fundamentalist voices (on both sides of the 'theism' debate) have drowned out any other kind of discourse in this forum?

It sometimes feels like a time warp. I could go back 3-5 years and it'd be the same posters making the same arguments.
Any particular topics that you would like discussed in a less fundamentalist manner?
I had wanted to discuss the historicity of Jesus, but nobody wanted to take it on.

I do think that we should all stop responding to RJ. (edit: and whodey)

divegeester
watching in dismay

STARMERGEDDON

Joined
16 Feb 08
Moves
120597
Clock
28 May 15
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Anyone get the feeling lately that the fundamentalist voices (on both sides of the 'theism' debate) have drowned out any other kind of discourse in this forum?

It sometimes feels like a time warp. I could go back 3-5 years and it'd be the same posters making the same arguments.
I'm aware that I end up arguing over repeated issues, but this is because they are of interest and importance to me. I don't my posting reflects a fundamentalist attitude, however I'm open to honest feedback.

lemon lime
itiswhatitis

oLd ScHoOl

Joined
31 May 13
Moves
5577
Clock
28 May 15
1 edit

lemon lime
itiswhatitis

oLd ScHoOl

Joined
31 May 13
Moves
5577
Clock
28 May 15

definition of terms:

omg = overtly menstruating gringos
gar = get a room
gabr = get a bigger room
bach = book a convention hall
ew = ew!

Suzianne
Misfit Queen

Isle of Misfit Toys

Joined
08 Aug 03
Moves
37388
Clock
28 May 15
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Anyone get the feeling lately that the fundamentalist voices (on both sides of the 'theism' debate) have drowned out any other kind of discourse in this forum?

It sometimes feels like a time warp. I could go back 3-5 years and it'd be the same posters making the same arguments.
Are there "fundamentalist" atheists?

If not, what do you mean by "both sides of the 'theism' debate"?

josephw
A fun title

Scoffer Mocker

Joined
27 Sep 06
Moves
9958
Clock
29 May 15
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Anyone get the feeling lately that the fundamentalist voices (on both sides of the 'theism' debate) have drowned out any other kind of discourse in this forum?
No.

It's not really that complicated.

BigDogg
Secret RHP coder

on the payroll

Joined
26 Nov 04
Moves
155080
Clock
29 May 15

Originally posted by Suzianne
Are there "fundamentalist" atheists?
Absolutely. They seem to want to make atheism into a sort of Bizarro-religion; a dark parody of what they despise. They are the ones who actually debate questions like, "are babies atheists?" They pay their tithe to the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science and recite the Scientific Method 3 times a day while facing Christopher Hitchens' grave.

BigDogg
Secret RHP coder

on the payroll

Joined
26 Nov 04
Moves
155080
Clock
29 May 15
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by josephw
No.

I'm not really that complicated.
FIX'D

BigDogg
Secret RHP coder

on the payroll

Joined
26 Nov 04
Moves
155080
Clock
29 May 15
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by divegeester
I'm aware that I end up arguing over repeated issues, but this is because they are of interest and importance to me. I don't my posting reflects a fundamentalist attitude, however I'm open to honest feedback.
You yourself aren't fundamentalist, but you do seem to like to argue with certain notorious ones here.

Look, I'm not trying to judge overly, because I have done my fair share of the same in the past. It was good fun for awhile. But at times I step back from this and wonder what might be possible if the temptation to re-launch a more stereotypical line of debate was resisted.

RJHinds
The Near Genius

Fort Gordon

Joined
24 Jan 11
Moves
13644
Clock
29 May 15
2 edits

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Absolutely. They seem to want to make atheism into a sort of Bizarro-religion; a dark parody of what they despise. They are the ones who actually debate questions like, "are babies atheists?" They pay their tithe to the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science and recite the Scientific Method 3 times a day while facing Christopher Hitchens' grave.
Sometimes they are called Humanists.

lemon lime
itiswhatitis

oLd ScHoOl

Joined
31 May 13
Moves
5577
Clock
29 May 15

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Absolutely. They seem to want to make atheism into a sort of Bizarro-religion; a dark parody of what they despise. They are the ones who actually debate questions like, "are babies atheists?" They pay their tithe to the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science and recite the Scientific Method 3 times a day while facing Christopher Hitchens' grave.
If understand you correctly, you're bothered by atheists who make a mockery of atheism by how they go about conducting themselves as atheists? That sounds strangely familiar...

If you're bothered by how the same arguments and questions (and accusations) are regurgitated after those same arguments and questions (and accusations) have been dealt with, then all I can say is welcome to my world... you are not alone.

BigDogg
Secret RHP coder

on the payroll

Joined
26 Nov 04
Moves
155080
Clock
29 May 15
1 edit

Originally posted by lemon lime
If understand you correctly, you're bothered by atheists who make a mockery of atheism by how they go about conducting themselves as atheists? That sounds strangely familiar...

If you're bothered by how the same arguments and questions (and accusations) are regurgitated after those same arguments and questions (and accusations) have been dealt with, then all I can say is welcome to my world... you are not alone.
Atheism to me is simply the state of not believing in gods. It should not be a 'movement' with an 'image' any more that people who share a lack of belief in Sasquatches should be. Perhaps the best response to people who identify foremost as atheists is, "Great, but what do you believe?"

lemon lime
itiswhatitis

oLd ScHoOl

Joined
31 May 13
Moves
5577
Clock
29 May 15

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Atheism to me is simply the state of not believing in gods. It should not be a 'movement' with an 'image' any more that people who share a lack of belief in Sasquatches should be. Perhaps the best response to people who identify foremost as atheists is, "Great, but what do you believe?"
Mere Atheism

I couldn't resist


'Atheist' is simply a word people use to identify what they and others like themselves believe is not true. It's a 'belief' that necessarily relies on (not believing) something other people believe. If religion in any form did not exist then neither would atheism, because atheism is not a belief... it's a disbelief.

Oddly enough though, many atheists (even those who know better) will discuss their disbelief as though it were a belief.

BigDogg
Secret RHP coder

on the payroll

Joined
26 Nov 04
Moves
155080
Clock
29 May 15
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by lemon lime
[b]Mere Atheism

I couldn't resist


'Atheist' is simply a word people use to identify what they and others like themselves believe is not true. It's a 'belief' that necessarily relies on (not believing) something other people believe. If religion in any form did not exist then neither would atheism, because atheism is not a belief. ...[text shortened]... y atheists (even those who know better) will discuss their disbelief as though it were a belief.[/b]
I think for some people it IS a belief. They are convinced there are no gods. Others take a more cautious stance of 'there isn't any evidence" or even "there isn't enough compelling evidence."

To me, it makes no difference whether you call it 'disbelief' or 'belief in not-G'. In both cases, G has been negated in the person's worldview.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.