Comments on: Fundamentalists vs. Moderates

By: Kaimakides

Kaimakides — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 02:19:27 +0000

If those people honestly believe that homosexuality is a sick wicked soul inside a person's body then they are blinded by the bible. If they believe that they can remove the homosexual soul by beating and choking a man into a seizure then they are stupid.

By: RtPt

RtPt — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 17:47:35 +0000

A weak or moderate argument against anyone just makes it easier for them to argue with their weak or moderate points which makes their conviction even stronger. The best way to argue is strongly and give no chance for any worthwhile rebuttal. There is no reason to be apologetic or nice to some group that is totally fucking loco. The problem is that atheists are not fighting back more vigorously with the strongest arguments possible.

By: bornslacker

bornslacker — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 19:17:17 +0000

Ahh,

If you think Dawkins is bad, you should see Hitchens. Hitchens can get pretty smug sometimes. But one thing I have noticed is that the other side is smug in their own way.

I remember watching a debate at one point and Hitchens said something to the effect of, "I don't want to go to any heaven, in fact, I want nothing after I die"

to which his opponent responded,

"God gives you what you want."

Hitchens could have responded back with something like, "Then I'll have a big titty blonde please! hello? hello? aw well, guess you're wrong" but he didn't.

By: Samuel

Samuel — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 18:15:52 +0000

I am not debating the topic, only that your Dawkins tone does not win you any converts.
More explicitly, that Dawkins is a big A atheist who insults and belittles to get his point across.
He is just as emphatic and passionate as the big G deists who take any questioning of their faith as a personal attack.

By: bornslacker

bornslacker — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 16:48:12 +0000

people who see pink unicorns and harm people
people who see pink unicorns and do not harm people

Is not the same as

people who do not believe in God and harm people
people who do not believe in God and do not harm people.

2 groups are violent and 1 groups is seeing things that is not there.

On the sanity scale, I would say, these 4 things are not equal as you suggest.

Now, are atheists just as capable as theists to cause harm. Sure. I'm not debating that point. I'm just saying, that for a system that claims one of it's biggest perks is a good sense of morality it sure is easily subverted to cause harm.

I think it's that way due to the lack of people suggesting you shouldn't believe things and act on them without evidence.

By: Samuel

Samuel — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:56:28 +0000

Only that:

Big fundamentalist atheists make the moderates look bad as does fundamentalist religious zealots make moderates look bad.

There are big A atheists and big G deists.

By: bornslacker

bornslacker — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 14:24:08 +0000

Not trying to win anyone over, just stating my opinion. If your position is defensible, defend it

By: Samuel

Samuel — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 13:53:58 +0000

Using the Dawkins approach does not win you anybody who is undecided:

"This is like calling some people who see pink unicorns who want to kill people crazy, but others who see pink unicorns and don’t want to kill people, perfectly normal."