Do you realize how dumb that sounds, coming from someone who has spent hours blabbing on about how we shouldn't be outspoken?

I'm guessing, no, you don't realize how dumb it sounds.

But we can if we want, right?

So, exactly why are you coming on this board trying to educate us about who you are, when there's no way we would have known you unless you told us? I just don't understand why that's so important to you.

Man, you are thick.

I was the one who wrote that, and you completely missed what I wrote just one sentence after: "However, your position only makes sense if theists keep their theism to themselves."

The problem is that they don't. You seem to be incapable of seeing this.

1) Beliefs influence actions.

2) Theism influence theists' actions.

3) Some theist actions affect atheists negatively.

4) Some atheists don't like that.

5) Some of those atheists choose to speak out about it to try to change things.

6) Some atheists don't like other atheists speaking out.

7) Some dumbass atheists come on atheist boards to try to change other atheists saying, "You shouldn't speak out to try to change things!"

8 ) Some of the atheists on the atheist boards say, "Hey dumbass, you're a dumbass!"

What more is there to say? Either you don't understand steps 1-5, in which case you're a dumbass, or you're committing hypocrisy in step 7, in which case you're a dumbass.

And a troll.

Never mind, Bob. Concern troll is concerned. If he was intellectually honest he would have immediately seen that the correct analogy is with gays, not straights. Hey Niall, why don't you go shout down all the vocal gay activists? What's that? Because it would expose how utterly hypocritical, empty, and pointless your concern about vocal atheist activists is? That's what I thought.

Is really the question where did we come from. And it's a question worth pursuing relentlessly.

I think I agree with others who've said they continue to argue against god because the theist position is generally hostile to unbelievers.

Theists never concede an argument even when they're wrong. They'll seep around every barrier in their pursuit of what they see as solid ground.

It's not like the religions common to our part of the world are faintly tolerant. Given half a chance some of these nutbags would throw scientists in gaol for

heresy. They believe after all, that we are the pawns of satan and that every idea not in their book is immoral.

I don't think being being utterly certain there is no god would necessarily allow you to stop thinking and talking about the issues that surround religion.

That would be not caring about the issues one way or another - not a total absence of belief.

I'm personally glad people are thrashing this shit out on RRS. It helps me no end even if I often have no idea what some of you folks are talking about.

Nor is it just that atheism needs a voice. Kids out there who can't bend their minds into a theistic mold need to know that everything's ok.

i also would like to second this and add that i myself as an american am concerned because, on the whole, compared with other brands of christianity, american "low-church" evangelicalism is just a sick fucking religion.  i'll attempt to explain.

i now live in slovakia, a traditionally catholic country which, while not as volatile as ireland, still has its catholic nationalist (read: fascist) party in the governing coalition, has a lot of fucking neo-nazis, has the black mark of having been a nazi puppet state with a catholic bishop as president, and still has a lot of the catholic episcopate (including the archbishop of bratislava) singing the wartime nazi president's praises to this day.  but this is all to be expected (though not excused, of course) because, imho, the root of the problem is nationalism, and the church always latches onto nationalism in both catholic and orthodox countries.  if there were no church, the violent nationalism would still be there, as it always is in countries which have spent the majority of their histories under the heel of one conqueror or another.

however, american nationalism does not exist, since there is no american "nationality" (in a sense akin to, but not necessarily identical with, ethnicity), nor does the USA have a history of being under long periods of oppression (the idea of the british as having been oppressors in the colonies is laughable, at least as far as hm's subjects were concerned).  there is american xenophobia, but this is not the same as nationalism.  my point is, the fascists and nationalists embrace the church because it jives with their ideology, and the rest of catholic central europe is overwhelmingly culturally catholic.  american evangelicalism, however, is aggressive fundamentally for intrinsic ideological reasons.  they simply believe that society must conform to their metaphysical views, whereas european christianity is often incidental to outside ideologies (outside in the sense of beyond the pale of official doctrine). 

of course, one of the things that makes this possible is the lack of "official doctrine" in american evangelicalism.  there is no pope or patriarch or ecumenical council to draw things neatly together.  interdenominational fellowships can try their best but they end up being ideologically shallow, weak, and ineffective.  when the current of religious action stems ultimately from the prejudices of every individual believer, as opposed to the prejudices of one infallible man or institution, cacophany and schizophrenia ensue.  young children are taught that they're grubby little shits and that they're in danger of eternal, painful, graphically described torment.  that also happens in catholicism, fair enough, but, unlike catholic children, american churchgoing children are offered a million ways out of this punishment, often dependent not only on the whims of an individual denomination or congregation, but even on the whims of an individual pastor or sunday school teacher.  they're also cautioned that they goddamn well better find the right one, and of course the right one is the one they're currently being assaulted with.  many of them carry this with them their whole lives.

such confusion leads to a stronger and stronger desire for absolute certainty.  since evangelicalism allows for only one authority, the bible, one must try harder and harder to make sure one is interpreting the bible correctly.  this leads of course to biblical literalism and the idea of biblical inerrancy.  biblical inerrancy is the belief that the bible is the ultimate and final authority on every issue to which it speaks.  this is fucking bollocks, to borrow a phrase from my british brothers across the waters (sorry, my wife subjected me to a jamie oliver marathon today).  it means that one further and further must try to force the 21st century globalized world into the worldview of second millennium bce nomads, which ultimately means, of course, that the political system must be changed.  in many places in the usa, particularly the "bible belt," they are changing it, and it's my opinion that they will change it much more quickly and profoundly if we all sit on our fucking hands.

the world doesn't just drift listlessly.  people do shit.  some shit does not need to get done.  i want to help stop that shit from getting done.  fuck that shit.

the end.

Do you realize how dumb that sounds, coming from someone who has spent hours blabbing on about how we shouldn't be outspoken?

I'm guessing, no, you don't realize how dumb it sounds.

I of course was referring to, educating them about being an Atheist...  I am sure that you knew this but perhaps I should clarify everything that I say for fear of having the punctuation police after me.  And No I don't see how dumb it sounds, were Atheists remember???  On the Belief's front we are a non entity, I won't get offended at your lack of a God, if you don't get offended at my lack of sense, so please lets try to keep the name calling to a bit of a more respectful manner.

But we can if we want, right?

Sure, I can come onto a public message board and debate the need if I like.

So, exactly why are you coming on this board trying to educate us about who you are, when there's no way we would have known you unless you told us? I just don't understand why that's so important to you.

Because that's just the kind of Jerk I am!!!

Man, you are thick.  Think skinned I hope you meant?

I was the one who wrote that, and you completely missed what I wrote just one sentence after: "However, your position only makes sense if theists keep their theism to themselves."

Why would they they keep it to themselves?  I said this somewhere else, they have faith and a belief in something you don't, so promoting your faith and the word of God as you see it, is a calling to bring as many people into the light of Jesus to a theist there is no higher calling...  How does convincing people that there is no God, benefit you?  I don't believe for one second that campaign was ever about freedom from religious oppression but rather that it was about offending as many christian values as you can and thats not what I'm about.

 The problem is that they don't. You seem to be incapable of seeing this.

1) Beliefs influence actions.  Absolutely.

2) Theism influence theists' actions.   Sure, just like Money influence's capitalists actions.

3) Some theist actions affect atheists negatively.   Give me an everyday example, and please don't say the  pledge or the inauguration or hanging angels on christmas tree's this isn't oppression, its not even and inconvenience.

4) Some atheists don't like that.   Some Atheists are whiney lil bitches.

5) Some of those atheists choose to speak out about it to try to change things.  If they are things that affect you so badly then you have my compliments, if not then what was the point.

6) Some atheists don't like other atheists speaking out.  For fear of being tarred with the same brush.

7) Some dumbass atheists come on atheist boards to try to change other atheists saying, "You shouldn't speak out to try to change things!"    Some Atheists get all offended at this.

8 ) Some of the atheists on the atheist boards say, "Hey dumbass, you're a dumbass!"    Hhhhmmm I'm seeing a pattern here.

What more is there to say? Either you don't understand steps 1-5, in which case you're a dumbass, or you're committing hypocrisy in step 7, in which case you're a dumbass.

And a troll.   Does the relevance of whether I am a "troll" or not suggest that you are uncomfortable discussing your lack of beliefs with someone whom may or may not be an atheist?  I thought this was a search for truth, why does it matter where my allegiance lie?

What is so difficult to understand? We are being outspoken that it is OK not to believe in God, which is directly in opposition to what many people, especially in the US, believe.

Note, the message is NOT just about saying we don't believe, it is about getting across that that does not make us immoral, or worse.

Being outspoken about being 'straight', and that that was a legitimate life-style, would be justified if being 'straight' was generally considered sinful. That would be the analogy.

Sorry, I still think that being an Atheist is a non entity, I don't think that my lack of support of the Irish Soccer team (because we suck) makes me unpatriotic (although the whole France world cup thing still blows).

Never mind, Bob. Concern troll is concerned. If he was intellectually honest he would have immediately seen that the correct analogy is with gays, not straights. Hey Niall, why don't you go shout down all the vocal gay activists? What's that? Because it would expose how utterly hypocritical, empty, and pointless your concern about vocal atheist activists is? That's what I thought.

Gay's aren't the right analogy because they do have a legitimate reason to protest for their rights, straight people don't.  Christian's fighting for lost souls, this I get...  Muslims speaking out so that they are not misunderstood, this I get...  Any religion speaking out for itself, this I get...  Atheist speaking out for what exactly???  So that people don't misinterpret you as deviants, OK fair enough...  I still think that it doesn't really need to be said as its kind of common sense, but when I originally started this thread thats not what people were saying to me.

There is probably a lot of truth to it. There are a lot of differences. In many ways the situation in Ireland with religious politicking has been much worse and more oppressive than in the US, but for that reason, surely you can understand why an American atheist might want to avoid it happening to them too. It's called progressive thinking.

That is probably the main difference really, come to think of it. Growing up in Ireland you knew you were growing up in a country traditionally run and ruled by Catholicism whereas in America you're taught the rhetoric that you're growing up in the anti-Eire, the land of the 'free' or whatever, on the one hand the US is telling itself 'we're free from all religious oppression' while on the other it bows and buckles to ever increasingly backward evangelical populism.

In Ireland at least you can feel like your country is moving forward into enlightenment on this issue, right? Cause everywhere the new "Power for Jesus" or "Biblical morality" etc bullshit movements are digging their claws into, traditionally, secular politics it's become difficult to believe we can without a fight.

P.s. (re: whats a sulk) I wasn't presuming anything as to your state of mind , I was calling your post a whinge because it was just that. It was otherwise entirely without merit.

This is pretty much bang on the money as we say...  When I'm at a rally in Ireland and we are fighting for some serious breach of civil rights and then when I hear of people in the States fighting for the right to have IN GOD WE TRUST changed, it makes me think to myself, "Jesus lads atleast pick something worth fighting for."

iwbiek, sorry I don't have the time but I do actually for the most part agree.

Yes! Yes! Yes! And lots more.

Not me specifically, but in some parts of the world and in some communities, people will lose their respect for you if you are an atheist, because you are an atheist. You can lose the support of family members and friends. If you run a business, you can lose customers; ask Hamby. In recent polls, atheists are the least trusted group of minorities in America; people dislike us more than homosexuals, Mormons, Scientologists, etc. 

The world is full of idiots, but so what...  As you can probably tell from my post, being unpopular isn't a deciding factor for me and since coming onto this site I have been called an idiot, a dumbass, stupid and other things, so now that the shoe is on the other foot isn't it refreshing to know that Atheists don't react that differently when someone challenges their beliefs, or indeed lack of beliefs?

You keep saying that you grew up surrounded by religion. That may be true, but based what you've written in this thread, it's clear that you've never really had religion shoved in your face or been pressured to change your beliefs via ethos. You just don't get it.

I get it, and as Eloise pointed out perhaps my upbringing has given me a pretty blase outlook on problems in America, I think that when we get looked at as a bunch of crazies for wanting to change some things that aren't really that important, when something important does come up we'll be written off as the nutjobs that made a lot of noise about nothing all that time ago.

Your analogy doesn't make any sense to me. 

I was trying to say that studying the bible and reading up on religious doctrine is a complete waste of time if you are an atheist, if you believe then its not....  (The not so smart plumber made a good call in becoming a plumber where as the other guy for all his smarts made a dumbass choice.....  No????  Ahh no one gets me on this site)

Being an atheist just means that you don't believe in any Gods, so of course you don't "need" or "have to" educate anyone about anything as some sort of atheistic requirement. 

There are other good reasons for doing things. Duh!

I am sure that there are, convincing people that you are not a bad person just because you don't believe in God, yeah fine I'll give you that...  Go volunteer in your local homeless shelter or something, but spreading your lack of a message around Christmas is for lack of a better phrase, a no no...  people will think that your nuts and they'd be right.

Anyway, its been fun.  I got a plane to catch.

"I don't believe for one second that campaign was ever about freedom from ~ "

I don't much care what you believe. If the persecution I receive in Canada was all I had to go on, I'd probably not be here. Most people in Canada don't preach on street corners. But let me introduce you to a specific American who represents more christians there than you obviously have a clue about: Fred Phelps. Here's another, slightly less hateful, but just as dangerous (if not more so due to being a religious pundit on a programme that calls itself news) and full of shit: Bill O'Reilly. Men like these say atheists are evil. They say evolution is a lie. They would see everyone who isn't a christian removed.

That's just two of easily thousands of reasons to put up a defence of atheism.

Niall, I think it comes down to this:

Our issues seem trivial to you.  You seem to not care whether or not religion has a negative effect on society.

We think religion has a negative effect on society.  We see the problems, though trivial, as steps backward in social development, and have to decided to combat them. 

People here are frustrated that someone is questioning their motives when the person asking questions appears not to care about the motives in question, hence the claims of hypocrisy.  My question for you is, if you don't care about our atheist activism, why are you actively trying to tell us that this is the wrong thing to do?

I think this sums up our discussion, and I apologize if I got something wrong. 

That doesn't make sense.  Did you mean to replace 'think' with 'know,' or 'know' with 'no?'  It makes a worldview of a difference.

Yes, but most people are theists, and they hold a negative attitude towards atheism. That's exactly why it DOES it need to be said. 

You're really not intellectually honest with your analogies.

Brian and Kelly are debating about theism, but they are not theists. A much better analogy would be that the smarter guy is not a plumber, but the dumber guy is trying to convince him to be a plumber.

I have done community service during the Christmas season in the past. I have never used Christmas as a prop to promote atheism. 

Also, why do you keep trying to pedal this bullshit that we're just spreading "a lack of a message?" You can't even reflect on your thoughts enough to notice that you're just repeatedly throwing semantic fallacies around? Holy crap.

Because he's a hypocrite.

He cares about something that he doesn't agree with. That's why he's debating these issues with us. 

"Vastet, I wouldn't take the lady that screamed at you too seriously.  When I was 6 one of my teachers gave me grief for not wanting to take piano lessons, not only do I not have any aversion to piano's today, but I am actually quite fond of them"

So you think it's ok for teachers to yell at students for disagreeing on a personal choice or belief, or lack thereof?
I'll add that this is minor compared to what would've happened in, say, Texas or Kansas, where I'd have been then stigmtized by my classmates for not believing in their sky daddy for the rest of my time in that school.

"and not that I am any kind of fan of Bill O'Reilly, but he did have Richard Dawkins on his show and they did have quite a pleasant and friendly chat about atheism."

Sure, if you call Bill yelling "friendly".

You're just proving your ignorance of North America. When I go to Ireland and tell you how to run your government and justice system properly, you can come here and tell me how to fight a deadly plague.

One more reply then I'll go, I promise... 

Vastet, do I think its OK for teachers to go around yelling at kids?  Of course not, but I also don't think that your particular situation is any reflection on God, anymore than my situation was a reflection on piano's, it was a reflection on one persons ignorance.

As I already said, Bill O'Reilly is a total moron and you won't get me to say otherwise, but if you think that there was yelling involved in the interview in question, then it makes me think one of two things, A) you didn't see the particular interview in question and therefore can't comment, B) If you did see the interview and call that yelling then it makes me wonder about the above incident.

Regarding not having the right to discuss how North America is run???  Did I misunderstand?  Your not trying to claim that USA's foreign policy is anything to be proud of are you?  Your government wouldn't put an air base in Co Limerick for example and force a neutral country into what is now an illegal war, not to mention forcing us into abuses of civil rights by rendition protocols being transported via said air base in Co. Limerick.  Furthermore you can't cling onto freedom of speech when it suits you and then disband it when someone comes into your space and starts saying things that you disagree with.

AtheistExtremist cool name by the way, I am not refusing to listen and I just don't agree with what has been said, there is a difference.  Of course I cling to my own views, wouldn't you?  I wasn't playing the victim card, people said that I did not understand their point of view I talked about my background to correct them.  Too right we got our country back....  YOU'LL NEVER BEAT THE IRISH!!!  unless of course your France, and you cheat.  I didn't miss the atheist activist label, however in my experience activists regardless to their agenda love nothing more than a good aul heated natter, perhaps instead of scolding me you should be thanking me and saying, Cheers Niall I haven't had this much fun since I set the dog on them Mormons.

"Vastet, do I think its OK for teachers to go around yelling at kids?  Of course not, but I also don't think that your particular situation is any reflection on God, anymore than my situation was a reflection on piano's, it was a reflection on one persons ignorance."

You think wrong. I didn't say it was a direct reflection on an invisible friend, I said it was indicative of people who believe such things and their need to force their beliefs on others. I will fight them whether you whine about it or not. You are absolutely clueless about the war for reason going on here, and your opinions are irrelevant as a result.

"As I already said, Bill O'Reilly is a total moron and you won't get me to say otherwise, but if you think that there was yelling involved in the interview in question, then it makes me think one of two things, A) you didn't see the particular interview in question and therefore can't comment, B) If you did see the interview and call that yelling then it makes me wonder about the above incident"

"Furthermore you can't cling onto freedom of speech when it suits you and then disband it when someone comes into your space and starts saying things that you disagree with."

Last I checked I haven't demanded you get kicked off the site. Anything else you want to make up and whine about?

You don't have to say things like that to your parents, and I don't suggest it if you think they'll find it offensive.  But it's a good thing for humanity that people exist who would say it.  Without language like that, we might overcome religion a little faster.

Did you catch the part where he said in order to believe in god you only need to have a brain?  I found that more insulting than anything we said.