Legion World Forums LEGION OUTPOST Mission Monitor Board Coming Out

Agreed; me too. Although I disagree that Dawkins et al gave atheists a bad name. The vocal atheists of late seem to me to be a defensive reaction after 30 years of being slandered and demonized.

Yeah, Kent. I have heard some pretty obnoxious followers of Dawkins and the rest. (About the only Atheist blog I like to read is Skepchick, because too many of the rest are crawling with so many woman-hating fartknockers that they make the sexists on <strike>certain</strike> most comics boards look like Alan Alda in comparison.)

But if we're not supposed to blame Jesus for some of his worst followers, maybe we should extend the same courtesy to Dawkins, too.

It was intersting.

I think she is wrong about the whole society creates individuals not the otherway around. I think there is play between both society and the individual with each having an influence on the other. I mean if individuals don't create societies, then the US would still be a slave-owning Protestant society.

I also think that no matter how polite and deferential an atheist is, she/he is going to be called arrogant and elitist by the extremely religious, particularly the fundamentalists who still believe in a literal interpertation of the Bible. I haven't seen all of Dawkins' interviews and talk (and have only read Harris' first book), but I did see the exchange between Dawkins and creationist Wendy Williams. There I thought Dawkins was extremely polite and patient and not the least bit arrogant.

I just read an interesting article about The Clergy Project

Basically, it is about clergy who become atheists.

Interesting article. I'm glad some of the former pastors continue to focus on "poverty, education, and a host of other ills" as Lawrence Hunter does. Helping others is what I think belief in God is ultimately about.

OK, so I am on a temp work assignment at Boston University helping with enrollment of the incoming class. They told us that there would be dead times and that it would be OK to bring a book to read (but no magazines or newspapers). I'm reading Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon by Daniel Dennett. One of my co-temps asked me what I was reading and I showed him, saying that it was about whether religion arose naturally and as part of evolution. He responded by saying how he has been born again since 1993 and asked if I accepted Jesus as my personal lord and savior. :rolleyes: I responded with "Well I was raised Catholic" to which he said "well you can still come to know Jesus personally." At that point some students came up and we had to wait on them.

Later he asked me what I believed seeing as I had said I was raised Catholic. I said that I am 99% atheist. Oh Dear! So he starts going on about having a personal relationship with Jesus. He asks me why I don't believe. To which I said that I don't see any evidence of God. He responded with "There is plenty of evidence if you just look for it." I mention that the Bible has many errors and contradictions. He asked for an example. I mentioned how in Matthew it is written that Judas hung himself, but that in the Acts of the Apostles, he fell down in a field and his gut busted open. Mark (the co-worker) says how the Bible is inerrant because the Holy Spirit inspired the writers. I gave him a few more examples, but he stuck to his belief about the inerrancy of the Bible. I did say that I felt that the underlying messages of Do unto others, turn the other cheek, love your neighbor are all good messages, but you don't need the Bible to have those messages. He also talked about how objective morality comes from God. I talked about how there were things people once thought were right, but we now think are wrong (i.e. slavery) He insisted that they really knew it was wrong because of how they got angry at people questioning them about it.

One of my other co-temps over heard him talking to me and later said that she was sorry that I was subjected to that.

Anyway, needless to say he did not convince me of anything.

*Sigh*

People like that give believers a bad name.

And of course he didn't draw any parallel to his reaction to your unbelief in his religion.

But then if he'd been a critical thinker it would have been a very different conversation.

You could've brought something like God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything

ooo oooo next time! next time! bring it to read! just to have another story to tell us!

PB,

I'm not one to provoke. After all, I am an atheist and as such above all that.

The RH bill debate in the Philippines is embroiled in religion. The bill's main thrust is to promote family planning, responsible parenthood, the prevention of AIDS infections, population control and reproductive health via sex education, the provision of contraceptives, and so on.

One key argument of the opposition is that contraceptives are immoral, and that they promote premarital sex.

Needless to say, there is also a lot of discussion on conception and when life begins, and whether contraceptives count as abortion.

Quis, when someone tells you he has a personal relationship with Jesus, and you say you're an atheist, it is (for some believers) a personal blow to him as if you're saying you don't believe his mother exists. It's not just a philosophical point of disagreement. And compounding that "blow" for him is the hidden-away knowledge that, in spite of all the arguments he presents to you, he still can't prove that God exists.

For some believers faith in God comes easily, and they honestly can't understand how someone else can not believe.

I suspect that's true of folks in all paths of God-thought. For some their views come rather easily and obviously (and sometimes with little critical thought), while for others it is a struggle to come to a place to stand.

I'm not sure I agree with this. It sounds like some basic religious tit-for-tat type discussion, unless he was being belligerent or mean towards Quis, which Quis does not indicate.

Quis does indicate (to my comprehension anyway) that the conversation went on way past comfort levels. It's always a good idea to know when to ease off, and this person should learn when to do that. I don't think it necessarily gives anyone else a bad name though.

Your comprehension skills are intact my friend.

I didn't mind him saying he had a personal relationship with Jesus. I didn't mind him asking me what I believed, although I was a little apprehensive telling him I was an atheist because it might result in the whole "you need to believe" sppech. I didn't mind him asking me why I don't believe.

It did get annoying and frustrating when he got to the point of basically saying that everything I believe is wrong, is wrong and everybody else believes it too whether they admit it or not.

He got into another religious debate/talk with another co-workers yesterday. I didn't hear most of it, but I did hear the other co-worker saying that she believed what she believed period. And she sounded a little annoyed when she said it.

One thing that did annoy me was when he asked if I had a personal relationship with Jesus and I responded that I had been raised Catholic, he said "well you can still have a personal relationsip with Jesus.". Like Catholics don't believe in Jesus.

LT,

I can understand the whole "by saying you are an atheist, you are saying I am wrong" thing, but that really isn't a good excuse. I mean isn't it the same thing if you tell a Muslim that you are a Christian? And there are atheists who get defensive if you tell them that you are religious. I also get the whole "this is such a good thing in my life and for me, you should do it too" feeling and the "bad things will happen to you if you don't believe like I do" idea.

Plus it really wasn't an appropriate time or place to have such a conversation.

Believe it or not, there are a lot of Evangelical/Fundamentalist types who do not believe Catholics are Christians. I remember, years ago, a man told me how glad he was that I had become a "Presbyterian" because "Roman Catholics worship idols." Never mind that I'm actually Episcopalian and Catholics don't worship idols.

I mostly avoid such conversations with people I don't know well now.

Quis, I hope you could read my intent between the lines. I wasn't trying to defend the guy, and I wasn't trying to school you. I was just typing out loud my thoughts about why some Christians tend to act that way.

I think the U.S. political climate is getting to me, and I'm trying to make sense of why so many folks (like your co-temp) are so dagnabbit unable to listen to their fellow humans these days.

LT,

I didn't think you were trying to defend the guy or school me. I was just responding to what you said and added in my own 2 cents.

So we are cool, Reverend.

Cool, Esq.

I think the last several posts have shown how touchy the subject of faith and religion is to many. Comments meant one way are taken another.

I'm sure your coworker had the best of intentions at heart, Quis. Unfortunately, intentions are not always enough. Many who hold to a singular belief in God have trouble respecting others who believe differently. That's what I was picking up on from your initial post, and that's why I said he was giving believers a bad name. It sounds like he's using the workplace to proselytize, and that should not be allowed.

I'm currently having an FB exchange with a friend who supports Bill Nye's assertion that parents should not raise their children to be creationists. To me, this is as bad as saying one should not raise their children to be gay or Chinese. It also obfuscates the valid point Nye is trying to make, that teaching evolution and science in general is not only good but necessary for children today. I fully agree with this point, but it's not helpful to divide people into camps of those who believe in creation and those who believe in science and claim one is better than the other. Most of us want the same thing: to understand the world and make it a better place.

In any given case, no, not necessarily. Such as, I suppose, if he had this conversation with you.

But I would think that most of the time, this sort of thing doesn't help the reputation of believers.

And to me, what Quis posted looked belligerent and condescending. The man may had sounded otherwise but just looking at the words as relayed here, I wouldn't care to meet him.

I have always been of the thought that if you want to share your faith or beliefs with someone, you had better be damned well ready to listen to theirs. If not...keep a lid on it.

[snip]



Being gay or being Chinese isn't part of a belief system. I don't understand your comparison here.