Why I Am Not An Atheist, by Bertrand Trout

[Nielsio]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I now allow for the existence of beings that we may call "gods," but I still see no reason to worship them.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an atheistic position.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it's an agnostic position.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agnostic is not a belief position.

[Justin A]

The amount of squabble over the last couple days in this forum over the definition of atheism/agnosticism is ridiculous.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
The amount of squabble over the last couple days in this forum over the definition of atheism/agnosticism is ridiculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mainly because its pretty important for the "enlightened, sophisticated" agnostics and moderate theists to be able to call atheists morons and fundamentalists and "just as bad as the theists" (which is my personal favorite insult). Some of us atheists don't like it when people a) tell us what we believe and refuse to listen when we tell them thats not it at all, and b) fail to make use of a dictionary.

I understand its a little ridiculous but so many discussions on this forum stall out over definitions, and there is a group of people who are INTENTIONALLY using non-standard definitions and then REFUSING to modify them when their error is pointed out to them. This is a pretty huge stumbling block to intelligent discourse.

[tpir]

[ QUOTE ]
...so many discussions on this forum stall out over definitions, and there is a group of people who are INTENTIONALLY using non-standard definitions and then REFUSING to modify them when their error is pointed out to them. This is a pretty huge stumbling block to intelligent discourse.

[/ QUOTE ]
QFT.

Just look at all the problems we have on this forum with *biological* evolution getting conflated into "evolution." A vauge spectre of an idea that is pointed to as atheist propaganda...even though the people pointing usually can't define exactly which evolution they are talking about or what an atheist is.

[tame_deuces]

Well, so far debating the existance of god seems to be a very uneventful and uninteresting question who sadly is only made interesting by the personalities who debate it.

It's kinda like a reality show, you know nothing is going to happen, but if the right persons are in it, it might still be entertaining for some.

[IronUnkind]

[ QUOTE ]
Mainly because its pretty important for the "enlightened, sophisticated" agnostics and moderate theists to be able to call atheists morons and fundamentalists and "just as bad as the theists" (which is my personal favorite insult). Some of us atheists don't like it when people a) tell us what we believe and refuse to listen when we tell them thats not it at all, and b) fail to make use of a dictionary.

[/ QUOTE ]

This explanation does not square with the facts of this thread, in which Kilgore stops self-identifying as an atheist, and the atheists come in to convince him that he still should.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Mainly because its pretty important for the "enlightened, sophisticated" agnostics and moderate theists to be able to call atheists morons and fundamentalists and "just as bad as the theists" (which is my personal favorite insult). Some of us atheists don't like it when people a) tell us what we believe and refuse to listen when we tell them thats not it at all, and b) fail to make use of a dictionary.

[/ QUOTE ]

This explanation does not square with the facts of this thread, in which Kilgore stops self-identifying as an atheist, and the atheists come in to convince him that he still should.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you missed the soko posts, hmm? Or when Kilgore agreed that he is still an atheist? Or the neighboring thread and the posts by RoundGuy and others?

[RoundGuy]

[ QUOTE ]
So you missed the soko posts, hmm? Or when Kilgore agreed that he is still an atheist? Or the neighboring thread and the posts by RoundGuy and others?

[/ QUOTE ]
Wow, vhawk, you just won't quit.

You know, a question I've been asking myself all afternoon is, why, of all the people that responded to my posts last night, were you the only one I called a dumb-ass -- twice. You were the only one. Why do you suppose that is?

I think I have the answer. You are, indeed, a dumb-ass.

Your responses to other's posts are not condusive to intelligent, civil discussion. You come off as an extremely arrogant individual.

I am one of the few people here who is firmly in the middle of the atheist/theist spectrum. I'd like to bounce my views off you and others. I enjoy that. But I will not do so when I am constantly bullied by the likes of you everytime I post.

Please keep that in mind.

[Sephus]

[ QUOTE ]
You know, a question I've been asking myself all afternoon is, why, of all the people that responded to my posts last night, were you the only one I called a dumb-ass -- twice. You were the only one. Why do you suppose that is?

I think I have the answer. You are, indeed, a dumb-ass.

[/ QUOTE ]

you've really been pondering that all afternoon?

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So you missed the soko posts, hmm? Or when Kilgore agreed that he is still an atheist? Or the neighboring thread and the posts by RoundGuy and others?

[/ QUOTE ]
Wow, vhawk, you just won't quit.

You know, a question I've been asking myself all afternoon is, why, of all the people that responded to my posts last night, were you the only one I called a dumb-ass -- twice. You were the only one. Why do you suppose that is?

I think I have the answer. You are, indeed, a dumb-ass.

Your responses to other's posts are not condusive to intelligent, civil discussion. You come off as an extremely arrogant individual.

I am one of the few people here who is firmly in the middle of the atheist/theist spectrum. I'd like to bounce my views off you and others. I enjoy that. But I will not do so when I am constantly bullied by the likes of you everytime I post.

Please keep that in mind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Honestly, anyone who would be scared away by the posts I've made in response to you isn't really someone I'd miss. I'm sorry if I come off caustic towards you, but if you will take a look at that thread, you will find that I didn't get sarcastic or harsh until you started with the insults. Its possible you are reading things into my responses that just aren't there.

For example, this post you just quoted of mine. There is absolutely nothing in there that is insulting to you in the least. I simply used your posts as an example of what I was talking about earlier. It was a value-less statement. And you, for some reason, decided to get insulted and, ONCE AGAIN, stoop to insults and personal attacks. I asked you once in the other thread if you actually READ the posts or if you just skim them looking to be insulted. I didn't ask this because you don't respond to all the points, I asked because you seem to completely misinterpret what is actually being said and instead get hostile and defensive for no good reason. This post right here is a perfect example.

But this is the third time you've threatened to leave now. Twice in the other thread and now this one. Its a laughable threat the first time. Three times strains the bounds of credulity.