Is Neo-Atheism The Way to Go? [Poll]

[kurto]

[ QUOTE ]
So find the right tool for the job, silly beliefs need to be addressed by ridicule. The more fervent the lunatics the more we should take the piss and laugh at them. Don't under-estimate just how much the nutty wing of the church hated Monty Pythons life of Brian, Bill Hicks etc. Not only do they hate being laughed at, it undermines their authority and authority is all they have.


[/ QUOTE ]

Chez's comments struck me as true. There is no doubt that the religous are NOT interested in reasonable debate. They consider it hubris and sinful to even question God. To apply man's logic to him is just silly to them. They consider it a virtue that they have Faith DESPITE the lack of evidence or reason to believe.

I think the hope is for future generations. And humor is one of the best ways to expose the weakness of a position.

[bocablkr]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm a little confused about the term neo-atheist. Since 'neo' implies new... what is new? Is the only new part that they're outspoken? Or is there supposed to be some other differences?

I've considered myself an atheist for about 14 years or so... just not sure if I'm a neo-atheist or just a regular atheist.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have been an Atheist for 50 years - am I a paleo-atheist?

[Kaj]

"We must respect the other fellow's religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart."
H. L. Mencken

[Bill Haywood]

[ QUOTE ]
It's non-negotiable if you're religious. To a Christian/Muslim/Hindu/etc., there's nothing to talk about. It's either their way, or the highway.

[/ QUOTE ]

That just isn't true. Many, many believers are very ecumenical. They believe in a divinity that is legitimately accessed through all sorts of religions. (Why do you think that word "ecumenical" exists?) Plenty more believers are theists, they believe in a divine creator, but that does not interact with its creation. So a theist doesn't give a phuc how anyone worships, because the creator isn't listening anyway.

To me, a point of atheism is to avoid dogmatism, not create a new version using scientific jargon.

This whole "all religion is ignorant stupidity" business isn't science, it's just arrogance. Dawkins should shut the hell up. He's just using science to justify his personal trip -- snobbery. That, and sell books to the angry egghead market, which is large.

People trash fish on this board all the time. Substitute the word "believer" for "fish" and it's the same conversation -- supercilious wanking.

And I've been an atheist since grade school, nearly four decades, so can the kool-aid cracks.

[ALLEN CONRAD]

I think how much of a neo-atheist one should be, directly correlates to severity of the Theists symptoms. If you are talking with someone who is certain that god created the universe in 6 days and we all lived with dinosaurs before the flood of noah. Then the same amount of respect and civil discourse should be provided that you would provide to me if I told you the only way to heaven was to lick as many stamps as possible.

[luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]
That just isn't true. Many, many believers are very ecumenical. They believe in a divinity that is legitimately accessed through all sorts of religions.

[/ QUOTE ]

How does that make it untrue?
It's just a different claim of the traits of their god, just as any other believer claims they know theirs.
Catholics claim "god is X-like".
Mormons claim "god is Y-like."
Ecu's claim "god is XYZ and a touch of W-like"

luckyme

[Bill Haywood]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That just isn't true. Many, many believers are very ecumenical. They believe in a divinity that is legitimately accessed through all sorts of religions.

[/ QUOTE ]

How does that make it untrue?
It's just a different claim of the traits of their god, just as any other believer claims they know theirs.


[/ QUOTE ]

The OP made a blanket statement that religionists do not tolerate difference, "it's their way or the highway," was his claim. In fact, many religionists do not believe their method is special, correct, or privileged in any way, it's simply the way they are used to worshiping. Have you ever met a Wiccan who thinks everyone is going to hell except Wiccans?

[DblBarrelJ]

[ QUOTE ]
This whole "all religion is ignorant stupidity" business isn't science, it's just arrogance. Dawkins should shut the hell up. He's just using science to justify his personal trip -- snobbery. That, and sell books to the angry egghead market, which is large.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT.

[Lestat]

Then do you agree with ALLEN CONRAD who seems to imply that our reaction should be proportional to the claim?

If someone notices you are on time alot and mentions in passing how your a typical Virgo, your reaction to such a comment might be rather tame. However, if someone started seriously outlining the legitimacy of astrology then your reaction to that should be a bit more serious?

The problem is how to react to people who are clearly living in a dellusional world. It might be true that the reaction should not only be proportionate to the dellusion and outrageousness of the claim, but also their demand for us to take them seriously. The problem with that is that the person who quickly reads their horoscope every day is walking along the same illogical path as someone who uses an astrological chart to plan major events. Do you really think the minor astrologist deserves more respect than the major one?

[Lestat]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That just isn't true. Many, many believers are very ecumenical. They believe in a divinity that is legitimately accessed through all sorts of religions.

[/ QUOTE ]

How does that make it untrue?
It's just a different claim of the traits of their god, just as any other believer claims they know theirs.


[/ QUOTE ]

The OP made a blanket statement that religionists do not tolerate difference, "it's their way or the highway," was his claim. In fact, many religionists do not believe their method is special, correct, or privileged in any way, it's simply the way they are used to worshiping. Have you ever met a Wiccan who thinks everyone is going to hell except Wiccans?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not a matter of what they believe. That's not what I'm talking about. The fact that if Wiccans beliefs are a little more pleasant than a Muslim's is beside the point.

The point is that those beliefs are still ridiculous and unfounded and we are expected to respect them. My question is, why? Why should we have to tippy-toe around the obvious and respect that which is ludricrous? What's wrong with laughing in a Wiccan's face the way we might laugh at someone who believes in witchcraft?