Reply to Is Atheism a religion without a church or temple ?

Forum Index » Religion

Reply to "Is Atheism a religion without a church or temple ?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Atheists don’t seem to agree about atheism. If that’s a feature not a bug, fine, but when atheists openly call prayer mental illness and emotional abuse- they are being more than prickly. It’s outright bigotry and also belittling, for religious people, abuse victims, and people struggling with mental health issues. You can pretend it’s not, but it is. I don’t see religious people here calling atheists mentally ill, or disparaging their beliefs, whatever their beliefs may be.

Religious people are told they are hateful, disrespectful of others, pedophiles, told they support pedophilia and the abuse of women, children, minorities, etc, just for having religious beliefs. I personally don’t know any religious people who support or do those things.

I don’t think from reading these forums that the atheist people posting here know anything about religion. In fact, what little they know is often completely wrong. And they assume the worst about religion and religious people. No one should come to these forums to learn about religion, as the few kernels of truth are hidden deeply in pages and pages of threads full of inaccurate information and outright slander and misinformation.

As the person upthread claimed Paine was an atheist, with no documentation or proof- atheists post their very often incorrect opinions about every subject.

If a Christian documents a a religious statement with link and source, it’s disparaged as cut and paste.

[/quote]

There is a poster who only copy & pastes from Wikipedia and obscure sites. Ask a question about it, and she just copy & pasted something else, unrelated.

Pretty funny.

And then sometimes people post “research” but then when you point out that they misinterpreted the “research” then they go silent.

Also funny. [/quote]

Wikipedia is a mainly and accepted source. Everything on wikipedia has footnotes from reputable sources.

The obscure sites have not been found to be incorrect in any way to my knowledge. They aren’t obscure, either; they deal with religious and Biblical knowledge. You can point out misinformation and false information at any time those links are posted but do not; you or others just dismiss it as copy and paste. You or others don’t give an alternate or different interpretation. The information posted is neither obscure or incorrect.

Take each post and refute it, if you feel it’s wrong.[/quote]

I have, repeatedly. Only to get another irrelevant copy & paste. There is no thought put into it at all. 
[/quote]

There’s actual facts put into the copy and paste from actual Biblical scholars, theologians, historians, and academics. You don’t refute anything. [/quote]

Many people have attempted to discuss the copy & paste info. But we never get a meaningful response. Just more, off-topic copy & pastes. Or demands to see our credentials.

If you aren’t capable of rational discussion then why bother? Are you just trolling? [/quote]

No, I haven’t seen any substantial refutation of fact. Credentials are important if you want to have your opinion taken seriously. Anyone can opine, but scholars, academics, scientists, historians, etc, are the experts.[/quote]

No, you’re incapable of responding to posts yourself. Many people have tried to engage in good faith but you just spam your off-topic copy/pastes. Doesn’t take a real scientist to figure that out. 
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics