Anonymous wrote:I think a big problem with conversations about faith between believers and non-believers, is the use of the bible as a source. Believers believe the bible is truth while atheists don't. We cannot have a discussion where one person is using a source that the other thinks is completely in left field. The believer thinks that by completely dismissing the bible, the atheist is being disrespectful. I don't know how to get past this first barrier of contention.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think OP is saying that atheists claim to be "good without God" and them come on sites like this and are mean to religious people. So thy are not good, they are mean, and that is hypocritical.
Sorry OP but I don't think getting down and dirty in a debate on an anonymous message board is "mean" enough to make an atheist "not good". If the atheist is not embezzling millions from their religious organization, molesting little children, or participating in the systemic degradation of women as religious tradition, or... etc. etc., then your whining about atheists being mean is just so..... lame.
It's so telling that you start your post with, I don't want to talk about the hypocrisy of religious people, only atheists - cuz you SO know that is a fight that religious people cannot win.
This is like one spouse forgetting to flush the toilet and the other cheating spouse complaining about lack of consideration. "Yeah but look at the mean thing YOU did".
I'll take my rep as a "mean" atheist for pointing out the evils of religion any day. You keep on tolerating hate, bigotry, backwards superstition and systemic corruption in your faith. See you on DCUM!
The difference between a religious person and an atheist, though, is the religious person knows s/he is fallible, sinful, imperfect, and seeks redemption for it. I think that's OP's point about the qualifier. It's not a matter of being a "fight that religious people cannot win." Religious people already acknowledge that and their religious are about trying to overcome that. It's a lifelong thing and a central tenet of faith.
Atheists, on the other hand, tend to be often wrong but rarely in doubt and feel entitled to act with impunity.
Anonymous wrote:I think OP is saying that atheists claim to be "good without God" and them come on sites like this and are mean to religious people. So thy are not good, they are mean, and that is hypocritical.
Sorry OP but I don't think getting down and dirty in a debate on an anonymous message board is "mean" enough to make an atheist "not good". If the atheist is not embezzling millions from their religious organization, molesting little children, or participating in the systemic degradation of women as religious tradition, or... etc. etc., then your whining about atheists being mean is just so..... lame.
It's so telling that you start your post with, I don't want to talk about the hypocrisy of religious people, only atheists - cuz you SO know that is a fight that religious people cannot win.
This is like one spouse forgetting to flush the toilet and the other cheating spouse complaining about lack of consideration. "Yeah but look at the mean thing YOU did".
I'll take my rep as a "mean" atheist for pointing out the evils of religion any day. You keep on tolerating hate, bigotry, backwards superstition and systemic corruption in your faith. See you on DCUM!
Anonymous wrote:Your post doesn't make very much sense. You might want to work on critical reasoning skills.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: A handful of DCUM's atheists are thoughtful, introspective, and willing to engage in discussion. But the majority -- not so much..
A handful of DCUM's users are thoughtful, introspective, and willing to engage in discussion. But the majority -- not so much..
There, fixed it for you.
Anonymous wrote: A handful of DCUM's atheists are thoughtful, introspective, and willing to engage in discussion. But the majority -- not so much..