quas wrote:

And there miltant anti-theists.....they are different.

Militant anti-theists are anti-theists. Can't be anti-theist and not militant.

So by applying Harris' and your own logic, your own militant atheism leads inevitably to events such as the Christchurch massacre. Why aren't you ashamed?

proudfootz wrote:Sadly, a lot of the 'New Atheism' that was in vogue a few years ago has devolved into Gamergate, anti-feminism, and white supremacism. It turns out there's a lot of money in pandering to the right wing fringe.

Ironclad wrote:What makes you say that?

Observation?

Militant atheists like Dawkins want to de-program sky daddy adherents - create a full secular society.

Militant anti-theists want to destroy religion including tho not nessarily the infrastructure. Erase religion and its symbols from society. Erase any gov bestowed advantage or privilege and prosecute for past crimes.

Killing for any meme is simply terrorism.

Macdoc wrote:Militant atheists like Dawkins want to de-program sky daddy adherents - create a full secular society.

Militant anti-theists want to destroy religion including tho not nessarily the infrastructure. Erase religion and its symbols from society. Erase any gov bestowed advantage or privilege and prosecute for past crimes.

Killing for any meme is simply terrorism.

I guess the underlying is that religion is ultimately harmful to people, even as it makes them feel better. You know, like an addictive drug that some people can handle and some can't. The unanswered question is why we should care. The answer is naked self-interest, but that just yields an us vs. them mentality, again, unless we can justify why we want to keep these poor saps from self-harm, and give a blast on the horn of altruism. I just think that quas should make the underlying as plain as he can, that is, as plain as I can make it. Then we can bypass all the tedious chatter about rationality and evidence. It's precisely the social dimension of religion, what you call the infrastructure, that mitigates the self-harm enough to make the fantasy viable.

OlivierK wrote:

quas wrote:

And there miltant anti-theists.....they are different.

Militant anti-theists are anti-theists. Can't be anti-theist and not militant.

So by applying Harris' and your own logic, your own militant atheism leads inevitably to events such as the Christchurch massacre. Why aren't you ashamed?

Because he's too busy trying to make himself significant. As you point out, the end game in significance is committing atrocities, for those who aren't any good at engineering or product promotion.

Fall.. FFS

OlivierK wrote:

proudfootz wrote:Sadly, a lot of the 'New Atheism' that was in vogue a few years ago has devolved into Gamergate, anti-feminism, and white supremacism. It turns out there's a lot of money in pandering to the right wing fringe.

Ironclad wrote:What makes you say that?

Observation?

Yesterday's New Atheists are now today's new racists? That's something. You seeing it too? Where is the most obvious example?

Macdoc wrote:Militant atheists like Dawkins want to de-program sky daddy adherents - create a full secular society.

Militant anti-theists want to destroy religion including tho not nessarily the infrastructure. Erase religion and its symbols from society. Erase any gov bestowed advantage or privilege and prosecute for past crimes.

Killing for any meme is simply terrorism.

Each paragraph ups the ante. Why have you done this?

Stolen from facebook:

The word "bigotry" makes zero sense as a criticism - if you're critical of people who fly 100,000 air miles a year for holidays because they don't care about global warming (or think there's no need to worry at all about it because God will take care of it) then you're a bigot. If youre critical of people who campaign for full scale privatisation of the NHS and an introduction of health insurance only access, you're a bigot. Etc ad infinitum. Innumerable heinous deeds are carried out in the name of Islam, as this petition illustrates, and I can tell you that having read the Qu'ran, for starters, there is scriptural justification for many of the worst. You might be perfectly happy to snuggle up with "racism, homophobia, NRA membership, US republicanism, Nazism, KKK membership" etc ad inf because you "share a lot more in common than that which is different" and some of the practitioners are really VERY moderate and barely registering on the scale then be my guest, but I won't be joining you in that activity.

This 'militant' anti theist description and sentiment I'm reading here lately, as well as making me a tad sad - so many of you appear to have reversed your position since this forum's inception - is making me pretty annoyed, an I am worried for some of you. I've made little effort to hide my own anti theism; I would see theism gone, I want faith privilege removed (as did most here once) and I would blanket-ban all public funded symbols of religion and have them removed from view; and religious education in schools stopped. However, this is my wish only. I cannot get away with being active or vocal in public, religion is protected. The best I can do is to lobby. There is no 'militant' anti theism.
What has happened to you guys?

I would describe myself as a militant anti-theist too, except I don't own an Apache helicopter, Eurofighter Typhoon, grenade launcher or M16...I also don't want to physically hurt let alone kill anybody. Militant? Moi? Na.

Ironclad wrote:This 'militant' anti theist description and sentiment I'm reading here lately, as well as making me a tad sad - so many of you appear to have reversed your position since this forum's inception - is making me pretty annoyed, an I am worried for some of you. I've made little effort to hide my own anti theism; I would see theism gone, I want faith privilege removed (as did most here once) and I would blanket-ban all public funded symbols of religion and have them removed from view; and religious education in schools stopped. However, this is my wish only. I cannot get away with being active or vocal in public, religion is protected. The best I can do is to lobby. There is no 'militant' anti theism.
What has happened to you guys?

Well it seems you read this topic only partially. Quas is the only one here to hold this position. Read my posts, and you'll see I always (unless I forgot) put militant between quotes, because it's quas' words, not mine.

ETA: "Stringent anti-theist"

Ironclad wrote:Fall.. FFS

I found it annoying too - I'll be darned if I'm going to humour foreign language posting of that type by using google translate so as to humour what appeared to be a "cleverness pissing contest" RE foreign language mastery.

Ironclad wrote:This 'militant' anti theist description and sentiment I'm reading here lately, as well as making me a tad sad - so many of you appear to have reversed your position since this forum's inception - is making me pretty annoyed, an I am worried for some of you. I've made little effort to hide my own anti theism; I would see theism gone, I want faith privilege removed (as did most here once) and I would blanket-ban all public funded symbols of religion and have them removed from view; and religious education in schools stopped. However, this is my wish only. I cannot get away with being active or vocal in public, religion is protected. The best I can do is to lobby. There is no 'militant' anti theism.
What has happened to you guys?

That is a very broad brush you are using. In this country what you are complaining about does not exist and we are not the only one. There is no faith privilege or public funded symbols. At any remembrance or other public celebrations you will never see men in frocks like you do in the UK. We dont have religion in schools. Religion is not protected. We have no need of militant anti-theists. The last thing we need. We achieve far more with syrup than with vinegar.

Theism in all its forms is dying. No need to rush it. It will die by itself including islam.

It is a broad brush, a global dream (vision).
Good luck with that last paragraph though.

Macdoc wrote:
Militant atheists like Dawkins want to de-program sky daddy adherents - create a full secular society.

Militant anti-theists want to destroy religion including tho not nessarily the infrastructure. Erase religion and its symbols from society. Erase any gov bestowed advantage or privilege and prosecute for past crimes.

Killing for any meme is simply terrorism.

Ironclad

Each paragraph ups the ante. Why have you done this?

Like say ecowarriors .....there are those willing to be more violent or virulent to move forward with their goals....Peta comes to mind.

Killing for a cause is rarely ever justifiable tho perhaps ending Apartheid could be an exception.

Some like me would happily see organized religion taxed out existence

Militant atheism is taking the war of ideas to the "enemy" ....sky daddy proponents....getting junk like creationism out of schools and out of any public institutions ....prayers etc.

Atheists by and large just want to be left alone.
Militant atheists want others to follow their thinking and to remove skydaddy shite from education systems...a war of ideas which I think atheists are winning in many nations.

Anti-theists want religion gone.
Militant anti-theists will take steps in the form of protests, legislation, court battles to see justice done for those impacted by theism ...indigenous peoples, abused kids etc with a long term view to outlaw or ostracise any religious practice. China is perhaps the closest to this being a reality in a nation state.

Ironclad wrote:It is a broad brush, a global dream (vision).
Good luck with that last paragraph though.

Data proves it.

Killing for a cause is rarely ever justifiable tho perhaps ending Apartheid could be an exception.

Bear in mind that a lot of the people killed by "freedom fighters" were innocent bystanders, victims of such actions as car bombs planted in public places. Since there is no great difficulty in identifying a specific target and acting accordingly, I find I am unable to understand how people who can do such things are not only forgiven, but glorified afterwards.