In America - Death Threats Against Atheists?

[MineralMan]

Yup. I've gotten a few online, myself. I don't take them seriously. But see this for one that could have been credible:

https://www.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2014/08/08/atheist-author-cancels-seattle-appearance-after-receiving-death-threats-signed-by-gods-little-helper

Atheist Author Cancels Seattle Appearance After Receiving Death Threats Signed by "God's Little Helper"

by Paul Constant • Aug 8, 2014 at 4:30 pm

This weekend, the Atheist Alliance of America is hosting their 2014 national convention in SeaTac. Prominent atheists, including Stephen Pinker and Rebecca Goldstein, are headlining a full docket of panels and banquets and field trips. One author, who publishes under the pseudonym Horus Gilgamesh, was scheduled to attend the convention in support of his new book Awkward Moments (Not Found in Your Average) Children's Bible, a study of the Bible's most contradictory and cruel episodes intended for adults, but presented in the guise of a children's book. At the last minute, Gilgamesh canceled his appearance at the convention after receiving two death threats in the mail this week.

On Monday, Gilgamesh opened the mailbox at his Washington state home to find a letter addressed to both his real name and his pseudonym. The letter, which arrived with a Tacoma-Olympia postmark, began "Do I have your attention now? You think your [sic] so safe to hide behind a fake name to spread lies about God and attacking Christians? You aren't." This is followed by a lengthy quote about putting idolaters to death from the King James translation of Deuteronomy 13. The verse warns that if anyone you know "serve[s] other gods," you should "surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death." The letter ends: "I'll see you up in Seattle next week. You wont [sic] see me." It's signed "God's Little Helper."

[guillaumeb]

1. Out of 325 million Americans,

one can expect nearly anything to be written.

Should we then start forming an underground railroad of sorts to help atheists flee from intolerant areas to more enlightened areas?

I have a picket fence surrounding my property. What sign should I put on the post by the drive?

[MineralMan]

3. You deny that such things occur? Really?

You appeared to in another thread. So, here are some examples of it. Imagine seeing such things in your inbox or as comments on something you had written, Guy. You underestimate the vicious hatred that is out there. By a great deal. Some people deny racial hatred, too. They're also wrong.

[guillaumeb]

5. No, I am responding to the overdone suggestion of an underground railroad.

Lightning also strikes. Earthquakes happen.

[MineralMan]

8. That organization exists. It operates mostly in Muslim Countries.

Who knows, though? It may be needed right here in the United States if right-wing Christian extremists get their way.

Don't minimize, Guy. Please.

[trotsky]

12. This is really disgusting.

Would you minimize threats to any other group of people? Homosexuals? Trans individuals? Would you mock them like you do with atheists?

[MineralMan]

15. Perhaps so. I don't know.

It worries me a little, though.

[guillaumeb]

16. Nice attempt to build something on your part.

Keep building on nothing.

What I am talking about is perspective. As to your claim of me mocking atheists, feel free to put your proof of that claim here in the form of a citation to a specific post or posts.

[MineralMan]

18. You're wrong. Badly wrong.

I think you do not know what you're talking about, frankly.

Perhaps silence on this would be a better choice.

[trotsky]

20. He really can't help it.

He digs these holes and can't stop.

[MineralMan]

22. Uff da!

He's trying to use numbers to minimize. As I pointed out downthread, most people who are racists don't kill people of color, but some do every year, and far too often. Most homophobes don't kill LGBTQ people, but some do, and there are numerous examples of that.

How many people have to die before such threats are taken seriously by some? I think one is plenty. Minimizing the impact of hatred and violence caused by hatred is a terrible thing to do. And yet...

[guillaumeb]

25. And your unfounded accusations?

waiting for the evidence of mockery that you claim takes place.

[trotsky]

27. Stay on track, gil.

This is about your behavior. Why would you chose to minimize death threats for atheists, when you (probably) would never do that for any other group?

[guillaumeb]

30. Weak deflection. Weaker framing.

You made a claim. Defend it or retract it. That simple, that basic.

The problem with your framing and accusations is that others can also read what I posted.

[trotsky]

33. I sure as hell hope a shit ton of people are reading this.

Jesus Fucking Christ on a pogo stick. You're dismissing death threats against a group of people, and trying to pretend that you're the one that's been wronged here. Incredible.

[guillaumeb]

38. Getting weaker.

You really should reread what I actually said. This is getting ridiculous. But if you have forgotten, here it is:

Of the millions of US Christians, how many do you think make death threats? A miniscule fraction. A death threat is a criminal act, but the vest majority of people do not make such threats.

[trotsky]

43. You can repeat that as much as you want.

It only further cements your position that you are minimizing death threats against atheists, and would never do that against any other group of people.

[guillaumeb]

45. Persistence is not always a virtue.

Of the millions of US Christians, how many do you think make death threats? A miniscule fraction. A death threat is a criminal act, but the vest majority of people do not make such threats.

[trotsky]

48. "Persistence is not always a virtue," he says,

while copying & pasting his same damning statement for the umpteenth time.

[guillaumeb]

51. Well, if you responded to what I actually said,

that might elicit a different response from me.

But if you insist on making accusations, I might continue to offer my actual words to rebut your claims.

[trotsky]

55. The thing is, your actual words are SUPPORTING my claim.

You are minimizing death threats to atheists.

Your words hurt, gil.

[guillaumeb]

59. Persistence:

You really should reread what I actually said. This is getting ridiculous. But if you have forgotten, here it is:

Of the millions of US Christians, how many do you think make death threats? A miniscule fraction. A death threat is a criminal act, but the vast majority of people do not make such threats.

Obstacles to dialogue.

[trotsky]

63. How about EXPLAINING YOURSELF, gil?

I have responded to your exact words AS I UNDERSTAND THEM.

If your words were not clear enough to me to understand them as you MEANT them, then EXPLAIN YOURSELF instead of continuing to blame me for not understanding.

Obstacles to dialog indeed.

[trotsky]

57. Allow me to make one thing ABSO-FUCKING-LUTELY CLEAR.

NO ONE has claimed a "majority" made death threats. YOU ARE NOT ACTUALLY DISPUTING ANYTHING THAT HAS BEEN SAID HERE with your horrible words.

Your statement, therefore, is an attack on atheists and dismisses the death threats they have received, simply because you don't think they are significant enough in number to warrant your concern.

Such blithe dismissal of threats against innocent individuals simply because they have a different opinion is appalling, gil. This has nothing to do with your beef with me. At long last, sir, have you no decency?

[guillaumeb]

60. You can vary the wording of your response,

but you made 2 unsupported claims against me.

So once again,

You really should reread what I actually said. This is getting ridiculous. But if you have forgotten, here it is:

Of the millions of US Christians, how many do you think make death threats? A miniscule fraction. A death threat is a criminal act, but the vast majority of people do not make such threats.

[trotsky]

62. I have read your words. Those words are the ones I object to.

Perhaps you could actually, you know, EXPLAIN WHAT YOU THINK YOU MEANT instead of continuing to attack me. Ya think that might help dialog??? MAYBE???

[guillaumeb]

67. I already did explain.

But the explanation does not fit what you apparently need to read from a theist. And THAT is evidence of an agenda.

[trotsky]

71. No, you did not explain.

And so you resort to a personal attack.

As usual.

[guillaumeb]

72. 5. No, I am responding to the overdone suggestion of an underground railroad.

[trotsky]

73. And in doing so, are mocking atheists.

That is how I understood your words.

And my inability to understand what you think you meant is apparently reason for you to launch vicious smears and attacks against me.

Perhaps if you tried to *dialog* instead of attack, and explain what you meant, it would help.

Quit just throwing the same sentence back at me and EXPLAIN.

That is, if you truly value dialog.

[guillaumeb]

74. Then you misunderstood.

And followed with your accusations of vicious smears and attacks.

One can only assume that you are hoping someone will read what your claims and follow up on them.

Again, pointing out instances hyperbole and mis-framing is not attacking atheists, it is attacking the use of hyperbole and mis-framing.

Unless you see all disagreement with your positions and agenda to be a personal attack.

[trotsky]

75. I see you refuse to clarify or explain.

So much for your desire for dialog. I guess you weren't sincere after all. Quelle surprise.

[guillaumeb]

76. 1) Read what I wrote.

2) Respond to it.

That is dialogue.

[trotsky]

77. 1) I did.

2) I have.

You have then spent the rest of the time screaming the same words at me, saying I misunderstood, but not clarifying or explaining, and instead throwing personal attacks and smears.

If that's your idea of dialog, congrats. You got it.

[ZannaA]

78. you are asking the wrong question

It isn't what percentage of US Christians utter death threats against Atheists, it is what percentage of death threats received by Atheists were from Christians, more specifically if you want to get a better handle on it, how many are from radicalized white Christians? That is a very different and more applicable number in this debate.

[MineralMan]

79. That's a very good point, indeed!

[guillaumeb]

80. And that is a tiny subset of Christians.

If approximately 85% of Americans are theists, theists might be represented in similar proportions in many subsets of Americans.

But this 4 year old article does not address that. And the suggestion that an underground railroad is needed or might be needed, as one responder suggested, is hyperbolic and inflammatory.

A small subset of white Americans are Nazis, but that does not mean we need to pass laws or prepare for a Nazi dictatorship in the US.

[trotsky]

81. Even if there's just one, it's still a death threat against an innocent individual.

That's wrong. Can we agree about that?

You could have just commented that you agree it's wrong, and left it at that.

But no, you had to go on the offensive. Mocking the concern over this, attacking those who tried to explain it to you, etc.

And then you go start a new thread to wail about the lack of dialog. Impressive.

[guillaumeb]

82. And as I responded to MM, any threats should be reported. You could have read that.

All threats should be taken seriously.

But you preferred to insist that I was mocking all atheists. And that is an obstacle to serious dialogue.

[trotsky]

85. Saying they should be reported is one thing.

Minimizing their significance, mocking those who express concern over them - that's another.

The latter is what everyone has objected to, gil. Pity you refuse to listen. Others are trying for that serious dialog, but we're not getting any help from you. Just attacks.

[guillaumeb]

86. Recognizing that these threats come from a tiny subset of theists

is also important. There will always be violent people and those who only threaten violence, but they represent a minority.

[trotsky]

87. NO ONE SAID OTHERWISE.

Again, in attacking your straw man, you are trivializing genuine concerns. THIS HURTS OTHERS gil. You need to apologize and STOP DOING THIS.

[guillaumeb]

112. You are persistent in your tactics.

Follow your own advice.

[ZannaA]

101. Thank you Captain Obvious

This might be the dumbest thing I have read all day and I have been on the internet for at least 3 hours. Nobody is saying 100% of theists utter death threats against Atheists, but Atheists are easy targets for slander, doxxing and death threats all over the world by all theists and in the US, Christianity is still the dominant religion so, therefore, most death threats to Atheists are from Christians. In other countries where a different religion is predominant then most of the death threats received by Atheists will be from that one. How on earth do you put forth a logic that says that just because it is a small percent of Christians who threaten Atheists and since they are a minority it is no big deal? Do you just need us all to reassure you that we don't think all Christians want to kill us? okay, fine #notallXtians ....happy now? Seriously, if you are gonna dig in your heels this deep on something, it should at least make sense.

[Permanut]

117. Over 99% of Americans are not serial killers..

And because the "vest majority" of people are not serial killers, and those who are serial killers are a "miniscule fraction" of the population, I think we can dismiss that threat altogether. Hardly worth discussing. Oh wait, that's a whole different problem, not at all analogous to another ""miniscule fraction" of the population who present a threat to another group. Never mind.

[guillaumeb]

24. I understand you might want to silence other opinions.

But in the interest of dialogue:

Of the millions of US Christians, how many do you think make death threats? A miniscule fraction. A death threat is a criminal act, but the vest majority of people do not make such threats.

[trotsky]

28. Who the fuck cares? Even if it's just one, and that person carries through,

isn't the loss of one innocent life bad enough?

What the actual fuck is wrong here?

[guillaumeb]

32. Weak deflection. Weaker framing.

[trotsky]

34. I agree, that's what you're doing.

And it's beyond pathetic.

[MineralMan]

36. Stop and think about what you are revealing about yourself.

Seriously. How many death threats are enough to get your attention? It's not a matter of numbers or percentages. It's a matter of something very serious and potentially deadly.

You're exposing something you probably shouldn't in this thread. I'm just saying...

[guillaumeb]

40. Harmony evident. But in the interest of what was actually said:

Of the millions of US Christians, how many do you think make death threats? A miniscule fraction. A death threat is a criminal act, but the vest majority of people do not make such threats.

No minimizing, no dismissal, and you too are revealing something of your approach to dialogue.

[MineralMan]

47. Sorry. I cannot continue and stay within the DU Rules.

Goodbye.

[AtheistCrusader]

89. Well, it's a good thing it's just some random crazy fuck that made up a book, chapter and verse

to support his crazy shit, pulled out of thin air and not printed by the millions of copies every year.

[guillaumeb]

90. Yes, a random person.

But the vast majority do not act in this manner. Why?

[AtheistCrusader]

172. Because as we have discussed before, I don't believe any of you actually believe in your faith.

[guillaumeb]

176. And if I said the same about you?

[AtheistCrusader]

185. You'd be right. I don't believe in your or any other religion either.

I do find a couple amusing or interesting, or 'would be nice', like discordianism (new amusing clearly sarcastic version, or old greek, either way I have an affinity for chaos.) or secular paganism.

[Mariana]

162. Silence? Never! Gawd is on his side, after all.

I wonder if The Gospel According to St. Guillaume will ever be published, so everyone can read all the "Good News" therein.

[AtheistCrusader]

186. It would be a 3 page pamphlet for all you can get him to clearly define/adopt/claim.

[trotsky]

19. And I'm asking you, would you do this to ANY other group of people?

I see that you refused to answer.

[guillaumeb]

42. Still persisting with the misframing?

Understood.

[trotsky]

46. Still refusing to answer a simple question?

And falling back on your nonsense "misframing" bullshit when you've suffered utter humiliation yet again.

Why won't you simply answer the question? Would you jump into a thread about homosexuals receiving death threats to minimize them like this? Yes or no?

[guillaumeb]

113. It is a question based on your misframing.

Whether the mis-framing arises from a genuine misreading, or otherwise, what makes you feel that you can mis-frame and then demand an answer to your own mis-framing?
This tactic is a genuine obstacle to any real dialogue.

[trotsky]

182. THEN FUCKING REFRAME IT.

Your constant refrain to avoid answering the tough questions is really, really tiring.

You want dialog? PROVE IT TO ME.

[rurallib]

108. you get a death threat in the mail, it ain't something to ignore

I have gotten them and went straight to the police.

[guillaumeb]

110. Which was, in fact, a part of my response.

I am not minimizing the threat, but recognizing that it comes from a tiny fringe.

[guillaumeb]

160. An assertion with zero evidence.

Why would you say such a thing?

[trotsky]

183. A fact with a metric shit-ton of evidence.

As anyone who can read your replies understands.

[Voltaire2]

93. You might consider another round of self deletion.

The stain you’ve left here is easily removed.

[guillaumeb]

109. Is this in the same vein as you other comments?

The ones about finding a different group? Do you feel that this group should be reserved for exclusively negative comments about religion? So much for any commitment to open dialogue.

[edhopper]

99. How do you feel about the very, very small minority

of Christians who threaten abortion doctors?

Should we ignore them too?

Make light of protecting them.

This is the scariest piece of apologetics I have yet seen you post.

[guillaumeb]

111. You apparently misread, or missed entirely.

Because you entirely missed where I suggested that any threat should be reported.

[edhopper]

135. Really?

because all I see is "online threat, no big deal." And then trivializing the threat.

Out of 325 million Americans,

one can expect nearly anything to be written.

Should we then start forming an underground railroad of sorts to help atheists flee from intolerant areas to more enlightened areas?

I have a picket fence surrounding my property. What sign should I put on the post by the drive?

[guillaumeb]

138. Right here, in this same thread where we are commenting:

82.

And as I responded to MM, any threats should be reported. You could have read that.

All threats should be taken seriously.

But you preferred to insist that I was mocking all atheists. And that is an obstacle to serious dialogue.

[edhopper]

139. Your first post was mocking

the OP.

Deny all you want, we can read.

That you later did a "Well sure but.." without acknowledging the crassness of your first post is disappointing.

[guillaumeb]

142. Wrong. It was a response to an hyperbolic suggestion.

Disappointing is the framing that some engage in to silence opponents.

[edhopper]

147. Keep doubling down

or cut your loses.

Your choice.

I could use half a dozen biblical quotes here, but I know they will fall on deaf ears.

[guillaumeb]

149. As I said. Sorry to see you responding in this way.

One frequent atheist poster has suggested more than once to me that I should not post here. Obviously the poster feels that this group should be restricted to only negative news about religion.

Dialogue? I see no desire for dialogue from a comparatively few posters here, only a desire for a uniformly hostile group where theists do not bother posting at all.

[edhopper]

156. we have spirited dialog

I think you stepped out of line here.

That's all. Nothing more to say here

[guillaumeb]

157. Yes, we do.

I understand but do not share your opinion.

[trotsky]

184. That's a falsehood.

No one has ever said you should not post here.

What HAS been said to you is that since you obviously struggle with having to put up with viewpoints that oppose yours, you could post to one of the "safe haven" groups to avoid them.

You are smearing people needlessly and maliciously.

[guillaumeb]

194. Voltaire has suggested it twice.

So your first and second statement are incorrect.

As to your last statement, we all know how you approach dialogue here. If anything positive is posted, the responses from a very few are predictable and consistent.

[MineralMan]

2. They're even more frequent in online comment sections.

Here's a screen shot from the American Athiests website:



Link: https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2011/07/30/more-death-threats-from-religious-folks/

[RKP5637]

4. And tRump is encouraging all of the hatred he can, it's his Zest in life. Watching and promoting

hatred!

[guillaumeb]

7. 325 million Americans.

A screen shot of a very few posts on an obscure Wordpress site.

Evidence that there are some few unbalanced and hateful people? Yes.

[trotsky]

11. It is really not cool to minimize death threats.

Really. Not. Cool.

[guillaumeb]

14. Perspective coupled with awareness.

Always a good combination.

When it rains do you sit in the house until it stops?

[trotsky]

21. It's really NEVER cool to minimize death threats.

Your lack of empathy is astounding.

Is this what being a Christian is all about, gil?

[guillaumeb]

26. Another attempt at framing?

Of the millions of US Christians, how many do you think make death threats? A miniscule fraction. A death threat is a criminal act, but the vest majority of people do not make such threats.

[trotsky]

29. IT IS NEVER COOL TO MINIMIZE DEATH THREATS.

I want to be astounded that I'm having to argue this, but then I remember that I'm dealing with you.

[guillaumeb]

35. Interesting and predictable response.

Your continued misframing is noted. Are you hoping others will read the title line and accept it as correct?

Of the millions of US Christians, how many do you think make death threats? A miniscule fraction. A death threat is a criminal act, but the vest majority of people do not make such threats.

I will keep posting this clip while you keep insisting I said something that I never said.

[trotsky]

41. Of course it's predictable.

I am opposed to death threats made against any group.

I sure as shit hope I'm predictable when it comes to that.

Jesus fucking Christ gil, you've really outdone yourself this time.

[guillaumeb]

44. Your answer was predictable. But, here it is again:

Of the millions of US Christians, how many do you think make death threats? A miniscule fraction. A death threat is a criminal act, but the vest majority of people do not make such threats.

Of the millions of US Christians, how many do you think make death threats? A miniscule fraction. A death threat is a criminal act, but the vest majority of people do not make such threats.

[trotsky]

49. "Persistence is not always a virtue." n/t

[marylandblue]

122. Fine, I'll bite, since the others are getting nowhere

What is your point in posting this. Is it simple to point out the obvious? If it is obvious, why point it out? Is it to defend religion in general? If so, it needs no defending here, because this is a case of religion in particular. The devil of religion is often in details like this one, where a particular religionist goes further than others dare to, while the majority of his coreligionists can just cluck their disapproval and carry on.

[guillaumeb]

125. This is an outlier.

That was the point, and the noting of MM's suggestion about an Underground Railroad. A suggestion amplified by the actual post.

[marylandblue]

134. I don't see where he originally posted that

but anyway, he made clear in this thread what he meant by that. What your are not addressing is that being a member of a targeted group brings a sense of vulnerability that seems disporportionate to members of a non-target group. This is where empathy comes in. You should seek to understand the fears of minority group, not dismiss the (to you) absurd manifestations of those fears.

[guillaumeb]

137. My concern in this very narrow venue is what I see as the needlessly

hyperbolic and always negative rhetoric that is directed against theists by a small group of self-described non-theists.

There is a reason that many people give for not posting in this group, and that reason is the rhetoric.
I post a mixture of what I title good news and bad news about religion.
When I post things titled bad news, there is rarely much argument, but when I dare to title something as good news the same cannot be said. Apparently for some, there can be nothing good about religion.

If you remember, I very recently posted an article about how (many) theists view atheists. It was not a flattering article, so I find any accusations of lack of empathy to be groundless.

[marylandblue]

143. On this particular topic you don't seem very empathetic

The rest is irrelevant to this thread. Maybe you should start a new thread about whether some people think there is anything good about religion.

[guillaumeb]

144. A good idea.

The keyword in your reply is "seem".

And the rest, that you so casually dismiss as irrelevant, is a cited reason by more than a few for not posting here. A toxic atmosphere. An obstacle to actual dialogue.

[marylandblue]

146. It's irrelevant to this particular thread, which should not have any disagreement in it

It's not irrelevant to the group as a whole, which has a lot of disagreement in it, and that amount of disagreement may scare some people off.

I use the word "seem" because I don't know what is in your brain, but your words don't reflect empathy. At least not here when it comes to the fear felt by atheists when they are threatened with violence.

[guillaumeb]

148. I am a Christian pacifist. I have previously made that known.

My response was to what I saw as one person's somewhat hyperbolic remark. And again, I also said and reiterated that threats should always be taken seriously and reported.

[marylandblue]

150. That's not a very comforting answer

Last edited Sun Feb 11, 2018, 11:34 AM - Edit history (1)

And if a frightened person makes a hyperbolic remark, then it is important to try to understand that fear, rather than advise someone to do something they probably would have done anyway.

[guillaumeb]

151. Your opinion.

I understand that is your opinion.


I have been accused by one poster of literally hating atheists. I asked for any proof of this and have received none to date. So is this accusation made out of fright, or is it an attempt to silence a poster who dares to comment positively about religion? Or is it hyperbole? I see it as attempted intimidation and silencing.

[marylandblue]

153. It is their opinion

You can't be silenced on an open board unless someone alerts on your post.

[guillaumeb]

155. It is an accusation, and an assertion with no evidence provided.

As to alerts, that is another story.

But again, this is a clear if unspoken attempt to drive out favorable posts about religion in an open group. There have been a few (new to religion) posters in recent days who posted favorable news about religion, and each one was subjected to hostility and negative comments.

The motive and method are obvious and transparent.

[marylandblue]

158. I haven't seen those threads, so I have no opinion on them

[guillaumeb]

159. But I and others have seen them.

I have received numerous personal messages in the past few weeks asking me to continue doing what I am doing, and praising my efforts to present balance here.

Edited to add:

Here is one

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1218269515

Edited to add:

here is another, more nuanced, but with typical ad hominem responses.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1218269524

Edited to add:

here is another, very dismissive in tone, that is itself based on a logical fallacy:
And with this little gem of reasoned and respectful discourse:

The reason for this, I believe, is that its audience has no critical thinking skills. Such skills are not encouraged among religious believers, and for obvious reasons.


https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=269030

And from the dusty archives, another example of "tolerance" for difference:

Including this bit of reasoned and nuanced argument:

For cbayer, and many like her, atheists are another, more convenient target. Despite lacking any evidence whatsoever that somehow a tiny number of anonymous Internet commenters are capable of defeating an alleged multi-million-strong group of people in real life, they relentlessly attack vocal atheists as the root of the problem, even going so far as to allege said atheists are "carrying water" for Republicans.

cbayer no longer posts here. She told me why but in a PM so I will say no more, except to add that cbayer was not a theist.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/121870169

[edhopper]

164. What is it

you think those posts you linked show?

[guillaumeb]

166. I saw evidence of tactics and possible agenda.

And you, what did you see?

[edhopper]

170. People with opinions

Some people here have a negative opinion of religion.

Others like you have a positive one, both sides are posted. Both sides are free to argue in the posts of the other.

And the "Your faith is the same as mine" thread deserved the opposition it got. It was the same bullshit it always has been.

If you don't think that is just baiting non-believes, you really don't understand atheism.

[marylandblue]

173. I see some harsh rhetoric and perhaps some ad hominen

But nothing really that awful for a internet forum where controversial issues are discussed. I understand some people don't like it. I don't like it myself and try to refrain from posting harsh responses myself. I don't think it helps anyone's argument.

If you have a crowd of silent supporters, more power to you. I think they should consider posting for themselves and ignore anything they don't like.

[guillaumeb]

174. Agreed.

As to a crowd of supporters, who can really tell? But a few have stated that the toxic atmosphere discourages them.

[marylandblue]

177. Ok fine then, getting back to this thread

The only proper response to the OP is blanket condemnation of such threats. Everything else you've written is either varying degrees of wrong or belongs somewhere else. I am surprised this even has to be pointed out.

[guillaumeb]

191. I suggested reporting the threats.

What you write does not need to be pointed out, thus I did not address it.

[marylandblue]

196. Well I suppose Trump does not need to unequivically condemn white supremacists

who run over women with their cars. Fortunately the incident was reported, so we needn't even remind her of that. Still, I take comfort from the fact that only a tiny minority of white supremacists run over women with their cars.

[trotsky]

188. For the umpteen hundredth time:

There is no requirement there be "balance" here. Anyone can post whatever they want. The notion that there must be "balance" (a la Fox News) is entirely YOURS and YOURS ALONE.

If anyone is upset by negative comments about religion, there are MULTIPLE "safe haven" groups where believers can post and discuss topics WITHOUT ANY FEEDBACK FROM NONBELIEVERS. If you are bothered by their opinions, YOU HAVE IT IN YOUR POWER TO AVOID THEM.

You can restore whatever "balance" on DU you desire by posting to your heart's content in a safe haven.

[MineralMan]

190. That is why I do not participate in DU Mail

Conversations. Since they can't be shared in open discussion, they do not add to the discussion, and can't be compared with what is claimed. I simply don't discuss things except in open forums. That way, what I say can be viewed by everyone, as can replies.

There is a note to that effect in my signature line. It keeps private messages sent to me at a minimum. Too often in the past here, private mail has been used in negative ways by groups who carried on background conversations that were later used to no good purpose.

I will always be happy to respond to anything in open discussion.

[guillaumeb]

195. I stopped responding to some posters.

And I would never discuss specifics of any PMs that I receive/have received.

But what it reveals about the sender/s does weigh in my consideration of what the sender/s publicly post.

[MineralMan]

204. I just find it simpler not to use DU Mail.

Normally, I tell people who contact me through it to post their thoughts in a thread, where I will respond. I don't do whispering in the background.

[Mariana]

161. It seems Gil has a personal vendetta against atheist posters here.

He's not really arguing in favor of religion or religious people, his goal is to oppose the atheists, regardless of topic, regardless of facts, regardless of anything else. That's why he won't stick to the topic on a thread, and answers you by talking about posts by other people on other threads at other times, as if any of that is relevant the discussion taking place. It's relevant to his purpose, which is not to discuss the topic honestly.

[guillaumeb]

167. Nice attempt at reframing.

Instead of looking at how all theists are attacked in this group, put the blame on the theists for daring to post here. Thus Voltaire's "suggestions" that I stop posting here.

As to vendetta, it is quite obvious from looking at years of posts where the vendetta originated.

[Act_of_Reparation]

187. Why do your posts read like they start off as Mad Libs?

[guillaumeb]

206. Try reading the fantasy framing of #161.

No basis in reality, but if it is intended to lay a foundation that might explain it.

[Act_of_Reparation]

208. It's quite obvious you don't much care for atheists.

But that doesn't explain why everything you post seems a variation on the arrangement of the same four or five buzzwords.

[guillaumeb]

209. I do not care for simplistic framing,

or reflexive criticism of faith and believers, or condescension directed toward 85% of the population.

I count a few atheists as friends. We talk about many things, but not to convince or persuade the other. So what you see as quite obvious reveals something about you. And your ability to interpret.

[Act_of_Reparation]

210. I don't care.

Your inflamed sense of indignity doesn't concern me. Nothing anyone says here will affect your life in a meaningful or tangible way. Nothing said here will affect any Christian's life in a meaningful or tangible way. And while you're whining about your hurt fee fees, some people are dealing with real problems, like being fired for getting married, losing access to reproductive medicine, or losing access to medicine altogether.


But whenever these topics come up, your issue isn't with the school firing the gay teacher, or the Church deliberately restricting access to reproductive health, or the bigots willing to let gay people die because the Hippocratic Oath inconveniences them spiritually. It's the "framing" of the criticism that bothers you. The real problems—and in some cases, lives—of real people are pushed to the side as you make the topic about the most non-fucking-issue in the history of non-issues: the mean atheists.

Just think about it for a second: you've derailed a thread about death threats in objection to how a powerless fraction of a powerless fraction of the population worded their reaction to death threats.

Yeah, stay classy.

[marylandblue]

199. Talk about reframing!

You turned a physical threat against an atheist into a vendetta against theists on an internet forum.

[Mariana]

202. It's performance art.

He's playing to his fan club.

[trotsky]

205. He's brilliant at it!

What talent!

[fleabiscuit]

201. Theres over 900 hate groups in the US.

Most identify as Christians, so there could be a sizable number indicating a willingness.

[guillaumeb]

207. Most Americans are theists.

So "most" of any subset are in all probability theists.

[fleabiscuit]

211. Yes, Christians.

[Act_of_Reparation]

212. Are they prorportional?

I doubt it.

[MineralMan]

17. It only takes one, dude.

Only one. Very few racists kill people. And yet, people die at their hands on a fairly regular basis. Very few homophobes kill LGBTQ people. But they do kill LGBTQ people. How many need to die before you care?

Please don't minimize risks. You have no idea what you're talking about if you do.

Death threats are serious business if you are the one receiving them. They are a constant thing in many places where things are discussed. Not on DU. They don't stand here, and are almost instantly removed. But, they occur here, too. MIRT watches for them like hawks and removes them.

You haven't received any? That's good. That's nice. Others, however, have. Please don't minimize such things.

[guillaumeb]

23. Perspective is the correct word, and you are avoiding it.

Of the millions of US Christians, how many do you think make death threats? A miniscule fraction. A death threat is a criminal act, but the vest majority of people do not make such threats.

[MineralMan]

31. So what, Guillaume?

As I said, it only takes one. I'm nowhere claiming that such hatred or violence is typical of Christians. That would be stupid of me. Instead, I'm pointing out that such attitudes and threats exist. Again, only a tiny percentage of racists murder people of color. Only a tiny fraction of homophobes kill LGBTQ people. That's no comfort to the ones who have been murdered or their families.

It's not a matter of perspective at all. It's a matter of a real phenomenon that needs to be a matter of attention.

If one atheist dies through violence from a religious fanatic, that's one too many. The threats occur on a daily basis. I've seen them. I've even gotten some of them. Should such threats simply be ignored? That appears to be what you are suggesting.

I don't care about percentages. I care about individuals who are threatened in the name of religion. That, I care about a great deal.

So how many threats are enough to get your attention? What risks are you willing for others to take? Don't speak to me about numerical perspectives when threats of murder occur. I won't have it, to be quite frank.

[guillaumeb]

37. And

Of the millions of US Christians, how many do you think make death threats? A miniscule fraction. A death threat is a criminal act, but the vest majority of people do not make such threats.

[MineralMan]

50. You keep posting the same words, over and over again.

Complete with a misspelling. Pasting the same thing in replies again and again has a name. It's not a good thing to do.

[guillaumeb]

53. When I keep reading the same misframing from more than one poster,

I wonder why it is happening.

This was my response, edited to correct:

Of the millions of US Christians, how many do you think make death threats? A miniscule fraction. A death threat is a criminal act, but the vast majority of people do not make such threats.

So how does that translate to intolerance for atheists, or avoidance of a problem?
Answer, it does not. So why would anyone insist that I am mocking atheists? Is this evidence of an agenda?

[MineralMan]

54. Don't ask me questions about what anyone else has posted, please.

I am unable to answer on others' behalf.

Again, I cannot continue this discussion with you and remain within the rules of this forum. Goodbye.

[marylandblue]

123. This is not perspective, it is lack of empathy

Threatening one atheist is a way of scaring all into silence. That is the proper perspective.

[guillaumeb]

126. Are you speaking of an individual who takes such action?

You are probably correct, but it is important to remember that these threats occur rarely. It does not excuse them, but it shows how rare they are.

[marylandblue]

128. Even just threats are a way of silencing people,

and are crimes in and of themselves. It doesn't matter how rare they are. For the threatened individual, it is a problem. If he is threatened for being a member of a group, it is a threat to the entire group.

[guillaumeb]

129. Which was why I suggested reporting any threats to the police.

Not that this is a guarantee of action or results, but it should be done to put it on record.

[marylandblue]

130. Why are you pointing out the obvious again?

[guillaumeb]

131. If it were truly obvious, many more incident of domestic/relationship abuse

would be revealed. Given that many or most incidents of domestic abuse are never reported, this is not as obvious to many as you seem to think.

Agreed?

[marylandblue]

132. You are pointing out that few Christians make these threats

That is obvious. Domestic abuse is a separate problem and those involved have different reasons for not reporting them.

[Mariana]

133. I suspect most atheists who receive death threats

do report them to the police. Gil is making an idiotic comparison to try to support his hateful position. Terroristic threats from strangers are in no way analogous to violence within families, or to threats from family members.

[sinkingfeeling]

9. But, but, Christians are being persecuted in the US.

[MineralMan]

6. Most people have forgotten the kidnapping and murder of Madelyn Murray O'Hair

They shouldn't. It happened. She was a prominent atheist. You can read all about it right here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madalyn_Murray_O%27Hair

[trotsky]

10. I've been around a while.

Not as long as you, MM (no offense), but long enough to have used BBSes and the Internet in the dial-up/text-based days.

I used to debate creationists and other literalists in various forums. Got threats all the time. One guy even doxxed me and I got vicious letters and signed up for all sorts of junk mail and objectionable material - via USPS *and* online. Not fun.

The thing we have to realize is that when these nuts get political power, THEY USE IT. Protecting religious beliefs, making it so that criticism is offline or even just frowned upon, enables them.

[MineralMan]

13. Yes. I've had my share of such things, too.

Some deny that they occur, or seek to minimize their frequency. But, anyone who publicly discusses religion as an atheist is likely to see such threats. Are they real threats? Who can say? I don't take them seriously very often. However, if I get doxxed and threatened, such threats get turned over to the authorities, once I've figured out who sent them.

The real danger is in the rise of fundamentalists and right-wingers to power. If they get enough of it, then many will be on the list for threats and worse. They are feeling emboldened right now, and may feel even more so before too long.

Those who minimize such dangers may not realize that there really are people who contemplate taking direct violent action. They may think such people aren't really Christians. They may poo-poo such concerns.

Such people are wrong. It's a real issue.

[trotsky]

39. I bet you didn't expect this thread to show exactly why these kinds of death threats are so scary.

When other believers (whom I hope wouldn't be ok with murdering atheists!) instantly jump in, not to express concern or sympathy, but to DISMISS the threats, it becomes obvious why this is a more serious problem.

[MineralMan]

52. Well, I guess I expected a discussion, rather than a spamfest.

And there has been some discussion, along with people silently approving the original post. I'm trying very hard to ignore the repetitive stuff.

[Act_of_Reparation]

56. This is actually a pretty instructive moment.

Because this is exactly what kills that precious "dialogue" we've heard so much about. You want to know why atheists are reluctant to embrace theists as allies? This. Thread. Right. Fucking. Here.

[trotsky]

58. Fucking right you are. n/t

[MineralMan]

61. Yes, it is. Rather than condemn those who would issue death threats,

but who are more or less co-religionists, the attempt to divert from the issue is disappointing, at the very least. It's also rather typical. It's a strategy we've all seen again and again in many places. It's sort of expected, but to have any thread that points a finger at the extremists among Christians hijacked with an attempt to minimize the problem is still frustrating.

I hope others who reading this thread are seeing it for what it is. My intent in starting this thread was to point out that atheists are frequently attacked, even in the United States, and sometimes threatened when they publicly discuss atheism. The intent of someone else was to distract from that fact through the use of very poorly-concealed spammy repetition of the same thing over and over again. That's regrettable, but most people will see it for what it is, I hope.

Whatever the group, death threats are a serious matter. For some groups, people seem to recognize that, but for others, apparently, death threats are just a nuisance and shouldn't be paid any attention, since millions of people don't post them. It's an odd, odd argument. I hope nobody sees it as a valid argument.

[trotsky]

65. "I hope nobody sees it as a valid argument."

Fortunately, I see that no one has leapt to the defense of that poster. I see that as a good sign. But frankly at this point I'm desperate for anything.

[Pope George Ringo II]

98. I'll tell you one thing

I'm feeling better about how well-targeted my ignore list is. There aren't a lot of names on it, but apparently one of them is the moral cripple in question.

[Iggo]

169. Word.

[trotsky]

180. In this case I can't ignore the hatred.

I wish I could.

[Mariana]

103. No Christians have leapt to his defense

but have any bothered to tell him he's wrong?

[trotsky]

181. What passes for acceptable Christian behavior these days, right here on DU.

Is it any surprise why we have Christians like Sessions and Cruz?

[Mariana]

100. I've noticed that no other Christians are telling him he's wrong.

Seems like all the Christians who participate in this group agree with him.

[Act_of_Reparation]

124. Their failure to self-police is the stuff of legend.

Just another blip on an uninterrupted trajectory. But atheistbadz, amirite?

[Mariana]

127. Yer rite. Especially the ones in Boston.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1218270285#post64

[Mariana]

64. The Boston Atheists revoked the membership of a Trump supporter.

Isn't that exactly the same? Gil seemed to think it was a very serious matter indeed.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1218242092

[trotsky]

66. Ha! Nice reminder.

I wonder what his response would have been if someone had posted this on his thread:

Out of 4-8 million Boston area residents, one can expect anything to happen. Should we start forming an underground railroad of sorts to help Trump supporters flee from intolerant atheists to more Trump-friendly areas?

Kicking someone out of a private group is the most egregious form of atheist intolerance, according to gil.

But death threats against atheists by religionists is really no big deal.

[guillaumeb]

70. Interesting that you minimize intolerance when it is a group of atheists.

Very interesting, and revealing.

[Lordquinton]

116. Still pushing that line?

[guillaumeb]

118. Still agreeing with the tactic?

Interesting how harmonious the atmosphere can be here.

[Lordquinton]

119. Clearly I disagree with your tactic

As do others.

[guillaumeb]

120. More harmony.

And denial of what is obvious to many.

[Lordquinton]

171. We know you are denying your blatant tactics

Thus the constant call outs for those watching at home.

[guillaumeb]

175. A reversal of reality, but if this is the best that you can do, I understand.

[Lordquinton]

178. Honestly if banning someone from an internet group is the worst you can come up with

for atheists behaving badly, I'll wear it with pride. Groups ban troublesome members all the time. It happens here. You frame the whole thing, as you always frame things, so it looks the worst you can make it. Anyone who actually looks into it, as in, looks at info past how you carefully frame it, they can see what happened.

Theists behaving badly: covering up and protecting serial child molestors (IE. the RCC)

Atheists behaving badly: Banning a troll from a forum.

[Mariana]

179. Gil has explained that his posts in this group

are essentially a performance for an audience, from which he receives "numerous" messages of praise and requests for more. I think that explains a great deal.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1218270285#post159

[Lordquinton]

189. That's an interesting link

Like I said, I'm calling him out for the people watching at home, not nessissarly posting so they feel more comfortable coming forward. I have have the occasional correspondence, though not from a known actor.

Interesting that once I gave a full rebuttal he ceased responding.

[guillaumeb]

193. Harmony.

[Lordquinton]

200. You dropped your mask

You gave your typical non-answer when cornered, and did not respond to my previous post. Why is that?

[guillaumeb]

192. What a bizarre reading of what I actually said.

But if this is the best that you can do, it is evidence of something.

[Mariana]

197. Bravo!

[guillaumeb]

198. 5 sets of clapping hands.

Not as good as a heart, but I will take them.

[Mariana]

203. You put on a terrific show, Gil.

Enjoy your fan mail.

[Mariana]

68. Children have received death threats from Christians.

https://www.npr.org/2012/02/14/146538958/rhode-island-district-weighs-students-prayer-lawsuit

More than 8000 death threats were posted to one facebook page after an interview with an atheist.

http://www.businessinsider.com/fox-news-facebook-death-threats-world-trade-memorial-cross-2011-8

[MineralMan]

69. Yup. It's more common than many people think, and

it's becoming more frequent all the time. It's a little scary, actually, and the Trump administration is emboldening such people.

It's a pity that some people don't recognize that and attempt to minimize it.

[SonofDonald]

83. You know as a former altar boy

I don't recall ever being taught that attitude.

"Atheist and not worried about burning in hell"

[MineralMan]

84. Sorry. I'm not quite sure what you mean.

[guillaumeb]

88. It is necessary to support the meme.

I too served at the altar. I never heard anything like that either.

[Act_of_Reparation]

91. You spent years in the Catholic church and never once heard that faith was necessary for salvation?

That's a cool story, bro. I'll bet that totally happened.

[guillaumeb]

92. Dod you read the comment?

Because it was:

You know as a former altar boy

I don't recall ever being taught that attitude.

"Atheist and not worried about burning in hell"

I am not certain what you were reading, but perhaps we read different comments. I responded to the one I cited here.

[SonofDonald]

94. That was my reply to the letter

I wasn't taught hate at at the altar.

You would think it was self explanatory but.

Oh well.

Btw, see ya.

[guillaumeb]

107. It was self-explanatory.

Or seemed to be.

[SonofDonald]

95. Not directed at you guillaumeb. n/t

[Act_of_Reparation]

96. It's fascinating you always leap to that "defense".

It may shock you to learn I am actually quite literate.

I suppose I should explain to you the difference between explicit and implicit attitudes... but I got a case of the Friday fuck-its.

[Mariana]

97. It's wonderful that you weren't taught that attitude.

Some people obviously were taught that attitude.

[gopiscrap]

102. First of all, that is a felony

secondly, i thought one of the main goals of Christans is to convert others to Christianity. Does the sender really think that will help convert others? Finally, sadly this is sent from my home town.

[Mariana]

104. Some Christians think the way to convert others to Christianity

is to threaten to kill them if they don't convert. This has been a very effective method of evangelism in the past.

[gopiscrap]

106. yes but dear God, let's hope we are beyond the Middle Ages

[Iggo]

168. We are. They aren't

And congrats on 17k.

[MineralMan]

105. Apparently, some Christians behave differently.

It's alarming, really.

[rurallib]

114. well this has been eye opening and most alarming

Thank you so much for posting this thread.

[MineralMan]

115. You're welcome. The thread went off the rails

very early on. I'm not sure exactly why, really. Such threats are real. They can be frightening to those who receive them. Atheists who are public or who write about their atheism are sure to get death threats, generally religious in nature. That's the reality, and it's one reason many atheists do not make their non-belief public.

The thread got hijacked. That's very unfortunate.

[Permanut]

121. But instructive.

Hijacked, but extremely informative in the way it rolled out. Illustrative of the thinking of good Germans in the making.

[Pope George Ringo II]

136. Indeed.

Who could have guessed that there would be "many fine people on both sides" of the question of murdering atheists?

[Mariana]

140. On another thread, someone posted about

"true believers on both sides of the issue" of women's reproductive rights. That's accurate enough, in that some people truly believe women should have reproductive rights, and some people truly believe we shouldn't have those rights, but the suggestion that those positions are morally equivalent is repugnant. As is this thread, wherein the g-man stands by his complaints about an atheist group in Boston expelling a member (probably for being an asshole, like most all Trump supporters are) but oh, it's only a few (thousands of) Christians who threaten to kill non-believers, nothing to be bothered about, so shut the fuck up about it.

[Pope George Ringo II]

141. I wish I could say I was surprised.

Suffice it to say that my expectations for that quarter are rather low in all respects.

[Mariana]

145. Of course, none of the other Christians

who post in this group and yuck it up with the g-man have seen fit to come in and reprimand him for his disgusting posts in this thread.

[Pope George Ringo II]

152. I can't say I blame them

Look at how much time atheists spend doing so, and it's a complete waste of time.

[Ferrets are Cool]

154. I hope they can track this sick person down and stop this

behavior.

[Mariana]

163. I hope the police who were assigned to investigate it

weren't Christians who dismissed the threats as unimportant and mocked the recipients, like the Christian guillaumeb has done in this thread.

[Ferrets are Cool]

165. My hopes also. nm