Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: It is absolutely okay to provoke religious fundamentalists [View all]0rganism
(25,642 posts)93. belief != lack of belief
this is where a lot of discussions of theism vs. atheism go off the beam, imho
"An atheist who says that there is no creator, or god, or deity, is expressing a belief"
sorry, but this is a (clumsy) expression of a lack of belief, and they are not equivalent. exceptional claims require exceptional evidence, the person claiming the existence of one or more omniscient/omnipotent/omnipresent entities might reasonably be expected to provide some strong non-circular evidence of this remarkable existence, whereas the person who says they do not believe in said entities can point to a lack of sufficiently strong evidence for the positive proposition as sufficient to qualify lack of belief.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
273 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Atheists have science, which is not classified as a "belief system." Religion relies on faith, by
WinkyDink
May 2015
#32
Bollocks, no-one here takes what Dawkins or any atheist says as "unquestioned truth"
muriel_volestrangler
May 2015
#69
Religions make a lot of claims about the nature of the universe besides it's origin.
Marr
May 2015
#121
Hate to be the proverbial fly in the ointment here, but science relies on 'faith' also (at
KingCharlemagne
May 2015
#212
Why shouldn't atheists be angry when we're constantly misrepresented here?
beam me up scottie
May 2015
#266
You're close but no cigar. God lives in the Milky Way...or should I say A Milky Way.
BlueJazz
May 2015
#148
And what is your response to manipulative con artists like Pat Robertson or Ken Ham?
gregcrawford
May 2015
#125
What about Aliens? It could be Aliens and this planet is a science experiment. Just sayin'
freshwest
May 2015
#144
atheists who feel that their "belief" that there is no creator is more valid than a person of faiths
AlbertCat
May 2015
#136
But saying "fundamentalist atheists" makes one sound so freakin clever!
beam me up scottie
May 2015
#179
If god actually showed up on the six o'clock news rather than on a piece of toast....
truebrit71
May 2015
#268
Evidently it's a person who insists science must be taught in science classes
Major Nikon
May 2015
#178
Fundamentalists believe that the statements in the Bible are literally true.
PeaceNikki
May 2015
#14
?? We have a secular society. We aren't the UK, where the monarch is "Defender of the Faith."
WinkyDink
May 2015
#27
It is. It's a secular society where the Christians have great power and privilege
PeaceNikki
May 2015
#43
Yes but we're annoying and that's just as bad as religious fundamentalism.
beam me up scottie
May 2015
#177
We have the ability to express ourselves and don't feel compelled to sit down and shut up!
haikugal
May 2015
#165
And for that we get called fundamentalists, militant, radical blah blah blah
beam me up scottie
May 2015
#169
They were told by the pope recently that it's cool to respond to insults with violence.
PeaceNikki
May 2015
#213
History has been filled with bloodshed from atheists responding to attacks against them.
Arugula Latte
May 2015
#245
I don't actively seek to offend anyone, but that's just me. Fundamentalist extremists of all sorts
uppityperson
May 2015
#2
It's the meek, I'll follow this religion's rules just so they don't get offended attitude.
FLPanhandle
May 2015
#4
That makes more sense, thank you. Not "we should" but "we should not be afraid to".
uppityperson
May 2015
#9
I agree. Fundamentalists of all types are the problem. I don't understand why our first
liberal_at_heart
May 2015
#82
Confronting some fundamentalists only fuels their anger and hatred. I'm not saying those in places
liberal_at_heart
May 2015
#255
If you imagine that is all Geller and her sympathizers are advocating for, you are mistaken.
Jefferson23
May 2015
#5
This is your response to that? Why not say you do not agree and leave it there, why speak
Jefferson23
May 2015
#13
It might be legal and protected, but a civil society needs respect and TOLERANCE.
KittyWampus
May 2015
#6
do you approve of using the word "thug" on DU even after some members have objected?
KittyWampus
May 2015
#38
If a religious fuckstick finds certain imagery offensive, they can not look at it
seveneyes
May 2015
#40
Yes, because if they don't, they are being intolerant of someone's "sincere religious belief"...
Humanist_Activist
May 2015
#60
So you made us all endure years of Phelps, Robertson and the various Archbishops shouting in
Bluenorthwest
May 2015
#42
-I- made "you all" endure years of Phelps? You object to hate speech by engaging in it against me
KittyWampus
May 2015
#58
I was accused of something not even remotely true in an incredibly hateful, vile manner.
KittyWampus
May 2015
#77
Criticism and an accusation are not 'hate', and there was nothing 'vile' in the post
muriel_volestrangler
May 2015
#84
Of course the 'you' was meant generally, as in straight religious folks, but you yourself defended
Bluenorthwest
May 2015
#228
No, you're right. Let's not aggravate people who believe in extreme ideologies.
Yorktown
May 2015
#185
I think that limiting it to religions is small potatoes, and ignores relevant consistency in our own
LanternWaste
May 2015
#15
how in the world can you say something like that when, each and every day, for years, there
niyad
May 2015
#258
"Provoke" is, IMO, the incendiary term. To some, another's mere existence = "provocation."
WinkyDink
May 2015
#24
Yank their chain and rattle their cage at evey opportunity! I'm considering having
brewens
May 2015
#33
Doesn't change the fact that we live in a reality where someone might kill you as a result
The2ndWheel
May 2015
#56
Why should you "actively seek to offend the religious" if they are NOT trying to force anything?
whathehell
May 2015
#83
"common decency to not go out of your way to malign it in a way that's offensive to them"
FLPanhandle
May 2015
#102
what you don't get because of your straight privilege is that those who take offense at others who
Bluenorthwest
May 2015
#233
A lot of Muslims interpret cartoons of the Prophet as an attack on their identity as Muslims
YoungDemCA
May 2015
#127
Fundamentalists do not have the right to sanitize reality to their particular demands.
Warren DeMontague
May 2015
#193
2 gay men hold hands walking down the street in a town full of homophobes.
Warren DeMontague
May 2015
#202
What if drawing pictures of Mohammed is CENTRAL to someone's religion, so much that it is mandatory?
Warren DeMontague
May 2015
#208
Willing to toss Judaism and Christianity under the bus too, pal, thereby achieving
KingCharlemagne
May 2015
#220
But defending your students is not the same as defending their religion. It's just not.
Bluenorthwest
May 2015
#236
You're tiresome. Some of my students are Muslim and some would probably qualify
KingCharlemagne
May 2015
#238
You put words and ideas into my mouth. You insult and provoke me as if that was your right. Why?
Bluenorthwest
May 2015
#273
So is it okay for religious people to push the view that we will burn in Hell for our non-belief?
Arugula Latte
May 2015
#247
Wouldn't it be great if instead of trying to provoke people to anger and violence....
Tommy_Carcetti
May 2015
#222