I have a problem with a Religion host

[Goblinmonger]

461. Ignore me or don't. I don't care.

Though I am trying to have a conversation with you (and I'm trying very hard not to react with what I realize is my vitriol to your "have you gotten the point yet comment). But my point has been not that you need to be held to a standard of perfection. I clearly like the fight club mentality. My point is that you need to realize that you are not even considering the possibility that those who post what you don't like see their point as being just as valid as yours when you post things.

You refer to your post as an "accurate if scathing post." How do you think that is different from those you don't like? I'm sure they feel they are accurate, too. Why can't they make their scathing posts if you get to make yours? That's one of my main points. trotsky has been making the same point in this thread.

For example, I would disagree pretty heartily with these two bolded points of yours:

The shit stirring becomes so obnoxious that many non-theists bow out of discussions and the remaining non-theists and theists start pushing back against all of the venom.

But that is not allowed you see for then the little shit disturbers whine about how imperfect all of the believers and their apologists are.

And I would certainly argue that your approach, language, and tone are no different than those you decry. And please, hear me again, I don't care about your tone. I care that you are using the same tone you get mad at others for. They feel just as strongly as you do.

I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt on this and for the moment assume it is just a rhetorical event you didn't realize, but honestly look at your examples of shit stirring:

It is the constant calling of any religious person a 'religionista'.

It is the constant calling of any one who agrees with any one of a religious persuasion an apologist.

It is the constant posting of thread after thread attempting to equate mental illness and religious belief.

To that end, it is a constant posting of tragic events designed to 'prove that point' when all it does is show the narcissism of the poster in question.

It is the constant need to inform us all of the horrors that humans using religion having done through out history but getting pissed off when someone replies that good has occurred as well.

It is the constant need to inform the Christians that fundamentalists suck and because they are not one but are a Christian, it is their personal fault for the situation even when the Christians are liberal and agree that fundamentalists of any ilk need stopping.

It is the constant need to interject how 'psychotic' the Old Testament God is when that has zero relevance to the topic at hand.

Notice anything? By your definition, only non-believers can be shit stirrers. OK, maybe a believer would post those things, but I doubt it. To me, that is troubling. To me, those statements seem to support claims made about you that you are an apologist for the religous. Or a faithiest. Or whatever terms have been used. Maybe you didn't mean that. I'll assume that for now until I hear your reply. But can you possibly see how your rhetoric might lead one to those conclusions? And ultimately, if you believe that only atheists (or anti-theists if you wish) can be shit stirrers, I don't care. Just don't act like you aren't doing the same thing anti-theists are doing. It frustrates me when you do. I'm sure it frustrates others. Roll up your sleeves and get in the scrum. That's all good. Just realize you're covered in mud and part of the scrum. Or get out of the scrum if you wish. It's rough in there. Sometimes people lose a tooth. Rugby metaphor ended!