Religion

cbayer

(146,218 posts)

53. Who's we? Did you read the article?

Reply to dimbear (Reply #45)

Mon May 7, 2012, 11:27 AM

May 2012

I am willing to bet that you did not, based on your response here.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

115 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Ask the Religion Experts: What does your faith say about atheists? [View all] rug May 2012 OP

I read this earlier today and enjoyed it. cbayer May 2012 #1

So what's your answer to the question posed? skepticscott May 2012 #2

Reasoned? darkstar3 May 2012 #3

What a great example of how one's agenda can completely change how one reads something. cbayer May 2012 #5

I summarized. You quote-mined. I'll take one over the other any day, as one included context. darkstar3 May 2012 #9

I will take one over the other any day as well. cbayer May 2012 #13

So pulling a sentence out of context is better? darkstar3 May 2012 #16

How could we do that? cbayer May 2012 #18

Read the beginning of this post. darkstar3 May 2012 #20

Perhaps that example extends to yourself? EvolveOrConvolve May 2012 #10

Of course it does. That's why I said it was a good example. cbayer May 2012 #12

And that's why I pointed it out EvolveOrConvolve May 2012 #17

For "reasoned and thoughtful" skepticscott May 2012 #6

All religion involves a disapproval of someone else. That's what they have in common. AnotherMcIntosh May 2012 #14

Not true. cbayer May 2012 #19

That article shows otherwise. darkstar3 May 2012 #21

Not so. cbayer May 2012 #22

Simple denial. Meh. darkstar3 May 2012 #24

You should use this as a learning opportunity EvolveOrConvolve May 2012 #25

It apparently wasn't offensive to the non-believer activist who did the interviews and wrote the cbayer May 2012 #28

And how do you know that? darkstar3 May 2012 #30

That's correct. He did not. Were he offended, I think he would have said so. cbayer May 2012 #31

It's not his blog. Perhaps he has some journalistic integrity. darkstar3 May 2012 #33

He didn't mince any words in his opening comments and cbayer May 2012 #34

Perhaps darkstar3 May 2012 #37

Go snark about me to one of your friends, darkstar. cbayer May 2012 #40

Oh? Have you run out of ways to tell me that this article was thoughtful darkstar3 May 2012 #42

And what kinds are we? EvolveOrConvolve May 2012 #36

You forget a post of hers earlier today... darkstar3 May 2012 #38

You are allowed to be offended by anything you want, whether offense is intended or not. cbayer May 2012 #39

I never claimed that there was any offense intended EvolveOrConvolve May 2012 #41

I have read the comments about why some find this offensive. cbayer May 2012 #43

An acknowledgement of atheism's existence is about all that it was EvolveOrConvolve May 2012 #46

Well said. darkstar3 May 2012 #47

Throughout the article, I could sense the pity these people have for atheists. It's revolting. AlbertCat May 2012 #87

So there is some tension between what you say and what you do. Goblinmonger May 2012 #49

Did you read the article, because what you are saying was said. cbayer May 2012 #54

Yep. Read the whole thing. Goblinmonger May 2012 #56

Why are you doubting someone else's perspective? trotsky May 2012 #63

Reason is not the right word.... Kalidurga May 2012 #4

Sure it is. cbayer May 2012 #7

I was highly offended by the views of the believers in the piece EvolveOrConvolve May 2012 #8

I guess we both missed all the positive points, and just have an agenda...Oi. darkstar3 May 2012 #11

I'll bet we're just deficient in the "other ways of knowing" EvolveOrConvolve May 2012 #15

According to the article, we're deficient in a great many things. darkstar3 May 2012 #23

For Christians, the verdict is just ignore them and avoid them. dimbear May 2012 #26

The whole point of the article (written by a non-believer) cbayer May 2012 #29

We know what their faiths say about atheists because they have written it down. dimbear May 2012 #45

Who's we? Did you read the article? cbayer May 2012 #53

cbayer, please read this post: trotsky May 2012 #81

Point taken. cbayer May 2012 #88

The atheist is the first person in the article to be asked muriel_volestrangler May 2012 #51

More people need to read your post. I hadn't realized that, and many others hadn't either. darkstar3 May 2012 #75

Well, that makes a lot more sense. cbayer May 2012 #76

I like this comment and agree with it. cbayer May 2012 #27

That comment, just like your "thoughtful" one above, darkstar3 May 2012 #32

So be it. cbayer May 2012 #35

What a tolerant and open-minded position. laconicsax May 2012 #70

What exactly does "nuanced answer" mean? skepticscott May 2012 #44

1 John 4:7-8 seems to define atheists as those who do not love: struggle4progress May 2012 #48

Is that what you believe? Goblinmonger May 2012 #50

So, atheists are hateful and can't feel love towards anyone? EvolveOrConvolve May 2012 #71

Try hard to avoid fallacious equivocation. When two conversants struggle4progress May 2012 #74

So you are the biblical expert telling us what this quotation means Goblinmonger May 2012 #83

I'm confused as to how you're parsing the scripture passage EvolveOrConvolve May 2012 #109

A ridiculous notion. darkstar3 May 2012 #77

Yes, we get a pat on the head. trotsky May 2012 #82

I would argue that when you feel love or appreciate beauty, you are in fact LTX May 2012 #84

And I would agree with that assessment. n/t trotsky May 2012 #85

Kind of makes you wonder whether god LTX May 2012 #86

The one thing I take from all the answers edhopper May 2012 #52

What do you expect from theologians? Of course they don't think atheists are right. cbayer May 2012 #55

No edhopper May 2012 #57

I can see how you would feel that way. cbayer May 2012 #58

I was being sarcastic, which I think is apropos to the "we just don't get it" attitude. edhopper May 2012 #60

Do you not think that some people have abandoned religion because they were hurt. cbayer May 2012 #62

I have know quite a few atheists edhopper May 2012 #65

I'll accept that, as it has been my experience as well. cbayer May 2012 #68

There are many of us who are angry EvolveOrConvolve May 2012 #72

Yes it is on full display. I think it's sometimes misdirected, though. cbayer May 2012 #73

Why do you assume that you are the target? laconicsax May 2012 #78

Individuals are routinely targeted and attacked here. cbayer May 2012 #79

Who has attacked you in this thread for being racist, homophobic, etc.? laconicsax May 2012 #80

You've twisted it. We were talking about the anger on full display here. cbayer May 2012 #89

I see you're not going to stop dodging questions. laconicsax May 2012 #91

Because the question you are asking is not the subject. cbayer May 2012 #92

That's not what I asked at all. laconicsax May 2012 #93

I don't think attacks on regressive believers are attacks on me (or others like me, cbayer May 2012 #94

Then what was the point of your comment? laconicsax May 2012 #95

She said that the anger towards believers was deserved and evident here. cbayer May 2012 #96

That's a distortion of what was said. laconicsax May 2012 #97

Are you claiming that it is not personally directed toward me? cbayer May 2012 #98

So you do see attacks against regressive believers as attacks against you. laconicsax May 2012 #99

No matter how many times I have tried to draw the distinction, you have failed to see it. cbayer May 2012 #100

I apologize for labeling you as a progressive believer. laconicsax May 2012 #102

laconicsax, I already answered that. I don't see it as an attack against me. cbayer May 2012 #103

I think you're mistaking anger at regressive theocrats for anger at you. laconicsax May 2012 #105

It's not disingenuous. It was an observation given in good faith. cbayer May 2012 #106

It's typically context-dependent. laconicsax May 2012 #107

Agreed. cbayer May 2012 #108

"You appear to have no interest in talking about why this group is hostile and toxic" trotsky May 2012 #101

One small quibble EvolveOrConvolve May 2012 #111

My bad. Funny, though. People often mistake me for a guy here! cbayer May 2012 #112

It's all good! EvolveOrConvolve May 2012 #114

And that anger is probably not going away any time soon EvolveOrConvolve May 2012 #110

I hear you. cbayer May 2012 #113

Neither I, nor any of the atheists I know, did that. trotsky May 2012 #67

The reverse is also true. rug May 2012 #59

Yes, the reverse is true as well. edhopper May 2012 #61

It absolutely is. Of course the difference is... trotsky May 2012 #64

' rug May 2012 #66

all condescend to the poor atheists who just don't get it. AlbertCat May 2012 #90

Quite a few Unitarian-Universalists LiberalEsto May 2012 #69

Thank God I'm a Buddhist-Taoist-Vedantist-Baha'i-Unitarian-atheist GliderGuider May 2012 #104

I honestly cannot remember atheists being mentioned in any church I ever attended Lydia Leftcoast May 2012 #115