To believe or not to believe... it's a helluva question for some. [View all]

[defacto7]

Our group has a small but interesting clientèle of people from across the board who share an interest in searching and sharing their views concerning belief and non-belief. Some of us have come to a conclusion that there is no deity or that we just don't know but we all share a quest for reality thinking. Sometimes we succeed and sometimes we fail but the end result is to learn from each other and form a community of searchers not bound to certain ideological positions that are taken for granted in other groups and forums. When we are able to build that community we also form a place to blow off steam in acceptance and understanding without repercussion. I think that is the reasonable outcome for any safe haven group.

Every once in a while, the Atheist and Agnostic group is visited by users who take positions that are contrary to it's ideals. Their positions are so virulent and accusing it makes me wonder why they are participating at all. They usually aren't trolls so to speak, they may be long term members of DU and also at times hosts of their own groups or even members of MER-T. It's been puzzling me for a while since it makes no sense that they intrude in this group as if they're trying to reform it or the subject. But now, I think I have figured out something, and I'll be the first to admit it's just conjecture on my part and may be bull shit but it's a possible answer to the dilemma of the disrupting nature of those who are compelled to "visit" and only contribute negative undercutting of it's constituents and their subjects.

Characteristics:

1. They claim at some time to be atheist, agnostic or non-believers.
2. Their points are baited with non-factual information about the commenter or the comment.
3. Their points are worded for the most effective disruption of the thread or a person.
4. They at some point resort to clear and outright personal insults based on bias without material reason.
5. They usually defend a religious point of view with a belligerent attitude.
5. They always project their own insults on the commenter; they blame to commenter for their own acts.

I think the issue is with their non-belief and actually, I don't think they are non-believers or agnostics at all. I think they want to be, wish to be, try to be, but they haven't reconciled their own fear of not believing and have a bent on defending any contrary position toward belief and religion in general. It may be they feel that vindicating or defending the beliefs they left or doubt will somehow relieve the guilt of being unable to relinquish those doubts. That would explain the extreme, untruthful and even hateful nature of their hit and run tactics and over the top anger geared to disrupt rather than reasoning together for the goal of understanding and conclusion.

This is a great place to share humor, angst, frustrations, ideas, information or anything that is in the spirit and interest of this group and I hope it does not meet the fate of other highly visible and disruptive groups who have no interest in reasoning with respect but rather cater to the reduction of all decent for the express purpose of decent alone.

I welcome any comments from those who participate in the spirit and good will of the A&A group and it's constituents but those who are bent on undercutting in A&A should just go back to the religion group or wherever it is you find your camaraderie.