The chance of a lifetime. Get rid of a fundie atheist.

[Evoman]

RT is a funny place. This place has a certain ebb and flow.

Sometimes, there are several discussions occuring, where there is basically no fighting and where everyone seems to get along fine. The next couple of weeks, there will be pretty long stretches where there is nobody posting, including atheists...I suppose it would be a perfect time for all these interesting religious discussions "free of intolerance and bigotry and hatred" to happen. But they don't. It is dead in the same way that the Christians forums are dead. Without argument, without some disagreement, discussion can't thrive.

And then we return to these fights about atheist fundamentalism. It always comes back to this. Always. And it's never productive, it never results in any changes. We start up the same old flame wars.

I've been here a long time...and I lurked for 2 years or more bfore I even signed up. And, honestly, I'm just not caring anymore.
When the topic comes up, I'll come in, make some jokes, but I don't really care. A little name calling isn't gonna hurt me. In the end, I know in my heart that the religious and non-religious people who stay in this forum will go back to the homeostatic level, where there may be a little snippiness but things never get out of hand.

But when this shit flares up, it does make me start wondering....Do the regular religious people here feel like we atheists hate them? That we are intolerant? That we are some clique who actually have some sort of anti-religous DUER network? Do they really want me to go? I'm not talking about the newbies, nor am I talking about the usual concern trolls from outside the forum who complain about the fighting, but seem to love to stir up shit. I'm talking about the religious people here who I've talked to a lot, both in an out of this forum. Do they really despise my participation in this forum THAT much?

I honestly can't say that I hate anybody here, nor that I have ever really taken any conflicts I've had personally. I personally enjoy the back and forth. But do others want me gone?

I thought about a little last night, and I decided what I'm going to do. Right now, I want to make a sincere offer. This goes out to all the religious people on this forum. I've decided that if you want me to leave, here is your chance. If you do, then fuck it, I'll leave. You'll never see me post here again. Here's the deal....if I get 5 people here who tell me "Evoman, I want you to leave"...then I'm out of here. Hell, if 3 people are adamant enough, I'll leave. And don't worry...if I see you outside the forum, I won't attack you nor treat you any differently. What I want is honesty. In fact, you don't even have to post. Send me a PM with the words, and that way you don't even have to deal with the repercussions from the small minority of people here who might like me.

I am ready to leave. Are you ready to kick me off? Here is your chance. You won't get rid of all of us "fundie atheists", but I am obviously one of them, so you'll get rid of at least one.

[TZ]

1. Good post.

I hope you don't leave though.
Its funny how people are making me out to be some kind of forum domineering hog when the truth is a rarely post here anymore, AND I haven't posted a whole lot in AA either. So this whole I should leave and never return meme is funny to me. Especially since I get along great with 99% of the religious people I know.

[Evoman]

2. Yeah, I know.

Almost my entire friend network is christian. My gf is christian. Fuck, my best friend since 3rd grade is a hardcore protestant fundie, for gods sake. But I come here, and I am constantly told I'm intolerant and hateful and narrowminded.

Well fuck it. If the people here hate me, I'll leave. I don't have to spend time speaking with people who don't want me around, when there are plenty of people who do.

[PDJane]

4. I'd rather have you here...........

Although I'm probably more atheist than anyone you know, so that probably doesn't count. I will have to admit that the Israel situation had a hand in that, too...which really makes me an apostate,I suppose.

[cosmik debris]

3. No one should be kicked out.

No one should leave, not even Poster X

Take a break if you need one. If you are not enjoying this, don't do it. But don't leave because a poster or two gets nasty. They will move on and the cycle will continue.

[Evoman]

5. Fuck it.

They want me to leave, I'll leave. I don't need to take a break, because I'm really not all that upset. And really, if it's only one or two posters, then I don't have anything to worry about, right? If people on this forum feel strongly enough that they have to complain for threads on end, than who am I to ruin their RT experience.

My challenge stays, and I'm dead serious.....but I'll keep it open for a couple of days. Give people plenty of time to get rid of me but if I stay past that, I'm here for keeps.

[Goblinmonger]

6. I want him out

he's an asshole. At least he didn't spill the beans about the Atheist meetings we have to take over the world.

[Evoman]

7. You don't count. You're a racist...I wanna be kicked out because I'm atheist, not because I'm

latino.

[Goblinmonger]

8. You're Latino?

Son of a bitch! How did I ever like you?

[Evoman]

10. I think it had something to do with the suitcase filled with

10,000 dollars in small, unmarked bills.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

9. Stay, evoman

What I've decided, after years of reading topics in this forum, is that atheists and religious/spiritual people think differently. Would not be in the least surprised if they did brain scans and found that different sections of the brain were developed/under developed in atheists and believers. Because of this, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to come to agreement. But that doesn't mean that we can't attempt to see the world from another's viewpoint.

[Evoman]

11. Yeah, maybe.

Lol....but the question then becomes: who's brain is devoloped, and who is underdeveloped?

Aw well, this underdeveloped brain thanks you. You're all class.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

20. Oh, I'd say you have portions of your brain

much more highly developed than mine, whilst I have other areas that are more developed. So we are both sages and fools at the same time.

[Goblinmonger]

12. I have no idea where you are coming from half the time

but I like you. I bet we'd get along in real life. And the fact that I don't understand half of what you are talking about, I think, proves your point about the brain scan thing.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

21. Thanks for your input

I'm glad that we concur that the brain development may be different, thus leading to differences.

[TZ]

14. I actually think its a right brain/left brain thing

There was a recent story about a neurologist who became more spiritual after a stroke because she could no longer use her left brain. And NO to any passing trolls I am NOT suggesting religion is the result of brain damage but I do think differing brain physiology does explain why some people are more sprituality oriented than others.:)

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

22. Now that's an interesting take on things

When I was a teacher, this "right-left brain" concept was just being explored, and I took a class on it. What I found was that, according to what they knew at the time (which may have been discredited by now-we're talking early 80s), I was mainly left-brained with some smattering of right brained-ness. I love to code web pages, which I take to be more left-brained, and don't understand geometry, which, at the time, they said was a right-brained activity. And yet I love music, can play just about any instrument by ear, and love to create art. It would be interesting to compare these activities with those of atheists to see how they are alike/different.

[Silent3]

13. It's okay with me if you leave the forum...

...so long as we can still get together offline for hot atheist sex.

[Evoman]

15. That's a given.

What's the point of being atheist if you can't have indiscrimate, nasty sex?

[Meshuga]

16. I think we are better off with you here

What a way to make a point! But I think you already had a great point at "Without argument, without some disagreement, discussion can't thrive." You didn't need to go on and make the offer since you nailed it right there.

There is no need to leave the forum. Please continue to post here. Your posts are appreciated by many of us.

[Evoman]

17. Thank you very much.

I appreciate your comment.

However, I really didn't do this to make a point. It is a serious offer and I don't plan on leaving unless I'm booted. When I play, I play for keeps. If somebody is going to go out of their way to call me intolerant and hateful, then take it all the way to the end.

[Dorian Gray]

18. For reals?

I have absolutely no interest in running people, fundamentalist atheist or not!!!!!!!!!! , out of this forum. (LOL!)

Sometimes you or Goblinmonger or Trotsky or someone else may say something that makes me feel as though you believe that because I believe in God, I'm a little affected in the brain. But, my own mother has made me feel that way since I was 8. So some strangers on a message board aren't going to upset me all that much!

People disagree all the time. I can handle it. If I find myself getting riled up, I take a break or will quit a thread. None of these threads are worth a spike in our blood pressure! :)

And when real debates happen rather than vague discussions about Fundy Atheists being THE EVIL or The Religious being THE SHEEP, I appreciate having everyone's POV.

[Evoman]

19. For reals.

I'm just trying to give a little power back to the believers whose powers we fundies usurped.

What I find weird is that I can give people the feeling that we think they are stupid or mentally ill, when that's really not what I think at all.

Do I believe that religion is nonsense and irrational. WEll, yeah. Do I think that any man or women on this planet is completely rational, all the time? Hell, freaking, no. I like to think that I know my own mind a lot better than a lot of people I know, but even I recognize irrationality in my thought patterns.

For example, I have an irrational fear/hate of vomit. Its not just disgust..it goes way farther than that. What's funny is that a lot of people, upon hearing that, like to pretend to make puking noises and bother me about it. Hell, I've got people in my life who like to find the kinks in my armor (and this is a big one) and needle me for all it's worth.

If there is one thing that even half bothers me about this forum (and it takes a lot to bother me..this fundie business doesn't affect me in the least), it's the accusation that I hate religious people or that I think they are stupid. No no no. How could I? I've said time and time again that most of the people I hold dearest are religious. My gf is smarter than I am and she is christian (albeit very lightly). Why would I hate my own family and friends? Or think they are stupid? Or be intolerant towards them? It doesn't make any sense.

[Dorian Gray]

36. See....

Thank you for that!

(And I also hate vomit. The sound, the sight, and the smell! I have to run away or close my eyes and cover my ears if someone is doing it near me!)

So, hopefully you realized that my last post was another vote for "Please don't go!"

[Zebedeo]

92. Stay, "Evilman"

This board would be boring without you.

:beer: :puke: :hi:

[Goblinmonger]

23. I have never thought that about you.

For real. I enjoy the give and take of this forum. You strike me as someone of the same vein. As a result, I may come on a little strong at times. If I do, just let me know to back off. Well, don't do it like some people and call me a fundamentalist, but just a friendly comment that something might have been over the line.

I am quite sure you and I would have a good time chatting over a black russian.

[Evoman]

24. Dude, you may have an alchohol problem. Your obsession with black russians is concerning.

And suprising, given how racist you are.

:rofl:

[Goblinmonger]

26. I actually don't drink that much

but do love the black russian to wind down at the end of the week.

And what better way to show my racial superiority than by drinking a black russian and pissing it out my cock of dominance. (was that over the line?)

[Evoman]

34. .....

:rofl:

Your asking the wrong guy about "lines". Charlie Murphy could have been talking about me when he said, "He was a habitual line-crosser".

[trotsky]

54. ...

:spray:

Considering the level of discourse generated by Poster X recently, I'd say your FAR from over the line with that remark.

[Dorian Gray]

40. I thought for sure

he'd be a White Russian man. ;)

[Dorian Gray]

37. Thanks...

Like I said, sometimes I may get that impression, but it's definitely not something that hurts me at the core of my soul or anything! :) And so many people in my life look at me funny for my myriad of views about life. My husband thinks I'm a fool for being a huge Battlestar Galactica fan! So, it's not something that really bothers me! (I think HE's the fool for not watching with me!) ;)

Seriously, at the end of the day, I think that we all probably have a hell of a lot more in common than not in common.

[uberllama42]

25. I was actually thinking about leaving myself

Just short of 1000 posts, too. But I realized that if I posted a GBCW here, I would just be bitching about Poster X. I'm sure I'll come back and enjoy this place once he decides to do whatever it is he does when he's not stirring shit up in R/T. And good luck him there, I say.

I can't speak for theists on this board, but I can tell you that I almost always enjoy your posts. I think this place would be diminished without your input. If you are tired and want to leave or go on hiatus, that's your prerogative.

Hang on. You're not just fishing for complements, are you? There are more than a handful of people here who like you. I don't think I trust the motives of this thread. :tinfoilhat:

[Goblinmonger]

27. I immediately had a list of about

50 things I wanted to post about my speculation of what Poster X does while not stirring up shit, but I think they might get me tombstoned.

[John Gauger]

45. I think if we've learned anything from the late shitstorm,

it's that right now, for whatever reason, you can pretty much break as many rules as you want and not get tombstoned.

[Evoman]

28. Nah...the only thing I care less about than insults is compliments.

If I could ascribe one other motive to this post other than the one I stated clearly, it is to leave some the ugliness behind us. I think it's sort of working.

I don't know if anyone will believe it, but I'm really not the drama queen type like you may have seen in other forum. You know, the ones who decide to leave in a dramatic, protracted, huff. Those people come back and want people to beg them to stay. I hate when people do that, and it isn't the game I'm playing. I don't want to leave, but I will.

If people really want me and "my type" to leave (this being the religion forum and atheists not belonging here), here is their chance. I wanna know if it is a real desire, or just a way to distract and evade.

[Dorian Gray]

41. It doesn't look like you are getting many takers

on your offer. Which is a good thing.

I even suspect that the more antagonist posters wouldn't know what to do without you here to rail on against. So, there is that, too!

Sometimes people just enjoy bitching and being contentious. That's what makes message boards thrive. And our innate desire to think
that what we have to say is really and truly the most important thing since the Big Bang.

[HamdenRice]

29. "Do the regular religious people here feel like we atheists hate them"

I think you are missing the point. The fundie athies hate not just religious people, but other atheists who do not "toe their line."

They are much more intolerant than you seem to be aware.

So it's not just the religious people who are annoyed, but the vast majority of atheists and agnostics who might have started posting here, if it had not developed into the "atheist taliban" discussion group.

[TZ]

30. rofl

"atheist taliban"...you just don't get it do you? Ad hom thy name is hamdenrice

[Evoman]

31. Cool....then this is their chance, isn't it.

Can I mark you down for "Please leave Evoman"?

[Evoman]

32. Oh, and if you would be so kind, I would prefer that you don't turn my thread into a flame war.

There are many other threads hashing that out. The purpose of this thread isn't really to discuss fundamentalism or whatever.

[HamdenRice]

33. Fair enough

but there was a factionally incorrect statement in the OP that needed to be corrected.

[Evoman]

35. You mean factually?

Meh..whatever.

I hope you don't mind someone of my low intellectual caliber correcting you.

[ZombieHorde]

38. If you do go, will you bring me back some soda and smokes?

[varkam]

39. I want you gone, Evoman.

But only because you stole my seat at the EAC, and my rubber chicken. :D

[Warpy]

42. I want you to stay, Evoman

You're the only one in this place that makes me look good by comparison.

[Evoman]

44. Ha....a good argument.

And the religious want me around because I make atheists look bad!

:rofl:

No wonder I'm not getting booted.

[Rob H.]

43. Don't go!

I always enjoy reading your posts, both here and in the AA group.

[PassingFair]

46. Can't we just pelt you with decaying vegetable matter?

We don't really want to drive you out of town....



:P

[ironbark]

47. Can I please have a link to the post

in which someone asked you to leave, suggested you should or expressed "hate" towards you.

It would help to see what had prompted you to feel this way.

Thanks

[varkam]

48. And why would it matter what prompted Evoman to feel this way? eom

[ironbark]

49. Because there have been quite a few posts lately

that interpreted criticism of a stated pov as personalised criticism of the author.

The two things are not the same nor does the former lead directly to the latter.

I am curious and concerned to establish that this is/not yet another such misunderstanding.

Evoman has expressed concerns indicating- “They want me to leave, I'll leave”…If somebody is going to go out of their way to call me intolerant and hateful”.

I haven’t seen any posts that express such views to Evoman but I also haven’t had time/opportunity to read all the recent threads….so I would appreciate the opportunity to see the posts or quotes that have prompted his thread.

[TZ]

50. Read this thread from the AA group

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=263&topic_id=32828&mesg_id=32828
I can't even give you the worst of the quotes here (although pay attention to post 93 there, that refers to me, something that upset him quite a bit, and is indeed quite nasty.)
Evomans never been shy about expressing his opinion, in fact he is much less diplomatic than I am but has always been honest enough to tell the group that he gets along with his religious friends in the real world quite well, as do I.
Which is part of the reason he is frusrated I think..I've actually gotten in flame wars with other athiests that I thought were being unfair to believers so to have the nasty accusations (that I need to "change my behavior")aimed at me (and other posters he respects), particularly in my thread has pissed him off.
Lets just say, as a group when one of us atheists gets smeared with THAT label, there is a long history here in R/T of it actually being an attack on the more vocal atheists here, Evoman being one of the most vocal or even "strident" I suppose.
I respect you, ironbark, which is why I am trying to clarify the situation here, as it seems to me you do not have all the background here and therefore are missing why me and Evoman and others get so pissed off at these rounds of "teh athiests are teh evul" flamewars which seem to occur here on a regular basis.
Edit: never mind about post 93, it was removed--but it was basically a thinly veiled accusation of me being mentally ill.

[ironbark]

51. I read the thread and I checked the names twice...

It’s late and I’m not Santa…..but I didn’t see anything about ““They want me to leave, I'll leave”…If somebody is going to go out of their way to call me intolerant and hateful”…in fact I didn’t even see Evomans name as a thread participant.

Ok…there is a history within R/T and AA of contention regarding the meaning and motive of “THAT label” (“He whos name must not be mentioned young Harry Potter” ). But I cannot see any link between the thread and the question I asked.

I thank you for your expression of respect…to you and all participants the feeling is reciprocated.
I’m struggling to understand how challenge to a stated pov is so frequently personalised or extrapolated and globalised.

From the link provided-
“Raise your hand... If you are a militant fundamentalist atheist who wants to destroy all religion, and kill believers in the name of your atheistic ferver!”

I would hope it is a joke? A deliberate straw man exaggeration of the original (un nameable) proposition? But it seems to get repeated, as a serious reflection, in one form or another in thread after thread.
>As if< the criticism of the expressed pov of some atheists was a personal attack on them and a blanket sleight on all atheists.

“Cause you know, thats the majority view of atheists on this board”

Um….no….I’ve been reading pretty carefully and that is nothing like what has been expressed.

I’m honestly finding it almost impossible to reconcile the disparity between what is actually said and the extrapolation, exaggeration and misrepresentation that is reflected back.

Often it is the 180% direct opposite of the pov presented.

All that aside….I still have no insight as to the origins of the feelings expressed by Evoman in this thread.

[TZ]

52. That thread was sarcasm indeed

I can't tell you how many times atheists as a group have been slammed because of the bad behavior of a few (numerous GD posts, along with R/T). No one has ever asked Evoman to leave but just look at what "poster x" keeps saying about me. I HAVE NEVER ONCE SLAMMED ALL BELIEVERS HERE AS FUNDAMENTALISTS, nor has Evoman, but we are repeatedly told that R/T should be a place for believers only because most of us are "talibanic jihads" (straight quote there from a recent thread) or intolerant or this that or they other. Yeah there are rude atheists here but I'ts a pretty constant that we all should be held responsible for their behavior...(although granted some people think a liberal christians should be held responsible for fundy behavior which is just as ridiculous).
Also please note that in my thread I was just called a "crybaby" for alerting on the nasty name calling posts that went beyond the rules of the board. This is not the first time I've been called nasty names because I* gasp *criticize religious establishments.
There are believers here who think ANY criticism of religion is out of bounds. Alot of this stuff can't be picked up from particular posts but by patterns of responses.
The whole fact that somehow *I* have been labelled a intolerant bigot..."fundamentalist atheist" is nothing more than that, illustrates the point, when I'm actually one of the more respectful of believers here..however, if someone makes a bullshit statement like "everyone is born with a religion" I'm going to call it as I see it.
People cannot distinguish between these phrases "I think religion sucks" and "I think you suck cause you believe in a fairy tale".
Evoman and I fall strongly in the first category but because of a few that say the second phrase, we are lumped together when we are really saying two different things.
Both my posts and Evoman's posts are more a reaction to a series of events and trying to point to one particular post (although I can say in this latest case, I can point to one particular poster)

I think you are better off instead of asking for a particular post, asking why something thinks or believes something.
Believe me, I've tried the here is a thread for you to look at and its LARGELY gets ignored. Even poster x seems to forget that he praised me for some of my posts in the past and is no locked in on "proving" how badly I am supposedly behaving because I've contradicted his pet world view

[ironbark]

60. If-

“No one has ever asked Evoman to leave…”

Then I resign myself to going to the grave without any insight as to what prompted/motivated the concerns expressed by Evoman in this thread.

I am now left with the option/dilemma of discussing/sorting out what occurred in another unrelated thread when I cannot gain insight into what prompted this one.

Ok….”Down the rabbit hole Alice”! ;-)

“ but just look at what "poster x" keeps saying about me. I HAVE NEVER ONCE SLAMMED ALL BELIEVERS HERE AS FUNDAMENTALISTS, nor has Evoman,”

turtlensue…. I cannot see >anyone< saying that >you< “HAVE [] SLAMMED ALL BELIEVERS HERE AS FUNDAMENTALISTS” and I can’t see Evoman mentioned at all.
It’s a whole thread, maybe I’m missing it, maybe it’s deleted……or maybe you/ (&Evoman) are personalising the criticism of the behaviour of a faction? I don't know...but I cannot find/see
what you describe.

“..but we are repeatedly told that R/T should be a place for believers only…”

Once more turtlensue I cannot see >anyone< saying “R/T should be a place for believers only” or that atheists (individual or collective) should leave. Please link direcly to the post/s in which someone is telling you/Evoman that you should “get out” or “leave” or that anyone wants to “get rid of all of us (atheists)” or “They want me to leave” or “to get rid of me” or “somebody is going to go out of their way to call me intolerant and hateful”

These are all direct quotes from this thread and there are others of similar nature all over the board. All I’m asking for is a link to the post/s that prompted them.

“because most of us are "talibanic jihads" (straight quote there from a recent thread)”

Well…no…it’s not a “(straight quote there from a recent thread)” turtlensue.
I site searched your “"talibanic jihads" straight quote” and nothing came up.
I recalled a recent “Taliban” remark… and unless there is another I believe you are referring to-

“So it's not just the religious people who are annoyed, but the vast majority of atheists and agnostics who might have started posting here, if it had not developed into the "atheist taliban" discussion group”. HR

>Yet again< it does not say, suggest or infer that “most of us are "atheist taliban" or all engaged in "talibanic jihads"….in fact it is suggesting EXACTLY THE OPOSITE (capitals for emphasis/not shouting ;-)


“Yeah there are rude atheists here but it’s a pretty constant that we all should be held responsible for their behaviour”

But in the thread link you provided and here and now in this one there is >NO EVIDENCE & NO SUGGESTION< that “all should be held responsible”

So what’s going on?
At every turn thus far there is no post/quote supporting the claims made and a couple that say the opposite.

“The whole fact that somehow *I* have been labelled a intolerant bigot..."fundamentalist atheist" is nothing more than that, illustrates the point”

Please turtlensue…I have read the thread five times now and I cannot see any point at which you personally are “labelled a intolerant bigot” or even identified as a "fundamentalist atheist"

I’m not going to say more about the thread you linked to Turtlensue instead I’m going to close with a statement of personal preference and intent-
If people are discussing an issue/idea/pov then I don’t believe it matters much if questions, positions and beliefs get lost in the mix- missed, ignored or conflated.
But when interpersonal allegations arise, assertions of attack, slander, insult (whatever) I believe it is important (almost a duty) to provide direct quote or link to the post of concern.
In the absence of evidence and substantiation there is often a reliance on innuendo misrepresentation,exaggeration or just 'what it sounded like'.

I read through the whole thread three times in full and several 'scans' searching for the words that matched up with what you heard/felt...I honestly couldn't make the connection at the crucial points
...especialy "somehow *I* have been labelled a intolerant bigot".....I cannot see that.

[Evoman]

67. I've just got one more thing to say to you.

The history of this forum goes on long before you graced us with your presence.

And this thing is not as personal as you may think...it's not so much that people have asked me to leave, it's that people have asked us VOCAL atheists to leave.

That's why the title was "get rid of a fundie atheist" and not "get rid of Evoman".


Let's leave it at that, and close it up.

I'm not leaving, and frankly, I've got to get back to being intolerant and hating theists.

[HamdenRice]

68. I don't think anyone has asked "vocal" atheists to leave

"Vocal atheists" (for the moment I won't use the other term) have been asked to allow space for respectful and tolerant dialogue between people of faith, agnostics and moderate atheists.

I think what is going on is this: there is a position within "vocal atheism" that says, belief in God is silly and demonstrably false, and I have no obligation to "respect" belief in the "sky king." So asking such a "vocal atheist" to be respectful is kind of like asking him or her not to represent an idea that is deeply held and deeply personal.

It's sort of like asking an African American not to "play the race card" by seeing racism in things that white people wouldn't see. It's just two ways of seeing the world that is almost unreconcilable.

I think that this was what happened in turtle's well known "please don't call religious people mentally ill" thread. There were people who responded that they honestly could not think of religious people as anything other than delusional and weren't prepared to lie about their conclusions.

So I honestly think that it is almost an irresolvable puzzle. I think what is going on is that asking a "vocal atheist" to be respectful of religious folk is perceived to be basically asking a "vocal atheist" not to exist or to go away.

But it isn't. It's asking for space to have a different conversation that they could just ignore.

If I'm right, I honestly don't know what the solution is.

[TZ]

70. sigh

What you are leaving out is the VAST MAJORITY of athiests in that thread including me Evoman, CD and others that have been called "disrespectful" agreed with my OP.

[HamdenRice]

71. But the question is whether you are reading in something that isn't there

and that's what I'm trying to get at. Maybe a better analogy would be to gays and lesbians. Back in the bad old days, gay people were often told in liberal circles, "I don't object to your being gay, but I don't want it in my face."

It seems to me that what is going on is that when some DUers ask "vocal atheists" not to "call out" religious people, they perceive this as being asked not to be what they are.

Ironbark has basically proven that what you think you were being told, you weren't being told.

[TZ]

73. So

Me evoman, Random Australian, varkam, Cosmik Debris, John Gauger, Umberllama42, Trotsky, Warpy, Goblinmonger, among others are all "mistaken" are we? Consiering the intellectual capabilities of this group (including R_A who is the intellectual superior of everyone here I think) of people, I highly doubt that.
Sorry. I know what I know and neither you or ironbark has proven a damned thing, However, unlike you I think ironbark has reasons for his obtuseness. You do not.

BTW, notice how badly varkam got flamed for talking about what an ad hominem "fundamentalist atheist is". So there is no hostility to atheists here? Or to those how criticism relgion. Yeah right.

[HamdenRice]

74. "for his obtuseness"

Do you think you in any way conform to an ideal of respectful dialogue? I don't see how you could.

[TZ]

75. that's not an insult fyi

It just means he just doesn't get it (and I've used it in debates with friends). Nothing else implied but you are the expert on insults, right?
edit..In light of your "view" I challange you to find a post where I have been less than respectful to ironbark, whom I think will never see eye to eye with me....

[HamdenRice]

72. Just wanted to say thanks!

for bringing some empirical rigor to this discussion!

[ironbark]

85. Sorry Mister....I'm not supposed to talk to you

Hell...if I even agree with your pov or a portion thereof I'm your "friend" and "buddy" and I've "hitched my star to your wagon" ;-)

"empirical rigor"?

Ahhhhh it aint worth Jack.

Say something loud and long enough and folk will hold it as gospel without even checking the
most basic facts.
And your "character" and "intent"?
Why that can be determined with psychic insight... regardless of your clearly stated pov.

Thanks to you for presenting my outsiders pov to the group….glad to see it evoked such thoughtful consideration and discussion ;-)

[Evoman]

65. *sigh*

"I’m struggling to understand how challenge to a stated pov is so frequently personalised or extrapolated and globalised."

You have no idea how frustrating this statement is. This has been my point forever. Although this thread may appear quite "personal", a lot of the issues and conflicts people have with me are due to the fact I have the same attitude.

When I say I hate religion, or I find it to be nonsense, or criticize it, I never mean anything personally. But I'm often accused of "attacking believers".

It isn't the believers I'm attacking, it's their ideas.

[ironbark]

88. *Deep breath*

(responding also to 67)

“Although this thread may appear quite "personal",”

Clearly it is both highly emotive and personal-
“They want me to leave” or “to get rid of me” or “somebody is going to go out of their way to call me intolerant and hateful”

I just requested quotes and/or links to the posts that had evoked and prompted the sentiments expressed. None have been put forward and I can only conclude that the concerns expressed are based on a sense or feeling or interpretation/extrapolation that arose from the history of this forum

“The history of this forum goes on long before you graced us with your presence”.

It’s a pleasure to be of service ;-)

“And this thing is not as personal as you may think...it's not so much that people have asked me to leave, it's that people have asked us VOCAL atheists to leave.”

Evoman….I have the sneaking suspicion that “somebody is going to go out of their way to call me intolerant and hateful” has little to do with ‘board history’ or general calls for “VOCAL atheists to leave” (The latter being repeated all over the board by a number of people in spite of the fact that no such (recent) call can be seen/linked to)

I could speculate further and ask again for a link to the post/s concerned but that (it has been made clear) would be imprudent and fruitless.


“That's why the title was "get rid of a fundie atheist" and not "get rid of Evoman".

Oh please Evoman…you identified yourself as the potential sacrificial fundie atheist and the people of Athens have spoken.

The question of who (if anyone) called for any individuals or groups removal or censorship is mute and dead because no evidence/substantiation is ever going to be given.

“Let's leave it at that, and close it up.”

Just out of curiosity…Has anyone ever read M Scott Pecks work on Community Stage Development and the continious loop cycle that runs from Stage one ‘Pseudo Community’ to Stage two ‘Chaos’ and back again ‘Pseudo Community’?
The cycle is only broken by the intervention of ‘disaster’ or by a ‘heart voice’ of Stage three ‘Vulnerability’…if a group can hear and respect a voice of brokenness or vulnerability and avoid the retreat into ‘Pseudo Community’ it may reach Stage four- ‘True Community’.

“I've got to get back to being intolerant and hating theists.”

Go for it Evoman!...I’ve got to get back to “bashing and insulting others” and taking a “mean & dirty path with personal slurs”

I can provide a source for my externally assigned task….got one for yours? ;-)

Happy trails.

[Evoman]

89. Look, if you don't believe me, I don't care.

I'm not going to bring up old threads to satisfy the needs of some guy I don't even know. Even with the new google search, looking for some old posts and bringing up names of people who may or may not even believe the same things they did when I had discussions with them is too much work and lame.

I don't keep a freaking list of every single insult somebody threw at me, or everytime someone has called me intolerant. I just remember that it has happened. I don't even care if they CONSIDERED it an insult or an objective statement of some sort. It doesn't matter to me. All that matters is that if people think that this forum can enter some golden age of deep,religious conversation without me and other like me here, then I'm giving them a chance to put their money where their mouths are and vote to have me go. Hey, I don't add anything to the conversation since I'm so intent on disturbing other people fine, religious conversation. Fuck, you yourself posted some of my hateful ramblings right?

So then fucking get rid of me so you don't have to listen to me ramble my anti-religious sentiments.

But none of it matters anymore. I'm not going anywhere, and frankly, I'm getting bored with justifying shit to you. Dude, I don't have anything against you, so I'm not interested in have some sort of argument with you. I don't even get your interest in this thing at all.

[ironbark]

90. It’s not a matter of “believing you”

“Fuck, you yourself posted some of my hateful ramblings right?”

I was asked by another contributor to defend my pov and provide examples of what I had seen-

"Where have the "members of the clique" that are responding in here been "fundmantally contemptuous/hateful towards all things religous." I just don't believe that is an accurate statement of my band of merry atheists".

I did so, naming >no one< and pointing the finger at >no one< nor asking any one to be censored/shut up or leave-
Please note the post heading making intent crystal clear

Thu May-29-08 06:54 PM
‘Here....the general spirit made flesh’
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=171766&mesg_id=172794


And by Thu May-29-08 12:35 PM we get-
“The chance of a lifetime. Get rid of a fundie atheist.”

Every opportunity was extended to see if my post sparked, prompted or influenced the appearance of your thread. All I got back (until now) was referance to prior “board history”

“So then fucking get rid of me so you don't have to listen to me ramble my anti-religious sentiments”.

No doubt the repeatedly alleged intent and desire to “get rid of you” resides in my repeated referance to ‘general spirit’ and ‘board culture’

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=171766&mesg_id=172914

“Your fully entitled not to believe and not to like.
And I’m fully entitled to question and challenge the unwavering depth and degree of such dislike and to examine its implications as reflective of a trend, prevailing attitude or board culture.


“But none of it matters anymore. I'm not going anywhere,…”

What?…….after >all the times< I have asked and expected you to shut up or leave (zero)…..your going to defy me and stick around!?
That’s pretty dammed bold! ;-)

“…and frankly, I'm getting bored with justifying shit to you. Dude,”

A “justification” may follow on from an explanation or substantiation…but in the absence of the latter I never expected (or asked for) the former. Mate.


“I don't have anything against you, so I'm not interested in have some sort of argument with you….”.

Likewise…nothing against you…never called you anything….never asked or expected “shut up” or “leave”…or “justify” your pov.
I am tempted to explain again that the original quote “fuck religion” was just one of many I could have picked up exemplifying the general board spirit/culture….but…what the heck…..why should we let 'the facts' get in the way of such a good (highly emotive and personalised) story?

“I don't even get your interest in this thing at all”

My interest was prompted by the (seemingly significant to me) small time frame between events of 29-08 06:54 PM and events of 29-08 12:35 PM ….and the suspicion/concern that there may be a connection between the two events.

This suspicion/concern was reinforced by-
“Fuck, you yourself posted some of my hateful ramblings right?” and
“So then fucking get rid of me so you don't have to listen to me ramble my anti-religious sentiments”.

[Evoman]

91. You? You think you had something to do with this thread?

Is that what this is about? Don't worry about it, because it didn't have ANYTHING to do with our exchange.

No, this thread was for anyone who has ever said "Why are you atheist fundies even in this forum? You disturb conversation and scare away other religious people."

And that shit has happened. Lots of times. And no I'm not going to dig up posts.

So just chill out.

[varkam]

55. I don't know, there have been a lot of ad homs lately.

Dumb, bigoted, fundie, et cetera. These are not criticisms of a pov, but rather direct attacks - they haven't been too hard to spot.

[uberllama42]

56. Come now, varkam

All three of those examples were used by one poster in particular. Why don't you list some of the ad homs used against him? You are being rather disingenuous. You are contributing to the overall tenor of snark that stifles discussion here.

I do not approve of snark.

[varkam]

57. Don't make me use my moderator death ray on you.

:rofl:

[ironbark]

58. Do you approve then of Boojums?

[uberllama42]

61. Come again? n/t

[ironbark]

76. Snark , Boojum or Bandersnatch.

“Snarks was all well and good, you must be careful; for, if your Snark is a Boojum, then "you will softly and suddenly vanish away, and never be met with again"

Lewis Carroll, The Hunting of the Snark

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hunting_of_the_Snark

http://www.literature.org/authors/carroll-lewis/the-hunting-of-the-snark/index.html

[uberllama42]

79. I had no idea Carroll used that word

I wonder if it has any relation to the way we use it.

I should really read Carroll. Thanks for the links.

[ironbark]

59. Without seeing the post and context

Without seeing the post and context

"direct attack" cannot be determined.

For all I know (without link to post) it may be- "A 'dumb' idea, a 'bigoted' pov and a 'fundie' point of view".

Here, as elsewhere I (and others) are asked to take these unseen 'ad homs' on faith….>blind faith<

Elsewhere it is alleged I “clearly intended insult” was “bashing and insulting others” took a “mean & dirty path with personal slurs..”

Ask for cite, link, evidence, substantiation and none is provided…..........nor will it be.

If I have been so clearly "bashing and insulting others" then it seems strange that the Mods have not deleted a post of mine (since last Nov?)...and stranger still that these "clearly intended insults" and "personal slurs" cannot be now shown or seen.

Strange in a realm of reason that we are expected to have faith and believe in the absence of >any< supporting evidence in the invisible demon posts.

No doubt if enough smoke is created some will assume fire.

[TZ]

62. They are deleted so you will have to take me on faith

The responses were "you are dumb", "you are a sock puppet", "you should change your behavior" etc. They are pretty black and white.
Remember varkam is a moderator, I think he knows an ad hominem when he sees them.

Look to be frank, I don't think you are ever going to see the POV of atheists. I think you genuinely don't understand, and are NOT trying to be disruptive, insulting or to drive people out of this forum or make them put you on ignore so you don't have to be embarrassed by them as I strongly believe one person is doing.
Don't be offended, because I think its worth my time to explain this, but I think you are the victim of a cultural misunderstanding.
You are an Aussie and I have had a lot of interaction with Aussies in the past couple of years. Your culture is QUITE different from here. Religion is not nearly as open and public and flaunted down there as it is in this country. When you say strident anti-religious attitudes are "dangerous", I have to try hard not to roll my eyes. DU is one of the few places where atheists can openly discuss their atheism without worrying about what is gonna happen to them. There are people on this board who have been fired from their jobs for being atheists. Even in my ultraliberal state there are still laws on the book that atheists cannot hold public office.

So they come here to talk. And yeah, there are a lot of progressive atheists, but they still make up a small minority in the real world. And it makes a lot of us bitter to watch our candidates go to pointless and to me DANGEROUS faith forums, where the are vetted for being properly religious (and of the RIGHT religion--look at how many people are trying to "smear" Obama as being a muslim that should tell you about the attitudes in this country) So when we come here and listen to fellow progressives talk about the "dangers of the fundamentalist atheist" which is OFTEN a fundie/RW talking point, it infuriates us. There are some believers on this board who behave as if they are being unfairly persecuted, when atheists know that IRL, its totally the opposite.
The best illustration of the real world prejudice are people like Anne Coulter who use the label "godless liberal" as an epithet. And the sad part of this, is many people, even some democrats think this is a bad thing.

[ironbark]

82. On “faith”? Oh I ‘BELIEVE’ in you turtlensue! ;-)

“The responses were "you are dumb", "you are a sock puppet", "you should change your behavior" etc. They are pretty black and white.”

Ok….that’s deemed ad hom and gets lifted…I have no problem with that…but must resign myself to the fact that the emotive terms (“get rid of” etc) didn’t occur in the deleted threads and cannot be shown elwere..

It seem to me patently obvious that (quite probably because of the ‘history’)
it has reached the stage at which folk cannot even read/hear what the other is saying without responding with disingenuous extrapolation, psychic insight assumption or straight up misrepresentation.
Now maybe the ad hom provokes the misrepresentation or maybe the other way round…don’t know and don’t care…whatever the history and origin it has an effect on others who come to discuss Religion and Theology in a (presumed) liberal environment.

“Remember varkam is a moderator….”

Oh I knew there was a reason why I liked varkum ;-)

“Don't be offended, because I think its worth my time to explain this, but I think you are the victim of a cultural misunderstanding.
You are an Aussie and I have had a lot of interaction with Aussies in the past couple of years. Your culture is QUITE different from here.”

Ah huh….perhaps my victimhood of “cultural misunderstanding” is reflected in-
“As an outsider I try to factor in that the US has a huge problem with evangelicals and the conservative Christian right and I keep in mind that many are still touchy about Islam since 9/11.”
From my post, linked to by HR, in the AA thread you linked to.
(And subject there of a great deal of thoughtfull examination ;-) not.

“Look to be frank, I don't think you are ever going to see the POV of atheists. I think you genuinely don't understand, and are NOT trying to be disruptive,”

To be equally frank…the only opportunity I am being offered to understand is that there is an (unseen) history to the contention that results in threads/posts/claims and allegations (“get out” “shut up” “atheists are evil”) for which there is no substantiating evidence. It’s just the feeling. impression, intuition people have because of the ‘history’.

I’ve got turtlensue telling me I’m “NOT trying to be disruptive” at the same time as I’ve got other atheists alleging “clearly intended insult” and “bashing and insulting others” and taking a “mean & dirty path with personal slurs”

You wanna know the ‘cultural constant’ in all this? (And it can be taken as an local atheist culture or broader if you wish).

It’s that people don’t >substantiates< anything…..no evidence, no example, no cite, quote, post or link. It’s (nine times out of ten) assumed psychic insight into “motivation” “intent” and “character” of others and when you examine the post it is based on there is no correlation between the original and the extrapolated response.

Here-
“When you say strident anti-religious attitudes are "dangerous", I have to try hard not to roll my eyes.”

With frustrated emphasis (Not shouting)- I HAVE NEVER SAID- “strident anti-religious attitudes are "dangerous" !!!!

There is a world of difference between “strident” and ‘contemptuous, hateful narrow minded bigotry’

Here is a proposition put up 3-4 times thus far and ignored on each occasion.
The invitation (to all) is to pick one (or more) that >IS NOT< a reflection of contemptuous, hateful narrow minded bigotry’ –

1/“America is evil and no good ever came of it, fuck America”
2/“Religion is evil and no good ever came of it, fuck religion”
3/”Men are evil and no good ever came of them. fuck men”
4/“Atheism is evil and no good ever came of it, fuck atheism”

I have been asked for and I have provided explicit evidence of proposition 2/ from this board.

I have asked for and not been provided with evidence of proposition 3/

And yet proposition 3/ is banner headlines all over the board >AS IF< it was a constantly expressed pov and the evidence/substantiation of the existence of proposition 2/ is steadfastly ignored.

“look at how many people are trying to "smear" Obama as being a muslim that should tell you about the attitudes in this country)”

YES! I know, it is one of several motivating issues that led me here, I would like to be able to discuss American and Western attitudes to Islam. I would like to be able to relate an account of Aboriginal kids living near the US ‘Pine Gap’ tracking station at the time of 9/11…relating to Religion/Empire/Territory and Terrorism.
But I can’t do that because I don’t have enough post points to start a thread and I (frankly) cannot get passed the DU atheist attitude to Islam let alone the RW Christians.

“and listen to fellow progressives talk about the "dangers of the fundamentalist atheist" which is OFTEN a fundie/RW talking point, it infuriates us”

Yes, that is very well understood.
The problem arises when people cannot even hear (or accurately reflect back) what is >actually being said< about the behaviour of some atheist and “the "dangers of the fundamentalist atheist" “ because all they are hearing is the prior voices of “fundie/RW talking point”.

[varkam]

78. Uh, I didn't accuse you of anything.

I didn't say that you personally have been attacking others, merely that there have been attacks.

And there is evidence - notice the deleted posts?

[ironbark]

80. Uh, I didn't say or suggest you did accuse me of anything

So what's that about?

"I didn't say that you personally have been attacking others"

Uh, I didn't say or suggest you did say that I personally have been attacking others.

"And there is evidence - notice the deleted posts"?

Yup...and the problem with deleted posts is that no one outside the Mods knows if it was
lame ad hom ("You are dumb") or serious/serial abusive behaviour("You are a filthy hateful biggot fuck off out of here")

I am now advised the deleted postd fitted the first catagory "you are dumb", "you are a sock puppet"
which leaves me still wondering what happened to all the "All atheists are bad/evil and should shut up or get out of town posts" ?

And one day I'll work out how "you are dumb" is ad hom but "mean & dirty path with personal slurs" aint and how "Asshole" will replace the 'That Term whos name must not be mentioned'.

[uberllama42]

81. It's pretty simple, really

"Dumb" is an insult. "Mean & dirty path with personal slurs" describes behavior. It describes a style of arguing and does not directly disparage another person.

I don't see how "asshole" is less of an ad hom than "fundamentalist," but I don't think whoever brought it up intended for it to be used as a replacement in general conversation.

[ironbark]

84. Oh I understand the technique of flying

false, baseless and unsubstantiated allegations couched in innuendo under the blunt ad hom radar.
I just haven’t worked out the pretence that the latter is verboten and the former is kosher ;-)

“I don't see how "asshole" is less of an ad hom than "fundamentalist,"

Because the former usually denotes something about the person and is difficult
to apply to behaviour. (ie “Your behaviour is that of an asshole” and “Your behaving like an asshole” both seem (to me) to be conveying something about the person/character.
‘Fundamentalist’ (it seems to me) can be conveyed impersonally as a descriptor of behaviour. “That is fundamentalist behaviour” “That is a fundamentalist pov”
Seems to me to work better than “That is asshole behaviour”.

Considering that ‘asshole’ is generally considered swearing I would have expected people would be more inclined to assume offence is intended.

“ but I don't think whoever brought it up intended for it to be used as a replacement in general conversation”

That’s what I’m trying to find out.

[varkam]

87. Here you go:

If I have been so clearly "bashing and insulting others" then it seems strange that the Mods have not deleted a post of mine (since last Nov?)...and stranger still that these "clearly intended insults" and "personal slurs" cannot be now shown or seen.

Did you not mean to suggest that I accused you of something? If not, then I suggest you pick your words a bit more carefully in the future.

Yup...and the problem with deleted posts is that no one outside the Mods knows if it was
lame ad hom ("You are dumb") or serious/serial abusive behaviour("You are a filthy hateful biggot fuck off out of here")

Hmm, either way that's an ad hominem attack.

And one day I'll work out how "you are dumb" is ad hom but "mean & dirty path with personal slurs" aint and how "Asshole" will replace the 'That Term whos name must not be mentioned'.

You're kidding, right? Unless you're having a discussion of results from a WISC, "you are dumb" is a personal attack meant to discredit an argument without refuting it by attacking the person instead.

Oh, and you can say fundamentalist atheist all you want to. At the very least it'll let me know where you're coming from.

[HamdenRice]

69. Have you seen any ad hom going in the other direction?

genuinely interested in your opinion on that.

[varkam]

77. Sure have, though they've mostly been coming from one person...

and in one direction. Feel free to alert on those posts that you feel violate the rules.

[Evoman]

64. How long have you been lurking here, bro?

Because I can't remember you ever being part of the history of this place. I don't want to go search into year old threads so that I can satisfy the curiosity of some guy I don't even know.

No disrespect meant, but a guy gets tired of the same ol' shit after while.

[Evoman]

63. Dude, since I've come to this forum years ago, people have been complaining about

how fundie atheists ruin this forum. People have called implied that I don't belong in the "religious" forum. So I figured..meh...they don't want me, they can damn well get rid of me.

[John Gauger]

53. So what's the verdict?

Do you go or do you stay?

[Evoman]

66. Lol...not one person has asked me to leave. Not even over PM.

I'm starting to think I should have just started a poll or something.

I'm not leaving, this post is officially closed, and anyone who has a problem with me will have to fucking suck it up.

I'm not going anywhere. They've had their chance.



Hehe...probably should have taken it.....:evilgrin:

[Marrah_G]

94. OMG- GET OUT! LEAVE YOU COMMIE PINKO ATHIEST BASTARD!

Whew, I feel better now? how about you?

:evilgrin:

[JerseygirlCT]

83. Oh damn, you're going to make me say it

Don't go!

Seriously, the temptation to come up with some wisecrack was huge, but you're a poster I've enjoyed interacting with. Even when you're wrong, lol.

There are people who just get my blood pressure up without adding anything thoughtful to the conversation. You've not been among them at all.

So I answered before reading, and I hope you didn't get any takers...

[knitter4democracy]

86. Why would anyone want you to go?

:hug: I've always found you to be open, interesting, and a real asset to the place. Now, I'm no fundie, but I'm a Christian who does like to hear things from other viewpoints, and I've always found you to be great at explaining things. Why would I want you to leave? I don't think anyone should leave, since you're right--it's all going to settle down again eventually.

[Marrah_G]

93. R/T would be dull without you

Yes, sometimes I think a few Athiests go overboard with the condescending posts, but not all do and it's not all the time.

I think the biggest thing needed in R/T is tolerance. Share your beliefs, argue your beliefs, but always respect others right to believe whatever they wish.

We have all come to our beliefs by way of unique personal experiences and have something worthwhile to share.

It comes down to basic civility.

As a Pagan I can out debate any christian when it comes to the bible. It's necessary since as a Pagan it's generally necessary to have this knowledge to verbally defend myself from the more rabid fundie types.

Now my mother is a very devout Catholic as is my father. Unlike many people they walk the walk and have spent a lifetime helping others. They are amazing people. Their religion is important to them and has been a benefit to their lives. I might not believe the same way, but I see that it is a positive in their life.

So when I am with them, I avoid the topic of religion and if it does come up, I just pipe down. Yes, I could argue circles around them.... but what good would it do to attack something that means so much to them.

I have had far more success making them realize through my actions that Wicca is not devil worship and that I haven't been sucked in my some evil cult. They will never believe as I do, but they have come to accept it.

And for me that is what is all about. Accepting and respecting that others have different beliefs or no beliefs at all.

HOWEVER- When a religion is causing harm to it's people or to other people I think it is our Obligation to stand up against that.

Woooo- there you have it- my caffeine deficient morning ranting- Now back to my first cup I go.


OH YEAH----- EVO-------- DON'T FUCKING GO ANYWHERE YOU NON-BELIEVING BASTARD!

:hi: