Author Topic: Freedom of speech or freedom to stir up the pot for hateful sake?  (Read 7084 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Freedom of speech or freedom to stir up the pot for hateful sake?
« Reply #30 on: December 07, 2008, 10:56:19 AM »
Atheist is no more negative a term than monotheist. The word monotheist indicates a belief in a but one god.

If atheists are happy being called atheists, I see no reason for them to invent a new name. It's just a classification, not really a religion, anyway.

Polytheists= believers in several gods. (there are a variety of polytheistic groups of gods)
Monotheists= believers in just one god (sort of) Allah, Elohim, God, the Trinity, etc.
Atheists = belief in no god or gods.


I don't think that atheists are more anti-theists than Christians, Jews Muslims, etc are anti-atheist. Anyone can be intolerant. Buddhists do not believe in a Creator Deity, and some believe in a large number of spirits, others in none at all.

"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Cynthia

  • Guest
Re: Freedom of speech or freedom to stir up the pot for hateful sake?
« Reply #31 on: December 07, 2008, 01:15:49 PM »
Anyone can be intolerant.


This is true. But on average Christians pray for others, especially non-thesists, than theisist "pray" for Christians.

Universe Prince

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3660
  • Of course liberty isn't safe; but it is good.
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Freedom of speech or freedom to stir up the pot for hateful sake?
« Reply #32 on: December 07, 2008, 01:35:07 PM »

Well, basically, I read this as atheists who seem to want to share their anti-Christian (anti love for Christ) sentiments via a  "protest board" along side another "board" which was also freedom of expression.


So you decided the sign was hateful because it disagreed with your religion?


Sure, it's ok to express one's beliefs or non belief system. But, I find it suspect when the signs are placed near another "celebratory voice" of expression.


So it's hateful/resentful for a person to directly contradict what he believes is wrong and possibly harmful?


Like I said, there's nothing wrong with expressing one's feelings, etc. But why didn't they put the sign near the mall .....or on the side walk.....or on their own front porch?


Why is the Nativity scene where it is? Why don't the Christians simply keep to expressing their faith on their front porch or their church? Why is the expression of religion at the Legislative Building okay, but not the expression of atheism?
Your reality, sir, is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever.
--Hieronymus Karl Frederick Baron von Munchausen ("The Adventures of Baron Munchausen" [1988])--

Cynthia

  • Guest
Re: Freedom of speech or freedom to stir up the pot for hateful sake?
« Reply #33 on: December 07, 2008, 01:39:28 PM »

Well, basically, I read this as atheists who seem to want to share their anti-Christian (anti love for Christ) sentiments via a  "protest board" along side another "board" which was also freedom of expression.


So you decided the sign was hateful because it disagreed with your religion?


Sure, it's ok to express one's beliefs or non belief system. But, I find it suspect when the signs are placed near another "celebratory voice" of expression.


So it's hateful/resentful for a person to directly contradict what he believes is wrong and possibly harmful?


Like I said, there's nothing wrong with expressing one's feelings, etc. But why didn't they put the sign near the mall .....or on the side walk.....or on their own front porch?


Why is the Nativity scene where it is? Why don't the Christians simply keep to expressing their faith on their front porch or their church? Why is the expression of religion at the Legislative Building okay, but not the expression of atheism?

So it's hateful/resentful for a person to directly contradict what he believes is wrong and possibly harmful?[/
More like holding disdain than hate....but there are so many who hold hate in their hearts for Christians, Jews, Muslims.
I dont' see believing in a God as harmful. DO you?

You raise a good questions about the placement of the Nativity Scene.


Universe Prince

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3660
  • Of course liberty isn't safe; but it is good.
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Freedom of speech or freedom to stir up the pot for hateful sake?
« Reply #34 on: December 07, 2008, 01:57:39 PM »

Yet, the atheist tends to outline a clear resentment against the believer. ...Thus the nature of the signs placed up against the believer.

I find that to be suspect. I find that to be anti in it's clearest form.

It's ok to believe one is not equal to the individual's core system. It's another to "protest" that belief out of resentment. Christians usually do not form the opinion of the latter.


Christians preach against sin, secularism and godlessness. How is that fundamentally different from the message of the atheist sign that speaks against what the atheist believes to be detrimental to individuals and society? Why is the atheist message "resentful" and the Christian message against sin and godlessness not?


So it's hateful/resentful for a person to directly contradict what he believes is wrong and possibly harmful?
More like holding disdain than hate....but there are so many who hold hate in their hearts for Christians, Jews, Muslims.
I dont' see believing in a God as harmful. DO you?


No, I do not. But then, Pagans and Buddhists, generally speaking, do not really believe in sin. A bisexual pagan may not see anything harmful in premarital sex with more than one person at a time. Lots of Christians do. Is it disdainful or hateful for a Christian to say so? The bisexual pagan might think so. The Christian probably doesn't think so. You see the atheist sign as resentful, but the atheist does not.
Your reality, sir, is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever.
--Hieronymus Karl Frederick Baron von Munchausen ("The Adventures of Baron Munchausen" [1988])--

Cynthia

  • Guest
Re: Freedom of speech or freedom to stir up the pot for hateful sake?
« Reply #35 on: December 07, 2008, 02:36:29 PM »

Yet, the atheist tends to outline a clear resentment against the believer. ...Thus the nature of the signs placed up against the believer.

I find that to be suspect. I find that to be anti in it's clearest form.

It's ok to believe one is not equal to the individual's core system. It's another to "protest" that belief out of resentment. Christians usually do not form the opinion of the latter.


Christians preach against sin, secularism and godlessness. How is that fundamentally different from the message of the atheist sign that speaks against what the atheist believes to be detrimental to individuals and society? Why is the atheist message "resentful" and the Christian message against sin and godlessness not?


So it's hateful/resentful for a person to directly contradict what he believes is wrong and possibly harmful?
More like holding disdain than hate....but there are so many who hold hate in their hearts for Christians, Jews, Muslims.
I dont' see believing in a God as harmful. DO you?


No, I do not. But then, Pagans and Buddhists, generally speaking, do not really believe in sin. A bisexual pagan may not see anything harmful in premarital sex with more than one person at a time. Lots of Christians do. Is it disdainful or hateful for a Christian to say so? The bisexual pagan might think so. The Christian probably doesn't think so. You see the atheist sign as resentful, but the atheist does not.


I'll give you that. I don't know the heart of the atheists who placed the sign, but it rings of "protest", which rings of resentment, which rings a deaf bell ......why not post the sign on the winter solstice. Christians celebrate on the 24th and 25th, but they also celebrate the "season" for at least a month of Sundays in the Catholic church, anyway.


Christians preach against sin, secularism and godlessness. How is that fundamentally different from the message of the atheist sign that speaks against what the atheist believes to be detrimental to individuals and society? Why is the atheist message "resentful" and the Christian message against sin and godlessness not?


I don't agree with your "broad stroked" assessment  that Christians preach AGAINST another. The Christians that I know certainly do not preach.   

Ok --yes, Sin is something which is core to the Christian belief system, this is true. . . but those who believe in Jesus Christ focus more on love for one another, and the forgiveness of sin.

My  sense is that many anti-Christians resent the idea of "sin".

Well then,they don't have to believe in sin. Period. Why bother? It's not something they should worry about.


I sense that atheists believe Christians to be arrogant, and judgemental......Not true if the person is a true Christian. The followers of Christ do not judge.

 Bad apples in all bunches? I suppose so.

Then,  who's to say that atheists are void of such judgement and resentment against Christians?

"Hateful" was my knee-jerk reaction, sure. Why? Because to place a sign against another person's religious belief has been hateful in the past....The Jews have endured such hatered for years.

 I say this was more of a protest with a hint of resentment.


Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Freedom of speech or freedom to stir up the pot for hateful sake?
« Reply #36 on: December 07, 2008, 11:51:07 PM »

This is true. But on average Christians pray for others, especially non-thesists, than theisist "pray" for Christians.

==========================

If one does not believe in God, then how would praying to a God be a rational act?
Prayer to no one is sort of silly, isn't it?
.
I suppose an atheist can HOPE a Christian does well and enjoys good health and can wish him well.

Buddhists do not believe in sin as Christians do. The basis of the Buddhist religion is the Dharma, the Sangha and Karma. Dharma is the teachings of Buddha and other enlightened ones, who are not necessarily Buddhists. The Sangha is the community of Buddhists, those that carry the begging bowls and those who keep them filled among other acts. And Karma is the realization that whatever goes around, comes around: unwise, spiteful and unhealthy acts, excessiveness in all things, have consequences, perhaps in this life, perhaps in the next.

I don't think that Atheists and Agnostics have resentment against believers any more than people who hate anchovies resent anchovy lovers. Christians are supposed to try to convert non-Christians to Christianity. Atheists normally have no such duty. Madeline Murry O'Hare was a rare exception who enjoyed deliberately pissing Christians and other believers off for her own personal reasons. She was not at all typical, but she was assumed to be so because she was so damned loud.

As an Agnostic, I rarely get involved in discussions, because I see no use in trying to win anyone over to my point of view, You always get the same question "Don't you believe in ANYTHING?" Well, of course, I believe in lots of things, I just have not been able to believe in a three piece Deity who thinks using Roman soldiers to suicide himself could possibly affect my life 2000 years later.

I do not believe that repeating things I don't believe in, like various prayers, makes them in any way true. I cannot see h0w a collection of ancient folkways, rants and advice (ie the Bible) could be the work of any being or Being of superior intellect.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Universe Prince

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3660
  • Of course liberty isn't safe; but it is good.
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Freedom of speech or freedom to stir up the pot for hateful sake?
« Reply #37 on: December 08, 2008, 12:07:12 AM »

I don't know the heart of the atheists who placed the sign, but it rings of "protest", which rings of resentment, which rings a deaf bell


Why does protest necessarily imply resentment?


I don't agree with your "broad stroked" assessment  that Christians preach AGAINST another. The Christians that I know certainly do not preach.


You don't know Christians who preach? They don't speak out against sin and godlessness? They don't claim Jesus died as a sacrifice for sin?


Ok --yes, Sin is something which is core to the Christian belief system, this is true. . . but those who believe in Jesus Christ focus more on love for one another, and the forgiveness of sin.


None of them speak against sinning? None of them speak of the importance of morality?


My  sense is that many anti-Christians resent the idea of "sin".

Well then,they don't have to believe in sin. Period. Why bother? It's not something they should worry about.


It's not? What sort of Christianity do you practice that does not care about sin?


I sense that atheists believe Christians to be arrogant, and judgemental......Not true if the person is a true Christian. The followers of Christ do not judge.


Since when?


Then,  who's to say that atheists are void of such judgement and resentment against Christians?


While you claim Christians are void of such judgment and resentment against atheists, I find that very difficult to believe. Considering all the "America is a Christian nation" assertions and the protestations against those who want to remove Nativity scenes and Ten Commandments monuments from government buildings and grounds, I am just not buying your argument. Or are you also claiming "true" Christians don't do that?
Your reality, sir, is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever.
--Hieronymus Karl Frederick Baron von Munchausen ("The Adventures of Baron Munchausen" [1988])--

Cynthia

  • Guest
Re: Freedom of speech or freedom to stir up the pot for hateful sake?
« Reply #38 on: December 08, 2008, 12:09:29 AM »
the thing about prayer on teh part of the atheist was a sort of joke..btw.


Well, thanks for your take on this, XO...Sorry to hear that you have written on the religion of Christianity.

Cindy

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Freedom of speech or freedom to stir up the pot for hateful sake?
« Reply #39 on: December 08, 2008, 12:19:33 AM »

Well, thanks for your take on this, XO...Sorry to hear that you have written on the religion of Christianity.

Written off, perhaps.

I read the book, and much of it made no sense. Then I read it again with a concordance, and I understood what it said better, and it made even less sense. The more I read it, the less sense it made. Still, I think that in many ways it has improved civilization and culture over the years. The more a loving religion it is, the less barbaric its believers become. Many people appear to have a deep need for something other worldly and mysterious to believe in, but I am not one of them.

When I read Buddhist writings, the works of Lao-Tse and Taoist works, they make logical sense to me. Not that anyone claims that they were written by God or even divinely inspired, just written by unusually smart and illuminated people.

"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Cynthia

  • Guest
Re: Freedom of speech or freedom to stir up the pot for hateful sake?
« Reply #40 on: December 08, 2008, 12:42:17 AM »
You don't know Christians who preach? They don't speak out against sin and godlessness? They don't claim Jesus died as a sacrifice for sin?

That’s not what you said originally. You said that Christians preach…broad stroking the sentiment of the Christian.

Christians preach against sin, secularism and godlessness.

Why does protest necessarily imply resentment?

I don’t see it as celebratory in scope. Why else would they place their "solstice joy" next to a Nativity scene. What's the point? Other than....rebellion.

None of them speak against sinning? None of them speak of the importance of morality?

All of the speak of the importance of morality. All Christians speak against sinning.

It's not? What sort of Christianity do you practice that does not care about sin?

I said those who are anti-Christians.  Of course my practice of Christianity cares about sin. That is a given, UP.

Since when?


Since they do not judge others lest they be judged themselves.

While you claim Christians are void of such judgment and resentment against atheists, I find that very difficult to believe. Considering all the "America is a Christian nation" assertions and the protestations against those who want to remove Nativity scenes and Ten Commandments monuments from government buildings and grounds, I am just not buying your argument. Or are you also claiming "true" Christians don't do that?


Well, the Christians I know do not judge atheists. I tend to wonder if the atheist, however are judging my religion. I know a couple of atheists and we get into some arguments over this topic. I am always approached by them with much skeptisism and a desire to prove me wrong. . .as opposed to the other way around.
I would be glad to share in their winter joy, but I hear nothing of that. Instead, I have to listen to their anti-Christ rants (as you have put it)….SUre, all of which is freedom of speech and all of which is fine with me.

I never said all America is Christian nation. If you were to go to Utah, you would see more Mormons than non-Mormons. If you were to go to Arizona and New Mexico you would see more Navajo Native Americans than in the state of Nevada. Does that mean we should place our Christian signs or Nativity scenes in their front yards? Of course not. There is respect for one another now in this country. But I doubt the intentions of the Atheist when they erect a sign next to a Nativity Scene. ..that's all I am saying.

Are there more Christians in this country?  I don’t know the stats. Ami might be able to dig those up…but my point is that when a majority of folks chose to celebrate a certain religion, be it Buddhism, or Judaism or whatever it is, you are bound to see more evidence of said “religious” icons etc in and around the neighborhood.

I agree that people should not be allowed to place remnants of their “religion” on the steps of any governmental building.

Considering all the "America is a Christian nation" assertions and the protestations against those who want to remove Nativity scenes and Ten Commandments monuments from government buildings and grounds, I am just not buying your argument. Or are you also claiming "true" Christians don't do that?


Are you saying that Christians want to shove the atheists out of the way? I am not saying that.
What you “consider” btw in your statement here is your opinion, UP.

All?    Assertions?    Against? All?

Hmmm, I find your own argument to be resentful, UP. Sorry, but I do. Perhaps you are quick to judge the Christians. And yes,  I do know Christians and Jews and Muslims in my community who would not be quick to judge the atheists. Yes, I stand by my statement; True Christians do NOT judge. 
Religion is a touchy subject, we all know this. I am questioning the intent of the atheists to take the time to share their “winter solstice” celebration. Why put it up next to a Christian Nativity Scene?
I find that to be a statement of protest, albeit not hateful. I retract that comment.
I find it to be reactionary/not celebratory.

Taking things to the highest court of law. We have that right. But I believe it to be more harmful for people to try to push things like Gay rights in our schools, for example. I do.

Another topic another day.

Ok, have a good week.

Later.
Cindy

Cynthia

  • Guest
Re: Freedom of speech or freedom to stir up the pot for hateful sake?
« Reply #41 on: December 08, 2008, 12:43:04 AM »

Well, thanks for your take on this, XO...Sorry to hear that you have written on the religion of Christianity.

Written off, perhaps.

I read the book, and much of it made no sense. Then I read it again with a concordance, and I understood what it said better, and it made even less sense. The more I read it, the less sense it made. Still, I think that in many ways it has improved civilization and culture over the years. The more a loving religion it is, the less barbaric its believers become. Many people appear to have a deep need for something other worldly and mysterious to believe in, but I am not one of them.

When I read Buddhist writings, the works of Lao-Tse and Taoist works, they make logical sense to me. Not that anyone claims that they were written by God or even divinely inspired, just written by unusually smart and illuminated people.



Yes, my typo...written off.

I am tired.

Nite. more on this later.
Cindy

hnumpah

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2483
  • You have another think coming. Use it.
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Freedom of speech or freedom to stir up the pot for hateful sake?
« Reply #42 on: December 08, 2008, 12:48:38 AM »
Quote
Atheist literally means without God.

It is being defined negatively , what is the positive side?

How is that negative?

Quote
It means "without theism".

Quote
Hm isn't that even worse?

Why should it be? In fact, why should it be bad at all? 'Splain, please.
"I love WikiLeaks." - Donald Trump, October 2016

hnumpah

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2483
  • You have another think coming. Use it.
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Freedom of speech or freedom to stir up the pot for hateful sake?
« Reply #43 on: December 08, 2008, 01:10:52 AM »
Quote
This is true. But on average Christians pray for others, especially non-thesists, than theisist "pray" for Christians.


How should we pray? To whom, or what? The urn that holds my dog's ashes? A Coleman lantern? What? If your god does not exist to us, what should we pray to?

Quote
The followers of Christ do not judge.

That's a laugh.

Quote
Well, the Christians I know do not judge atheists. I tend to wonder if the atheist, however are judging my religion.

I'd just about bet every Christian who has met an atheist has thought to himself that here is a person who is going to hell because he does not believe  in god. He may not say it out loud, but more than likely the thought is there. That, even if unspoken, is passing judgement.

As for the other way around, I could care less about your religion, as long as you don't try to push it on me. I've been where you are; I like where I am better.
"I love WikiLeaks." - Donald Trump, October 2016

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Freedom of speech or freedom to stir up the pot for hateful sake?
« Reply #44 on: December 08, 2008, 01:14:25 AM »
I think people confuse atheists with antitheists.