"Why are all you atheists so angry?"

[Keep The Reason]

A terrific speech on this issue, Greta Christina articulates why atheists are angry, and why it's valid and justified to be so, but also what "angry" actually means. This video is about 50 minutes long, but it's worth it. Watch it, and let's talk about it.

Why Are All You Atheists So Angry?

[humanguy]

What a load of bollocks. "Greta Christina articulates why atheists are angry."

[Keep The Reason]

What a load of bollocks. "Greta Christina articulates why atheists are angry."

For a person who often claims that humans are important, you are fairly consistent in dismissing them having their opinions and points of view.

Did you listen to the commentary?

[humanguy]

What a load of bollocks. "Greta Christina articulates why atheists are angry."

For a person who often claims that humans are important, you are fairly consistent in dismissing them having their opinions and points of view.

Did you listen to the commentary?

No, I didn't listen to it. What I did was Google Greta Christina. Thanks, but I'll pass. Anyway, I have better things to do with fifty minutes of my life.

Also, I absolutely disagree with the notion that atheists should be angry. There comes a time when acceptance is the only positive step to take.

[Keep The Reason]

No, I didn't listen to it. What I did was Google Greta Christina. Thanks, but I'll pass. Anyway, I have better things to do with fifty minutes of my life.

For an atheist you're pretty religious, you know that?

Gee, what a surprise -- commenting without listening to a word of it. And you call me "religious"? LoL. Your picture readily appears under the dictionary definition of "irony".

For a human, you're pretty intolerant, you know that? Why don't you listen to 5 minutes of the speech and then decide? What, you can't open your mind for that long?

[humanguy]

No, I didn't listen to it. What I did was Google Greta Christina. Thanks, but I'll pass. Anyway, I have better things to do with fifty minutes of my life.

For an atheist you're pretty religious, you know that?

Gee, what a surprise -- commenting without listening to a word of it. And you call me "religious"? LoL. Your picture readily appears under the dictionary definition of "irony".

For a human, you're pretty intolerant, you know that? Why don't you listen to 5 minutes of the speech and then decide? What, you can't open your mind for that long?

Okay, you've got it. I'll listen to five minutes of it and then I'll decide.

Five minutes later: Sorry, that kind of thing isn't for me, the us and them thing I mean. It's too clubby, too group-think. I'm not a member of the atheist movement that this woman refers to. Personally I think the idea of an atheist movement is ridiculous. But I accept that there are people who are attracted to that sort of thing.

[Keep The Reason]

Okay, you've got it. I'll listen to five minutes of it and then I'll decide.

Five minutes later: Sorry, that kind of thing isn't for me, the us and them thing I mean. It's too clubby, too group-think. I'm not a member of the atheist movement that this woman refers to. Personally I think the idea of an atheist movement is ridiculous. But I accept that there are people who are attracted to that sort of thing.

Good, at least you listened to it. Not to worry about movements, there are those who do, and those who don't. It'll happen without you (or me, in fact) though I prefer to be involved. You have every right to not be involved or think its "clubby" or whatever. For me, lack of involvement is not a solution, but part of the problem. And yes, given religious sway over social direction, there is a problem,whether you believe so or not. I'm glad you took the 5 minutes to listen.

[humanguy]

Okay, you've got it. I'll listen to five minutes of it and then I'll decide.

Five minutes later: Sorry, that kind of thing isn't for me, the us and them thing I mean. It's too clubby, too group-think. I'm not a member of the atheist movement that this woman refers to. Personally I think the idea of an atheist movement is ridiculous. But I accept that there are people who are attracted to that sort of thing.

Good, at least you listened to it. Not to worry about movements, there are those who do, and those who don't. It'll happen without you (or me, in fact) though I prefer to be involved. You have every right to not be involved or think its "clubby" or whatever. For me, lack of involvement is not a solution, but part of the problem. And yes, given religious sway over social direction, there is a problem,whether you believe so or not. I'm glad you took the 5 minutes to listen.

I don't understand that sentence, the one that's in boldface. Give me an example of religion's sway over social direction.

[Keep The Reason]

given religious sway over social direction, there is a problem,whether you believe so or not. I'm glad you took the 5 minutes to listen.

I don't understand that sentence, the one that's in boldface. Give me an example of religion's sway over social direction.

Stem cell research being shackled. Catholic church lobbying for no condoms in AIDs ravaged Africa, and making abortion illegal in South America (and enforcing the legislation). "Faith-Based Initiative" cabinet position in the USA. Christian impact on USA politics escalating ever since Reagan, and getting precipitously worse (some respite with Obama, but as a Democrat, "having a backbone" is anathema to him). Tax free status of churches in the USA, burdening other tax payers down the line.

Anything else? Or are these socio-political concerns "too religious" for you?

[Equinox]

a human wrote:

Give me an example of religion's sway over social direction.

OK, which "mountian" do you want to start with? (and have you watched the video by Rick Perry that was all over the web last week?)

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... -bond.html

Equinox

[JustJim]

None are so blind as those who will not see....

Jim

[Rian]

No, I didn't listen to it. What I did was Google Greta Christina. Thanks, but I'll pass. Anyway, I have better things to do with fifty minutes of my life.

For an atheist you're pretty religious, you know that?

Gee, what a surprise -- commenting without listening to a word of it. And you call me "religious"? LoL. Your picture readily appears under the dictionary definition of "irony".

For a human, you're pretty intolerant, you know that? Why don't you listen to 5 minutes of the speech and then decide? What, you can't open your mind for that long?

Isn't that a pretty good thing to do - to check on the author? I mean, if someone recommended a good discussion to you on how to best treat the handicapped, and you checked into the author and found it was by an Adolph Hitler (nod to Godwin's law), would you want to listen to it? (unless it's just for information on the "other side").

I was just curious why you didn't seem to acknowledge at all that checking into the author is a good thing.

[JustJim]

Isn't that a pretty good thing to do - to check on the author? I mean, if someone recommended a good discussion to you on how to best treat the handicapped, and you checked into the author and found it was by an Adolph Hitler (nod to Godwin's law), would you want to listen to it? (unless it's just for information on the "other side").

I was just curious why you didn't seem to acknowledge at all that checking into the author is a good thing.

I checked very carefully, and I can't find where KTR said or implied in any way that checking into the author isn't a good thing. He didn't address that subject at all. You're nit-picking fleas out of a straw man. His failure to "acknowledge" that checking into an author is a good thing does not mean he thinks it's a bad thing.

I was just curious why you didn't seem to acknowledge at all that sometimes people you don't like can say/write good things.

If you refuse to read something because you don't like the author, or because you disagree with the author's positions on some thing(s), you're bound to miss out on some very good stuff. Just because an author writes 10 things you think are trash, doesn't mean the 11th one won't be a gem to hold on to.

And besides, don't you think it's a bit prejudicial to judge something you haven't heard or read based solely on who wrote it or said it?

Jim

[JustJim]

Humanguy,

I'm not sure what game you're playing, but it doesn't seem like it'd be very much fun. I know from your previous postings on this forum that you're fully aware of the many, many influences religion has had on social directions in our and other societies throughout religious history. And now you're pretending to be in some disbelief and shock to hear someone say that? And you need examples? Come on... What gives with you lately?

Jim

[Keep The Reason]

humanguy,

You know, you have a penchant for asking questions about my motives and approach rather than actually contributing to the intent of the thread. If you want to ask these "just wondering" litanies of questions, start a thread on it. I may bother to answer. But otherwise, you seem to use this tactic to derail the OPs and i think its intentional, and it's no longer appreciated.

Now, if you have something to say about the speech, say it. If not, please stop derailing the thread.

JJ, I think it's done on purpose. It's a way to detour the conversation-- and it is indeed played out as if it's all a game.