In God We Must

[Martinus]

Anyway, this is a classic case of double standards, something also I am familiar with as a gay person.

Straight people can tell everyone about their spouses, their kids, have their pictures all over the desk, can wear a wedding ring, can embrace in public and have other PDAs. But when gay people do anything other than being apologetic "sorry that I live", e.g. hold hands in public, they are "flaunting their sexuality."

Religious people can pray in public, can dress in a funny way, can kill animals in a special way, can hold street gatherings, can bother total strangers in the street or by going door to door and preach their hodge podge, can tell everyone who is willing to listen what god means to them and why Jesus is the best thing that can happen not just to them but to you. But when atheist people are not "keeping it to themselves" but are "vocal", they are obnoxious annoying assholes.

Seriously, go fuck yourself.

Edit: and if you think that these are not comparable, it just goes to show that atheists are currently more discriminated against than gays.

[rufweed]

If you can tell me I'm going to a non-existent, evidenceless Hell (usually with a smirk), ...that's all the excuse I need to mock the totality of your superstition.

If I don't know that's what you think, we have no problem. As it should be.

Bibles, Qurans, Torahs and etc. are for your personal delusions, keep it that way.

Thanks 

The problem with that point of view is it seems to be along the same lines as the argument that homosexuality is OK as long as homosexuals stay in the closest.  Both seem to say, in essense, "Be who you are, just don't show it to others".

I'm not smug or sanctomonious about Christians or Jews or Muslims. I don't really give a shit what you believe in as long as you don't bang on about it. 

Dawkins does bang on about what he believes, which is what pisses some people off.

He has a right to believe and say what he wants, and those who disagree with him have the right to ignore him, express their disagreement, or just point and laugh.

Wrong. 'Being" who you are is fundamentally different than 'being' what you choose to believe.

[rufweed]

If you can tell me I'm going to a non-existent, evidenceless Hell (usually with a smirk), ...that's all the excuse I need to mock the totality of your superstition.

If I don't know that's what you think, we have no problem. As it should be.

Bibles, Qurans, Torahs and etc. are for your personal delusions, keep it that way.

Thanks 

The problem with that point of view is it seems to be along the same lines as the argument that homosexuality is OK as long as homosexuals stay in the closest.  Both seem to say, in essense, "Be who you are, just don't show it to others".

I'm not smug or sanctomonious about Christians or Jews or Muslims. I don't really give a shit what you believe in as long as you don't bang on about it. 

Dawkins does bang on about what he believes, which is what pisses some people off.

He has a right to believe and say what he wants, and those who disagree with him have the right to ignore him, express their disagreement, or just point and laugh.

Wrong. 'Being" who you are is fundamentally different than 'being' what you choose to believe.

However, being a dick about either isn't.

[Martinus]

I don't know about it. I think being a dick is often as much an inborn trait as being gay or being a lunatic (aka "religious").

As I said before, I don't think the distinction between "choice" and "nature" is a helpful one. I think we just should treat everyone equally. The argument that religious people can spout their nonsense to strangers and semi-strangers (e.g. coworkers) because "it's part of their religion" but atheists cannot do so, is simply ridiculous. Whether religion is an inborn lunacy or a result of acquired brainwashing is irrelevant.

[Martinus]

Also, I think that the ability to be a dick about almost anything (whether it is the brands you wear, healthy dieting, sucking cock or believing in invisible faeries in the sky) is perhaps the single unifying trait of the human race. So we should cherish it, not besmirch it.

Without being a dick (and other people being dicks), our lives would be incomparably more boring and monotone.

[dps]

If you can tell me I'm going to a non-existent, evidenceless Hell (usually with a smirk), ...that's all the excuse I need to mock the totality of your superstition.

If I don't know that's what you think, we have no problem. As it should be.

Bibles, Qurans, Torahs and etc. are for your personal delusions, keep it that way.

Thanks 

The problem with that point of view is it seems to be along the same lines as the argument that homosexuality is OK as long as homosexuals stay in the closest.  Both seem to say, in essense, "Be who you are, just don't show it to others".

I'm not smug or sanctomonious about Christians or Jews or Muslims. I don't really give a shit what you believe in as long as you don't bang on about it. 

Dawkins does bang on about what he believes, which is what pisses some people off.

He has a right to believe and say what he wants, and those who disagree with him have the right to ignore him, express their disagreement, or just point and laugh.

Wrong. 'Being" who you are is fundamentally different than 'being' what you choose to believe.

However, being a dick about either isn't.

I don't think that I'm being a dick about it.  I'm saying that both atheists and people who hold religious beliefs have a right to hold their opinions, and to be vocal about them.  But members of neither group should be considered exempt from criticism about it.  In both cases, though, I think that saying that they're wrong and you disagree is OK, but calling for state action to silence them is wrong, because it violates their freedom of speech.

[Admiral Yi]

Well, you just said (or at least implied that it can legitimately be said) that a category of people to which I belong is unfit to raise children by the very quality of our birth, which if you think about it, is kinda offensive.

No, I implied that it can legitimately be said that children should be raised by a man and a woman.

[Gups]

Well, you just said (or at least implied that it can legitimately be said) that a category of people to which I belong is unfit to raise children by the very quality of our birth, which if you think about it, is kinda offensive.

No, I implied that it can legitimately be said that children should be raised by a man and a woman.

It could be, but in almost all instances it's failry clearly a fig leaf since the only policy outcome of such a position is always that gay people can't adopt. There is never for example any suggestion that adopting couples lose their right to seperate or divorce.

[Eddie Teach]

No, I implied that it can legitimately be said that children should be raised by a man and a woman.

That may be optimal(depending on the people involved of course), but surely being raised by a gay couple is better than growing up in an orphanage or with foster parents who see you as nothing but a meal ticket.

[Ed Anger]

Religious people can pray in public, can dress in a funny way, can kill animals in a special way, can hold street gatherings, can bother total strangers in the street or by going door to door and preach their hodge podge, can tell everyone who is willing to listen what god means to them and why Jesus is the best thing that can happen not just to them but to you. But when atheist people are not "keeping it to themselves" but are "vocal", they are obnoxious annoying assholes.

This actually reminds me of an underling when I was LORD OF THE CORPORATE UNIVERSE. Dude was off for a bit and came back a hard core atheist. He was a Shiite Atheist. Fucker wouldn't shut up about it, and wouldn't leave this chick alone who wore this giant cross everyday. I think it came off a building. Thing was, she didn't bother anybody with godtalk. But goddamn it, he was going to tell us stupid fuckers about his shit. And his first target, the obvious believer.

Eventually, I gave a sermon from the mount to the dude, because a)he was being a cunt and b) she was going to go to HR, and they would have tore him a new asshole. HR ladies would have cast him into the lake of fire. Even though Shiite atheist was a jerk, I hated HR interference more.

Eventually, there was peace. The heathen gave godgirl a wide birth. AMEN.

From the book of Monkeybutt, 3:16

[Admiral Yi]

It could be, but in almost all instances it's failry clearly a fig leaf since the only policy outcome of such a position is always that gay people can't adopt. There is never for example any suggestion that adopting couples lose their right to seperate or divorce.

I think there are jurisdictions that give preference to married heteros over single heteros, which suggests it's more than a fig leaf.

[garbon]

Anyway, this is a classic case of double standards, something also I am familiar with as a gay person.

Straight people can tell everyone about their spouses, their kids, have their pictures all over the desk, can wear a wedding ring, can embrace in public and have other PDAs. But when gay people do anything other than being apologetic "sorry that I live", e.g. hold hands in public, they are "flaunting their sexuality."

Religious people can pray in public, can dress in a funny way, can kill animals in a special way, can hold street gatherings, can bother total strangers in the street or by going door to door and preach their hodge podge, can tell everyone who is willing to listen what god means to them and why Jesus is the best thing that can happen not just to them but to you. But when atheist people are not "keeping it to themselves" but are "vocal", they are obnoxious annoying assholes.

Seriously, go fuck yourself.

Edit: and if you think that these are not comparable, it just goes to show that atheists are currently more discriminated against than gays.

There isn't much to say if you are an Atheist other than I don't believe in God.  What else is there to do? You can't really hope to "convert" anyone, you can't pray or dress in funny ways. So what it is that you want to do?

[Josquius]

Religious people can pray in public, can dress in a funny way, can kill animals in a special way, can hold street gatherings, can bother total strangers in the street or by going door to door and preach their hodge podge, can tell everyone who is willing to listen what god means to them and why Jesus is the best thing that can happen not just to them but to you. But when atheist people are not "keeping it to themselves" but are "vocal", they are obnoxious annoying assholes.

1:  Overly preachy and annoying  religious folk are regarded as pricks too.
2: Religious people believe something, people do tend to go on about what they believe. Athiesm however is the lack of belief.
I mean, I like football, I talk about football a lot and this is fine. I don't however like cricket- it makes absolutely no sense for me to go on and on about cricket.
I hate athiests because they make such a big song and dance about not being religious...if you're not religious then religion should be a non-issue for you as it for the vast majority of irreligious people. I hate the way some make a religion out of non-religion.

[Neil]

No, I implied that it can legitimately be said that children should be raised by a man and a woman.

That may be optimal(depending on the people involved of course), but surely being raised by a gay couple is better than growing up in an orphanage or with foster parents who see you as nothing but a meal ticket.

I'm not so sure.

[Barrister]

Religious people can pray in public, can dress in a funny way, can kill animals in a special way, can hold street gatherings, can bother total strangers in the street or by going door to door and preach their hodge podge, can tell everyone who is willing to listen what god means to them and why Jesus is the best thing that can happen not just to them but to you. But when atheist people are not "keeping it to themselves" but are "vocal", they are obnoxious annoying assholes.

Seriously, go fuck yourself.

I dunno Marty.  When religious types go door to door proseltyzing they are also being annoying assholes.  I don't know of anyone who enjoys having Witnesses coming by dropping off copies of the Watchtower.  Dressing in a funny way and attracts odd looks no matter whether it is burkha or a mesh top.  Anyone can hold a street gathering - whether it be for Easter or for Gay Pride.

Fair point about the gay double standard, but I don't see a double standard for atheists.  Annoying is annoying, regardless of beliefs or lack thereof.