Forum Settings
Forums

Atheist Billboard in Triad Urges People to Skip Church (This shit is retarded)

Pages (3) « 1 2 [3]
Post New Reply
Dec 11, 2015 11:17 PM

Offline
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 9482
^^while it's true that Saint Nicolas (6th december) got dumped in favor of Father Christmas (25th december) during the reformation (mostly because god is a jealous guy and doesn't like saints), it was nothing likewhat we currently know. He was red... sometimes.
The name Santa Claus appeared for the first time at the end of the 18th century in the USA, and his current appearance and legend was set in stone by americans at the start of the 20th century.
The only reason Santa Claus is so popular nowadays is because he has been used for advertising by americans since more than a century now, and while Coca Cola wasn't the first brand to use him, they quickly understood the benefits and jumped in the bandwagon during the thirties.

So yeah, my post was trollish and biased, and yours was truncated and biased. We can call it even or keep going in the wrong direction, it's up to you.

BTW, I'm not sure if you said that you'll pray for me to annoy me, or out of genuine compassion, but go for it. This has no meaning at all for me, do as you want ;).

Grey-Zone said:
As far as I can see those billboards are neither a "Christian" nor an "Atheist" thing... they are actually an "American" thing.


Actually you can find that kind of shit in the UK too, it's just rare.
Modified by Deathko, Dec 11, 2015 11:36 PM
 
Dec 12, 2015 12:28 AM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 31926
Agafin said:
traed said:
Nope, he had no standard appearance. Seriously you can find images all over the place. Hes been depicted in green or yellow originally. His generally fat appearance is because of the poem Twas the Night Before Christmas

If you look deeper the Saint Nicholas story doesnt hold water. No evidence of what he was like or his life by anyone who actually witnessed him.
"Nicholas’s existence is not attested by any historical document, so nothing certain is known of his life except that he was probably bishop of Myra in the 4th century."
http://www.britannica.com/biography/Saint-Nicholas

The story of Saint Nickolas bearing gifts is just a story. Do you not know the part of the story also is that he gave gifts AFTER he died? That he also resurrected children from the dead even if they were dismembered? Its a story. Also Saint Nicholas day is December 6th... not the 25th. The 25th is a later change in a few countries to meld it with Christmas. He has nothing to do with the 25th at all.

He mostly comes from folk tales and pagan mythologies.
http://www.ibtimes.com/santa-claus-pagan-origins-5-influences-behind-father-christmas-1736863


What does this change about what I said? The existence of Saint Nicholas is attested by the presence of his bones/skeleton, which we still have today. I didn't say he had a standard appearance. I said he was depicted as red well before. So Coca Cola didn't start anything, though they might have popularised it. I also said that Santa has had everything to do with December 25th since something like 500 years in case you didn't notice, so you haven't refuted what I said, since it's true. Saint Nicholas's day is still the 6th, and Santa is still a bringer of gifts and joy so no perversion of his original purpose has been carried out by the church like these atheists did.

Santa is inspired from Saint Nicholas, the fact that he might have absorbed the traits of Odin along the way (mostly appearance wise) does not change that, people will always partially merge their culture with such an influential figure.


Santa is not representative of Saint Nicholas. He is his own thing. If Santa = real Saint Nicholas then you would not have countries where both are present.
 
Dec 12, 2015 12:38 AM

Offline
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 22802
Leave it to a site filled with atheists to misrepresent CHRISTmas....
 
Dec 12, 2015 12:53 AM

Offline
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 14604
JustALEX said:
Leave it to a site filled with atheists to misrepresent CHRISTmas....
Blame big companies and Santa for that. Poll Christian kids what they are "looking forward to about Christmas" . . . I will bet you that the amount saying "To celebrate Jesus Christ" will be less than 5%. It is not Atheists that took the "Christianity" out of Christmas.
 
Dec 12, 2015 1:07 AM

Offline
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 2698
So much religion vs atheism debate.


While, being neither Christian nor Atheist, I could add a bit of perspective, certain among those groups wouldn't care, and it's not really important. What is important is a rather overlooked aspect of this: where they chose to put the billboards.

If you think this wasn't meant specifically for Christians, you haven't seen the people around there. The billboards are mainly put up on the highway between Greensboro and Winston-Salem. These are two very religious communities, especially for cities of their size. This is why the area was chosen. It's not an accident. It's not a call to Atheists. It's propaganda against Christians. And it's as offensive to them as proselytizing is to an Atheist.

And note that I'm capitalizing Atheism intentionally. You may be atheist, but the ones putting this up are an organized group based around 1) the active disbelief in any form of higher power, 2) the active desire to convert others to their belief system (yes, a singular belief can be a system!), and 3) a unique desire to insult and belittle those who deign to have a different belief. All traits they deridingly attribute to religious people. In other words, they're no different from religious fundamentalist nuts.
 
Dec 12, 2015 1:12 AM

Offline
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 4310
religious tolerance in usa is only okay if its islam apparently
 
Dec 12, 2015 1:19 AM

Offline
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 14604
Salvatia said:
religious tolerance in usa is only okay if its islam apparently
0_0 . . . I mean, hell did freeze over and all.
 
Dec 12, 2015 1:25 AM

Offline
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 15762
Pirating_Ninja said:
JustALEX said:
Leave it to a site filled with atheists to misrepresent CHRISTmas....
Blame big companies and Santa for that. Poll Christian kids what they are "looking forward to about Christmas" . . . I will bet you that the amount saying "To celebrate Jesus Christ" will be less than 5%. It is not Atheists that took the "Christianity" out of Christmas.


Maybe if more people celebrated Christmas for Christian reasons more parents can save so much money lol no more xbox for you son.

ErwinJA said:
So much religion vs atheism debate.


While, being neither Christian nor Atheist, I could add a bit of perspective, certain among those groups wouldn't care, and it's not really important. What is important is a rather overlooked aspect of this: where they chose to put the billboards.

If you think this wasn't meant specifically for Christians, you haven't seen the people around there. The billboards are mainly put up on the highway between Greensboro and Winston-Salem. These are two very religious communities, especially for cities of their size. This is why the area was chosen. It's not an accident. It's not a call to Atheists. It's propaganda against Christians. And it's as offensive to them as proselytizing is to an Atheist.

And note that I'm capitalizing Atheism intentionally. You may be atheist, but the ones putting this up are an organized group based around 1) the active disbelief in any form of higher power, 2) the active desire to convert others to their belief system (yes, a singular belief can be a system!), and 3) a unique desire to insult and belittle those who deign to have a different belief. All traits they deridingly attribute to religious people. In other words, they're no different from religious fundamentalist nuts.


Bingo we don't have to demand it removed and stomp around but we do all have to realize the reasons why it was put it. Its the same side of the coin, pot meets kettle an atheist group no better than the Christians they don't like. none of this its a positive message for atheists! thats bullshit at least I can admit Christianity puts up dumb billboards and not have to defend everything my side does because of bias loyalties. Its ok to admit some atheists are immature and just as bad but because atheism is the opposition of something some people dislike it must make atheism purely good and right which is just as stupid as claiming that for religion all the time. Once again no different.

Sees dumb Christian billboard: I find that offensive and oppressive!
Sees dumb atheist billboard: ehh well yeah er nah its fine its a positive message! its only for atheists! its not even offensive.

I could literally swap an atheist and Christian in that scene and it would play out exactly the same. Remember its ok to admit some things are just tit for tat atheism isn't a religion or a group you belong to its just a definition not some world order (apparently) you don't have to defend everything any atheists do just because it "sticks it to religion" and you don't have to be totally against religion 100% of the time if that stops you seeing anything good in it then you have to re-evaluate how much bias you have. I can admit in a shit ton of benefits atheism has over religion without "betraying the cause" or whatever it is. A Christian saying atheism has some good points or an atheist saying Christianity has some good points around here is like an American in the cold war saying "communism isn't all bad" you'd get mobbed and tried as a traitor to your group. Which is stupid.


Talk about selective bias.
Modified by Spooks, Dec 12, 2015 1:39 AM
 
Dec 12, 2015 2:25 AM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 1585
They are perfectly free to put the sign up, and I am perfectly free to tell them no one is buying their "I don't believe in God" act. Dollars to dimes the vast majority of atheists believe in God. They just don't like Him all that much.
Let's go bowling.
 
Dec 12, 2015 2:54 AM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 31926
StopDropAndBowl said:
They are perfectly free to put the sign up, and I am perfectly free to tell them no one is buying their "I don't believe in God" act. Dollars to dimes the vast majority of atheists believe in God. They just don't like Him all that much.
lol No Although some do just as some Christians are really atheists. Only 8% of self proclaimed atheists are actually theists.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/05/7-facts-about-atheists/
 
Dec 14, 2015 2:04 AM

Offline
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 9482
ErwinJA said:
And note that I'm capitalizing Atheism intentionally. You may be atheist, but the ones putting this up are an organized group based around 1) the active disbelief in any form of higher power, 2) the active desire to convert others to their belief system (yes, a singular belief can be a system!), and 3) a unique desire to insult and belittle those who deign to have a different belief. All traits they deridingly attribute to religious people. In other words, they're no different from religious fundamentalist nuts.


Yeah, and? We all know this argument. So what? We shouldn't do what the religious factions did a long time ago and allowed them to take over the world? I have no problem with atheist propaganda, I have a problem with religious one. I'll gladly support the former if we get less of the latter, and I don't see how it's hypocrisy. if anything, religious people telling us "lol, you're doing it too" are the one who are hypocrits.

We atheists wouldn't have to do that shit without religions in the first place. Blaming it on us annoys me just like those believers who think they're really clever when they tell us that athesim is a belief too. The belief that there are no gods wouldn't be one without the belief in gods. You can't complain about things that are your own doing.
Modified by Deathko, Dec 14, 2015 2:10 AM
 
Dec 14, 2015 4:37 AM

Offline
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 1270
I think the campaign is great. Why should a holiday that has become part of our secular culture be monopolized by religion? That seems unfair and this billboard draws attention to that.

I can understand that for religious folks this is an attack on religion, but I think that's wrong. I don't think this billboard is aimed at Christians, i.e. I don't think it is meant to deconvert anyone. I think it is aimed at Atheists so that they won't feel the need to attend masses/worships during Christmas.
your waifu is shit
 
Dec 14, 2015 8:19 AM

Offline
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 15762
SzJ said:
I think it is aimed at Atheists so that they won't feel the need to attend masses/worships during Christmas.


I don't think you know what atheist means....

Clebardman said:
I have no problem with atheist propaganda, I have a problem with religious one. I'll gladly support the former if we get less of the latter, and I don't see how it's hypocrisy.


lol you don't? let me point it out:

"I have no problem with Christian propaganda, I have a problem with Atheist one. I'll gladly support the former if we get less of the latter, and I don't see how it's hypocrisy."

Also your response to a message like that ^ would also be bias and hypocritical.

For a man who berates people for having religious bias you sure can't spot bias.
Modified by Spooks, Dec 14, 2015 8:29 AM
 
Dec 14, 2015 4:50 PM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 31926
Spooks said:
SzJ said:
I think it is aimed at Atheists so that they won't feel the need to attend masses/worships during Christmas.


I don't think you know what atheist means....
There are plenty of atheists who pretend to be Christian because they dont want to come out to their family about it.

I dont think its directed at atheists though.
 
Dec 14, 2015 7:08 PM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 2569
It should be allowed to be up because of Freedom of Speech.

Though I never got why Atheist and Christians put up billboards advertising there beliefs, You're not going to change someone's beliefs by just having them look at a billboard.
 
Dec 15, 2015 12:32 AM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 6844
I don't think any of the billboards should be banned per se... but their existence just seems incredibly stupid.
 
Dec 15, 2015 12:59 AM

Offline
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 150
atheism, the new religion
 
Dec 15, 2015 1:02 AM

Offline
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 150
"teh religious peple pushing their beliefs on others tsk tsk tsk"
 
Dec 15, 2015 4:19 AM

Offline
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 1270
Spooks said:
SzJ said:
I think it is aimed at Atheists so that they won't feel the need to attend masses/worships during Christmas.


I don't think you know what atheist means....


I think that you're wrong and that you don't understand the struggle of deconversion in a theistic environment. You no longer think religion is true but you're forced to act as if you still believed and you feel guilty for no longer belonging but you are also angry at religion for forcing you to be in that situation. So you pretend grudgingly. And this billboard is aimed at atheists standing up for themselves in that kind of environment so that they will no longer feel the need to pretend. I think that's why it's a great initiative.

2potatosoneguy said:
atheism, the new religion

For the love of God, atheism is not a religion. It's the lack thereof. Atheists have no dogma, no holy scripts and no beliefs in God/gods. So what makes atheism a religion again?
Modified by SzJ, Dec 15, 2015 4:23 AM
your waifu is shit
 
Dec 15, 2015 4:32 AM

Offline
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 11302
2potatosoneguy said:
atheism, the new religion
 
Dec 15, 2015 4:41 AM
otaking
Offline
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 24952
SzJ said:
Spooks said:


I don't think you know what atheist means....


I think that you're wrong and that you don't understand the struggle of deconversion in a theistic environment. You no longer think religion is true but you're forced to act as if you still believed and you feel guilty for no longer belonging but you are also angry at religion for forcing you to be in that situation. So you pretend grudgingly. And this billboard is aimed at atheists standing up for themselves in that kind of environment so that they will no longer feel the need to pretend. I think that's why it's a great initiative.

2potatosoneguy said:
atheism, the new religion

For the love of God, atheism is not a religion. It's the lack thereof. Atheists have no dogma, no holy scripts and no beliefs in God/gods. So what makes atheism a religion again?


i call bullshit on this one alot of pf atheists treat the words of Psudo leftist Bigots lie Hariis Dawkins and hitches like a Bible and refuse ot have anything said agirgst them
"If you tremble with indignation at every injustice, then you are a comrade of mine"

When the union's inspiration through the workers' blood shall run
There can be no power greater anywhere beneath the sun
Yet what force on earth is weaker than the feeble strength of one
For the Union makes us strong
 
Dec 15, 2015 4:45 AM

Offline
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 3364
^ Name one truly bigoted thing ever said by any of those guys.
 
Dec 15, 2015 5:20 AM
otaking
Offline
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 24952
Altairius said:
^ Name one truly bigoted thing ever said by any of those guys.


the fact darwkins only openply bashes muslims lokk how he acted after paris did m dawrkins harris and any of there drones ie the Yt leftist really say anything abut the planed peratnhood incident and theres been no con mendation from any of them fo the fact in the past month 1o8 innoncets have died in occupied Palestine

but there muslims the dont matter too the

no condemnation of Settler Terrorism in the Occupied lands any any one oof of them but if somtng like paris happens its all bash and condem Islam


i hold more leftist ideals then they do by far in any way im also an man of faith but i attack thing evenly

that not in nay way mu biggest issues with them guy it is this all they have ever talked about in there anti faith manly anti isalm views never have i seen harris talk about issuse of class like a real leftist

and harris said " id back carson over sanders"
"If you tremble with indignation at every injustice, then you are a comrade of mine"

When the union's inspiration through the workers' blood shall run
There can be no power greater anywhere beneath the sun
Yet what force on earth is weaker than the feeble strength of one
For the Union makes us strong
 
Dec 15, 2015 1:00 PM

Offline
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 2698
Clebardman said:
ErwinJA said:
And note that I'm capitalizing Atheism intentionally. You may be atheist, but the ones putting this up are an organized group based around 1) the active disbelief in any form of higher power, 2) the active desire to convert others to their belief system (yes, a singular belief can be a system!), and 3) a unique desire to insult and belittle those who deign to have a different belief. All traits they deridingly attribute to religious people. In other words, they're no different from religious fundamentalist nuts.


Yeah, and? We all know this argument. So what? We shouldn't do what the religious factions did a long time ago and allowed them to take over the world? I have no problem with atheist propaganda, I have a problem with religious one. I'll gladly support the former if we get less of the latter, and I don't see how it's hypocrisy. if anything, religious people telling us "lol, you're doing it too" are the one who are hypocrits.

We atheists wouldn't have to do that shit without religions in the first place. Blaming it on us annoys me just like those believers who think they're really clever when they tell us that athesim is a belief too. The belief that there are no gods wouldn't be one without the belief in gods. You can't complain about things that are your own doing.
Not all religions actively seek converts. Many are going to make you work hard for the privilege of joining. It's just that they're smaller because they never used force to grow. Ironically, many atheists actively seek converts to their belief. I've been proselytized by them almost as much as Christians.

Now, a religious person who complains that you're doing it while doing it themselves is indeed a hypocrite, but any religious person that does not like their advertising either is merely being consistent. And when such people say you're being a hypocrite, they win. The definition of hypocrisy is "the behavior of people who do things that they tell other people not to do : behavior that does not agree with what someone claims to believe or feel."
You say you do not like religious propaganda trying to convert people to their beliefs and then support propaganda so as long as it's for your belief. That's straight up hypocrisy. No denial accepted. None of this "atheism isn't a religion" defense. You're still doing the same thing you deride them for. You have a hypocrisy problem, but are simply in denial about it. Admit your double standard and modify your opinions accordingly, or just let your entire argument die for the hypocrite that you are.

And the belief in no gods does not stem from belief in gods. It can't. They're simply two sides of the same coin. You might as well say darkness exists because of light, or right because of left. The two concepts are so inextricably entwined that you could not separate one from the other. Instead, both stem from the concept of a higher power or guiding force.

Rather, religion stems from a psychological and social need. And where atheism stems from religion, it's because its opposition to religion helps fill part of that need. But that's also the weakness. Most avowed atheists have a strong dislike for religion, if not outright hatred. And many expand that to encompass all religious people. That makes them much more likely to be bigoted for reasons of belief than the very religions they deride. And the belief that atheism isn't a religion also makes them easily fall into the hypocrisy trap.
 
Dec 15, 2015 5:35 PM

Offline
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 3364
DateYutaka said:
Altairius said:
^ Name one truly bigoted thing ever said by any of those guys.


the fact darwkins only openply bashes muslims lokk how he acted after paris did m dawrkins harris and any of there drones ie the Yt leftist really say anything abut the planed peratnhood incident and theres been no con mendation from any of them fo the fact in the past month 1o8 innoncets have died in occupied Palestine

but there muslims the dont matter too the

no condemnation of Settler Terrorism in the Occupied lands any any one oof of them but if somtng like paris happens its all bash and condem Islam


i hold more leftist ideals then they do by far in any way im also an man of faith but i attack thing evenly

that not in nay way mu biggest issues with them guy it is this all they have ever talked about in there anti faith manly anti isalm views never have i seen harris talk about issuse of class like a real leftist

and harris said " id back carson over sanders"


Dawkins bashes Christianity far more often, which is something I find annoying about him. He has indicated he avoids Islam out of fear though. I can't really blame him.

Really? Your reaction to Paris and the constant attacks from Muslims everywhere is "why aren't they talking about the planned parenthood incident"? You're too far gone.

No, you don't attack evenly. Attacking evenly means attacking Islam 99% of the time, because it takes up that amount of worldwide terrorism. You pick out the one crazy Christian guy and harp on that for months, and call people bigots for not doing the same.

How about we stop caring if someone is a "true leftist" and just focus on whether or not their ideas are correct. He said Carson over Chomsky, not over Sanders. He was just making a point about how far gone the left is. I can kind of see Chomsky being extremely light on Islam and economic migrants.
 
Dec 15, 2015 6:07 PM

Offline
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 387
I don't quite understand why this is even an issue in the first place. If we Christians can advertise, why not the atheist? The outrage in my opinion is unwarranted. If you're a committed, thinking theist, chances are that some billboard isn't going to change your opinion of church anyway. So for people to get this mad about it, in my opinion, just goes to show that they don't have any confidence in the message they preach, since they're more concerned with the potential effectiveness of a billboard than they are with one's personal convictions to go church in the first place. And that, as a professing Christian, is an awful thing.
Eminem meets Clannad
Just when you thought Clannad's OST was as sad as it could get ;_;

If you seen School Days, rewatch the ending while listening to A Little of Piece of Heaven by A7X. I guarantee laughs.
 
Dec 16, 2015 2:21 AM
otaking
Offline
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 24952
Altairius said:
DateYutaka said:


the fact darwkins only openply bashes muslims lokk how he acted after paris did m dawrkins harris and any of there drones ie the Yt leftist really say anything abut the planed peratnhood incident and theres been no con mendation from any of them fo the fact in the past month 1o8 innoncets have died in occupied Palestine

but there muslims the dont matter too the

no condemnation of Settler Terrorism in the Occupied lands any any one oof of them but if somtng like paris happens its all bash and condem Islam


i hold more leftist ideals then they do by far in any way im also an man of faith but i attack thing evenly

that not in nay way mu biggest issues with them guy it is this all they have ever talked about in there anti faith manly anti isalm views never have i seen harris talk about issuse of class like a real leftist

and harris said " id back carson over sanders"


Dawkins bashes Christianity far more often, which is something I find annoying about him. He has indicated he avoids Islam out of fear though. I can't really blame him.

Really? Your reaction to Paris and the constant attacks from Muslims everywhere is "why aren't they talking about the planned parenthood incident"? You're too far gone.

No, you don't attack evenly. Attacking evenly means attacking Islam 99% of the time, because it takes up that amount of worldwide terrorism. You pick out the one crazy Christian guy and harp on that for months, and call people bigots for not doing the same.

How about we stop caring if someone is a "true leftist" and just focus on whether or not their ideas are correct. He said Carson over Chomsky, not over Sanders. He was just making a point about how far gone the left is. I can kind of see Chomsky being extremely light on Islam and economic migrants.



im in the bakunin school of socialism and haven been since i was to young to know what right and left is so os most of my family mius some of cousins

Harris is form the us right and figues bakc this uo in the us there is more far right white Terrorism then there is Islamic im sorry that both true in is the past 40 years at lest [ but he does nt care about that]

and plus nothing about Settler terrorism in Palestine from nay of them or any of there Drones[ ie 99% of the leftist voices on YT ] the closest to saying anything about right wing Terror n us the left on YT have said is TYT then the big Psudo leftist in the YT community Sargon spent over 40 Muins attacking him while only just under 20% of that time debunking fox news' bull shit reaction ot that event [ of couese im talking about Charleston]

the civil war of the left is pushing all of more to the center [no im not a communist] im moderate left left of center left but not as left ot called far left

and Noam dispte being of jewish decent openly attck zionism unlike Harris[ hes like the diea of removing stabling forces ] Darwkins Hitchens[ Warhawk] im sorry what happen to the left being anti inpreailsim but no

link me to 10 vids were harris attacks zionsim and il call him even minded
"If you tremble with indignation at every injustice, then you are a comrade of mine"

When the union's inspiration through the workers' blood shall run
There can be no power greater anywhere beneath the sun
Yet what force on earth is weaker than the feeble strength of one
For the Union makes us strong
 
Dec 16, 2015 2:57 AM

Offline
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 67
Militant atheism is always retarded
are you baiting me? because it's working


 
Dec 16, 2015 5:31 AM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 31926
sirius707 said:
Militant atheism is always retarded

Evangelical atheism is a better term. Militant is supposed to be for literal militant groups but there are no atheist militant groups like there are militant Christian and Muslim groups at last as far as I know.
 
Dec 16, 2015 6:22 AM

Offline
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 5246
traed said:
sirius707 said:
Militant atheism is always retarded

Evangelical atheism is a better term. Militant is supposed to be for literal militant groups but there are no atheist militant groups like there are militant Christian and Muslim groups at last as far as I know.
Militant does not neccessarily refer to fighting or being a soldier. Militant means aggressive. A militant atheist is someone who forces their own views on others without regards to anyone else. And as far as I know, the only relevant militant Christian groups are all in very underdeveloped areas, like Central Africa. And their extremism has more to do with them being uneducated and poor than being Christian.
 
Dec 16, 2015 6:54 AM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 31926
You cant compare a militant atheist with a militant christian and a jihadist militant muslm.
 
Dec 16, 2015 6:57 AM

Offline
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 5875
I would post a saitamaok reaction pic, but can't be bothered to...
 
Dec 16, 2015 6:57 AM

Offline
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 5246
traed said:
You cant compare a militant atheist with a militant christian and a jihadist militant muslm.
I didn't compare them. I just said your definition of a militant was wrong.
 
Dec 16, 2015 7:00 AM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 31926
Muffet said:
traed said:
You cant compare a militant atheist with a militant christian and a jihadist militant muslm.
I didn't compare them. I just said your definition of a militant was wrong.

Calling them Militant Atheists is making a comparison.

Militant is a reference to the use of violence NOT debate. You cant be inconsistent with the use of the word from one group to another because it creates false images

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=evangelical+atheist
http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=6487
Modified by traed, Dec 16, 2015 7:06 AM
 
Dec 16, 2015 7:07 AM

Offline
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 5246
traed said:
Muffet said:
I didn't compare them. I just said your definition of a militant was wrong.

Calling them Militant Atheists is making a comparison.

Militant is a reference to the use of violence NOT debate.
No, it's just you reading thigs into my post. How is saying "militant atheist" is comparing them to other militants? If I say "black panther" does that mean I compare the animal to every other animal that's black?
A supporter of a militant group is also a militant, even if they don't use violence. And as I said, you don't need to be physically violent to be a militant. Someone who spreads hate speech (which some atheists do) is a militant.
1. Urban Dictionary is not a valid source
2. An atheist linking a partial atheist site is not reliable

How about actual definitions?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militant_(word)

A militant, as a noun, is a person who uses militant methods in pursuit of an objective; the term is not associated with the military. In general usage, a militant person is a confrontational person who does not necessarily use violence. Militant can refer to individuals or groups displaying aggressive behavior or attitudes.
Modified by Zees, Dec 16, 2015 7:10 AM
 
Dec 16, 2015 9:06 AM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 31926
Calling them a militant atheist is putting them in the same likes as militant christians and militant jihadist muslims. Which a direct result of that is saying an atheist who likes to debate is as bad as violent religious criminal that uses violence to spread religion, when its not. Just think about it instead of spewing out dictionary definitions. You dont seem to grasp the consequences of the inconsistencies.

It does not matter what a words definition is when it carries a lot of weight behind its other meanings creating a strong stigma. I use the term sometimes too but I dont think its accurate or a fair description at all when its better suited to those who actually are on the criminal and terrorist end of things. It leaves no term for distinguishing the people on that far end.
Modified by traed, Dec 16, 2015 9:20 AM
 
Dec 16, 2015 9:23 AM

Offline
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 5246
traed said:
Calling them a militant atheist is putting them in the same likes as militant christians and militant jihadist muslims. Which a direct result of that is saying an atheist who likes to debate is as bad as violent religious criminal that uses violence to spread religion, when its not. Just think about it instead of spewing out dictionary definitions. You dont seem to grasp the consequences of the inconsistencies.
I'm sorry, but if you claim something, you should know the definitions. Stop trying to find excuses when you were mistaken. Besides, my very first response said
A militant atheist is someone who forces their own views on others without regards to anyone else.

I outright stated what a militant atheist is. I never ever compared them to militant jihadists or muslims, it's bullshit you read into my post.

traed said:
Which a direct result of that is saying an atheist who likes to debate is as bad as violent religious criminal that uses violence to spread religion, when its not.
Stop. I'm not sure why you are hallucinating, but I never implied a militant atheist is as bad as a religious criminal. In fact, it was you who used the wrong definition, implying that a militant atheist is a violent criminal. It was you who made the comparison. The red part is the wrong definition and the blue part is your own comparison, which you later claimed to be mine.
traed said:
Militant is supposed to be for literal militant groups but there are no atheist militant groups like there are militant Christian and Muslim groups at last as far as I know.

There is no inconsistency, it's you mixing up the definitions. Militant atheist refers to someone who tries to enforce their own views aggressively, while a militant jihadist/Christian usually uses physical violence. Just because both terms have "militant" in them doesn't mean the militant part means the same thing. If your definition was right, that would be kind of pointless since a militant atheist group similar to a militant jihadist group doesn't exist, as far as I know.

tread said:
Just think about it instead of spewing out dictionary definitions.
Pot calling the kettle back, if I remember correctly it was you who mixed up a definition and then spewed out biased and false dictionary definitions (urban dictionary + atheist website).
Modified by Zees, Dec 16, 2015 9:27 AM
 
Dec 16, 2015 9:27 AM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 31926
You're missing the point...
 
Dec 16, 2015 9:29 AM

Offline
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 5246
traed said:
You're missing the point...
Not really, you still didn't explain why militant atheist would mean a violent terrorist group when it's not the right definition. Just because some people associate militant with terrorism doesn't mean other people should be forced to use the wrong definition too, to avoid confusion.
 
Dec 16, 2015 9:33 AM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 31926
Uhhhhh there are literally terrorist militias out there. To call atheists "militant atheists" leaves no room for proper comparison. Does that mean every Evangelical Christian and Christian missionary I can call a Militant Christian now?
 
Dec 16, 2015 9:34 AM

Offline
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 9482
traed said:
Uhhhhh there are literally terrorist militias out there. To call atheists "militant atheists" leaves no room for proper comparison. Does that mean every Evangelical Christian and Christian missionary I can call a Militant Christian now?


I don't care much about the current argument wich seems like nitpicking to me, but I'd rather be called militant than evangelical.
 
Dec 16, 2015 9:36 AM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 31926
Yeah I know it sounds cooler and its funner to say but it has a slanderous use to it that seems disproportionate when in comparison the extreme side of the religious. That is pretty much all ive been saying. I pretty much just pointed out there are consequences to the terminology and mostly am just playing devils advocate because I dont really give a shit which term is used because no one is going to change really.
 
Dec 16, 2015 9:39 AM

Offline
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 5246
traed said:
Uhhhhh there are literally terrorist militias out there. To call atheists "militant atheists" leaves no room for proper comparison. Does that mean every Evangelical Christian and Christian missionary I can call a Militant Christian now?
By definition, maybe. It depends on whether they force their views on people in a "no questions, just accept it" way. A Christian missionary is not neccessarily a militant. Missionaries are not like they were in the middle ages, most of them are no longer forcing others to join. I don't really like the militant term either because I know a lot of people confuse it with terrorism. But if one really has to use it, at least use it correctly.
Long story short, what I've been trying to say all this time is that someone calling the more aggressive atheists militants doesn't mean they are associating them with terrorist groups like ISIS or some Christian terrorist group.
 
Top
Pages (3) « 1 2 [3]