Someone Explain Sam's Sig Line to Me

[_msnobody]

I interpret it as atheist not giving God credit for good things that happen, while blaming God for anything or everything bad that happens.

[_marg]

There is one individual (on this board) that said a theist should die because of his beliefs in a deity. That would be a fundamentalist atheist in my book. Those that view all theists as one large group and can't separate between denominations, religions, and beliefs would appear, to me, to be a fundamentalist atheist. Those that blame theists for actions in the past by those that had a belief in a deity would seem, to me, to be a fundamentalist atheist. Those that believe all religious practices, beliefs, etc... should be eradicated appear, to me, to be a fundamentalist atheist. Those that state theists shouldn't be allowed to participate in the political process would suggest, to me, that they are fundamentalists.

Now, there are some of these sentiments seen on this board, at times, and on the net. I think that we can disagree with the beliefs and attempt to change them, yet, as soon as you approach someone telling them that they are deluded, are dangerous, stupid, etc... the conversation shuts down.

I'd rather use the term "rabid atheist"...

What is the difference between a fundamentalist Christian and a non fundamentalist Christian. Sam Harris (shade's brd) doesn't seem to accept or be tolerant of fundamentalist Christians, do you also not accept and respect Fund. Christians? Do you think there is a problem with the beliefs of Fundamentalist Christians. If so what is the problem? Do you think that all beliefs of everyone in this world should be tolerated, respected and not criticized.

I repeatedly said beliefs should be challenged, marg. I certainly don't think I spoke to respect of beliefs. Matter of fact I am not fond of the belief that we should eradicate all religious beliefs or theists should not be allowed to participate in the political process, as well. I would have no problem debating with the individuals that held these views and try to sway them.

Jersey Girl mentioned it and I'm more comfortable with the term fanatic. I don't know why Sam chose the word fundamentalist to refer to people that I sense she sees as fanatics. I'm not defending that website or the sentiments there. I was just pointing out that there are those that paint all theists with a broad brush -- and the same can be seen with theists painting atheists with a broad brush (as in the website) or those of a different religion/denomination.

I don't consider a lack of belief in a deity to be a particular belief. Hence I don't consider soft atheism to be a belief. At the time of writing my post to you I was about to add "religious" to the word "belief" in my question, but I figured you'd understand that's what I meant given the context I used the word "belief" in the post. So I'm not talking about atheism. What I was asking you was " Do you think that all religious beliefs in this world should be tolerated, respected and not criticized?" As well I have the other questions which you did not address. What is the difference between a fundamentalist Christian and a non fundamentalist Christian. Sam Harris (shade's brd) doesn't seem to accept or be tolerant of fundamentalist Christians, do you also not accept and respect Fund. Christians? Do you think there is a problem with the beliefs of Fundamentalist Christians. If so what is the problem?

[_Moniker]

There is one individual (on this board) that said a theist should die because of his beliefs in a deity. That would be a fundamentalist atheist in my book. Those that view all theists as one large group and can't separate between denominations, religions, and beliefs would appear, to me, to be a fundamentalist atheist. Those that blame theists for actions in the past by those that had a belief in a deity would seem, to me, to be a fundamentalist atheist. Those that believe all religious practices, beliefs, etc... should be eradicated appear, to me, to be a fundamentalist atheist. Those that state theists shouldn't be allowed to participate in the political process would suggest, to me, that they are fundamentalists.

Now, there are some of these sentiments seen on this board, at times, and on the net. I think that we can disagree with the beliefs and attempt to change them, yet, as soon as you approach someone telling them that they are deluded, are dangerous, stupid, etc... the conversation shuts down.

I'd rather use the term "rabid atheist"...

What is the difference between a fundamentalist Christian and a non fundamentalist Christian. Sam Harris (shade's brd) doesn't seem to accept or be tolerant of fundamentalist Christians, do you also not accept and respect Fund. Christians? Do you think there is a problem with the beliefs of Fundamentalist Christians. If so what is the problem? Do you think that all beliefs of everyone in this world should be tolerated, respected and not criticized.

I repeatedly said beliefs should be challenged, marg. I certainly don't think I spoke to respect of beliefs. Matter of fact I am not fond of the belief that we should eradicate all religious beliefs or theists should not be allowed to participate in the political process, as well. I would have no problem debating with the individuals that held these views and try to sway them.

Jersey Girl mentioned it and I'm more comfortable with the term fanatic. I don't know why Sam chose the word fundamentalist to refer to people that I sense she sees as fanatics. I'm not defending that website or the sentiments there. I was just pointing out that there are those that paint all theists with a broad brush -- and the same can be seen with theists painting atheists with a broad brush (as in the website) or those of a different religion/denomination.

I don't consider a lack of belief in a deity to be a particular belief.

I don't either and made no statement concerning that.

Hence I don't consider soft atheism to be a belief.

See above.

At the time of writing my post to you I was about to add "religious" to the word "belief" in my question, but I figured you'd understand that's what I meant given the context I used the word "belief" in the post. So I'm not talking about atheism. What I was asking you was " Do you think that all religious beliefs in this world should be tolerated, respected and not criticized?" As well I have the other questions which you did not address. What is the difference between a fundamentalist Christian and a non fundamentalist Christian. Sam Harris (shade's brd) doesn't seem to accept or be tolerant of fundamentalist Christians, do you also not accept and respect Fund. Christians? Do you think there is a problem with the beliefs of Fundamentalist Christians. If so what is the problem?

I answered that I didn't think all beliefs should be respected and I stated REPEATEDLY beliefs could be challenged (that's akin to criticism). That would include beliefs held by religious organizations, religious individuals, atheist organizations (there are some), atheist individuals.

I challenge fundamentalist Christians on a weekly basis on another board, marg, and have no problem doing so. I don't know why you're asking me these questions as I made no comment about fundamentalist Christians. I was responding to a question as to what precisely would be a fundamentalist atheist (and I think Sam could have cleared up confusion by using a different term such as fanatic or militant).

[_marg]

I challenge fundamentalist Christians on a weekly basis on another board, marg, and have no problem doing so. I don't know why you're asking me these questions as I made no comment about fundamentalist Christians. I was responding to a question as to what precisely would be a fundamentalist atheist (and I think Sam could have cleared up confusion by using a different term such as fanatic or militant).

The appearance you have given in this thread Moniker is that you are in agreement with Sam. You wrote: "I think fundamentalist, in this instance, is referring to someone very intolerant of other beliefs and quite militant. I wouldn't use that term, yet, I think that is the way Sam was using it so I carried on with her term." So you are quite willing to carry on with her term and even assume what Sam meant by fundamentalist atheists. Nowhere in this thread do you criticize fundamentalist Christians but you are obviously critical of "rabid atheists" or your assumption of what you think Sam meant by fundamentalist atheists.

So where I'm going with this and why I am asking you the questions I did was to differentiate you and your views from these "rabid atheists" you are critical of.

So how do you differ? You say you are critical of fundamentalist Christians, so why are you critical of them and not Christians in general? What is wrong with their beliefs as opposed to Christians generally.

[_Angus McAwesome]

Replying to multiple people here, so if you see your name feel free to respond (or even if you don't see your name for that matter).

I think fundamentalist, in this instance, is referring to someone very intolerant of other beliefs and quite militant. I wouldn't use that term, yet, I think that is the way Sam was using it so I carried on with her term.

Well, that's just flat out ignorance of the English language on Sam part then. Here's everything on the word fundamentalism, as per Dictionary.com. Be arsed if I can find a definition that fits for what Sam is trying to describe, so let's not compound the dumbassery by misapplying the same term.

In the context of this thread, would it be more effective to replace "fundamentalist" with "fanatical"?

Fanatical could work, so could irrational or extremist.

I interpret it as atheist not giving God credit for good things that happen, while blaming God for anything or everything bad that happens.

My sarcasometer is in the shop right now, so please tell me that was a joke.

[Guest]

Replying to multiple people here, so if you see your name feel free to respond (or even if you don't see your name for that matter).

I think fundamentalist, in this instance, is referring to someone very intolerant of other beliefs and quite militant. I wouldn't use that term, yet, I think that is the way Sam was using it so I carried on with her term.

Well, that's just flat out ignorance of the English language on Sam part then. Here's everything on the word fundamentalism, as per Dictionary.com. Be arsed if I can find a definition that fits for what Sam is trying to describe, so let's not compound the dumbassery by misapplying the same term.

This was in the link you supplied:

strict adherence to any set of basic ideas or principles: the fundamentalism of the extreme conservatives.

It is often believed by theists on the net that atheists do have a set of principles or beliefs. If one starts with that premise (and I think Sam did start with that premise) then saying they are fundamentalists is not really that inappropriate. I disagree that there are certain beliefs atheists must hold -- yet, I think Sam was looking at individuals that pretty much state the same thing over and over and there is quite a bit of repetition going on. There is quite a bit of intolerance and extreme fanaticism, I think, seen espoused by a few and Sam has made statements to that, as well, in the past. I have a bit of history with this board and understood what statements by atheists she was likely referring to with the use of the term.

I have no problem reading and understanding how Sam was using the term and immediately knew how she was applying it. I don't think I'm the one continuing dumbassery since I was able to understand what she was getting at. I think being pedantic to win an argument could be akin to dumbassery - yet, I'm not familiar with the meaning behind that term (is it in the dictionary?) and I think I'll just make up my own definition for dumbassery to apply to those that are incapable of understanding context and dwell on inconsequentials in a conversation.

[_Moniker]

I challenge fundamentalist Christians on a weekly basis on another board, marg, and have no problem doing so. I don't know why you're asking me these questions as I made no comment about fundamentalist Christians. I was responding to a question as to what precisely would be a fundamentalist atheist (and I think Sam could have cleared up confusion by using a different term such as fanatic or militant).

The appearance you have given in this thread Moniker is that you are in agreement with Sam. You wrote: "I think fundamentalist, in this instance, is referring to someone very intolerant of other beliefs and quite militant. I wouldn't use that term, yet, I think that is the way Sam was using it so I carried on with her term." So you are quite willing to carry on with her term and even assume what Sam meant by fundamentalist atheists. Nowhere in this thread do you criticize fundamentalist Christians but you are obviously critical of "rabid atheists" or your assumption of what you think Sam meant by fundamentalist atheists.

So where I'm going with this and why I am asking you the questions I did was to differentiate you and your views from these "rabid atheists" you are critical of.

I explained to Mc why I continued with her term. That's not true about me not criticizing those on the Christian side. You need to reread the thread. I had edited out those comments since I didn't want to get embroiled in a debate, yet, Kemp caught me and they are quoted in his reply to me. I don't think I must criticize both sides at all times. My interest in the thread, at first, was the heated exchange between Sam, Kemp, and Mc -- the vitriol is not productive.

So how do you differ? You say you are critical of fundamentalist Christians, so why are you critical of them and not Christians in general? What is wrong with their beliefs as opposed to Christians generally.

I am critical of certain beliefs, marg. Beliefs that I view as being harmful to my political agenda for the most part. I have no desire to continue in this vein with you as I didn't enter into the thread to discuss specific beliefs, rather how you approach those that may have beliefs that differ from you.

[_Angus McAwesome]

This was in the link you supplied:

strict adherence to any set of basic ideas or principles: the fundamentalism of the extreme conservatives.

Problem being that Sam said that violence, arrogance, and intolerance were what made someone a "fundamental" atheist, not their adherence to a set of principles or a specific ideology. So that definition fails as well.

It is often believed by theists on the net that atheists do have a set of principles or beliefs. If one starts with that premise (and I think Sam did start with that premise) then saying they are fundamentalists is not really that inappropriate. I disagree that there are certain beliefs atheists must hold -- yet, I think Sam was looking at individuals that pretty much state the same thing over and over and there is quite a bit of repetition going on. There is quite a bit of intolerance and extreme fanaticism, I think, seen espoused by a few and Sam has made statements to that, as well, in the past. I have a bit of history with this board and understood what statements by atheists she was likely referring to with the use of the term.

Well, I'm a new guy, so all that is largely irrelevant to me. I don't read minds, I read words, and when someone uses a word incorrectly I ask what me they mean. When their answer doesn't jive at all with any accepted meaning of the term they use, then I point it out them. If they continue to incorrectly apply that term after having it pointed out to them repeatedly then they are a dumbass.

I have no problem reading and understanding how Sam was using the term and immediately knew how she was applying it. I don't think I'm the one continuing dumbassery since I was able to understand what she was getting at. I think being pedantic to win an argument could be akin to dumbassery - yet, I'm not familiar with the meaning behind that term (is it in the dictionary?) and I think I'll just make up my own definition for dumbassery to apply to those that are incapable of understanding context and dwell on inconsequentials in a conversation.

Yes, because understanding what the words one uses is wrong, amirite. Seriously, if you don't know what the word you're about to use means then either go look it up or don't use it. "Fundamental Atheism" is an idiotic term. No matter how many times I've asked no one here, especially Sam, can provide an explanation or give an example of what the "fundamentals" of atheism are that would make someone a "fundamentalist".

Also... Dumbass, is "a thoroughly stupid person; blockhead." That would make "dumbassery" the act of being a dumbass or the actions of a dumbass. Pretty simple to figure out, just requires a little working knowledge of the English language. Bear in mind, I make grammatical mistakes a lot, but I know words. More importantly, I know what the words I use mean.

[_Moniker]

This was in the link you supplied:

strict adherence to any set of basic ideas or principles: the fundamentalism of the extreme conservatives.

Problem being that Sam said that violence, arrogance, and intolerance were what made someone a "fundamental" atheist, not their adherence to a set of principles or a specific ideology. So that definition fails as well.

If you start with the premise that atheism is a belief (which Sam does) then it doesn't fail. She's not outside the norm of thinking atheists have a certain set of beliefs and she started with that premise. It's a premise I don't think is accurate, yet, she does which is why she used that term most likely. So in light of understanding what her premise was it is fairly simple to see how she was using the term. Yet, I wish she'd used a different term.

It is often believed by theists on the net that atheists do have a set of principles or beliefs. If one starts with that premise (and I think Sam did start with that premise) then saying they are fundamentalists is not really that inappropriate. I disagree that there are certain beliefs atheists must hold -- yet, I think Sam was looking at individuals that pretty much state the same thing over and over and there is quite a bit of repetition going on. There is quite a bit of intolerance and extreme fanaticism, I think, seen espoused by a few and Sam has made statements to that, as well, in the past. I have a bit of history with this board and understood what statements by atheists she was likely referring to with the use of the term.

Well, I'm a new guy, so all that is largely irrelevant to me. I don't read minds, I read words, and when someone uses a word incorrectly I ask what me they mean. When their answer doesn't jive at all with any accepted meaning of the term they use, then I point it out them. If they continue to incorrectly apply that term after having it pointed out to them repeatedly then they are a dumbass.

Which is why I reentered the thread and tried to give specific examples of things said on this board, and the net in general, to try to make a working definition.

Yes, because understanding what the words one uses is wrong, amirite. Seriously, if you don't know what the word you're about to use means then either go look it up or don't use it. "Fundamental Atheism" is an idiotic term. No matter how many times I've asked no one here, especially Sam, can provide an explanation or give an example of what the "fundamentals" of atheism are that would make someone a "fundamentalist".

It may be an idiotic term and yet I think it's fairly simple to see how she was applying it. Especially after I cited specific beliefs that she was likely referring to -- the belief that theists should not be allowed in the political process, those that have a belief in a deity should die, etc...

Also... Dumbass, is "a thoroughly stupid person; blockhead." That would make "dumbassery" the act of being a dumbass or the actions of a dumbass. Pretty simple to figure out, just requires a little working knowledge of the English language. Bear in mind, I make grammatical mistakes a lot, but I know words. More importantly, I know what the words I use mean.

Ah, yet, you played about with that word, did you not? I don't mind it, at all. I'm not the one getting antsy about application of terms -- you are. :)

[_Sam Harris]

A fundamentalist atheist as a fool who thinks that only their view is correct, just like a fundamentalist Christian is a fool who thinks only their view is correct. Simple.

Your definition makes little sense. Most people including yourself think their views or particular beliefs are correct or the best beliefs to hold, otherwise they wouldn't hold them. A fundamentalist Christian believes in a literal interpretation of the Bible.

So according to you what is the difference between a fundamentalist atheist and a non fundamentalist atheist? What does a fundamentalist atheist believe versus a non fundamentalist atheist?

I believe you say that religion can be separated from a belief in a God. Are you speaking for yourself and your religious beliefs? Do you completely ignore the Bible and all other sacred texts and believe in none of them? Do you think they are complete man created fabrications?Do you believe in an interfering with mankind sort of God, one that listens to you when you pray, who might intervene on your behalf or the behalf of others?

Once again you have to paint me into a corner to justify yourself. I do not believe that my beliefs are the best to hold. What is it you people think I believe?

I'm not aware of painting you into a corner. I am asking questions to get clarification.

Marg, there is never clarification for you, only the last word. We saw that during your adhomimania phase. Six weeks!

I am NOT a fundamentalist Christian, and have never defined myself as one on these boards. It's amazing that you all have to perpetuate this lie in order to have an argument!

No where have I said you are a fundamentalist Christian. And in fact I don't think you are. [/quote]

Wow, for once an atheist who doesn't think I'm a fundie.

A fundamentalist atheist is a violent, militant individual who feels that no one is deserving of respect if they are a theist. A non-fundamentalist atheist holds the belief that there is no God, but sees no need to advocate the harm or disrespect of those who do.

Give me an example of an atheist who by virtue of their lack of God belief has been violent against theists or caused harm. Do you think Dawkins and Sam Harris are fundamentalist atheists? Have they been violent and caused harm against theists? [/quote]

Dawkins and Sam Harris are hateful, and have not yet proven that a lack of religion would create world utopia. Man's fear is the root of all evil, not religion. Religion is just the mask it wears, but I understand that for the reason of personal agendas, we can ignore that. Even if one were to list killers who were atheists, you would not be able to say they did it because they were athiest. No, but how about going deeper? I've come across too many negative people who claim that life sucks and God should do something about it, but they don't want to be responsible for the words that come out of their mouths (I guess words have no meaning whatsoever), they don't want to be responsible for their actions (let's just throw condoms at the kids, otherwise we're abusing them), they just want FREEDOM to do as they wish. People like that, please go run as many red lights as possible at high speed, and come back to me with your findings. If you do.

Marg, please give me an exact percentage of theists in this world who have harmed people. Have I? Have my family? My friends? My neighbors? Militant, rabid, fundamentalist atheists take news stories and pin that guilt on every theist out there, and especially Christians and Muslims. Across the street from my mother lives the most kind, intelligent, and neighborly family. They are muslim. They do not fit any stereotypes that I have heard, and I love being around them. I was never taught by any church I went to to hate them. But hear some FUNDIE atheists speak, I have been. Not to mention, I hate gays, I'd probably kill, I might as well have a bomb strapped to my butt. Again, the exact percentage of theists who kill....oh, but no atheists commit crimes, so even if that percentage were small, you'd still have the upper hand, right?

It would really deflate the militant atheist argument to come across a whole lot of theists who didn't look at things the way you think we do. Many theists are far FAR more open-minded than you give us credit for, but if you gave us that credit, you'd have nothing to complain about.

Since you seem to oppose Sam Harris's books have you read The End of Faith? Do you think Sam Harris is a militant atheist and if so, how or why? Do you appreciate what his main argument or point is particularly in End of Faith? [/quote]

I was throwing up so hard after reading Letter to a Christian Nation that I couldn't make it back to that section of the library. That book was filled, utterly filled with condescention and generalizations. No, thank you. Also, I've read some of his trash on the Washington Post. He's a fool.

I haven't cracked open a "sacred text" in quite a while. I do not go to church, I give my money to charity or the homeless. Is that what fundie Christians do?

A fundamentalist Christian believes in a literal interpretation of the Bible and that is irrespective of how often or if ever they may read the Bible. Their fundamentalist beliefs are also irrespective of whether or not they attend Church. I'm not saying you are a fundamentalist in your Christian beliefs but I suspect that despite the fact that you don't go to Church and that you haven't read the Bible in a while that you do believe in the Christian God of the Bible, and that you do hold many beliefs typical of Christianity. So while it is true that a person can believe in a God without believing in any tenets of any organized religion, I don't think you are one of those people. That doesn't make you a fundamentalist Christian. As far as being a fundamentalist Christian what do you find wrong in being one?[/quote]

Wrong about fundie Christians not attending church. Most do. If they don't, they're on what is called the "sick and shut in list". Try a better argument.

I do not believe in the Christian God of the Bible, I believe in a FORCE OF GOOD THAT RUNS THROUGH ALL NATURE AND MANKIND. I was just influenced by my Judeo-Christian upbringing, but I reject a lot of what I was taught. Try again.

Try again, try again.

This is what sickens me, when speaking with MANY atheists, you have to tell ME what I believe! But don't want anyone doing it to you. I have heard the same tired, worn out statements from many an ignorant person who is of the atheistic belief.

1. There is no God.
2. Belief in God is not rational.
3. "I just can't see myself hanging on to something like that!" *pat back*
4. Flying Spaghetti Monster, Santa Claus, Tooth Fairy, Old White Man in the Sky
5. Inquisition
6. Planes in buildings, those horrid Christians, genital mutilation
7. If all else fails, call the person a fundie and whatever other names you can think of, get your playstation pals to jump in, and YOU'VE WON!

What's wrong with being a fundamentalist Christian? Why the insistence that everyone who is not one is damned! How dense can you get?

YES, I am speaking for myself (and others that I have spoken with) when I say that religion can be separated from God. You can be SPIRITUAL but not RELIGIOUS. It's amazing how such a simple concept is so hard to get.

I addressed this above. You have given no indication that you hold God beliefs which are not in line with Christianity.[/quote]

I posted my beliefs here a long time ago, and if I told you I was Buddhist tomorrow you wouldn't believe me because it doesn't serve your agenda.

I do not ignore sacred texts, Marg. But I do not think them to be inerrant. I know you and your anti-theist friends here have to assume that I think God wrote the Bible with a quill pen, but I've never believed that.

You are the one assuming. [/quote]

It's enough to make you shoot yourself, I swear. I wish I had never become LDS, because had I not, I'd have never come across the angry atheist.

I do not believe in an interfering God, but I do not personify God, either. I'm not going into depth about WHAT I think God is here, because it is obvious that the complete and utter need to spit on religion demonstrated by many anti-theist exmos here will not accept what I say. I've posted my thoughts a few times before, but individuals like yourself, GoodKontempt, and others only see what you want to.

Do you think Intelligent Design or Creationism should be taught alongside Theory of Evolution in science classes? Do you think prayers should be allowed in public schools? I ask this because I do not perceive atheists attempting to force their lack of belief on anyone but I do see Christians attempting to force their religious beliefs on others. [/quote]

Christians, Christians, Christians....that's all you have.

I was taught natural sciences in school, and that is what I expect my children to be taught. Private groups, like the Lesbian Gay Straight Alliance, which I was part of my senior year, those are allowed....and those include Bible study groups. They include language groups, they include cultural groups (like the Latin-American club at my school). I have no problem with those organizations. Prayer before a basketball game I'm against. But I doubt you'd believe me, you have an agenda.

Let me tell you what I will do when MY child comes and asks me about the subject of God. Perhaps this will clue you in. If and when my child asks me about God, I will tell them what mommy believes, I will bring daddy by and ask him to explain. I will give examples of what others believe (including atheism), and I will tell my child that in time they will be able to come to their own conclusion, that their conclusion will be accepted by me, and not to put too much worry into the subject right now. I'm sure you'll find fault with that too.

Intervene on my behalf? Um, why should such a thing matter to me?

When you all can accurately tell me what I believe (and stop calling me a fundamentalist Christian) I'll stop laughing at you. Please, before I tinkle.

I've never called you a fundamentalist Christian, you may or may not be, I don't know. But I've never called or applied that label to you.

So am I a fundamentalist atheist and if so why?[/quote]

You insist that you're right. You tell me what I believe. Anyone who doesn't think like you is illogical.

Fundamentalist atheists use the same rant tactics as fundamentalist Christians. I like this quote: Militant atheism and religious fanaticism are one and the same. Any type of strong adherance to a particular kind of belief, with no tolerance to a different point of view leads to a very shallow existence.

Marg, you want to see me as a flat-out Christian. You have to see me in a certain way to have your argument, just like a few others here. You can't accept that I don't care if you're atheist, I'm just tired of being painted as a Bible-thumping, gay-hating, hellknowswhatelse Christian because of what happened to YOU. It's like people in the black community going on and on about supposed injustices, but when you ask them the last time someone walked up to them and called them a n*gger, they can't say. I have a feeling that a lot of the loudest people go through their days in relative peace.