Are atheists "Scrooges" by ruining all the fun of religious faith?

[T.G.G. Moogly]

There can be an element of masochism there, some people argue just to put others in their place, not for any particular benevolent reason.

Like every other successful species on the planet our constitution does include a healthy dose of competitiveness. Is it pleasure in seeing someone experiencing something unpleasant or is it pleasure in knowing you may be helping someone?

 

[rousseau]

There can be an element of masochism there, some people argue just to put others in their place, not for any particular benevolent reason.

Like every other successful species on the planet our constitution does include a healthy dose of competitiveness. Is it pleasure in seeing someone experiencing something unpleasant or is it pleasure in knowing you may be helping someone?

Both, depending on which of the two you're doing.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I can't recall a time when people were neither hateful nor divisive. When was this lost golden age?

I was a child in the 1950s. I'm not claiming that everyone got along perfectly, but people did get along a lot better compared to the late 60s or the most recent years.

What happened in the 1960s was based largely on the 1950s. The conditions of the '50s were intolerable for many people, and that's why they rose up to make a better, freer world. I think they succeeded to some degree.

As I see it, taking religion away from somebody is like taking garbage away from them. In those cases it's better for us to receive than to give. If we do give, then we should give knowledge. That's why we should take away from them. Education involves the eradication of ignorance.

We can respectfully disagree on that one. I know how powerful and important religious mythology is and as long as it's not extreme, it can add a lot of joy to some people's lives.

Alcohol and illegal drugs add happiness to some people's lives too.

I have friends like that. It's not just the beliefs, it's the community, the emotional joy and probably the hope. that it gives some people.

I just wish people would see their hope as something that doesn't come at the cost of the damnation of others.

I'd love to debate Christians here. I understand they've been driven off. Is that correct? I've had Christians tell me they've been mistreated here.

I don't think they were mistreated. I think they either got bored or discouraged when none of us became converts.

So they're lying about being mistreated here too. Wouldn't a more prudent course of action be to at least investigate--fairly--if people are in fact being mistreated here? It seems unlikely to me that people would be treated well here only to lie saying they were not treated well here.

Criticism doesn't bother me, but some people don't take it well.

Oh? Who might those people be?

it's best not to let what others think about you hurt your self esteem, imo. How else do you think I've managed to be a happy, well adjusted atheist living in the heart of the Bible Belt for many decades?

That's a rather loaded question, don't you think?

On any discussion board regarding religion any sensible person should expect disagreement regarding religious belief but abuse should not be allowed.

I think perhaps the way you define abuse is very different from how some of us define abuse.

I've found that abuse is defined here according to who's on the receiving end. I get whacked on a daily basis, and the stalkers who do it get away with it. If I just ask questions, then I get nailed with a warning.

But I understand. If people can't win fairly, then they cheat if they can.

I've been here over 20 years and have never felt that anyone has been abused, at least not by my definition of abuse.

You're not going to see what you don't want to see.

 

[laughing dog]

The stereotypical view of atheists is that they are a bunch of bitter spoilsports who since they cannot entertain comforting notions of a Daddy God, miracles of provision and protection, and hope for immortality, must ruin all the fun of the people who do entertain such notions. But I've had people, many of whom are avowed atheists themselves, object to anybody who seeks to debunk religion. In another forum years ago, for example, I started a thread at the Reasons to Believe board about the futility of seeking and hoping for life beyond the grave. I told the Christians there that if they really want to see what awaits them beyond the grave, then all they need to do is dig up any grave and take a look. All they will see, of course, are the pitiful, rotting remains of what used to be a person who now resides in a cold, dark box six feet underground. "There's your salvation! That's the heaven Jesus promised you!"

I was just plain nasty.

Another member there, an avowed atheist, jumped on me like white on rice: "Let them believe what they want to believe!" To this atheist I was going too far. The truth I posted was just too monstrously cruel to say. Like some other atheists, he feels it is wrong to disabuse the religious of their faith. They're not harming anybody, and if it feels good to them, then let them believe it.

So was I a Scrooge? Am I the Grinch who tries to steal the supposed joy of Christ?

Yes to the first. No to the second, because there is supposedly more to the joy of Christ than the supposed joy of heaven.

 

[southernhybrid]

I can't recall a time when people were neither hateful nor divisive. When was this lost golden age?

I was a child in the 1950s. I'm not claiming that everyone got along perfectly, but people did get along a lot better compared to the late 60s or the most recent years.

What happened in the 1960s was based largely on the 1950s. The conditions of the '50s were intolerable for many people, and that's why they rose up to make a better, freer world. I think they succeeded to some degree.

As I see it, taking religion away from somebody is like taking garbage away from them. In those cases it's better for us to receive than to give. If we do give, then we should give knowledge. That's why we should take away from them. Education involves the eradication of ignorance.

We can respectfully disagree on that one. I know how powerful and important religious mythology is and as long as it's not extreme, it can add a lot of joy to some people's lives.

Alcohol and illegal drugs add happiness to some people's lives too.

I have friends like that. It's not just the beliefs, it's the community, the emotional joy and probably the hope. that it gives some people.

I just wish people would see their hope as something that doesn't come at the cost of the damnation of others.

I'd love to debate Christians here. I understand they've been driven off. Is that correct? I've had Christians tell me they've been mistreated here.

I don't think they were mistreated. I think they either got bored or discouraged when none of us became converts.

So they're lying about being mistreated here too. Wouldn't a more prudent course of action be to at least investigate--fairly--if people are in fact being mistreated here? It seems unlikely to me that people would be treated well here only to lie saying they were not treated well here.

Criticism doesn't bother me, but some people don't take it well.

Oh? Who might those people be?

it's best not to let what others think about you hurt your self esteem, imo. How else do you think I've managed to be a happy, well adjusted atheist living in the heart of the Bible Belt for many decades?

That's a rather loaded question, don't you think?

On any discussion board regarding religion any sensible person should expect disagreement regarding religious belief but abuse should not be allowed.

I think perhaps the way you define abuse is very different from how some of us define abuse.

I've found that abuse is defined here according to who's on the receiving end. I get whacked on a daily basis, and the stalkers who do it get away with it. If I just ask questions, then I get nailed with a warning.

But I understand. If people can't win fairly, then they cheat if they can.

I've been here over 20 years and have never felt that anyone has been abused, at least not by my definition of abuse.

You're not going to see what you don't want to see.

Wow! I see no point in wasting time trying to reason with you. I have better things to do with my time.

 

[gmbteach]

I can't recall a time when people were neither hateful nor divisive. When was this lost golden age?

I was a child in the 1950s. I'm not claiming that everyone got along perfectly, but people did get along a lot better compared to the late 60s or the most recent years.

What happened in the 1960s was based largely on the 1950s. The conditions of the '50s were intolerable for many people, and that's why they rose up to make a better, freer world. I think they succeeded to some degree.

As I see it, taking religion away from somebody is like taking garbage away from them. In those cases it's better for us to receive than to give. If we do give, then we should give knowledge. That's why we should take away from them. Education involves the eradication of ignorance.

We can respectfully disagree on that one. I know how powerful and important religious mythology is and as long as it's not extreme, it can add a lot of joy to some people's lives.

Alcohol and illegal drugs add happiness to some people's lives too.

I have friends like that. It's not just the beliefs, it's the community, the emotional joy and probably the hope. that it gives some people.

I just wish people would see their hope as something that doesn't come at the cost of the damnation of others.

I'd love to debate Christians here. I understand they've been driven off. Is that correct? I've had Christians tell me they've been mistreated here.

I don't think they were mistreated. I think they either got bored or discouraged when none of us became converts.

So they're lying about being mistreated here too. Wouldn't a more prudent course of action be to at least investigate--fairly--if people are in fact being mistreated here? It seems unlikely to me that people would be treated well here only to lie saying they were not treated well here.

Criticism doesn't bother me, but some people don't take it well.

Oh? Who might those people be?

it's best not to let what others think about you hurt your self esteem, imo. How else do you think I've managed to be a happy, well adjusted atheist living in the heart of the Bible Belt for many decades?

That's a rather loaded question, don't you think?

On any discussion board regarding religion any sensible person should expect disagreement regarding religious belief but abuse should not be allowed.

I think perhaps the way you define abuse is very different from how some of us define abuse.

I've found that abuse is defined here according to who's on the receiving end. I get whacked on a daily basis, and the stalkers who do it get away with it. If I just ask questions, then I get nailed with a warning.

But I understand. If people can't win fairly, then they cheat if they can.

I've been here over 20 years and have never felt that anyone has been abused, at least not by my definition of abuse.

You're not going to see what you don't want to see.

Wow! I see no point in wasting time trying to reason with you. I have better things to do with my time.

My opinion is that US’s posts are designed to piss people off and get a reaction… you know like some kids thrive on ANY attention wether it be good or bad.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

My opinion is that US’s posts are designed to piss people off and get a reaction… you know like some kids thrive on ANY attention wether it be good or bad.

Anything's possible, and I'm left wondering why you don't speculate about the motives of the people who've stalked me for months incessantly attacking me. Why aren't they "kids who thrive on attention"? At least I engage the issues while you join the ranks of those of who engage in personal attacks.

Anyway, now that you've had your little laugh at my expense, can you post your view on atheists who may be ruining all the fun of religious faith?

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I can't recall a time when people were neither hateful nor divisive. When was this lost golden age?

I was a child in the 1950s. I'm not claiming that everyone got along perfectly, but people did get along a lot better compared to the late 60s or the most recent years.

What happened in the 1960s was based largely on the 1950s. The conditions of the '50s were intolerable for many people, and that's why they rose up to make a better, freer world. I think they succeeded to some degree.

As I see it, taking religion away from somebody is like taking garbage away from them. In those cases it's better for us to receive than to give. If we do give, then we should give knowledge. That's why we should take away from them. Education involves the eradication of ignorance.

We can respectfully disagree on that one. I know how powerful and important religious mythology is and as long as it's not extreme, it can add a lot of joy to some people's lives.

Alcohol and illegal drugs add happiness to some people's lives too.

I have friends like that. It's not just the beliefs, it's the community, the emotional joy and probably the hope. that it gives some people.

I just wish people would see their hope as something that doesn't come at the cost of the damnation of others.

I'd love to debate Christians here. I understand they've been driven off. Is that correct? I've had Christians tell me they've been mistreated here.

I don't think they were mistreated. I think they either got bored or discouraged when none of us became converts.

So they're lying about being mistreated here too. Wouldn't a more prudent course of action be to at least investigate--fairly--if people are in fact being mistreated here? It seems unlikely to me that people would be treated well here only to lie saying they were not treated well here.

Criticism doesn't bother me, but some people don't take it well.

Oh? Who might those people be?

it's best not to let what others think about you hurt your self esteem, imo. How else do you think I've managed to be a happy, well adjusted atheist living in the heart of the Bible Belt for many decades?

That's a rather loaded question, don't you think?

On any discussion board regarding religion any sensible person should expect disagreement regarding religious belief but abuse should not be allowed.

I think perhaps the way you define abuse is very different from how some of us define abuse.

I've found that abuse is defined here according to who's on the receiving end. I get whacked on a daily basis, and the stalkers who do it get away with it. If I just ask questions, then I get nailed with a warning.

But I understand. If people can't win fairly, then they cheat if they can.

I've been here over 20 years and have never felt that anyone has been abused, at least not by my definition of abuse.

You're not going to see what you don't want to see.

Wow! I see no point in wasting time trying to reason with you. I have better things to do with my time.

Wow!!! I guess I really can't disagree with you here.

 

[bilby]

I'm left wondering why you don't speculate about the motives of the people who've stalked me for months incessantly attacking me.

Who has done that?

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

My opinion is that US’s posts are designed to piss people off and get a reaction… you know like some kids thrive on ANY attention wether it be good or bad.

Probably just has some growing-up to do.

 

[ideologyhunter]

By this time even Jesus is doing the violin sign.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

My opinion is that US’s posts are designed to piss people off and get a reaction… you know like some kids thrive on ANY attention wether it be good or bad.

Probably just has some growing-up to do.

Oh. I am so immature. You need to tell me what it's like when you get there.

Now. May we please get back to the issue? Either do that or get off this thread.

 

[gmbteach]

My opinion is that US’s posts are designed to piss people off and get a reaction… you know like some kids thrive on ANY attention wether it be good or bad.

Probably just has some growing-up to do.

Oh. I am so immature. You need to tell me what it's like when you get there.

Now. May we please get back to the issue? Either do that or get off this thread.

Wow. I don’t recall saying you were immature, simply using my experience as an educator to draw a comparison. However you read my statement is up to you.

Oh, do you OWN the thread? Have you paid for it? What about free speech?

Hmm, are you going to be a Scrooge and spoil my fun?

 

[gmbteach]

My opinion is that US’s posts are designed to piss people off and get a reaction… you know like some kids thrive on ANY attention wether it be good or bad.

Anything's possible, and I'm left wondering why you don't speculate about the motives of the people who've stalked me for months incessantly attacking me. Why aren't they "kids who thrive on attention"? At least I engage the issues while you join the ranks of those of who engage in personal attacks.

Anyway, now that you've had your little laugh at my expense, can you post your view on atheists who may be ruining all the fun of religious faith?

Hmmm, THEY are attacking you? No one has commented on them being ‘kids who thrive on attention ‘?

Drawing on my experience again, when you post this scenario about a child who doesn’t play well with anyone, it’s not too difficult to realise it’s the one kid not wanted, and not every single other one.

HMM, laughing at you? Why bother?

However, to get back to your OP, what a load of bollocks! I don’t know of ANY athiest, agnostic or theist who ruins any festive occasion. I have yet to encounter anyone.

Oh, wait a minute! My dad was an itsy bitsy tiny minuscule upset for a nanosecond that I didn’t want a priest at Bilby‘s and my wedding. Does that count as a comment in the other direction?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The stereotypical view of atheists is that they are a bunch of bitter spoilsports who since they cannot entertain comforting notions of a Daddy God, miracles of provision and protection, and hope for immortality, must ruin all the fun of the people who do entertain such notions. But I've had people, many of whom are avowed atheists themselves, object to anybody who seeks to debunk religion. In another forum years ago, for example, I started a thread at the Reasons to Believe board about the futility of seeking and hoping for life beyond the grave. I told the Christians there that if they really want to see what awaits them beyond the grave, then all they need to do is dig up any grave and take a look. All they will see, of course, are the pitiful, rotting remains of what used to be a person who now resides in a cold, dark box six feet underground. "There's your salvation! That's the heaven Jesus promised you!"

I was just plain nasty.

Another member there, an avowed atheist, jumped on me like white on rice: "Let them believe what they want to believe!" To this atheist I was going too far. The truth I posted was just too monstrously cruel to say. Like some other atheists, he feels it is wrong to disabuse the religious of their faith. They're not harming anybody, and if it feels good to them, then let them believe it.

So was I a Scrooge? Am I the Grinch who tries to steal the supposed joy of Christ?

Sounds crass, not well put. Not nearly as intellectual as you were likely thinking it was. Seeing that no one denies that we all rot in the ground, it doesn't actually prove any sort of point.

 

[laughing dog]

The stereotypical view of atheists is that they are a bunch of bitter spoilsports who since they cannot entertain comforting notions of a Daddy God, miracles of provision and protection, and hope for immortality, must ruin all the fun of the people who do entertain such notions. But I've had people, many of whom are avowed atheists themselves, object to anybody who seeks to debunk religion. In another forum years ago, for example, I started a thread at the Reasons to Believe board about the futility of seeking and hoping for life beyond the grave. I told the Christians there that if they really want to see what awaits them beyond the grave, then all they need to do is dig up any grave and take a look. All they will see, of course, are the pitiful, rotting remains of what used to be a person who now resides in a cold, dark box six feet underground. "There's your salvation! That's the heaven Jesus promised you!"

I was just plain nasty.

Another member there, an avowed atheist, jumped on me like white on rice: "Let them believe what they want to believe!" To this atheist I was going too far. The truth I posted was just too monstrously cruel to say. Like some other atheists, he feels it is wrong to disabuse the religious of their faith. They're not harming anybody, and if it feels good to them, then let them believe it.

So was I a Scrooge? Am I the Grinch who tries to steal the supposed joy of Christ?

Sounds crass, not well put. Not nearly as intellectual as you were likely thinking it was. Seeing that no one denies that we all rot in the ground, it doesn't actually prove any sort of point.

A perfect synopsis of US's mo.

 

[abaddon]

Naturalists and Christian supernaturalists both know that our bodies rot after death. Naturalists will be bugged by mortality if they've failed to contemplate it thoroughly (because if experiencing of one's life starts after you're born but ends before you're dead, there's only experience of life and no experience of "being dead" so why fear it?). Whereas Christians will be bugged by our mortality, but only if they don't really believe their religion.

In any case, a Christian's response would be "yeah, the body rots but I don't. I, as a spirit, leave the body and go to heaven".

My response would be similar to that: "yeah, the body rots but I don't. The 'I' thingamajig, as an emergent phenomena, cannot 'rot' along with a rotting body".

Christians call emergent features of the body and environment "spirit" whereas I call them "emergent".

So I find the "you're going to rot" argument to be very weak.

But is it Grinch-like to say "there's no afterlife" to Christians? No, but beating one's speculative opinions over anyone's head while asserting it's "the truth" when you can't demonstrate it's true, is just preaching.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

But is it Grinch-like to say "there's no afterlife" to Christians? No, but beating one's speculative opinions over anyone's head while asserting it's "the truth" when you can't demonstrate it's true, is just preaching.

Does behavior associated with non-scientific thinking after a certain age constitute a mental illness? If not a mental illness at least a mental deficiency? We should want to understand the mechanism behind a 55 year old person claiming to believe in an afterife because they want to be with their mother again. We should be able to know how that happens in one person and not another just as easily as we can know how it happens that one person can be 6'10" tall and the next person 5'2" tall. After all, both are simply differences in expressed behaviors. It isn't magic so why do we struggle for answers?

I find this article quite informative when it comes to discussing this aspect of human behavior.

 

[rousseau]

But is it Grinch-like to say "there's no afterlife" to Christians? No, but beating one's speculative opinions over anyone's head while asserting it's "the truth" when you can't demonstrate it's true, is just preaching.

Does behavior associated with non-scientific thinking after a certain age constitute a mental illness? If not a mental illness at least a mental deficiency? We should want to understand the mechanism behind a 55 year old person claiming to believe in an afterife because they want to be with their mother again. We should be able to know how that happens in one person and not another just as easily as we can know how it happens that one person can be 6'10" tall and the next person 5'2" tall. After all, both are simply differences in expressed behaviors. It isn't magic so why do we struggle for answers?

I find this article quite informative when it comes to discussing this aspect of human behavior.

We do know the answer to this question, though, pretty clearly. In evolutionary terms being swayed by one's culture is a feature, not a bug. When people are firm believers in the culture they're raised in, belief happens, children happen. When people are smart enough to know that it's all meaningless and religion is untrue, children tend not to happen.

Wishing this wasn't so doesn't make it not so.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The stereotypical view of atheists is that they are a bunch of bitter spoilsports who since they cannot entertain comforting notions of a Daddy God, miracles of provision and protection, and hope for immortality, must ruin all the fun of the people who do entertain such notions. But I've had people, many of whom are avowed atheists themselves, object to anybody who seeks to debunk religion. In another forum years ago, for example, I started a thread at the Reasons to Believe board about the futility of seeking and hoping for life beyond the grave. I told the Christians there that if they really want to see what awaits them beyond the grave, then all they need to do is dig up any grave and take a look. All they will see, of course, are the pitiful, rotting remains of what used to be a person who now resides in a cold, dark box six feet underground. "There's your salvation! That's the heaven Jesus promised you!"

I was just plain nasty.

Another member there, an avowed atheist, jumped on me like white on rice: "Let them believe what they want to believe!" To this atheist I was going too far. The truth I posted was just too monstrously cruel to say. Like some other atheists, he feels it is wrong to disabuse the religious of their faith. They're not harming anybody, and if it feels good to them, then let them believe it.

So was I a Scrooge? Am I the Grinch who tries to steal the supposed joy of Christ?

Sounds crass, not well put. Not nearly as intellectual as you were likely thinking it was. Seeing that no one denies that we all rot in the ground, it doesn't actually prove any sort of point.

When I read stuff like the OP mentions I wonder in fear "I hope I wasn't that stupid when I was younger." I know I was dumber, less refined, dumber, not as good at humor, dumber, as well as being dumber.

Back in the day, early 00's was a bit of golden age of TWeb, BaptistBoard, etc... tit for tats. I know those weren't my best posting days (if I was ever to have any).