View Single Post
  #57   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
Muggles[_11_] Muggles[_11_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 316
Default Are Atheists religious

On 5/12/2016 10:42 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 13:35:07 -0500, Muggles
wrote:

On 5/12/2016 1:04 PM, Meanie wrote:
On 5/12/2016 12:49 PM, Muggles wrote:


A good majority of people live by some moral code, so I try to not
attribute their attitudes to any particular belief system when they
behave self-righteously. Often times we all revert back to our base
responses, some more than others.



Most good Atheists live by the "do unto others" code and not one of a
religious nature. IMO, when/if proven wrong in their belief structure,
they will not revert to a book proclaiming their righteousness with an
adamant stance


They just revert back to their human nature which requires them to
display any number of responses, such as, rejection or control
techniques, manipulation, any number of logical fallacies, name calling,
their own version of self-righteous indignation, implications that
attack the character of their opponent, or some even go so far as to
threaten violence in some way. Some of those responses are outright
obvious, and others are passive aggressive, but they all point to a
deeply held belief that something they reject is more valid than someone
else who doesn't reject the same ideas. They justify their responses as
simply supporting their particular point of view, and can't see their
behavior is no different from someone who is religious who responds in a
similar way.

Any belief that prompts such responses to the opposition is akin to
behaving religiously. A book have no bearing in the matter.

whereas a religious zealot will.


A zealot is just as likely to be found amongst Atheists as it is they
can be found amongst computer programmers, even. The mindset of a
zealot if just simply they are right and everyone else is wrong, and
they won't hesitate to go on the attack if anyone challenges them.


Religion is the main problem.


Human nature is the main problem, not religion.




Historically and presently, most atheists lean politically left (See:
Atheism and politics).

Theodore Beale wrote about secular leftists and leftists in general:

“ Regardless of whether it is...Richard Dawkins, PZ Myers, or the
vast and corpulent mass of feminists, the Left has an observable
tendency to shun debate. They assert many different reasons for doing
so, but the truth is always revealed by their seemingly contradictory
willingness to debate the incompetent and the overmatched....
One of the things that has been interesting to observe over time is
the way that the heated attacks on me, both in public and via email,
have all but disappeared even though my overall readership has never
been larger. Why is this? My theory is this is because most of my
critics, be they atheists, feminists, evolutionists, or free traders,
have learned they simply cannot win in a direct confrontation. They
can't openly criticize my ideas because they have learned, much to
their surprise, that they cannot adequately defend their own.

As Aristotle pointed out more than two thousand years ago, even at the
rhetorical level, the side more closely approximates the truth will
tend to win out, because it is easier to argue when your arguments are
based on truth rather than falsehood. Events will always ultimately
prove the arguments of the global warmers, the godless, the female
supremacists, the socialists, the Keynesians, and the monetarists to
be false because their ideas are false. This is why a good memory is
one of the most lethal weapons against them and why it is so easy to
win debates against them, as given enough time, they are going to
contradict themselves.

Why? Because they have no choice. Being false, their positions have to
be dynamic, which means they can never hope for any significant degree
of consistency. This is why ex post facto revision and double-talk are
the hallmarks of the Left, and is why the first thing Leftists do when
they are in a position of power is to erase history and attempt to
silence any voices capable of calling attention to their fictions and
contradictions.[2]



bravo!

--
Maggie