Re: A treatise on how religious Atheism is

On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 16:52:31 -0500, Christopher A.Lee
<calee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 21:45:26 GMT, luminoso@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Luminoso)
wrote:

On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 13:22:17 -0600, " TomP" <th_o_m_as_p@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

"kingdoodlesquat" <neggerscheggers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:q8KdnXacht_Cl0jYnZ2dnUVZ8qWhnZ2d@xxxxxxxxx

Atheism is religious in the sense that it is a comprehensive worldview
which seeks to explain the 'why' of existence. < remainder of ***
snipped


In the first sentence you ridicule youself making the rest of your
argument
fairly & certainly not worth the read. Atheism is nothing more than not
believing in any god/s. Religion exists to support god/s. Science &
philosophy amongst other things attempt to explain the "why" of existence,
not atheism.

Atheism is not a religion. An ideology perhaps, and most atheists seem to
share a similar world view, but religion doesn't seem to be an accurate
description. That having been said, can you please explain how it is you
believe science can explain "why"?

Atheism is not a 'religion' in that it not informed by
'supernatural' entities nor does it have a standard
dogma beyond the hyper-simple dictum "Gods do not exist"
or perhaps "There is no such thing as 'supernatural'".
It's an outlook, a philosophy, a set of reasoning - but
not a 'religion' in any sane interpretation of the word.

HOWEVER - Atheism CAN take on certain aspects of religions
"look and feel". This is particularly evident in the ongoing
battles over the "school prayer" and "state/church" issues
in contemporary America. In this particular venue atheism
has taken a role that's functionally indistinguishable from
a State "established" religion ... pushing all other
theological notions out the door and into the alleyways.
To practioners of religions, athiesm SEEMS like a competing
faith, out to marginalize their own.

Only in the deluded fantasies of theists who pretend that what is
merely the negative reaction to their stupidity, bigotry etc, happens
out of the blue.

They'd say they're reacting to the stupidity and bigotry
practiced by 'athiests' - bigotry not 'out of the blue'
but by design, a conspiracy to marginalize theists.

Since the reach of this form of "establishment" reaches
only as far as the courthouse/schoolroom door though, it
fails to take on the full odious persona of true State
"establishment". Those who wish to call it "establishment"
are forced to narrow their focus to the point of laughable
tunnel-vision, to pretend that the courthouse/schoolhouse
is the entirety of US territory and culture.

Still, their anger at even this minimal form of "establishment"
should not be entirely dismissed any more than 'black' anger
over ANY kind of jim-crow discrimination. Would we dare tell
Al Sharpton that he shouldn't worry about corporation 'X' or
government department 'Y' discriminating against 'blacks'
because the problem is not widespread enough to warrant complaint ?
Even a pinprick hurts ...

IMHO, 'atheist activists' and their ACLU helpers need to get off
their white horse and quit pretending that persecuting and
prosecuting every microscopic manifestation of religion in
public institutions is the only way to "Save the country" from
a theocratic takeover. The word "hubris" comes to mind ...

A liar as well as an idiot.


Keep charging those windmills guy ... saving America from
the theocracy we never had even before Maddie Ohair. Of
course you're just adding fuel to the fundamentalist fire,
risking us all so you can indulge your white knight fantasies,
likely bringing exactly what you seek to prevent ...


Things went MUCH more smoothly when there was less effort to
"establish" atheism. The theists didn't feel compelled to
push their personal agendas because they didn't feel the
overall environment was threatening. Nowdays they're in reactive
mode and OVER-react in proportion to how much the athiest
activists over-react.

Nobody is trying to do that, liar. And you know this.

What you're "trying" to do is irrelevant - what's being
DONE is what worries me. Didn't yer mamma ever teach you
not to stir up a hornets nest ?

We're just not putting up with bull***, slander, bigotry and
nastiness any more. Nor the imposition of your religion.

Yes, polarization is wonderful - for political activists and
the TV news. For the rest of us it just plain sucks.

Then keep your religion to yourselves.

Keep your singulars and plurals straight ...

In any event, I don't have a religion to keep to myself
and the theists don't HAVE to keep theirs to themselves.
They're free to spread the word ... or words (there are
so many religions and variants thereof) ...

The constitution says the State may not "establish" a
religion ... whatever "establish" means this week. It
also says that the "free expression" of religion shall
not be curtailed. In short, the theists DO have very
considerable legal and moral rights to NOT keep their
religions entirely to themselves.

My advice ... back off a little and give everyone a little
more breathing room. Don't let the activists manipulate
us, don't let them set us against each other. In short,
recognize that there's a 'game' going on here - and
refuse to play.

We've been doing this for too long.

Odd how things were just fine here for centuries,
without militant athiests throwing lawyers at
everyone.

Falwell and Robertson say the theists have been
giving ground to the athiests for too long. Such
complaints find considerable resonance amongst
the populace. That resonance translates into
political clout.

.