Theories on Why Atheists are met with Hostility

[Derideo_Te]

Let me reiterate, facts not in evidence.

Atheist group weighs legal action in SE Ind. park cross case Local News - WLWT Home

"A group of atheists and agnostics who oppose Indiana's decision to erect a sculpture featuring a cross in a state park may sue to halt the artwork's display, the group's attorney said Wednesday."

Atheist group s lawsuit against Orange County School District... www.wftv.com

"ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. —

A judge dismissed a lawsuit against the Orange County School District.

Before the dispute could play out in court, the school board agreed an atheist group could distribute its pamphlets when Christian groups leave Bibles inside certain public schools.

But, officials would not tell WFTV why they changed their minds.

An atheist group was allowed to leave pamphlets about atheism at schools like Boone High School last year, but they claimed the district censored their views so they took it to court.

The district allowed a Christian group to leave Bibles for students at 11 high schools.

That led to David Williamson and the Central Florida Free Thought Community to leave pamphlets about atheism at the same schools.

But the district wouldn't allow all of the literature because they said titles like "Jesus is dead" and "Why I am not a Muslim" would cause disruption. So, Williamson's group sued the district over freedom of speech.

"There's no censorship at all taking place on the Bible, but there's censorship on our materials," said Williamson.

WFTV found out the judge dismissed the case because school board members changed their minds and agreed to allow all of the group's materials.

Williamsons' group is appealing the case and it's still pending litigation.

"What's the point in appealing if you're getting what you want?" WFTV reporter Deneige Broom asked."

Why Atheists Are Finally Turning on Richard Dawkins

"One of Dawkins' biggest missteps came in 2011, when he blasted Rebecca Watson, a young atheist activist who wrote about feeling sexually harassed at a free-thought conference. In a now-infamous series of comments posted to the blog Pharyngula, Dawkins wrote in a message titled "Dear Muslima," "Stop whining, will you? ... For goodness sake grow up, or at least grow a thicker skin."

That incident—and others that did not involve Dawkins—led several atheist groups to include sexual-harassment policies at conferences and many say it swelled interest in the newly founded Women in Secularism conferences in 2012."

This last one sounds like religion to me.

None of the above substantiates your allegations about atheists.

 

[koshergrl]

Of course it does.

 

[koshergrl]

Giving meaning to life without an afterlife is the same thing as worshiping your kitchen table, IMO; its a love of material things, with nothing to look forward to after departing this Earth (except of course the arrogant thought of, "Surely I'll be remembered for this!").

If you believe something as superficial as that then you obviously know nothing whatsoever about atheists.

What gives meaning to my life are the people that I love here and now. Making them happy now is more important that telling them that everything will be just hunky dory when they are dead. Cherishing the life one has now and those that I share it with is way more meaningful than wasting my life on an expectation that will never occur.

IRONY!

Lol..there is really nothing more shallow than insisting that the only thing that is important is instant gratification.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The more I learn about science, the more I can honestly say "yes".

A little background:

I'm fascinated with the Big Bang, String Theory, Quantum Mechanics etc. (one of several hobbies of mine). I'm just geeky enough to set a lot of Science Channel shows on my DVR. The more I learn about the inner-workings of the Universe, the more I revere God. All these things help explain "how" He created our existence.

Its very obvious that God would create all the laws of science along with the dirt that gathered to create us in a very specific and (so far) unique manner.

Christianity (my specific religion) has gone through reform on more than one occasion, getting more and more peaceful as time moves on and as we learn more about our Creator. The next reform I believe will happen as soon as we confirm life on one of the thousands of newly discovered exoplanets.

If you are into science and logic then can you resolve this paradox about your creator?

Omnipotence is a paradox because if there is something that your creator cannot destroy then he is not omnipotent. Equally so if he cannot create something that he cannot destroy he is not omnipotent either.

Ergo your creator is not omnipotent.

Law of Conservation stipulates that matter is neither created nor destroyed. That means that the matter/energy of the universe has always existed and will always exist in one form or another which precludes the need for a creator.

 

[koshergrl]

"Junk science" thy name art DT

 

[SixFoot]

Giving meaning to life without an afterlife is the same thing as worshiping your kitchen table, IMO; its a love of material things, with nothing to look forward to after departing this Earth (except of course the arrogant thought of, "Surely I'll be remembered for this!").

If you believe something as superficial as that then you obviously know nothing whatsoever about atheists.

What gives meaning to my life are the people that I love here and now. Making them happy now is more important that telling them that everything will be just hunky dory when they are dead. Cherishing the life one has now and those that I share it with is way more meaningful than wasting my life on an expectation that will never occur.

And where does that meaning go when you and everyone you've ever known are dead and gone? IMHO, that is a meaningless ending. I don't believe anything ends for us. If science can be correct in discovering a Multiverse, anything is possible. When anything is possible, there's meaning. Where there's meaning, there's a source, and where there's a source, there's a Creator.

If you don't agree, that's cool too. I don't want to infringe on any of your rights just because I believe in God (or even just because I believe in Him differently than others), I just can't be expected to do anything to hide it, up to and including displays that people can see. Perhaps its a flaw on my part, but I don't mind.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Giving meaning to life without an afterlife is the same thing as worshiping your kitchen table, IMO; its a love of material things, with nothing to look forward to after departing this Earth (except of course the arrogant thought of, "Surely I'll be remembered for this!").

If you believe something as superficial as that then you obviously know nothing whatsoever about atheists.

What gives meaning to my life are the people that I love here and now. Making them happy now is more important that telling them that everything will be just hunky dory when they are dead. Cherishing the life one has now and those that I share it with is way more meaningful than wasting my life on an expectation that will never occur.

IRONY!

Lol..there is really nothing more shallow than insisting that the only thing that is important is instant gratification.

Too bad that all you have is a lying distortion of what I actually posted but I expected nothing better from a faux Christian who uses her bible like a blunt object.

 

[koshergrl]

Don't be silly. You maintain that we should live for the moment.

I think that is the Webster dictionary definition of "shallow".

 

[koshergrl]

DT lives in opposite land. Living to a high standard characterized by repentance and the desire to do good, is "shallow"...whereas people who live for the moment and instant gratification are viewed as complex.

 

[SixFoot]

The more I learn about science, the more I can honestly say "yes".

A little background:

I'm fascinated with the Big Bang, String Theory, Quantum Mechanics etc. (one of several hobbies of mine). I'm just geeky enough to set a lot of Science Channel shows on my DVR. The more I learn about the inner-workings of the Universe, the more I revere God. All these things help explain "how" He created our existence.

Its very obvious that God would create all the laws of science along with the dirt that gathered to create us in a very specific and (so far) unique manner.

Christianity (my specific religion) has gone through reform on more than one occasion, getting more and more peaceful as time moves on and as we learn more about our Creator. The next reform I believe will happen as soon as we confirm life on one of the thousands of newly discovered exoplanets.

If you are into science and logic then can you resolve this paradox about your creator?

Omnipotence is a paradox because if there is something that your creator cannot destroy then he is not omnipotent. Equally so if he cannot create something that he cannot destroy he is not omnipotent either.

Ergo your creator is not omnipotent.

Law of Conservation stipulates that matter is neither created nor destroyed. That means that the matter/energy of the universe has always existed and will always exist in one form or another which precludes the need for a creator.

I have absolutely no desire to defend my belief in God against you so you'll forgive me if I don't participate in your litmus test. I've merely given my opinion and if you'd just slow down and read the entire conversation that you're trailing behind and responding to, you'll see that I'm simply having a nice discussion with someone about our different beliefs.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Giving meaning to life without an afterlife is the same thing as worshiping your kitchen table, IMO; its a love of material things, with nothing to look forward to after departing this Earth (except of course the arrogant thought of, "Surely I'll be remembered for this!").

If you believe something as superficial as that then you obviously know nothing whatsoever about atheists.

What gives meaning to my life are the people that I love here and now. Making them happy now is more important that telling them that everything will be just hunky dory when they are dead. Cherishing the life one has now and those that I share it with is way more meaningful than wasting my life on an expectation that will never occur.

And where does that meaning go when you and everyone you've ever known are dead and gone? IMHO, that is a meaningless ending. I don't believe anything ends for us. If science can be correct in discovering a Multiverse, anything is possible. When anything is possible, there's meaning. Where there's meaning, there's a source, and where there's a source, there's a Creator.

If you don't agree, that's cool too. I don't want to infringe on any of your rights just because I believe in God (or even just because I believe in Him differently than others), I just can't be expected to do anything to hide it, up to and including displays that people can see. Perhaps its a flaw on my part, but I don't mind.

The only meaning that endures is love. The love that I share and pass on to others will in turn be passed on. And yes, not even that will endure because eventually the human race will die off like every other species.

Does that make my own life any less meaningful to myself? Does it make it any less meaningful to my loved ones? Not in the least. We lead full lives, I am a community volunteer in a number of areas but my passion is knowledge and learning so I am a trustee at my local library. Approximately 250,000 times per year people visit the library where I provide my support. People of all ages and cultures. What they derive from those visits might be as mundane as getting help with taxes, homework or finding a job or it might be as uplifting as singing, painting, teaching children how to build robots or looking through a telescope.

I might not never meet them in person but that is immaterial to me. That I helped make it possible for them is what is meaningful to their lives and to mine.

 

[koshergrl]

DT shows where the hostility comes from.

And it isn't the Christians.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Don't be silly. You maintain that we should live for the moment.

I think that is the Webster dictionary definition of "shallow".

Once again you distort what I actually posted because you cannot refute it.

 

[koshergrl]

Giving meaning to life without an afterlife is the same thing as worshiping your kitchen table, IMO; its a love of material things, with nothing to look forward to after departing this Earth (except of course the arrogant thought of, "Surely I'll be remembered for this!").

If you believe something as superficial as that then you obviously know nothing whatsoever about atheists.

What gives meaning to my life are the people that I love here and now. Making them happy now is more important that telling them that everything will be just hunky dory when they are dead. Cherishing the life one has now and those that I share it with is way more meaningful than wasting my life on an expectation that will never occur.

And where does that meaning go when you and everyone you've ever known are dead and gone? IMHO, that is a meaningless ending. I don't believe anything ends for us. If science can be correct in discovering a Multiverse, anything is possible. When anything is possible, there's meaning. Where there's meaning, there's a source, and where there's a source, there's a Creator.

If you don't agree, that's cool too. I don't want to infringe on any of your rights just because I believe in God (or even just because I believe in Him differently than others), I just can't be expected to do anything to hide it, up to and including displays that people can see. Perhaps its a flaw on my part, but I don't mind.

The only meaning that endures is love. The love that I share and pass on to others will in turn be passed on. And yes, not even that will endure because eventually the human race will die off like every other species.

Does that make my own life any less meaningful to myself? Does it make it any less meaningful to my loved ones? Not in the least. We lead full lives, I am a community volunteer in a number of areas but my passion is knowledge and learning so I am a trustee at my local library. Approximately 250,000 times per year people visit the library where I provide my support. People of all ages and cultures. What they derive from those visits might be as mundane as getting help with taxes, homework or finding a job or it might be as uplifting as singing, painting, teaching children how to build robots or looking through a telescope.

I might not never meet them in person but that is immaterial to me. That I helped make it possible for them is what is meaningful to their lives and to mine.

Of course your life is meaningful to yourself.

Again, you are the epitome of shallow.

 

[koshergrl]

Don't be silly. You maintain that we should live for the moment.

I think that is the Webster dictionary definition of "shallow".

Once again you distort what I actually posted because you cannot refute it.

I didn't distort anything. I have no doubt that you believe the only thing that matters is your own happiness, as you've stated.

 

[mudwhistle]

Below, I have posted a link to a video I recently watched that I feel gives a good explanation for the hostility that many theists have towards atheists and why they often feel threatened by our nonbelief. My purpose for posting it here is to encourage others here to watch it and then post some of their own explanations of why they think atheists are so hated.

Theists don't like to hear stupid things like, "We're all here by some universal cosmic accident and all life is meaningless in the end."

There's my theory.

You'd rather hear other stupid things like "a man lived inside a whale?" Oh, sorry, it was a big fish.


.

I'd rather live with the fact that I'm intelligent enough to understand the different between parables, historical occurrences, and cultural mythology. It only takes a two dimensional mind to have faith, but a three dimensional mind to understand that faith. That's why I believe one's faith should be a one-on-one conversation between the Soul and the Lord.

I certainly agree with you there!


.

I'm glad we could come to an agreement. God bless you, regardless of what you believe or don't believe in.

Thank you kindly.

When I have more time, I'd like to start a thread about parables, and why Jesus used them. It seems to me that his teaching methods were ineffective. Maybe you could help out there???

Anyhoot, nice to meet you.

His teaching methods were excellent. Something just seems to be lost in translation.

I think a lot of things got lost in translation quite literally where the Bible is concerned and that's part of the problem.

Only in the minds of the biblically illiterate. Nothing has been *lost in translation*. We still have the ancient texts and verification of each of the "translations".

Biblically ignorant people think we have no connection to biblical days, that nobody knows what was said by whom...they think this because they are ignorant, they don't know the history of the bible..and if they don't know it, they assume it can't be known.

It's the same way they approach God and everything else. If they don't get it, well then, obviously it means it doesn't exist/is fraudulent/stupid etc.

I wasn't being literal. I was speaking metaphorically.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The more I learn about science, the more I can honestly say "yes".

A little background:

I'm fascinated with the Big Bang, String Theory, Quantum Mechanics etc. (one of several hobbies of mine). I'm just geeky enough to set a lot of Science Channel shows on my DVR. The more I learn about the inner-workings of the Universe, the more I revere God. All these things help explain "how" He created our existence.

Its very obvious that God would create all the laws of science along with the dirt that gathered to create us in a very specific and (so far) unique manner.

Christianity (my specific religion) has gone through reform on more than one occasion, getting more and more peaceful as time moves on and as we learn more about our Creator. The next reform I believe will happen as soon as we confirm life on one of the thousands of newly discovered exoplanets.

If you are into science and logic then can you resolve this paradox about your creator?

Omnipotence is a paradox because if there is something that your creator cannot destroy then he is not omnipotent. Equally so if he cannot create something that he cannot destroy he is not omnipotent either.

Ergo your creator is not omnipotent.

Law of Conservation stipulates that matter is neither created nor destroyed. That means that the matter/energy of the universe has always existed and will always exist in one form or another which precludes the need for a creator.

I have absolutely no desire to defend my belief in God against you so you'll forgive me if I don't participate in your litmus test. I've merely given my opinion and if you'd just slow down and read the entire conversation that you're trailing behind and responding to, you'll see that I'm simply having a nice discussion with someone about our different beliefs.

I didn't expect you to defend your belief in God. I asked if you could resolve the paradox. The paradox doesn't preclude the existence of your God at all. It merely establishes that the universe wasn't "created".

There is a distinct possibility of the existence of beings with god-like powers in this universe. 200 years ago the idea that you could see what someone was doing on the other side of the planet, push a button and a bolt from the sky would obliterate them would be perceived as a god-like power but it is something that we can do today. 25 years ago we could only speculate that there were exo-planets. Today we have evidence that they exist.

So are there beings in the universe with god-like powers to shatter an entire planet or make a star go supernova? As I said the possibility is there. But do they care that I live on a remote planet, one out of 10^24 amongst the 200 billion known galaxies, together with 7 billion other homo sapiens? Doubtful to say the least.

 

[SixFoot]

The more I learn about science, the more I can honestly say "yes".

A little background:

I'm fascinated with the Big Bang, String Theory, Quantum Mechanics etc. (one of several hobbies of mine). I'm just geeky enough to set a lot of Science Channel shows on my DVR. The more I learn about the inner-workings of the Universe, the more I revere God. All these things help explain "how" He created our existence.

Its very obvious that God would create all the laws of science along with the dirt that gathered to create us in a very specific and (so far) unique manner.

Christianity (my specific religion) has gone through reform on more than one occasion, getting more and more peaceful as time moves on and as we learn more about our Creator. The next reform I believe will happen as soon as we confirm life on one of the thousands of newly discovered exoplanets.

If you are into science and logic then can you resolve this paradox about your creator?

Omnipotence is a paradox because if there is something that your creator cannot destroy then he is not omnipotent. Equally so if he cannot create something that he cannot destroy he is not omnipotent either.

Ergo your creator is not omnipotent.

Law of Conservation stipulates that matter is neither created nor destroyed. That means that the matter/energy of the universe has always existed and will always exist in one form or another which precludes the need for a creator.

I have absolutely no desire to defend my belief in God against you so you'll forgive me if I don't participate in your litmus test. I've merely given my opinion and if you'd just slow down and read the entire conversation that you're trailing behind and responding to, you'll see that I'm simply having a nice discussion with someone about our different beliefs.

I didn't expect you to defend your belief in God. I asked if you could resolve the paradox. The paradox doesn't preclude the existence of your God at all. It merely establishes that the universe wasn't "created".

There is a distinct possibility of the existence of beings with god-like powers in this universe. 200 years ago the idea that you could see what someone was doing on the other side of the planet, push a button and a bolt from the sky would obliterate them would be perceived as a god-like power but it is something that we can do today. 25 years ago we could only speculate that there were exo-planets. Today we have evidence that they exist.

So are there beings in the universe with god-like powers to shatter an entire planet or make a star go supernova? As I said the possibility is there. But do they care that I live on a remote planet, one out of 10^24 amongst the 200 billion known galaxies, together with 7 billion other homo sapiens? Doubtful to say the least.

If you believe such beings exist (and there's a probability that they do, too), then you shouldn't leave out the possibility that God created everything in existence and does care about us measly Earthlings. Both can exist if either one can.

I always got the impression that God didn't tell us in the Bible that there were other people ~20 light years away because it really wasn't applicable when people here were still striking rocks to make fire.

 

[Derideo_Te]

DT shows where the hostility comes from.

And it isn't the Christians.

You are probably the single most hostile faux Christian in this entire forum. I call you a faux Christian because you display none of the normal attributes associated with Christianity. You treat everyone who doesn't kiss your feet like the enemy. What is even worse is that you take pleasure out of being nasty to others. You were singlehandedly responsible for triggering the ultimate demise of the Tavern and the banning of it's OP so you even managed to betray your own friends.

You are the epitome of hostility towards atheists and if I was to postulate a theory per the OP of this thread I would put it down to your own lack of self esteem. You are so insecure you feel the need to put down others in order to boost your own fragile ego.

Atheists are a convenient whipping boy for you because you know that they are the last persecuted minority that you can get away with denigrating. By failing to show Christian compassion for your fellows and instead attacking them you are exposing the vile mendacity of your inner being.

Your kneejerk reaction is going to be a screech that I am displaying "hostility" towards you but it is anything but that. I am not posting this out of any emotion on my part at all. Instead I posting this because it is the simple truth about you and your hostility towards atheists.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The more I learn about science, the more I can honestly say "yes".

A little background:

I'm fascinated with the Big Bang, String Theory, Quantum Mechanics etc. (one of several hobbies of mine). I'm just geeky enough to set a lot of Science Channel shows on my DVR. The more I learn about the inner-workings of the Universe, the more I revere God. All these things help explain "how" He created our existence.

Its very obvious that God would create all the laws of science along with the dirt that gathered to create us in a very specific and (so far) unique manner.

Christianity (my specific religion) has gone through reform on more than one occasion, getting more and more peaceful as time moves on and as we learn more about our Creator. The next reform I believe will happen as soon as we confirm life on one of the thousands of newly discovered exoplanets.

If you are into science and logic then can you resolve this paradox about your creator?

Omnipotence is a paradox because if there is something that your creator cannot destroy then he is not omnipotent. Equally so if he cannot create something that he cannot destroy he is not omnipotent either.

Ergo your creator is not omnipotent.

Law of Conservation stipulates that matter is neither created nor destroyed. That means that the matter/energy of the universe has always existed and will always exist in one form or another which precludes the need for a creator.

I have absolutely no desire to defend my belief in God against you so you'll forgive me if I don't participate in your litmus test. I've merely given my opinion and if you'd just slow down and read the entire conversation that you're trailing behind and responding to, you'll see that I'm simply having a nice discussion with someone about our different beliefs.

I didn't expect you to defend your belief in God. I asked if you could resolve the paradox. The paradox doesn't preclude the existence of your God at all. It merely establishes that the universe wasn't "created".

There is a distinct possibility of the existence of beings with god-like powers in this universe. 200 years ago the idea that you could see what someone was doing on the other side of the planet, push a button and a bolt from the sky would obliterate them would be perceived as a god-like power but it is something that we can do today. 25 years ago we could only speculate that there were exo-planets. Today we have evidence that they exist.

So are there beings in the universe with god-like powers to shatter an entire planet or make a star go supernova? As I said the possibility is there. But do they care that I live on a remote planet, one out of 10^24 amongst the 200 billion known galaxies, together with 7 billion other homo sapiens? Doubtful to say the least.

If you believe such beings exist (and there's a probability that they do, too), then you shouldn't leave out the possibility that God created everything in existence and does care about us measly Earthlings. Both can exist if either one can.

I always got the impression that God didn't tell us in the Bible that there were other people ~20 light years away because it really wasn't applicable when people here were still striking rocks to make fire.

I eliminated the possibility of a creator because there is no evidence of one and there is evidence that the universe is eternal.

As far as what was written by bronze age mankind being the basis for the existence of a creator that is a non starter.

There are certainly some basic truths in those writings that hold true to this day but the fact that it starts out with a deliberate deception of mankind by God makes the rest of that aspect less than credible.