On being blocked . . .

[ChairmanAgnostic]

I suppose I can understand a bit. Our presence scares and angers people, although far fewer here than on other sites. Too many people had their brains washed and rinsed in some religious rite or wrong, too many deal with the world with fear -a fear installed and instilled, even stoked by wrongheaded ministers, preachers, rabbis, imams, and priests.

Some folks take those lessons to heart, and in the process, lose something special. They lose the ability to think rationally first, emotionally last. They feel that by spitting or attacking women seeking medical care, that somehow they prove themselves to their god. What exactly, I haven't a clue. They go after atheists, agnostics, humanists because they fear what our ideas do to their kids. They come here to create strife, because they feel it is their godly duty.

Just what sort of god teaches those kinds of lessons?

[mr blur]

1. I'd say, All of the Gods of patriarchal religious systems -

which is just about all of them.

[Mr.Bill]

2. Don't worry, Chairman.

I'm sure they are praying for you.

[TexasTowelie]

5. LOL!

[TexasTowelie]

3. I'm not scared of agnostics or atheists

and on many issues I respect their POV--including the ones mentioned in your OP. The presence of A&As only scares and angers some people very similar that a post from someone not a member of this group only riles up some people within this group.

Whether or not a person believes in a deity or deities is a personal decision. People may disagree on the role of religion in life, but as long as people respect each other and try to get along then it shouldn't be an issue.

My apologies to anyone who believes that I am attempting to create strife with this post--I do not consider it to be a godly duty to make it. While I can only speak for myself, there are people that do respect freedom from religion also. It is one of the founding principles of this country.

[beam me up scottie]

7. pfft

[TexasTowelie]

11. The OP characterized everyone that is not A&A as being angry or scared and I offered an opinion that

disputes his notions. Being disrespectful of the opinions of other people does nothing to bridge, discuss and solve issues.

[beam me up scottie]

12. No, the op did not characterize "everyone that is not A&A".

So your opinion got all the respect it deserved.

[TexasTowelie]

14. Read it again:

"Our presence scares and angers people". He could have used an adjective such as "some" or "many". Instead the OP put all people (presumably anyone that is not A&A since this the A&A group) into a group and did not limit that group. How does the author of the OP or you know how I feel about atheists or agnostics? I've made friends with several people in this group so it is disrespectful to be assigned the qualities of "scared" and "angry" by someone who doesn't know me.

I know that it is a matter of interpretation and perspective, but stereotyping a group of people as "scared" or "angry" is a form of bigotry and is not any better than believers characterizing non-believers with negative qualities. I hope that clarifies my opinion and why I'm disputing the OP.

[beam me up scottie]

15. And there it is.

You were in so much of a hurry to scold the op and accuse him of bigotry it blinded you to the rest of the sentence:

Our presence scares and angers people, although far fewer here than on other sites.

Well, either that or you read it and are purposely misrepresenting what he said.


Do you go into the womens' groups and demand that they say "some men" when they're expressing an opinion too? How about telling the folks in AA that they specify which white people they're referring to?

Try it, I dare you.



This is our safe haven, we shouldn't have to go out of our way to protect the delicate fee fees of non-atheists. ChairmanAgnostic did not stereotype anyone, he used a qualifier and you either missed or ignored it.



If you come here to be offended we'll be more than happy to oblige you.

[TexasTowelie]

17. Please accept my apology then for making you go out of your way to protect this group.

You wrote, "This is our safe haven, we shouldn't have to go out of our way to protect the delicate fee fees of non-atheists."

I will point out that the heading for this group says "Atheists & Agnostics." I'm not an atheist, but in many ways I consider myself to be agnostic since I am not overly religious and question most Biblical text. Therefore, I believe that I have as much right to post an opinion in this group as anyone else so there is no need to be combative. My initial response was that I'm not "scared" or "angry" so let it be.

I also apologize to ChairmanAgnostic for accusing him of bigotry since I doubt that was his intention. However, the qualifier that he used does lead to some ambiguity since it still includes the group of believers that are on DU, no matter whether they posted their concerns or not.

[Cartoonist]

25. "Our presence scares and angers people"

There's no qualifier there. YOU added the word ALL. Now apologize to the OP and everyone in this thread.

[TexasTowelie]

27. You are right, there is no qualifier there

which means that to an outside observer that it does refer to all people (or at least the ones that aren't A&A members). However, as some members of this group explained to me the unwritten rules within the group are that qualifiers are not necessary and that outside observers should intuitively know that the OP was only referring to some people that are believers (see the post by LostOne4Ever).

I've done my best to be polite and respectful to everyone in this thread, offered explanations and taken consideration of the viewpoints from everyone else. I posted my opinion, apologized for how I interpreted the OP, apologized for an accusation that I made about the author, and I believe that the topic has been exhausted. However, issuing ultimatums for apologies does come off as demanding and impolite.

[Warren Stupidity]

28. "which means that to an outside observer that it does refer to all people"

wow. just wow. It only means that in your head, and only because you misread the op and then accused somebody who pointed out your misreading of having misread the op. You dug yourself a hole, and having gotten down in that pit, you are proceeding to dig deeper.

[TexasTowelie]

29. Trashing group.

Yes, it does mean that in my head and I believe that more people would have similar interpretations, but they don't want the hassle that comes from expressing an opinion in this group. There is enough ambiguity in the OP that if you don't know the unwritten rules of this group (as noted by LostOne4Ever) that it can be misinterpreted.

I am willing to discuss the nonsense that come from religious extremists and religion in general. To be fair there are some members in this group that disagree and they also were respectful as to why I misinterpreted the OP. However, to be attacked for expressing an opinion that does not align with the group makes the group hostile for newcomers. Hopefully by trashing the group (the first that I've ever trashed on DU in almost four years as a member) I won't offend anyone else.

[Warren Stupidity]

30. you chose to put into the text what you needed to be there to sustain your outrage.

When that was pointed out you just doubled down on it after first claiming that it was others misreading what wasn't said.

Have a nice day.

[TexasTowelie]

31. And you have a nice day too. nt

[PassingFair]

37. Don't let it hit ya...

[Lordquinton]

32. Try doing this in the feminist group

Tell them "Not all men..." and see the reaction you get. If you believe you're correct in coming here and saying what you are saying isn't just tone policing then go do it.

[TexasTowelie]

33. Why are you equating this group with the feminist group?

I said that I was trashing the group and there is nothing further to discuss, yet you continue to stir the fire and be hostile. Have a good day.

[Lordquinton]

34. Both groups are maligned in the public sphere

Both groups hear this exact same argument of "Not all X" and it's a known disruption argument, it distracts from the real issues and it shows you're more concerned about the feelings of the group that is doing the oppression than the group that is being oppressed. You're making it about yourself, yanking the spotlight away from the real issues because they didn't include the gigantic boilerplate of "I don't mean every religious person there are many good ones and liberal ones and..." and so on therefore you must immediately jump to the conclusion that the person making the statement is a bigot and should be shamed by his own community.

To your other point I will quote the great Gilbert and Sullivan in their seminal work "The Pirates of Penzance":

Yes, but you don't go.

[amuse bouche]

35. " Being disrespectful of the opinions of other people does nothing to bridge, discuss and solve "

You don't get it. For me, there is no bridging or discussing. I want all the SkyDaddy horseshit to dissolve

It is nothing more than a fake place for bigots to go and justify their bigotry

[LiberalAndProud]

13. I don't want to speak for the OP, but when we talk about

discomfort that we engender in believers, if that's not you, it's just not you. There are a great many believers who get a bit of a queasy feeling in the pit of their stomach that triggers a rage response when their beliefs are challenged. Although it may feel like we're painting with a broad brush, most of those on this side of the belief spectrum understand that we are talking about a certain specific subset of the faith community who we have all encountered.

[TexasTowelie]

16. Hello L&P,

I acknowledge that there are many believers that are so adamant in their beliefs that they fit into the "angry" and "scared" categories when they interact with atheists and agnostics. It was because I felt that the OP was painting with a broad brush that I offered my opinion. Perhaps the author of the OP could have clarified his opinion by including some adjectives that would have narrowed the focus of the target audience and I'm reassured by your statement that it is only a subset of people that the OP characterizes.

I don't mean any disrespect to any of the members of this group and I realize that this is a safe haven for a group that is often persecuted. I sympathize with the fact that members of this group may have experienced uneasiness, bias and persecution due to interactions with religious activists. For those reasons I acknowledge the rights for all people to have freedom of religion and freedom from religion.

In some respects I waver between being a believer and being agnostic. If nothing else, having a non-member of the A&A group contribute an opinion livens up the discussion. Hopefully, by joining in the discussions in this group people will realize that I am frequently aligned with the consensus of the group rather than opposing it. Thanks for your considerate response.

[LostOne4Ever]

21. So I have read your replies to this point

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]So I understand that you thought that the original poster was generalizing and missed their qualifiers. I also believe you when you say that you didn't come in here to create strife. That said, I would kindly ask that you consider the audience in future threads when you choose to participate in here.

Almost everyone following this group are either atheists and/or agnostics. We are a minority in this country and as such there is hardly a day that goes by where we do not interact with believers. Further, many (probably most of us) are either former believers or were raised by believers and have many many believer family members. Trust me, we know all about the different variety of believers. We know all too well that not ALL believers think or act alike.

Knowing that, we have a tendency to generalize about believers in this group. We occasionally fail to throw in qualifiers because we know our audience. We do this because we know that the members of this forum know full well that we don't mean ALL BELIEVERS. In fact, you could say we kind of expect our members to generalize.

The purpose of this Group is to give us a safe-haven where we can discuss how religion affects us, to express our disbelief in an environment of support, and to vent to others who understand fully where we are coming from. To paraphrase another poster in another thread, this is a place where we can say "that's crazy" without worry. We shouldn't have to worry about if we remember to throw in qualifiers or not; because we know that everyone here understands what we really mean.

Maybe as an outsider you thought what the OP said sounded bad; but you have to remember, we are all leftwingers here. If someone really does cross the line we will know and we will set them right. No one is gonna come in here and say ALL believers want to rape and kill all atheists (like the duck guy thinks) and not get called on it.

Hell, I have seen a few times when it was members of this group standing up for members of smaller religions when no-one else would. Just because we don't like religion does not mean we hate the religious or don't believe in freedom of (and from) religion.

When you came in here and more or less said "not all believers™" I can assure you that almost every member here rolled their eyes. We know that and don't need that lecture. We have heard it a million times before and many of us come here specifically to get away from that.

*Not only that, you picked a really bad time to chide us on generalizing. We are more than a little up in arms after two people came in here and disrupted a thread yesterday, including one who called a regular dishonest for not telling her nail stylist she was a skeptic the moment she met her...

The point I am trying to make in this long rambling post is that there are no believers here to defend. This group is for A&A, not believers. And even if this was not the case, they are the OVERWHELMING majority and we know their point of view all too well. Your point was not necessary and comes across as condescending.

You say that you are an agnostic?

Great!

I enjoy your posts in the Texas group and would love updates in here about the latest conservative idiocy affecting non-believers in our state.

Similarly, when you are feeling frustrated with the way SOME believers are treating you feel free to come and vent. We will listen without judging and give you support. When you are mad about SOME believers trying to codify their beliefs (especially bigoted ones) into law we will rally around you.

Because that is what this group is about! Just try and keep your audience in mind.

[font size=5][center]Peace![/center][/font][/font]

[EvolveOrConvolve]

24. +1, those are my sentiments as well

You said it far more eloquently than I ever could LO4E.

[TexasTowelie]

26. Thank you for your reply.

I do try to keep in mind the audience that I'm addressing and to respect other viewpoints. I thought that my initial response in this thread was rather innocuous (my mistake) and would not cause any backlash. However I felt that the reply that I received towards my initial post was dismissive and rude, most likely due to previous posts that I made. If the members of this group treat non-members (whether believers or non-believers) with dismissive or combative responses, then the author of the OP is correct--it will make people scared and it becomes a reason why people choose not to participate in this group. I thought for several minutes between the time I typed my reply and posting it because in the back of my mind I suspected that it would not receive a warm reception by at least some of the members in this group.

FWIW, I do not subscribe to the A&A group, but I occasionally click on a thread if the title is intriguing. When I clicked on this thread I expected to see links to some posts that would be truly offensive (something that clearly violated the SOP of the group) and to see who was banned. I did not look at the other threads in A&A to determine what was occurring elsewhere in the group so I wasn't aware of the prior disruptions within the group.

One point that I would like to make though is that the audience in the A&A group is not limited to just the members of A&A or even DU. As you are aware DU is monitored heavily by RW trolls. You may ask, "Why should we care?" The opposition that monitors DU do use our posts to justify their attacks on minority groups with derogatory terms and stereotypes. They also use it to justify their bigotry against A&As, feminists, LGBTs, and racial minorities by saying that we are being bigots ourselves and could also be considered as hypocrites. For those reasons, it is important to be careful of the language that we use in all groups on DU and particularly in OPs (and I admit that I'm not perfect either).

I'm not here to defend the believers because they can post to defend themselves. My opinion is mine alone and does not represent any other person or group. I want to believe that there is a middle place between believers and non-believers where neither group is condescending to the other group. If my posts came off in that manner, then I did not find the correct words so that my reply was misunderstood.

I also enjoy your posts and will consider cross-posting some of the posts that I make in the Texas Group over into A&A. However, I am concerned that some other members might consider it as trolling the group. Putting religious issues aside, I do believe that we share more things in common than things that we disagree about and I would hate for the differences that we (the DU collective) have on religious issues keep us from accomplishing our goals.

Peace to you, LostOne4Ever!

[Binkie The Clown]

4. I don't remember whether it was Dawkins or Hitch who said:

"Religion teaches people to be satisfied with not knowing." (Quoted from memory, thus the exact wording may differ slightly.)

[mr blur]

8. “I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world.”

Dawkins.

[Binkie The Clown]

9. Thank you. :-) n/t

[beam me up scottie]

6. The same kind that instructs its followers to kill/convert/expel non-believers.

Since they can't do any of the above on DU they have to make do with being assholes.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

10. Isn't that the truth.

[AlbertCat]

18. Just what sort of god teaches those kinds of lessons?

Well, since technically the Buddha isn't a god....



...I'd say ALL OF THEM.

One god is a divisive concept...


God is a concept by which we measure our pain.... (I'll say it again....)

&spfreload=10

[LiberalAndProud]

23. I don't believe in Zimmerman takes on a whole new meaning.

No disrespect to the esteemed Bob Dylan intended.

[edgineered]

19. In trying to figure out what has been happening here for the past few days

I can't get past why when one cat got belled, others lined up as if the bells were flea collars.

It is asked just what sort of god teaches those kinds of lessons. Perhaps it could also be asked what fools would believe such nonsense as lessons?

[PassingFair]

38. The A&A room is the cat.

We haven't been belled yet.

[edgineered]

39. So easily those words are said -

it seems there was a very popular post in this group on Thursday - the very tone of which had the effect of an electric can opener to clawed friends.

Sorry to rush out, pool league tonight. The entire 'OK...here's the thing on "respecting" religious and other supernatural beliefs....' was a gem, right down to the parts where one has to ask, "what's not to get about it?"

BTW, in the tale of belling the cat, it is the cat who always reigns, and A&A room is a fine cat.

[LostOne4Ever]

22. An egotistical one with the biggest inferiority complex the world has ever seen? (nt)

[mr blur]

36. After reading through this thread, I'd ask you (almost) all to remember one thing:

[edhopper]

40. You say "Some folks take those lessons to heart"

How many, I need to know exactly. What percentage lose the ability.
If you can't give us the precise amount, then you are insulting those we might think you also mean.

Stop using English in a common, conversational way!