| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
FlatEarth1024
Hey, Everybody!
Joined: 18 Sep 2006
Posts: 4152
Local time: 4:36 PM
Location: Dippin' my balls in it.
|
 Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2007 9:48 am Post subject: |
  |
|
Well, HB, let's agree to disagree. I completely disagree with your notion that all minorities in this country's history owe their existence to the white/straight/christian man's benevolence and acceptance. And actually, I find that notion a little offensive. Blacks, women, gays...they are not here because The Man graciously allowed them to exist. They are here because over hundreds of years they fought and they organized and they got the word out and they took what was goddamn well coming to them. They are here IN SPITE of The Man, not because of him.
I find it absolutely horrifying the notion that A) I should beg to exist, B) That I should prostitute myself to my foe to do so, and C) When and if that acceptance is magnanimously granted that I should be eternally grateful and in debt to the wonderful christians who have chosen not to legislate me out of existence.
I also find it troubling that some portion of the atheist population would allow themselves to be legislated out of existence. We practically already are. So what? If that happens, you go underground and continue the fight. I would rather spend my entire life as an underground atheist than as an above-ground traitor to my principles who willingly grabs ankle for his foe in exchange for favor.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|
ShaSha
Forum Master
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
Posts: 4996
Local time: 10:36 AM
Location: Minnesota
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2007 12:26 pm Post subject: Re: Atheists cannot hold public, governmental or secular off |
|
|
| hillbillyatheist wrote: | | we have no choice but reach out and win them over with charm, and by appealing to their sense of fairness. I don't think we should give up our rights, I want us to fight for them (in a realistic way) and since the majority votes, it very much matters what they think. (what if they vote to have atheism banned? (and stack the courts against us) |
I don't think that can happen because the moderates and liberals are already in your camp when it comes to basic rights. Nobody wants their religious rights removed. That nobody would vote for an atheist right now is just a poll. I guarantee that if a man with the pull and charisma such as JFK ran and was pretty squeaky clean in his history, he could get a winning vote. It really does come down to personal habits at this time more than religion. Even that is being overcome by people such as Guliani when their "hero" status is high, whether true or not.
You are right though. It will be a candidate with a similar attitude such as yourself that will win the vote. JFK would not have won even Catholic votes if he would have said the Catholic church is the only true church and the rest of you are going to hell if you don't convert.
So naturally it will not be a candidate who is atheist who states that "theists are delusional" or whatever the put down of choice is by the militant atheists.
Remember, it was mostly theists who got prayer out of school. That was a legitimate complaint that had to be corrected and was corrected by moderates not extremists.
I also believe Gays could easily win office if they are discreet and charismatic. It isn't a matter of hiding anything. It is a matter of not pushing an exaggerated agenda at others. That they and atheists are on the lower scale, their pro vote is quite high. Another decade and it simply won't be a big deal just as voting for a woman or black is not a big deal.
I suspect that if Islam would have been in the presidential poll question, that they would be on the lowest at this time or a wiccan or pagan and etc. Atheism is far from being the most hated anything. There is more ignorance and prejudice about the latter religions than atheism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hillbillyatheist
Administrator
Joined: 29 Jun 2004
Posts: 15987
Local time: 11:36 AM
Location: Denver Colorado.
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2007 2:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| FlatEarth1024 wrote: | | Well, HB, let's agree to disagree. I completely disagree with your notion that all minorities in this country's history owe their existence to the white/straight/christian man's benevolence and acceptance. And actually, I find that notion a little offensive. Blacks, women, gays...they are not here because The Man graciously allowed them to exist. They are here because over hundreds of years they fought and they organized and they got the word out and they took what was goddamn well coming to them. They are here IN SPITE of The Man, not because of him. |
what if whites had decided to eradicate the blacks? would they have stood a chance? did the jews stand a chance in germany? (before a more powerful ally joined forces and kicked the Nazis ass, that is)
if the majority wanted us fucked, we would be fucked. we stand no more a chance then a two year old against mike tyson. is it fair? hell no! is it offensive? hell yes! but thats just the facts.
look at the indians. they got their ass handed to them. whites stole everything from them, and almost wiped them out. the fact that whites were wrong is irrelevant. they had more power. might doesn't make right but it does make you win.
thats why you need to be diplomatic.
I'm not saying we should bend over backward to kiss christian ass, I am just saying we need to be practical, choose fights we can win, and try to get moderates as allies.
we need a majority on our side or we WILL lose. its not matter of our being right, its a matter of us being outnumbered and outgunned.
| Quote: | | I find it absolutely horrifying the notion that A) I should beg to exist, |
the fact that it sucks and is totally unfair doesn't make it any less true. minorities are at the mercy of the majority. it doesn't matter how that makes you feel, its just hard cold reality.
| Quote: | | B) That I should prostitute myself to my foe to do so, and C) When and if that acceptance is magnanimously granted that I should be eternally grateful and in debt to the wonderful christians who have chosen not to legislate me out of existence. |
you must be misunderstanding me. I am not suggesting we bend over backward and kiss their ass. I am saying we need to use good PR skills, and rhetoric and emotional appeals and whatever else to keep the majority on our side. if you want to just tell all theists that they are "fucking deluded morons" you will simply polarize them against us, and we WILL lose. mark my words.
do you think MLK Jr. would have won public support if he had made speeches about how "fucking oppressive crackers are"? we should take pages from his book for our own campaign.
| Quote: | | I also find it troubling that some portion of the atheist population would allow themselves to be legislated out of existence. We practically already are. So what? If that happens, you go underground and continue the fight. I would rather spend my entire life as an underground atheist than as an above-ground traitor to my principles who willingly grabs ankle for his foe in exchange for favor. |
who said anything about grabbing ankle? was MLK an ankle grabber for appealing to whites sense of decency?
Last edited by hillbillyatheist on Mon Nov 19, 2007 2:38 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hillbillyatheist
Administrator
Joined: 29 Jun 2004
Posts: 15987
Local time: 11:36 AM
Location: Denver Colorado.
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2007 2:37 pm Post subject: Re: Atheists cannot hold public, governmental or secular off |
|
|
| ShaSha wrote: | | hillbillyatheist wrote: | | we have no choice but reach out and win them over with charm, and by appealing to their sense of fairness. I don't think we should give up our rights, I want us to fight for them (in a realistic way) and since the majority votes, it very much matters what they think. (what if they vote to have atheism banned? (and stack the courts against us) |
I don't think that can happen because the moderates and liberals are already in your camp when it comes to basic rights. Nobody wants their religious rights removed. That nobody would vote for an atheist right now is just a poll. I guarantee that if a man with the pull and charisma such as JFK ran and was pretty squeaky clean in his history, he could get a winning vote. It really does come down to personal habits at this time more than religion. Even that is being overcome by people such as Guliani when their "hero" status is high, whether true or not.
You are right though. It will be a candidate with a similar attitude such as yourself that will win the vote. JFK would not have won even Catholic votes if he would have said the Catholic church is the only true church and the rest of you are going to hell if you don't convert.
So naturally it will not be a candidate who is atheist who states that "theists are delusional" or whatever the put down of choice is by the militant atheists.
Remember, it was mostly theists who got prayer out of school. That was a legitimate complaint that had to be corrected and was corrected by moderates not extremists.
I also believe Gays could easily win office if they are discreet and charismatic. It isn't a matter of hiding anything. It is a matter of not pushing an exaggerated agenda at others. That they and atheists are on the lower scale, their pro vote is quite high. Another decade and it simply won't be a big deal just as voting for a woman or black is not a big deal.
I suspect that if Islam would have been in the presidential poll question, that they would be on the lowest at this time or a wiccan or pagan and etc. Atheism is far from being the most hated anything. There is more ignorance and prejudice about the latter religions than atheism. |
I do fear that if enough rabid atheists get to pissing enough people off, we may well lose the moderates and some liberals. they will simply think we are "as fundy as the fundies" and might even ban us under the guise of tolerance and stopping "hate speech" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ShaSha
Forum Master
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
Posts: 4996
Local time: 10:36 AM
Location: Minnesota
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2007 7:37 pm Post subject: Re: Atheists cannot hold public, governmental or secular off |
|
|
| hillbillyatheist wrote: | | ShaSha wrote: | | hillbillyatheist wrote: | | we have no choice but reach out and win them over with charm, and by appealing to their sense of fairness. I don't think we should give up our rights, I want us to fight for them (in a realistic way) and since the majority votes, it very much matters what they think. (what if they vote to have atheism banned? (and stack the courts against us) |
I don't think that can happen because the moderates and liberals are already in your camp when it comes to basic rights. Nobody wants their religious rights removed. That nobody would vote for an atheist right now is just a poll. I guarantee that if a man with the pull and charisma such as JFK ran and was pretty squeaky clean in his history, he could get a winning vote. It really does come down to personal habits at this time more than religion. Even that is being overcome by people such as Guliani when their "hero" status is high, whether true or not.
You are right though. It will be a candidate with a similar attitude such as yourself that will win the vote. JFK would not have won even Catholic votes if he would have said the Catholic church is the only true church and the rest of you are going to hell if you don't convert.
So naturally it will not be a candidate who is atheist who states that "theists are delusional" or whatever the put down of choice is by the militant atheists.
Remember, it was mostly theists who got prayer out of school. That was a legitimate complaint that had to be corrected and was corrected by moderates not extremists.
I also believe Gays could easily win office if they are discreet and charismatic. It isn't a matter of hiding anything. It is a matter of not pushing an exaggerated agenda at others. That they and atheists are on the lower scale, their pro vote is quite high. Another decade and it simply won't be a big deal just as voting for a woman or black is not a big deal.
I suspect that if Islam would have been in the presidential poll question, that they would be on the lowest at this time or a wiccan or pagan and etc. Atheism is far from being the most hated anything. There is more ignorance and prejudice about the latter religions than atheism. |
I do fear that if enough rabid atheists get to pissing enough people off, we may well lose the moderates and some liberals. they will simply think we are "as fundy as the fundies" and might even ban us under the guise of tolerance and stopping "hate speech" |
To do that would make us no longer moderates or liberals. I can only speak for myself but I can certainly ignore a rabid atheist as you put it when it comes to my association with him or her. But I would never violate his or her constitutional right to free speech. And I certainly would never lump all atheists in that category. I've had lots of practice from being on forums 
The majority of atheists are tolerant of theists and have good friends in both camps IMO. Heck even Falwell had an atheist friend in Larry Flynt and vice versa. And they started out about as rabid as each could be when they first crossed paths |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hillbillyatheist
Administrator
Joined: 29 Jun 2004
Posts: 15987
Local time: 11:36 AM
Location: Denver Colorado.
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2007 7:48 pm Post subject: Re: Atheists cannot hold public, governmental or secular off |
|
|
| ShaSha wrote: | To do that would make us no longer moderates or liberals. I can only speak for myself but I can certainly ignore a rabid atheist as you put it when it comes to my association with him or her. But I would never violate his or her constitutional right to free speech. And I certainly would never lump all atheists in that category. I've had lots of practice from being on forums
The majority of atheists are tolerant of theists and have good friends in both camps IMO. Heck even Falwell had an atheist friend in Larry Flynt and vice versa. And they started out about as rabid as each could be when they first crossed paths |
shasha I would be very surprised if you turned on atheists.
however I know there are folks that upon hearing I was an atheist wouldn't care less except for the fact they they associate me with folks like this
stuff like that turns people against us who might be totally for our legit causes if they weren't so tired of us crying wold over stuff that really isn't discrimination.
there is also how we word things.
example: telling a conservative that you support gay marriage because you want to "get the government out of our lives" vs, "you're a bigoted asshole, you stupid fundy"
neither tactic may work, but at least the first one has a chance in hell of working.
also "I want your church to have the right not to mary gays but if another church does, thats their freedom of religious beliefs too" is a good way to try and persuade a conservative, where as suing them into submission will just rally them to fight against us.
similar stuff can be used on moderates and liberals too. there are ways to try and win folks over without picking a fight and without compromising principals.
picking fights with theists will result in us getting our ass kicked.
using diplomacy and the art of persuasion, may win them over, or at least get them on board with the important causes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ShaSha
Forum Master
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
Posts: 4996
Local time: 10:36 AM
Location: Minnesota
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:07 pm Post subject: Re: Atheists cannot hold public, governmental or secular off |
|
|
| hillbillyatheist wrote: | | ShaSha wrote: | To do that would make us no longer moderates or liberals. I can only speak for myself but I can certainly ignore a rabid atheist as you put it when it comes to my association with him or her. But I would never violate his or her constitutional right to free speech. And I certainly would never lump all atheists in that category. I've had lots of practice from being on forums
The majority of atheists are tolerant of theists and have good friends in both camps IMO. Heck even Falwell had an atheist friend in Larry Flynt and vice versa. And they started out about as rabid as each could be when they first crossed paths |
shasha I would be very surprised if you turned on atheists.
however I know there are folks that upon hearing I was an atheist wouldn't care less except for the fact they they associate me with folks like this
stuff like that turns people against us who might be totally for our legit causes if they weren't so tired of us crying wold over stuff that really isn't discrimination.
. |
I just read that article and the thread that went with it. Bravo for all of those who dissed the AA as not speaking for them. I don't see them as rabid though. I see as rabid, those who would lock up or medicate theists. Yet even there I know they are the ones who have the mental or emotional problems and can only have compassion in the scheme of things because I know what it is like to have loved ones with real mental problems.
I see your link people similar to those who want to get god off coins and other small piddly stuff. They are nit picky and yes, they do make it harder to sympathize with the real problems you may have. But on the other hand, I don't like memorializing deaths along the highways either. How many accidents have happened while noticing that there are 7 small flower sites side by side?
Incidentally, while the atheists are foolish IMO to get hot about god on their coins, I learned last nite that there are some or even many American Indians who won't take 20 dollar bills as tender because Jackson is on it and they see Jackson as an enemy of the past.
I think it will be good if we get to where all money transactions are done with a card or a fingerprint That way everybody will love "their legal tender"
I'm ready for whatever they used in Star Trek TNG in addition to the replicator |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Live Video and Chat Room
Freethought Videos
FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Register
