Would I be called a "true disbeliever"?Only when there are true believers in the room... as with religion.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Would I be called a "true disbeliever"?Only when there are true believers in the room... as with religion.
Would I be called a "true disbeliever"?
This discussion about a specific subset of atheists - those with an aggressive arrogant streak -has been actively devolved into a binary opposition argument of religion vs atheism.
This is how any criticism of said aggressive arrogant people is derailed when they are also atheists.
It it as though these atheists feel that they are are a privileged group, such that any degree of uncivil provocation from them is sacrosanct.
Funny, that's what some are saying about the religious ...
So, are those arguing in the negative actually suggesting that there are no atheists who ever cross the line of civility ?
What an extraordinary claim.
It's almost ... religious.
I have found most atheist perspectives to encompass the idea that they may in fact be wrong.
This discussion about a specific subset of atheists - those with an aggressive arrogant streak -has been actively devolved into a binary opposition argument of religion vs atheism.
This is how any criticism of said aggressive arrogant people is derailed when they are also atheists.
It it as though these atheists feel that they are are a privileged group, such that any degree of uncivil provocation from them is sacrosanct.
Funny, that's what some are saying about the religious ...
So, are those arguing in the negative actually suggesting that there are no atheists who ever cross the line of civility ?
What an extraordinary claim.
It's almost ... religious.
Who do you think is making such a claim? Please be specific.
Anyone else bothered by the existence of what I call either fundamentalist or mainstream atheists? To be honest, these guys and gals annoy me more than almost any other group. I'm talking about these outspoken atheist who'll literally result to fideism in their hate for religion or fallacy to attack religion. Pretty much 99% of r/atheism.
Anyone else see these folks?
Being specific is not necessary. Also it would break the rules of the forum to name any members and state that they are arrogant *****s.
You didn't respond to the crucial question in my post.
Do you not see any atheists who are arrogant and provocative for the sake of it ?
In other words, are atheists in general monolithic in social style and emotional maturity ?
I can clearly see that being religious to some degree does not imply a specific simplistic profile. There is a huge range of personality types in any group defined by a single feature.
Are you suggesting otherwise ? Are you suggesting that there are simply no atheists who are insufferable provocateurs of the kind referred to in the OP? You seem to be. And as my last post suggested, that is ironic considering that there are posters here accusing theists of demanding special status.
Asking me to name them is not only an avoidance of my observation, it seems like a ruse to initiate another level of sub-argument to further obscure a very simple and understandable proposition.
So let's get down to it - are there any atheists who do fit the description in this thread, as observed by many members, including those identifying as atheist ?
Yes or no, please.
Yes there are.
Excellent.
Those are the people under discussion.
I am done in this thread.
Drive by whining?
Yes, but you are young, you will outgrow it
Except you are the one running tail tucked...
From your own strawman no less.
Yes, but you are young, you will outgrow it
To be honest, these guys and gals annoy me more than almost any other group.
Walking away from a pointless argument is not equal to one tucking ones tail and running away.
You are a champion at pidgeon chess. Congrats.