Fundamentalist atheists

Post Reply New Topic

There's something about agnostics claiming atheists say they know there is no god that makes my back itch and toes twitch. You know there are probably a few atheists who say they "know" there is no God, I haven't met any and Richard Dawkins said he hasn't either (he has stated more then once he does not know), BUT there is a very large group of theists who claim they know there is a god, now, are "fundie" atheists the other half of a two sided coin of fundamentalism and intolerance?

"fundamentalist atheists are just as bad as fundamentalist theists" OK, well, do fundamentalist atheists blow up clinics, torture and fly plains into buildings, subjegate women, start holy wars and kill non believers? As far as I know the worst thing fundie atheists do is act smug and arrogant! - oh noes! The worst atheists I've ever met were self centred "atlas shrugged changed my life" elitists, the worst theists are war criminals

And some people have the gall to actually compare these seemingly non existent smug bastards with an actually dangerous group of people! (I don't just mean muslims

I don't know there's a God and I don't think most of you have ever met an atheist who said this, but I think we've all met a theist who says this..and we're supposed to respect them for it.

In the words of Yatzhee Crowshaw, there is no middle finger big enough!

That is all.

Cough... points at the league of militant atheists

Also check out the celebration of Goddless Reason that was held in Notre Dame Cathedral in November 1793... that nice little party they had after the guillotined the priests.

I await no true Scotsman fallacies from both sides.

I don't believe there is a god, but that's not the same as saying I know there is no god.

The majority of Atheists, the ones that actually think at least, rather than just "hurr hurr, I fit in, guys! I don't believe in god either, hurr hurr!", know that they can't disprove god, but they also know that the Theists can't prove god either.

As a whole, Theists are more ignorant about it. The majority of them "know" there is a god because they "feel" him... Yeah, sure, whatever.

But as you said, even if there are a few ignorant Atheists - I've never heard of an Atheist terrorist organisation, or Atheist extremists who physically attack people for beliefs that go against their own.

you have to go back pretty far huh

What militant atheists? do these atheists blow up churchs? do they sacrifice their kids or exorcise? If by "militant atheists" you mean atheists with atitude problems then well..i wouldn't worry about them when we've got thesists actually killing people for religion.

I just can't stand the comparison, on one hand you have this tiny group of smug arrogant twits, on the other you have dangerous terrorists that are threat to the world over,
and agnostics and such actually say they are comparable and "equally awful".

Here's a comparison for you. The number of deaths caused by atheists ('militant' or non-'miiltant') and the untold numbers caused by the 'smug arrogant twits' who believe there is a God and that he is on their side willing them on in the business of slaughter.

I can sympathize with the outrage. It can feel like atheists and theists are increasingly bunking down against one another. This trend as only gotten worse with time. Your portrait is quite one sided though. I don't deny that some believers do commit terrible acts, in the name of their respective faith. It is also true that arrogant atheists are not the same as violent believers.

What is missing from the discussion is an appreciation of the different sorts of atheism. The atheism which is associated with Communism, can no doubt be described as violent and oppressive. That said, there is a recent trend in atheism towards a more eighteenth century enlightenment sort; the proponents of this position, in large part, honestly think that their views will lead to greater freedom. The new atheism, despite its cynicism is dramatically optimistic.

One of the worlds leading philosophers of atheism, Michael Martin certainly sees a risk in new atheism, that the optimism could turn quickly to outrage and then into a desire to suppress religious opinions. Martin certainly thinks atheists are just as capable of being oppressive as their theistic counterparts (Michael Martin, Atheism : A Philosophical Justification (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1990), 458). People like Dawkins however, seem to reject this risk.

For myself, I am optimistic. I hope that the new movement of atheism remains non-violent. That said one does not have to look far to see opinions from atheists that show how perched upon a knifes edge the movement really is. The new atheists are optimistic, but they are also angry.... while I hope for the best... anger has a nasty habit of finding a way to become violent. It is entirely possible that the new atheism could be as nasty as the old communist form. The enlightenment optimistic form ended in a bloodbath of Church destruction, repression and murder of the faithful clergy.

Both views can be chained to anger... if we want a peaceful future, we must begin breaking those chains... perhaps it starts with posts like your own.

For myself, I think the answer is more proper Christianity. I think a good belief has a better chance against a bad belief, than no belief does.

I don't believe in god for the same reason that I don't believe that Father Christmas delivers millions of children's toys all in one night or that the tooth fairy leaves money under children's pillows in place of a lost tooth.

Religion is UTTER nonesense and causes nothing but misery, hatred, and division.

Fundie Atheists, eh?

Do they argue over how many digits are really significant to define the value of Pi? ("Significantalians"?)

Is there one sect that says, "We descended from monkeys" and another that says,"Monkeys and humans descended from a common ancestor"? ("Linealists" v. "Branch Darwinians"?)

Are there sects of Fundamentalist Atheists that are still in opposition to anything beyond Classical Mechanics? ("Orthodox" v. "Reformed"?)

This could be as significant as the schism in the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster between the "Marinaran" and the "Alfredo" sects (Personally, I'm a "Primaveran", but who's keeping score?)

Alas, we are not permitted by Big Brother to point to people who consider theists and those who adhere to a religion [alas again, we are not permitted to distinguish the two, that would be like suggesting that a fetus inside a human female might be human] to be a clear and present danger and take steps to minimize or eliminate that danger.

Thus Henry VIII by the Grace of God King of England and Defender of the Faith eliminating people who suggested he might not be the head of the vhurch in England we are not allowed to say has anything in common with Communists who just happen to be atheists eliminating those who suggest that God might have something to say about current affairs.

Big Brother does not allow us to say that someone does a bad thing BECAUSE he is an atheist. But we are encouraged to recognize that a theist OR member of a religious organization who does a bad thing does so BECAUSE of theism or religion.

But in one respect Big Brother is even handed: if someone does a GOOD thing it is not done BECAUSE of atheism or theism.

Beheading the Priests was a necessary evil.

ruveyn

I used to believe in Santa.
Then I didn't believe in Santa.
Now I AM Santa.
So yes, Santa exists. In fact, millions of Santas exist.
Could it be the same with God?

nice try

Where? I don't see them.

Do you mean people who demand crosses be removed from court rooms based on separation of church and state? Do you mean the people who oppose anti-gay legislation based on the 1st amendment? Or...?

What do you define as a "militant atheist"? If it is someone who blows up a church or place of worship in the United States based on their atheism, I have yet to see. In communist countries where they do not allow freedom of religion, it is not based on atheism but usually dictatorship and oppressive ideals. So they don't count as an example. They are unified by nationalism, not atheism.



That form of fundamentalist atheism was over 200 years ago. Certainly does not count now. Find something within the last two years in the United States like it, and I will be concerned.

^^^^

No true Scotsman and special pleading in one post, at least it was efficient of you. It appears I did not have to wait long at all.

Specifically what religion(s) are we referring to?

Islam fits the bill perfectly.

ruveyn