Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
@Neverhappend someone should tell them(regressive leftists) that 1984 is not a manual.
@ AlphaLogica
For cryin' out loud. This is a bunch of bullshit if ever I have seen bullshit. It is an entire rant against anything that isn't conservative. Black Lives Matter is about institutional racism, that not only kill blacks, but also institutionally practice racism in the form of trumped up charges, heavier sentences for the same crimes that whites commit, and overall harassment by the police and courts. It has nothing to do with bombings or the Black Liberation Army.
This tripe that you are trying to pedal is pure and utter bullshit. It is the same FOX propaganda that says that the Black Panthers are intimidating voters at every station.
Black Lives matter doesn't take offense of the statement of "all lives matter". What upsets them is that it is taking attention away from the real issue. To say all lives matter is a true statement, but it is also a statement that whitewashes the whole issue. Also it's plagiarism. BLM agree all lives matter, but want to focus on the institutional racism that is being ignored. That is what upsets them.
Also the fact that some colleges are very liberal doesn't mean a damned thing. Go to Texas A&M and try and make a liberal speech of any kind. You'd be taking your life in your own hands. I dare say that you have made an unsolicited rightwing political rant that is not only false but rather childish.
I looked up "regressive liberal" And there is no such group or affiliation. It is purely a conservative hate phrase. It is their mischaracterization of "Progressive Liberal."
So any day YOU want to get your head out of the bumper-sticker mentality it is in, will be just fine.
Now about islam. I am a veteran of no less than 2 official wars and many battles. I have lived, fought against, and fought with muslims. The only thing that is not peaceful about islam is the corrupt terroristic leaders that use islam as a tool to recruit disenfranchised people. As a matter of fact, Islam is by it's core very tolerant of other religions. The Ismailis actually teach things like, educate your daughters before you educate your sons because all families rely on their mothers. Having 1st hand experience in dealing with muslims, I can personally attest that you are completely wrong.
Well, I have to get back to work (I work from home), so I can't rebut everything that you posted that so obviously wrong.
@mykcob4
LOL here allow me to do your research for you, its obvious that you are incapable of doing it yourself
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regressive_left
What to know what else if funny, it was a term coined by a...what for it....LIBERAL
So maybe spare me your indignant rage and come back when you are ready to have an adult discussion these MASSIVE conclusions you jump to is only revealing your bias =)
1) Wikipedia is not reliable because anyone can change it.
2) I was correct in calling "regressive liberal" a negative epithet. I don't think it was coined by a liberal at all. Maajid Nawaz is hardly a liberal.
3) Spare me the raging rightwing propaganda speech.
"Maajid Nawaz is hardly a liberal."
What HAHAHAHAHAHA...my god you are really this oblivious.
He was the Liberal Democrat parliamentary candidate for London's Hampstead and Kilburn constituency in the 2015 general election
So go sit in the corner and think about what you have said because you are doing a better job of demolishing your own argument than I could hope for
Maajid Nawaz Ran only in that party because he thought that was the only way he could win in that local election.
Here's the thing, YOU and conservatives like you AND Nawaz don't understand that it's not pandering to the terrorist by refusing to call those terrorist Islamic terrorist. The fact is that ISIL WANT very much to make the war on terror a religious war. If the west starts calling terrorist "islamic terrorist", it gives ISIL an excuse to recruit the whole of the islamic world. Terrorist make up a very small part of islam. The fact is the biggest opponent of ISIL and terrorism are MUSLIMS! Both Sunni AND Shia!
Nawaz wants a holy war. He would like to see a world war against islam. He is seeking revenge not justice.
BTW you can't win an election in Kilburn as a Tory!
mykcob4 - "2) I was correct in calling "regressive liberal" a negative epithet. I don't think it was coined by a liberal at all. Maajid Nawaz is hardly a liberal."
Yes, clearly it is a pejorative.
Are you sure about that? Or are you just blindly agreeing? Because you strike me as one who has never taken the time to actually look into things, but just post, regardless of whether or not you are correct. You know, like your failed "this is not equivalent" argument.
AlphaLogica - "Because you strike me as one who has never taken the time to actually look into things"
You have absolutely got me pegged. lol
--------------------------------------------------------------
AlphaLogica - You know, like your failed "this is not equivalent" argument.
Fake quote is fake.
@Nyarlathotep
"Fake quote is fake."
But a thesaurus is very real...and proved you wrong. Yet I noticed that you ran away after I spelled out why you are mistaken...I wonder why?
AlphaLogica - "Yet I noticed that you ran away"
It is amazing you can tell that I ran away because I haven't posed in 4 minutes. That telepathy module of yours must be really good.
4 minuets? maybe look at the post mark and check the time, look i know fact checking is like the plague to you and as such you feel it should be avoided but for the sake of not looking like a fool i encourage you to try it LOL I want to know, just how low will you sink in order to salvage your fragile ego? Thank you for proving that you are tantamount to a waste of time =) If anything you good for a laugh. And a valid lesson on how NOT to debate.
22:37 - 22:33 = 4 minutes. Luckily I didn't have to take my shoes off to calculate that.
Dude, take that huge chip off your should.
Here better yet let us allow Maajid Nawaz to speak for himself: I do not enjoy being this vitriolic but there is only so much willful ignorance i can take;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6Vjn3d70UQ
@mykcob4
You mean its not reliable because it proves you wrong? Well let us examine the accuracy of Wikipedia. Did you know that Wikipedia put the encyclopedia Britannica out of print because it contains less errors per page? Don't believe me? Well here:
http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/13/after-244-years-encyclo...
Wikipedia is a source that can and IS altered. Usually by conservative wonks. That is its failure. It doesn't meet the criteria of standard facts.
My god the horrible logic you put forth is really the strongest rebuttal to your own post. But allow me to explain why your military service is absolutely IRRELEVANT to the discussion. Have you ever heard of the Qur'an...well you see its this book the literally explains what it means to be Muslim. Maybe try reading it because I can tell that you have not spent even a single second studying it or the accompanying Hadiths. Your entire response was nothing more than a very loud declaration of your ignorance.
"The only thing that is not peaceful about islam is the corrupt terroristic leaders that use islam as a tool to recruit disenfranchised people."
Oh REALLY? Well let us take a look at what the Qur'an as to say about this:
Sura 40 says that those who reject the scriptures will have iron collars and chains placed around their necks, be dragged into scalding water and burnt in the fire.
or lets check the Hadith (the sayings of the prophet muhammad:
“Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.” — Bukhari 9.84.57 ‘baddala deenahu, faqtuhulu’
So now that I have shown your response to be nothing more than an admission on your part to be oblivious to islamic doctrine i'll leave it at that. So before you come back and make a fool of yourself again, i encourage you to actually do some research otherwise I will continue to show that you have no idea what you are talking about and only disagree with me bacuse your 'progressive' panties are in a bunch =)
I agree with you on your stance on Islam. While I have not read the Quran in its entirety, I have researched many quotes from the text itself, and I have never read a more violent or mysoginistic text than the Quran. I honestly get really pissed off when liberals defend the Islamic faith, they rather call people bigots than look at the actual facts and realize that about 90% to 95% of terrorist attacks across the world are Islamic related. If this world is ever going to be rid of religion, Islam is the first one that needs to go.
Well the Qur'an is broken into two parts before the pilgrimage to Medina, and after. In the beginning its mild, but as you read on it gets more violent, Muhammad was a warmonger who made up a religion. There is a rule of thumb when reading the Qur'an and that is what comes last, supersedes what came first, so all the mild and peaceful stuff is rendered meaningless by what comes after.
Well, it's obvious that you have no experience or first-hand knowledge about islam. That you are going on what you THINK is fact instead of reality. The fact that you think what comes last is most important. You don't know islam is a glaring fact by that statement alone. You dismissed my first-hand experience, and I think you did it because you can't refute it.
I fought in Iraq against the Republican Guard who were Ba'athist. I fought with Sunni Saudis. To a man, the Arabs I fought with believed in peace and were totally against terrorism and ethnic and ideological cleansing. I fought with Kurds who felt the same way. I fought with Shia who felt the very same way.
So you dismissing my experience is evident that you are not in touch with reality.
BTW I just didn't spend 4 years in service. I served for 22 years. That means that I have more than a snapshot of experience. When I say that I lived with these people, I mean that I LIVED with them. I know how they think, what their motivations are. I know how they apply their religion.
Terrorist like ISIL, Al Qaeda, the Taliban, are not representative of islam. Those terrorist organizations are made up of a few leaders that have dreams of power and control. The bulk of their organizations are made up of young disaffected thugs.
Islam, on the otherhand, is made up of families. So you don't know what you are talking about.
You are obviously misrepresenting the Quran for your own political purpose, which equates you with terrorist, The Quran that you misrepresented is talking about after life not the real world. I know this because I discussed this very passage with an Imam, at length. Actually several Imams over many years in many places in the world. Kurdish, Shia, Sunni, all said the same thing.
So when I cite specific examples from BOTH the Qur'an and the Hadith how exactly I am misrepresenting Islam? Have you even read the Qur'an? Can you even tell me how many variations of Islamic interpretation there are? Have you even read the Hadith? Really I want to know becauae you have NOT ONCE cited anything to counter my argument. The problem with service members is the delusion that because YOU were in the middle east, that makes you an expert in Islamic doctrine. Well, it does not. The only way you can possibly refute a single calim I have made to offer something either from the Qur'an or hadith. Do you have the intellectual honesty to admit that you have failed to do so?
Dismiss what you don't understand. Let's say I believe Imam more than I believe you. When one spends YEARS in the society of muslims, one understands much more than people like you that only supposedly read about islam. I dare say that imams are far better qualified to interpret the Quran than you.
This page is a joke, rampant with pseudo intellectuals who have zero respect for critical thinking or fact checking. Just mindless drones who regurgitate regressive leftist talking points and avoid an honest discussion. I am reminded why i left in first place. Not a single shred of intellectual honesty. Ah well, i have schooled you ingorant fools long enough and have better things to do with my time. Mycob thinks shooting bullets at Muslims is tantamount to islamic studies lol. What a fucking joke.
@AlphaLogica
Talk about intellectual dishonesty! I said I lived with those people. Can't you read? I bet you read what you want to hear and then just react.
You are typical of self-absorbed wonks that want to rant and rave.
You post a clearly inaccurate blanket statement, knowing that there will be a rebuttal. Then you use those rebuttals as an excuse to rant. You insult anyone that disagrees with you and do so without cause. You dismiss facts and information that don't fit your narrow-minded political ideology.
So you are the typical and classical troll.
There is no such thing as "regressive leftist." That is just an insulting catch-phrase made up by an extreme rightwing talking head like Rush Limbaugh that people like you latch onto.
You have "schooled" anyone. In fact, it's obvious that you CAN'T school anyone. You just wallow in rightwing propaganda and project. It's so pathetic! The bumper-sticker mentality robs you of intellectual and critical thinking. Your narcissism blinds you to reality.
I know why you came back. You came back to fill your lust for your ego. You wanted to find a place to rant and hear yourself talk (metaphorically). You wanted to cut down liberals. You have false indignation created by rightwing propagandist, and you need to release that false anger.
I suggest that you seek mental health before it gets any more out of control. It may be a maturity issue, insecurity, paranoia, or any number of mental problems, but there is most definitely a problem.
@ AlphaLogica
This is a depressing topic to read through.
At first I thought "this is a good post about how we need to be less dismissive against theists and invite to debate, to show how we are open to discourse."
I initially agreed with that, because sometimes the dialog gets to harsh with a quick and dismissive "PROVE IT!", which can ruin the opportunity to actually reach that person with some level-headed debating.
I don't have anything personally against those who have joined in the last year, on the contrary I welcome them and their views.
You have some valid points worthy of debate, but the discussion in this thread quickly turned disappointing.
The first alarming mistake according to me, was dragging politics into the discussion in the original post.
Excuse me, but what the hell does political preference have to do with "atheists condemning theists for daring to challenge our lack of belief"? (rhetorical question)
It's an embarrassing statement to read.
You give the appearance of being open for debate, but it didn't take long before you attacked the opposing parties personally, instead of attacking their arguments.
Comments like:
"What HAHAHAHAHAHA...my god you are really this oblivious."
"...look i know fact checking is like the plague to you"
Is this really what you call being able to "handle getting your position challenged"?
At this point there is no open discourse from you, instead you remind me more of people like Chanty "Big Red" Binx, who has comments like "Shut the fuck up!" and "I'm reading, fuck face!".
I really thought you would be better than to stoop to this level.
Edited to add:
In this discussion, you have effectively made a mockery of your own topic "On Effective Criticisms".
Well Prag consider the fact that while I offerd citation to support my argument all I got in response was "nope" when the trolls come out and shit all over the discussion, patting themselves on the back for their MASSIVE jump in conclusions about my politicol affiliation which by the way was entirely assumed on their part, why should I allow them do go unchallenged? Really, I never brought politics into the discussion, only pointed to the FACT that it is the regressive left that utilizes these tactics, I gave multiple examples to support this assertion and it was not returned in kind. So to this I admit that my behavior was no better, but DO NOT imply that I am the only one, if you want to criticize me then fine, you gave valid points worthy of consideration and yet you need to be fair in your criticisms and call out ALL parties involved otherwise you are simply jumping on the bandwagon.
@ AlphaLogica
Well, you're obviously still very emotional about this.
It's understandable and forgivable, at least for me who have been there and done that. I got one of my topics removed and got a warning when I reacted and responded way too emotionally a couple of years ago.
"why should I allow them do go unchallenged?"
I didn't say any such thing. I just pointed out that Ad Hominem attacks and gloating is not the way to go.
"Really, I never brought politics into the discussion, only pointed to the FACT that it is the regressive left that utilizes these tactics"
If that is a fact or not, I have no idea. Even if that is a fact, I'm quite sure that the tactic is not exclusively theirs...
But that is besides the point I'm making. Your argument about "Atheists do not need a safe space" did not require the use of the emotional cheap shot "the regressive left". If you ask me, that was exactly to bring politics into the subject and even worse: it brought prestige into the subject.
"DO NOT imply that I am the only one"
I didn't. But in bringing in that "regressive left" comment, the ball was already dropped.
Nyarlathotep didn't insult you, he at most used a little sarcasm, yet you became very personally insulting.
mykcob4 called your arguments bullshit, not you.
After that, the personal stakes were raise by you, mykcob4 only responded to you.
Then you snapped, calling the whole web site "a joke, rampant with pseudo intellectuals who have zero respect for critical thinking or fact checking."
I assure you, you are very much mistaken on that entire post.
AlphaLogica - "I never brought politics into the discussion"
VS.
-----------------------------------------
AlphaLogica - post 5- "atheists+ [are] feminists/pseudo-liberals/anarchists/ etc"
AlphaLogica - post 5- "therefore seek to interject itself into every aspect of identity politics"
AlphaLogica - post 5- "They are also referred to as Social Justice Warriors, or (my personal favorite) Regressive Leftists"
AlphaLogica - post 5- "they claim to be liberal but seek to destroy the very foundation of classical liberalism"
Wow so not only is basic English beyond your grasp, but politics as well LOL
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/politics
Pages