As for how many priests are child molesters, would you like to compare their numbers with those of public school teachers, and day-care center employees? I doubt that you would.

Most atheists I know are very nice and are not any of these things As Quaker in a Basement would say – “Haw!”

You aren’t even very nice! I can imagine what your friends are like.

Also “vicious morons” is as slanderous as “murderers of the poor” (which I paraphrased from one of Christopher Hitchins’ may anti – Mother Theresa screeds).

No, sorry Frank, no deal. And here’s why. Creationism is not science and has no business being in a science classroom. Virtually everything you said is wrong though.

bigoted , stereotyping pseudo intellectual, intolerant, arrogant, atheist friends

Most atheists I know are very nice and are not any of these things, Frank. We tend to be humanists. So funny with the “stereotyping” charge, too – have you no irony meter? You cannot use that term simultaneously with calling all atheists “bigoted, intolerant, arrogant”, etc. Idiot.

Also, there are far too many priests that ARE child molesters.

Also, people who believe in God believe in a fairy tale. I think people who believe in unicorns and leprechauns and Santa Claus are ignorant fools too. Or they’re children.

Also, I’ve never called people who do not advocate birth control “murderers of the poor”, but they definitely are vicious morons.

So no. No deal. Your suggestion is way lopsided.

Had to fix that, it was bugging me.

Neither would I. Perhaps I am being inarticulate. In Christianity, the fundamental belief that Jesus Christ is the Son of God is not rational. If you should choose to pursue Christianity in spite of this for reasons that you deem beneficial to your life, that’s not irrational. It’s on a foundation of irrationality, but that particular component makes sense.

but the minute you generalize to an entire population you are engaging in bigotry.

Nope. Disagree. I am not “generalizing to an entire population” by acknowledging their fundamental, core theistic beliefs are nonsense. This goes for Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Zoroastrianism, Taoism, Shintoism, Hinduism, Flying Spaghetti Monsterism, and Pink Unicornism. Their theological beliefs are all wacky nonsense – I don’t care what religious group they are affiliated with. It’s a fundamental principle of theistic religions – acknowledging that does not make me a bigot.

I’m quite liberal, and I watch with amusement as conservatives on this blog accuse liberals of seeing racism in innocuous happenings. Despite this, even I think that the bar for declaring a bigot is too low.

You may have perfectly rational reasons to be distrustful of some religions and some religious people, but the minute you generalize to an entire population you are engaging in bigotry.

No matter what you say, you cannot make religious belief a rational thing. It can’t be done. It isn’t.

If I have an experience that is meaningful to me and choose to pursue that experience for the value it gives my life, I’d hardly call that irrational decision making. You are equating materialism with rationalism. I contend that they are related, but not the same.

Because it encourages people to act in a manner and believe things that aren’t rational. I would like an informed, reasonable citizenry – it’s tough to have that when so many adhere to crazy nonsense like the Earth being 6000 years old, or that humans popped into existence rather than evolved, etc.

But perhaps here I am conflating “religion” with “certain pushers of religion.” After all, even the Vatican allows for evolutionary theory.

I promise I won’t read Einstein’s Theory of Relativity for spiritual or moral guidance. You don’t have to read the Bible for natural history.

Interesting. I don’t really have a problem with using the Bible for moral guidance – like I said, Jesus’ philosophy isn’t what I take issue with. I do think that turning to the Bible is superfluous, as I (and atheist) can be moral without the need for a holy book. But I don’t think that’s harmful, just redundant. Like I said before, looking to the Bible as anything more profound than a work of literature, or as a philosophical guide to life, is just loony. Which isn’t to say it’s worthless, at all – as a work of literature, it’s very interesting. As a work in philosophy, it is interesting in many ways. But as a “holy” book – no. That’s nonsense.

Also, could you tell your creationist friends about this deal you propose? Maybe then we could stop them from trying to put Intelligent Design in the science classroom.

So it’s okay to be bigoted, as long as the trait to which you are opposed is chosen rather than inherent? Is it okay to be bigoted against vegetarians? Or socialists?

I didn’t say it was okay to “be bigoted”. Rather, I am saying that it’s far more acceptable to be critical and/or mocking of someone based on a choice they’ve made. Calling people names based on race or sexual orientation is grossly inappropriate, because these people could not BE otherwise. Why do you suppose that the right had tried, so hard, to make homosexuality into a “choice”?

However, I can criticize someone for their religion. And call them an idiot. I can tell vegetarians that they aren’t being wise, that we were evolved to consume meat and not doing so may be unhealthy. There are certainly valid criticisms of socialism, as well. But it’s stupid for me to go up to a person who’s 6’9″ and tell him, “Haha, you’re a dickwad because you’re so tall! How do ya like that, Tallboy?” See the difference?

but when it turns into lashing into him just for the kicks of slamming his religion then it becomes bigotry.

I disagree. I have perfectly rational reasons to be distrustful of religion and religious people. That’s not bigotry. Bigotry is irrational.

See, I can exercise my right to free speech, too!

Great. Didn’t think I ever said you couldn’t. The opposite, in fact.

There are plenty of religious people in the world who are nonethelessotherwise rational, thinking human beings.

Fixed.

One does not need to take the Bible literally to find meaning within it’s text or use it as a guide as to how to live one’s life. There are a lot worse people in history one could try to learn from than Jesus.

Didn’t say they did. You’re arguing for a philosophical point. And I don’t disagree. I have no problems with Jesus the Philosopher, or the Historical Figure. I do have a problem with Jesus, Son of God. The instant that one goes from following the moral precepts that Jesus taught to worshiping him and Yahweh and thanking them for life’s bounty, that is the instant in which they are becoming believers in irrational nonsense.

No matter what you say, you cannot make religious belief a rational thing. It can’t be done. It isn’t. Deal.

Atheism is a choice as much as religion. Is it bigotry when 50% of Americans claim they would not vote for an atheist for President?

I don’t know if I would call it bigotry, per se. Some or most of those people are probably bigoted against atheists. But that statement specifically? I probably wouldn’t call that bigotry. I would call it idiotic, but probably not bigotry.

We certainly know more than we did 2000 years ago, Whale. There is no disputing that, at all. I am being neither presumptuous nor intellectually dishonest by saying that.

Atheism is a choice as much as religion. Is it bigotry when 50% of Americans claim they would not vote for an atheist for President?

So it’s okay to be bigoted, as long as the trait to which you are opposed is chosen rather than inherent? Is it okay to be bigoted against vegetarians? Or socialists?

Of course you are within your rights to criticize Frank; but when it turns into lashing into him just for the kicks of slamming his religion then it becomes bigotry. The link he posted was to the website of a group many here would find distasteful. But instead of pointing out why that might be so, it turned into a round of “let’s bait Frank because he’s a Christian.”

I think that religiosity is often a sign of a lack of critical examination of the evidence at hand, in addition to a failure of logic. Religious belief is a matter of faith, which is antithetical to reason, logic, and evidence-based understanding of the world.

That’s a load of crap. (See, I can exercise my right to free speech, too!) There are plenty of religious people in the world who are nonetheless rational, thinking human beings. One does not need to take the Bible literally to find meaning within it’s text or use it as a guide as to how to live one’s life. There are a lot worse people in history one could try to learn from than Jesus.

While I don’t agree with Frank on very many things, he does have a point. Disagree with him all you want when it comes to religion, but calling him a “knuckle-dragging moron” simply on the basis that he is religious is just as bigoted as using the “n-” or “f-” words.

I agree. I am all for criticizing religion(even though I am a Christian) but at some point others blind hatred for people’s faith is far too telling.

“We know stuff now”- Mambo

I would beg to differ. You can call it fantasy, but we don’t “know” jack squat. Even as an atheist that statement is presumptious or intellectual dishonest.

“Liberals are tolerant and admire and respect diversity.
LOL”-AO

…and this is where I can’t follow folks like yourself. Your making a blanket statement about liberals. You have to seperate those with criticisms and those who just hate religous folks. You can’t take too much from one fellow’s personal experience but I left the Catholic Church because monolithic thinkers such as yourself.

Does no one else see the irony here?

No, there’s no irony there. You’re imagining things.

While I don’t agree with Frank on very many things, he does have a point.

Not really.

Disagree with him all you want when it comes to religion, but calling him a “knuckle-dragging moron” simply on the basis that he is religious is just as bigoted as using the “n-” or “f-” words.

First of all, there are many reasons that I can call Frank a knuckle-dragging moron.

Secondly, I disagree that it is “just as bigoted” as using those terms – while one does not have a choice to be either black or gay, a religious affiliation is something that can be chosen.

I think that religiosity is often a sign of a lack of critical examination of the evidence at hand, in addition to a failure of logic. Religious belief is a matter of faith, which is antithetical to reason, logic, and evidence-based understanding of the world. There’s no positive evidence whatsoever to promote the truth of Christianity over any other religion (real or imagined). The Flying Spaghetti Monster is just as likely to be real as Yahweh.

Also, I was illustrating a point about freedom of speech. I’m within my rights to call him a knuckle-dragging moron, just as he’s within his rights to call me a “narrow-minded bigot”. This is akin to homophobes being allowed to call gay people “fags” and racists calling black people “n—-rs”. They are within their rights to do so, but it doesn’t mean that they cannot be criticized or shunned for their speech. You can criticize my speech all you like. Go nuts. If you think that what I said was really over the top, you can shun me. Have a hell of a time!

Too often, people think that because they have the right to say stupid crap, that this absolves them of any responsibility for their words. And that is simply not true.

I guess I’ll go throw out my copies of The Iliad and The Aeneid now…

C’mon, Quaker, you’re better than that. No one is living their life according to a literal interpretation of either of those texts. That’s what I meant by “taking them seriously.” Which is not to say that they can’t or shouldn’t be taken seriously as works of literature – just like the Bible should be. Just not as a guide to living one’s life.

Occasionally, reason will prevail.

Hahahahaha, now THAT’S an ironic statement. Hilarious.

Frank…We support liberty/tolerance/equality only if we agree. Think about American Indians…African Americans…gays…poor…non-Christians…non-Protestants…atheists… Mary Dyer, executed for her Quaker faith in Boston in 1660…the Mormons that were expelled from Missouri in 1838…the attack on Chinese miners in Wyoming in 1885…the battle of Wounded Knee in 1890, the Ku Klux Klan activities in Mobile, Alabama in 1981…the Crown Heights riot in 1991…the invasion of Iraq…todays politics…

I guess I’ll go throw out my copies of The Iliad and The Aeneid now…

Similarly, people are typically within their rights to call homosexuals “fags”, or to call black people “n-ggers”. However, while they have the right to say those horrible things, others have the right to call them idiotic bigots who should be shunned.

Does no one else see the irony here?

While I don’t agree with Frank on very many things, he does have a point. Disagree with him all you want when it comes to religion, but calling him a “knuckle-dragging moron” simply on the basis that he is religious is just as bigoted as using the “n-” or “f-” words.

I merely pointed to a page from a Religious news service, and I was automatically branded as anti-woman and anti-gay.

In this weblog, smearing people is a all too common occurrence .

Conversely, drawing too much from a personal experience can be wrong, too.