my evangelical atheism
I think of myself of an evangelical atheist. It’s only recently come to my attention that some other atheists are offended by the very notion.
I am evangelical because I am passionate about the positive changes I believe atheism can have on society, and I am dedicated to sharing my world view. I want to engage religious people in conversation and discuss what they believe and why they believe it. I want to expose them to facts that may convince them not only that their belief is unlikely to be true, but that certain aspects of living promoted by their religion may be harmful.
Most atheists are not evangelical. Most atheists simply don’t believe in gods. Religion is irrelevant to them and they are living their lives with little reference to gods or faith, and certainly wouldn’t attempt to persuade religious people to change their lives.
Think of me as spreading good news.
This disagreement over terminology is a case that highlights the complexity of language and definitions – across time, across cultures and even among individuals. We all have different definitions in our heads. Thank goodness we have dictionaries for that moment of doubt. I suspect that in the UK this second definition is now more widely used than the primary religious definition.
Oxford English Dictionary 2nd definition of evangelical:
Zealous in advocating or supporting a particular cause.
‘she was evangelical about organic farming’
More example sentences
‘Whilst the advocates of quality and empowerment are almost evangelical in their quest to change the way we work those on the receiving end are considerably more sceptical.’
‘I get coffee and they get evangelical support from me and everyone I can convince to drink their coffee.’
‘I started off implacably opposed to this and now I am almost evangelical in my support.’
?! I wouldn’t have guessed you thought of yourself in that way. I didn’t get that vibe from the overall tenor of the comments on your posts.
Live and learn something about Violet today. 🙂
It’s a laudable goal to normalize relations with those of faith in that it’s useful to break incorrect stereotypes christians have about atheism and to work toward humanizing some of their toxic rhetoric. I’ve been an activist for many years for the separation of church and State. It’s an uphill battle.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I guess recent posts have seen a change in tone, and intent to some degree. But the majority of my posts have been criticising harmful aspects of religions and I doubt that will change much. I think I can still be an evangelical atheist and treat people and their beliefs with respect. Others disagree. 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
Agreed. Although I don’t think I’ve ever actually entered a situation thinking “I’m going to convert this person.” It’s more, “Your ideas a just wrong, dead wrong, and dangerous, and sad, and sick, and regressive, unhelpful, poorly-thought-through, embarrassing, ignorant, naïve and anti-human, and I’m going to show you just how wrong these thoughts of yours are.”
LikeLike
I thought you had quit entertaining that Dickhead Branyan? 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh I have. I intended that comment this morning to be a single one, but a few more ensued, until Branyan started censoring. Truly, a pathetic wanker.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh, shoot! I was not aware you had been back. lol…
Must go over and read?
I have read one or two but now the normal people hardly visit have you noticed how frakking mental he has become?
I mean, his non-comedic pores are suppurating godness all of a sudden!
He is even outdoing his ankle-biter.
LikeLike
That was the first time I’d visited in weeks, and I doubt I’m going back. There is nothing at all intellectually stimulating, or even remotely amusing in John Branyan.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agreed. He gets worse with each successive post.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think he’s going insane. Literally, mentally unhinged. Perhaps it’s out of suympathy for his daughter? Whatever the case, calling himself a “comedian” now is just patently weird. I swear, he must only work old people’s homes, hospices, and primary schools. I can’t see any adult actually paying money for, let alone sitting through, his act.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I just popped over for a lurk. I can understand how some people might find your questions repetitive, but I think it looks better for them if they leave the repeated question, rather than spamming. I might pop back later if I get a chance, it’s a really silly conversation.
LikeLike
I wouldn’t bother. You can see how his daughter was shown to be wrong in the first comment (if its still there), then she deleted every comment after that out of embarrassment. The same thing happened with the short thread with John Branyan. Every comment was deleted. And his daughter was lying about me asking questions. That’s their excuse to get out of the embarrassment.
LikeLike
So you weren’t repeating the same question?
LikeLike
Once, after he, John Branyan, failed to address it when first presented. It actually came up the other day, on Sirius Business’s blog, and he danced around it there, too.
LikeLike
I googled him, and found his comedy blog. I found him dull, but mostly inoffensive. I would ignore him if I were you.
I started censoring Arkenaten when he was repetitive. Him saying the same thing three times got boring. His allegations of me being boring, stupid and blinkered merely enabled me to feel self-righteous about it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Not all religious thoughts fit that description. Some are as simple as a Nice creator wanting people to be nice to each other. I might question things around that but I don’t feel the need to challenge it.
LikeLike
Sure, and you don’t see me launching into, say, Catholics, or Jains. It’s just evangelicals; those who practice wilful ignorance, yet pretend to be somwething else, like the Branyans. They should have no contact whatsoever with children.
LikeLike
I haven’t got a handle on what exactly they believe. Is it really that bad?
LikeLike
Oh, well that’s interesting. They both “claim” to be Christians, but they jettison Christianity quick-time when it becomes awkward. They LOVE Yhwh, until loving him becomes awkward, then they jettison him at the drop of a hat. Slipperly little snakes they are. Impossible to have a rational conversation with idiots like that who shapeshift, then delete comments (multiple comments) when they’re shown to be wrong. It’s really quite pathetic, especially considering John Branyan swore he’d never, ever censor. The ease at which evangelicals lie is astonishing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Just read your comment. Nicely said, but it’s far, far, far too rational for them. Anything that disturbs their utter hatred for atheists (and gays and negros, i believe) will be met with a wall of nonsense. Watch, if they answer, how they shift it.
LikeLike
You are utterly hilarious!
LikeLike
Thanks, I appreciate your ongoing support. 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s a unique idea of vacation fun, I’ll give you that! 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
If your beliefs can’t stand up to rigorous scrutiny, then you may safely conclude that “scrutiny” isn’t the problem.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I expect that reply was meant for Insanitybytes? Yes, it’s an odd objection.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, thank you. My ept at replies failed me momentarily. Whose odd objection? I’d made those before. 🙂
LikeLike
Insanity’s odd objection. Objecting to showing people the truth (almost like she admitted it).
LikeLike
Indeed. I shouldn’t worry if I were IB. You cant reason people out of positions they didn’t reason themselves into.
LikeLike
Not sure I get that …? I’m sure there’s a criticism in there though. 🙂
LikeLike
I thought you said you were on vacation right now. . . 🙂
LikeLike
As opposed to your Spring snow? 😀
LikeLiked by 1 person
Evangelizing atheism is the very epitome of selfishness. Some people feed the hungry, some people comfort those who despair, but you guys go around trying to rob people of their faith and hope. It’s immoral,unkind, and ugly.
LikeLike
Inanity, if you just kept it to yourself, and didn’t brainwash innocent children who have no defense, then we wouldn’t care.
So, keep it to yourself, don’t meddle in the operation of our secular societies, and we’ll have no problem.
LikeLike
I believe there’s a meme that involves unicorns and shoes with that statement, JZ. 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m pretty sure I’ve shown Inanity that before. I don’t think, thoguh, the message filtered through.
LikeLike
John,
Your love for the children is touching.
Yet the Great Genocide of Unborn continues unabated as the innocent are ruthlessly butchered and their body parts sold for coin.
LikeLike
Genocide?
That’s an interesting choice of words.
Tell me, how can you “kill” something that cannot “die”?
LikeLiked by 1 person
John,
I already answered that question for you a few months ago.
Your “reasoning” was that since life is 4 billion years old it is impossible to kill an unborn child.
Such bizarre “thinking” is a result of atheism and why atheism is behind the greatest genocides in human history.
LikeLike
Um, no, that has nothing at all with it.
The fact that life began on earth 3.82 billion years ago, and hasn’t been interrupted since, is merely me educating any ignorant Pro-Forced-Birther that “life” never maginally appears in the foetus. Ever.
What I asked you was how can you kill something that cannot die.
You did use the word, Genocide, did you not? That implies “killing.” It implies “murder.”
So, tell me, how can you “kill” something that cannot “die”?
LikeLiked by 1 person
John,
If something is alive it can die.
Even you must agree that a live skin cell dies eventually.
To say that a fetus cannot die means that it is dead.
If the fetus is already dead, why butcher it and sell its body parts for coin?
LikeLike
You want to see the legal, scientific and medical definition of human death, SOM?
LikeLiked by 1 person
John,
According to science the human life begins at conception. Since medicine is based on science, then according to medicine the fetus is a human life.
What you are expressing is atheism which rejects morality and modern science.
It must otherwise the Great Genocide of the Unborn would be what it is: mass murder on an unimaginable scale.
LikeLike
Um, no, that is not what “science” informs us.
You chose to use the word, genocide, so defend it. Justify it. Rationalise it.
How can you “kill” something that cannot “die”?
LikeLiked by 1 person
John,
Once the sperm and egg unite, human life begins.
We know this because we can see it with our own eyes.
We know from the molecular biology, which to taught in every freshman pursuing a degree in science, that at the moment of conception, the new creature is endowed with the genome unique to human beings.
Biomanufacturing begins immediately building a human being one molecule at a time.
Death by abortion can be a processes that stops all biomanufacturing or the butchering of baby’s body thus exterminating its human nature.
The separate butchered baby body parts are then sold for coin making many people very rich.
LikeLike
No, that is not when human life begins. Please stop making things up. A human being can die. Here is the legal, scientific and medical defintion of human death:
This is mirrored in US law:
It is also mirrored in Australian law:
Or we can go to the Dorland’s Illustrated Medical Dictionary, 31st Edition, 2007:
“death (death) (deth) the cessation of life; permanent cessation of all vital bodily functions. For legal and medical purposes, the following definition of death has been proposed-the irreversible cessation of all of the following: (1) total cerebral function, usually assessed by EEG as flat-line (2) spontaneous function of the respiratory system, and (3) spontaneous function of the circulatory system…
So, the question is, SOM: as full bilateral synchronisation does not occur until week 28, how can a foetus before that moment “die”?
LikeLiked by 1 person
John,
You are just parroting atheist legalism.
What I am doing is expressing common sense which has been greatly enhanced by a great education in theology, philosophy, mathematics, engineering and molecular biology.
“Full bilateral synchronization” is quite a mouthful, John.
Hopefully you will pull the pickle out of your mouth before you try to say it.
Do you think anyone is impressed when you google a bunch of gibberish that you don’t even understand?
LikeLike
I understand it fully.
If you don’t want to believe me, believe Professor Goldenring, a leading figure in the anti-abortion movement. He wrote the New England Journal of Medicine paper, “Development of the Fetal Brain.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
John,
I have learned a great deal from atheist professors.
That is why the trash you folks peddle has to be exposed for what it truly is.
LikeLike
Not entirely sure Goldenring is an atheist as he is a leading member of the anti-abortion movement.
But let’s not stop with him. Here is the so-called “Father of the Anti-Abortion Movement,” Dr. Jack Willke, confirming exactly what I am saying:
LikeLiked by 1 person
John,
Not the caveat at the very beginning:
“Since all authorities accept…”
Your argument is from authority, which is a logical fallacy.
On the other hand, I am arguing the old fashioned way which is from common sense (simple reasoning) guided by decades of study.
LikeLike
Errum, he’s the Father of the Anti-Abortion movement.
Anyway, you like your pantomime, and I like my facts. Fair enough.
LikeLiked by 1 person
John,
Your argument is not based on any reasoning of your own.
You merely parrot people you have endowed with authority over your own thinking.
I prefer to think for myself and develop my own arguments.
LikeLike
As faulty as they are 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
John,
That is why we must all reason together.
When you allow other people to think for you, you become a religious zealot.
That means the atheist is exactly that which he holds in such low regard.
LikeLike
I get your point SOM. Potential human life in the form of an embryo or fetus is clearly living. What John is pointing out that is that in terms of how we determine whether a human has died or not, a fetus before 20-something weeks doesn’t have sufficient brain activity to quality as alive. So although the fetus or embryo is living, it brain activity is sufficiently non-existent to qualify as a dead human being.
If you think potential life should be cherished at all costs, that’s fine: if you ever find yourself in an unwanted state of pregnancy, allow the pregnancy to continue. That’s your choice. But you can’t seek to remove that choice from other women, and doesn’t help anyone by pretending abortion is the equivalent of murder, when brain activity is essentially dead.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Violet,
Conception means that a new human person has come into being.
The new person is not potential, but actual.
Just because that new person doesn’t look like you, isn’t aware like you, or have the same needs as you, does not mean he isn’t a human being.
Possessing an active human genome imparts human being and thus personhood.
LikeLike
But you concede that ‘person’ is not yet alive by the standards we use to measure death?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Violet,
What standards are you referring too?
You are referring to standards which rationalize genocide.
The standard I am referring to is human nature as defined by molecular biology.
Human nature begins at conception because it is at conception that the human genome begins expressing itself.
The being of an unborn child is just as wondrous and priceless within the womb as without the womb after birth.
LikeLike
I’m referring to the way we measure brainwaves, which determines if someone is alive or dead. Are you familiar with such a process?
LikeLike
Violet,
A newly conceived child does not have a brain.
Consequently, the standard you use to judge his humanity is grossly unfair.
My standard, the human genome is possessed by all human beings from conception to natural death.
Consequently, my standard is completely fair.
LikeLike
Okay, well my standard (just as arbitrary and in denial of human reality) is the potential for human life. It’s therefore genocide to misuse any sperm or to have a period. Just as logical.
LikeLike
Violet,
A sperm does not possess the human genome and though alive, is not a creature of any sort anymore than is a skin cell.
Also, since the standard I am using in this discussion is based on the facts of molecular biology it is not in any way arbitrary.
I have shown quite clearly that the standards that you and John use to justify the Great Genocide of the Unborn, are in fact completely arbitrary.
In fact, the standards you and John use were devised specifically to justify abortion.
In effect you and John are like Christians who try to use the Bible to prove the existence of God.
You are expressing classic, undiluted, textbook circular reasoning.
Which is a logical fallacy.
Which means that neither your argument nor John’s is a rational one.
LikeLike
Yes but human life starts before the genome. You may be content to protect life at that point, but what about those of us who value it before that point? It’s the basic biology of potential human beings. The Great Genocide of Menstruation and Masturbation. It’s as logical as calling the morning after pill a tool for genocide, which you are doing here.
LikeLike
Violet,
Human life does not exist before conception.
That is the way it is for all sexually reproducing creatures.
A human life cannot be hallucinated into existence, yet the atheist has hallucinated justification after justification to end its existence.
LikeLike
And yet living organisms that create potential human life do exist before conception. They are alive in a similar way to a zygote – they are living organisms that can potentially develop into human beings. Of course the genocide that should concern you most as a Christian in this respect is the Great Genocide of Miscarriage arranged by the creator of human life. But some pro-life Christians conveniently aren’t concerned about that one.
LikeLike
Violet,
You have now taken off into the Twilight Zone.
According to you, flour is chocolate cake and pigs can fly all because you say so.
But this is not surprising since all of your arguments are based on logical fallacies as I have already demonstrated.
You simply make things up and think you are having a reasoned discussion.
LikeLike
Just trying to make you think about your position, and about what exactly ‘potential human life’ is depending on your bias. As I say, I won’t stand in your way if you ever have an unwanted pregnancy. The decision to grow and give birth to a potential human beings is all yours.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Violet,
You don’t seem to understand the difference between potential and hallucinatory.
Besides I refuted your misuse of the idea of potential.
Our arguments concern the actual, not the potential.
You are neither reading nor understanding my comments evidently.
I have successfully refuted each of your arguments but you blithely ignore that and are simply now re-hallucinating “potential” as an argument when it has absolutely nothing to do with reality.
Reality, by the way, actual, not potential.
The just-conceived human being is actual, not potential, as I have so simply and completely explained in earlier comments.
LikeLike
John,
Lately, I have been listening to a couple of renowned atheist, anti-Christian professors lecturing about the philosophy of Nietzsche.
After the sweet reason of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, each lecture feels like a whole new hallucination.
No wonder the poor man went nuts.
LikeLiked by 1 person
LOL
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have never considered myself in any sense evangelical, and atheists have no frantic need to save everyone before Jesus of
NazarethJapha returns to cast us all in the lake of Fire – not you of course, you get to wash his feet and do his ironing … for eternity.I consider internet interaction with theists, and especially the more fundamental kind … such as you … a zoological exercise. I have never had the intent to deconvert anyone I have chaytted with over the internet.
Besides, as reason and commonsense have never been prime motivators for conversion, so they are unlikely to help in deconversion.
But there are lurkers who read. Lurkers who are uncomfortable coming out, as it were, to have to face disgusting, mindless creationists, and fundagelicals, often in very close-knit communities. Sometimes even their own families.
Thus, for these folk, to be able to connect, albeit on the peripheries,and albeit on the internet,with people they have traditionally been brought up to believe are Tools of Satan only to discover that they are, in fact, the normal ones, makes me at least smile. And maybe they will go away and think, and be a little bit more knowledgeable, a little less fearful, slightly more happy and one step closer to a normal life.
And perhaps, eventually they will emerge from under the heel of religion and finally be able to flip the bird at theists and walk away with a smile.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ark, I can honestly say that you and jz had a lot to do with my process of deconversion. You both made me think and search beyond the answers I was being given for the questions I started to ask on other blogs. Thx again.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ding ding! Another point for Ark. Do you think hammering the message home is more effective than gentle discussion?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Violet, I think both tactics have their place and have varying degrees of success. The lurker often gets more out of it that the die hard believer you’re discussing with though. IMO
LikeLike
Well, remember, the Devil is my Dad … according to someone!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh, Wally tried to use that on me too. But alas, there is no satan, not in the dualistic ‘demigod’ sense that christianity portrays. It satan was a servant of God sent on commands from Him to test mankind. He is called the Adversary, but it’s not the adversary of God, but of man. The nt writers got it so wrong. I think I read somewhere that it’s an admixture with zoroastrian dualism.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You 2? *Smile*
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yup ark. I’m even more a ‘son of the devil’ in that I was a Christian and now I have apostasized
LikeLike
Have you read Neil’s latest post? Smashing it is.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ark, Not yet. I follow, but haven’t read his latest post yet
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am sure Violet will not mind if I link it.
It really is a superb post.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/godlessindixie/2017/04/04/our-biggest-mistake/
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have it up on the tablet now
LikeLike
Thanks, it is excellent. I don’t follow anything outside WordPress so good to get links like that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hey Violet-
You saying that link was ‘excellent’ explains why people are lost as fog when they ‘try’ to justify SO CALLED leaving the faith according to the scriptures.
According to their lame interpretations, yes, understandable.
According to the idea that God was not their Butler, yes, understandable.
According to their pathetic excuses for so called unanswered prayer, yes, understandable.
According to their disappointment in other believers, yes, understandable.
According to their enjoyment of godlessness, yes, understandable.
But ACCORDING TO the scriptures, they have been found out as spiritual frauds, where the very scriptures they appeal to, marks them out as fools.
So it is no surprise then either, that you found that link ‘excellent.’ And btw, if they actually read with a true desire to understand, and did not view God like as their friend they no longer ;like,’ I suppose things would be a bit different.
It is always amusing to watch people hold God Almighty and His word in contempt. No, not amusing, pitiful to the nines.
LikeLike
CS, at least you concede they have a case in most of the points made. Maybe once you’ve studied the Bible in more detail you’ll see what they mean in that final point.
LikeLike
You mean this point?
“We were told to follow the evidence wherever it led, and it led us right out the front door.” ??
But me? Study the bible in more detail? Ah but vi, it is the details which mark that singular book as head and shoulders above all. It is the details which separate the men from the boys.
And the evidence? Now that is amusing. I’ll stay with the evidence of the Creator, not people who sit in judgment of Him. 😉
And as far as conceding a point? I concede only his (anybody’s) disappointment is not caused by scripture, but by a mis-handling of scripture, as well as the total inability to understand God’s word in its context, as well as not differentiating law from grace, being clueless as to Israel’s purpose, and being out to lunch as to the reasons and proof for prophecy.
God’s word stands unaccused violet, except to the crooked of heart. Sorry, but this is the evidence.
LikeLike
He is a clever bloke, is Neil.
The fundy’s despise him, as you would imagine!
LikeLike
I wonder if CS will go on his blog to put forward the comments he did on here? I’m thinking NOT. 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
And with perfect anticipation did I see that someone would challenge my points, and make the dare to post over there!!
Love it.
Truth be told carmen, I have ‘wasted’ many a good comment on sites like that where the host deleted entirely, (no, not moderated) the common sense and scorching embarrassment and exposure of false believership. (and ms wisp knows my observations are not vulgar nor worthy of deletion)
Tarico, Neurotic, on and on and on.
So why don’t YOU cut and past the comment??
LikeLike
I did notice they deleted a creationist comment. A bit disappointing.
LikeLike
In all fairness maybe it was worthy of deletion. Pornographic, etc.
But it’s distressing to write out a seeming thoughtful response, only to see it burned.
LikeLike
Maybe so, we’ll never know.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Perhaps Neil’s moderator does a great job managing the lunatic fringe. 😉
LikeLike
You mean Neil’s blog or his own?
LikeLike
See comment downwind. . .
LikeLike
Aaah … yes,I was commenting in the dropdown.
LikeLike
Yeah, he is clever all right
Another pretended knowitall. 😉
To be pitied.
LikeLike
I don’t ever recall Neil alluding to being a know it all?
You however, are a veritable treasure trove of theological and historical knowledge designed to make even the most fundamentalist dinosaur promise that should your god ever flood the world again they will not even look at anther animal and will become vegetarian as soon as the boat reaches dry land .. .again.Promise. For sure.
LikeLike
Yeah, probably because he’s nice as well. They want all atheists to behave like you. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Either way, my dad’s name was tim
LikeLike
Mine’s Bryan! … and he laughed when I told him someone suggested he was the Devil!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wally may not be listening now, but who knows who in the background is reading the conversation and being prompted by the discussion and Wallys unchristian responses. Both he and James’s tone were big factors for me
LikeLiked by 1 person
Aaah … YEC James. He of the dinosaurs running around with humans.
Very strange fellow.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ark, I once believed that too
LikeLike
Yes, but you are no longer a member of the Dickhead Club!
🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ark, hindsight is 20/20. I once did and said alot of Dick head things, even to people I loved and loved me
LikeLiked by 1 person
Saved has a whole new meaning these days, right?
*Smile*
LikeLiked by 1 person
Saved from accountability to reality and evidence. Saved from the Fear of what the Loving God of the Bible would do to me for eternity unless I loved Him back and Immolated my entire identity on the Bonfire of His Vanity
LikeLiked by 1 person
Link?
LikeLike
James … https://thei535project.wordpress.com/
LikeLike
I’m trying to help people have hope based on reason and our perceived reality. I can testify it’s like a fresh breeze on the other side, honestly evaluating each issue as it comes, instead of wondering what the Right thing to do is and trying to fit things into an archaic framework. It gives hope. But to be fair, there are certain people I don’t try to ‘rob’ of their faith, because I recognise what a mess their life would be without it. Fair enough if they come to that conclusion themselves, but I would never try to upset them by pushing my opinions on them. Unless they were promoted harmful actions – like criminalising abortion or persecuting gay people.
LikeLike
Wrong, Violet. Don’t kid yourself, you believe you know better than every other believer on the planet. Should any qualms come up about robbing people of their faith, you can just tell yourself it’s justified and okay, since they promote harmful actions anyway.
LikeLike
IB – you have somehow missed the conversation violet wisp has been conducting these last few days??? Persecution complex, much?
LikeLiked by 1 person
No one is being ”robbed’ of anything! What a thoroughly ridiculous thing to say.
You are not robbing anything from a child who is so thoroughly indoctrinated with Creationism they think dinosaurs once lived with humans and were all vegetarian until two made up – people ‘sinned” by eating an apple and then they became carnivorous!
That’s like stating a doctor is ”stealing” a neurological disorder from a patient.
Don’t be so bloody stupid!
LikeLike
You think the likes of Branyan, IB, Wally, or James SOM or CS will ever consider reason from one of us, no matter how reasonable we present our case?
Look at John’s posts.
Every archaeology post is jam-packed full of factual info, yet look at practically every response from a theist.
Even Branyan commented on one, which was how I discovered the Dickhead in the first place.
We might reach the occasional lurker but people like Wally, IB and Branyan are way too self centred, egotistical and indoctrinated to even consider the veracity in anything we might present on the internet.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Ib, I think the crowd would agree that encouraging others to think and challenge their own beliefs in light of evidence and reality to the contrary when one could just simply stay quiet is the LEAST selfish thing a non believer could do, especially given the consequences of allowing such beliefs continue to affect society and the education of the next generation. It might even be rightly called an altruistic act of kindness to be such an ‘evangelical’ atheist or missionary deconvert.
Of course, your mileage may vary based on your unwillingness to embrace that evidence and reality.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Immoral, unkind and ugly like supporting a movement to kill the gays in Uganda?
LikeLiked by 3 people
How do you feel about all the gay men who troll 12yr boys, pack them full of meth, and have sex with them, Pink? Do you ever stop thinking of yourself long enough to think of them? Or do even the kids get to serve the gay agenda?
I’ve seen one too many of those boys, kids whose lives have been totally ruined, now addicted,on the streets, uncertain if they’re homosexuals or prostitutes or victims.
LikeLike
Gay men who troll 12 year old boys? I think you’re confused. Homo is from the Greek meaning SAME. Homo-sexual means sexually attracted to the same characteristics. Not sexually attracted to children- you disgusting, immoral, dishonest, idiot.
When lives are ruined they’re ruined by people like you who have no moral compass; who support the abuse and murder of innocents; who can’t differentiate tribalism from ethics.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’m not confused at all. Some gay men actually have the courage to speak the truth about it, too.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The number one class of child abusers is Evangelicals, not gays. Where’s your courage to speak the truth about that?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Mr. Merveilleux,
Why is an act of courage and righteousness for you to declare that “the number one class of child abusers is Evangelicals, not gays….”
…but it is an outrageous act of hatred for Insanity to declare the opposite?
Can you not see your own bias?
LikeLike
1. Firstly IB is promoting a myth. There’s no “link” between homosexuality and pedophilia. So her proposition is simply false.
2. Secondly it’s very easy to give random examples to create the appearance of a link. In fact I can cite not one or two but an enormous number of cases involving Evangelicals abusing children.
3. Finally I never proposed, defended or excused a law that imprisoned innocent people- in some cases putting their lives at risk. That is what the Ugandan Kill the Gays Bill did. An adult gay couple would have been imprisoned under its statutes. That has nothing to do with “trolling 12 year olds” -as she yet again tries to imply in hopes of deceiving people here to justify her disgusting actions.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m sure everyone else will point out to you the difference between ‘homosexual’ and ‘paedophile’. I’m surprised you don’t know the difference and genuinely disappointed.
LikeLike
Sort it all out for me, Violet. Tell me why this story just repeats itself over and over again. Tell me there is no relationship at all.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/lawsuit-accuses-seattle-mayor-molesting-boy-1980s-46635754
LikeLike
There is no relationship at all. Unless you want me to send you stories in greater numbers of young girls being sexually abused, and you agree it’s the fault of heterosexuality. People like your husband do that, heterosexual men are therefore just as much as problem.
And yet the same proportion of them aren’t. That’s why we call the criminals ‘paedophiles’ or criminals, and try not to involve other people in the label.
LikeLiked by 4 people
You deceive yourself and you deceive others too,Violet. That is your indoctrination speaking, not the truth.
LikeLike
Can you point me to facts that show otherwise?
LikeLike
I can’t Violet, because you’re simply going to not believe what you have already decided to not believe.
I gave you a link to the Seattle mayor. Gay men have been trolling for kids since the dawn of time. That’s something you learn on the wrong side of the tracks.
LikeLike
The sort of things we learn from the dawn of time (like redheads being witches and deformities being a sign of evil) are now subject to quite rigourous checks. So our discriminatory assumptions about certain groups of people can easily be fed by our confirmation bias, until we refer to facts. I’m not denying the Seattle mayor abused a child – I’m telling you that makes him a criminal, not a homosexual. Do you think all heterosexual men are criminals too, because some criminals abuse young girls? Honestly, I’m open to reading what evidence you have that can actually back up your claim. You’re smarter than this Insanity, and you know more about people and the world than this kind of comment suggests. Think about it.
LikeLike
“I’m telling you that makes him a criminal, not a homosexual.”
The Seattle mayor is actually accused of abusing several children. He is not the first.
He’s a homosexual and being a homosexual in a land that thinks as you do, means gay men in power go right on raping kids often for decades, and they will never be held accountable for it,never labeled a criminal because after all gay men aren’t criminals and protecting the positive public image of homosexual men as a group trumps all empathy for the children many of them destroy.
He is not a criminal, he will never be a criminal because to label him a criminal would force us to confront some unpleasant truths about homosexuality.
LikeLike
Please read the link below, that cites numerous studies. If you wer right, you would be able to find some sort of evidence, because there would be a body of research that shows you to be correct. If you’re wrong, as everything indicates, you are perpetuating a truly harmful myth that ruins people’s lives.
“Members of disliked minority groups are often stereotyped as representing a danger to the majority’s most vulnerable members. For example, Jews in the Middle Ages were accused of murdering Christian babies in ritual sacrifices. Black men in the United States were often lynched after being falsely accused of raping White women.
In a similar fashion, gay people have often been portrayed as a threat to children.”
Full text here: http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’m curious Violet, what would you tell the lost boys,the ones who have been exploited,the ones who now live on the street battling addiction,the ones likely to commit suicide before their 25th birthday?
Would you show them your link and lecture them about not “perpetuating a truly harmful myth?”
Do they get a voice in your world at all, Violet? Or do we just dismiss them as human rubbish, as members of a disliked group? Necessary collateral damage in our public relations campaign for homosexuality ?
LikeLike
Insanity, the only thing I can do is ask you to read the link with an open mind and see what evidence about child abuse actually tells us. You are approaching them from the culture with a vicious myth about homosexuals and you are framing everything you see within that myth. Read about actual figures before you say anything else.
As I’ve said in several posts in the past, I support voluntary castration for all men (I’m not sure why they would disagree, given the figures), until we can work out a more reliable and less draconian measure of halting ALL sexual abuse. No-one else seems to think it’s a good idea.
I don’t have to perpetuate any harmful myths to protect children – the kind of lies you are promoting do more damage than anything else, allowing real sexual predators to go undetected.
LikeLike
Violet, Inanity just hates gays. Period. She’s not operating on rational grounds here. Indeed, she supports the Kill the Gays laws in Africa. Doesn’t that say it all?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yes, I remember challenging her on that post. I erroneously concluded that she had posted without knowing all the facts and was too stubborn to back down. I’m kind of shocked by these statements and wonder how widespread that kind of thinking (which I think of as having died out 50 years ago) really is. It’s funny how all these conversations tie up, it reminds of the comments I’ve just made at Branyan’s about the fresh air of leaving religion – you really do start to investigate things much thoroughly and don’t take any beliefs for granted.
LikeLike
I’m reading that exchange. See, I was right, he dodged you completely. You’re driving him nuts, though, which is nice.
I shudder to think what group-think is going on inside evangelical circles in small-town US. Inanity voted for Trump and thinks he’s doing a grand job. This is the man who bragged about grabbing women by their pussies, the man who lies ten times before his first crap in the morning. It’s truly fascinating to watch.
LikeLike
I know what you mean. But kind of scary too.
LikeLike
I don’t want to read links and talk about theories,Violet. I want to talk about real people! The Seattle mayor is a real case there are boys who he hurt and all you can say to me is I’m perpetuating harmful myths. That fear of speaking truth to power is what perpetuates child sexual abuse in the first place. It’s an awful crime just make sure the perpetrator isn’t a member of some protected group like a priest, a politician, or a gay rights advocate, because our cultural desire to protect such people is always going to trump the rights of their victims.
LikeLike
Good, I want to talk about real people too. The article links to studies based on real people, numerous studies, which you can then refer to and confirm if they have used a rigourous method before accepting your conclusions. I’m not asking you to read random anecdotes – it’s a summary of a whole body of serious studies into the life of thousands of individuals. If I tell you all Catholic priests are pedophiles and send you countless stories about them abusing children will that make it true? No, it won’t. They abuse at the same rate as any other group of men in society. Read about facts, stop obsessing about individual stories that confirm your bias and discriminatory views.
LikeLiked by 2 people
…Stories repeating themselves:
Inside the Investigation into Child Sexual Abuse at Sovereign Grace Ministries
http://time.com/4226444/child-sex-abuse-evangelical-church/
Evangelical Sex Abuse Record ‘Worse’ Than Catholic, Says Billy Graham’s Grandson
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/01/protestant-sex-abuse-boz-tchividijian_n_4019347.html
Prominent Evangelical Christian Leader Accused of Sexual Abuse and Harassment
http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/prominent-evangelical-christian-leader-accused-of-sexual-abuse-and-harassment
Evangelical church accused of ignoring sexual abuse, “pedophilia ring”
http://www.salon.com/2013/03/12/evangelical_church_accused_of_ignoring_sexual_abuse_pedophilia_ring_partner/
Dozens of Children Abused at Evangelical Commune, Adult Survivors Allege
http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2014/february/dozens-of-children-abused-at-evangelical-jpusa-jesus-people.html
Trinity Baptist Church sex scandal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity_Baptist_Church_sex_scandal
“2008: Joe Barron: Joe Barron, one of the 40 ministers at Prestonwood Baptist Church, one of the largest churches in the United States with 26,000 members, was arrested on 2008-MAY-15 for solicitation of a minor after driving from the Dallas area to Bryan, Texas, in order to allegedly engage in sexual relations with what he thought to be a 13 year-old girl he had met online. The “girl” turned out to be an undercover law enforcement official.”
“2008: Tony Alamo: On SEP-20, FBI agents raided Tony Alamo Christian Ministries headquarters as part of a child pornography investigation. This investigation involved allegations of physical abuse, sexual abuse and allegations of polygamy and underage marriage.”
“2008: Wayne Bent (aka: Michael Travesser) was the founder of Lord Our Righteousness Church, sometimes called Strong City. He was convicted of one count of criminal sexual contact of a minor and two counts of contributing to the delinquency of a minor in 2008.”
Reformation.com lists allegations involving 838 Protestant ministers who have been accused of sexually abusing children:
147 Baptist pastors
251 fundamentalist/evangelical pastors
140 Anglican/Episcopalian Ministers
38 Lutheran Ministers
46 Methodist Ministers
19 Presbyterian Ministers
197 misc. Church Ministers
It just keeps happening! I wonder if that means that all Evangelicals are dangerous potential child abusers?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Although I’ve been referred to as an evangelistic atheist, I’m really just a deconverted Christian on a mission. 😉
LikeLike
That’s a good description too.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Have you converted anyone?
Seeing how opposing the pro-life stance, or the creationist stance, is proof to some of your deluded wickedness, seeing the answers people construct to such arguments to prove themselves right to their own satisfaction and how their self-image is so invested in their beliefs, is there any point in these discussions?
I have read an evangelical argument this evening on how men (ie me) should be kept out of women’s spaces because we prevent feminism. Shall I engage? I commented on the fb share, I don’t think that woman is completely down the rabbit hole yet, but I would not engage on the article. The article made me feel sick enough, I just could not face the comments.
LikeLike
Well, that’s a good point. I should maybe re-name the post to ‘my ineffective evangelical atheism’. I try my best. Apparently Ark has a much better success rate, which doesn’t say much about my recent posts appealing for pleasant dialogue.
And I think my posts about Arb’s horrible anti-trans stuff has only succeeding in polarising people towards him. So it’s all a bit of a worry, and maybe I should give up blogging, now that I think about it. I just find it useful for clarifying my own thoughts a lot of the time.
I’m thinking more about the problems women who have been sexually assaulted by men must have, in terms of terror. And I think we have to accept that genuine irrational fear, based on real experiences that have nothing to do with who uses which toilet, is driving a lot of this, not just the harmful ideology. The two need to be separated. And people need to be able to use the toilet safely in public, without having their biological sex of birth scrutinised.
LikeLike
I have taken positions on abortion, creationism, trans exclusion and other things. So often when I engage with someone on the other side, it is not to listen but to point out how they are wrong.
LikeLike
Yeah … two confirmed ”kills”
🙂
LikeLike
It is the hallmark of a free society to keep the conversation among various viewpoints going all the time.
The problem with atheism is that it advocates lawlessness and doesn’t recognize the legitimacy of any other creed.
That means in a free society, the atheist will eventually win and all other beliefs will become outlawed.
LikeLike
Thanks SOM. In what way does lack of belief in gods advocate lawlessness? Does Christianity recognise the legitimacy of any other creed? I thought Jesus was the only way.
LikeLike
Violet,
As we discussed in an earlier post, man, of all creatures is unaware of his nature.
That is, he must be taught everything because he is born knowing nothing.
If the source of morality is not God, it must be man.
And since man is born totally ignorant of everything, it follows that any sense of atheist (Godless) morality can only flow from ignorance.
That means justice will always be the advantage of the strong, enforced by ironfisted tyranny.
LikeLike
Violetwisp, Neil Carter’s story is one to illustrate the harm religion does to people. His story is on his site (I believe) but it is but one example of how much a person stands to lose (personally and professionally) when one goes public – in the ‘Bible Belt’ of the USA – with one’s apostasy. He’s an extremely intelligent man and has great credibility.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, if I’m thinking of the same person, he was on WordPress before, wasn’t he? I’ve read his stuff before anyway, I think Victoria recommended him a lot, coming from a similar area. He’s a good writer and captures the common deconversion experience really well in that post.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, he was originally on WordPress. Just a great guy and has many stresses b/c of his deconversion.
LikeLike
Violet and Carmen,
I have the same problem in the Catholic Church now, and have had the same problem with Protestants.
It bothers me deeply and dearly when people try to befriend me just so they can recruit me for some church club they happened to be interested in.
Then when I say I’m not interested, they drop me like a rotten potato don’t even bother saying “Hi,” when we pass each other coming to and fro around the church.
When I decided to quit worshipping with a Protestant sect all the friends I thought I had, literally shunned me.
Thankfully my faith is not determined by other people.
I own it. It’s mine.
So I think disillusioned Christians like Neil and others commenting here, are just herd beasts who can’t think for themselves nor practice their faith in the privacy of their own hearts.
They need a show place brotherhood to feed their pride and cater to their own type of thinking.
LikeLike
Of course, you’d know Neil’s, mine, and others’ minds better than we would SoM.
This is the ‘I’m the only adult in the room’ (fundamentalist-type) thinking that most of us object to, by the way.
LikeLike
Carmen,
That is exactly right. I do know Neil’s mind, your mind and other’s minds better than you do.
That is because I am on the outside looking in and you folks are too frightened to even get to outside.
You just pretend and call yourselves atheists.
Basically, you all are just elitists who think you are better than everyone else.
LikeLike
Playing (your) god, are you SoM? 😉
LikeLike
Carmen,
No, I am not playing God.
You people are no better than the Christians you hate.
You just belong to a different club.
This is Kindergarten 101 not playing God.
LikeLike
It’ll never cease to amaze me what goes on in the fundamentalist’s mind . . . and it’s unfortunate that you have to tell yourself that I hate Christians. Could that be projection?
LikeLike
Carmen,
No it isn’t projection.
It’s called reading your comments.
You people are hateful elitists based on your own words.
A signature characteristic of abusers such as yourself and the other atheists commenting here is that you blame your hate on your victims.
Just like you are doing with me, right here, right now.
LikeLike
I’m sure this isn’t the first time you’ve read this but you. need. help.
LikeLike
Carmen,
Everyone except and your kind are crazy.
You type of hate is what fuels genocides.
LikeLike
I believe you should call yourself an evangelistic atheist rather than an evangelical atheist. An evangelical is a person who holds a specific set of beliefs, including belief in the death and resurrection of Jesus. An evangelist is one who tries to convince others that what he believes is true. It isn’t possible to be an evangelical atheist; it is possible to be an evangelistic atheist.
LikeLike
It’s a good point, but I can still be both according to UK usage at least.
LikeLike
Pingback: So near to how I feel, yet different | Disabled Thoughts
I’ll usually only talk about my atheism and skeptical worldview if somebody else initiates a conversation with me that involves religion or spirituality.
Otherwise, I keep it to my self because I know that probably nobody else gives a shit.
Just like I don’t give a shit about their religion or spirituality.
I am definitely not an evangelical, but I would say that I’m a strong skeptic.
LikeLike
Thanks for your comment. I expect that’s a similar story for most people in their general life.
LikeLike
The first time I was referred to as an Evangelical Atheist it was an insult from a theist friend of mine. They were trying to say that I had given up the faith but hadn’t stopped preaching my beliefs. I took the insult as a compliment and began referring to myself as an evangelical atheist after that. Why shouldn’t we be excited and motivated by the things that we view as important? Religion gets it’s control by being loud and outspoken, if we are to fight back we need to raise the volume and the energy as well.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agree completely, good luck spreading the news! 🙂
LikeLike
Incidentally, your name isn’t embedded with a link, so curious people can’t do a direct link through to your blog – just in case you want to change that.
LikeLike
Hey Iowa:
I would love to hear your ‘sermon’ on how rain and dew are serendipitous, mere acts of happy circumstance, and how raging seas and a deathly still lake are more acts of pure accident.
I would love to hear you hide behind godlessness as you preach the hidden 7 year locust, and how your invisible friend ‘gravity’ has no more power over a drop of water than it does over a butterfly.
I would to hear of the non existent moon phases that just exploded without a purpose, but somehow have a perfect purpose.
Geez, how pitiful that sermon will be. Wake up and smell the putrid stench of godlessness.
LikeLike
“Wake up and smell the putrid stench of godlessness.”
Some of us call that the liberating air of facts and reason. Don’t be afraid, have a wee sniff. 🙂
LikeLike
Sure Vi, and I’m sure you heard of the bridesmaid last night at the wedding who vomited for hours after drinking herself into oblivion, upon waking up swore of the great time she had, while the hotel staff cleaned the hotel carpeting for 6 hours.
Such is that libation. And such is the poor perspective of facts and reason. She was clueless.
LikeLike
Well, I wasn’t expecting that. 😀
LikeLiked by 1 person
Fancy you using the word ‘clueless’. . . grin. . .
LikeLike
Thanks for taking the time to read my blog and thank you for the compliments. I can always appreciate ideas for future godless sermons. 🙂
LikeLike
Great post! Atheist really should learn to approach their view with a different angle. We as atheist are put in a box next to evil. When atheist explain their understanding of life with a clear, sincere and passionate terms, theist tend to listen for longer and take your thoughts into consideration. Bickering turns the dialogue into a wrestling match between egos and that’s one you can’t win.
LikeLike