Last edited Mon Feb 11, 2019, 10:16 AM - Edit history (1)

That's the REAL intolerance, dontchaknow?

TIA.

look at the KKK and such.

I'm not really sure, but I've never heard of a Jewish, Islamic, Atheist, Buddhist, Jain or any other class of person(s) associated with White Supremacy/Nationalism.

Just one distinguishable class of person(s): christian.

Last edited Mon Feb 11, 2019, 06:28 PM - Edit history (1)

Not supported by facts.

it does not agree with my pre-determined viewpoint, so I reject it. Confirmation bias?

Just as that DUer said.

If you can find facts, please present them. Otherwise you have simply presented someone else's opinion, as usual.

Start digging for those facts, Guy. If you find them, drop them in the thread.

but the same demonstration of confirmation bias.

for evidence? Why have you not presented such evidence? I think we all know the answer to that question. That you named only Richard Spencer in your excerpt is telling. Your attempt to tie atheism to a rabid white nationalist is about as weak as can be. Atheism has no doctrine, nor dogma. Individual atheists can have any ideas, including abhorrent ones. Atheists are not tied together by anything though.

But you knew that...

And that it represents one person's opinion?

If you do not, that might explain your apparent confusion.

my first post in this subthread? It is your habit to post brief excerpts of other people's opinions, rather than posting your own opinions. You post them without remarks, in most cases. People take that as evidence that you agree with your excerpt.

Then, you defend the statement in the excerpt. One person, a well-known white nationalist, is an atheist. For you, apparently, that is typical of atheists.

We mentioned that, and asked for further evidence, which has not been forthcoming. Why? Because there is no such evidence. You know that, but persist in your folly.

Not what you made up what I said.

and the underlying motivation and meaning.

...allowing the reader to infer what ever meaning they so desire.

So that,

As opposed to the statement from Jesus to Peter, telling Peter to literally put up his sword.

Understood.

who is not you. You think you are qualified, but you are clearly not.

The minute you comment on what was not said, but you think was meant, you fail.

You know nobody's thoughts or motivations except your own.

Because many of your comments here, your opinions I should say, leave that very impression.

It says so under every post. You are free to dismiss them at your pleasure. I am free to voice them. Everything I write her can be considered to be an opinion, unless I back it up with links to actual data.

However, I do not tie people words to unspoken motivations. I have no way to know what motivates you, for example. It is a complete mystery, really. I, and others, have tried to ask you about your beliefs, but you refuse to share them. So, we have only your words on which to base our opinions of what you say.

You have seen the results of that. You will continue to see the results of what you write here. That, I guarantee.

Please explain yourself for once in plain language, not intentionally vague phrasing.

Many things are written with levels of meaning.

The creation story in Genesis can be read literally and metaphorically.

Why did you say that about my post?

Since the author identified one prominent alt-right atheist trying to create a secular white nationalist movement, that's already one too many. He also identifies several cases where atheists repeated racist or misogynistic right-wing tropes, which he seems to think is a problem all by itself, even if those atheists are not part of the alt-right.

Therefore atheists have a problem.

I'm not trying to say that atheists are never right wing, I'm disputing the claim that atheists have a problem.

Last edited Wed Feb 20, 2019, 12:18 PM - Edit history (2)

It's not that Spenser joined a Christian movement. It's that he created the alt-right as a secular alternative to Christian-based white nationalism. The alt-right is working because it is picking up disaffected young white males who are either atheists or loosely connected to religion. He links to article discussing that in more detail.

He also complains about prominent members of the New Atheist movement picking up misogynistic, racist and Islamophobic right wing tropes. He blames the decline of New Atheism on this problem.

And lastly, he complains about atheists organizations who don't condemn misogynistic and racist rhetoric from other atheists.

Whether you agree or disagree with him, he is definitely talking about more than one person and IMHO provided a lot of interesting links about the issues he discusses.

as if they were all in something like a church is just plain wrong and quite misleading.

As my 2 contradictory links show.

Please provide polling data that demonstrates the right wing proclivities if atheists.

I’ll wait.

We both know the answer.

Of course you are carefully reframing it to "Not everyone who is a white supremacist is christian, therefore it has nothing to do with it" but if you don't know that it's rots and scaffolding are intractably intertwined with christian thinking, then you should probably do some research.

Unless you already know that and are desperately trying to muddy the waters enough to make it seem like you gained some footing.

...someone who steps up and says (in a metaphorical sense), this sand dune looks to be Tan, or maybe even light brownish mustard in color:


only to drop down and dig until they find that contravening grain of sand, or 2:


They don't realize that the 'exception' they are touting helps prove the general rule.

I stand by my original (admittantly sweeping and apriori generalizing) statement: As a class of persons, white supremacists are christian.

In retort to the case of the neo-pagan white supremacists discussed above, if I were to really bother and waste my time that is, would be to ask, where did these 'Wotansvolk' (i.e. white nationalist, neo-völkisch pagans) get the idea of white supremacy?

More son's of ham derivative BS?

Hmmmm...where did that come from?

And just what is a 'Wotansvolk'?

We're talking about white supremacy, and suddenly it gets reframed to white supremacists. Just like when a discussion about Christianity is taking place and it gets reframed to Christians.

The whole neopagan bit is a strong undertone, but it's still rooted in the same origins as the rest of it. When you peel back the layers you don't find anything about Scandinavian theology, you find the same Christian roots.

Of course we're also dealing with a person who saw a poll that showed a small amount of atheists believed in some sort of divine spirit and immediately jumped to "some atheists believe in God" instead of using the powers of deductive reasoning to realize that that's just a stupid thing to say.

...a 'pearl clutcher' internalizes a criticism of an idea.

<Gasp> "I'm offended by that..."



So what?






When it comes to ideas, they can be, should be, and will be challenged.

Their position is undefendable, so they turn it into a personal attack against themselves so they can control the perception of the debate, rather than try to win it on merit.

It's funny when paired with their own arguments that are the same as the ones they make up to be offended by. There is a white supremacist that happens to be an atheist, therefore atheism has a problem.

You are not qualified to determine what motivates others.

Full stop.

I am not talking about individual motivation for being a supremacist, I'm talking about the system.

uses Christian language and imagery to justify supremacy. But given that Jesus was not white, and given that race was not really a concept in 5800 BCE, or in 33CE, white supremacy did not exist.

Christianity is not inherently a system of white supremacy, nor was it designed to be.

You should find some sources. I suggest starting with an early pre Roger and me Michael Moore documentary called Blood in the Face (which refers to blushing, showing you have blood, not violence) as a starting point.

Feel free to find a link between Semitic Jesus and white supremacists.

Perhaps in the undocumented years Jesus visited Europe and forged ties with Aryans?

But while we're on the subject, perhaps you can supply the missing evidence that Jesus actually existed.

That post #33 was directed specifically to you, not to anyone else. Use your own words, Guy, not mine, if you can come up with any.

So are you saying you use different standards for theists versus non-theists?

That explains much.

Post #33 was directed to you, and referred to a previous post of yours. It was meant for you, not for anyone else. If you can't think of the words to use in your own postings, it's not acceptable to simply refer someone to a post made by someone else.

Your habit of simply referencing other posts by number is annoying to me. It requires me to go look for that post to see what it is you think you're trying to say. All too often, the post referred to isn't even your words. I realize that it's easier to attempt a diversion than to actually think of something to write, but I wish you would not use my posts as though I am speaking for you. I am never speaking for you, Guy, and if you co-opt my words, you can count on me to object, as I am in this thread.

Are you blaming that on me using reply numbers also?

Given that you often reply to posts not directed to you, as you did ironically enough in this sub-thread, your comment is puzzling.

That's the nature of this place.

That said, I am quite finished with this subthread.

Yes, people who disagree with you get to post here, too. They get to reply to any posts in any thread they wish, too. How unspeakably awful that must be for you.

Almost word for word. Almost, in harmony.

I was on the mark when i asked:

It's disgusting seeing people like guillaumeb trying to pretend that religion has no role. They cannot be allowed to rewrite history.

No doubt there are more...just wait...I'll find some...wait just a little longer...they're there, I know...I'll get back to you.

The ULTIMATE in atheistic intolerance!

Hmm...

Duh.

now it is all over the news. Of course, now there are the abuse cases, many churches have that problem. How can they tell other people what to do when they abuse children so frequently. We have even had some cases nearby.

Condemned prisoner forced to have Christian counsel instead of one of his choice
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/scotus-disregards-establishment-clause-to-expedite-prisoner-death-1439948355738

Ruled by whites, practicing a religion they made up to fit their viewpoint, with people of color and women given no status in society!

They have done anything and everything they can to arrange it - and they come up with new tricks every day.
Theocrats believe the end justifies the means - that is imposing their Gawd's rules on all of society no matter how it is done.

Here in Iowa Republicans are trying to totally change how justices are picked because they are still pissed off about the homosexual marriage decision ten+ years ago. If they can get away with it you can bet they will be imposing their Gawd on all of us as much as they can.

At least in practice.

There's no question about it. The majority of Christian voters cast their ballots for Trump. Many of them did so because they believed he would use the power of the Executive Branch to enforce their religious views upon others, and they want him to do exactly that.