Science in general and medicine in particular is "anathema" to most religious people only in your imagination.

I guess you feel insulted by my opinion ... hence the argumentum ad hominem ... duly noted ... too bad for you ...

Your OP was a broadbrush attack on all religions and religious people.

A safe haven that provides opportunities for people of all faiths, spiritual leanings and non-belief to discuss religious topics and events in a positive and civil manner, with an emphasis on tolerance. Criticisms of individual beliefs or non-belief, or debates about the existence of higher power(s) are not appropriate in this group.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=about&forum=1264

As a host of this group I ask you to refrain from criticism of people's faith.

Thank you.

some people.

Ignore the fact that he risked his own life to save others, he's a terrible person who deserves serious derision because he thanked god!!

How small do you have to be to take that position?

I see people who examine the claim that god intervened on his behalf, to his benefit, and then subsequently want to know, what did the (updated 30 seconds ago) other 1,427 people who (we know so far who have) died do (if anything) to not warrant such intervention.

It's an 'IF/THEN' proposition.

It's the same dichotomy that upsets many or most non-believers, when a tornado chews a half-mile wide swath of death and destruction through an inhabited area, and one house more or less in the path seems improbably spared, people 'thank god' for being spared. Well, what did the other folks do to deserve the brunt of the whirlwind then? It seems the logical conclusion/next question in the chain. One possible answer, assuming that a god exists, is that god is not actually responsible for the safety of that house, nor the initiation of the whirlwind at all. So one might even assume that some believers would look at that 'god saved us' claim with a negative opinion, because it could ascribe responsibility for the destruction that did occur, to their reference frame of 'god', who they do not believe to be responsible for that destruction at all.

As an atheist, when I am presented with a datapoint (a 'thanks' to god in this case) I immediately examine it in context. Which must needs raise the question; If he warranted divine intervention, why didn't the 1,427 others, and further, does that mean god reached in and salvaged this man from a death not of his responsibility (meaning god did nothing to cause the infection of Ebola in this case) or does that mean god is actively spreading Ebola, but allowed this one to survive what would have otherwise been a deliberate death. And what would either outcome imply or mean about our understanding of the nature and purposes of god?

If-Then.

I don't believe that is 'being small' when considering that sort of thing. You might say, it's my substitute for religion, not having religion.
I feel this is a safe contribution to this safe haven, because I am not criticizing his faith, I am defending mine, from your attack, so to speak. Just as not all people of religious faith believe in intercessory prayer, so too do all atheists not necessarily automatically perform the sort of analysis I described above. But a lot of us do. It is our nature. Just as a lot of religious people, by nature, do believe in the potential of intercessory prayer. And others do not.

That whole thread is toxic. Needs a BioHazard warning.

That poster is assuming arrogance on the part of Kent. One of multiple possibilities.

Some people do get angry at that sort of proposition. For the reasons I described.

It is not meant to apologize for the commentary you see in that thread. I can't do that. But I would like to explain it from another vantage point. You see, I am trying hard to contribute, rather than destroy. To add, rather than inflict context. In that effort, I am going to use a blunt expression that is not flattering, so please know that I do not think Kent is aware of or intends his statement to be taken in this way. But the math works out the same, regardless of intent.

"Fuck you, got mine"

Again, I am certain he does not mean it in that way. I doubt he has any idea that is how 'thank god' comes across to some people, when the follow the logical chain to who did and did not survive, and why, and whether any responsibility can be assigned somewhere.

I'm sure he is genuinely grateful that he survived, and I am sure he genuinely credits god on some level with his survival, and that he means that in a positive way, without any malice toward the people who did not survive.

But I share the frustration you see in that other thread, because, as I said, the math works out the same. If god can be credited whatsoever with the infrastructure and medical expertise that saved him, as well as the circumstances by which he survived, then that has implications for the dead, that are not flattering.

That is why it draws an angry response from someone like me. That was my knee jerk initial emotional reaction when I read the headline/lead paragraph. It sounds monstrously callous and arrogant to me, on first reading. I had to actively suppress that reaction, and look to what he meant, to see that he doesn't mean it that way, and find a shred of anything I could empathize with whatsoever. I firmly believe, because I share the same nature, that the angry responses in that thread are due to the FYGM interpretation of his statement. Hence, the vitriol.

Anyway, like I said, not trying to excuse the anger you see in that thread, just trying to contribute, if that helps with some level of understanding.

But still, "Fuck you, Kent" because he survived ebola and mentioned God in the press conference says a hell of lot more about the mindset of that OP than it does about Kent in particular, or religious privilege in general.

It is truly a fucked up thing to do.

I don't see how a man who nearly died thanking God is religious privilege. I get some are turned off by the God talk but give the guy a break.

I give you plenty of attention in the religion group. I come here to get away from the internecine war that dominates that group.

I was kicked out of AA for "quote mining". BTW, if you are interested, the quote I "mined" and reposted in religion was from a well known disruptive troll who has been banned from this site at least a dozen times, but that is neither here nor there.

Now, if you can't find what I am talking about on this site, then I can't help you.

I am not going to read your post. Please go away.

From an interfaith point of view. I guess I would need to consider where the attack you refer to originated - in what language.

Take it down to a less life and death situation - I get a new job and I say "I feel like God helped me here and I am going to rededicate myself to doing things that would please him, like being nice and kind." While the content of my words is not that objectionable, the implication is that God wanted me to have this job rather than the other people who applied - that's why he helped me and didn't help them. Is that an attack statement though?

I suppose it's also worth asking what the difference between meaningful and intercessory prayer is - I think that intercessory prayer in this context means praying specifically that something in the real world happens that is meaningful and trackable - i.e. I pray for a job and then I find a job. I pray not to catch ebola and then i don't catch ebola.

But even if one never makes that kind of prayer, but simply prays to reach out to God - to build a connection to God - isn't that a bit of an attack as well? I mean if I pray to God and believe that I receive a spiritual benefit to that prayer, than don't I also believe that that spiritual benefit isn't open to Atheists? I mean you aren't likely to pray go God and have a meaningful connection to him, without believing in him. Isn't that also an attack on Atheism, suggesting that you are missing out on something?

One answer is that most people think they are right, and that, by definition, other people are wrong. That doesn't necessarily prevent meaningful interaction.

Bryant

I saw the article about them and after marveling at their recovery and the promise it could hold for so many, it occurred to me that once I looked online I was bound to see the gnashing of teeth over him mentioning the...the...'G' word!

can't even pull a laugh from it.

When people are so desperately bigoted against something, they will no longer filter what they say. The hatred just seeps out at every opportunity. YOu find this with racists, homophobes, misogynists and those that hate religion and the religious.

It's ok, though. I don't know about god, but I believe in karma.

On Sat Aug 23, 2014, 11:50 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

I also find it funny most of the time, but sometimes it so toxic that I
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1264&pid=4387

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Did the poster just compare DU's Atheist & Agnostic community to racists, homophobes, and misogynists?

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Aug 23, 2014, 11:59 AM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: More alert-stalking of cbayer?
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The poster made no such allegation; no hit on DUers, no hit on athiests. No the poster did not make the comparison.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I think she did so I will vote to hide this but I don't believe it will be hidden. Some posters here can get away with these things.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: News to Alerter: Some of DU's Atheists ACT like racists, homophobes and misogynists.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Sorry about that, friends.

But this is one of the reasons I object to bringing meta into this group. I have a lot to say and most of it probably shouldn't be said.

Subthreads like this happen but threads that start out like meta will only bring attentioned.

Despite what we are told in religion and AA we are being watched.

simple watching, like obsession.

But we also watch, don't we.

I am happiest when I truly ignore the zealots. So I think I will stick to that.

DH and I had a nice talk about you last night. You would have blushed. You are a good person, much better than I most of the time.

I decided that I should pull myself back sometimes when baited.

Last week turned me off to several individuals so it is best to refrain from talking to a few for awhile.

I think it is just done to get reactions and a hidden post or two and I think it is best not to play that game as much.

But I will not leave religion no matter what some do in there.

How is the vacation going?

You seem to make the best decision when it comes time to step up or step back.

My live is a vacation of sorts. We live very simply but live in a way that we can immerse ourselves in different places and different cultures. Our only requirement is access to the internet, in terms of making a steady income. We are extremely fortunate and never let a day go by without recognizing that.

Italy is wonderful. We are in the middle of nowhere and spend our time just being here, exploring, cooking, seeing friends or just hanging out on DU.

I don't know what I did to deserve this, but its' a life without complaint.

DU is lucky to have you.

My wife and I own an apartment in a town in the Comune di Panicale in Umbria, a few klicks west of Perugia. We managed to spend most of August there.

I was recently up in your area visiting Assissi. It is just beautiful. The area I am in has not yet been discovered by tourists and is pretty idyllic.

So did you come this summer? We will be here for another 3 - 4 weeks.

When you say "Sabina", my immediate thought is the Rape of the Sabine Women.

I like Assisi, even though the first time we were there my wife fell and we spent a couple of hours in the emergency room of the local hospital. (Fortunately, there was a doctor and a couple of nurses who spoke fluent English, since at that time our Italian could generously be described as rudimentary.)

Fascinating story, that one.

Too bad about your experience in Assisi. It is a very, very steep city. I liked the basilica very much, but I found the city itself to be a bit touristy for my taste.

My husband is fluent in italian, which has resulted in my not learning as much as I should have.

We plan to return next summer and many summers after that. My husband is a citizen of the UK, so he can get residency here pretty easily.

Perhaps we will meet up here next year?

I would love to meet you next year. Lord willing and the creek don't rise, I'll send you a DU email before I come.

My wife and I now speak decent Italian, and we can read it even better. Oddly, neither one of us is Italian. My father's family is English, my mother's family is Mitteleuropean Jewish. My wife's father's family is Polish, her mother's family is lace-curtain Irish.

I understand much more italian than people think I do, lol.

But I have found people to be very kind and accommodating. If I try, they will try back, and we generally get it done.

Maybe an even dozen.

paid attention to.

I hope it gets better but last week made clear to me that some in there are not here to discuss and I think just limiting my interactions with a few will be better for me.

I am usually good at keeping calm but last week tested that.

God forbid you actually disagree with them.

When I read that I was shocked.

means you should be able to violate the TOS and other standards that govern DU.

Some seem to forget that safe havens does not mean that anything can be posted in them. The same site rules apply everywhere here.

I have attempted to remind certain parties that Safe Haven is not a closed group, invisible to non-members.
There's a lot of anger percolating about though, so I doubt it holds any sway.

But as Okasha says, "Good luck!" Standing up to the kind of anger you refer to rarely bodes well. You may not agree with those who frequent this group, but they will treat you with respect. I'll take that option any day.

If God saved an American doctor with Ebola, why did he let 1,200 Africans die?

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/aug/25/ebola-africans-die-god-american-doctor