2 of 3
2
Recently Banned
Posted: 31 January 2012 04:16 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1201
Joined  2009-05-10

Okay, but having “atheist” in the name garnered more new members than “freethinker”, and weren’t we just discussing that it is probably also better than “secular” in that regard? So for political reasons, the name seems to be good

 Signature 

“What people do is they confuse cynicism with skepticism. Cynicism is ‘you can’t change anything, everything sucks, there’s no point to anything.’ Skepticism is, ‘well, I’m not so sure.’” -Bill Nye

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 January 2012 04:22 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3121
Joined  2008-04-07
domokato - 31 January 2012 04:16 PM

Okay, but having “atheist” in the name garnered more new members than “freethinker”, and weren’t we just discussing that it is probably also better than “secular” in that regard? So for political reasons, the name seems to be good

I don’t find that in this thread. Where was “atheist” said to be better than “secular”? Point the way housecat!  smile

 Signature 

Turn off Fox News - Bad News For America
(Atheists are myth understood)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 January 2012 04:26 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1201
Joined  2009-05-10

Not this thread, this one. IMO, “atheist” feels like a stronger word than “secular”. It feels more active, combative, and polarized.

[ Edited: 31 January 2012 04:29 PM by domokato ]
 Signature 

“What people do is they confuse cynicism with skepticism. Cynicism is ‘you can’t change anything, everything sucks, there’s no point to anything.’ Skepticism is, ‘well, I’m not so sure.’” -Bill Nye

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 January 2012 04:31 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3121
Joined  2008-04-07
domokato - 31 January 2012 04:26 PM

Not this thread, this one. IMO, “atheist” feels like a stronger word than “secular”. It feels more active, combative, and polarized.

Thanks housecat! Looks to me like “atheist” is an attention getter for a 24 hour newsfeed, but I doubt a party with atheist in its name is sustainable. But that’s just me.  smile

I see I wrote this while you edited yours to say pretty much the same thing. I.e., we agree.

 Signature 

Turn off Fox News - Bad News For America
(Atheists are myth understood)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 January 2012 04:35 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1201
Joined  2009-05-10

Yeah, going by the low number of atheists in this country and the two party system we have, I don’t see how it could really hope to get much done. We need to fix our party system and our voting system first.

 Signature 

“What people do is they confuse cynicism with skepticism. Cynicism is ‘you can’t change anything, everything sucks, there’s no point to anything.’ Skepticism is, ‘well, I’m not so sure.’” -Bill Nye

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 January 2012 04:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3422
Joined  2011-08-15

As I’ve stated before, we need to work within the dominant parties to effect change whenever possible rather from the outside. I think that an atheist party would be great, but we represent only 18 percent of the total population at present and that’s not enough to create a ground swell of positive opinion on issues unique to freethinkers, whereas progressives represent a sizable majority of the Democratic party and can even be spoilers in a presidential election. More power to you guys but I’ll stay a committed Dem for a while and back President Obama. We could later be included as one of the groups in the Dem. coalition however. We need more freethinkers. How about opening more minds?


Cap’t Jack

 Signature 

One good schoolmaster is of more use than a hundred priests.

Thomas Paine

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 January 2012 05:15 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  40
Joined  2012-01-23

Language is an interesting thing to study. Atheism doesnt mean ant-theism like most people suppose. Ant-theism is anti-religion, atheism is without religion. In that way atheist politics makes sense. I know the name may SEEM exclusionary, it was not the intention. We have many theist members who agree with all of our platforms and do not limit their involvement due to our name. Our name is an attempt to change the connotation of the word Atheist and I will admit that it will not be an easy battle. I also agree that while Democrat and Republican are seemingly strictly political labels, you cannot say that atheism doesnt influence politics just as you cannot say that religion doesnt influence politics. We are just being open about the fact that we dont support religion in government and will not back up laws that are justified by religion. I wish that the republican party could just say that religion is a strong part of their platform, they act like it is anyway. I think using the word atheist means we have no hidden agenda, what could you hide with a name like that?

 Signature 
Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 January 2012 08:25 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5551
Joined  2010-06-16

I occasionally have some theist comment that as an atheist I’m anti-god.  Rather than bothering arguing about this, I say that I’m really a non-theist, but that most people are too dumb to recognize the difference.  Now, I haven’t quite called that person dumb, but s/he’s sort of stuck trying to figure out the connotations so s/he doesn’t appear dumb.  smile

Occam

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 February 2012 07:53 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3422
Joined  2011-08-15

Most people from my generation attribute the word “atheist” with Madalyn Murray O’Hare’s campaign to do away with prayer in school. They view it as Occam said, anti-god, not non-god. It’s up to the neo’s to educate the public and change the mindset from anti to non. Until then entering the political arena with an atheist banner at the fore will be met with cries of derision. “They’re trying to take away our god!” Evangelicals will rally behind Rick Perryesque campaigners whose single purpose is to defeat the powers of darkness and communism! Been there, seen that. Remember the cold war era folks. Another “sign of the times” from the good book”.

Cap’t Jack

 Signature 

One good schoolmaster is of more use than a hundred priests.

Thomas Paine

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 February 2012 08:48 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3121
Joined  2008-04-07
Thevillageatheist - 01 February 2012 07:53 AM

Evangelicals will rally behind Rick Perryesque campaigners whose single purpose is to defeat the powers of darkness and communism! Been there, seen that. Remember the cold war era folks. Another “sign of the times” from the good book”.

Cap’t Jack

That’s a good analogy. I just watched “The Majestic” yesterday because someone had a highlight of a speech here in another thread. It’s good to remember that we are capable of really stupid mob mentalities.

 Signature 

Turn off Fox News - Bad News For America
(Atheists are myth understood)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 February 2015 10:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  2
Joined  2015-02-18

Hi Catey Condon
I was looking how to contact the admin for atheistforums.com
after a Mod banned me for being a sock and troll.

When I alwasy use my real name and I write long msgs
trying to reconcile how the Bible can be translated
into secular terms, which takes a bit of work to explain.

I still want to form online teams to follow up on what I was working on
a “consensus on the meaning of God Jesus and the Bible”
by agreement between nontheists and believers.

the atheistforums.com has bad reviews
for bullying and banning people.

Thought about starting an online petition to protest
and have them remove their slogan since they don’t believe in free thought!

Any ideas or is this old hat to you?

Please let me know if I should still post what got me banned as a sock/troll
for using my real name and writing how I really write!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 February 2015 07:42 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5057
Joined  2007-10-05

I’ve never spent much time at atheist forums.com so I went over there to see what you’re so upset about. I found a lot of interesting discussions on varied topics, and for the most part the participants were thoughtful and polite. Perhaps they banned you for repeatedly posting the same boring message. Just a thought.

 Signature 

You cannot have a rational conversation with someone who holds irrational beliefs.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 February 2015 08:29 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 28 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1563
Joined  2014-06-20

Secular is a word open to interpretation. The western meaning, at least,  is “non-religious” but it is also  “an ecclesiastic (as a diocesan priest) not bound by monastic vows or rules”; “a member of the secular clergy,”  “a layman.”  In the West, especially in the contemporary world it has come to mean not bound or defined by religion or “spiritual” concerns. So a government can be “secular” in that it is not run by religous influence but people involved can be either theist or atheist. They are just not supposed to bring their religion into political discussions.  However, religion often does come in, anyway. Every time anyone suggests that US history and tradition is based on Christian values, for example, breaks what would be strict secular rules. People’s intentions may be “secular” but we know that religion and belief does influence secular issues.

So it’s ambiguous—even more ambiguous than atheism is. An atheist rejects all religion and religious influence in his life. A secularist can have any kind of religious influences but has agreed (for the most part) to disregard religious beliefs when discussing and deciding non religious issues. But there is no hard and fast rule as to how it’s carried out. It’s changeable and reinterpretable.

Lois

[ Edited: 20 February 2015 11:32 AM by LoisL ]
 Signature 

[color=red“Nothing is so good as it seems beforehand.”
― George Eliot, Silas Marner[/color]

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 February 2015 03:09 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 29 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1798
Joined  2007-10-22

N.A.P.  the nap party, sounds like they need some advise from an experienced political operator on their terminology.  Now don’t go to sleep. LOL

 Signature 

Gary the Human

All the Gods and all religions are created by humans, to meet human needs and accomplish human ends.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 March 2015 10:18 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 30 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  2
Joined  2015-02-18
DarronS - 19 February 2015 07:42 AM

I’ve never spent much time at atheist forums.com so I went over there to see what you’re so upset about. I found a lot of interesting discussions on varied topics, and for the most part the participants were thoughtful and polite. Perhaps they banned you for repeatedly posting the same boring message. Just a thought.

Hi @DarronS
That’s what really gets me, on two counts.

1. What if that is the way I naturally talk, which it is. So you are going to ban someone for talking in long sentences?

What about autistic people with asperger’s?
What about people with social disorders?

I met a bunch on another site where the Mod understood that people with personality or social disorders
were getting banned off other sites. And had a rule against banning, because of this.

If I can’t even post without getting banned, I can’t imagine people who are even more frustrating and frustrated.

Not everyone types in two or three sentenced.

2. Also what is so “boring” about scientific proof of spiritual healing? And resolving historic religious and political
conflict through restorative justice?

Medical research into spiritual healing, as a natural universe process,
can bridge the gap in understanding between science/reason and faith/religion.

Wouldn’t that solve a lot of personal and religious conflicts with church-state issues
by ending the false division so people from all groups can communicate and connect freely?

Thanks for your honest response.

Yours truly,
Emily

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 3
2