i'm starting to think that dialog is impossible.

[Warren Stupidity]

there doesn't seem to be any attempt at honest discourse.

[cleanhippie]

1. Nope. At least with the usual suspects there's not.

[Curmudgeoness]

2. Duh.

How long have you been trying? Why don't you just beat your head against the wall instead if you are concerned about dialog.



The only reason to add any dialog is if you want to address the people who will be reading the back-and-forth. If we are the reasonable voice, others will see it.

[Warpy]

3. Well, not about belief with believers

The best we can hope for is an armed truce wherein we agree not to point and laugh at their beliefs and they agree not to try to stuff them down our unwilling throats.

[PassingFair]

27. "...wherein we agree not to point and laugh at their beliefs..."

That is my nature, though.



See that kid pointing?

That's me.

Question everything....
Nazis would NEVER have stood a chance of forming in MY family.
They would have to recruit elsewhere.

[skepticscott]

4. Oh, I gave up long ago

waiting for anything but hypocrisy and despicable apologetics from our friends. The first time someone refuses to answer a direct question on a substantial topic, I pretty much write them off as hopeless, and they've all done that more times than I can count. After that, it's just a matter of making sure no one else is tempted to take them seriously.

And it really it sad...and telling...that there is not a single intellect among the usual suspects. No one capable of anything but evasion, snark and vapidity.

[defacto7]

5. If you're talking about "that" place,

the one that starts with "R", you are absolutely correct. Logical dialog does not exist there, only defense even if they must resort to bearing false witness. It's sad actually.

edit: see my signature.

[skepticscott]

6. Yes, and apparently now

We're a cabal of goose-stepping hateists. This from our favorite atheist-but and champion of tolerance.

The family apparently has a thing about smearing people they disagree with by associating them with genocide.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=101947

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=110335

They must have some sweet conversations over the dinner table.

[muriel_volestrangler]

8. Yes, dialog is impossible - 3-3 vote to keep this, same result as the direct insult of you

that you linked to.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This is call out and personal attack against DU members in a group they are blocked from participating in and unable to respond.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Jan 30, 2014, 08:04 PM, and the Jury voted 3-3 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Smells like a callout to me...
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: WTH? Looks like call out nonsense to me.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No, the 'personal attack' is "goose step with SS and his cabal of hateists", by Starboard Tack. It's ridiculous to suggest that such an absurd, over-the-top instance of Godwin's Law must go unremarked because Starboard Tack has, in the past, been disruptive enough to get blocked from a safe haven group. There is no 'personal attack' by skepticscott.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I don't like that people are unable to respond but I don't see how pointing out others hateful comments is a personal attack.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

So, to recap: call a DUer a hateful Nazi - 3-3 to leave it. Link to the post: 3-3 to leave it.

I'd remind all DUers (hopefully jurors #1 and #2 will look at this, and the alerter) that 'call outs' are not mentioned at all in the discussion of community standards: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards or the blurb for an alert: "This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate."

[skepticscott]

10. Thanks! some people seems to have a major problem

with having their own words quoted back to them. Sheesh.

It really should be changed so that people cannot alert on posts in forums they are blocked from posting in, but I suppose that won't stop them from recruiting one of their minions to do it.

[onager]

16. Well, you ARE "Mr. SS."

Thanks, that was an interesting pair of threads.

Thread 1: we are once again lectured on poverty...by a person living on a boat with apparently unlimited internet access and the leisure for nanosecond updates on DU.

Thread 2: everyone gets to define atheism and agnosticism...except atheists and agnostics. We obviously don't count in that conversation. And we should STFU and let the real experts tell us what we don't believe. And why. And be grateful for those explanations, since we are all obviously too stupid to know what it is we don't believe.

And when the A/A's complain too much..."Look over there! The Pope did something cool!"

[JNelson6563]

28. Well said Onager.

[mr blur]

7. It is, I'm afraid. nt

[trotsky]

9. It is.

And it's pathetic that the worst behavior comes from those who lecture others on how they should behave. Palpable hatred, simply for the crime of having the gall to question religious beliefs and their effect on the world.

I guess some people have control issues. They lack control in their lives, so they seek to exercise it elsewhere. They get a special forum created to try and eliminate viewpoints they don't like, and it fails miserably. Since so few feel like coming into their boring, rigidly-controlled sandbox, they return to open discussion and turn into passive-aggressive bullies to try and get rid of us. They scream that you cannot use words to describe people, then turn around and use words to berate others. They are blind to their raging hypocrisy.

[edhopper]

11. I am experiencing a bit of this now

in the thread on immorality.

Sigh.

[Warren Stupidity]

12. yeah that.

I noticed in the "interfaith" safe haven the theory is that it is us who are the problem. And you know, maybe that is true, it could be observer bias on my part, selecting the patterns from the data that I want to see.


Nah....

[skepticscott]

14. Yes, rather amusing

that some are only now noticing that the chat level is very low in Interfaith (wow, who could have foreseen that?). And that their fellow religionistas (and others) have been spreading muck quite eagerly in Religion.

Gee, wouldn't it be nice if the ones who were hosts tried to set the tone there...oh...wait.

[skepticscott]

21. well certainly, none of the people there

have the slightest interest in "improving things". There's a very good reason why Interfaith is a ghost town..none of them really likes a civil discussion, unless it means getting atheists to bow and lick their boots. A civil discussion among each other is the last thing they want..boring. The truth is that they enjoy a good dust-up far more than they pretend, which is why they stay in Religion and mix it up, despite claiming to want something different. They just can't seem to have one with the truth on their side.

[trotsky]

17. You did well.

She actually had to retreat from one of her proclamations. Maybe there's some hope.

[edhopper]

18. It just takes so much work sometimes

scott's back and forth with the OP in that thread for instance.

[AtheistCrusader]

13. I still enjoy watching theists paint themselves into corners with weak logic.

Especially the ones that pretend to be something else.

[skepticscott]

15. Not necessarily even weak logic

but when you argue from false premises, even with impeccable logic, eventually you reach a contradiction. Not a one of them grasps that. But they know when they get there, because that's when they run and hide, or start yelling "gotcha question! Won't answer!"

[Lordquinton]

19. How hard is it to answer a simple question?

I've asked that before, and I know I will never get an answer, but it's good to try.

[skepticscott]

20. Very hard, when an honest answer

would undermine your whole agenda and worldview. Most of those people have lived in protected little bubbles their whole lives, with their deep-seeded delusions never being really questioned or challenged. When they finally are, they have to either run away and hide, put their fingers in their ears, or be evasive and dishonest. Denial in one form or another is all they have to protect themselves with.

[edhopper]

23. Because those questions can't be answered

because "unknowable" and "doubt" and "no evidence possible" and stuff. Or so I have been repeatedly told.

[Warren Stupidity]

22. At least one regular considers his role to be "inquisitor", which explains why questions

are almost always ignored.

[Arugula Latte]

24. They get FURIOUS when you want a simple explanation.

Honestly, I think the act of spelling stuff out makes them realze -- deep down -- how ridiculous all their mythology is. And that displeases them greatly.

[uriel1972]

25. I realize now I can not respect faith...

Just by being an atheist I am attacking belief without evidence. There can be no peace only a begrudging truce. I can not respect a position that believes without evidence, it is foolish at best and deluded and/or deceitful at worst.

I realize that this will be seen by others and I doubt I will return to the religion forum as a curious seeker. I think I will go in the corner and weep with frustration. :'(

[Heddi]

26. Fun things happening on the Facebook Group....Dialog IS possible there

of course, it's nothing BUT atheists/agnostics, so of COURSE there'll be dialogue. And laughs. And loves...you should see the meme's that have been posted. And the conversation is OFF THE HOOK. But, alas, it's a secret group and is the envy of those who aren't a part of it....

But you can be a part of it...PM me for more info

(this is not spam. It's a continuation of my self-deleted thread here..
http://www.democraticunderground.com/123019524

come on...you know you wanna