Religion

dmallind

(10,437 posts)

86. Prove it.

Fri Apr 27, 2012, 01:57 PM

Apr 2012

Cite the reference to de Botton not being a TRUE atheist. I'll promise in advance I will excoriate such idiocy roundly. Speaking personally the only time I have referred to people not being real atheists is when a few answered aa survey that they believed in a god. That's definititional, not related to behavior. If somebody says "all true Scotsman are born in Scotland" it's not an NTS to react to "Well Joe was born in Sunderland and he's a Scotsman" with "Well then he's not a true Scotsman" - it's just correcting a false use of the term.

WHEN has it been used as you describe here? WHEN has an atheist used a NTS example to say ALL Christians exhibit the same behavior that the NTS sought to disassociate them from?

You keep making these assertions. Back them up.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

165 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Does there need to be an Atheist/Theist dialogue? [View all] Taverner Apr 2012 OP

"there are a great deal of Atheists intent of "converting" theists." cleanhippie Apr 2012 #1

Not you, not me, and not most of us on DU Taverner Apr 2012 #2

Where? Exactly? cleanhippie Apr 2012 #6

Here is just one example Taverner Apr 2012 #20

OK, I'm pretty sure that cleanhippie and I aren't the only ones who thought your OP... trotsky Apr 2012 #23

Internet and Real World Taverner Apr 2012 #24

Yeah, I'm with you two. Goblinmonger Apr 2012 #27

I thought the question was more broad than just DU. nt ZombieHorde Apr 2012 #69

Ok, I thought you meant here in DU. cleanhippie Apr 2012 #33

I apologize for the lack of clarity Taverner Apr 2012 #35

No need for apologies. thanks for the clarification. cleanhippie Apr 2012 #36

I feel no need to convert theists. Goblinmonger Apr 2012 #3

I agree 100% Taverner Apr 2012 #4

THIS! cleanhippie Apr 2012 #7

Absolutely. obxhead Apr 2012 #17

Just calling any conversation "religious bullshit" is all the answer you need to give. Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #59

What a mean-spirited response. laconicsax Apr 2012 #65

Build your strawmen somewhere else. Goblinmonger Apr 2012 #73

There goes civil rights legislation and a lot of other progressive things. nt Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #64

We've been through this in other thread, but there is no indication Goblinmonger Apr 2012 #72

If you want a wall so that you are never in the vicinity of any "religious bullshit" Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #145

People can have all the religion they want. Goblinmonger Apr 2012 #162

I don't have a clue and am not interested. Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #164

As long as any dialogue centers around objective facts, there should be no problem. stopbush Apr 2012 #5

Objective facts, huh? cleanhippie Apr 2012 #8

Tee hee, and of course right there is when the theists quit wanting to play, they have Lionessa Apr 2012 #10

Lionessa, FTW. cleanhippie Apr 2012 #13

That's a converatation stopper. nt Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #60

What about perceptions? Taverner Apr 2012 #18

Is your last paragraph really the dialogue you're advocating? skepticscott Apr 2012 #9

I feel no need to convert atheists, and I would like to engage in dialogue, but... TygrBright Apr 2012 #11

That is the most impressive post I've ever read in this group. trotsky Apr 2012 #16

100% agree Taverner Apr 2012 #19

Bless you..... AlbertCat Apr 2012 #51

Excellent post, TB. cbayer Apr 2012 #52

Well, to take them in order: TygrBright Apr 2012 #78

I agree with much of what you say here and am willing to be an ally. cbayer Apr 2012 #79

I think the most important thing someone like you needs to realize... trotsky Apr 2012 #99

Thank you - awesome post EvolveOrConvolve Apr 2012 #66

+10 nt mr blur Apr 2012 #93

Show me where I can attack discrimination against atheists, and I'll fight it allong side you. nt Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #114

Start with your own OPs. cleanhippie Apr 2012 #117

I had to pass, I'm afraid. mr blur Apr 2012 #12

In 'Murica Taverner Apr 2012 #44

Yes - there needs to be dialogue between everyone LeftishBrit Apr 2012 #14

Agreed. Whites/Blacks, Muslims/Christians, Muslims/Hindus, Christians/Jews, Muslims/Jews.... Taverner Apr 2012 #32

There already is one and it's going quite well. cbayer Apr 2012 #15

And why should a "truce" be negotiated skepticscott Apr 2012 #21

That's cool. I'll put you down in the doesn't want to participate column. cbayer Apr 2012 #22

What you advocate is a surrender skepticscott Apr 2012 #28

Exactly. "Tolerate my view, but yours is irrelevant" Taverner Apr 2012 #30

Really...most Americans would rather live next to a serial killer than an atheist Taverner Apr 2012 #25

Could you please show me your data? cbayer Apr 2012 #26

And I suppose your bias is OK? Taverner Apr 2012 #29

I wouldn't be a good mediator either. cbayer Apr 2012 #34

I don't think you even belong in the dialogue Taverner Apr 2012 #39

Oh, SNAP! cleanhippie Apr 2012 #56

On and here's your data Taverner Apr 2012 #31

I don't see anything in there about serial killers. Could you point it out? cbayer Apr 2012 #37

Funny how you get all specific when it comes to my claims Taverner Apr 2012 #38

You appear to want a dialogue only with those with whom you agree. cbayer Apr 2012 #40

+1000 skepticscott Apr 2012 #41

Having read it, I don't see anything there which comes within amile of your accusation. nt Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #62

Where's the data that proves your god was born of a virgin? Taverner Apr 2012 #63

It's a story!! Why drag that in? It has nothng to do with this thread. Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #146

Since you are big on "facts," where did you get that one? nt Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #61

Interesting. trotsky Apr 2012 #71

After reading the comments I voted no based on what I saw here in this thread Leontius Apr 2012 #42

Yawn. How er...wise you are. nt mr blur Apr 2012 #47

Thanks, I wish I could say the same but Leontius Apr 2012 #48

And that majority would be the ones skepticscott Apr 2012 #49

This thread, this day, this topic. You want to fight your battles with those other posters in Leontius Apr 2012 #50

Not your problem, it just skepticscott Apr 2012 #55

I'm sorry you don't seem to see "This thread, this topic, this day" Leontius Apr 2012 #67

Oh, it's quite clear that you'd like to base your answer skepticscott Apr 2012 #68

Yep. Lots of "dialog" here. n/t LTX Apr 2012 #43

There's a local Interfaith Coalition in my area, bridging a number of organized religions pinto Apr 2012 #45

I'm sorry but I find the question meaningless dmallind Apr 2012 #46

So is Dawkins when he insults people or Newdow when he's being a preening git. AlbertCat Apr 2012 #53

OK, I have read it twice and am still digesting. cbayer Apr 2012 #57

I tried dmallind Apr 2012 #75

Nicely put. trotsky Apr 2012 #76

"If there were "other ways" of knowing there would be NO way of knowing." cleanhippie Apr 2012 #77

Yes .... I agree with cbayer AlbertCat Apr 2012 #58

What is "NTS"? n/t LTX Apr 2012 #74

no true scotsman - the Xian apologists' favorite fallacy dmallind Apr 2012 #80

I've seen the same argument here that de Botton is not a true atheist. cbayer Apr 2012 #83

The argument is that de Botton is a dick Goblinmonger Apr 2012 #84

Prove it. dmallind Apr 2012 #86

I think calling someone an Uncle Tom is a pretty clear statement that they are not cbayer Apr 2012 #88

Bullshit in the extreme. Have you read the damn book Uncle Tom is in? dmallind Apr 2012 #91

It's the same argument used by both theists and atheists to distinguish cbayer Apr 2012 #81

Surely you can link to some examples where atheists have done it, then. Goblinmonger Apr 2012 #82

You called him an "uncle tom atheist" and others have suggested that he is just in it cbayer Apr 2012 #87

Do you REALLY not understand the NTS or just desperately trying to avoid backtracking dmallind Apr 2012 #89

I don't respond to people that call me a liar. cbayer Apr 2012 #92

Tough crap then because I responded to lies. There's only one other alternative after all dmallind Apr 2012 #95

That's not the NTS fallacy. Goblinmonger Apr 2012 #90

I see your point, but wonder about this other point. cbayer Apr 2012 #94

First one is NTS and second one isn't. Goblinmonger Apr 2012 #96

I have often wondered if Phelps isn't an example of Poe's law. cbayer Apr 2012 #98

And yet no one has claimed that about de Botton. trotsky Apr 2012 #100

I've thought that of Limbaugh, too Goblinmonger Apr 2012 #101

I've also thought that about Limbaugh. cbayer Apr 2012 #103

Your "good faith" has nothing to do with it. trotsky Apr 2012 #105

I can't speak for the folks you mention - I don't know Phelps or the others OriginalGeek Apr 2012 #116

I have met some as well. They regard me with pity, lol. cbayer Apr 2012 #118

That analysis leaves two important things out: laconicsax Apr 2012 #121

Do either of those things diminish the good done by religious leaders, congregations and cbayer Apr 2012 #123

That depends on what you mean. laconicsax Apr 2012 #124

But as we discussed earlier, they would not acknowledge a shared religion. cbayer Apr 2012 #125

You're overlooking what both have in common. laconicsax Apr 2012 #128

Every individual sees, reads, hears things through their own prisms. cbayer Apr 2012 #129

It isn't that complicated laconicsax Apr 2012 #132

Wow, you sure do make a lot of assumptions about people of faith. cbayer Apr 2012 #134

Yes, I do assume that people's attitudes and beliefs are shaped by their environment. laconicsax Apr 2012 #137

What assumptions? skepticscott Apr 2012 #138

lol - yeah, I've felt that pity many times OriginalGeek Apr 2012 #130

I am glad that you have your aunt and uncle. cbayer Apr 2012 #131

Everything that **YOU** believe defines a Christian? dmallind Apr 2012 #97

Let me try my hand at this. laconicsax Apr 2012 #102

I agree that it becomes much more complex because of the lack cbayer Apr 2012 #104

Those "most basic tenets" aren't interpreted the same. laconicsax Apr 2012 #106

I can buy that. It's seems like an argument about semantics, then. cbayer Apr 2012 #108

I think you are kind of getting it. Goblinmonger Apr 2012 #109

OK. I think I can do that. cbayer Apr 2012 #110

Not always. :) nt rrneck Apr 2012 #143

There's nothing wrong to specifying denominations. laconicsax Apr 2012 #111

I'm not so much concerned about specifying denominations, more about cbayer Apr 2012 #112

Nothing wrong with that either. laconicsax Apr 2012 #115

Now you're just bringing up more problems. trotsky Apr 2012 #107

What?? dmallind Apr 2012 #85

+1000 Taverner Apr 2012 #126

Waste of time skepticscott Apr 2012 #139

Need? No. Do I support such discussion? Yes. laconicsax Apr 2012 #54

Fantastic answer. nt ZombieHorde Apr 2012 #70

Then your goal must be to get rid of the 1st amendment. nt Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #113

WTF are you talking about? No one wants to rid anything, stop fabricating things. cleanhippie Apr 2012 #119

1,432 posts Taverner Apr 2012 #127

There's another word for "fabricating" skepticscott Apr 2012 #141

Damn, Charles! When you make shit up, you go all out! laconicsax Apr 2012 #120

Um, I have no idea where you deduced that from my posts... Taverner Apr 2012 #122

Clearly the first amendment guarantees the freedom of religion to exist and speak in the Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #135

Why would a publicly (tax) supported park be a haven for oilpro2 Apr 2012 #136

The court has spoken about most of these things. Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #144

No, it doesn't skepticscott Apr 2012 #140

Not when "free exercise" means lobbying government. rrneck Apr 2012 #142

Dialogue? Man, I'm just here for the lulz. Evoman Apr 2012 #133

Well, we might just affirm you as a person with guts.We ight even listen to you. nt Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #147

It's so generous of you to consider listening to someone on a discussion board. laconicsax Apr 2012 #148

your snark is tedious and ignored. If you have something txo say, then say it.nt Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #151

This is a discussion board. laconicsax Apr 2012 #154

He's like me....he is here for some righteous lulz. Evoman Apr 2012 #155

I don't care. Evoman Apr 2012 #149

I guess it is important (to me at least) that you do give a shit. nt Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #152

Oh please, no it's not. Evoman Apr 2012 #153

Hey. Great! While you really don't know what is going on inside me, and have missed it by a mile, Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #156

Haha. Evoman Apr 2012 #158

Good luck in this fight. I hope this round is easier and knocks the cancer out for good. Leontius Apr 2012 #160

Evoman......FOR THE WIN!!!! cleanhippie Apr 2012 #161

Or rrneck Apr 2012 #150

Your snark is tedious and ignored. laconicsax Apr 2012 #157

ha! Evoman Apr 2012 #159

I think what would really help dialogue felix_numinous Apr 2012 #163

+10000 Taverner Apr 2012 #165