"The Malevolent Roots of Wicca" (beliefs, hell, church)

[Bennettresearch]

Originally Posted by FeathersinHair

Greatly! Usually, I threaten other people with it, but I felt that I needed a good tuna-smacking treatment.

I was confused but now i know that Tuna are Satan worshippers. Does this mean I have to burn my old Hot Tuna records in protest?

[s2a]

Originally Posted by lilithu

Dude, that makes no sense. The fact that some people have so little faith in human intelligence that they would take the web site seriously has no bearing on whether or not there is a God. The only reason to not believe in God is because you do not believe in God.

If my statement seems non-sensical to you, it may be that you have drawn an inept and inaccurate inference therefrom.

I agree that confusion regarding the "authenticity" of the linked site is not disproof of a god, nor was it offered with that sort of purposed intent.

The point within my follow-up commentary (that apparently eluded you) was to lend observation regarding the length and breadth of deference people extend to irrational/illogical/absurd/asinine actions and behaviors that would otherwise be unacceptable and intolerable if not caveated under some rubric of "religious opinion/expression". I did not suggest (nor intend to infer) that this particular aspect of "religious tolerance" within society was a failing or lack of IQ/intelligence amongst any individual or group. It's the generally ready and willing abdication/deferment of reason/logic in evaluating the merits of spuriously spewed "religious opinion" that I lament as regrettable.

"Religious opinion" can be just as stupid, uninformed, or just plain wrong as any other proffered opinion. It's just that when religious "belief" is cited as foundation of lent opinion; that opinion, more often than not, gets a free pass from rational criticism and scrutiny. This is not to suggest that atheists are any less prone to offering up stupid or worthless opinions. It's just that (again, more often than not) stupid remarks from atheists are essentially indefensible as some sort of "religious expression", or erstwhile assignment of deity-instigated/inspired cause/effect "explanation" - which suits me just fine, for I neither request nor expect undue deference/tolerance from others in withholding their criticisms of anything manifestly stupid or wrong in my actions or behavior, or what I may express as "my opinion". I always seek to avoid any extended crutch of tolerance that allows for the accepting sentiment of "Your ideas are just plain dumb, but that's OK, because...you're an atheist".

[Fortunately, the overwhelming majority of REF's regularly contributing members do not suffer reticence in lending correction or undue deference to unqualified opinions. ;-)]

[michel]

Originally Posted by FeathersinHair

Greatly! Usually, I threaten other people with it, but I felt that I needed a good tuna-smacking treatment.

Ah, but have you owned up to the self-flagellation with wet noodles ?.........

Thinking about it, guys, I don't think any of you want to know about that....time for mt injection methinks...

[lilithu]

Originally Posted by s2a

If my statement seems non-sensical to you, it may be that you have drawn an inept and inaccurate inference therefrom.

Frankly, I'm surprised that someone as intelligent as you could get so defensive so quickly. I had no objection to anything you said in the previous post until the last sentence - until you implied that these were the reasons why you're an atheist. And you've written a lot more words here but that comment still does not logically follow from what you've written.

I would have hoped that your atheism is not simply the product of what other people choose to do, because to me that would be a silly response, and I had the impression that you were very intelligent and sensible. I would have hoped that you are an atheist because that is how you view the world, which is fine. But since you choose to object strongly enough to even insult me, I'll concede. You are an atheist because other people are silly, fine.

[s2a]

Originally Posted by lilithu

Frankly, I'm surprised that someone as intelligent as you could get so defensive so quickly. I had no objection to anything you said in the previous post until the last sentence - until you implied that these were the reasons why you're an atheist. And you've written a lot more words here but that comment still does not logically follow from what you've written.

Within those "a lot more words", I sought to clarify, not "defensively" support, my overall perspective. Efforts to mischaracterize my comments to your advantage or sympathy are ill-spent.

I would have hoped that your atheism is not simply the product of what other people choose to do, because to me that would be a silly response, and I had the impression that you were very intelligent and sensible.

So now you infer your impression that I am neither intelligent nor sensible? You'll understand if I don't reciprocate in kind, for I have yet to reach any such conclusions of your capacities.

I would have hoped that you are an atheist because that is how you view the world, which is fine.

Atheism is not a "world view". It's an individualistic perspective regarding nonacceptance of the veritability/validity of claims of alleged supernaturalistic cause/effect explanations as outlined by deistic, spiritualistic, and pseudo-scientific beliefs. Atheists retain their own independent philosophies, and are not constrained by any defined set of atheistic "rules" or dogma from which to perceive "the world" in any particular shape, form, or fashion. I do not claim to speak for any other atheist, nor do I profess any presumptive dictums on behalf of atheists as a minority group of like-minded individuals. If my earnest and sincere opinions proffered as a lone atheist qualify me as a nonsensical ignoramus in your eyes, then so be it. You will neither be first person nor last in arriving at such a conclusion.

But since you choose to object strongly enough to even insult me, I'll concede. You are an atheist because other people are silly, fine.

I intended no personal insult (nor sought to deliberately infer such). I suggested that you may have inferred poorly and incorrectly, and I sought only to elaborate with extended clarity my (apparently) misunderstood/mischaracterized expressed commentary.

To revisit - verbatim - I said to you:

"If my statement seems non-sensical to you, it may be that you have drawn an inept and inaccurate inference therefrom."

Please identify the "insult" allegedly resident (or implied) within (or if you prefer, from any other comments I lent within that "offensive" post).

However you may personally digest the previous directed statement, know that I do not consider naive ignorance, nor lent genial and unwitting misunderstandings/mischaracterizations...as assumptively inherent character flaws, or evidenced intellectual deficiency. We all share mutual communicative disadvantage in lacking the visible and auditory aids in "reading": body/facial "language"; tonal speech inflections; and erstwhile intangibles of atmosphere, salubrious lubrications, and impressionistic estimations of character and demeanor. Personally (from long-term experience in forums like REF), I expect to encounter on occasion -(seemingly) uncharacteristic outburts, misunderstandings/misreadings, and misplaced sentiments and assumptions. Clarification and correction are the only remedies I know of that are imminently availible in such faceless forums to ameliorate unwitting and/or unintended "offenses" to another's personal sensibilities.

And yes...one of the more gratifyingly self-serving aspects of being a confidently self-assured atheist is the constancy afforded a personalized perspective that can removedly regard the perplexing and ready willingness of people to believe or accept life-altering - and objectivly perspective-influencing - claims of invisible beings and supernatural phenomena as the very best available explanation for things they don't understand/comprehend, abjectly fear, or know absolutely nothing about.

And as you say, I think that such rationalizations/beliefs are silly (or as I prefer to echo Edison - "bunk")...and I remain most pleased not to be counted amongst those who do profess such faith-predicated perspectives as "rational" explanations or unequivocal "truths".

Please understand, respectfully, that I reject your offered "concession" on the grounds upon which it is tendered. To do so would be to concede to your allegation that I purposefully intended you insult...which is a characterization that is, at best, benignly inaccurate; and at worst, a grossly overstated misunderstanding unworthy of further elaboration or discussion in this public forum.

I'll be pleased to address any outstanding concerns you may feel left unresolved between us in more appropriate and discrete PM or email correspondence.

Sincerely yours,
s2a/Cal

[lilithu]

Originally Posted by s2a

Within those "a lot more words", I sought to clarify, not "defensively" support, my overall perspective. Efforts to mischaracterize my comments to your advantage or sympathy are ill-spent.

What advantage? I don't care if you are atheist, nontheist, polytheist, pantheist, or worship Carmen Elektra. It's all the same to me. Well, maybe not the last one. I simply disputed the logic of your implication that your atheism has anything to do with how other people behave. It didn't make sense to me and it still doesn't.

Originally Posted by s2a

I'll be pleased to address any outstanding concerns you may feel left unresolved between us in more appropriate and discrete PM or email correspondence.

No thanks.

[Storm Moon]

The sad thing is that there are people who really think this is a legit site and believe every word of what's on there. I'm sure whoever put this up was probably making fun of the religious right ( not to offend those here )