A place where ModDB members can debate civilly, and learn from each other's views.

  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
Add media Report RSS Is atheism exempt from criticism? (view original)
Is atheism exempt from criticism?
embed
share
view previous next
Share Image
Share on Facebook Post Email a friend
Embed Image
Post comment Comments
Headhunter128
Headhunter128

Thank you for generalizing. Always encourages positive thoughts.

No, Atheism is not above criticism, imo nothing is, that's a stupid standpoint and in most atheist and religious debates, highly hypocritical. However, I would like to point out that I think the criticism you have is not in regard to atheism, but certain atheist debaters.

Personally, I can't imagine any real criticism of atheism by itself (Forget the people for a moment). If we define it as "Not believing in a higher party or deity". Then I see it as a matter of Free Will and the right to make your own choices in life.
____________________

Something else. That pic is unnecessary flamebait. If this is how you go about debates, then I'm not surprised that you see the worst in us.

Reply Good karma Bad karma+4 votes
HinduMan Author
HinduMan

"Thank you for generalizing. Always encourages positive thoughts."

There's a difference between "internet atheists" (a specific intolerant group I listed) and "all atheists" so you're the only one generalizing here. Please don't try to dismiss my argument with a straw-man. This is the second time an atheist has to attempted to shoot down my argument with the accusation that I'm generalizing when I've said my views are about a select group of atheists.

Reply Good karma-2 votes
Headhunter128
Headhunter128

I'm not here often enough to know what you mean by "internet atheists". If anything, I would presume to be among those. Which I guess you could say I did. As I never really involve myself in debates such as these outside of the internet.

(Don't get the straw man reference, sorry)

And the "generalization" was not an argument/accusation or anything of the like. I apologize if that is how it was presented. I guess the sarcasm didn't pass through in translation.
_________________

That aside, I believe the rest of my points stand.

Reply Good karma Bad karma+1 vote
HinduMan Author
HinduMan

I listed the internet atheists I was referring to in the image description. The moddb group in particular but I guess r/atheism and the YouTube atheist community would be other groups "internet atheists" would refer to. Perhaps I should have been more specific. I don't mean just the general atheist who uses the internet and comments. I mean internet atheist groups who make it their prime duty to attack religion constantly (because please find me one group that doesn't do this).

Reply Good karma+1 vote
CommanderDef
CommanderDef

'With the time I've spent in this group, I have learnt that it's okay to debate anything so long as it's not atheism.'

And yet you are here again. There was some quote about doing something more times and expecting different result... Speaking about quotes, those should always be complete, or it's not quote at all (Sagan's part).

Whatever you, or anybody write here now was (on 99%) discussed before. You can only get same answers, or same answers with more emotions. Considering that you are doing this on purpose, doesn't that make you the aggressive and intolerant one?

Reply Good karma Bad karma+2 votes
HinduMan Author
HinduMan

"And yet you are here again."

Yes, receiving similar "don't speak about us" comments.

"Considering that you are doing this on purpose, doesn't that make you the aggressive and intolerant one?"

Yeah. I suppose. Let's just ignore all the intolerance from your group again...

Moddb.com

"Speaking about quotes, those should always be complete, or it's not quote at all (Sagan's part)."

Moddb.com

I agree but you advocate a group which does the same thing.

It's impossible for you take the moral high ground here when you're part of the most intolerant group on moddb. If you want to get somewhere here, I'd suggest you leave them because you're only proving my point.

Reply Good karma0 votes
CommanderDef
CommanderDef

It's not "my group". It's group I joined. I don't have to agree with every pic they post, but I agree with the general idea.

They post it on our group anyway, not to debate group directly under your nose. Feel the difference. You don't have to visit group you don't like.

My personal intolerance of your religion is that deep that I even forgot you exist. I can't really care less than that. It's the things you wrote that I can't tolerate. Every single comment from you I had seen was an attack. Not neutral, not defensive, but always an attack.

Reply Good karma Bad karma+1 vote
HinduMan Author
HinduMan

"They post it on our group anyway, not to debate group directly under your nose. Feel the difference. You don't have to visit group you don't like."

And you don't have to visit this debate group where I'm posting to debate issues like these. I presented a valid point in the description but unlike Headhunter128, you've decided to start an ad hominem and attack me personally rather than address the argument.

If I'm intolerant, it's only towards atheists like you who attempt to take the high ground when you invalidated that right long ago.

The whole point is that how is it fine for atheists to criticize religion but it's wrong when a religious person criticizes atheism?

Reply Good karma+1 vote
CommanderDef
CommanderDef

There is the valid point of argument that you asked: of course if you attack one group, members get offended. Striking back feels good and righteous, doesn't it?

Now why did you asked this (here?)? Isn't this obvious?

What did you expect? Of course it wasn't 'Ow, sorry, we are using even triple standards and we are very ashamed of it.' No, you wanted a flame war, so here we go. And yes I feel like on high ground now. You can disagree from your point of view, but that's all you can do about it. You can only bring me more (and you will) in your next post. And it will go from revenge to revenge until someone delete it - then it will be quiet for a while, until you (and I mean you personally) toss this here again.

Reply Good karma Bad karma-1 votes
KnightofEquulei
KnightofEquulei

Regardless of his intentions, you're still avoiding the question. The reason you guys put up your images must be to draw a response from religious people who visit (HinduMan, clearly being one of those people). I find it funny that every time a response has been created, you act all innocent and surprise.

Flame war or no flame war. You can't take any high ground here.

Reply Good karma Bad karma+1 vote
HinduMan Author
HinduMan

"No, you wanted a flame war, so here we go."

No, only you atheists are interested in flame wars. If you link this to your group, that's not my problem, it's yours.

Reply Good karma-1 votes
KnightofEquulei
KnightofEquulei

It's my understanding from a friend in the atheist group, that this group was established specifically in response to the religious debates that once raged between the Christian and atheist groups.


Quite true. Only when we started discussing these things...well, you know how it went. Cervi_Messias started removing any image attacking atheism that he saw (whilst keeping ones up that attacked religion) and ComradeWinston flew into an rampage at one image he saw attacking atheism (which Cervi - in his advocation of censorship - took down).

I still don't understand how their minds worked here or what their logic was behind this hypocrisy. ComradeWinston was fine for the first several months and then just suddenly snapped. Maybe he just couldn't take his own medicine anymore?

It was actually okay for the first few months if you check out the forums but you can see the tension building even then as Cervi attempted to ban discussions on atheism, religion, creationism and evolution.

Most of the other atheists here were actually fine with all the content that had been posted but those two somehow found a problem with it all and created a schism plus a personal hate campaign against me (and you, as you know since they started claiming you - alongside those agnostic trolls who trolled both the atheist and Christian groups - were one of my alts).

A better subject to discuss would be about the extremism of certain atheist groups, a topic we briefly touched on before here Moddb.com.

Reply Good karma Bad karma0 votes
Post a comment

Your comment will be anonymous unless you join the community. Or sign in with your social account:

Description

With the time I've spent in this group, I have learnt that it's okay to debate anything so long as it's not atheism. In this group meant for debates, on a site supporting freedom of expression, it is wrong (according to a select few individuals here) to attack atheism despite their constant attacks against religions in their bigoted hate group, "Atheists, Agnostics, and Anti-theists of ModDB."

Attacks against religions are okay but when it's done against atheism, it becomes wrong. That's double standards.

Why are internet atheists so intolerant to the so called free-thinking they claim to perpetrate?

It's my understanding from a friend in the atheist group, that this group was established specifically in response to the religious debates that once raged between the Christian and atheist groups. Why then are a select few here that are so offended when I bring up criticism against atheism?

Better question yet, why do some atheists feel the need to censor anything they disagree with? Why do the religious people here fear responding to an incredibly aggressive intolerant group?