PDA

View Full Version : The arrogance of the atheists: They batter believers in religion with smug certainty



CueSi
12-29-2010, 10:37 PM
The arrogance of the atheists: They batter believers in religion with smug certainty (http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2010/12/29/2010-12-29_the_arrogance_of_the_atheists_they_batter_belie vers_with_smug_certainty.html)

S.E. CUPP
December 29th 2010
NYDailyNews.com

EXCERPT:


Back in college, while I was busy pretending that a blottoed discussion of Nietzsche over $1 beers made me an intellectual giant, my fiftysomething father, who'd worked so hard to send me there, was quietly being saved. Having long eschewed any ties to his Southern Baptist upbringing, he suddenly found himself born again and on a quest to know God better.

As a longtime atheist, I was a little surprised. But eventually I came to be relieved by this development. While my friends' fathers were buying flashy sports cars and exchanging their wives for models, my own father was turning inward and asking: Is there more to life than this?

I was also proud of him for becoming a student again. As I watched him pore over C.S. Lewis, Lee Strobel and even neoatheist thinkers such as Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens, I thought it amazing that he still wanted to learn something new.


~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

Link in title. I just find (as a believer), I find S.E Cupp's comfortable, non-confrontational, non-condescending atheism the kind I can live with.

~QC

djones520
12-29-2010, 11:00 PM
Doesn't hurt she's easy on the eyes.

But yeah, thats totally the way I live it. I can't stand militant atheists. They just need to shut the hell up.

CueSi
12-29-2010, 11:10 PM
Doesn't hurt she's easy on the eyes.

But yeah, thats totally the way I live it. I can't stand militant atheists. They just need to shut the hell up.

And that's how she works... draws you in with the good looks, next thing you know, you're agreeing with her.

Believe me, I understand.

http://i51.tinypic.com/dmr0qu.jpg

~QC

Novaheart
12-29-2010, 11:55 PM
And that's how she works... draws you in with the good looks, next thing you know, you're agreeing with her.

Believe me, I understand.

http://i51.tinypic.com/dmr0qu.jpg

~QC

That photo looks like a still from a porno.

CueSi
12-29-2010, 11:57 PM
That photo looks like a still from a porno.

you have your claws out tonight, don't you?

~QC

Rockntractor
12-29-2010, 11:59 PM
That photo looks like a still from a porno.

Why would you know what a porno with a woman in it would look like.:confused:

Rockntractor
12-30-2010, 12:00 AM
you have your claws out tonight, don't you?

~QC

He just had his nails done.

Novaheart
12-30-2010, 12:03 AM
you have your claws out tonight, don't you?

~QC

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_cm1e4tl9DcE/TFYNckVloFI/AAAAAAAACkc/n5UKlRfEtWQ/s1600/jungle+red+-+Norma+Shearer.jpg

jungle red!

CueSi
12-30-2010, 12:05 AM
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_cm1e4tl9DcE/TFYNckVloFI/AAAAAAAACkc/n5UKlRfEtWQ/s1600/jungle+red+-+Norma+Shearer.jpg

jungle red!

as I said before, iCan't with them and iCan't with you... <facepalm>

~QC

Rockntractor
12-30-2010, 12:05 AM
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_cm1e4tl9DcE/TFYNckVloFI/AAAAAAAACkc/n5UKlRfEtWQ/s1600/jungle+red+-+Norma+Shearer.jpg

jungle red!

Nice!:D

Novaheart
12-30-2010, 12:08 AM
Why would you know what a porno with a woman in it would look like.:confused:

Somebody has to watch it.

Rockntractor
12-30-2010, 12:27 AM
Somebody has to watch it.

The music is good!:D

wilbur
12-30-2010, 10:14 AM
A couple of issues....

She claims that the new atheists act as "conversation enders"....

But I think most of the credit belongs to Hitchens, Harris and Dawkins for actually bringing the debate about religion to the public. Thanks to them, the "conversation" is more public and more prevalent that it probably ever has been in human history, ever. They are conversation starters. This success is probably in no small part because many have been riled up by the challenges they present.

There are many believers who see it that way too, and are eager to take on these new challenges, presented by the movement. Kudos to them for manning up, instead of whining about their new and vocal adversaries.

Sure there are guys like Maher, who really step-up the childishness, but this ideal picture of humble, stalwart and noble believers as the victims (like the author's dad) of viciousness and vitriol from mean ol' atheists - when all they want to do is believe in peace - is crap.

Pat Robertson, Phil Donahue, Jerry Falwell, et al... the list is LONG of prominent believers who want much more than to humbly believe in peace or "grow in a spiritual journey", and they are often full of more arrogance and vitriol than any new atheist has been able to muster... and they are driven to re-shape the world in their image, and frighteningly enough, often come with hordes of followers who are generous with their money to aid their causes.

Yea, ignorant atheists abound who know nothing of theology or the religions they rail against - but I have yet to meet few Christians or religious folk who can give any better treatment to atheism or naturalism - few if any believers on this board qualify, that's for sure.

Rockntractor
12-30-2010, 10:18 AM
A couple of issues....

She claims that the new atheists act as "conversation enders"....

But I think most of the credit belongs to Hitchens, Harris and Dawkins for actually bringing the debate about religion to the public. Thanks to them, the "conversation" is more public and more prevalent that it probably ever has been in human history, ever. They are conversation starters.

There are many believers who see it that way too, and are eager to take on these new challenges, presented by the movement. Kudos to them for manning up, instead of whining about their new and vocal adversaries.

Sure there are guys like Maher, who really step-up the childishness, but this ideal picture of humble, stalwart and noble believers as the victims (like the author's dad) of viciousness and vitriol from mean ol' atheists - when all they want to do is believe in peace - is crap.

Pat Robertson, Phil Donahue, Jerry Falwell, et al... the list is LONG of prominent believers who want much more than to humbly believe in peace or "grow in a spiritual journey", and they are often full of more arrogance and vitriol than any new atheist has been able to muster... and they are driven to re-shape the world in their image, and frighteningly enough, often come with hordes of followers who are generous with their money to aid their causes.

Yea, ignorant atheists abound who know nothing of theology or the religions they rail against - but I have yet to meet few Christians or religious folk who can give any better treatment to atheism or naturalism - no believer on this board qualifies, that's for sure.

Hitchens is actually an expert on the subject today, if you could get a hold of him and get some quotes I would listen.

MrsSmith
12-30-2010, 10:29 AM
A couple of issues....

She claims that the new atheists act as "conversation enders"....

But I think most of the credit belongs to Hitchens, Harris and Dawkins for actually bringing the debate about religion to the public. Thanks to them, the "conversation" is more public and more prevalent that it probably ever has been in human history, ever. They are conversation starters. This success is probably in no small part because many have been riled up by the challenges they present.

There are many believers who see it that way too, and are eager to take on these new challenges, presented by the movement. Kudos to them for manning up, instead of whining about their new and vocal adversaries.

Sure there are guys like Maher, who really step-up the childishness, but this ideal picture of humble, stalwart and noble believers as the victims (like the author's dad) of viciousness and vitriol from mean ol' atheists - when all they want to do is believe in peace - is crap.

Pat Robertson, Phil Donahue, Jerry Falwell, et al... the list is LONG of prominent believers who want much more than to humbly believe in peace or "grow in a spiritual journey", and they are often full of more arrogance and vitriol than any new atheist has been able to muster... and they are driven to re-shape the world in their image, and frighteningly enough, often come with hordes of followers who are generous with their money to aid their causes.

Yea, ignorant atheists abound who know nothing of theology or the religions they rail against - but I have yet to meet few Christians or religious folk who can give any better treatment to atheism or naturalism - few if any believers on this board qualify, that's for sure.

Few believers qualify? Whatever. Most of the Christians on this board are polite, accurate and well informed. Most will explain endlessly in the face of rudeness, condescension and ignorance. Time after time, I've seen atheist/Christian debates go on for page after page with the Christian carefully giving accurate Christian information while the atheist repeats "Boy, you're stupid," in various forms. The worst I've seen any Christian return for that attitude is my own reply of, "You are woefully ignorant, go read _____ book or take at least a Basic Theology course before continuing your attack."

wilbur
12-30-2010, 10:46 AM
Few believers qualify? Whatever. Most of the Christians on this board are polite, accurate and well informed.

Well, then by all means, please present an account of what you believe to be the strongest argument for atheism, naturalism, non-theistic moral values, or something similar. Be sure to characterize it accurately and fairly, in its best possible light. Then you can follow it up with your reasons for rejecting it, if you like.

I can do the same for many religious arguments and theological positions. Few believers here (that care enough to take part in these debates) can do that for even one strong argument in any of those topics.

So yes, few believers qualify - and I'm pretty sure that you do not.



Most will explain endlessly in the face of rudeness, condescension and ignorance. Time after time, I've seen atheist/Christian debates go on for page after page with the Christian carefully giving accurate Christian information while the atheist repeats "Boy, you're stupid," in various forms. The worst I've seen any Christian return for that attitude is my own reply of, "You are woefully ignorant, go read _____ book or take at least a Basic Theology course before continuing your attack."

Heh... simply look over your own post histories, for examples where this is not the case. My patience with your incessant snarkiness and arrogance, on many occasions, has been superhuman... though I make no bones about it, I'll give it right back to you, often enough.

The difference between us isnt in all that great in our general attitudes, but in our self-awareness...

wilbur
12-30-2010, 11:04 AM
Hitchens is actually an expert on the subject today, if you could get a hold of him and get some quotes I would listen.

If you're interested to hear Hitchens speak.... check out his debates on youtube - there are tons of them.

Sometimes he is badly defeated, or looks to be in drunken stupor, other times he is amazingly eloquent and makes mince meat out of his opponents. Either way, they are interesting to listen too.

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=christopher+hitchens+debate&aq=0

Lager
12-30-2010, 04:15 PM
Here's a point Wilbur. I have not an ounce of concern whether you believe in God or not. Nor do I have any inclination to try to disuade you or any atheists of your beliefs, or lack thereof. And as far as I can tell based on the many, many posts here on this topic at CU, few here think it matters to them, or to the rest of the world, what you believe or not.

On the other hand, you seem to exert a lot of energy attacking the intelligence and motivations of believers. You also seem sometimes, to have made it a personal mission, to rid the world of the "scourge" of religion. And hence, that is where I believe the "arrogance" in the post title comes from.

wilbur
12-30-2010, 05:30 PM
Here's a point Wilbur. I have not an ounce of concern whether you believe in God or not. Nor do I have any inclination to try to disuade you or any atheists of your beliefs, or lack thereof. And as far as I can tell based on the many, many posts here on this topic at CU, few here think it matters to them, or to the rest of the world, what you believe or not.

On the other hand, you seem to exert a lot of energy attacking the intelligence and motivations of believers. You also seem sometimes, to have made it a personal mission, to rid the world of the "scourge" of religion. And hence, that is where I believe the "arrogance" in the post title comes from.

Not really. People, perhaps like yourself, simply are not used to religious beliefs being challenged, and find it uncomfortable when they are. I don't treat religious belief any harsher than you or anyone else here treats liberalism, or other ideologies to which CU folk are opposed.


But anyways... get used to it!

Lager
12-30-2010, 05:53 PM
Not really. People, perhaps like yourself, simply are not used to religious beliefs being challenged, and find it uncomfortable when they are. I don't treat religious belief any harsher than you or anyone else here treats liberalism, or other ideologies to which CU folk are opposed.


But anyways... get used to it!

I'm not very religious myself, so I have no discomfort. I would guess that most religious people aren't worried about their beliefs being challenged, since many know that the core of most religions is built on faith, and it would be a waste of time to try to prove one's belief empirically. Perhaps they'd be uncomfortable feeling that you were challenging their wisdom or judgement.

CueSi
12-30-2010, 06:10 PM
I'm not very religious myself, so I have no discomfort. I would guess that most religious people aren't worried about their beliefs being challenged, since many know that the core of most religions is built on faith, and it would be a waste of time to try to prove one's belief empirically. Perhaps they'd be uncomfortable feeling that you were challenging their wisdom or judgement.

THIS! The tendency of some atheists to try and make you feel stupid for believing in God...Is this a push back or just a new angle to the debate?

~QC

Rockntractor
12-30-2010, 07:43 PM
If you're interested to hear Hitchens speak.... check out his debates on youtube - there are tons of them.

Sometimes he is badly defeated, or looks to be in drunken stupor, other times he is amazingly eloquent and makes mince meat out of his opponents. Either way, they are interesting to listen too.

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=christopher+hitchens+debate&aq=0

I want to hear what he has to say now that he has met his maker.

wilbur
12-30-2010, 08:33 PM
I want to hear what he has to say now that he has met his maker.

He's not dead yet... and in his terminal illness, he is still the same ol' Hitch, when it comes to religion

MrsSmith
12-30-2010, 08:57 PM
Well, then by all means, please present an account of what you believe to be the strongest argument for atheism, naturalism, non-theistic moral values, or something similar. Be sure to characterize it accurately and fairly, in its best possible light. Then you can follow it up with your reasons for rejecting it, if you like.

I can do the same for many religious arguments and theological positions. Few believers here (that care enough to take part in these debates) can do that for even one strong argument in any of those topics.

So yes, few believers qualify - and I'm pretty sure that you do not.



Heh... simply look over your own post histories, for examples where this is not the case. My patience with your incessant snarkiness and arrogance, on many occasions, has been superhuman... though I make no bones about it, I'll give it right back to you, often enough.

The difference between us isnt in all that great in our general attitudes, but in our self-awareness...

Looking over past threads would be excellent. You are frequently completely immune to reason and seem to be unaware of your arrogant, overbearing attitude. You not only cannot present any intelligent religious or theological argument, you resist picking up any facts with an intensity that demonstrates absolute extremism. I spent the first 30+ years of my life learning in a secular environment, eventually learned theology, and therefore have a good understanding of both positions. You don't, despite your own opinion of your knowledge. In fact, several other Christians have also spent hours carefully explaining theology to you...and you've managed to miss all of it. The only thing larger than your ignorance is your ego. My fervent prayer for you is that God will eventually whack you upside the head the way He did me.

m00
12-30-2010, 10:34 PM
Few believers qualify? Whatever. Most of the Christians on this board are polite, accurate and well informed. Most will explain endlessly in the face of rudeness, condescension and ignorance. Time after time, I've seen atheist/Christian debates go on for page after page with the Christian carefully giving accurate Christian information while the atheist repeats "Boy, you're stupid," in various forms. The worst I've seen any Christian return for that attitude is my own reply of, "You are woefully ignorant, go read _____ book or take at least a Basic Theology course before continuing your attack."

This really hasn't been my experience. Especially where Christianity intersects with morality.

CueSi
12-30-2010, 11:05 PM
This really hasn't been my experience. Especially where Christianity intersects with morality.

Yeah... I get it, you're right, you're better, but the way you treat me doesn't make me want to aspire to it. Though by all rights and messages I SHOULD.

~QC

m00
12-30-2010, 11:07 PM
Yeah... I get it, you're right, you're better, but the way you treat me doesn't make me want to aspire to it. Though by all rights and messages I SHOULD.

~QC

:confused:

CueSi
12-30-2010, 11:09 PM
:confused:

my perspective on those who assert their moral superiority on me vis-a-vis my orientation.

~QC

swirling_vortex
12-31-2010, 04:18 PM
My particular issue with the militant atheists is that they've skewed science into a political issue. To them, it's no longer a tool used for finding knowledge and critiquing it, but rather they seem to convert theories into universal truth. Note that I'm not criticizing evolution, but what they seem to do is use such things as a way of saying that God doesn't exist. They are so hell bent on rejecting anything but the Materialist position that they have lost the process of thinking critically.

hampshirebrit
01-03-2011, 12:06 PM
I want to hear what he has to say now that he has met his maker.

Hitchens is still alive.

Novaheart
01-03-2011, 12:38 PM
My particular issue with the militant atheists is that they've skewed science into a political issue. To them, it's no longer a tool used for finding knowledge and critiquing it, but rather they seem to convert theories into universal truth. Note that I'm not criticizing evolution, but what they seem to do is use such things as a way of saying that God doesn't exist. They are so hell bent on rejecting anything but the Materialist position that they have lost the process of thinking critically.

It would not be very scientific to declare that there is no superior being or perhaps even a supreme being. It is scientific to say that the concepts of gods as portrayed by the existing and past religions, have been studied extensively and track to origins having nothing to do with supernatural beings.

Wei Wu Wei
01-03-2011, 01:08 PM
It takes a stuttering mind of an iconoclast to realize that God does not exist. It takes an enlightened mind to realize that this realization is irrelevant.

wilbur
01-03-2011, 01:17 PM
It takes a stuttering mind of an iconoclast to realize that God does not exist. It takes an enlightened mind to realize that this realization is irrelevant.

Sorry man, I think the whole necker's cube analogy of existence/non-existence being flip sides of the same coin is nonsense on stilts.

Wei Wu Wei
01-03-2011, 01:38 PM
Sorry man, I think the whole necker's cube analogy of existence/non-existence being flip sides of the same coin is nonsense on stilts.

Nope. Those are very rough analogies but not getting it hardly makes it nonsense. Then again I shouldn't pretend that I did a good job explaining it.

Wei Wu Wei
01-03-2011, 01:46 PM
Another way to consider it is that while existence and nonexistence are mutually exclusive, they still always come together. Like a thing and it's shadow.

You cannot concieve of existence without non-existence as the backdrop which offers meaning to the foreground concept (in this case, existence). Just like you can't have existence without first presupposing existence as a concept. Because of this shaky whole comprised of muitually exclusive parts, it's improper to conclude that something can be full or whole merely in it's existence, without also considering it's nonexistence, which can't simply be ignored.

While we can argue about what we are talking about in this case: that is, God and religion, this form of analysis - this relationship between things or concepts that functions as a whole comprised of mutually exclusive parts which constitute each other is a very important form of analysis.

This is the nature of commodities (use-value / value) this is the nature of consciousness (conscious / unconscious), selfhood (self / nonself), metaphysical problems such as (freedom / determinism) and on and on and on.


While taking this analysis towards the theological is a pretty huge jump, one that I'm not exactly well versed on myself and thus I have a hard time articulating my shifty thoughts on the subject, using this form of analysis in metaphor like the necker cube and applying it to conceptual problems can be extremely illuminating.

hampshirebrit
01-03-2011, 02:23 PM
It takes a stuttering mind of an iconoclast to realize that God does not exist. It takes an enlightened mind to realize that this realization is irrelevant.

I think you are underthinking this issue. Both of your statements above need a full explanation, ideally in your own words.

hampshirebrit
01-03-2011, 03:37 PM
Sorry man, I think the whole necker's cube analogy of existence/non-existence being flip sides of the same coin is nonsense on stilts.

LMAO. Nice way of putting it. I'm guessing you think the same goes for his completely bonkers rabbit/duck thing as well.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/Duck-Rabbit_illusion.jpg

Yep, the duck/rabbit thing, that one.