Atheism is not a religion, right?

[_Doctor Scratch]

I have to admit, Josh, that there is a certain amount of irony in the fact that you're complaining about Dawkins's inflammatory rhetoric. After all, was it not you that once tried to profit off of a Web site called "MormonsSuck.com"? Why is is, I wonder, that you complain about bigotry against LDS when you yourself were the owner and proprietor of an anti-Mormon Web site? (And trying to profit from it to boot?)

[_beastie]

What is always funny about these sort of threads is that usually the very people who hotly demand that Mormons be allowed to define Mormonism themselves are the same people who insist that atheism is a "religion", despite the fact that atheists nearly universally reject that premise.

[Guest]

REMOVED DUE TO THREAT

[Guest]

REMOVED DUE TO THREAT

[_Doctor Scratch]

I have to admit, Josh, that there is a certain amount of irony in the fact that you're complaining about Dawkins's inflammatory rhetoric. After all, was it not you that once tried to profit off of a Web site called "MormonsSuck.com"? Why is is, I wonder, that you complain about bigotry against LDS when you yourself were the owner and proprietor of an anti-Mormon Web site? (And trying to profit from it to boot?)

Again, shut up until you get some balls and stop hiding behind that mask. It's easy to attack and character assassinate people while hiding.

JMS

I'm right here, jskains---I'm not "hiding" at all. You're welcome to say whatever you'd like to me. And pardon me, but I don't think it's "character assassination" to simply refer to your own actions. If anyone "assassinated" your "character," it was you, Mr. Potato-head.

[_Sophocles]

I've never made such a demand. So your argument is invalid.

I don't think I've ever encountered that sentence in a serious context before.

Your Argument Is Invalid.

[_Panopticon]

I agree with Sam Harris on this.

Harris suggests that he advocates a benign, noncoercive, corrective form of intolerance, distinguishing it from historic religious persecution. He promotes a conversational intolerance, in which personal convictions are scaled against evidence, and where intellectual honesty is demanded equally in religious views and non-religious views. He suggests that, just as a person declaring a belief that Elvis is still alive would immediately make his every statement suspect in the eyes of those he was conversing with, asserting a similarly non-evidentiary point on a religious doctrine ought to meet with similar disrespect.

I see no reason to give religion a privileged status. Ridiculous ideas should be open for ridicule.

[_beastie]

I've never made such a demand. So your argument is invalid.

JMS

Seriously? You've never asked that LDS be allowed to define their own beliefs and religion? You're ok with, say, Ed Decker telling people what Mormons believe?

Sweet.

[_Buffalo]

I agree with Sam Harris on this.

Harris suggests that he advocates a benign, noncoercive, corrective form of intolerance, distinguishing it from historic religious persecution. He promotes a conversational intolerance, in which personal convictions are scaled against evidence, and where intellectual honesty is demanded equally in religious views and non-religious views. He suggests that, just as a person declaring a belief that Elvis is still alive would immediately make his every statement suspect in the eyes of those he was conversing with, asserting a similarly non-evidentiary point on a religious doctrine ought to meet with similar disrespect.

I see no reason to give religion a privileged status. Ridiculous ideas should be open for ridicule.

Agreed.

[_Corpsegrinder]

Again, shut up until you get some balls and stop hiding behind that mask. It's easy to attack and character assassinate people while hiding.

JMS

Someone should tell Josh that an evil anonymous poster named "jskains" has stolen his online ID.