Happy Atheist Forum

Hi fellow atheists,

I'm a militant atheist located in Los Angeles and very active in the movement.

I see religion as a cancer on society that must be removed if the human race is to survive. To me atheism is not a passive 'belief' but a moral imperative.

I promote 'total war' on religion and don't pull my punches.

I may offend some but you will find me a straight shooter and very knowledgeable in regards to history, physics and political campaigning.

Hope to get to know you all.

Warmest regards,


Paul King
Atheists: - One voice, one fist!

Haha, I don't know what a militant atheist even means.  Do you punch people?  Try to organize hostile take-overs of churches?  Are there mini-bats involved?  :yay:

"Try to organize hostile take-overs of churches?"

Now there's an idea!

My position is religion is NOT harmless and has caused such suffering to mankind it must be treated as a threat to our very survival.

I advocate: -

Forcing governments to tax Churches and making them conform to 'truth in advertising' laws.
Arresting (and after a fair trial) hanging the Pope for crimes against humanity.
Removing all religious symbols from public places.

and that is just for starters.

As I said I don't pull my punches but neither does the Church.

[youtube:2ni22jnz]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCX0JJ16dFM[/youtube:2ni22jnz]

This is my response.

Quote from: "PaulKing"I advocate: -

Forcing governments to tax Churches and making them conform to 'truth in advertising' laws.
Arresting (and after a fair trial) hanging the Pope for crimes against humanity.
Removing all religious symbols from public places.

and that is just for starters.

Absolute and total rubbish. I do not believe a word of what you're saying.

Quote from: "PaulKing"Arresting (and after a fair trial) hanging the Pope for crimes against humanity.

I 'ed.  How very Texan of you.

And welcome.

Quote from: "PaulKing""Try to organize hostile take-overs of churches?"

Now there's an idea!

My position is religion is NOT harmless and has caused such suffering to mankind it must be treated as a threat to our very survival.

I advocate: -

Forcing governments to tax Churches and making them conform to 'truth in advertising' laws.
Arresting (and after a fair trial) hanging the Pope for crimes against humanity.
Removing all religious symbols from public places.

and that is just for starters.

As I said I don't pull my punches but neither does the Church.

Wow, You have some intense animosity issues. Call me a hypocrite, but as long as you don't go after Buddhism, I don't see a problem here.

"Absolute and total rubbish. I do not believe a word of what you're saying."

Why?

If you are not angry about the genocide of 800,000 people in Rwanda and 50,000 children in Canada not to mention the rape of hundreds of thousands of children Worldwide, then in my opinion there is something wrong with you.

What does it take to make people angry these days?

Some of you act as if the Holocaust was just a little bit naughty.

Quote from: "PaulKing""Absolute and total rubbish. I do not believe a word of what you're saying."

Why?

I'l put it this way. You're slick but you could still use another greasing.

I fail to see the point in holding all Christians accountable for the actions of, admittedly, quite a few.  How is that not stereotyping?

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"I fail to see the point in holding all Christians accountable for the actions of, admittedly, quite a few.  How is that not stereotyping?

Whilst it is Sterotyping, it is more holding their God accountable and attacking his outlets on earth instead of the individual everyday Christian. Although more of an atheist view would be that we would eventualy be freeing them from their own ignorance.

Whilst i'm not saying i support a full on equivalent of a holocaust with christians it sure as hell would be fun to turn on the news and see a load of atheists raiding a church and smashing things

Quote from: "PaulKing"Hi fellow atheists,

I'm a militant atheist located in Los Angeles and very active in the movement.

I see religion as a cancer on society that must be removed if the human race is to survive. To me atheism is not a passive 'belief' but a moral imperative.

I promote 'total war' on religion and don't pull my punches.

I may offend some but you will find me a straight shooter and very knowledgeable in regards to history, physics and political campaigning.

Hope to get to know you all.

Warmest regards,


Paul King
Atheists: - One voice, one fist!

Poe. If not, then not in my name. Faced with you I'd stand beside any theist and go down fighting on their behalf. Stalin and Mao would have promoted you right to the head of the army and Pol Pot would have been proud of any body who held your bigoted views.

So on an entirely personal view I sincerely hope you just leave and take your militant views with you as they have no place on this forum. I don't see why you would want to hang around on a forum with a mission statement that starts with

QuoteAt HAF we know that atheists are often happy ethical people just like anyone else. It is our goal to help dissolve negative stereotypes currently held towards atheists and facilitate productive dialogue with those of differing viewpoints.

Please leave and take your Nazi style hate speech with you.

Richard Dawkins calls Martin Rees a compliant quizling for respecting theists.
This sounds a bit harsh, it is hard to win a war without allies.

"Faced with you I'd stand beside any theist and go down fighting on their behalf. Stalin and Mao would have promoted you right to the head of the army and Pol Pot would have been proud of any body who held your bigoted views."

Seems you are unaware that Stalin was an Altar boy, lived with his mother in the house of a Priest, wanted to join the Church and was Catholic Educated from pre school thru college.

Pol Pot was Catholic educated from the age of 8 thru 14.

Hitler was a devout Catholic until death. Catholic educated and Mein Kampf was edited by a Catholic Priest.

Religion killed well over 100,000,000 million people last century and in Rwanda it got a great start with this one.

I make NO APOLOGY for hating hate and also pathetic moral cowards like you.

If you don't care about humanity fine. But don't spout absurd holier than thou crap like you did.

Paul, I'm curious as to how you came to be an atheist.

I'm also curious as to what exactly it is that you do as an activist atheist.

"Paul, I'm curious as to how you came to be an atheist."

I was born one. I was lucky enough to have never suffered from the mental disease known as religion.
My education was at a progressive school and from the age of 12 I left school (I later returned to my education and attended college) to be active in radical political groups.

Listing all the activities in regard to atheism in my life would probably exceed the capacity of this forums server but currently I am a member of a small but very active radical atheist group called "The Fist" (hence the slogan: - One voice, One fist).

Best,

Paul King

"Whilst i'm not saying i support a full on equivalent of a holocaust with christians".

HITLER WAS ANTI ATHEIST

However, the regime strongly opposed "godless communism",and most of Germany's atheist and largely left-wing freethought organizations were banned the same year; some right-wing groups were tolerated by the Nazis until the mid 1930s.

 In a speech made later in 1933, Hitler claimed to have "stamped [atheism] out"

AND

Adolf Hitler: Burn out the Poison of Immorality

Today Christians ... stand at the head of [this country]... I pledge that I never will tie myself to parties who want to destroy Christianity .. We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit ... We want to burn out all the recent immoral developments in literature, in the theater, and in the press - in short, we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered into our whole life and culture as a result of liberal excess during the past ... (few) years.

- Adolf Hitler, quoted in: The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, 1922-1939, Vol. 1 (London, Oxford University Press, 1942), pg. 871-872

ALSO DO SOME RESEARCH ON THE GENOCIDE IN RWANDA AND OF NATIVE CHILDREN IN CANADA

I'm sure it wouldn't surprise you if you heard yourself described as a radical. Now the term radical is mostly used in a negative way, "radical Islamists" for example. But radical doesn't have to mean bad, and I would never say that being a radical is by definition a bad thing.

In my case I can't afford to be radical about anything besides having money and trying to stay healthy. Times are tough and most of us can't afford to make too many enemies, you dig? We have mortgages to pay, some have children to take care of.

This forum is a place to more-or-less calmly and congenially discuss topics of mutual concern and interest to atheists. I say this to try to give you a better idea of what this forum is about.

In a nutshell, this forum strives to be cerebral rather than visceral, you dig?

"In a nutshell, this forum strives to be cerebral rather than visceral, you dig?"

The only tiny little problem is that most organized religions take a rather different approach and while you talk they increase their strangle hold on the media, children's minds and the government.

It is like fiddling while Rome burns.

I care about humanity and justice NOT being popular.

You dig?

Quote from: "PaulKing""Try to organize hostile take-overs of churches?"

Now there's an idea!

My position is religion is NOT harmless and has caused such suffering to mankind it must be treated as a threat to our very survival.

I advocate: -

Forcing governments to tax Churches and making them conform to 'truth in advertising' laws.
Arresting (and after a fair trial) hanging the Pope for crimes against humanity.
Removing all religious symbols from public places.

and that is just for starters.

As I said I don't pull my punches but neither does the Church.

Quote from: "PaulKing""Faced with you I'd stand beside any theist and go down fighting on their behalf. Stalin and Mao would have promoted you right to the head of the army and Pol Pot would have been proud of any body who held your bigoted views."

Seems you are unaware that Stalin was an Altar boy, lived with his mother in the house of a Priest, wanted to join the Church and was Catholic Educated from pre school thru college.

Pol Pot was Catholic educated from the age of 8 thru 14.

Hitler was a devout Catholic until death. Catholic educated and Mein Kampf was edited by a Catholic Priest.

Religion killed well over 100,000,000 million people last century and in Rwanda it got a great start with this one.

I make NO APOLOGY for hating hate and also pathetic moral cowards like you.

If you don't care about humanity fine. But don't spout absurd holier than thou crap like you did.

I concede that religion has inspired a lot of death and suffering, but it's not belief in the supernatural that does this. It's dogma, and Religious Intolerance.  Since there are no actual gods, people's unquestioning devotion toward their deity is filled in by people with their own corruptions and agendas.

If I believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, I'm not hurting anyone. It's not until you decide your religion has an imperative to take over the world (a trait exclusive to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) that your beliefs become dangerous. Other dangerous beliefs are things like "Original Sin" and "The Rapture." that seem to devalue human life, and make death preferable to life.  I will admit that these are problems, but we can’t overcome anger and hatred by simply suppressing them. We need to actively cultivate their antidotes - patience and tolerance. You cannot drive darkness with darkness, you need light for that. You cannot drive hate with hate, you need love for that.

~

I agree with taxing churches, (As well as Mosques, and Buddhist/Hindu Temples and other stuff of the sort.)

I don't think we should hang the Pope (but I opposed the death penalty for Saddam Hussein, so...) maybe that's just the radical opinion of a pacifist.

Hitler was a Catholic, but Stalin was very Militantly anti religion, not in a way at all dissimilar from yourself.  Your religion isn't defined by what you're born into, it's the behavior that you show in your life, and Stalin and Pol Pot were Militant Atheists. Sorry, but you're joining that club.  If Catholics have to own up to Hitler, it's only fair that you take on a few communist revolutionaries.

Quote from: "PaulKing""In a nutshell, this forum strives to be cerebral rather than visceral, you dig?"

The only tiny little problem is that most organized religions take a rather different approach and while you talk they increase their strangle hold on the media, children's minds and the government.

It is like fiddling while Rome burns.

I care about humanity and justice NOT being popular.

You dig?

Yes I do, but this website forum is what it is, see, and nothing you post here is going to change how it is. So please try to understand that everyone here just can't be a radical activist, even if they wanted to.

Really, there are good people here, they're good people to talk to. Why not make an attempt to get to know us first? Settle in and check the place out. I see how passionate you are, but there's a time when you need to be cool. If you can't or refuse to be cool then this is definitely not the place for you, okay?

Oh, and stranglehold is spelled as a single word.

What is that you do for a living, if I may ask?

Quote from: "PaulKing""Faced with you I'd stand beside any theist and go down fighting on their behalf. Stalin and Mao would have promoted you right to the head of the army and Pol Pot would have been proud of any body who held your bigoted views."

Seems you are unaware that Stalin was an Altar boy, lived with his mother in the house of a Priest, wanted to join the Church and was Catholic Educated from pre school thru college.

Pol Pot was Catholic educated from the age of 8 thru 14.

Hitler was a devout Catholic until death. Catholic educated and Mein Kampf was edited by a Catholic Priest.

Religion killed well over 100,000,000 million people last century and in Rwanda it got a great start with this one.

I make NO APOLOGY for hating hate and also pathetic moral cowards like you.

If you don't care about humanity fine. But don't spout absurd holier than thou crap like you did.

I care very much about humanity and the ideas you espouse and the manner in which you espouse them are dangerous, very dangerous indeed. It's easy to be a rabble rouser and mob ruler, it gives people with a poor self image a sense of worth and power. It is actually much harder to stand up to be counted when people are under threat from extremist and radical views, such as Islam, Christianity, Communism, Nazism and Atheism (with a capital A) you sir have no right, no right whatsoever to use my world view to further you agenda of hatred. So not in my name mate, ever!

(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.northernsun.com%2Fimages%2Fimagelarge%2FCoexist-Magnet-%25289934%2529.jpg&hash=6c507251de1779757f2def081103f39f1539ca6c)

Certainly an old image, but I think it's appropriate here.

A message for all the people of all the world who think that their beliefs are the best possible ideas in the world, and that those who think differently are somehow inferior:

(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Findisputablelogictime.files.wordpress.com%2F2010%2F03%2Fcoexist-morons.jpg&hash=17d96ee75d2986d661ed7b9ae4d9a55ba6fa4807)
Coexist Morons!

"Religion" is an incredibly broad term. I think the OP is ignoring this, and only looking at the negative aspects of religious belief. Religion is not nearly as bad as he thinks it is.

If I went out and killed a bunch of people in Rwanda, and said I was doing it out of White Pride, that doesn't mean we need to abolish White People. It just means that I'm batshit crazy, and need to be tried for crimes against humanity.  Religion doesn't need to have war declared upon it. Religion will die, on its own, as humanity naturally progresses into the future. Why can't we just sit back and enjoy the ride?

I see the imperative to want to help people who have been harmed by religion, but would you have yourself become something just as bad to do it?

Oh, goodness me. Welcome PaulKing, although I can't guess you'll be around for long. Is this the first atheist troll we've had? I hope you prove my first impression wrong.

Damnit, I'm rhyming again.

I can certainly appreciate your militant attitude, Paul. I always argue against religious people.

Actually the discussions don't usually start out as arguments, just that when religious people find out that I am an atheist, I am always forced to defend myself - especially if I am in a room with more than one of these deluded assholes and they gain strength in numbers and they feel the power of almighty jeebus himself wagging their tongue for them.

The anger against the religious comes from frustration. The frustration of having to essentially accept belief in unicorns on a daily basis and respect that belief. I can't accept it and I will not respect it.

This doesn't mean that I actively attack the religious, I only enter into debate when invited to do so. For the most part, I don't give a fuck if people want to walk around with their heads up their asses. But as Nietzsche warned "where the rabble drink - all wells are poisoned." The deluded do affect all of our lives in a negative way.

I understand you anger, Paul, and appreciate it. Time will give you the mechanisms to attain inner peace in a world full of fucktards.

Seek out the similar minded and don't lose your passion - regardless of what some of these wishy washy too cool for school dorks have to say. The passionate are always persecuted - even by those who claim to be in the same camp, but the passionate are the only ones who ever affect change.

YEAH! F them all!

We'll show those murderous intolerant theists just how murderous and intolerant we atheists can be!

But on a serious note, I dislike religions for the same reasons I dislike your attitude toward theists PaulKing, because really, you're not much different: if I were to swap the religious and atheist words in all your sentences (swap the word Catholic for Atheist and vice versa), how would I know that you're any different than irrational and angry theists?

Quote from: "Catholic - PaulKing"Hi fellow Christians,

I'm a militant Catholic located in Los Angeles and very active in the movement.

I see atheism as a cancer on society that must be removed if the human race is to survive. To me Christianity is not a passive 'belief' but a moral imperative.

I promote 'total war' on atheism and don't pull my punches.

I may offend some but you will find me a straight shooter and very knowledgeable in regards to history, physics and political campaigning.

Hope to get to know you all.

Warmest regards,


Paul King
Christians: - One voice, one fist!

The difference being that the intolerance that I believe Paul King has and I most certainly have (sorry if I am trying speaking for you PK) is for ignorance and what that ignorance does to us all.

The example being given that priests are allowed to rape little boys all over the world and hide behind the popes vestments. It has been shown again and again that the catholic church is complicit in this atrocity. Hiding it's well documented crimes and transferring their holy rapists from parish to parish.

I guess this is something we are supposed to "tolerate."

It's not about beating the crap out of anyone who is deluded. It's about standing up against ignorance. Not accepting ignorance as though we have to understand that people have different opinions and why can't we all just get along. This ignorance is actively dragging us all back into the dark ages.

While we're trying to be polite and understand other points of view - loud mouthed reactionaries are affecting government policies all over the world.

Atrocities happen when people of good conscience (and in this case people of reason) do nothing.

(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv648%2FTedious1%2FNeato%2Ftumblr_l6xd5mwxX01qd8onlo1_400.jpg&hash=4de80e0c0b62258762f962849524a0ae07d6b2c0)

I think religion is dangerous and could well prevent our society making it into the next century.
Paul what does "I promote 'total war' on atheism and don't pull my punches" mean?
Are we talking about a peaceful protest outside a Christian school or violence?

Quote from: "Smarmy Of One"The difference being that the intolerance that I believe Paul King has and I most certainly have (sorry if I am trying speaking for you PK) is for ignorance and what that ignorance does to us all.

I've met plenty of ignorant atheists too.  No one worldview has a monopoly on brilliance, or stupidity.

QuoteThe example being given that priests are allowed to rape little boys all over the world and hide behind the popes vestments. It has been shown again and again that the catholic church is complicit in this atrocity. Hiding it's well documented crimes and transferring their holy rapists from parish to parish.

I guess this is something we are supposed to "tolerate."

I'm pretty sure that no one in this thread has advocated tolerating criminal behavior.

QuoteIt's not about beating the crap out of anyone who is deluded. It's about standing up against ignorance. Not accepting ignorance as though we have to understand that people have different opinions and why can't we all just get along. This ignorance is actively dragging us all back into the dark ages.

Actually, I think the flow of history is the reverse.  Sects that once banned women in positions of power are now being forced to reconsider those bans.  Sects that once banned gay clergy or laic marriages, likewise.  Even the monolithic Catholic Church has been forced to abandon positions it once defended with fervor; the RCC has, through the molestation scandals, been forced to reconsider, for instance, the celibacy rule.

QuoteWhile we're trying to be polite and understand other points of view - loud mouthed reactionaries are affecting government policies all over the world.

That sounds like a need for the ballot box, not the megaphone.

QuoteAtrocities happen when people of good conscience (and in this case people of reason) do nothing.

Yeah, I'm not sure where the idea was planted that non-confrontational atheists are doing nothing.  However, it is certainly wrong.

Nice photoshop, btw.

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"I've met plenty of ignorant atheists too.  No one worldview has a monopoly on brilliance, or stupidity.

Absolutely. But I am referring to a specific ignorance that only religious people enjoy. This is an atheist forum after all.

QuoteI'm pretty sure that no one in this thread has advocated tolerating criminal behavior.

No doubt. It was a jab at those who seem to be questioning someone's outrage. Hope that clears things a little for you.

QuoteActually, I think the flow of history is the reverse.  Sects that once banned women in positions of power are now being forced to reconsider those bans.  Sects that once banned gay clergy or laic marriages, likewise.  Even the monolithic Catholic Church has been forced to abandon positions it once defended with fervor; the RCC has, through the molestation scandals, been forced to reconsider, for instance, the celibacy rule.

I don't care if priests are allowed to fuck or not. The fact that the use of condoms is still a matter of debate is absolutely ludicrous. The catholic church has a long history of atrocities that they do nothing to rectify until public pressure becomes too great. I am particularly hard on catholics because I was one, but other faiths are just as slow to accept reality. This damages us all.

QuoteThat sounds like a need for the ballot box, not the megaphone.

You don't believe in the right to public protest? I don't see the two as mutually exclusive. Ballots are not authored without public demand.

QuoteYeah, I'm not sure where the idea was planted that non-confrontational atheists are doing nothing.  However, it is certainly wrong.

Can't disagree with that.

QuoteNice photoshop, btw.

I didn't do the photoshopping. Just found the image and thought it was funny.

Quote from: "Smarmy Of One"Absolutely. But I am referring to a specific ignorance that only religious people enjoy. This is an atheist forum after all.

Indeed, and it behooves us to acknowledge that atheism doesn't prevent facepalm.  I'm sure you know that already.

QuoteNo doubt. It was a jab at those who seem to be questioning someone's outrage. Hope that clears things a little for you.

Given that no one advocated the protection of molesters, it strikes me as a deeply unfair jab.

QuoteI don't care if priests are allowed to fuck or not. The fact that the use of condoms is still a matter of debate is absolutely ludicrous. The catholic church has a long history of atrocities that they do nothing to rectify until public pressure becomes too great. I am particularly hard on catholics because I was one, but other faiths are just as slow to accept reality. This damages us all.

I agree that they hold many absurd positions.  I was merely pointing out that their position is shrinking, and not growing.  They are being dragedd into the future, not dragging us into the past.

QuoteYou don't believe in the right to public protest?

I'm unsure how my advocating the use of the ballot rather than the megaphone suddenly became my desire to stifle dissent.  Care to map that out for me?

QuoteI don't see the two as mutually exclusive. Ballots are not authored without public demand.

Of course they're not exclusive.  I just think that sometimes hectoring is unproductive, or even counterproductive.

QuoteI agree that they hold many absurd positions.  I was merely pointing out that their position is shrinking, and not growing.  They are being dragedd into the future, not dragging us into the past.

In certain areas and in some minor ways. The vatican has been making allowances as it sees it's membership shrinking. But this is largely in North America and Europe. Not so much in the rest of the world. And just as their policies may become slightly more accommodating as an appeasement, they can just as easily be reversed again. It is important to be vocal and visible. Dogma, like Mould, grows in the dark. Plus there are many positions held by catholics that are not necessarily on the books. Propaganda that is spread from the church by word of mouth in sermons. Like Obama being the antichrist for example.

Catholics aside, islam is growing more popular each day and it's probably the most dangerous and damaging religion in the world at the moment.

QuoteI'm unsure how my advocating the use of the ballot rather than the megaphone suddenly became my desire to stifle dissent.  Care to map that out for me?

It is a question.

QuoteOf course they're not exclusive. I just think that sometimes hectoring is unproductive, or even counterproductive.

I didn't say anything about hectoring. I am advocating spreading secular policies with the same veracity that the religious spread theirs.

I don't have a problem with some hectoring and protest.
But to get results for birth control and restrictions on science, a common cause could be found with progressive christians.

Quote from: "Smarmy Of One"

QuoteI'm unsure how my advocating the use of the ballot rather than the megaphone suddenly became my desire to stifle dissent.  Care to map that out for me?

It is a question.

A loaded question, the premise of which is wrong.  Again, I ask: Care to explain your train of thought?

Quote from: "Thump"Of course they're not exclusive. I just think that sometimes hectoring is unproductive, or even counterproductive.

Quote from: "Smarmy"I didn't say anything about hectoring. I am advocating spreading secular policies with the same veracity that the religious spread theirs.

Actually, I'd say we atheists have more veracity on our side.  What I bemoan is the difficulties imposed on the advance of rational thought by those who shoot from the lip.

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"

Quote from: "Smarmy"I didn't say anything about hectoring. I am advocating spreading secular policies with the same veracity that the religious spread theirs.

Actually, I'd say we atheists have more veracity on our side.  What I bemoan is the difficulties imposed on the advance of rational thought by those who shoot from the lip.

He shoots... he scores!!  

The end, removal of collective religious influence from society, does not justify the means, shove all the Jews in a gas chamber. Now I realise that nobody is advocating a 'final solution' to religion in the Nazi sense. However ranting at, and berating,  Catholics for the excesses of the Catholic Church is counter productive. If you start trying to take down the church on the basis of the actions of some of it's members you will actually strengthen the cohesion of the church because it will feel collectively under threat. The behaviour of individuals in the church who have carried out those acts and those that have hidden the events and the perpetrators are culpable and need to be found and punished.

During WWII it was a widely held belief that mass bombing of civilian populations would break their moral. This did not prove to be the case because tribalism is deeply embedded in the human psych. If you want to affect change you have to do it one mind at a time and you don't do that by being perceived as the enemy.

Which guy is the more approachable?

This chap?
[spoiler:3vvb1wp5](https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fe-biscuit.com%2Fimages%2Fuploads%2FbhatMOS1111_468x421.jpg&hash=e47dcfe588e7194d4a906af93ab79c95ca39c7d8)[/spoiler:3vvb1wp5]

Or this chap?
[spoiler:3vvb1wp5](https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsheikyermami.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2007%2F10%2Fislamic_rage_boy.jpg&hash=988b141aabb682d520aad6dfb30d9622bb53d5f9)[/spoiler:3vvb1wp5]

Well obviously they are the same guy.

As an atheist I want to be seen like the first guy, friendly and inviting, I don't want to be seen like the second guy, aggressive and mindless. What's more is there is no need or requirement to appear hostile IT IS COMPLETELY COUNTER PRODUCTIVE! See simply using the caps lock changes the tone of the comment from inviting to aggressive. Aggressive ATHEISTS are perceptually no different from aggressive MUSLIMS, they are both just shouting their dogma in a pointless way.

Atheism is a minority world view, we are the ones who have to do the work and it is not aided by an approach that puts atheism in a bad light.

Is it not all relative? I was told i embarrassed a work friend when we were in town on lunch because i confronted a mormon on his silly views. The mormon was the one who approached us so i happily confronted him. The simple act of me politely telling the mormon he was wrong in his beliefs left my workmate - who is herself an apathetic atheist - shocked. Before about three years ago i wouldn't have confronted that mormon. I would have politely declined his leaflet and carried on with my day. To my colleague, i was being militant

I'd never dream of standing on a street corner with a megaphone promoting the beauty of a world without god. To me, that is OTT. But then, maybe i'm not pissed off enough. Maybe if the UK started to become a theocracy, i might pick up that megaphone.

As long as things can stay respectful, ie, no effigies or flag burning, then i don't see the issue with militance, per se.

I have considered getting a sign and a couple of fold up chairs and sitting in the middle of Leeds, me in one chair with the other facing me. The sign would read 'Evangelical Evolutionism'
'Would you like to ask any questions?'

The idea being I would only talk to the person sitting in the seat opposite me. The main reason I have not done this is the grief and aggravation I would get from my other half.  lol

However my facing down the street preachers in Leeds meant they were removed and prohibited from preaching again, which sort of annoyed me as I quite liked debating them. Apparently the ruck I, and others, caused meant the police felt that the preaching could lead to a 'breach of the peace'.

Quote from: "Tank"The main reason I have not done this is the grief and aggravation I would get from my other half.

Couldn't you go to the next town?

Paul was flamboyant, I don't know what he meant by total war.
Maybe he's just young and enthusiastic.  
He doesn't seem to have returned for a while.

I live in a country where 3 of the last 7 prime ministers were atheist.
People don't loose their jobs and suffer ostracism for non belief.
If I did I'd probably be as pissed off as Paul.

I am a bit uncomfortable with the say nothing and keep the peace approach.
People used to keep quiet about domestic violence, maybe many still do.
The community attitude to drink driving here has changed.

There is no reward for an atheist martyr, but I hope we can give the world a little nudge in the right direction when we can.

Quote from: "The Magic Pudding"

Quote from: "Tank"The main reason I have not done this is the grief and aggravation I would get from my other half.

Couldn't you go to the next town?

Paul was flamboyant, I don't know what he meant by total war.
Maybe he's just young and enthusiastic.  
He doesn't seem to have returned for a while.

I live in a country where 3 of the last 7 prime ministers were atheist.
People don't loose their jobs and suffer ostracism for non belief.
If I did I'd probably be as pissed off as Paul.

I am a bit uncomfortable with the say nothing and keep the peace approach.
People used to keep quiet about domestic violence, maybe many still do.
The community attitude to drink driving here has changed.

There is no reward for an atheist martyr, but I hope we can give the world a little nudge in the right direction when we can.

If I gave the impression that atheists should keep quiet then I don't think that at all. Every attempt should be made to remove the influence of institutionalised religion from society while defending 'freedom of and from religion' for the individual. My issue with Paul's approach is that it easily turned against us and it serves no useful purpose and that is all. We could write the same song sheet, but I think he'd sing it in a punk style while I would not.  

I think it is generally more effective to have a dialogue and slowly and painstakingly, slice up a religious dogmatists argument and feed it to them than it is to just shout at them, which just makes one look like 'rageboy'.

Quote from: "Tank"If I gave the impression that atheists should keep quiet then I don't think that at all.

No I don't think that.
I don't think we got to know what Paul meant either.