Happy Atheist Forum

Hello all, I'm a 20 year old (male) student from London UK excited to be signing in for the first time. Here is my little religion story, please feel free to comment. In fact, please do or I'll never graduate to full membership.    I'm afraid the substance doesn't really justify the length, and I apologise. It has helped me clarify my thoughts just to write it down, even if it remains unread.

I was born into a Methodist family, or more accurately my mother was/is a Methodist and leader of the Sunday School, whereas my Dad kept out of it. I attended church pretty much weekly from birth until going to university at the age of 18. The church was typically Methodist (British Methodist that is): i.e. fairly liberal, avoiding fire and brimstone etc.

While I was a teenager, I slowly came to realise that I was gay. It never even crossed my mind that there was any contradiction between my religion and my sexuality. I didn't have any boyfriends, but I fully intended to if the opportunity arose. This was probably to a large extent because of my attitude to my religion: I believed in God, as it were, 'intellectually' but I didn't really draw any spiritual value from it. I rarely prayed, and when I did I didn't feel particularly close to God or, indeed, any different from how I usually felt.

The beginning of the end for my Christianity was at the age of 18 when one day, when I was at church, I suddenly thought 'do I really believe in this?' So I read 'The God Delusion' and 'God is Not Great' and they seemed quite reasonable, but I kept on going to church and I wouldn't have identified, to myself or others, as an atheist.

Then I went to university somewhere with lots of evangelical Christians, who believed all the things I never did. To cut a long story short, one of them became my boyfriend. He told me that he was gay, and that he could only do anything about it now, because he'd lost his faith. He had thought, and still did, that Christianity and homosexuality were incompatible. We debated this point; I argued that the Bible was open to interpretation, etc etc. He said if we pick and choose bits to follow, it's just like any other book. More on that in a moment, but the other point he made was that he didn't think I'd ever really believed in Christianity, that I liked going to church and singing hymns and whatnot, but never really took it seriously. And, he argued, if someone genuinely believes Christianity is true isn't it the most amazing thing? How could anyone be a 'Christmas-only' Christian, for example, if they actually believed in Jesus?

I found the second point more persuasive than the first - he's probably right that I never really believed it, and I've slowly but surely come to consider myself an atheist. But it's the first point that got me thinking. I put it to my Mum, who pointed out quite legitimately that nobody follows all the biblical rules - why should someone feel they can't engage in homosexual relations but could wear a mixed fabric shirt or eat shellfish or whatever. I suppose the obvious response for an atheist would be to say that the Ian Paisley types are hypocrites just like the Bishop Spong types, but I did wonder (if anyone's still reading) whether atheists do think that, if I can put it like this: Given Christianity, homosexuality is a sin.

I've tried to extricate myself from 'my' church and tell my parents that I don't really believe it any more, and frankly I'm surprised how disappointed they are (even my Dad who, inconveniently for me, has recently become a church-goer.) I think I've been guilty of confusing the two issues my boyfriend made: that I never really believed and that Christianity and homosexuality are incompatible, with the result that my parents think I won't go to church because I think everyone is appalled by my relationship. Every time we discuss it it gets a bit awkward - I don't quite know how to tell them I didn't believe 'properly' in the first place. 'Mum, I think you're peddling those little children dangerous lies' somehow seems to strike the wrong note.

Firstly, welcome!

The way I see it, homosexuality is incompatible with all conservative groups, and that includes some branches or churches of Christianity, just as knowledge and tolerance are *eyeroll*. They get fussy about that topic because, like they do with evolutionary theory while not contesting scientifically incomplete (in the larger scale) theories such as gravity, it has a string of moral questions that come with it. They might think that homosexuals destabilise society and family values, for instance, and so are immoral. The problems they have with that is not on the same level as passages that say that eating shellfish or wearing a piece of clothing made of different fabrics are sins. You have to remember that religions have a purpose for group organisation and perpetuation...

What were your beliefs like? Did you use god mostly to explain gaps in your knowledge?

you have done nothing wrong, and there is nothing wrong with being gay.
it is a touchy topic, where you can lose friends and families over if you're not careful.
im no expert, but being an atheist or an agnostic isn't much of a big deal nor should it change your social life. hay im an atheist and it really doesn't impact me (i did have some religious troubles when i was 8 but i was confused then)

Hi Gorton

It's a shame that you are having to go through this sort of thing. The hang over of institutionalised superstition.

Welcome to HAF.

Regards
Chris

Hi Gorton,

The majority of people who say they are of a certain faith have never read the teachings that they believe, so how can they truly believe something if there only basis for there belief is what the religious figures teach in there services (and that is usually from there individual perspective of the writings). I personally see the mainstream religious crowd as less of a "[they] pick and choose bits " but more of they aren't fully aware of the entire teachings. Saying that though there are a lot of people that use the pick and mix model, my personal view on this is they can use there religious writings to justify certain actions then ignore the bits they don't like.

Homosexuality is definitely incompatible with most religions and as xSilverPhinx points out all conservative groups as there structure is a derivative of religion. Christianity's stance on the matter is people may be homosexual but should not act upon any desires and if they remain celibate will become heterosexual in heaven, if there not they will go to hell. What do I think of this? Its total bullshit it oppresses people for what is natural to them, attempting to form people into tightly formed boxes that reject the relativism of human ways of life so they can manage the populace in a more orderly way.

Thanks for the welcome all!

QuoteWhat were your beliefs like? Did you use god mostly to explain gaps in your knowledge?

My beliefs were basically that I couldn't see how the universe could exist without something to create it. I never seriously doubted evolution, I would have gone with the typical explanation that natural selection is all true, but it was guided by God. I'm no scientist, so I just accepted the mainstream scientific explanations of phenomena and accepted God to the extent that he was compatible with them.

The one area where I could have been called a Biblical literalist was miracles. I could never see, and actually still can't, why Christians would disavow the virgin birth or the turning of water into wine, for example. If God is omnipotent why should they not have happened?

QuoteThe problems they have with that is not on the same level as passages that say that eating shellfish or wearing a piece of clothing made of different fabrics are sins. You have to remember that religions have a purpose for group organisation and perpetuation...

Also, I suppose a Christian would point to the New Testament passage (I forget where it can be found, clearly wasn't paying much attention) where God says anything goes in the diet department. The intellectual contortions are quite impressive in some ways.

QuoteIt's a shame that you are having to go through this sort of thing. The hang over of institutionalised superstition.

Many thanks, but I hope I didn't give the impression that my life is very difficult because of my atheism. Obviously I'm unhappy that my parents are disappointed but I'm not being disowned or anything. My boyfriend, however, cannot tell his Christian parents about his sexuality. It's sad, because they're actually very nice people.

QuoteThe majority of people who say they are of a certain faith have never read the teachings that they believe, so how can they truly believe something if there only basis for there belief is what the religious figures teach in there services (and that is usually from there individual perspective of the writings). I personally see the mainstream religious crowd as less of a "[they] pick and choose bits " but more of they aren't fully aware of the entire teachings. Saying that though there are a lot of people that use the pick and mix model, my personal view on this is they can use there religious writings to justify certain actions then ignore the bits they don't like.

This is probably very true. It makes one wonder what their response would be if they knew the full extent of Biblical law. Either they'd have to accept all of it, give up their religion or soldier on with all the contradictions.

I don't know how new you are to these issues and don't know where to start, but have you checked out how other deconverted atheists which share many things in common with you have handled it?

IMO non belief or different beliefs are enough on their own to be a reason not to want to go to church. I would focus mostly on those at first more than on your sexuality since your parents might be confused as to why you would want to leave an more accepting "fairly liberal" church. If you want to leave a community that revolves around some beliefs you no longer hold, then that should be enough. To me it doesn't even make sense that a deist would go to a theistic church if they didn't go primarily for the community they see themselves as part of...

Christianity really has become an odd thing - it's grown multiple personalities - making it seem like very different religions based on one same body of text and if the parts that your church followed (or wilfully ignored) do not consider homosexuality to be a sin, then you'll be attacking a strawman, and that won't get you anywhere. What was it's stance on that?

Fundamentalist Christians (those who say that you can't "pick and choose" what you want to follow) don't realize that even if they say they aren't, they are still picking and choosing which parts of the bible they want to give the most emphasis to. You can try to interpret the bible literally, but no human can actually live in literal accordance with all of it. It just isn't going to happen. You end up "sinning" no matter what you do, so you have to pick which "sins" are more acceptable. They create this kind of warped "sin hierarchy".  

This is when they get into all kinds of zany rationalizations and tricks and "interpretations." If you try to point out potential contradictions in the Bible, they'll say "oh, no. It's not really a contradiction. It 'actually' means THIS". I saw one fundamentalist on a Christian forum argue that he knew all of the "real" interpretations and he absolutely would NOT admit that there was the slightest possibility that he was mis-interpreting the bible. He honestly thought he was reading every word exactly as God in intended.

Now, seriously, how arrogant do you have to be to think that you have the key to totally understanding the word of God; to the point where you will not accept any other points of view or possible interpretations. And wait now, isn't pride a sin? (do you see where I'm going with this?)

So, honestly, I wouldn't worry about it. There is no "right" or "wrong" Christianity (despite what some would lead you to believe) they're ALL based on interpretations - by people of things that other people have written.

QuoteChristianity really has become an odd thing - it's grown multiple personalities - making it seem like very different religions based on one same body of text and if the parts that your church followed (or wilfully ignored) do not consider homosexuality to be a sin, then you'll be attacking a strawman, and that won't get you anywhere. What was it's stance on that?

The church is fairly liberal. I think you're right, I should focus on the general points. I think part of the problem in some people see Christianity as a 'default,' i.e. you should practise as a Christian unless you disbelieve enough to stop practising, whereas I think atheism should be the default, if that makes sense. A lawyer would call it the burden of proof.

QuoteThis is when they get into all kinds of zany rationalizations and tricks and "interpretations." If you try to point out potential contradictions in the Bible, they'll say "oh, no. It's not really a contradiction. It 'actually' means THIS". I saw one fundamentalist on a Christian forum argue that he knew all of the "real" interpretations and he absolutely would NOT admit that there was the slightest possibility that he was mis-interpreting the bible. He honestly thought he was reading every word exactly as God in intended.

And of course, there's no way of disproving their rationalisations, but if the Bible is divine(ly inspired) one wonders why God wouldn't have made it consistent. They have the advantage of 2000 years of very clever people coming up with plausible justifications. 2000 years of scholarship on The Cat in the Hat could probably make it sound like a reasonable basis for a belief system.

This is one of the things I struggle to understand about some religions. It seems to be god first and family second. If there is a conflict then family members can get disowned (in extreme cases). In my opinion loving parents support their children and want to see their children happy.

I know it could be scary for a parent who might believe that their child will go to hell and endure eternal torture. This belief may force a parent to do all they can to straighten out their kid. The result will be a broken family, over an imagined belief that has not proof or evidence whatsoever to back it up.

It really is frustrating and sad.

Churches know this is going on, but arrogantly hold firm to their stance.

I predict that the homophobia of religions will ultimately lead to their downfall.

Quote from: "Stevil"I predict that the homophobia of religions will ultimately lead to their downfall.

Nah, some are adapting to the changing times. And I think that there will still be plenty of people who for some reason or another are homophobes, they'll still have plenty of like-minded communities to join.  :sheep: :sheep:

Quote from: "xSilverPhinx"

Quote from: "Stevil"I predict that the homophobia of religions will ultimately lead to their downfall.

Nah, some are adapting to the changing times. And I think that there will still be plenty of people who for some reason or another are homophobes, they'll still have plenty of like-minded communities to join.  :sheep: :sheep:

I totally agree. What certain religions once persecuted is now considered to be ok, what we usually see is a religion will oppose the something until the main consensus in the world population changes, religious authorities will then take notice of this change and very very slowly begin to adopt it. It is this slow changing with the times that allows them to constantly hang in there, If the religions changed its consensus quickly they would come under fire for looking like a business trying to capture as many consumers as possible by keeping up with the next big thing. But the slow transformation of these institutes wont scare off people and look more appealing to the younger generations or those on the verge of joining be it for a point of view they disagree with.

If by any chance a popular religion did take on the belief that homosexuality was ok (I'm using church of England, and Britain as the example) the die-hard homophobic minded will just go to another religion that is practically the same but opposed to the view. Or on the other hand it may push them further towards radical political parties like the bnp (*sigh*).

I don't see much way around the issue for Christians. Its not like the subjigation of women issue which is not so strongly advocated within scripture.

QuoteLev 20:13 If a man also lies with mankind, as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be on them

But now, much more people are openly gay, not just the stereotypical, limp wristed, feminine male but now adays people that you can't know unless they tell you or unless you meet their partner at a social. It's becoming a much more normal aspect to society, gay people are no longer seen as deviant freaks but simply people who may also be in love with someone. With familiarity comes compassion, understanding and even friendship. Religion's anti gay campaign cannot continue as people can easily see the issue with being anti gay and are starting to second guess their god and their church with regards to this stance. Once they start to second guess, well, the self assertion illutions of god being perfect and all loving then come into question. Once a person makes this step there is no going back, the god theory can no longer hold up.

The only way people can continue to have belief is to hold a position of disassociation between their religious belief and their real world society. Even then they are bound to suffer from cognitive dissonance. Once one understands their internal conflict then religion will go by the way side.

I just can't see the scriptures being rewritten, and major religious outfits doing a u-turn on this. e.g. imagine the Pope addressing the public and saying it is OK to be gay, that the Catholic church got it wrong for all these years. If they let people know that they can be wrong then the illusion is over and people start engaging their critical thinking.

The interesting thing to me is the consideration of why would homosexuality be vilified in the first place by any religion? Was it to ensure the propagation of more belivers? Was it out of fear or confusion? Was it a tool for population control. Because when you look at humanity historically homosexuality has been prevalent in some cultures while in others it has been relegated to fringe populations due to religious or political rules against it. Little boys when they learn about their stuff really want to stick their pecker in everything. I know I did, shampoo bottles, faucets, toys, furniture, for a while there I was fu**ing everything. Not to get off but just because I was experimental. Looking back its amazing that I did not end up enamored with all types of perforated objects. Not only that but some of our closest relatives, the Bonobos have sex for pleasure including homosexual sex especially between 2 females. Basically what I’m getting at is that we evolved all of our sexual intricacies, It’s entirely natural and these interests and adaptations should be celebrated and explored not vilified and suppressed. So instead of getting frustrated with 200 year old words that I can’t change I’d rather take a naturalist look at things and study the behavior of sexual suppression. Not only in religion but in culture as a whole, for something that is so natural and enjoyable why are there so many stigmas surrounding it?

Hey. I've been in the dilemma before, well, really I still am in it, of being a Christian and (in my personal case) being bi-curious. While in some communities, Christianity and gay can co-exists, I'm finding it more often that not that they can't. Sucks for me, I guess, but glad to hear you've found someone who almost shared your beliefs.

Quote from: Gorton on April 17, 2011, 06:00:28 PM
Hello all, I'm a 20 year old (male) student from London UK excited to be signing in for the first time. Here is my little religion story, please feel free to comment. In fact, please do or I'll never graduate to full membership.  <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/sad.gif" alt=":(" title="sad" />  I'm afraid the substance doesn't really justify the length, and I apologise. It has helped me clarify my thoughts just to write it down, even if it remains unread.

I was born into a Methodist family, or more accurately my mother was/is a Methodist and leader of the Sunday School, whereas my Dad kept out of it. I attended church pretty much weekly from birth until going to university at the age of 18. The church was typically Methodist (British Methodist that is): i.e. fairly liberal, avoiding fire and brimstone etc.

While I was a teenager, I slowly came to realise that I was gay. It never even crossed my mind that there was any contradiction between my religion and my sexuality. I didn't have any boyfriends, but I fully intended to if the opportunity arose. This was probably to a large extent because of my attitude to my religion: I believed in God, as it were, 'intellectually' but I didn't really draw any spiritual value from it. I rarely prayed, and when I did I didn't feel particularly close to God or, indeed, any different from how I usually felt.

The beginning of the end for my Christianity was at the age of 18 when one day, when I was at church, I suddenly thought 'do I really believe in this?' So I read 'The God Delusion' and 'God is Not Great' and they seemed quite reasonable, but I kept on going to church and I wouldn't have identified, to myself or others, as an atheist.

Then I went to university somewhere with lots of evangelical Christians, who believed all the things I never did. To cut a long story short, one of them became my boyfriend. He told me that he was gay, and that he could only do anything about it now, because he'd lost his faith. He had thought, and still did, that Christianity and homosexuality were incompatible. We debated this point; I argued that the Bible was open to interpretation, etc etc. He said if we pick and choose bits to follow, it's just like any other book. More on that in a moment, but the other point he made was that he didn't think I'd ever really believed in Christianity, that I liked going to church and singing hymns and whatnot, but never really took it seriously. And, he argued, if someone genuinely believes Christianity is true isn't it the most amazing thing? How could anyone be a 'Christmas-only' Christian, for example, if they actually believed in Jesus?

I found the second point more persuasive than the first - he's probably right that I never really believed it, and I've slowly but surely come to consider myself an atheist. But it's the first point that got me thinking. I put it to my Mum, who pointed out quite legitimately that nobody follows all the biblical rules - why should someone feel they can't engage in homosexual relations but could wear a mixed fabric shirt or eat shellfish or whatever. I suppose the obvious response for an atheist would be to say that the Ian Paisley types are hypocrites just like the Bishop Spong types, but I did wonder (if anyone's still reading) whether atheists do think that, if I can put it like this: Given Christianity, homosexuality is a sin.

I've tried to extricate myself from 'my' church and tell my parents that I don't really believe it any more, and frankly I'm surprised how disappointed they are (even my Dad who, inconveniently for me, has recently become a church-goer.) I think I've been guilty of confusing the two issues my boyfriend made: that I never really believed and that Christianity and homosexuality are incompatible, with the result that my parents think I won't go to church because I think everyone is appalled by my relationship. Every time we discuss it it gets a bit awkward - I don't quite know how to tell them I didn't believe 'properly' in the first place. 'Mum, I think you're peddling those little children dangerous lies' somehow seems to strike the wrong note.

It isn't possible tp extricate oneself from the church. Even science and psychology has its best parts rooted in the church, and they dictate our beliefs. Not only that, but our moral standards in public and science also come from thousands of years of christianity. There's no escape.

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 11, 2011, 07:42:51 PM
It isn't possible tp extricate oneself from the church. Not only that, but our moral standards in public and science also come from thousands of years of Christianity. There's no escape.

If it is so impossible, how are there Atheist? And moral standards? That comes from an individual's view point. Ex: You might find it rude to be greeted by being called a bitch, whereas in my circle and our standards, it's not an insult but a term of endearment. I do believe it's possible to extricate oneself from church, just a one can join the church. It's all in a matter of will.

Quote from: not your typical... on November 11, 2011, 07:53:07 PM

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 11, 2011, 07:42:51 PM
It isn't possible tp extricate oneself from the church. Not only that, but our moral standards in public and science also come from thousands of years of Christianity. There's no escape.

If it is so impossible, how are there Atheist? And moral standards? That comes from an individual's view point. Ex: You might find it rude to be greeted by being called a bitch, whereas in my circle and our standards, it's not an insult but a term of endearment. I do believe it
s possible to extricate oneself from church, just a one can join the church. It's all in a matter of will.

There is no escape, it is true. Reliogious or supernatural alternatives to God are found everywhere in science, and especially in psychology which has strong links to christianity, and even in maths and logic. New non-ideas have also shown a rise in popularity, like autism.
Morally, we are all, almost irretrievably, thoroughbred christian. Best example I can think of is our attitude to drugs and altered states.

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 11, 2011, 07:59:29 PMNew non-ideas have also shown a rise in popularity, like autism.

What now?

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 11, 2011, 07:59:29 PM
There is no escape, it is true. Reliogious or supernatural alternatives to God are found everywhere in science, and especially in psychology which has strong links to christianity, and even in maths and logic. New non-ideas have also shown a rise in popularity, like autism.
Morally, we are all, almost irretrievably, thoroughbred christian. Best example I can think of is our attitude to drugs and altered states.

U must live in a Bible belt area, cuz the attitude towards drugs in the places I frequent is, 'more drugs, more love.' And while America was built on christian principles, a lot has changed since then. How do you explain kids being suspended for having a Bible with them in school? Or getting written up for praying? That's doesn't sound very thoroughbred Christian to me.

Quote from: oscarstrok on April 17, 2011, 08:31:46 PM
it is a touchy topic, where you can lose friends and families over if you're not careful.

If you are not careful..? I'm sorry, but if a friend leaves you over your sexual orientation, you are most probably better off without the asshole to begin with. The same goes for family.

I don't see why someone would want to be "careful" around friends and family, as being yourself is a nice and sure way to get rid of all the trash and keep the good friends who actually accept you for you.

Quote from: Asmodean on November 11, 2011, 08:16:29 PM
I don't see why someone would want to be "careful" around friends and family, as being yourself is a nice and sure way to get rid of all the trash and keep the good friends who actually accept you for you.

I completely understand your point, but I can agree with him. The friend thing, if they can't accept u then forget them, but as for family. I have a strong belief that there is a big difference between family and relatives. I don't have a very large family, but I have tons of relatives. But I'd never come out to any of them. I told my friends when I first found out, but as for telling my mother and the few cousins I consider family, that'll never happen.

Quote from: not your typical... on November 11, 2011, 08:13:08 PM

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 11, 2011, 07:59:29 PM
There is no escape, it is true. Reliogious or supernatural alternatives to God are found everywhere in science, and especially in psychology which has strong links to christianity, and even in maths and logic. New non-ideas have also shown a rise in popularity, like autism.
Morally, we are all, almost irretrievably, thoroughbred christian. Best example I can think of is our attitude to drugs and altered states.

U must live in a Bible belt area, cuz the attitude towards drugs in the places I frequent is, 'more drugs, more love.' And while America was built on christian principles, a lot has changed since then. How do you explain kids being suspended for having a Bible with them in school? Or getting written up for praying? That's doesn't sound very thoroughbred Christian to me.

Our traditions and social outlook are all christian, whether or not the Bible or praying is in favour. There is much more to christianity than the menagerie of the Bible.
The attitude to drugs and psychology reflect christian principles, whether or not you are for or against drugs. Any drug experience that doesn't fall in with the moral menagerie handed down to us is struck off.

Quote from: Davin on November 11, 2011, 08:08:21 PM

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 11, 2011, 07:59:29 PMNew non-ideas have also shown a rise in popularity, like autism.

What now?

The belief in non-things, or meaningless phrases, like autism, is a non-christian sign of our primitive thinking.
The christian element in autism is something shared by science - animism. In this case it is the belief in a non-material energy or force that inhabits the brain.
Autism of course is eugenics in action. There are many examples of animism in christianity and science.

What you're describing right now is a paradox. You're saying that regardless of how we as a society acts, society is based off of Christian principles. So by being against drugs, we're Christian, and by being for them, we're still Christian? By banning Bibles and prayer, we're Christian and when they were allowed, we were Christian. You might want to rethink you're definition of Christan. Beign a Christian is not just believing in the birth, death, and resurrection of JC, but being a follower of his word and keeping God's commandments. So Now that you have the true definition of Christianity, explain how today's society is consumed by it.

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 11, 2011, 09:03:22 PM

Quote from: Davin on November 11, 2011, 08:08:21 PM

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 11, 2011, 07:59:29 PMNew non-ideas have also shown a rise in popularity, like autism.

What now?

The belief in non-things, or meaningless phrases, like autism, is a non-christian sign of our primitive thinking.
The christian element in autism is something shared by science - animism. In this case it is the belief in a non-material energy or force that inhabits the brain.
Autism of course is eugenics in action. There are many examples of animism in christianity and science.

I have no idea what any of that is supposed to mean. Keep in mind that I know a great deal about autism, and none of anything you said even comes remotely close to anything about it.

Quote from: not your typical... on November 11, 2011, 09:07:27 PM
What you're describing right now is a paradox. You're saying that regardless of how we as a society acts, society is based off of Christian principles. So by being against drugs, we're Christian, and by being for them, we're still Christian? By banning Bibles and prayer, we're Christian and when they were allowed, we were Christian. You might want to rethink you're definition of Christan. Beign a Christian is not just believing in the birth, death, and resurrection of JC, but being a follower of his word and keeping God's commandments. So Now that you have the true definition of Christianity, explain how today's society is consumed by it.

Experiential censorship qualifies both pro- and anti- drug attitudes in the west.

Compare and contrast christian (western) and eastern societies, and tribal societies. There's a huge difference. The west, for one, is characterized by a moral panic over experiences that challenge their world view. This stern fundamentalism is our moral hangover from the dogmatic promotion of the menagerie of the Bible.

Quote from: Davin on November 11, 2011, 09:09:11 PM

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 11, 2011, 09:03:22 PM

Quote from: Davin on November 11, 2011, 08:08:21 PM

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 11, 2011, 07:59:29 PMNew non-ideas have also shown a rise in popularity, like autism.

What now?

The belief in non-things, or meaningless phrases, like autism, is a non-christian sign of our primitive thinking.
The christian element in autism is something shared by science - animism. In this case it is the belief in a non-material energy or force that inhabits the brain.
Autism of course is eugenics in action. There are many examples of animism in christianity and science.

I have no idea what any of that is supposed to mean. Keep in mind that I know a great deal about autism, and none of anything you said even comes remotely close to anything about it.

The medical model is christian based and so seeks to diminish a person's profile or autonomy if that person behaves in ways that challenge christian society.
The way to eliminate the threat of people's social non-compliance is to describe them in terms of a pseudo-medical category, like autism.

This is different in non-christian countries.

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 11, 2011, 09:22:23 PM
Experiential censorship qualifies both pro- and anti- drug attitudes in the west.
Compare and contrast christian (western) and eastern societies, and tribal societies. There's a huge difference. The west, for one, is characterized by a moral panic over experiences that challenge their world view. This stern fundamentalism is our moral hangover from the dogmatic promotion of the menagerie of the Bible.

... Honest question. Are you drunk/high/under the influence of any legal and/or illegal substance(s)? Because if so, it would justify how everything you've said throughout this thread makes sense in you're head.

Quote from: not your typical... on November 11, 2011, 09:27:25 PM

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 11, 2011, 09:22:23 PM
Experiential censorship qualifies both pro- and anti- drug attitudes in the west.
Compare and contrast christian (western) and eastern societies, and tribal societies. There's a huge difference. The west, for one, is characterized by a moral panic over experiences that challenge their world view. This stern fundamentalism is our moral hangover from the dogmatic promotion of the menagerie of the Bible.

... Honest question. Are you drunk/high/under the influence of any legal and/or illegal substance(s)? Because if so, it would justify how everything you've said throughout this thread makes sense in you're head.

Do you understand this sentence:
"The west, for one, is characterized by a moral panic over experiences that challenge their world view. "

I showed that around my house. The opinion was that with average reading ability and allowance for context it looks straight forward. Who did you say was drunk or on drugs.

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 11, 2011, 09:25:56 PM

Quote from: Davin on November 11, 2011, 09:09:11 PM

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 11, 2011, 09:03:22 PM

Quote from: Davin on November 11, 2011, 08:08:21 PM

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 11, 2011, 07:59:29 PMNew non-ideas have also shown a rise in popularity, like autism.

What now?

The belief in non-things, or meaningless phrases, like autism, is a non-christian sign of our primitive thinking.
The christian element in autism is something shared by science - animism. In this case it is the belief in a non-material energy or force that inhabits the brain.
Autism of course is eugenics in action. There are many examples of animism in christianity and science.

I have no idea what any of that is supposed to mean. Keep in mind that I know a great deal about autism, and none of anything you said even comes remotely close to anything about it.

The medical model is christian based and so seeks to diminish a person's profile or autonomy if that person behaves in ways that challenge christian society.
The way to eliminate the threat of people's social non-compliance is to describe them in terms of a pseudo-medical category, like autism.

This is different in non-christian countries.

Still not showing that you know anything about autism. Being described as autistic does not limit a person's ability to to be socially non-compliant. I am socially non-compliant and I am autistic.

@anyone: What's with all the people picking on autism lately?

Quote from: Davin on November 11, 2011, 09:30:56 PM
@anyone: What's with all the people picking on autism lately?

I have no idea. It seems that the latest 'controversial' topics are autism and sexual orientation. I don't get what the fascination is.

Quote from: Davin on November 11, 2011, 09:30:56 PM

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 11, 2011, 09:25:56 PM

Quote from: Davin on November 11, 2011, 09:09:11 PM

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 11, 2011, 09:03:22 PM

Quote from: Davin on November 11, 2011, 08:08:21 PM

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 11, 2011, 07:59:29 PMNew non-ideas have also shown a rise in popularity, like autism.

What now?

The belief in non-things, or meaningless phrases, like autism, is a non-christian sign of our primitive thinking.
The christian element in autism is something shared by science - animism. In this case it is the belief in a non-material energy or force that inhabits the brain.
Autism of course is eugenics in action. There are many examples of animism in christianity and science.

I have no idea what any of that is supposed to mean. Keep in mind that I know a great deal about autism, and none of anything you said even comes remotely close to anything about it.

The medical model is christian based and so seeks to diminish a person's profile or autonomy if that person behaves in ways that challenge christian society.
The way to eliminate the threat of people's social non-compliance is to describe them in terms of a pseudo-medical category, like autism.

This is different in non-christian countries.

Still not showing that you know anything about autism. Being described as autistic does not limit a person's ability to to be socially non-compliant. I am socially non-compliant and I am autistic.

@anyone: What's with all the people picking on autism lately?

I know what socially non-compliant is, but what's autism?
Autism is a non-thing, a modern belief in a non-thing. No one can say they "have it", because nothing, no "it", is specified, described, or understood.
That's good news.
(I used autism as an example of our religious leanings. Forget this example.)

Hello Gorton.
Are you from Gorton?  If so would you like to go for a pint?
Willow.

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 11, 2011, 09:29:57 PM
Do you understand this sentence:
"The west, for one, is characterized by a moral panic over experiences that challenge their world view. "
I showed that around my house. The opinion was that with average reading ability and allowance for context it looks straight forward. Who did you say was drunk or on drugs.

That's not the issue here. The issue is how you're stating that everyone is "thoroughbred Christian" when in all honesty, Christianity is turning into a seasonal coat, just take it out on Christmas and Easter, and some don't even acknowledge it. How do you explain the people with no knowledge of God or Christianity whatsoever? And you still didn't answer about how there are Atheist.

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 11, 2011, 09:37:02 PMI know what socially non-compliant is, but what's autism?
Autism is a non-thing, a modern belief in a non-thing. No one can say they "have it", because nothing, no "it", is specified, described, or understood.
That's good news.
(I used autism as an example of our religious leanings. Forget this example.)

With this, it's time for me to leave the taco stand.

Quote from: not your typical... on November 11, 2011, 09:35:00 PM

Quote from: Davin on November 11, 2011, 09:30:56 PM
@anyone: What's with all the people picking on autism lately?

I have no idea. It seems that the latest 'controversial' topics are autism and sexual orientation. I don't get what the fascination is.

It's probably because we autistics are the genetically engineered super human future of the human race that the Government has been secretly developing with the aliens since they landed in Roswell. You just wait until our psychic powers are activated by the chemicals put into the air by the contrails of the airplanes and start taking over the human race!

I think I've said too much...

Quote from: Willow on November 11, 2011, 09:39:33 PM
Hello Gorton.
Are you from Gorton?  If so would you like to go for a pint?
Willow.

He only participated for a few days in April, but his email address is public so you coud always drop him a line via that route.

Quote from: not your typical... on November 11, 2011, 04:42:55 AM
Hey. I've been in the dilemma before, well, really I still am in it, of being a Christian and (in my personal case) being bi-curious. While in some communities, Christianity and gay can co-exists, I'm finding it more often that not that they can't. Sucks for me, I guess, but glad to hear you've found someone who almost shared your beliefs.

At the end of the day, god made you that way, yet god says it's not ok? This does not make sense along with most other religious teachings. And that is because they are made up by ancient savages.

Quote from: Davin on November 11, 2011, 09:49:30 PM
It's probably because we autistics are the genetically engineered super human future of the human race that the Government has been secretly developing with the aliens since they landed in Roswell. You just wait until our psychic powers are activated by the chemicals put into the air by the contrails of the airplanes and start taking over the human race!
I think I've said too much...

when this does happen, can you promise to spare my life? Even if it means I have to be a lowly servant, I'll take it.

Quote from: Norfolk And Chance on November 11, 2011, 10:06:25 PM
At the end of the day, god made you that way, yet god says it's not ok? This does not make sense along with most other religious teachings. And that is because they are made up by ancient savages.

I think the most common responses I get to this by Christians are:
1. It's a trick of the enemy/You allowed demons into your life.
2. It's a test of faith/The devil is planting the seed of temptation. Reject the fruit, for no matter how sweet it may smell, it is still the rotten fruit of sin.
Personally, I think it's more of a nature vs. nurture argument, but that's for another time.

Quote from: Norfolk And Chance on November 11, 2011, 10:06:25 PM

Quote from: not your typical... on November 11, 2011, 04:42:55 AM
Hey. I've been in the dilemma before, well, really I still am in it, of being a Christian and (in my personal case) being bi-curious. While in some communities, Christianity and gay can co-exists, I'm finding it more often that not that they can't. Sucks for me, I guess, but glad to hear you've found someone who almost shared your beliefs.

At the end of the day, god made you that way, yet god says it's not ok? This does not make sense along with most other religious teachings. And that is because they are made up by ancient savages.

Why were they savages? They may have lacked understanding about the way the world worked but that makes them 'ignorant', not necessarily savages.

Quote from: Tank on November 11, 2011, 10:13:08 PM

Quote from: Norfolk And Chance on November 11, 2011, 10:06:25 PM

Quote from: not your typical... on November 11, 2011, 04:42:55 AM
Hey. I've been in the dilemma before, well, really I still am in it, of being a Christian and (in my personal case) being bi-curious. While in some communities, Christianity and gay can co-exists, I'm finding it more often that not that they can't. Sucks for me, I guess, but glad to hear you've found someone who almost shared your beliefs.

At the end of the day, god made you that way, yet god says it's not ok? This does not make sense along with most other religious teachings. And that is because they are made up by ancient savages.

Why were they savages? They may have lacked understanding about the way the world worked but that makes them 'ignorant', not necessarily savages.

They used to sacrifice people and killing in the name of god was just fine. That makes the people of 2,000 years ago savages, IMO.

Quote from: Norfolk And Chance on November 12, 2011, 03:34:29 AM

Quote from: Tank on November 11, 2011, 10:13:08 PM

Quote from: Norfolk And Chance on November 11, 2011, 10:06:25 PM

Quote from: not your typical... on November 11, 2011, 04:42:55 AM
Hey. I've been in the dilemma before, well, really I still am in it, of being a Christian and (in my personal case) being bi-curious. While in some communities, Christianity and gay can co-exists, I'm finding it more often that not that they can't. Sucks for me, I guess, but glad to hear you've found someone who almost shared your beliefs.

At the end of the day, god made you that way, yet god says it's not ok? This does not make sense along with most other religious teachings. And that is because they are made up by ancient savages.

Why were they savages? They may have lacked understanding about the way the world worked but that makes them 'ignorant', not necessarily savages.

They used to sacrifice people and killing in the name of god was just fine. That makes the people of 2,000 years ago savages, IMO.

I can understand that thought process, but to them, it was the equivalent of going to war, except there reason was to get rid of heathens, not steal land, enslave people, or abuse power. While those things might have happened in the process, that's simply because humans are corrupt, not to be confused with the original reasoning.

Quote from: not your typical... on November 12, 2011, 03:37:16 AM

Quote from: Norfolk And Chance on November 12, 2011, 03:34:29 AM

Quote from: Tank on November 11, 2011, 10:13:08 PM

Quote from: Norfolk And Chance on November 11, 2011, 10:06:25 PM

Quote from: not your typical... on November 11, 2011, 04:42:55 AM
Hey. I've been in the dilemma before, well, really I still am in it, of being a Christian and (in my personal case) being bi-curious. While in some communities, Christianity and gay can co-exists, I'm finding it more often that not that they can't. Sucks for me, I guess, but glad to hear you've found someone who almost shared your beliefs.

At the end of the day, god made you that way, yet god says it's not ok? This does not make sense along with most other religious teachings. And that is because they are made up by ancient savages.

Why were they savages? They may have lacked understanding about the way the world worked but that makes them 'ignorant', not necessarily savages.

They used to sacrifice people and killing in the name of god was just fine. That makes the people of 2,000 years ago savages, IMO.

I can understand that thought process, but to them, it was the equivalent of going to war, except there reason was to get rid of heathens, not steal land, enslave people, or abuse power. While those things might have happened in the process, that's simply because humans are corrupt, not to be confused with the original reasoning.

Just because they thought they had reasons did not make them not savage.

Quote from: Norfolk And Chance on November 12, 2011, 03:42:53 AM
Just because they thought they had reasons did not make them not savage.

That's like saying everyone who goes to war is a savage. While some are, I know of plenty who aren't.

Quote from: Norfolk And Chance on November 12, 2011, 03:34:29 AM

Quote from: Tank on November 11, 2011, 10:13:08 PM

Quote from: Norfolk And Chance on November 11, 2011, 10:06:25 PM

Quote from: not your typical... on November 11, 2011, 04:42:55 AM
Hey. I've been in the dilemma before, well, really I still am in it, of being a Christian and (in my personal case) being bi-curious. While in some communities, Christianity and gay can co-exists, I'm finding it more often that not that they can't. Sucks for me, I guess, but glad to hear you've found someone who almost shared your beliefs.

At the end of the day, god made you that way, yet god says it's not ok? This does not make sense along with most other religious teachings. And that is because they are made up by ancient savages.

Why were they savages? They may have lacked understanding about the way the world worked but that makes them 'ignorant', not necessarily savages.

They used to sacrifice people and killing in the name of god was just fine. That makes the people of 2,000 years ago savages, IMO.

WTF! Just because some people may carried out human sacrifice 2,000 years ago does not make all people who lived 2,000 years ago savages!

Quote from: Tank on November 12, 2011, 08:18:29 AM

Quote from: Norfolk And Chance on November 12, 2011, 03:34:29 AM

Quote from: Tank on November 11, 2011, 10:13:08 PM

Quote from: Norfolk And Chance on November 11, 2011, 10:06:25 PM

Quote from: not your typical... on November 11, 2011, 04:42:55 AM
Hey. I've been in the dilemma before, well, really I still am in it, of being a Christian and (in my personal case) being bi-curious. While in some communities, Christianity and gay can co-exists, I'm finding it more often that not that they can't. Sucks for me, I guess, but glad to hear you've found someone who almost shared your beliefs.

At the end of the day, god made you that way, yet god says it's not ok? This does not make sense along with most other religious teachings. And that is because they are made up by ancient savages.

Why were they savages? They may have lacked understanding about the way the world worked but that makes them 'ignorant', not necessarily savages.

They used to sacrifice people and killing in the name of god was just fine. That makes the people of 2,000 years ago savages, IMO.

WTF! Just because some people may carried out human sacrifice 2,000 years ago does not make all people who lived 2,000 years ago savages!

The people who wrote the holy books were religious and likely agreed with the hideous practices of the time therefore were equally culpable. I don't think I'm making a quantum leap here.

Quote from: Norfolk And Chance on November 12, 2011, 08:53:53 AM

Quote from: Tank on November 12, 2011, 08:18:29 AM

Quote from: Norfolk And Chance on November 12, 2011, 03:34:29 AM

Quote from: Tank on November 11, 2011, 10:13:08 PM

Quote from: Norfolk And Chance on November 11, 2011, 10:06:25 PM

Quote from: not your typical... on November 11, 2011, 04:42:55 AM
Hey. I've been in the dilemma before, well, really I still am in it, of being a Christian and (in my personal case) being bi-curious. While in some communities, Christianity and gay can co-exists, I'm finding it more often that not that they can't. Sucks for me, I guess, but glad to hear you've found someone who almost shared your beliefs.

At the end of the day, god made you that way, yet god says it's not ok? This does not make sense along with most other religious teachings. And that is because they are made up by ancient savages.

Why were they savages? They may have lacked understanding about the way the world worked but that makes them 'ignorant', not necessarily savages.

They used to sacrifice people and killing in the name of god was just fine. That makes the people of 2,000 years ago savages, IMO.

WTF! Just because some people may carried out human sacrifice 2,000 years ago does not make all people who lived 2,000 years ago savages!

The people who wrote the holy books were religious and likely agreed with the hideous practices of the time therefore were equally culpable. I don't think I'm making a quantum leap here.

So by you're argument you are a rapist? It goes like this. 99% of rapes are carried out by men therefore all men are rapists. Exactly how many religious groups carried out human sacrific? Get some facts and be specific please. So were the Greeks 'savages' some/most of them were theists. You are making horrendous generalisation about the behaviours of billions of people you have never met.

Quote from: Tank on November 12, 2011, 09:02:19 AMSo were the Greeks 'savages' some/most of them were theists.

I suppose so.

If you draw a circle around yours and behave civilly within, but you're a hero for slaughtering those outside the circle, you are a savage by my measure.

Quote from: Tank on November 12, 2011, 09:02:19 AM

Quote from: Norfolk And Chance on November 12, 2011, 08:53:53 AM

Quote from: Tank on November 12, 2011, 08:18:29 AM

Quote from: Norfolk And Chance on November 12, 2011, 03:34:29 AM

Quote from: Tank on November 11, 2011, 10:13:08 PM

Quote from: Norfolk And Chance on November 11, 2011, 10:06:25 PM

Quote from: not your typical... on November 11, 2011, 04:42:55 AM
Hey. I've been in the dilemma before, well, really I still am in it, of being a Christian and (in my personal case) being bi-curious. While in some communities, Christianity and gay can co-exists, I'm finding it more often that not that they can't. Sucks for me, I guess, but glad to hear you've found someone who almost shared your beliefs.

At the end of the day, god made you that way, yet god says it's not ok? This does not make sense along with most other religious teachings. And that is because they are made up by ancient savages.

Why were they savages? They may have lacked understanding about the way the world worked but that makes them 'ignorant', not necessarily savages.

They used to sacrifice people and killing in the name of god was just fine. That makes the people of 2,000 years ago savages, IMO.

WTF! Just because some people may carried out human sacrifice 2,000 years ago does not make all people who lived 2,000 years ago savages!

The people who wrote the holy books were religious and likely agreed with the hideous practices of the time therefore were equally culpable. I don't think I'm making a quantum leap here.

So by you're argument you are a rapist? It goes like this. 99% of rapes are carried out by men therefore all men are rapists. Exactly how many religious groups carried out human sacrific? Get some facts and be specific please. So were the Greeks 'savages' some/most of them were theists. You are making horrendous generalisation about the behaviours of billions of people you have never met.

Billions? Not in those days.

I never said they were all ancient savages, I said the books were written by ancient savages. You only have to read the OT, and I know you will have. Christopher Hitchens agrees with me, well technically I agree with him because he first mooted that the bible was written by "ancient savages", so that'll do for me.

Quote from: Norfolk And Chance on November 12, 2011, 04:43:48 PM

Quote from: Tank on November 12, 2011, 09:02:19 AM

Quote from: Norfolk And Chance on November 12, 2011, 08:53:53 AM

Quote from: Tank on November 12, 2011, 08:18:29 AM

Quote from: Norfolk And Chance on November 12, 2011, 03:34:29 AM

Quote from: Tank on November 11, 2011, 10:13:08 PM

Quote from: Norfolk And Chance on November 11, 2011, 10:06:25 PM

Quote from: not your typical... on November 11, 2011, 04:42:55 AM
Hey. I've been in the dilemma before, well, really I still am in it, of being a Christian and (in my personal case) being bi-curious. While in some communities, Christianity and gay can co-exists, I'm finding it more often that not that they can't. Sucks for me, I guess, but glad to hear you've found someone who almost shared your beliefs.

At the end of the day, god made you that way, yet god says it's not ok? This does not make sense along with most other religious teachings. And that is because they are made up by ancient savages.

Why were they savages? They may have lacked understanding about the way the world worked but that makes them 'ignorant', not necessarily savages.

They used to sacrifice people and killing in the name of god was just fine. That makes the people of 2,000 years ago savages, IMO.

WTF! Just because some people may carried out human sacrifice 2,000 years ago does not make all people who lived 2,000 years ago savages!

The people who wrote the holy books were religious and likely agreed with the hideous practices of the time therefore were equally culpable. I don't think I'm making a quantum leap here.

So by you're argument you are a rapist? It goes like this. 99% of rapes are carried out by men therefore all men are rapists. Exactly how many religious groups carried out human sacrific? Get some facts and be specific please. So were the Greeks 'savages' some/most of them were theists. You are making horrendous generalisation about the behaviours of billions of people you have never met.

Billions? Not in those days.

I never said they were all ancient savages, I said the books were written by ancient savages. You only have to read the OT, and I know you will have. Christopher Hitchens agrees with me, well technically I agree with him because he first mooted that the bible was written by "ancient savages", so that'll do for me.

I don't think necessarily that all who wrote the Bible were savages, just like not all who were in the Bible were savages. I believe that in our modern day and age, we see them as savage, simply because we don't carry out the same practices anymore. But I'm almost positive that if we lived back then, with the exception of a few small breed, we would have similar, if not all the same mentality. Personally, I don't like to judge unless I understand the person's point of view. For them, sacrifice was normal, to us it's cruel and unusual. It all depends on how close you stand to the mirror.

Quote from: not your typical... on November 11, 2011, 09:39:54 PM

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 11, 2011, 09:29:57 PM
Do you understand this sentence:
"The west, for one, is characterized by a moral panic over experiences that challenge their world view. "
I showed that around my house. The opinion was that with average reading ability and allowance for context it looks straight forward. Who did you say was drunk or on drugs.

That's not the issue here. The issue is how you're stating that everyone is "thoroughbred Christian" when in all honesty, Christianity is turning into a seasonal coat, just take it out on Christmas and Easter, and some don't even acknowledge it. How do you explain the people with no knowledge of God or Christianity whatsoever? And you still didn't answer about how there are Atheist.

You have developed a censor againt altered states. You have adopted the moral code of christinaity. yOu have accepted a belief in the afterlife of the gene.

Quote from: Davin on November 11, 2011, 09:49:30 PM

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 11, 2011, 09:37:02 PMI know what socially non-compliant is, but what's autism?
Autism is a non-thing, a modern belief in a non-thing. No one can say they "have it", because nothing, no "it", is specified, described, or understood.
That's good news.
(I used autism as an example of our religious leanings. Forget this example.)

With this, it's time for me to leave the taco stand.

Quote from: not your typical... on November 11, 2011, 09:35:00 PM

Quote from: Davin on November 11, 2011, 09:30:56 PM
@anyone: What's with all the people picking on autism lately?

I have no idea. It seems that the latest 'controversial' topics are autism and sexual orientation. I don't get what the fascination is.

It's probably because we autistics are the genetically engineered super human future of the human race that the Government has been secretly developing with the aliens since they landed in Roswell. You just wait until our psychic powers are activated by the chemicals put into the air by the contrails of the airplanes and start taking over the human race!

I think I've said too much...

We "autistics"?What do you mean by autistics?

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 13, 2011, 03:44:48 AM

Quote from: Davin on November 11, 2011, 09:49:30 PM

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 11, 2011, 09:37:02 PMI know what socially non-compliant is, but what's autism?
Autism is a non-thing, a modern belief in a non-thing. No one can say they "have it", because nothing, no "it", is specified, described, or understood.
That's good news.
(I used autism as an example of our religious leanings. Forget this example.)

With this, it's time for me to leave the taco stand.

Quote from: not your typical... on November 11, 2011, 09:35:00 PM

Quote from: Davin on November 11, 2011, 09:30:56 PM
@anyone: What's with all the people picking on autism lately?

I have no idea. It seems that the latest 'controversial' topics are autism and sexual orientation. I don't get what the fascination is.

It's probably because we autistics are the genetically engineered super human future of the human race that the Government has been secretly developing with the aliens since they landed in Roswell. You just wait until our psychic powers are activated by the chemicals put into the air by the contrails of the airplanes and start taking over the human race!

I think I've said too much...

We "autistics"?What do you mean by autistics?

Hey, Jonesboy,
Maybe you should begin by doing a bit of research on autism before making such wide sweeping generalizations on it being some sort of fiction. Have you ever spent an hour with an individual with autism, mild, severe or otherwise?
So, autism is a non-thing? That's great. Can you cite a source for this claim? It is, in fact, a thing, a disorder, sometimes debilitating, and your bullshit statement is the epitome of ignorance.
So, autism is a non-thing? Why is it, then, that my autistic son did not speak until he was five. Why is it that he cannot understand how to pull up his pants, but can perform complicated (for his age) mathematical problems and is functionally literate? What do you gain by making such statements?
Socially non compliant is a far way off from autism. The disorder is not a fiction. It is not a fad. Autism, for some, can be a life long struggle, and for you to relegate it to the realm of the imagined is disingenuous and quite offensive.

I work with a number of autistic people in the charity for which I'm a volunteer.  Jonesboy, you are talking through your arse on that subject and I make no apology for being blunt about it.

Quote from: Jonesboy on November 13, 2011, 03:44:48 AMWe "autistics"?What do you mean by autistics?

I don't like your tacos.