3 Muslims killed by gunman in NC, USA

[msj]

Agreed. And most people who are criticizing religion, never get around to identifying what aspects of religion they are attacking: beliefs and doctrines, ritual observances, prayer, church attendance and leadership etc.. Religion is a big catch-all that's been with us as long as the early city states discovered (accidentally or intentionally) that they needed some sort of shared rituals and beliefs to unite people together for common purpose. If we just get rid of religion, what do the antitheists propose we put in its place?

Strange to complain about catch-alls with your own catch-all, eh?

If you want people to talk specifics about silly ideas (religious or otherwise) I think there are already lots of posts on this forum where specifics are mentioned.

This is done on a regular basis.

Many moons ago I did up a thread about some guy who tattooed a quote from Leviticus on his arm. If one went to Leviticus then one would also look up the prohibition on getting tattoos. I thought the whole thing rather funny and typically hypocritical.

Anyway, as an atheist I do not need to propose any replacement to the theists.

Like many atheists (and agnostics etc) all I ask is that religious people keep their silly ideas to themselves and stop killing people and/or implementing poor public policy which is informed based on silly religious ideas rather than something like logic, science, etc....

If people want to meet and talk about an imaginary power (or not) then do it all they want.

Do not try to make me do as they think and I will do the same.

Discussion, on the other hand, is fair game - they can proselytize to me and myself to them all we want.

And if they want to call my ideas silly and stupid and they can back them up with an argument then all the more power to them.

Most haven't even thought that far ahead, because they are still too busy in their parents' basements playing World of Warcraft etc. to consider that the real world requires real solutions to problems, not just wishing away religions they don't happen to like or agree with.

I can't speak for every atheist, but I know that I have not lived with my parents for over 20 years now.

Not sure how that is relevant and not sure why you allow yourself such a "catch-all" while being critical of others ....

As for the rest of your ad hominem attack - well, once again, not sure how it is relevant to any serious discussion. It is unnecessary too.

Play the ball and not the player....

[cybercoma]

I think it's very important to start distinguishing between atheists and the anti-theists.

[Guest]

Or even just between those who don't give a toss about religion when it doesn't hurt anyone and those who despise it when it does.

[msj]

Or even just between those who don't give a toss about religion when it doesn't hurt anyone and those who despise it when it does.

It's funny: people will argue about how few Islamists there are (thousands, or perhaps tens of thousands) but oh noes! "Anti theists!"

Break out the antitheist legislation because there are so many instances of antitheists flying planes into churches; strapping bombs to themselves in front of churches; rushing into religious schools demanding that girls be indoctrinated the same as boys and then killing dozens of children because, no god; and don't forget the antitheists who kidnap religious children and hold them for ransom.

I think antitheists need to target journalists and start cutting off their heads and then maybe they will get sympathy from the "tolerant" liberal sect.

[cybercoma]

I think you're being ridiculous. Nobody said anything about violent threats from anti-theists. I'm just saying there's a clear and fundamental difference between atheists and anti-theists.

The comparison between Muslims and Radical Islamists only extends as far as the logical construction of these abstract concepts, not in their means or praxis. Even then that's entirely flawed as well. What I mean by the logical construction is this: All dogs are animals, but not all animals are dogs. All anti-theists are atheists, but not all atheists are anti-theists. All terrorists are Muslim, but not all Muslims are terrorists.

That in itself is flawed because not all terrorists are Muslims. There are Christian terrorist organizations beheading Muslims in Africa as we speak. Anders Breivik was a terrorist but not a muslim. Ted Kaczynski was a terrorist but not Muslim. Timothy McVeigh was a terrorist but not Muslim. There are radical terrorist monks in Myanmar who are not Muslim, but are attacking Muslims in the streets.

Likewise, I suppose there could be a situation where someone is an anti-theist but not atheist. They could be agnostic, but I reject the idea that agnosticism is mutually exclusive from atheism (I've posted extensively on this in the past and do not wish to re-iterate things I've already argued).

Anyway, I have no idea what lead you to jump to the conclusion that somehow anti-theists are comparable to Radical Islamists in terms of their methods. I don't think anyone came even remotely close to saying that nor implying it even.

[msj]

CC, I agree I was being ridiculous. Sarcasm soaked post.

Yet you will rail at me when you should be railing at WIP for his "anti theist" hair splitting nonsense in the first place.

Quite telling though.

[cybercoma]

I'm not railing at anyone. I'm just suggesting that we clarify between atheists and anti-theists.

[Mighty AC]

I think it's very important to start distinguishing between atheists and the anti-theists.

Agreed. I am both. I am an atheist in that I don't believe in deities, but also an anti-theist because I want to see a reduction in religiosity.

[WIP]

Like many atheists (and agnostics etc) all I ask is that religious people keep their silly ideas to themselves and stop killing people and/or implementing poor public policy which is informed based on silly religious ideas rather than something like logic, science, etc....

And what about when the non-religious kill people? Like the "gun-toting" atheist who decided to kill three Muslim students....which is supposed to be the topic of this thread btw!

[WIP]

It's funny: people will argue about how few Islamists there are (thousands, or perhaps tens of thousands) but oh noes! "Anti theists!"

Break out the antitheist legislation because there are so many instances of antitheists flying planes into churches; strapping bombs to themselves in front of churches; rushing into religious schools demanding that girls be indoctrinated the same as boys and then killing dozens of children because, no god; and don't forget the antitheists who kidnap religious children and hold them for ransom.

I think antitheists need to target journalists and start cutting off their heads and then maybe they will get sympathy from the "tolerant" liberal sect.

And, what will your excuse be if that happens? Until two weeks ago, you could run around declaring that nobody has killed in the cause of atheism...until it begins to happen.

*I want to reiterate on a point I've made before that the category "state-sponsored terrorism" should include nations that claim some veneer of legitimacy by using their armies to kill large numbers of civilians. This is after all, one of the major motivators for opposing sides to use terrorist tactics also.

If beheading hostages, suicide bombings and shootings are terrorist attacks, what are "double tap" drone strikes? And are these double taps - used in at least five different target zones, Christian terrorism/or secular terrorism? And should Obama, the CIA which is conducting these strikes, and assorted other flunkies be regarded as war criminals who need to be brought before a war crimes trials in a fair world?...which would mean hypothetically of course.

Edited February 22, 2015 by WIP

[WIP]

Agreed. I am both. I am an atheist in that I don't believe in deities, but also an anti-theist because I want to see a reduction in religiosity.

Why?

It seems to me that most people believe in some sort of supernatural forces and a purposeful universe because their intuitions tell them this is how the world works......somebody must have made it etc.. Some psychologists call it problem created by our predisposition to detect agency in everything that seems to move independently. But, what if they're right, and skeptics have narrowed their range of acceptable understandings too much?

I'm an atheist because I don't see anything more than wishful thinking and faulty reasons to believe in anything supernatural, but I'm also not an antitheist, because I see that as an equally dogmatic position to take, considering how limited our knowledge may still be in this general subject area. So, I would rather live in a world where a lot of people believe in a lot of different ideas...but can still get along together, than in one where everybody is thinking the same way.

But, my big issue with antitheism in principle, is that it takes on the aspects of in-group thinking and behaviour that we always worry about from the religious crowd. The big problem with this gun nut in North Carolina was....well he's a gun nut! But, if he was an atheist who did not share some level of contempt for those who believe in God, he would have had one less reason to kill three people!

*I should mention again that I don't believe this excuse about the parking situation in his building at all! From witness testimony, he had parking disputes with all of his neighbours, but he targeted these three for other reasons.

[msj]

And what about when the non-religious kill people? Like the "gun-toting" atheist who decided to kill three Muslim students....which is supposed to be the topic of this thread btw!

Point me to the "anti theist" Bible that states "kill the believers for they are stupid and silly and should be killed."

A person who does not believe in any gods has no "anti theist" reason to kill.

A believer does have a reason to kill.

If I believe in Zeus and you believe in God then various passages of the Bible /Koran specifically call for the death of apostates and non-believers.

No, this is a parking dispute with easy access to guns.

Like any other day in America.

[Michael Hardner]

A person who does not believe in any gods has no "anti theist" reason to kill.

A believer does have a reason to kill.

Those aren't axioms, though. The opposite of both assumptions here happens all the time.

[msj]

Those aren't axioms, though. The opposite of both assumptions here happens all the time.

Agreed on the former. Please elaborate on the latter.

[WIP]

Point me to the "anti theist" Bible that states "kill the believers for they are stupid and silly and should be killed."

A person who does not believe in any gods has no "anti theist" reason to kill.

A believer does have a reason to kill.

If I believe in Zeus and you believe in God then various passages of the Bible /Koran specifically call for the death of apostates and non-believers.

The anti-theist has turned atheism into a distinct in-group! And that is ultimately what this is all about: in-group/out-group behaviour!

The rest of the baggage being cobbled together around anti-theism...that all beliefs must be based in reason and science, cannot be demonstrated as having universal benefits. Simple fact is that a lot of people are going to find the atheist universe lacking.....and continue invoking new ways to place a supernatural force in charge of creating a universe, and having a special purpose for everyone. No doubt a lot of this is sourced in fear of death....like just about every other aspect of culture....but many people find an aversion to thinking about a universe coming together without predetermined design or purpose.

What is crucial here is how much importance you put on your and everyone's metaphysical beliefs. How important are they in regards to dealing with others and going about daily life. Not every religious adherent is a fundamentalist.....not even many of those who belong to fundamentalist religions.

An anti-theist is the doppleganger of any believer in an exclusive religion that separates believers and unbelievers for eternal life in some sort of paradise. Both groups are not necessarily going to kill or do any act of violence against those who are on the other side. Think of the Mennonites or the Amish. these are Christian sects founded on pacifist traditions, and yet believe that God will cast everyone outside of their faith into hell! Can't get more judgmental than that! But, they go about peacefully in their daily lives, refusing even retaliation when assaulted by others.

For my part, I would favour all universalist belief systems that do not judge people by their core beliefs. Atheists who fall in this antitheist category, are going to be inclined to consider all believers as the out-group.....hopefully not targeting them in a murderous attack like this one, but still showing contempt for them, and less willing to consider what they have to say on many subjects to be of value.

No, this is a parking dispute with easy access to guns.

Like any other day in America.

So, you're joining in with the band of atheist bloggers and podcasters I've come across lately, who are trotting out the No True Scotsman fallacy to explain this crime: he may have been an atheist, but atheism played no part of his decision to commit the crime...and it just so happened that it was the Muslim students he had been harassing because of their religion, whom he decided to kill!

[Boges]

So, you're joining in with the band of atheist bloggers and podcasters I've come across lately, who are trotting out the No True Scotsman fallacy to explain this crime: he may have been an atheist, but atheism played no part of his decision to commit the crime...and it just so happened that it was the Muslim students he had been harassing because of their religion, whom he decided to kill!

Funny that. I'm sure they're the same people to say that Christianity was complicit in Nazism. Or that the Wars in the Middle East are a continuation of the Crusades.

[msj]

So, you're joining in with the band of atheist bloggers and podcasters I've come across lately, who are trotting out the No True Scotsman fallacy to explain this crime: he may have been an atheist, but atheism played no part of his decision to commit the crime...and it just so happened that it was the Muslim students he had been harassing because of their religion, whom he decided to kill!

I await evidence to suggest otherwise. People like to point to his atheism as being some kind of decisive factor and it could be.

However, once again, point me to the atheist Bible that would justify such an action?

Show me the atheist churches where preachers preach the kind of hate that is taught in churches, synagogues, and mosques.

The problem with atheists is that we are not very organized so we don't preach hate in church and don't write much hate in books so if someone is going to be inspired to kill someone he is going to have to find it within himself to be inspired to kill for whatever reason(s).

I think an ongoing parking dispute and easy access to guns plays a bigger role here than believing in one less god than the victims does.

If he comes out of the courtroom yelling "God ain't great" and "F Allah" and other such things then he clearly has gone into the "anti-theism" world that you have made up.

[msj]

The anti-theist has turned atheism into a distinct in-group! And that is ultimately what this is all about: in-group/out-group behaviour!

Sure sure, and when they fly planes into buildings then I will be sure to take them seriously.

The rest of the baggage being cobbled together around anti-theism...that all beliefs must be based in reason and science, cannot be demonstrated as having universal benefits. Simple fact is that a lot of people are going to find the atheist universe lacking.....and continue invoking new ways to place a supernatural force in charge of creating a universe, and having a special purpose for everyone.

Most atheists have no problem with people believing whatever they want.

Go ahead and believe in Thor for all I care.

JUST DO NOT TRY TO FORCE ME TO DO AS YOU THINK.

Excuse the yelling, but you are clearly not getting it.

Yes, as an atheist I would be very happy if 90%+ of Canada believed in no god(s).

But if religious people would just leave us alone then that would be a huge improvement (and it already is mostly that way in Canada in 2015, thankfully).

For my part, I would favour all universalist belief systems that do not judge people by their core beliefs. Atheists who fall in this antitheist category, are going to be inclined to consider all believers as the out-group.....hopefully not targeting them in a murderous attack like this one, but still showing contempt for them, and less willing to consider what they have to say on many subjects to be of value.

One again - it is the ideas that are being judged.

People are only being judged when they do something that becomes newsworthy.

So a self identified atheist kills 3 muslims and you jump all over it as an example of anti-theism.

Here you are clearly judging the atheist by his core belief system even though we do not know how and/or if his atheism is related in anyway.

A parking dispute may only be a parking dispute.

[WIP]

Funny that. I'm sure they're the same people to say that Christianity was complicit in Nazism. Or that the Wars in the Middle East are a continuation of the Crusades.

Hitler wanted a patriotic Christianity....which is why dissident clerics like Dietrict Bonhoeffer were sent to the concentration camps! Just a thought for you and MSJ(since I do not want to have to repeat the point) - would an atheist be as likely to risk death by acting on principle as Bonhoeffer did? Or would an atheist be more likely to go along/to get along? I'm inclined to think the latter, and since you guys want to trot out every story where some religious fanatic did something awful, if we are going to use the Nazis as a reference point, then you have to admit that there were some guided by their religious faith who did great things in spite of the certain risks of torture, imprisonment and death!

And, that's my point: religion and ALL belief systems, including naturalistic philosophies created by atheists, have the potential to try to reach for a universal appreciation of life and everyone's welfare....regardless of what they believe. Or the belief system can separate "the sheep from the goats," so to speak, and have such disregard for out-group members that their lives are of no consequence!

[WIP]

I await evidence to suggest otherwise. People like to point to his atheism as being some kind of decisive factor and it could be.

However, once again, point me to the atheist Bible that would justify such an action?

Show me the atheist churches where preachers preach the kind of hate that is taught in churches, synagogues, and mosques.

The atheist bible and the atheist preachers and churches are an online phenomena. So, it is coming together. I find a sense of orthodoxy developing online, because a lack of belief is just a void waiting to be filled! Most atheists atheist groups who have the most attention online, are:

-antitheist....and badger and harass any who don't follow this line of thinking.

-are on the political right, varying somewhere between standard liberal and extreme libertarian. Modern liberalism is an attempt to reform/not change the system we live under now, so I notice the lack of critics of capitalism and individualistic ethics systems among atheists, compared to those in liberal Christian or others with vaguely spiritual or pantheistic beliefs.

-are techno-optimists, and see a better future...in spite of what is in front of our eyes right now.

-that future optimism is likely an essential ingredient to rally around an atheist flag, since critical or pessimistic view of the future can't provide a useful reason to convert/or deconvert believers away from their religions and embrace an atheistic worldview. So, those who claim to be driven solely by reason and evidence, betray that principle every time they try to paint a picture of a glorious humanistic future that looks like something from a Star Trek movie or TV episode.

So, the atheist bible may already be essentially out there....it just has several different versions online today, that are repeating most of the same things among themselves.

And, since this thread is about a very loud atheist who according to many witness statements was loud about his antitheistic beliefs and hostile in particular to these three Muslim students who lived near him, I can say for certain, that being part of the online atheist culture (if he wasn't part of a real world atheist meetup group) did not prevent him from committing this crime.

So, will you have a slightly different fallback position when some atheist does fly a plane into a building?

Edited February 24, 2015 by WIP

[msj]

And, that's my point: religion and ALL belief systems, including naturalistic philosophies created by atheists, have the potential to try to reach for a universal appreciation of life and everyone's welfare....regardless of what they believe. Or the belief system can separate "the sheep from the goats," so to speak, and have such disregard for out-group members that their lives are of no consequence!

The thing is that atheists are not organized like religious folk.

We do not have a universal book like the Koran or Bible to inspire believers (or non-believers) to hate or love.

All an atheist is is someone who does not believe in God.

That's it.

Anything else an atheist believes will be influenced by culture, logic, etc....

[msj]

Hitler wanted a patriotic Christianity....which is why dissident clerics like Dietrict Bonhoeffer were sent to the concentration camps! Just a thought for you and MSJ(since I do not want to have to repeat the point) - would an atheist be as likely to risk death by acting on principle as Bonhoeffer did? Or would an atheist be more likely to go along/to get along? I'm inclined to think the latter, and since you guys want to trot out every story where some religious fanatic did something awful, if we are going to use the Nazis as a reference point, then you have to admit that there were some guided by their religious faith who did great things in spite of the certain risks of torture, imprisonment and death!

Lots of Christians and Jews took part in the holocaust too. Some gleefully, others to save their own skin.

BFD.

People are people.

[msj]

The atheist bible and the atheist preachers and churches are an online phenomena. So, it is coming together. I find a sense of orthodoxy developing online, because a lack of belief is just a void waiting to be filled! Most atheists atheist groups who have the most attention online, are:

-antitheist....and badger and harass any who don't follow this line of thinking.

-are on the political right, varying somewhere between standard liberal and extreme libertarian. Modern liberalism is an attempt to reform/not change the system we live under now, so I notice the lack of critics of capitalism and individualistic ethics systems among atheists, compared to those in liberal Christian or others with vaguely spiritual or pantheistic beliefs.

-are techno-optimists, and see a better future...in spite of what is in front of our eyes right now.

-that future optimism is likely an essential ingredient to rally around an atheist flag, since critical or pessimistic view of the future can't provide a useful reason to convert/or deconvert believers away from their religions and embrace an atheistic worldview. So, those who claim to be driven solely by reason and evidence, betray that principle every time they try to paint a picture of a glorious humanistic future that looks like something from a Star Trek movie or TV episode.

So, the atheist bible may already be essentially out there....it just has several different versions online today, that are repeating most of the same things among themselves.

And, since this thread is about a very loud atheist who according to many witness statements was loud about his antitheistic beliefs and hostile in particular to these three Muslim students who lived near him, I can say for certain, that being part of the online atheist culture (if he wasn't part of a real world atheist meetup group) did not prevent him from committing this crime.

So, will you have a slightly different fallback position when some atheist does fly a plane into a building?

It "may already essentially [be] out there?" That's all you have to support your little "anti theist" theory?

As for this thread - I don't take any of it as proof for the gunman's beliefs and the extent he allegedly screamed them.

I will await the police investigation to show if this is a hate crime or not.

As to when an atheist does fly an airplane into a building - once again - show me the atheist bible!

Where are atheists burning down embassies because of a cartoon?

Where do atheists strap bombs to themselves and kill people?

Sure, it will happen at some point.

But show the link between the behaviour and the belief.

With the Koran it is clear - it calls for death to apostates and infidels for example.

Atheism only means believing in one less god than religious people. Nothing more.

[Michael Hardner]

Agreed on the former. Please elaborate on the latter.

A believer has reasons to kill. A believer has reasons to not kill.

People get so outraged about those who abuse religion, that they forget that it's a moral code and that most simply follow it in a positive way. It just stands to reason that if you institute a moral code in a group, the code will be followed for the most part.

[Mighty AC]

A believer has reasons to kill. A believer has reasons to not kill.

People get so outraged about those who abuse religion, that they forget that it's a moral code and that most simply follow it in a positive way. It just stands to reason that if you institute a moral code in a group, the code will be followed for the most part.

Those who attack abortion clinics, oppose equal rights and kill cartoonists feel they are following the moral code. According to scripture, the so called revealed word of a god, sometimes those who commit heinous acts are actually following the rules more closely than those most of us consider to be moral.