A plea to the moderators of this site
Quoting Dfpolis
This is one of the many quotes by religious infiltrators to our philosophy site. There are many of them, right now, and I urge the moderators to take action agains this phenomena of spewing religious dogma which is not philosophy. If you allow this, your children will be next.
I am seeing more than a few threads where new members are defended for their unfounded (philosophically unfounded) religious views, and that is defenitely an anti-philosophical activity.
I can't act on it, and arguing with the blindly relgious is futile -- I won't even start. Please, Moderators, do something.
This new wave of religious infiltrators have a hallmark of not defending their theist views with logic, but simply stating outrageous religious dogma. Please do something, Moderators, I beseech you.
When we know, we know that there is a God who is the ultimate cause of all reality and that contemplation of God quiets the mind.
This is one of the many quotes by religious infiltrators to our philosophy site. There are many of them, right now, and I urge the moderators to take action agains this phenomena of spewing religious dogma which is not philosophy. If you allow this, your children will be next.
I am seeing more than a few threads where new members are defended for their unfounded (philosophically unfounded) religious views, and that is defenitely an anti-philosophical activity.
I can't act on it, and arguing with the blindly relgious is futile -- I won't even start. Please, Moderators, do something.
This new wave of religious infiltrators have a hallmark of not defending their theist views with logic, but simply stating outrageous religious dogma. Please do something, Moderators, I beseech you.
Comments (38)
How dare you. What little faith ye have. Thinking- nay- daring, insulting others by pretending, in the most condescending manner- that logic can somehow be defeated- and not just us but.. oh god.. "our children" with what you even admit is "futile" and "outrageous" blether. Good Lord, what side are you even on man?
The moderators will not ban this, and I don't think they should, but it should be classed to its own lounge, they can call it, The God Lounge. I do know Dfpolis to be an exceedingly skilled polemicist for his position, he would certainty not fit into any evangelical category, at least not his arguments from what I've seen. I'm quite sure he's a Christian, but he can handle himself on this front. Nevertheless, the above statement is quite indefensible. What I would say to the moderators is please stop defending people who say this kind of stuff. Let me tell you what I mean, don't protect them when we call them out in the same public forum in which they try to preach. The fact that they are offended that someone challenged their fantastic claims is just too damn bad, don't come to their aid or get all emotional about it. They're the ones that had the audacity to assert this stuff in a public philosophy forum. What do they expect? Please do not give their religion an a priory status of respect, if they want respect for their premises, then just like everyone else here, they need to be held to the same philosophical standard, they need to earn it. The moderators here should agree that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The man or woman who calls this stuff out is not doing anything wrong, quite the contrary, they are doing what so many others were not allowed to do. It is the right of philosophy to assault the positive. And if one cannot do this then one cannot practice philosophy. This is a philosophy forum not a religious forum.
Evangelists: Those who must convince everyone that their religion, ideology, political persuasion, or philosophical theory is the only one worth having.
Racists, homophobes, sexists, Nazi sympathisers, etc.: We don't consider your views worthy of debate, and you'll be banned for espousing them.
Advertisers, spammers: Instant deletion of post followed by ban.
Trolls: You know who you are. You won't last long
Sockpuppets[/quote]
If they are evangelists and are genuinely trying to push their ideology as the only one worth, by the rules they should at least be getting warnings of their behavior.
@god must be atheist Have you asked what steps the moderators take and what their criteria is for dealing with these infractions? Have you flagged the alleged offending comments?
How hard have you tried to convince these alleged offenders of the errors in reasoning they are making?
Unfortunately due to the language used in the rules, if they are pushing their ideas while not saying anything about other peoples ideas then they aren't technically trying to convince that their ideology is the only one worth having, they are just very strongly pushing theirs. In order to make the full claim, that their ideology alone is best and that all others are useless. There would probably need to be evidence that says they have not only strongly pushed their claim, but baselessly attacked others claims and judged them for those claims. Without even being willing to listen to the substance of those claims if they aren't similar enough to their claims.
Hypothetical; I am a christian, you are a muslim.
I tell you about my beliefs, I tell you that you are wrong to have your beliefs and that you will burn in hell. I even make a false claim about a muslim practice that you know, no Muslim would ever do. I refuse to allow you to even object and reject that claim and I refuse to listen to anything you have to say about your own faith as I claim I already know what I need to know about it to even bother listening to yours.
As a Muslim, you make your claims strongly, you believe they are the only ones worth having. However, you also listen to other peoples claims and give them their time to speak. Allowing them the opportunity to convince you and giving some time to listening instead of talking.
Only one of these persons would be breaking the rules. Both might believe that their views are the only ones worth having. However only one is behaving like they truly believe that. This one is the real rule breaker.
Not saying I agree or disagree with you. I'm just asking if the people you are concerned are like the Christian or Muslim in our scenario?
Only mosquitoes and idiots don't go away when you ignore them. When any bible puncher is ignored they eventually figure out that they are wasting their time and go away. If you get upset by them I think it says more about you and your agenda than theirs.
Peace and love bro, sit down and drink a beer. :victory:
Is this equally true of Nazis?
I have no idea about his political views, but he does seem to be a bit of a fanatic about the topic.
That doesn't answer my question. You said his criticism of religion is a negative mark against him. I would like to know, does this also apply to people who are critical of Nazis? What about the Peoples Temple? What about Aum Shinrikyo? What about Heaven's Gate? What about Branch Davidians? What about the Order of the Solar Temple?
Of course it did not answer your question, it was not supposed to.
Seriously, is there any way to compare a bunch of hyped up bible blathers to the nazis?
Anyone with a half way working brain would have a right to get upset with the nazis, but a bunch of psalms readers!!!
If he is so scared of them then he must be very insecure about his own will to resist them. Maybe he is a closet christian and is projecting his disgust with himself at them, who knows.
But to deliberately try to have freedom of speech banned because he is scared that everyone on this forum will convert to christians and all of our children will also succumb to the dire consequences of it is just pathetic.
And why do you capitalize the letter N in nazi if you do not have respect for them.
Which g/G is that? :roll:
Any one of them will do, they are all the same.
Inquisitions.
Not according to any believers, theologians or religious traditions I'm aware of.
No they aren't. In fact very few conceptions of god are the same.
Holy fucking hell, run for your lives everyone. The inquisitors have come to TPF.
Did you not read what I said?
Let me explain again. I get upset with people that go out and kill other people because they don't like their color, gang, religion, sexual preference, the books you read, or any other stupid reason you can think of. I think anyone would as well.
But what does that have to with the people that come here to talk about how great their god is? Do you seriously think that they will be able to convert anyone here? Jeez, that is sad.
Quoting MSC
I am not a believer, so I just use a generic, everyday definition of the word god
god=Any supernatural being worshipped as controlling some part of the world or some aspect of life or who is the personification of a force.
And I really don't care too much how they define their personal one.
Bullshit is still bullshit even if it is wrapped up as a fact.
I generally think the best solution to that kind of problem is to ignore it (on the users' part; the mods have recourse to deleting on account of low quality or evangelism).
In which case I shouldn't even be making this post, but I am anyway.
You charged the original poster with, "If you get upset by them I think it says more about you and your agenda than theirs."
To test the accuracy of this statement I asked you several questions, none of which you answered. What you fail to see is that your bias (and that's what it is) is bent uncritically in favor of religion. If this was not the case then why not say this position is equally true of Nazis? It's because your cultural stance on Nazis is entirely negative, while you live too far apart from (cannot comprehend) the historical atrocities of religion.
Maybe we can drive the point home more. Suppose some fanatics from Isis wanted to come on here and start talking about Allah, would you still claim, "If you get upset by them I think it says more about you and your agenda than theirs." ?
I don't think so. Why? Because you live in a time when you can see the dogmatic violence of Isis, understanding the dangers of religion requires more than your immediate impression. Suppose someone from Isis came on here long before they starting pillaging and mass murdering, what an ignorant fool you would look like right now.
Kind of circular then: there is no proof of the existence of an unbeliever's g/G - well, of course, but vacuous. I think was saying something more (yet unspecified) than this.
Now that is strange, when I told the guy to just ignore them some jumped all over me about it. But you are right, I would not be here if it were to for someone else trying to pick holes in what I said.
Excuse me. Lots of people read these threads, some of them very likely, impressionable young people, are you claiming that a person is doing something wrong by criticizing religious error? You are here calling it "shallow," "little-reasoning," and comparing it to the irrationality of religion. Based on what, how did you arrive at this conclusion?
Quoting Pfhorrest
For the most part I agree, but this is not finalized. Sometimes this can be cowardice, being afraid to offend people, at other times it can be an evasion of responsibility. Notice: you confess that it's error, and then say, "well, just let it be," and further, you say, "I will not stand up to those who speak error, but I will stand up to those who speak out against error." This strikes me as backward conformity.
All g/G.
I'm not saying that anyone is doing anything wrong by criticizing religious errors. I'm saying that, for the most part, it's not worth the effort of engaging; they won't be convinced to change their minds, so you'll just be wasting your own precious time arguing against a brick wall.
If some people do want to spend the time to give a quick rebuttal for the sake of onlookers, then that is valuable, for the onlookers' sake, sure.
Quoting JerseyFlight
I'm calling the religious threads that this thread complains about "shallow" and "little-reason", not this thread itself.
But I'm saying that threads like this complaining about the existence of shallow unreasoning religious people are little better. The mods will eventually delete low-quality or evangelical threads -- if they don't have any high-quality responses yet. (It takes them time, because they're not here watching the forum like a hawk 24/7; they're people with lives). So giving a quality rebuttal to them makes it less likely that they will be deleted. And posting threads like this complaining about them... just creates more filler that isn't quality philosophical discussion on the forum.
regardless of the position, assertion and authority is considered to be violating the rules of the forum.
Which I assume they are already
Who said anything about changing their minds? I specifically mentioned the context: many people read these threads. Further, the criteria for refuting error is not that one must liberate the preachers of error, but that one stops them from doing damage in the public sphere.
Quoting Pfhorrest
Here you refute yourself, and in the same instance, affirm the value of refutation, at the same time you speak condescendingly of those who are doing a thing you confess to be of "value?"
Quoting Pfhorrest
What's the complaint based on, error? If not then how can a thread based on value be "little better" than a thread based on error?
Do you know the difference between charging a person with something and making a comment on that persons attitude? It appears not, and I have no wish to help you figure it out.
Quoting JerseyFlight
No, you asked me one questions a couple of times. And I did answer you. If you don't understand even after I explained it again that is your problem.
Quoting JerseyFlight
Don't you read the posts between the ones you make? Saying that I am in favor of any religion is like saying that someone's grandmother had balls.
Quoting JerseyFlight
Stop spouting garbage, you are not doing your cause any good with this kind of thing. Telling me this is exactly the same as what you are accusing me of doing to the guy that started this thread.
My cultural stance on nazis is beyond your conception because you have no idea who I am or anything about me that would allow you to logically make such a claim.
And please do not try to lecture me about history. Presuming that you know more than me would have to be proven before I would pay any attention to you.
Quoting JerseyFlight
Did I not say it loud enough, let me repeat it again for you.
I WOULD GET PISSED OF IF ANY FREAKING FANATIC THAT WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE KILLING OF PEOPLE INNOCENT PEOPLE CAME HERE OR TO MY HOUSE AND STARTED TALKING SHIT ABOUT HOW GREAT THEIR GOD IS.
But the people that come here to try and convince us to join them are not killers. Maybe their stupid religion is responsible for the deaths of people, but not these people.
Is not not possible for you to see that fanatics like that would not waste their time coming here, what could they possibly gain? and if you are scared of them your self, you can always hide behind an alias.
Quoting JerseyFlight
And you live in a time when you are lucky enough to only see the pictures of these atrocities on the internet instead of of being there to see the damage. I was born just after WW2, and I still remember asking what had happened to the houses that used to be down the street when they removed the rubble.
I am more worried about people like you and others that want to silence the ideas of other people just because the don't like them.
Read a bit of history
https://abcnews.go.com/US/skokie-legacy-nazi-march-town-holocaust-survivors/story?id=56026742
When you understand why the lawyer did what he had to do, come back and talk to me about it.
Pointing out that there is no proof that any god does not exist is the same as saying that there is no proof that any god does exist. Who really cares. I you believe fine, if not fine as well.
But my explanation was just to show how I viewed the idea of god. The same way I view the spaghetti monster, and I do not capitalize any of them.
Who specifically?
Pardon me. This is not my position. I don't want to silence them, I just don't want them to get special treatment like you want to give them. They make the claim they incur the criticism, no one needs to be jumping in (people like yourself) with this charismatic defense of error.
Here, here!
I'm moving this to the Feedback section and closing it.