I apologize. In no way would I deliberately insult one's intelligence...I meant no harm at all.
I totally understand how you feel. You are right.
Thanks for the correction. I appreciate it.
And the resident Atheist says:
Thank you, no problem, I understand your religion teaches you those misinformed beliefs, which is why questioning those beliefs is a very good thing as they reveal the real facts.
For sure the Atheist believes that his words are not condescending and the Christian is apologizing to make piece and the underlying issue was appropriate for debate.
//// So our question is for forums: Is the response antagonistic on purpose or is it just straight speech?
My view is that the response is harsh and mean and mean spirited and is an example of what is ruining our world. And ability to be mean but not be called out on it. Is that crazy?
I'm not sure why or how telling someone that they should question things people tell them is ruining the world.
Certainly that is accurate. Questioning things is correct. I assume your response is that you see it as perfectly normal speech. And how we should speak to each other.
Is the proselytizing and teaching by the Christian automatically less offensive than that done by the atheist then?
My view is that the statement is half false; that there was no appreciation for the correction as there was no belief it was offered as a correction. It was sarcastic. And that the response is an effort to train, to teach what is real in this world.
So wilderness it is your position that the above statement is proselytizing? And forcing a belief on someone?
I find your atheist's statement proselytizing in the same manner a theists' speech declaring their god to be true and real is. (S)he is trying to teach, same as the theist is, albeit accepted reality rather than an imaginary one.
Forcing? No, not forcing. No one need read, no one need accept it. Few theists, in fact, will.
Wilderness are you just totally ignoring the tone of the comments? You really think these comments are equal in civility. That is clearly the question of the forum.
Tone is what I'm going on - perceived tone from past experience as I have no idea of the actual context of either comment.
Both seem rather snarky to me, but the theist a little worse because I don't believe it is honest at all. Just sarcastic, although like I say, context could easily change that.
The atheist is also a little snarky because they know it will not be accepted just as the theist knows their preaching will not be accepted by an atheist. But preach anyway.
But you seem to find preaching in the forums quite acceptable, while calling the atheist form of preaching bad and rude. That was the point I was trying to make. It could have been said a little more graciously, a little kinder, by padding it in cotton rather than bare truth, but at the bottom it was just an atheist sermon about reality and how to think properly to find truth.
You just said it wilderness --- you find pleasantness and apologies insincere based on past experience and not the statement at hand. Wilderness there are no linguistics or syntax to back up where you are coming from it is just a raw knee jerk reaction to a Christian apology. That author is as and more sincere than any bone in your body. That is why I chose her comment.
Yes I set a trap for a seemingly reasonable atheist to walk into. (though I am a Christian -- I am still a bricklayer or soldier) I saw presupposition time and time again from you. You took an argument from one forum to another. Wisdom is in the details of each situation, not in blanket application like a zombie christian.
You did it beautifully -- you just assumed the Christian to be snarky and there is absolutely not one shred of evidence in her comment to back up your attitude - because that is what it is -- against Christians. You are being prejudice without looking at the language. That normally would be called bigotry, but that is not PC these days.
She may be sincere - I said that. I haven't read enough of her posts to know, so am limited to what I find such gushing apologies to usually mean; sarcasm. I'm American, not Canadian.
No, nothing to do with Christians. Just overdone, in my experience, which usually means sarcasm. Now, you put it into the context of a conversation, with comments from both sides being shown, and I could very well agree with you.
But why do you consider a pleasant, if short, description on analytical thinking methods to be rude? You plainly do think that the atheist comment, obviously a quick lesson in questioning all information, is rude - is it just because it comes from an atheist? Or because it mentions that all theological information is suspect and known to be false sometimes - something you personally don't like to hear? Why is they atheist comment rude, or is it called bigotry? Does it need padded in cotton, made three times as long, so as to lose the listener before the message is delivered? Biblical quotations don't seem to need that...
You got me wilderness and that is why I drew this out --- you really do believe in your heart that the response in the forum starter was pleasant? Good for you. Now people can chose what system they want to be a part of -- your "pleasantness" or Sparkea's.
Hands down I want to interact more like Sparklea than like e head. I think that is clearly Christian rather than what ever soup of the day you folks call yourself.
(see I can do snarky -- but I can at least recognize when I do it but I do not think your folk can)
You are continuing to put words in my mouth.
I do NOT believe the response was pleasant. Just as I do NOT believe that continual preaching and bible quotations are pleasant. They are both at the same level as far as I'm concerned.
I have several times now pointed that out - that preaching is preaching wherever it comes from - and that you somehow find theist preaching pleasant, or at least neutral, but not the atheist preaching. Are you unwilling to accept this, or will you find that the response in the OP is not unpleasant? Or, against what I think of as your very soul, find that ANY proselytizing on the forums, any biblical quotations, any preaching from either side, should really not be done as it is offensive?
You may be snarky, but I really am trying hard not to - trying instead to say something rather indelicate but say it delicately. Obviously isn't working very well so, without meaning any offense, I will accuse you of being two faced; what the atheist says is unpleasant while when the theist says the same thing it is fine and should be accepted as an effort to help the poor atheist.
Good you make it clear that you think both those comments are equal in the use of antagonism. That is what this forum was and is for.
I disagree and as someone who can be so rude as to be banned from here 4 times, I do believe I can judge.
Thank you wilderness.
I think you are being a little hard on him.
I think Wilderness is an incredibly reasonable person. A good person with a good heart, as well as being open minded. He is occasionally rude, but I think it is more a matter of being upfront and not sugar coating things, as opposed to being mean or outright rude. I think it is the intention that counts more, and not the presentation.
Why TY, Jane! It's nice to know that someone recognizes what I try to say.
Yes, I can get a little rude now and them - even been banned twice, although I'm not sure I agree with the reasoning there. But poke me enough, and I will get rude - patience is not unlimited.
Well, you beat me (only twice) so I'll have to give you the gold on that!
But can you reasonably, setting aside your theism, disagree? I've seen several comments about having the intelligence insulted, and indeed that can be what it feels like. When someone says the planet is 6,000 years old, that is most definitely what it feels like. When they then insist that they know that, and I should agree with it, because some unknown dude that thought the earth was the center of everything wrote it into the bible, well, that doubles the insult.
You "automatically" forgive such transgressions, but others don't. Instead, they "automatically" forgive such transgressions as pointing to an accepted authority that we don't like to recognize or hear about.
I guess the bottom line is that
"There is a god because the bible says so even if we can't find him" and
"There is no god, the bible is untrue and should be questioned" are about equal in unpleasantness - the real question is why you can't see it? Has your spirituality removed the empathy of understanding others? Hard to believe...
People who are preaching, proselytizing and behaving dishonestly on these forums don't even deserve respect let alone civility.
Ehead, I think most people get into a debate and sometimes are a little rude. But what you are saying here is that you intend to be "uncivil" ---- Did I read that right?
Of course, you believe that people are ruining your world, which is the world that has already been ruined by religions for the past several thousand years. You believers hate the fact that we are standing up to your intolerance and bigotry, and your ridiculous assumptions that we are evil, angry, sad, hateful and a myriad of other insulting terms you use to describe us. You simply can't stand the fact that your irrational belief systems will disappear one day soon, and reason and logic will finally see the light of day for mankind.
If that is the world you view as being ruined, I'm all for it.
I am having trouble understanding where you're coming from, Eric. A month or so ago, you posted a rant on some group or individual. You opened a new acct. with a distorted (somewhat scary) pic of you, and your name slightly altered, posting more of your angry viewpoint on the same thread (double the Eric/double the anger). At first I was very uncomfortable by your anger and your distorted doppelganger. I shared that it was disturbing and you kinda freaked. I remembered that you had shared on the forum about having a bi-polar issue and I thought maybe your meds were off. (I had a good friend who's husband would take some pretty heavy nose dives when his bi-polar meds were off.) So when it looked like ppl were going to start attacking you, I simply posted that you might not be feeling your best and maybe it would be better if we didn't post for a while (to give you time to regulate again; which that last part, I didn't share.) You went into attack mode and said some really horrible things. I took the blame and said not to worry about it. You never apologized... that was fine, but to now be telling ppl they should be called out for their mean and harsh ways, when you don't take responsibility for your own, surprises me a bit.
Edit: I just looked up that old thread (http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/119484) and realized you did not make that duplicate acct, it was a troll. At the time, I thought maybe you were losing it. I'm sorry I misunderstood that fact. I'm still not sure why you lost it so completely though, but I s'pose it's water under the bridge.
Beth why do you post on my forums? Certainly you have every right to do so. I am not questioning your right. My question is why. Again, of course you have a right to and are welcome to, I just am wondering why. Remember the topic of this forum please.
Q."Is the (antagonistic) response antagonistic on purpose?" A. Yes.
Q."Or is it (the antagonistic response) just straight speech?" A. No.
"My view is that the response is harsh and mean and mean spirited and is an example of what is ruining our world.
*And ability to be mean, but not be called out on it.*
Q. Is that (opinion) crazy?" A. No.
The Way I, (as an individual,) See It
Are you saying that if people were nicer to each other, the world would be a better place?
Sounds simplistic, but it's certainly true.
I think the hard battles have been fought enough to allow us to be civil. I hope this forum draws out lack of civility so we do not have to debate it. En-whateverhead should get nice, why not? Wilderness should stop defending nastiness ass appropriate. His contributions are awesome but this need of his to pretend posters like ATM are justified to be nasty is misplaced.
I think I will just start responding to them XXX to let them know they are heard but I find their tone -- no not their point obnoxious.
If they really cannot admit through this forum that it is hard and hurtful then we should just start ignoring them. Like North Korea.
LOL Eric, that is the point I tried to make; preaching by atheists is no more onerous to the theist than theist preaching to the atheist is. Nastiness? Of course, but it is on both sides of the fence, not just the side opposite you. My last post here pointed out that both of those are nasty, but more than that, that the atheist preaching is at the same level of nastiness of the theist preaching, whatever level you choose to assign that to.
I think this speaks volumes. And I for one have learned much.
Blessed be you wilderness and may God's grace be upon you for helping all of us to learn more about our neighbors and brothers and sisters. These understandings are worthy of our pursuit and good for man. Good honest men like you prevent resentments and antagonism because we can understand each other.
Just relaxing and refreshing to get a straight answer.
I get you, Eric. Me and Janesix get you. Right Jane? P.S, Eric, I have missed you! Where have you been?
I just want everyone to be nicer to each other, whether we agree or not.
I include myself in this, as I am no Mother Teresa.
You got that right… I will never forget your description of certain Yogic practices... where the tongue is... and the nose… You want to explain that again? (That OP about Yoga being evil…Were you playing the devil's advocate?)
lol...yeah, that's embarrassing:)
I was having what you guys would call a psychotic episode that week or so. I've mentioned on here more than once that I'm bipolar.
I was having spontaneous yoga experience, and thought Satan was doing it somehow, and freaked out. I've learned it's called "kryas" and is quite normal.
Either way, there are some extreme types of yoga I would never do, that are creepy and disturbing to me.
It's embarrassing, that's one of the reasons I was gone so long from this forum.
It's not exactly easy being thought of as a lunatic. I've learned to accept the way people think of me, because I don't have a choice. I'm different, and I know it.
I suppose I can't say it doesn't bother me to a certain point, because it's actually pretty lonely sometimes.
Thanks Beth. I've seen you be extra nice to other's who are going through what I am(or similar) and I think that's great.
I'm actually not that bad off, due to the fact that I have enormous emotional support form my family and boyfriend.
It's my social life that is the problem, I have trouble with people and relating to them. I think that's why I like forums.
You have an absolute right to your privacy. You don't owe anyone an explanation, but I think when ppl are open, it is the most honest way to live. When you share personal things about yourself, you open yourself up to all kinds of criticism and insults, but ppl who are worth their salt will understand that we all have problems. One of my favorite quotes is by Plato: "Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle."
That's one of the reasons I like this particular forum. People here know I'm weird, but still a good number of them will actually listen to what I have to say without treating me like I'm an alien, or a dim-witted child. They don't necessarily agree with me, but at least treat me like a human being.
I also enjoy the company:) There are many people here that I've grown to really like. Even if we have opposite opinions of things. There are a few who are blatantly cruel, but that's to be expected anywhere.
Check with an astrologer. There is a lot of info that will help you by knowing your chart.
I do my own chart, but I'm still far from understanding any of it.
Can't afford an astrologer.
What house is Saturn in? what sign? Do you have anything in the 12th house?
My chart's on my old laptop. I'll charge it up and take a look. I'll have to get back to with that in a little while.
kool. Make a new forum…? like, "Astrological Charts 101" …LOL.
I was banned for a month. Apparently several folks thought I was in fact a poster that used a hideous (although not much is needed there;-) distorted picture "avatar" of me and an extremely similar hubPages name. So then comments of mine that would normally be just robust were amplified. So folks like Beth and a couple of "beauty" writers did the rest.
Of course now my status is one of suspected terrorist on a plane. So I will have to be self censored.
It is an interesting reality -- hence this forum "question".
Beth was trying to be nice to you. She didn't realize what was actually going on in that thread. No one did at the time. She thought you were having a psychological issue, tried to help you, and DEFEND you. She apologized for her mistake.
If you are assuming that I reported you Eric, I did not. I could have, quite easily, for the terrible things you said, but I assumed it was the illness talking and let it go. I did not report you for the duplicate account. Even if I wanted to, why would I need to, as HPs staff could see it on their own without any help from me. When I apologized, it was for merely *thinking that the duplicate acct was yours, but I had nothing to do with your banning. I assume that came as a result of your speech. I tried, on this thread to discuss it with you (civilly), but just like on the other thread, you singled me out as some kind of villain.
(Thank you Jane.)
False. your attack on my character --- just like you just did regarding your false perception and mention of a disease is a stigmatized attack on another human. Good for hubPages. But have you a degree or true knowledge of this "disease" you attribute to me because of my honesty?
Your constant reference to Bi-polar matters makes you a hater of folks who have overcome. And make us wonder what you have yet faced.
Let me give you some examples for fun: George Washington, Leonardo Devinci, Michael Anchelo, George Bush - both. Clinton -- both. Jobs, Buffet - both, of course Einstein and Edison and Darwin.
Your ignorance and stereotyping is worse than straights who hate gays.
You need to get some therapy -- I suggest you start with yourself.
And if I am banned right now we will know who caused it.
That doesn't sound like the apology you owe her.
Explain -- she accused me falsely without the facts. And I should apologize????
Her own words.
She didn't accuse you of anything. She obviously thought you were having an episode of some sort. So did I/ That's what it looked like.
You were extremely rude to a concerned person who was trying to help and defend YOU.
You are the one who owes her an apology for being so mean to her. She has already apologized for her MISTAKE of not realizing what was actually going on, which was a troll posing as you.
I stand before all with hat in hand on bended knee. I was the one hurt. And that is good for I need admonition and correction. Let all pass. And on my shoulders does burden rest for my yolk is easy. Let me be the one to carry all wrong. This is good and cleansing with my sisters here.
So be it.
Beth, I read through that thread and you were profoundly nice and it was clear you were attempting to help. Hats off to you.
Many years ago, when I was in High school and College, we were taught how to debate without letting our emotions over run our mouths. This appears to be a lost art. There are very few in HubPages that can have civil debates, bouncing facts back and forth at each other, trying to bring a greater understanding to others. That used to be what a debate was about, information, not seeing who can yell the loudest or be the most sarcastic.
Good on ya mate -- perhaps you should be more loud! So we get this message. Bad things happen when good men sit idle.
...weird things happen
when we debate and discuss...
while we are not
face to face.
The temptation to anonymously bully and put down and attack and mimic and criticize and demean and seem superior, glorious, great and wise
and like anything we could never get away with face to face…is a reality we must deal with and tolerate in ourselves and each other.
Cuz we're only seventeen… I mean human!
A mirror is all we have to know us
Introspection is always a plus
Lost in waves of human combat and battle
We soon love to hear us prattle
Not really us but a shell cuddled
Soon we are less thnt a word muddled
If we remain true and stand for right
soon we will see the unfolding light
But that light may become
I light that shows us numb.
(Please omit the last two lines and let it end with:
But, if we remain true and stand for right,
soon we will see the unfolding light.)
Kathryn, please make that correction and re-write in so I can copy and paste.
Let us go for second verse and humble ourselves. And let us go with Leonard Cohen --- Hallelujah
A mirror is all we have to know us
Introspection is always a plus
Lost in waves of human combat and battle
We soon love to hear us prattle
Not really us but a shell cuddled
Soon we are less thnt a word muddled
If we remain true and stand for right
soon we will see the unfolding light
Friends we leave in the dust
but they are what love we must
And goodness falls beside our love
And we see what is above
And we cry to mountains here and there
but our same clothing do we wear
Until we rise above the muck
And it is known as damn fool's luck
//// I do not know God but one time in a desert She told me that it was in everyone.
Let me play a favorite song --- <iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/2FpwjQLZTTs?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Thank you for that intriguing and very lengthy comment. I hope people read it and benefit from your insight. After reading that I really wanted to visit your hubs and check out your outstanding profile. Doggone it you only joined 4 weeks ago and have no profile or hubs published. Let us hope this will inspire you to teach us how to write better. I know I could use the help.
This comment took a lot of work and we should appreciate that.
I'm trying to decide which is more laughable between the fact that the only comeback you could come up with in response to my comment was to point out how long I have been here and how many hubs I have posted or the fact that you actually believe that your response was actually valid. One does not have to be here long in order go see and point out the blatant hypocrisy displayed by you and other supposed Christians here. At least I am honest enough with your so-called God to tell him I lack belief. You and others claim belief with your words, but your actions tell a different story. You spout your biblical nonsense at others here in trying to point out their faults, but then you backpedal when those words amd scriptures are directed at you with excuses like "That scripture doesn't apply to me", "The spirit tells me that I'm right ad you're wrong", and (my personal favorite) "I know I'm a wretched mess. That's why I need a savior". Last time I heard (over and over), Jesus didn't die so a drunk jerk can stay a drunk jerk or so a gutter slut can keep writing memoirs. He died so that you can stop doing that stuff. You all spout "Love thy neighbor" then you turn around and attack everyone (even your own people) who disagree with you. What a pathetic joke. And you actually expect people to convert to your religion? Why should I (or any rational human being) follow a God that is prostituted and treated like a joke by his own followers? If you want change, try actually living the crap that you spew. Your God may dislike that I don't believe, but I'm sure he hates hypocrisy more. So I may go to your supposed Hell, but I'm sure I will see some of you believers there
What a joke
"Doctor" you are not. Writer you are not. Person you are not you are a beer glass avatar.
Be happy being nothing. Your words are seen as who writes them and that is a nothingness above all nothing.
"Dr" is an insult to those of us who have earned them. Use a new one.
Please leave my forums. We shall see you again as another coward. And that is good you have proven your point here. Be well.
All of this is meant for your peace which we all want for you. This is a factual post and not an antagonistic one. Be Well.3
Sorry, but these are not "your" forums, and you don't get to dictate who posts in them.
How do you know Dr. Lamb isn't a doctor? Or a writer? or anything else? Or are you claiming first-hand knowledge - maybe you're because you're him/her and you may enjoy trolling yourself?
Be careful, the last time he told me to leave one of "his" forums and I said I'd post wherever I wanted to, he accused me of stalking him, said he feared for his children, and threatened to call the authorities.
Yet another laughable post. So you own hubpages forums now? No. This is an open forum (meaning anyone can post anywhere). Another irrelevant post by a believer "loving his neighbor"?
I think not
I feel the love Eric. Wonderful stuff.
I know RA I am not supposed to stick to facts and be unpleasant I will give it up for Lent - just for you.
Got to admit it is funny seeing religionists speak of "facts."
You don't get a free pass because you keep telling us that you "love," everyone.
I hope your mom and dad disciplined you in love. When I played football and boxed I still loved the opposing player.
Is that Liberation you are talking about, Eric? Did you go out together?
Seriously though, its sounds suspiciously like a conflict in logic to me. Yet apparently the gladiators of Ancient times did have great love affairs with the young man they were grooming for the fight. I might be mistaken.
Guess that is the difference between my sort of love and yours. I could never beat the living daylights out of some one I "loved." I keep forgetting Christian "love," allows you to burn witches because you love them.
Of course, that's why they didn't use physical violence, because they loved me. Instead, they talked, reasoned and rationalized. Perhaps, they should have behaved more like your God and set me on fire?
I didn't, I respected them, instead. That's what they expected and gave in return.
You might spend a little time attempting to understand what compels you to speak so negatively and dismissively. Then, you might have a better handle on what propelled you to start this thread in the first place.
I hope Emile that we can see my negativity and also compare it. I have no qualms with that. Now what we see is that when I post negatively everyone agrees that is what it is. But folks like EDead get a free pass --- why is that? Why am I held to a higher standard?
EDead is only somewhat rude and sarcastic.
YOU personally attack people with bizarre accusations like they are members of the kkk, and other things.
That's the difference.
I think the fact that ED is exactly how he presents himself is also part of it. He doesn't try to say he ISN'T rude or sarcastic. He doesn't try to convince others to not do what he does. His feelings don't get hurt and he doesn't go on tirades when people give him back what he gives.
Please reread my post the analogy is spot on. Do something that is not right and hide your identity. Can you think of a better example that people would understand. You seem to have problems with this one. How could I be more clear. Conduct while disguised is against the notions of citizens of most countries. Do you like the Al Qaeda analogy better -- or maybe the made up outlaw bank robbers of the old West?
How can I not offend you and say this as clearly?
Stop using insulting and inapt analogies that don't make sense? That might help.
You didn't write it as an analogy. You just said it as if it were true.
As an analogy, it is overtly antagonistic, cruel, and overboard.
I would prefer spiderman personally. Batman's okay, but he's no spiderman. Why would you think they would need to keep their identity hidden? Mister I preach love.
So it's better to do things that aren't right and mistreat others as long as you show your face?? Interesting. Tell people they're going to hell with a smiling picture. attacking others is okay as long as they can see it's you doing it.. Got it..
Your Religion is so open
Sorry dude or dudette I really do not believe much in that Hell place, not with my God. Purgatory sounds maybe fathomable. But a Loving God sending someone to hell. That is a little much. Although with that said we could maybe create our own.
I think you and Rad Man make and excellent point here. And I just thought of another group-- Knights, I think they wore helmets and such and wasn't Robin Hood similar.
Looking at this comment, I have a question: When looking at your statement against the statement you mentioned in the OP, are you now willing and able to subject yourself to the same scrutiny that you placed the other poster in the OP, you know..
or would this be another case of the guidelines and standards of behavior you would impose on others not applying to you?
Given your track record, I suspect the latter, Which would be another obvious display (even in my "short" time here ) of the hypocrisy you regularly display on these forums
edit- This is a factual post, not an antagonistic one
Absolutely. And I hope it is helpful. That is exactly what I intended to draw out double standards. Seems a Christian is held to a higher standard than an atheist. With backhanded comments referencing our hypocrisy if we deal harshly. I do believe you make a great point.
Let us flush this out and get to the bare bones.
PS. This question of yours is not at all rude or antagonistic it is right on point.
Shouldn't Christians be held to a higher standard than atheists? Isn't it the Christians who claim to hold the higher moral ground over and above everyone else, especially atheists, who are constantly told by Christians they are evil and only follow the deceiver, Satan?
No, a Christian is not held to a higher standard than an atheist. Both Christians and atheists are held to the same exact standard of behavior in everyday life, namely behave with basic common ethics and morals when dealing with others and the world. The reason that the standard is PERCEIVED to be higher for Christians is because the motivation behind displaying such behavior is different for Christians than atheists. The atheist displays ethical and moral behavior because it IS ethical and moral. Nothing more. Nothing less. Christians, on the other hand, display (sometimes) moral and ethical behavior in an effort to get to heaven and be in good with their God. As such, Christians claim moral superiority because they are being "blessed by a higher power". The amusing thing about this is that Most Christians claim everyday superiority with the belief that no matter how they act they are still getting into heaven simply on the grounds that they believe and have a "relationship" with God while on the other hand piss on the morals and ethical behavior displayed by atheists by saying no matter what they do they're still doomed to Hell for not believing. Here lies the hypocrisy. Most of you don't even follow the words or the spirit of what is even written in the Bible that you claim is the word of Your God. As such, as long as atheists see Christians not acting in according to the standards that you have placed on yourself because of your claims, the atheist will call you out on it every time. So you believers have a choice: Either start acting as according to those standards that you have placed on yourselves, or get your noses out of the clouds (and your heads out of your rectal cavities), accept that you are not special and no better than anyone else, and start behaving with morals and ethics for no other reason than to be a good person here.
Do you even remember the things you said on this thread the other night? Do you feel you are beyond reproach? Do you really not understand how vicious and cruel your words were? I'm very confused that some ppl seem to freely rip apart strangers, without even knowing if they are fragile or not. It's a dangerous game to play. There are very often consequences to our actions. I wish that you understood that a little better.
What I said here the other day pales in comparison to some of the things I see you and other believers spew out on a daily basis. You constantly attack both believers and nonbelievers here with some of the venom and vitriol that you post here, yet want to play the victim when someone returns comments? It would appear that this is a case of reaping what you so. You don't get to say and do whatever you wish to others then play poor victim when it is directed at you. It doesn't work that way.
I wish you understood that a little more better.
P.S- Hey Eric, Are you getting this? This is another prime example of what I have been pointing out.
I wont enter in to this kind of debate with you. I've been here a year and I don't believe I've seen anything as hate-filled as what you wrote the other night. Ignoring what you said about me, what you said about Eric and Kathryn was void of any kind of human compassion. I'm very surprised that your account was not shut down. What really surprises me is your need to post under a false name. When there is no fear of repercussion, you reveal yourself. So be it.
Do you really not here the things that you three say? You didn't see or comment on Eric's KKK comment? Why aren't you telling him that that's not nice? Kathryn got a lengthy ban for comments she made poking fun at someone with a learning disability. When she came back she admitted that she was wrong but never said sorry.
Did you speak out against them?
1) I was under the impression what Eric meant was that posting anonymously was like what the KKK did... doing your foul deeds masked. I thought what he was saying was that you were taking the side of the person who was doing this this. I am not a forum lawyer, I do not defend or prosecute (or read) every post or thread.
2) Kathryn's remarks about your l.d. seemed to me to be coming from a place of ignorance. She really didn't seem to understand it. On top of that, your group sliced her up, but good. What would I have possibly have needed to add to any of that mess? That was the thread that actually made me want to close my acct. It was so ugly and hate filled in every direction, I just wanted to get away.
The remarks made the other night were intentional. They were meant to cut others deeply. It saddens me greatly that we forget there are humans on the other sides of our screens.
I remember once when I teased you about a misspelling, you said you had a l.d. I read your hub on the matter. I understood that you were sensitive about it. I never said another word about it. I always thought ED was a troll, I genuinely thought this was a game to him. If I said black, he said white. But once when Will Apse tried to explain good-natured ribbing to him, I could see him differently. He could tease and think it was free of insult, but he couldn't be teased without believing it was a true insult. So even though it is in my nature to joke with him, I try not to anymore. I actually used it to avoid being mean and to avoid fighting. Without being able to joke, I don't really know how to talk to him at all, unfortunately.
The list goes on and on. Melissa and personal stories she's shared about her kids, her marriage, her past... Same with JM and all her deep wounds that she's spoken of... I would never bring these things up to mock any of them. There is a humanity that tends to disappear when we are online and it is wrong for us to lose it. It is human nature to lash out when someone hurts us, but we sometimes have the opportunity to start over. However, this whole - hiding behind an invisible cloak while throwing poisonous darts is nothing but cowardliness. Would you do it Radman?
Calling me a coward? Nice. Making excuses for just some that you agree with. Nice.
For the record. I'm not sensitive about my difficulty spelling. I simply honest about it.
I do have reasons for not telling everyone who I am. I personally don't bring up religion with friends because I'd like to keep them, however some here that I trust know who I am.
Um, I was talking about Dr. Lamb, Radman. I'm afraid you have misunderstood.
I know how these conversations go, I am going to excuse myself.
Only certain ones belonging to certain people? You don't defend anyone, you only add to an attack or you do indeed prosecute posts then hide behind the excuse of being a wretch.
and why is it that you only seem to target those people you mentioned? You state that you dislike people being attacked yet YOU attack. You must not own any mirrors
There is a perception that we have a "group" and that we all "gang up" on people that we don't like.
Which is hilarious considering that the "group" is made of very strong-minded individuals of completely different philosophies. So apparently we gave up both our strength and our beliefs to be in said group, which it appears she is mad she isn't in.
It's an assumption that the whole world functions on a junior high school level. Most of us have gone beyond that, so we don't make that assumption.
A group that gang up and attacks people you don't like that you had to give up your individuality to be part of, you say?? Where have I heard this before?
Actually, this comment would show trollish behavior:
And, speaking of games, who is the one here often complaining to others because no one gets here so-called humor?
You and I both know that isn't true. You make false statements and I question them, often providing something that is actually based in reality. Then, you start tossing our personal insults.
It would appear that both you and Will are the ones treating this like a game, not me.
Nope, because anything directed at an atheist or anything directed at someone who has been "mean" to her is fine in her mind.
Then why comment on it at all if you did not expect a response? Hypocrisy. You don't want to get into a debate with someone but you throw out comments that will cause a debate. Typical
Because you've been writing it yourself. Oh I forgot, your words are done in "love". It doesn't matter how they appear.
And telling someone daily they're an evil wretched sinner that is hell bound is compassionate? Spare me that compassion.
And I feel the same about you with the things you post to others here. Look at how you are attacking me now? Again you don't get to say whatever you want then cry to HP mommy and daddy when it is spoken to you.
What doesn't surprise me is that you are proving my (and Eric's coincidentally) point.
I'd like to know what your comment to Eric was, but it's been replaced with "[REDACTED FOR PERSONAL ATTACKS]". I gather from that it wasn't entirely friendly. If you have written a comment so bad it needs to be redacted, then I do wonder why you are critical of Eric's less-than-friendly response that came after it. Is it a surprise for someone to respond in kind? Perhaps there is history I'm unaware of, but based on the interaction here I'm slightly confused by your apparent surprise and criticism of Eric reacting to what presumably was a very negative comment from you.
Didn't read it. What did he/she say. Couldn't be much worse than telling people they will burn in hell if they don't do as you do.
That is your argument for all Christians. You actually accused me of that before I'd ever even mentioned hell on this forum. Try to remember this, if you say you are going on vacation in Yuma AZ in Aug. and I tell you that may not be to your liking, it doesn't mean I'm hateful. I seldom ever mention hell although I have posted verses that include the mention of hell. You don't believe in God, Heaven or Hell, so it shouldn't be an issue for you. If you don't want to discuss God, Heaven and Hell, you should maybe not be on this forum or at least stop pursuing ppl and bringing the subject up.
What are YOU doing in the Atheism and Agnosticism section?
I like it when we hear someone in the Atheism and Agnosticism section telling others that they never mention hell, except when posting scripture.
And again we have someone trying to control who and where others can post on an OPEN forum. Sorry, you don't make the rules.
Edit- You should also rethink your use of the term "never" If you NEVER post anything about heaven or hell except when posting scripture, then you are contradicting yourself
I see a generation gap.
Times are moving on...
Welcome to our parents world.
I miss them. They had so much common sense and true wit and good natures... they worked hard and said how it was.
Not how its not.
Some one needs to dig up those books of the 60's and 70's :
How to be Cool.
and the Art of True Hipness.
and read the heck UP!
"Then we have Kathryn (L Hill,) who sees her self as an "enlightened" soul and thinks that's why no one can understand her. The truth is she as crazy as a **** house rat." " "
No one can understand her because she isn't making any sense.
( Really? " " )
When people tell her that, she... rages in the most vile of personal attacks," (The most vile? Really? " " ) "then stands around looking confused when she gets banned for it." (I stand around? looking confused…
You got a telescope?) "... you have (not) taken a damn bit of personal responsibility for your rude, insulting behavior and now -in fact- stand here (?) looking to be a "leader(s") in a kinder, gentler forum."
By Dr. Lamb
Yet, here it is! (with my commentary and edits in parenthesis) This one should be redacted too don't you think? Who was responsible for that redaction? Dr. Lamb? or HP staff??
Well, since you took it out, edited it and posted it outside of a quote, then please feel free to report yourself so it can be redacted on your post as well.
I see. I have never seen this kind of editing on the side of HP staff. Good for HP staff.
I am actually glad to have captured the evidence! So no, I will not report myself.
Thanks for that cute suggestion.
I wouldn't be surprised if she did.
I've been noticing her editing her comments repeatedly. She will say something, someone will answer, then she will edit it, sometimes completely. She does this repeatedly. It took me a while to catch on. It makes for very confusing conversation.
She's done this with entire conversations.
Why are you doing that, Kathryn?
Yep. I've noticed it too... along with the same habit in at least one other poster that only shows up when she is banned.
Because I do not trust ANYONE! I will censor myself as to my reputation and any retaliations as I so choose. (BTW I realize I have little to loose as far as reputation. That is pretty much shot…) Which leaves me free to (verbally and virtually) fight for my beliefs:
1. Freedom for America
2. The Reality of God.
3. Boundaries based on the laws of nature.
That was my husband's avatar, squeeknomore. He let me use it. I didn't know it was against policy. Then they flashed the Forum Rules at me. I read them. Now I know. And unfortunately squeeknomore was mortally wounded…. in the mouse trap of 100% banned-dom. So don't worry, he is indeed squeaking no more.
Way more than I need. So, here goes:
"It happens quite a bit. Pay closer attention. Do you capture evidence every time someone insults you?
How much hard-drive space does your computer have?"
By Melissa Barrett
Dr. Lamb my All who visit forums and love that lifestyle. I am good with it but wonder how you live in a world of total lack of production. How lonely it must be. Know that I am here for you. Let us heal.
What is a total lack of production? I don't get it.
Find a production or published writing of Dr. Lamb. I bow my lady there are none.
Maybe he just likes to socialize. That's the main reason I come here. I put up a poem now and again, but my main goal is to be social and talk about ideas that are going on in my mind. This is an active forum with a variety of people and opinions. People are generally nice to each other, compared to other forums. I like it here.
I listen to your ideas. I like talking to you, and listening to what you have to say.
I probably should have stayed out of the whole situation though. I was just trying to defend Beth, because she seemed to be trying to help him. I honestly don't know what's going on with that, so I'm just going to say out of people's personal arguments from now on.
I know nothing about Eric, this is actually the first time I've even talked to him on here.
We must be at peace with our first impressions given. If they are wrong it is on our shoulders. Perhaps you are well to inner debate my intentions and earnestness. I would rather me a woman who had pre-judged me than one who does not know me.
Judge harsh. But please never on my account judge yourself. for you are that person I love.
I apologize for jumping in where it wasn't my business.
But I think it's a good idea to judge ourselves, or how can we know where we need to make improvements?
Beg or thee, the admonition was not to judge too harshly of yourself. I have come to peace with that nagging voice inside that judges me. may you also.
And this brings us back to the forum. (which language sounds right?)
This was a well placed question. I just posted over 30 featured hubs here in less than thirty days, plus some others. I just about went over the 200 mark of featured hubs simultaneously. We are talking the hardest of all writer's rankings in the world. I am just about to pop the rarefied air of under on million on Alexa. And as reported that is all done without any social networking. Last night they put the values of my site at over 14,000 dollars and this non person with no nothing questions my ability as a writer.
It is good for everyone to have a court jester,
And this is by choice of a well respected member of our community. "Be good for there is plenty bad" (sitting shaman woman of the Navajo 1977 Wapatki) "we do not lead by silence" (ed 1980)
You are congratulating him for insulting someone he does't know?
Rad man. Good for you. "Blind faith against something" -- I like it. All I was doing was pointing out hard facts. Or can only others do that who are not Christian?
Hard facts? What do you know about his hard facts. Do you measure everyone's success on how many hubs they produce here?
Maybe to you Rad Man -- old fashioned notions of standing up and showing your face and being a man mean nothing. Perhaps you like this notion of hooded KKK assassins, of course I say this simply for friends who are intimidated by you who have no identity, who stand only for divisiveness. I do not like it and I do not like you not saying who you are. Period. For me it is cowardice and chicken. You have shown a good man to us, do not support hooded men that wreak havoc.
I am Eric Hugh Dierker and I live at 908 Parkbrook street Spring Valley CA and you can call me at 858-736-4432
Did you just imply that Rad was a member of the KKK? Really?
See? I told you guys. Weirdness abounds here lately. (Including myself of course)
Apparently. That was my WTF moment for this week. Apparently Eric equates anyone who disagrees with him as a member of a racist hate group. That brings to mind several questions, all of which I'm not asking.
Considering the group he claims, that would be pot calling kettle
People who write as avatars and not themselves are the core of the concept of KKK. Sorry if it historically bothers you. White hoods to hide identity. And keep this in mind. In all fifty US states -- even a misdemeanor committed while hiding identity is elevated as a crime -- normally to a felony. Why?
It would seem that my concerns have historic and societal verification and concern. Even in the Anonymous 12 step programs they do not where masks and in fact declare there real name.
That palm and those small trees between your yards could use a trim, Eric.
It really depends on how you choose to see it. Personally, I think the apology and appreciation shown appeared genuine. The response could have been condescending, but it appears more of a case of words possibly not matching the intent. It happens often here on HP by both atheists and Christians (including myself in this)
No I don't think You're crazy, Eric. I think at times with certain hubbers it is easy to see offense where there may not be any intended (again guilty). It is difficult at times to understand tone based on words.
I don't think the response is that harsh or mean. Just mildly condescending and a bit smug. I think he's, at the same time, being totally sincere.
I wouldn't want someone talking that way to me. I would be mildly annoyed, but that's about it.
Yeah, he could have been nicer and we need more niceness in the world.
But, this is also the pot calling the kettle black, I've said a lot worse than that to people.
I think the atheist response you quoted is certainly blunt. Is it rude? Yes, in the sense that it is impolite and tactless (this person should definately not apply to the diplomatic corp, he said tactlessly). But it doesn't strike me as being deliberately insulting. More akin to someone making a faux pas than actively trying to offend, but I always try to give the benefit of the doubt, so I may be way off base there.
In general, some antireligionist academics have gained attention over the last few years, which seems to have stirred many armchair antireligionists into life. The result is that you find lots of antireligionists on forums attempting to emulate the brash, abrupt, argumentative style of discourse that the most well known antireligionists (Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens etc) employ. Unfortunately many also lack the rhetorical skill that allows those speakers to employ that tactic (it is a tactic) effectively. The result is that it often comes across someone being rude, or just bitter about something. I'm not suggesting that's what this is an example of, just making a general observation.
Btw I found some theists can be as equally rude, but as you asked specifically about the atheist response here, I haven;t commented on that.
Excellent stuff here which makes a lot of sense. It does seem that equally both sides of this particular isle have a history that carries over. It would also seem there is a visceral gut reaction to matters such as these and that only good training/practice tempers that well. Perhaps it should, then again perhaps not. Perhaps that "gut check" is indeed a bit insincere.
On the one hand we should appreciate and not deprecate brutal honesty. And on the other we should not deprecate heart felt "lovingness". And I think it is born out here that we generally consider the latter as more sought after. That is my read at least.
It certainly would appear as if you have never even watched those guys speak. Brash? Abrupt? Argumentative? Try and be honest.
I stated an opinion. You disagree with it. That doesn't make me (or you) dishonest. It just means we disagree, as people often do. Is there any particular reason you feel the need to question someone's integrity just because they happen to have a different opinion to you?
Only if they offer blatant falsehoods, as you have done.
Let's just avoid the whole **ssing contest that is likely to ensue if I point out how idiotic that comment is, and cut to the chase:
I think Dawkins and some other well known antireligionists are antagonistic and deliberately provocative. You don't agree.
I think I just saved us both some time. You're welcome.
I think what is wrong with this world is that people allow themselves get insulted
I just read all these posts and appreciate the positive vibes here. Of course I often wonder about these same issues. Its clear if people respond with reason and facts there would be far less vitriol. There are limits to incivilty that should not be condoned and the hub masters (whoever they are) seem to be on the ball about it.
To Eric and everyone on this forum:
My apology was sincere, and, as previously stated, never would I deliberately insult ones intelligence.
I also know that any time I comment on a forum, I leave myself open to criticism
That being said, sarcasm is never my intent.
I personally respect the multitude of responses on the forums. Each individual has a right to his/her own opinion.
And I had no intent to offend you; I responded as someone not knowing you at all, and taking a collection of words at face value with no other knowledge. Do, please, understand that my comments were towards those unsupported words, not towards you.
Dr. Lamb, I used to imagine that you were ATM, but now I know who you are. Only one person on this forum post with this much animosity. You are filled with anger and I'm sorry about that. I know how deeply you have been hurt. I know you're not worried about getting banned cause you'll simply use your usual account, but if you do get banned, I want to assure you, as I did Eric, I have no intention of reporting you. It's like Sara Bareilles says, "Say what you wanna say..." It ain't no thing. But when you're ready to be Brave, post as yourself. There's nothing to be afraid of.
It's amazing how wrong you can be about who people are here and just how absolutely irrelevant it is.
You're probably just as wrong about that as so many other things you say.
by Claire Evans4 years ago
It's easy to deconvert to atheism because they are disappointed, hurt or because they have lost their faith due to God making sense. It's harder to suddenly make a rational atheists convert to Christianity, which...
by Chasuk4 years ago
If you have been on HubPages for very long, you know that there are many people who believe mutually contradictory things. They each know that the others are wrong; After all, God or the Holy Spirit or [insert an...
by augustine724 years ago
Is atheism non-belief in the existence of God or belief in the non-existence of God?
by Ryan Whitacre3 years ago
Ok, here's the deal. i am an atheist, at least i was. I don't know anymore. Some things have happened in my life that have made me question my beliefs. For instance, a little less than a year ago i was going through a...
by Brittany Williams2 years ago
Atheism only means the lack of a belief in God. Why is it so hard for Christians to realize that we dismiss their religion for the same reasons that they dismiss all other religions? It doesn't make us horrible people,...
by HattieMattieMae4 years ago
Seen a video that asked this question! If one some feel the world would be better without religion, or supernatural, spiritual. Explain how it would make people's lives better?
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.