The Passion of the Atheist

[POTA]

Hello all,

Long time lurker, first time poster (actually, I've posted once or twice in the past, probably a year or so ago, but could not for the life of me remember my username that I used.)

I'm not sure if I am posting in the correct section of this forum, it seems to fit however, but I guess the computer and technology section would be appropriate as well...

Due to what I feel is a huge 'push' if you will from the religious right over the past few years, I've decided to create my own website, and would be really curious as to what people here think about it.

www.passionoftheatheist.com

I would be really interested in everyones (yes, even christians) opinions and suggestions on everything about it...from the look, to content, to ideas on what should be added, changed, etc. Basically, if you have an opinion on something, I'd like to hear it.

A friend and I are in the process of setting up an online streaming audio 'radio' type talk show as well, which will be linked from the site...think of it as a 'news and information from an atheists perspective' type show. To my knowledge, there isn't one out there...if anyone knows differently, please let me know where I can find it.

Semper Fi,

P.O.T.A.

[RandFan]

Originally posted by POTA
Hello all,

I'm not sure if I am posting in the correct section of this forum, it seems to fit however, but I guess the computer and technology section would be appropriate as well... Hi POTA. I would strongly recomend posting this also to the Politics Forum (http://forums.randi.org/forumdisplay.php?s=&daysprune=&forumid=14&x=17&y=3)

[jmercer]

You should also probably check with Randi or Kramer for permission before linking your site (as you have) to the JREF site.

[POTA]

Thanks RandFan, I will post it there as well.

Thanks also JMercer, I assumed people would want to have their sites linked from other web pages as it generates more traffic for them. But I will gladly remove it if they do not want it up there...perhaps a mod could let me know if having it linked is a problem?

Semper Fi.

[elliotfc]

Hey, I like the site. My only suggestion...you are adding to the confusion between religion/atheism. If atheism has nothing to do with religion, why co-opt the "passion" moniker? I know it's cute and tongue and cheek and a pretty innocuous dig, but it's also really funny to the believer who verifies what he/she claims; that atheists just can't escape religion, can they?

So that's my only suggestion. Define yourself in the most non-religious of terms, I think that'll help your assertion (or, the one that you quote from Hirschberg at least).

I briefly skimmed your articles...the strongest one if the one on morality. By far. Maybe another suggestion...you can set up a forum, at your site, where your articles could be discussed.

Nice job all in all. Oh yeah another suggestion...be as dispassionate as you can when discussing religion, it's the best way to convince open-minded people.

-Elliot

[POTA]

Elliot,

Thanks much for the feedback.

"why co-opt the "passion" moniker?"
As you guessed, tongue in cheek...However, I think it is also somewhat relevant to the message I want to get out there...perhaps my "About" section clears it up a little better then what I am saying here.

"be as dispassionate as you can when discussing religion, it's the best way to convince open-minded people."
I agree to some extant...but, being a Marine, there are just some things I have to be passionate about...My 'Reasonable Conlusions' article I think was very dispassionate...but some of my other articles are the opposite...I also find that if you are too dispasionate, people will find you boring...and therefore have no real interest in what you say. It's a bit of a two-edged sword I'm afraid, and I have yet to master the fine art of finding the middle ground between the two. But I do greatly appreciate your feedback.

I'm new to this website building business, but I am looking into the possibility of adding a forum eventually, but I'm afraid it is a little further down the road.

Anyone have any thoughts on the streaming audio show I mentioned? Good/Bad?

Also, if anyone would have an interest in maybe writing an article or two for the site, please feel free to email me and we can discuss it further.

SemperFi

[elliotfc]

I did read the About section. I thought it was a bit...unfair. No doubt Bush Sr. said what he did in 1987. When you said that a majority of religious Americans agree with the statement...I kind of figured what would come next. Taking a 1987 statement and extrapolating it to the *majority* of religious today? I think that's unfair. I wouldn't have one person characterize the opinions of others, regardless of their belief system or politics.

Like, I understand that you are a patriot and have served this secular country which houses millions of religious like myself and for that you have my gratitude and respect. The additional comments certainly humanize you and suggest why you feel it important to have your webpage, but it also smacks of fear-mongering a bit. I don't think that it is inevitable that religious atrocities are in our future if the religious have their way, anymore than I think that NAMBLA and sex instruction in kindergarten is inevitable if gay activists have their way.

Having said all that, a secularist or a like-minded soul might have a completely different opinon. And probably does. So I guess all I'm saying is that a religious believer probably won't be affected or engaged as much as a borderline secularist with no real religious ties.

An audio-stream, I missed that part. Would it be live? A debate? I think it's unnecessary unless you're interviewing somebody. Your writing skills are fine.

-Elliot

[POTA]

Elliot,

[POTA]

Elliot,

"I don't think that it is inevitable that religious atrocities are in our future if the religious have their way"

You don't? You don't think there will be at least one more terrorist attack from muslim extremists because of their faith?

You don't think there will be another bombed abortion clinic (and, just fyi, I am pro-life) because of someones faith?

If you don't believe any more atrocities are going to happen because of 'faith', I would really be interested in how you came to this conclusion, as history would completley disgaree with you I am afraid.

The quote from Bush is not meant to be a jab at Bush, but rather evidence towards those of religious beliefs having misconceptions of atheists and atheism.

And to my understanding, gay activism and NAMBLA are distinctly different from one another.

[elliotfc]

Originally posted by POTA
Elliot,

"I don't think that it is inevitable that religious atrocities are in our future if the religious have their way"

You don't? You don't think there will be at least one more terrorist attack from muslim extremists because of their faith?

I'm sorry, we're on two different lines here. There *ARE* terrorist attacks happening right now. I may have misunderstood your statements. I thought you were talking about a way of thinking (GHWB) that would make something analogous to the current Islamofacism occur in this country. Meaning, the teorrists aren't GHWB fans, but the GHWB fans may eventually be like the terrorists.

My bad, I misunderstood your point. -Elliot=

[jmercer]

Originally posted by POTA
Thanks also JMercer, I assumed people would want to have their sites linked from other web pages as it generates more traffic for them. But I will gladly remove it if they do not want it up there...perhaps a mod could let me know if having it linked is a problem?

Semper Fi.

You'er absolutely right, most people do, and it's usually not a problem. I just do it out of courtesy, and because sometimes the site will link back to me. :)

[elliotfc]

One more thing POTA...

I have no doubt that you have the ability to list religious atrocity after religious atrocity, and this bolsters your case.

I think, however, that this ability can be applied on *anything*. Take the US. You should reject the United States because of atrocities like slavery. Or medicine. Doctors do some bad things. Or science. Chemical weapons? What's next?

It is this limited condemnation which is certainly very personal to you, but will also make me not consider your site to be anything more than selective identifications to support a deeply held, apparently emotionally held, opinion.

Yet it is a good service to identify bad things about religion. Other people can identify the good things I guess. Good luck with it. It's not something that I could do. I can't exclusively fixate on negativity, see only the ugly, even when it comes to belief systems that I reject. -Elliot

[POTA]

JMercer,

I've taken your advice and sent out an email to Mr. Randi asking for permission to link to his site. I agree with you 100% that it probably should have been done out of courtesy anyways, I'm just new to the whole webpage ownership process I guess.

Thanks again for the suggestion.



Elliot,

"My bad, I misunderstood your point"

I had the feeling we were on two different pages...again, just to reiterate so you know where I am coming from, I have tried to make it clear on my site that my issue is not with religion, in general, my issue is with people who's 'faith' leads to harm and destruction in our world...as well as the reasons I personally have rejected the notion of 'faith.'

"You should reject the United States because of atrocities like slavery. Or medicine. Doctors do some bad things. Or science. Chemical weapons? What's next?"

If the U.S. was still promoting slavery, then yes, I would have a major problem with it. If I knew of a doctor that was doing some bad things, yes, I would have a problem with it. I'm not a big fan of chemical weapons either...but is the blame on science, or the way some use it?

It's the same with religion...I don't have a beef with christianity (other than the fact that I am a non believer in it) but I do have a major problem with the way some practice it...and I have concerns that those harmful ways of practicing it could become the norm in our society if someone doesn't stand up and shout, and show why christianity (the religion itself) is a belief system filled with error, and should be viewed with a skeptical mind. This also can be used for any of the other religions of the world as well.

"will also make me not consider your site to be anything more than selective identifications to support a deeply held, apparently emotionally held, opinion."

While my emotions may come through in my articles...your statement says nothing about the actual content, in which I have tried to use as many facts as possible, within the articles. If I was just making angry statement such as "I think God is stupid" and just left it at that, then I would agree, you would be wasting your time looking at my website...but I really don't think I have done that. Please read something like my 'Reasonable Conclusions' section, a section where I have tried entirely to withhold any emotional prejudices, and let me know how I would be wrong in my decision making process. Read my 'Separation of Church and State' article, and let me know where I am wrong.

I guess my point is, you don't have to like what I say, but attack the issues and facts I state, not the emotions I feel because of them.