Comments on: Atheists: Are they the new Gays? http://jutiagroup.com/2006/11/28/atheists-are-they-the-new-gays/ Market Jitters & Political Critters Tue, 16 Mar 2010 14:33:05 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Tom http://jutiagroup.com/2006/11/28/atheists-are-they-the-new-gays/comment-page-1/#comment-105 Tom Tue, 05 Dec 2006 06:16:16 +0000 http://jutiagroup.com/archive/2006/11/28/237/#comment-105 Does Anon think that only Christians will exist in an afterlife? What if hell doesn't exist? Anon's issues go beyond Athiests. Does Anon think that only Christians will exist in an afterlife?
What if hell doesn’t exist?
Anon’s issues go beyond Athiests.

]]> By: Anon http://jutiagroup.com/2006/11/28/atheists-are-they-the-new-gays/comment-page-1/#comment-101 Anon Thu, 30 Nov 2006 02:31:17 +0000 http://jutiagroup.com/archive/2006/11/28/237/#comment-101 bottom line, if you don't believe in GOD and accept Jesus Christ as your savior your're going to hell, I pray for athiest people, that someone will show them the light of God, and they can become saved. bottom line, if you don’t believe in GOD and accept Jesus Christ as your savior your’re going to hell, I pray for athiest people, that someone will show them the light of God, and they can become saved.

]]> By: Bill a.k.a. NO DooDahs! http://jutiagroup.com/2006/11/28/atheists-are-they-the-new-gays/comment-page-1/#comment-99 Bill a.k.a. NO DooDahs! Wed, 29 Nov 2006 19:41:17 +0000 http://jutiagroup.com/archive/2006/11/28/237/#comment-99 Atheists are the new gays? I was a mere child when the "love that dare not speak its name" started to become the "love that dare not shut the f**k up!", and I don't know if I can take another multi-decade "coming out party." Next thing you know, the G-D atheists will have their own channel! Maybe instead of LOGO they can use "NOGOD." How about "Godless Eye for the Religious Guy" as a prime-time hit? Or how about "militant atheist" stand-up jokes, like "Did you hear they're going to cancel Easter this year? Someone found the body!" Thanks for coming, remember, the nine o'clock show is completely different from the six o'clock show! But seriously, folks … Regarding "atheist," I find the definitional debate to be beside the point. There are theists and anti-theists, those who believe and those who, often quite zealously, disbelieve. There are also some who claim "no knowledge" or an undecided posture and these would often in the past be called agnostic. Regarding "proof," there are those who hold God's existence as proven (all of these are theists), dis-proven (all of these are anti-theists), unproven (some each of theists, anti-theists, and agnostics), and un-prove-able (again, some each of theists, anti-theists, and agnostics). As you can see, the intersections of belief in God and belief in proof of God's existence are not perfect. It seems to me that either (1) the anti-theists are either trying to "lay claim" to the entirety of the "no proof" camp by calling them "atheist" in order to soften the impact of the word "atheist," or (2) some of the ones more properly (my opinion) referred to as "agnostic" are wanting to call themselves "atheist" for shock value. Atheists are the new gays? I was a mere child when the “love that dare not speak its name” started to become the “love that dare not shut the f**k up!”, and I don’t know if I can take another multi-decade “coming out party.” Next thing you know, the G-D atheists will have their own channel! Maybe instead of LOGO they can use “NOGOD.” How about “Godless Eye for the Religious Guy” as a prime-time hit? Or how about “militant atheist” stand-up jokes, like “Did you hear they’re going to cancel Easter this year? Someone found the body!”

Thanks for coming, remember, the nine o’clock show is completely different from the six o’clock show! But seriously, folks …

Regarding “atheist,” I find the definitional debate to be beside the point. There are theists and anti-theists, those who believe and those who, often quite zealously, disbelieve. There are also some who claim “no knowledge” or an undecided posture and these would often in the past be called agnostic. Regarding “proof,” there are those who hold God’s existence as proven (all of these are theists), dis-proven (all of these are anti-theists), unproven (some each of theists, anti-theists, and agnostics), and un-prove-able (again, some each of theists, anti-theists, and agnostics). As you can see, the intersections of belief in God and belief in proof of God’s existence are not perfect.

It seems to me that either (1) the anti-theists are either trying to “lay claim” to the entirety of the “no proof” camp by calling them “atheist” in order to soften the impact of the word “atheist,” or (2) some of the ones more properly (my opinion) referred to as “agnostic” are wanting to call themselves “atheist” for shock value.

]]>