|
Post by ebonywnd on Nov 5, 2003 14:56:33 GMT -5
In no way does your definition of atheist state that it promotes tolerance of non-christians. It merely says that and atheist lacks belief in a god or gods.
Our meetings are Wendsdays at 7:30pm. If you go to our website, and look at the calender of events, you should find the "where" part easily enough. The meeting place changes.
|
|
|
Post by profdunebastard on Nov 5, 2003 15:00:45 GMT -5
Our meetings are Wed nights at 7:30. Our meeting places change rooms often, but are usually in the Union. Today though, we have a debate at 7:30 at N100 of the Buisness College feauturing Henry Silvermen of the Lansing ACLU and Dr. Ronald Mayers of Cornerstone University. It concerns Religion's role in government and we are serving as impartial mediators. I suggest you attend if you are available.
On these boards, we are somewhat tounge in Cheek, many of us are indeed atheist or agnostic and many of us have certain qualms about Christianity, moreso it's role in the nation and our lives, than actual tenets of beliefs, although I personally have qualms with those too. Anyway, sometimes we forget we may be construed as offensive(some of our members don't care) or get caught up in an idea. On the internet it is hard to tell joke from reality sometimes. Anyway, no personal harm meant, but many of us will continue to have problems with organized religion, both with our beliefs concerning the existence of god, but alsoorganized religion's pervasive, sometimes threatening amd arrogant role. We will probably express our opinions again, and you may very well be offended again, but is in no way a personal attack, abd I respect and defend your right to have your own view and look forward to discussions in the future, hopefully inoperson. Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by the anti-myrmidon on Nov 5, 2003 15:23:56 GMT -5
Magnus, You can find our meeting times and places on our website on the "Calendar" page. They are most often on Wednesdays at 7:30 in the Union, though the rooms may vary. This week we have a debate in n100 Business College at 7:30 tonight, but next week we have a speaker on Tuesday (not sure just where yet). We will also have tables set up on campus during Church/State Separation Week (as recognized by the City of East Lansing), and further info about that will surely be posted here.
As for your latest post, let me start with some definitional issues. Atheism is the lack of a belief in a god or gods, nothing more. Any other beliefs, including views and opinions about religion, are the views of individuals. Atheists may be religiously tolerant, or religiously intolerant of many different views, Christian or otherwise. There are some common views held by atheists, but that does not mean that atheism is a philosophy or worldview beyond the disbelief in deities. Christians likewise share many views that are not dependent on their being Christian.
As for the notion of anti-Christianity, you are using a meaning well beyond what you used in your original post. In the sense that I am pretty sure that Christianity (in most of its common forms) is false, I guess that would make me "opposed to the Christian religion" by the definition you supplied. But it is another matter to connect a disagreement about theological truth with "promoting non-tolerance of Christians." Just because I disagree with what they believe does not mean that I favor discrimination and intolerance toward Christians. Quite the opposite, in fact.
As for what your friends heard at our meetings, I repeat my previous statements that individual opinions, even if shared by multiple people, do not indicate that a group (seen as an entity in and of itself) advocates those opinions. Many of our members have had negative experiences with religion, and most often, it involves some form of Christianity (simply because our national population demographics indicate a much higher percentage of Christians than members of other faiths). We encourage an environment where freethinkers (freethinker: one who forms his opinions about religion independently) who have had such experiences feel safe to vent and discuss their backgrounds, and this applies both to our nonreligious and religious freethinking members. When we have people come to our meetings to share the gospel with us (as they view it), we are more than willing to listen to them. All we ask is that people do not disrupt us when we are trying to accomplish group business. Again, the responses given to such discussions are the opinions of our individual members.
Also along a similar vein, when the group was formed, "freethinker" was used because it is a theologically neutral term (see definition above). The name could have been atheism-specific, anti-religion specific, but it was not. The idea was to emphasize the inclusive nature of the group. That is why you and any of your friends (religious or otherwise) are more than welcome to come to any of our meetings. Will there be discussion? definitely. Will there be heated debate? possibly, as opinions concerning religion and/or political issues tend to foster heavy disagreement. But you are still welcome, because discussion fosters a freethinking mind, whether atheist, Christian, or otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by the anti-myrmidon on Nov 5, 2003 15:26:21 GMT -5
ehh...I figured that someone else would reply before I finished up my lengthy post. I tend to write a lot. Maybe J.K. Rowling should hire me to write the last two Harry Potter books?
|
|
Jess too lazy to log in
Guest
|
Post by Jess too lazy to log in on Nov 5, 2003 15:46:38 GMT -5
At least you could edit them. She fired her editor, and the 5th book showed it.
|
|
|
Post by SluttyJesus on Nov 5, 2003 19:12:16 GMT -5
I consider myself anti-christian. I am also atheistic, agnostic, and just to be sure I've covered all my bases, anti-unicorn, anti-leprechaun, and anti-mormon. But then, I have an astoundingly large amount of vitriol, probably more than any human being should be allowed to hold. I believe what we (that is, the individuals on this board) have been asking for is not whether or not you or your friends feel the majority of the MSUFA members are anti-christian, but some reason why you would be able to logically validate and defend the statement that our organization is anti-christian. Acceptable evidence would be an eyewitness account of one of our venerable leaders closing the meeting with "Okay guys, lets all pile into the group sponsored Evil'on'Wheels van and go defecate on some crosses!" Also, I feel I should make it clear that while I am certainly anti-christian and do not believe you or anyone else should believe in christianity, that in no way suggests that I think you should not be ALLOWED to believe in christianity. I believe we have successfully established that your previously formed opinion about the character of MSUFA, as well as the opinions formed by your opinions are incorrect and fallacious. That being said, shall we drop it? Since our current debate seems to have been settled and exhausted of its logical opportunities, I believe we should move on. I for one, love Dragonlance. As you probably would have guessed, Raistlin was my favorite. I'm guessing Sturm was yours?
|
|
|
Post by ebonywnd on Nov 6, 2003 11:49:43 GMT -5
I consider myself anti-christian. I am also atheistic, agnostic, and just to be sure I've covered all my bases, anti-unicorn, anti-leprechaun, and anti-mormon. :oWhoa, whoa, whoa, wait a minute. Anti-unicorn?? What is wrong with unicorns?? You've obviously never met Stabby, my pet flesh-eating unicorn. How can you be against something you have never even encountered?
|
|
|
Post by Atsuko73 on Nov 6, 2003 18:42:12 GMT -5
Raistlin? honestly. He's for people who wish they were cool.
Can you guess who my favorite was?
|
|
|
Post by SluttyJesus on Nov 7, 2003 0:00:23 GMT -5
Raistlin? honestly. He's for people who wish they were cool. Can you guess who my favorite was? No way! He could spit up blood for 2d6 damage!
|
|