On Mon, 01 May 2006 15:02:29 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:

On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 23:53:14 -0700, johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote in alt.atheism

In article <n1t2529p8764hdvith73i9fid8o47lhese@4ax.com>,
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:

webeditors@newsweek.com

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12498143/site/newsweek/

Mr. Gellman;

<snip for brevity>

I would ask for forgiveness from the angry atheists who write to me if
I thought it would help. Religion must remain an audacious, daring and,
yes, uncomfortable assault on our desires to do what we want when we
want to do it. All religions must teach a way to discipline our animal
urges, to overcome racism and materialism, selfishness and arrogance and
the sinful oppression of the most vulnerable and the most innocent among
us.

{Oh, fucking *****! Another damn fool who's on the 'hedonism' binge
and highlights his terminal lack of morality. I call that 'Dog Training
101' morality. The person is unable to think and can't be trusted
'off-leash.' Congradulations on demonstrating your superstition's a
total failure.}

{snip the rest of this drek. I can't handle anymore.}

Regards,
Stoney

This guy sounds like some of the dimwitted trolls who come over here and
try to tell us what we 'believe'.

Exactly.

It is the rare American theist who understands atheism, even though it
shouldn't take much thought on their part.

After all, they don't give
other deity-beliefs a thought, let alone actively "believe they don't
exist". Nor do they do it for any the ad hominem reasons they invent
for us.

I don't know why they have this problem. Theists in Western Europe
don't, and understand that even to believers in other religions, their
own is "somebody else's religion". They understand this and leave it
at that.

I only ever came across a believer who was rude enough to lecture me
on what as an atheist my position "really" was, once. My manager circa
1981, who was a complete jerk. But then I moved to the USA a few years
later

Their strawmen are issued from the pulpit (or in this case the Jewish
equivalent) to ignorant and gullible believers as a warning to keep
them in the flock, who unthinkingly swallow it and have neither the
common sense nor the courtesy not to repeat it to a general audience
that includes the very people they slander.

Even if the falsehoods were true, which they aren't, they should
understand that nobody likes to be told "the unpleasant truth" about
themse;ves. Let alone when it's a slander.

And again, even if the falsehoods were true, which they aren't, the
arguments in response to what they thoughtlessly tell us still stand.

Any wonder they're treated like the nasty idiots they show themselves
as.