Atheist Propaganda Effectiveness

You can use the advance search feature of the forums and find every post a person has made in the active forums quite easily, and thus avoid making mistaken conclusions about what they believe based on the use of a bad dictionary.

Looking up propaganda on dictionary.com yields these two definitions at the top of the list: "The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause." and "Material disseminated by the advocates or opponents of a doctrine or cause: wartime propaganda." Neither of these two definitions implies saying bad things or slanting the truth. I use the term partly because it amuses me.

If you had checked my prevoius posts you would see that I became an atheist while in Sunday School many decades ago, and fully expect to not meet my non-maker still an atheist.

If you do make a poll that really ought to have a zero in it don't forget to include a zero in the answers like I did. Hee hee that is funny, zero is probably the most popular answer by far and I forgot to include it in the poll. That's a hoot.

I suspect that attempting to reason people who really do "believe in God" into not believing in probably a waste of time.

Sigh, back to work.

Atheists can not be converted, only self made.

One day someone came up with the idea of god and it's been passed on ever since. If all references to god where destroyed, someone would make it up again.

Of course you theists proabably feel I'm stepping on your toes right about now, well who cares, it's how you usually make us feel all the time. If you want to be religous, thats fine with me, but most are not "fine" with me choosing not to be.

You think you are defending "good" or "morality", but really you just want other people to be the same religion as you.

Gay marriage ban... protecting good? Or forcing your religion?

Banning abortion... saving babies and *ahem souls.. or forcing your religion on others.

There is nothing I "do" as an atheist that imposes on others, yet people who are religous are so feverant that it is "right" that they don't even "see" it as imposing onto others.

You can't make others live like you, when we atheists do our little threds like this that seem like we are trying to make you Atheist.. it' simply isn't so. We are trying to convey what it's like to constantly be told what one needs to belive.

So stop and think (theists) about how you feel when you read threads like this.
It's how we (atheists) feel most of the time.

I really don't believe the way I get treated by theists is about saving our souls, it's about the inability for others to believe that people have different views on life.

I have many friends who are religous, we don't try to convert each other.

I can't see becoming friends with anyone trying to tell me "believe this or you will burn a long long time".

I can get enough of that here:

www.chick.com

I am never addressing religious issues on the forum again. I am officially done with it.

I think there may be a tendency for people who have professed to atheism or at least not been very serious about their religion to become more pious and devout as they begin to realize that death is approaching. The fear of permanent torture could have a powerful mindbending effect.

The fact some people use the idea of a God as a way to make money and/or control people doesn't negate the reality of a creator. Nothing the creation does affects the reality of the creator. Any claims made against religion or religious people should have no bearing on the discussion of whether there is a creator or not. Any argument should not reference religion or how people act to mke the point either way. That's my opinion anyway.

The fear of eternal punishment can have a profound affect on some individuals; but a conversion inspired by fear would seem, to me, to be hollow... rather like a terrified wife falling to her knees and saying "I love you" (without meaning it) in hopes of avoiding a beating.

Hehe, I've never understood this statement. Not only have I jumped off many a bridge, but I have both followed others off bridges and I have convinced others to jump off bridges. Its dangerous, but I personally enjoy it more than sky diving. In a plane it is like jumping into a picture. A 50-70 foot bridge lets you know exactly what type of danger you are in. As long as you keep your legs crossed, wear shoes, keep your arms tucked in, and test the water before jumping, you'll be fine.

Where is this pervasive Atheist propaganda of which you speak? Don't answer that, it will only disgust me. It's a rhetorical question. This thread makes me want to read Tardblog.

--Off to reread Riti Sped.

The best part is that feeling of NOT CARING when you see religious symbols- when they evoke NOTHING, but you can relate back to when they did and compare the feelings. It's both comforting and empowering to have no emotional reaction when hooligans draw some symbols in the sand or utter some arcane passages (or when said things are defiled or cursed).

Dark,

Either way, whether the Bible is the true Word of God or not, it (the point) offers no evidence as to the reality of the Creator. Even if every religion is wrong, it doesn't say anything about the existence of God.

I can't help but wonder, what you read in the Bible that made you stop believing it?

I read it, and it didn't change my views negatively. By reading it I found that the myths of what I thought it says were cleared up.

Okay, I have an idea for a couple of polls! The first would be, how many of us have had religious people knock on our doors and try to convert us in person. The second would be the same, but with atheists instead of believers. How many of us have had atheists knock on the door and try to convert us? Why is it that people who want to share their religion with you don't want you to share yours with them?

"DING DONG" Atheists Calling!

LOL

Hehehe, I always thought it was a silly question. My favorite response was in an episode of Duckman when Dweezel Zappa's character replied with the question "How many of them?"

It's not the same type of intolerance experienced in the real world. It's not even effing close. Being called a moron in an online forum is nothing like waking up to find out that your neighbors have voted to amend the state's constitution to specifically discriminate against you and your family and friends. Being called a moron is not the same as having the funeral of a loved one picketed by fascists in the name of Jesus. Being called a moron is not at all similar to being bashed and left for dead on a fence in Wyoming. Not. At. Fucking. All.

Now that I have that off my chest....

Atheists, please don't call the theists names. Theists please don't call the atheists names. Personal attacks are wrong. But if I have a stupid belief, feel free to call it so. If my beliefs are contradictory, feel free to point it out. I'm going to do it to yours, so feel free to do it to mine. I won't tell you not to say things about my beliefs because they "hurt my feelings" and, guess what, I won't listen when you say the same to me. If I refer to your sacred scriptures as mythology, don't tell me not to. I won't tell you not to refer to my mythology as sacred scripture either. We're all adults here, if your beliefs are so fragile they can't withstand a little criticism, be warned now: don't read my posts.

My bad. I'm sorry I mischaracterized your intentions. I should have know how to check your posts. I didn't and I'm sorry.

Not to hijack a thread, but what exactly is your (or anyone's) definition of a "fundamentalist Christian"?

This one is easy to explain. For the theists going around knocking on peoples' doors, trying to convert them - well, it is really important. According to them, they have a chance at saving people from eternal damnation, and not doing something about that when you could would be pretty sucky, theist or not. If you heard on the radio that there was a storm coming, and you didn't bother to tell your radioless neighbours about it, that wouldn't be very nice of you.

From the atheist point of view it is of different importance. I'd like people to believe things that I think are true, but if they don't it isn't a terribly big deal, as long as they don't do things based on those beliefs that adversely affect me or people I care about.

If I manage to convert someone to atheism/agnosticism/etc. from some kind of theist position, then I don't gain that much, and they don't gain that much (according to my beliefs). The opposite situation, (according to the theist's beliefs) is of far more importance.

I define it as a Christian who believes that the Bible is the Literal Word of God. I define fundamentalist Muslims as Muslims who believe the Koran is the Literal Word of God.

The point I was trying to make was to show the absurdity of Kevn's claim,



The atheist organizations have never rung my doorbell, but lots and lots of Christians have. It's the religious groups who seek converts, not the atheists. That was the point I was trying to make.

I think your wikipedia quote is out of date, when I look up propaganda it reads like this:

''Propaganda''' is a message aimed at promoting a point of view. At its root, the denotation of propaganda is 'to propagate (actively spread) a philosophy or point of view'. Some seem to think of the term only in political contexts; in particular to refer to certain efforts sponsored by governments or political groups. This views improperly narrows and distorts the actual meaning of propaganda, which can be about any subject, and be true,accurate, and well reasoned, or not, as the author chooses. A propaganda message, like any form of publicity, can include significant and deliberate falsehoods, and/or omit so many pertinent truths that it becomes highly misleading.The italics were added here for emphasis.

If we consider that in any population of things, those things that replicate themselves well will end up dominating, then we may consider the brain as a holding tank for replicative ideas.

But "fitness" isn't just about fecundity. It's also about survivability. Therefore, those unshakable ideas are quite likely to survive.

There are two very unshakable ideas. One is faith against all reason, the other is reason against all faith.

I consider these dogmas to be immune systems for the brain. They prevent unsolicited ideas from entering and taking up vital resources (aka attention).

Additionally, there is one very fecund (replicative) idea. That is, the notion of foisting one's ideas onto another. Despite the fact that those ideas may or may not be adopted, the carrier "foisting one's ideas on another" has been almost universally proliferated.

Of course, there's no sensible reason to try and convince any other person of one's own beliefs, except insofar as it propagates the ideas themselves. If you must do it, consider attacking the immune system rather than simply injecting a new idea. Consider opening up the discussion to why exactly, ideas occupy attention, and why exactly, ideas need to be foisted on other people.

This is elementary memetics.

Further, you can't change beliefs by simply pressing other beliefs. You can change beliefs by inducing epiphanies. Chanting, music, lightshows, endorphins, sleep deprivation, and ritual, are all known to induce epiphanies. Science has it's ritual just like religion.

Introduce a theist into a university crowd. Get them high on caffeine. Then begin to speak about the power of science and the meaninglessness of existence. With enough late nights, that person will start to have their world shaken. They'll have a paradigm shift and an epiphany. They'll believe whatever new ideas happen to be present at the time.

Good luck.

-WW

I think your wikipedia quote is out of date, when I look up propaganda it reads like this:

''Propaganda''' is a message aimed at promoting a point of view. At its root, the denotation of propaganda is 'to propagate (actively spread) a philosophy or point of view'. Some seem to think of the term only in political contexts; in particular to refer to certain efforts sponsored by governments or political groups. This views improperly narrows and distorts the actual meaning of propaganda, which can be about any subject, and be true,accurate, and well reasoned, or not, as the author chooses. A propaganda message, like any form of publicity, can include significant and deliberate falsehoods, and/or omit so many pertinent truths that it becomes highly misleading.The italics were added here for emphasis.

I want one of these dvd players...

I've know some highly intelligent people who attend church and say they believe in God. One is my father, who is an absolutely brilliant person, extremely well read, full to the brim with knowledge of many subjects. Another is one of my cousins, a lawyer and minister. He is also immensely intelligent and articulate. A third is the father of one of my younger daugter's best friends, he is one of those people that spouts information in minute detail from thousands of things he has read or heard and his memory is always annoyingly correct. Whatever it is that makes some people "believe in God" when the idea seems silly to me, it can't be lack of intelligence, knowledge or the ability to reason.

If one is truly trying to convince others of anything, including atheism, as opposed to just having a cerebral sort of barroom brawl for fun, it is probably not a good idea to insult them. If you tell the listener they are stupid, that they have a high school mentality, they are much less likely to give the rest of your statements credence. I suspect in the particular case of atheism, rudeness, curtness, mockery, and other unpleasant types of behavior might actually cause readers or listeners to see this as evidence of the need for a belief in God to show a person how to act right.

A person who is an atheist is not only an atheist, they might well have other beliefs they hold strongly and which they would like to promote. Scarcity, in the economic sense, applies in this case just as it does in all human action. Resources spent by atheists promoting the cause of disbelief are resources not spent doing something else. As an example, suppose a person is an atheist and also a advocate of dramatic change in the role of the U.S. military in Iraq. Suppose they think the change they want to occur in U.S. foreign policy needs to be made rapidly and that failure to do so causes an immoral loss of life and constitutes a horrible crime. Time, effort, and material resources spent opposing belief in God by such a hypothetical person could have been spent promoting their foreign policy views in an attempt to alter U.S. military policy and thus to save the lives of the innocent. Given the unpopularity of atheism, making an issue of identifying yourself as one and promoting the idea in an unpleasant and antagonistic manner might well not only divert resources from a matter of greater urgency, it might even undercut the effectiveness of one's effort to promote other causes that one holds dear such as the one in the example.

Wow, Suzanne, that may be one of the most misguided and bigoted statements I've heard in a very long time. Yeah yeah, atheists should just shut the hell up and use their energy for things that actually matter, because obviously the bigotry they've had to endure every day of their fucking lives isn't really important.

I'm an atheist expressing my views. Thanks for your support, your gracious treatment really helps to relieve the misery caused by the lifetime of bigotry I've experienced from religious folks.