Are you a Bright??

[Aldebaran]

I looked at a translated website they linked to and saw some very very weird things posted there.

They talk about religions as if what they think they know about is, is correct and hence "true" while they clearly have no clue (and in addition are clearly influenced by biased media "knowledge").

If you have the arrogance to claim to be "bright" and then want to talk about something, especially when that talking is done in a critical way, then the most rational (read: rational) since the most normal (read: normal) thing to do is to study first - and in depth - on what you want to talk about.

= Summarized: Who on earth do they think they are?
God?


Sorry to say, but such idiots don't provide for any "help" for atheists. They make them look like prejudiced, intellectually lazy and arrogant fools.

salaam.

 

[Jo/Joe]

Atheists don't need any help. It's only an issue in the US.

 

[Aldebaran]

Atheists don't need any help.

If I was a Christian of a certain brand, I would now post that I was praying for you because you don't know you need help to "find Jesus" (there is at least one such US Christian praying for me. Since about a year now if he is comitted to his promise made on a street in Europe)

It's only an issue in the US.

Going on what I read and hear about the situation there I can understand they are a bit more desperate by the day.
(I would become desperate would I live there, and I am one of the "superstition believers" myself)

Nevertheless such websites - with such stupid names at that - aren't going to "help" much.
By the way, I read a translation in a European language and there I saw all that rubbish I described. So I don't think that has much to do with the USA.

salaam.

 

[spring-peeper]

If I was a Christian of a certain brand, I would now post that I was praying for you because you don't know you need help to "find Jesus" (there is at least one such US Christian praying for me. Since about a year now if he is comitted to his promise made on a street in Europe)



Going on what I read and hear about the situation there I can understand they are a bit more desperate by the day.
(I would become desperate would I live there, and I am one of the "superstition believers" myself)

Nevertheless such websites - with such stupid names at that - aren't going to "help" much.
By the way, I read a translation in a European language and there I saw all that rubbish I described. So I don't think that has much to do with the USA.

salaam.

Oh look, they have a chapter near me.



They haven't been in the paper since 2004 but have around 30 members from here. Can't see them in other provinces, though just Quebec. Nice of them to post the bios of their members and have their photos up on the net like that

 

[onemonkey]

As it happens, no atheist should call himself or herself one. The term already sells a pass to theists, because it invites debate on their ground. A more appropriate term is "naturalist", denoting one who takes it that the universe is a natural realm, governed by nature's laws. This properly implies that there is nothing supernatural in the universe - no fairies or goblins, angels, demons, gods or goddesses. Such might as well call themselves "a-fairyists" or "a-goblinists" as "atheists"; it would be every bit as meaningful or meaningless to do so.

naturalist is a bit confusing too..

 

[Masseuse]

No fairies?

 

[frogwoman]

The term already sells a pass to theists, because it invites debate on their ground.

Whats wrong with debate ... heaven forbid that the poor little loves would be exposed to another point of view ...

 

[s.norbury]

I'm very bright

 

[Roxy641]

Bright AND an Atheist

I consider myself to both a Bright and an
Atheist.

Roxy641

 

[In Bloom]

What has this been bumped for?

And why would you want to call yourself a "Bright"? Why not just get "arrogant cock" tatooed across your forehead and be done with it?

 

[Balbi]

Ref: the point about Copernican models as opposed to the older model of the earths position in relation to the sun.

It's important not to forget prior theory - it's all important to the current theory. The sun may not go round the earth, but it's key to progress that the narrative of the 'which one goes round and round?' includes theories before Copernicus to show that questioning the established theories is what proper science is all about.

It's the Stewart and Cohen thing 'lies-to-children'. If something is complicated, then you break it doen into smaller manageable parts - or work out a story to explain how it works. And sometimes the story is a 'lie'. Then once a small part is understood, the rest follows in time.

This bright thing seems a bit like Dawkinistic meme creation - a rival to one of the most succesful memes ever, god. Shame about the name.