Posted on 11/03/2013 8:42:48 AM PST by Salvation
Speaking as an atheist, I couldn’t care less whether Oprah apologizes or not...she’s simply showing her ignorance on yet another subject.
The famed "atheist" Madalyn Murray O'Hare, according to her son who is now a Baptist minister, used to set up a Christmas tree and a Nativity scene on the floor close to the tree and proceed to stomp on the Nativity figures in front of her children.
Wouldn't a true atheist, or one that we would probably recognize by the atheist propaganda, just ignore the whole Christmas scene?
But, really. At this point “what difference does it make?”
I certainly consider myself a "true" atheist, and I don't completely ignore Christmas. Don't get me wrong, I certainly don't celebrate any of the religious aspects of it, but I do thoroughly enjoy what has become a largely secular festivity...presents, Christmas music, Christmas trees & lights, Rankin Bass cartoons, the family getting together, etc.
Heh. In the case of Oprah, not much....
“shes simply showing her ignorance on yet another subject.”
She got it right. Atheists are narcissists.
Some are, certainly...as are some believers, yes?
At life’s end is it more comforting to know that there is a merciful, loving God or that one just passes into an eternal nothingness? If every beautiful and awesome work of art, music and literature has a creator of it why is it so hard to believe that the sun, earth and the whole universe also has a Creator? To believe otherwise is a big disconnect of logic, IMHO.
Atheists responded by criticizing Winfreys lack of understanding about atheism, and some, such as the Boston Atheists, are calling on her to apologize for her comments.
Oh, some things are better not said.
It was fake. It was propaganda.
Could have been, but who knows the mind of Oprah?
In the early days of their movement, the homosexuals generally denied there was any universal effort or intention to convince society to embrace homosexuality as normal and acceptable. The argued that they simply wanted to be able to be left alone to practice a lifestyle that they wished to follow without interference by the heterosexual community. That, of course, turned out to be untrue, as we now see that the ultimate goal was to re-order societal thinking into believing that homosexuality is normal and good.
Now I realize that the atheistic community is no more homogeneous than the homosexual community, but do you believe that, generally speaking, atheists simply want to left alone to believe (or not believe) what they wish without societal interference? Or do you believe that, like the homosexuals, the atheists have a larger agenda and actually want society to do what it must to convince God-fearing members of our community to embrace atheism in the same manner that they embrace theism?
?
I don't quite follow the sentence structure of your 2nd question. When you say, "in the same manner that they embrace theism, who is the "they" of which you are speaking? Are you asking if atheists wish to force believers to reject their long-held beliefs and become atheists? If so, I would have to answer, "no". Even the most vehement of atheists in the West don't (as far as I know) advocate the forced conversion of Christians.
As for the first question, I think very few atheists are active in the "pro-atheist" movement. Heck, there's a lot of social pressure not to even admit that one is an atheist (although that has lessened considerably in the last 40 years). I think most atheists do, in fact, simply wish to be left alone when it comes to their lack of belief.
I will freely admit that most of the "Nones" (atheists, agnostics, and those indifferent to religion) trend left-wing in their politics, although there's a substantial Libertarian/Ayn Randian wing. I certainly lean (not all the way, mind you) in that direction myself.
I think many outspoken atheists are leery of the fact that the only true atheism is nihilism. After all, they think that we accidental confluences of chemical actually have some worth, that a person exists.
I had to read that sentence a few times myself to figure out what I was trying to ask; but your understanding of it was correct. Nevertheless, I sense that like any other movement, the goals of the the activists will shift as their philosophy become more acceptable, and eventually, they will want believers not to believe. And Im not making that statement in any negative way; I simply think its reality.
Nevertheless, as a traditional Catholic I pray that the Modernist bishops of our Church speak out in a much louder voice against atheism than they ever did against homosexuality. The results of their muted response to that sin is all too evident today.
The atheists worship nogod. Despite their anger at Oprah, Oprah, based on her comment about her god, worships someone other than the Holy Trinity.
We'll see, I suppose...I certainly have no desire to force anyone not to believe; for that matter, I don't even want anyone not to believe. Different strokes and all that.
(The main thing I want is for the Government to simply leave me alone, but that's a topic for another thread)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.