Atheists: No Monopoly
On Smarts Or Honesty
(unsigned)

Graphic Rule

From: "Positive Atheism" <editor@positiveatheism.org>
To: "bluekalyx"
Subject: Re: a fellow "atheist" with a big issue
Date: August 06, 2001 4:32 PM

Why is it that the ones who write to me and try to portray me as being stupid tend to be the ones who don't know how to write?
 

Just what is it that makes the lack of religion a religion? I suppose the next thing you're going to try to tell me is that bald is a hair color.

What gives you the privilege to make words mean what you want them to mean when the rest of us go ahead and use their commonly accepted meanings? and what benefit do you derive from doing this?
 

Think what you want. The definition for atheist that has been commonly accepted by atheists ever since it stopped being a capital crime to discuss atheism is: one who is without any religious faith or one who lacks a god belief for whatever reason.

I don't understand where you get off talking about "one particular faith" when we have clearly stated our definition of atheist.
 

Again: Say what you want. We have made our position clear and are not trying to band anybody together to do anything. In fact, even though we produce a magazine and a website with a specific target audience in mind, we don't care how many people read it -- if any.
 

It's very easy to sling emotionally charged language such as this: perhaps those who are too lazy to look up the facts might be swayed over to your position (whatever that is). However, that doesn't fly with me. I want you to give some specific examples of what you mean by "belligerant tone."
 

I come out swinging at liars -- theist or otherwise.

Again, please demonstrate that it's theists that I "come out swinging at" and that it's nontheists that I do not "come out swinging at."

You won't be able to do this because the truth is that I launch my salvoes at liars (such as yourself) and do not care if they're theists or atheists.
 

Again: I have problems engaging in "truthful" conversations with liars (such as yourself) and I have problems engaging in "intelligent" conversations with uneducated or lazy people who cannot even pull off a simple sentence in English (such as yourself).
 

The statistics and studies disagree with you. I will continue to go along with the statistics and studies unless and until you give me a strong reason to do otherwise.
 

I don't see this being the case. Again, you'll have to give me strong reasons to believe that you're telling me the truth, here.
 

So, then, even if you're right (and you have not convinced me that you are), does it then become expedient or proper to simply bend over and take it?

Please do not write to our domain again unless you're willing to be more truthful than you've been here.

Have a nice life: as far as we can tell, it's the only one we get.

Cliff Walker
"Positive Atheism" Magazine
Six years of service to
     people with no reason to believe

Graphic Rule

Graphic Rule

From: "Positive Atheism" <editor@positiveatheism.org>
To: "bluekalyx"
Subject: Re: a fellow "atheist" with a big issue
Date: August 06, 2001 5:12 PM

I asked you not to write to this domain again unless you are willing to be truthful. An Ad Hominem Attack, combined with implied threats of physical violence and other personal attacks, is not my idea of honest argument.

Now I must insist that you stop writing to our domain, period.

We're here to engage in truthful, intelligent discussions. In fact, we can handle your flippers having been placed a little farther apart than most, and we can even handle the cheese having slid off your cracker, that's not really an issue with us; but we do insist on truthfulness and honest in a discussion, as the statement on our front page indicates.

Have a nice life.

Cliff Walker
"Positive Atheism" Magazine
Six years of service to
     people with no reason to believe

Graphic Rule

Material by Cliff Walker (including unsigned editorial commentary) is copyright ©1995-2006 by Cliff Walker. Each submission is copyrighted by its writer, who retains control of the work except that by submitting it to Positive Atheism, permission has been granted to use the material or an edited version: (1) on the Positive Atheism web site; (2) in Positive Atheism Magazine; (3) in subsequent works controlled by Cliff Walker or Positive Atheism Magazine (including published or posted compilations). Excerpts not exceeding 500 words are allowed provided the proper copyright notice is affixed. Other use requires permission; Positive Atheism will work to protect the rights of all who submit their writings to us.