Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

That's down to which Atheists you meet. Every group has some people who are bad it's hardly unique to atheists. It's also linked to your perception of Atheists. I find the vast majority of theists to be annoying at best however a religious person would probably have no problem with them as they agree/understand the reasons for their religious behaviour much better than I do.

I actually kind off agree with Smacks, in that you shouldn't follow an unethical (as in, preaches killing & hating for whatever reason) ideology, and there are things in most religions that many would consider unethical. Take the Torah/Bible/Quran's (since they're all based of the preceding one) passages on homosexuality or slavery as an example. If you don't follow these particular verses, I have no problem with it. The same goes for how far you take your religion (or lack thereof); if you rub it in every one's faces and preach to anyone who disagrees with you (I've actually had some idiot splash Holy Water over me) people won't like it.

Clearly you don't remember the joys of Hari Krishnas. Crap I can't find the right airpost scene but this is even better:

I remember them, but they were usually pretty funny and not so annoying, to me anyway. A bunch of bald people in orange sheets dancing around with tambourines and handing out fliers and books is one thing. Telling every single person in the student center that they are gonna suffer an eternity of fire and brimstone is quite another.

"Man, I was just trying to play Frisbee, but this douche is bringing me down. If only I had something to throw at him.....wait!"

Andrew1975 wrote:

Clearly you don't remember the joys of Hari Krishnas. Crap I can't find the right airpost scene but this is even better:

I remember them, but they were usually pretty funny and not so annoying, to me anyway. A bunch of bald people in orange sheets dancing around with tambourines and handing out fliers and books is one thing. Telling every single person in the student center that they are gonna suffer an eternity of fire and brimstone is quite another.

"Man, I was just trying to play Frisbee, but this douche is bringing me down. If only I had something to throw at him.....wait!"

Plus, if you time it right, you can run them all down in one go.

Gooouranga!

Andrew1975 wrote:

Clearly you don't remember the joys of Hari Krishnas. Crap I can't find the right airpost scene but this is even better:

I remember them, but they were usually pretty funny and not so annoying, to me anyway. A bunch of bald people in orange sheets dancing around with tambourines and handing out fliers and books is one thing. Telling every single person in the student center that they are gonna suffer an eternity of fire and brimstone is quite another.

"Man, I was just trying to play Frisbee, but this douche is bringing me down. If only I had something to throw at him.....wait!"

Actually I was just trying to link in one of my favorite scenes from Airplane but couldn't find it.

To your note above, agreed. Their free speech ends at my nose.

Smacks wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:Godwin wept.

Oh please, I didn't call anyone a Nazi for their opinion. We were discussing ideologies that are tolerated and not tolerated in western culture.

Yes, and putting Nazis on the same level as organized religion is indirectly comparing the two.

Frazzled wrote:

Andrew1975 wrote:

Clearly you don't remember the joys of Hari Krishnas. Crap I can't find the right airpost scene but this is even better:

I remember them, but they were usually pretty funny and not so annoying, to me anyway. A bunch of bald people in orange sheets dancing around with tambourines and handing out fliers and books is one thing. Telling every single person in the student center that they are gonna suffer an eternity of fire and brimstone is quite another.

"Man, I was just trying to play Frisbee, but this douche is bringing me down. If only I had something to throw at him.....wait!"

Actually I was just trying to link in one of my favorite scenes from Airplane but couldn't find it.

To your note above, agreed. Their free speech ends at my nose.

Leave us not forget....

Smacks wrote:
Not true, if you didn't find anything to be unethical then you would not be able to find anything ethical either or understand the concept of the word. You obviously do.

First, I don't consider anything to be ethical. Second, I can understand things without believing that they are sensible. There is no requirement for me to apply any concept which I understand to my appraisal of reality.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:
To your note above, agreed. Their free speech ends at my nose.

Right, but no one really agrees on where your nose begins.

biccat wrote:

Smacks wrote:'Can you condone something unethical, without being unethical yourself?

condone

1. to disregard or overlook (something illegal, objectionable, or the like).
2. to give tacit approval to: By his silence, he seemed to condone their behavior.
3. to pardon or forgive (an offense); excuse.

#1 is easy, we do it all the time. If you believe that gambling is unethical, but overlook your neighbor's weekly poker game, you are condoning that behavior.

Yes, but it could be argued that not raising objection to a neighbour's private poker game, a matter of individual choice, falls within the boundaries of many people's personal ethical codes. To clarify; though you may seriously disapprove of your neighbour's gambling, it is not unethical to respect his personal choice.

#2 is the more difficult one, but I think it's also something we do regularly. There are actions that we consider unethical if we do it ourselves (for example, I think it would be unethical to represent someone who confessed to me that he murdered his family), but we not only condone, but consider ethical, when others do so (I think it's ethical for someone to represent someone who murdered his family).

It could be argued that where it becomes unethical is when you personally refuse to represent such a client, but pass him onto another member of your law firm in order to bring in business, whilst also absolving you of any personal ethical transgression resulting from representing the murderer yourself.

Another example are those who consider capitalism "unethical," yet continue to support the capitalist system by purchasing or producing goods under capitalism. By their silence, they are affording tacit approval to the system.

Do ethics exist without choice? We live in a capitalist hegemony, and as such, our choices are severely limited. Our every action reinforces capitalism, by dint of simply being alive in the place where we live. If your example were true, the only way to be 'ethical' in that situation would be to kill yourself or move to North Korea, neither of which are practical options. I'm not sure that living under a hegemonic force necessarily constitute tacit approval of that hegemony. I'm not saying it doesn't, just that I'm not sure.

lol He be trollin. This is awesome.

Albatross wrote:

Another example are those who consider capitalism "unethical," yet continue to support the capitalist system by purchasing or producing goods under capitalism. By their silence, they are affording tacit approval to the system.

Do ethics exist without choice? We live in a capitalist hegemony, and as such, our choices are severely limited. Our every action reinforces capitalism, by dint of simply being alive in the place where we live. If your example were true, the only way to be 'ethical' in that situation would be to kill yourself or move to North Korea, neither of which are practical options. I'm not sure that living under a hegemonic force necessarily constitute tacit approval of that hegemony. I'm not saying it doesn't, just that I'm not sure.

There's also the issue of being able to disapprove of a thing you do all the time.