This is happening sunday
Oh excellent. A bunch of non-atheists telling a bunch of Christians what Asthies "really think" and why it does and does not matter!
It's as bad as the other side watering down religion to make their point. sighs.
If they were honest, they would have real live atheists stand up there and say "bullocks. Deal with *this*, and not the straw man.
Oh give her a break, you know typing isn't her strong point. Anyway, it should be bollocks not bullocks.
Yes, it was supposed to be Atheist. I didn't see the red squiggles, since i was on my phone. so there ;-) (and yes, i can't see errors unless there is a red squiggle. blame my eyes, or blame being premature, or what ever the newest theory on why dyslexics don't read / see letter arrangement well.
- We shouldn’t attack theology or religion
because Godot is an accommodationist and doesn’t like us to attack theology or religionbecause we aren’t experts in theology or religion and don’t understand things properly.
- We should attack the patriarchy, the rape culture etc
because Godot is a feminist and does like us to attack those subjectsbecause Godot and the rest of us know enough to attack male chauvinism. Incidentally Godot feels her qualifications in Religious studies qualify her to attack male chauvinism generally but I’m not qualified to attack Christianity in Godot’s opinion.
Can we dissect racism without being racists? Can we dissect pseudoscience, faith healing woo generally, all those subjects that we dissect without believing it all or at least studying whichever silly idea we dissect for very many years? Let’s get some consistency. Proxima Centauri (talk) 17:10, 11 October 2012 (UTC)