My issue is that on many topics, some already have become too PC and close minded.

@Piratefish I really appreciate the raw honesty on this site. Hope it never goes away.

@Piratefish "too pc" pffft. I absolutely reject the idea that it is ok to discriminate against people for circumstances of birth (race, sex, sexual orientation,place of birth, financial status) however I will judge the hell out of people who ignore evidence and facts to further their own biases and make others lives miserable over their circumstances of birth. Ignorance and bigotry is not a valid veiwpoint or lifestyle.

@OpposingOpposum Yes. This.

@OpposingOpposum ????

Believe you me there are groups to do that. This s a group for hello. Introduction. plenty of unhinged people in appropriate rooms to debate anything you believe.

@DoctoralZombie, @Piratefish my idea is that you need to go where you will get so much interaction on atheists, religions, belief systems that I stay away. Most all argue something they cannot prove scientifically. I stay away. I enjoy positive people.

it is to say hello group, not your life story.

@OpposingOpposum

Yet the very people who claim to be opposed to it have no problems with hating and blaming entire groups of people for the actions of a reprehensible few. It's very PC to say that one stands against prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination of any kind, but this idea does not seem to extend to all groups. To me, this feels like a double standard. We should always be careful when discussing any group, regardless of how popular or unpopular it may be to bash them.

@Piratefish it is absolutely not a double standard to denounce the groups who can be factually shown to be the originators of problem people and policies as bad, outdated or toxic. You know a man or a group by their actions, not their claims.

Not sure we're talking about the same things here.

@Piratefish I thought we were. I was addressing your hostility statement and posting my opinion as to why there is hostility. Who knows...maybe I have misunderstood your point...that is entirely possible.

@patchoullijulie The "unmasking" and "hostile times" part is where you lost me and made me think we may possibly be referring to two different phenomena.

@Piratefish Oh gotcha ya. I could have been a little more specific. I meant unmasking in terms of todays exposure of things like misogyny, bigotry, etc. which is the basis for a lot of the hostility in conversations today. I don't know if that clears or muddies it up my previous comments.

Fortunately, I haven't run across those three groups here on this site ... yet. When I do, I will simply block them.

@Piratefish i enjoy getting all snarky with these fools, and my android tablet does not have a "block" button ( i queried Admin about 5 months ago on this). So i get to enjoy what they have brought upon themselves!

@AnneWimsey I've read others' comments about interactions with evangelists on this site, but I have yet to actually witness one of these misguided people trolling on here myself. Maybe one day ....

@Piratefish There used to be a very few, easily spotted.
There are a bunch more now, and they are Much better at it. They post interesting questions, usually seemingly erudite, and ingenuous. BUT the question requires you to respond AS IF there were a "gawd"....thus undermining your hard-won independence from that whole concept.

@AnneWimsey Why not just ignore those posts? I refuse to have a conversation with anyone who is clearly only trying to be antagonistic or contrary.

As an aside, I am surprised that admin does not do more to address the influx of shit-stirrers and deliberate trolls. We have to put up with enough ignorance and hatred toward us in the "real world", our few havens should not be places where we have to be subject to harassment as well.

@Piratefish If you spend enough time here, you, like I will likely encounter those that assert "Someday you will pay for your science belief" implied within context (because science is lies and my faith (belief without evidence) is the only way to find truth)" and a host of other face-palm nonsense too lengthy to list. They exist and I am not kind to them.

@Piratefish 1. I abhor censorship in every form!
2. I am on here about 6 hours a day, and read over 800 words per minute...i do not think "patrolling" is possible, even if I thought it was desirable, which I do not.
3. Hey, get your own hobby, snarkiness is one of mine!

@AnneWimsey I think there is a difference between censorship and not allowing troublemakers to seek you out in your own home, so to speak. Imagine if we started showing up in their churches and disrupting their fellowship. It is in poor taste, and is never censorship to show disruptive jerks the door. It's no different than declining to invite a Jehovah's witness into your home when they come knocking.

@NoMagicCookie And those are not the people to whom I am referring. I am referring to people who wax political or social and then get really upset whenever anyone has a different opinion or view. Upset to a point where they become unnecessarily nasty, rude, and hateful. My original post is about them, not the handful of religious diehards who come here to troll. Hence my reference to atheists, agnostics, and skeptics.

@Piratefish "troublemakers" get, and richly deserve, trouble.

@Piratefish my feeling is, if you express an opinion, you should Expect to get some back....and not always couched in the most polite way, too bad so sad.....

Well put!

I agree, as long as they are actually and truly dangerous or exploitative beliefs. However, the comments I have made are neither, yet have been met by outlandish hostility by some. I just expected more from a group known for its ability to question and be open minded.

@Seeker3CO Spot on!

yeah, but many americans bot the trickle down BS & now they & their progeny are pretty well fucked.

@OwlInASack anytime

Trouble is, you don't even have to challenge some of the people on this site. Just disagreeing with their opinion or view is enough to launch some into a tizzy.

@Piratefish I've definitely encountered it before. I made my own post about it. Even though it's just a difference of opinion, I guess they view it as a challenge to their own belief. Maybe it just feeds their ego.

I would submit that the scientists that you noted as “devout” were required to be Christians in order to be accepted in their societies.

@Science-guy I have to disagree with that point, although can't say that it hasn't happened.
Newton, was so into the scriptures that he spent years trying to formulate the second coming.
Faraday never gave up his belief in god no matter what Scientific discoveries he had amassed.Gallaleo, even though he had his beef with the religious, he still held on to his belief of god.
Farther more, the vadican itself has a very advanced astrophysics department that has worked hard with other Scientists on discovering what we can about the cosmos.

Of course, that is the modern way. I agree that the vadican did in fact years ago did repress any one who differed from scriptures.

And I will also renote that there are still today a few believers in the Sciences that are giants in their field.

My best conclusion about why that is.
I can only venture to guess that they have found a way of not taking the bible literally, and are able to meld together both.
Personally I don't agree with their beliefs, but I'll never discount their Scientific achievements.

Precisely how I am feeling.

Perhaps it is more accurate to say that atheists, as a group, have a far greater proportion of better educated and more intelligent people compared to the general population. In fact a number of studies have concluded as much. And a s a group, atheists have certainly demonstrated the ability to be more open minded. I, perhaps naively, had higher expectations from a community of atheists, agnostics, and skeptics. But sadly, politics and self-centerdness seem to fuck up any group they taint. By 47, I should know better.

It's more than having an opinion. It is about being completely close-minded and intolerant of other views to the point of hostility. And I am not referring to dangerous or unreasonable views, either. I am referring to any view that is simply different or doesn't include generalizations, stereotyping, prejudice, hatred, etc. It's amazing how comfortable some are with hating entire groups of people based solely on the actions of a reprehensible few.

One that does not include generalizations, stereotyping, hatred, prejudice, etc. I have noticed that it is okay to hate certain groups but not others, based solely on the actions of a reprehensible few. To me, this seems to be a bit of a double standard. But it seems rather unpopular to some if it is brought up.

@Piratefish interesting...but can you give any specific examples you've seen?

@imnotdavid

How about any of Betty Coleman's comments on this post?

@Piratefish quote one please

I have still come across a few people who come out of the blue with ugliness. Right out of the gate, both guns blazing. And I have been like "wow, where did that come from"? I can usually spot it coming, too, but a couple of people have come from out of left field, obviously harboring a lot of personal issues and a lot of pent up anger and hatred. It is these few people to whom I am referring. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. More disappointed. I just had higher expectations from a group I viewed as being more open-minded and intelligent as a whole. Oh well.

@Piratefish
In that respect, we have both been let down. This is why I tend to sit on a log at the campfire and let the angry ones do what they do while I watch the fire.

and you are so right. i avoid rooms that are notorious for hatred and prejudice. I almost quit. I left here many times and then decided to stay out of those rooms. This is the first out of place post in a long time. The group owner should police their group. I am here to say HELLO and Welcome. Just put topics where they belong.

@BettyColeman
This may be an out of date question, but I always ask 'Why can't we all just get along?'

You speak of countries as if all the citizens therein act in a singular way. This is not true. I have no idea who in the US you are talking about, but I have no problem talking about US foreign policy and I have had conversations with people from other countries in relation to their foreign policy in which they became enraged at my perspective of what their government is doing. To attribute this to America alone is simply wrong.

@redbai You may says so but my experience in my travels to the US have been different. Also when I travel in other countries and discussed their government what they do and not do, people don't get aggressive about it. Just because you are a level headed person many are not.

It's not speaking the "truth" so much as being able to express a different view on social or political issues without some people completely flipping out.