Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruithne
Gldnrule, you mention the term 'fundie atheist' a lot and I was wondering, what is your definition of a 'fundie atheist'?
I was wondering if you consider me a 'fundie atheist' since you seem to consider Dawkins a fundie atheist - and as I agree with most of what Dawkins says whether you lump me into the same category?
People see Richard Dawkins as objectionable because he questions people's belief systems and questions everything they hold dear who they are as a person. People translate that as rude because of course nobody wants to have their belief system questioned. And then people take it personally just as Deepak Chopra did initially.
|
I don't think I can get too into it. As I had noted before, my posts are being reported and axed. As you noticed, they (and by extension, any referencing them) are now not there. SMH, oh well.
By a "Fundie"...I mean someone that is so entrenched and "closed minded"...that if you were to ask them, "Are those that don't agree with your view, people that you consider to also have a fully acceptable perspective, or are they simply 'wrong'?"...would never say the differing perspective is cool and acceptable, but insist that it's 'wrong'. They hold that their perspective, and only their perspective, is "correct"...and will fervently argue against any opposing.
I'm not at all religious...never have been. I used to be Atheist...for all my adult life until a few years ago. I now embrace the concept of the Universe as "God". I feel that it has the attributes that would qualify it to be titled as such.
But I don't take any exception what-so-ever to any belief or nonbelief anyone else chooses...that is their own individual perception. Each perception is unique anyway...no two are exactly alike...so we all hold a perception that is one-of-a-kind, no matter what it is.
As long as it doesn't cause harm (being "bothered" is not harm)...I'm cool with it.