From: johnsd2@vccnw06.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: A point well missed ...
Reply-To: johnsd2@vccnw06.its.rpi.edu.its1
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 15:45:20 GMT

In article 6zB@darkside.osrhe.uoknor.edu, bil@okcforum.osrhe.uoknor.edu (Bill Conner) writes:
>: 
>: Of course, I can't speak for all atheists, but here's why I am an atheist.
>: 
>: I have a skeptical world-view.  In other words, I do not accept something
>: as "truth" without some sort of evidence to back it up.  So far, I have
>: not received convincing evidence that "god" exists.  Therefore, I live my
>: life under the assumption that there is no god.  That makes me an atheist.
>: 
>: This is somewhat simplified, but I think it makes my point.  So, I have
>: explained my position, I have not used sarcasm, ridicule, or hyperbole,
>: and many atheists on this group will agree with me, so I don't think that
>: what I said makes me look foolish.  How about it, Bill?  Do I get a prize?
>: 
>: -Jim Burmeister, jimb@csd.harris.com
>
>Jim,
>
>   Yes, you get a prize; you were both civl and rational - the only
>response that was in fact.

Yeah, c'mon Jim, flame him next time. It'll make you feel better! :)

Heck, there's no alternative. Even if you reason with him, he is insulted.

> It seems odd that I never stated my
>position on the central question, do I believe in the existence of
>God, yet was attacked by all and sundry, what does it mean?

It means you attacked us, PERSONALLY. You were't talking about
our opinions. Want me to go back and dig up your origional articles
and show you what I mean?

> If
>atheists are veritable paragons of reason, the intellectual elite, the
>most rational of people,

Which we arent...

> why do they get so hot when someone challenges their
>faith?

We don't usually. But you have not so challenged our faith; that's
not part of the question.

>   Your skeptical world-view is not really yours.

No? Do I have to give it back? :)

> To make the
>statement suggests (as Madalyn Murrey O'Hair likes to do about
>herself) that you are somehow exempt from the influences and pressures the 
>rest of us feel,

Huh?

> that while we become ensnsared in folly, you managed
>to transcend beyond.

Double huh?

> Granted this is sarcastic, but this kind of
>attitude is so common, I have trouble remaining genteel.

"remaining"?

> My point is
>that we are all born into the same world with pretty much the same set
>of attributes; it seems ridiculous to pretend that some "special"
>people have an advantage, which in the case of the atheists who have
>responded to this posting, is exactly what is being implied.

You reading some other newsgroup I don't know about?

Crossposting to alt.atheism.but.dont.tell.dan?

Cuz nobody HERE has said any such thing. (that is, on alt.atheism)

>   All of us are exposed to various world-views, usually before we've
>developed the means to determine the most likely or valid.

A lot of people only are exposed to one- their parents- but perhaps
you mean by "us" something other that "us humans"

> In my
>experience, skepticism follows belief else of what are you skeptical?

Theist claims, generally. :) But most of us DID believe once.

> At
>some time you believed in Santa Claus or something similar, you
>probably believed in fairness and justice, you may have even believed
>in God. You had, at that time, a different more credulous world-view.

You are absolutely right here (congrats!)

Most of us did believe in all these things, and most of us
still believe in fairness and justice (in some sence at least)

Perhaps even all, I dunno.

>   What I'm curious to know, is what made the difference, why did you
>change, and why atheism? Claiming to be a skeptical person begs the
>question it seems. The change from a child for whom God was at least
>possible, to a cynical adult for whom there is nothing greater than
>Man is radical at least.

Strawman. We changed from a child that believed whatever he was told
to an adult that didn't. And we feel that this belief in God is
unfounded. This has nothing whatsoever to do with "nothing greater
than Man". I'm not even sure what you mean. It appears to be
rife with teh Judeo-Christian-Islamic assumption that the world
was constructed for Man's benefit, instead of (say) beavers, or
nobodies.

Get it now?
---
			- Dan Johnson
And God said "Jeeze, this is dull"... and it *WAS* dull. Genesis 0:0

These opinions have had all identifiying marks removed, and are untraceable.
You'll never know whose they are.