Comments on: Update on Albuquerque City Councilor Don Harris

By: Bruce Gorton

Bruce Gorton — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 07:07:49 +0000

Why shouldn’t the scumbag be reconciliatory? He just demonstrated to the atheist community that Albuquerque is populated by bigots, so any given atheist doesn’t stand a chance of winning there.

We are no longer a threat, we are just another group who can vote for the lesser of two religious evils in the next election.

A few words of insincere appology doesn’t cost him anything – and it could win him a few votes in the future.

By: muggle

muggle — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 01:11:05 +0000

Michael, I was going to ask the same thing. How can it be a choice? Either you find a thing credible or you don’t.

Which is why I forgive Christians (or those of other beliefs) for being mistaken — as long as they do likewise. I simply think they’re mistaken and they think I am.

It’s the hypocrites who are threatened by my disbelief (hmmm, why could they possibly be, could it just possibly give voice to nagging doubts they don’t want to admit), I have a problem with.

Edmond said it. It’s not the word; it’s how it’s used.

Give the Devil his due. He’s doing the right thing and it actually does take some courage. Unless he’s a complete idiot (and if he were I doubt we’d even be getting this much), he has to know he’d be taking the more popular stance to treat us like extreme reactionaries. To his credit, he’s not and actually considered what people said to him about it. So maybe he was just a bit sincere, after all.

Hemant, great job and I’d say you have it about right in the lessons learned.

By: Edmond

Edmond — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 21:52:33 +0000

I don't think anyone is saying that calling someone an atheist is bad or derogatory. What they are saying, I believe, is that if you use the word in a way that you intend to be derogatory, that's bad. You're trying to make it into a derogatory word, and thereby vilify those that identify as such.

By: Michael

Michael — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:57:20 +0000

@A Mile of Bad Road

Ahh, wrong word. Was looking for “Epithet”.

I offer no excuse except for stupidity:-)

By: A Mile of Bad Road

A Mile of Bad Road — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:59:28 +0000

“Racial epitaph”? So you don’t get offended at racial carvings on tombstones?

By: gettingfree

gettingfree — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:21:31 +0000

@ Michael

I am trying to understand – to get clarity on – your comment that atheism is a choice. You could sincerely believe that there really IS a god if you wanted to? If not, then it is not by choice that you are an atheist.

By: mike c.

mike c. — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 16:53:35 +0000

I’m with Michael on this one. I don’t see how calling someone an atheist or an atheist supporter is derogatory in any way. I believe that being an atheist is far more rational than being a worshiper of supernatural beings. If the word is used to scare superstitious people, there’s not much we atheists can do about that other than education.

By: Michael

Michael — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 16:07:22 +0000

@gettingfree I am not seeing what you are trying to get at. Could you clarify?

I don’t believe in any mythological supreme beings. I don’t get offended if someone uses the “atheist” as derogatory. I find this a completely different than using a racial epitaph.

By: Siamang

Siamang — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:26:38 +0000

Wow, that article is going to get this issue notice beyond this blog.

That’s the most positive development yet. I didn’t expect it.

By: gettingfree

gettingfree — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:13:48 +0000

…because I choose to be an atheist…

After many years trying to be a Christian, trying to develop a strong faith in that god, I just found that I couldn’t believe. My atheism is not a choice at all. It’s interesting that you could actually chose to really, genuinely believe in a god but chose not to do so. Which god to you think is real but chose not to believe in?