I wonder how an atheist could be a conservative. They do exist.

Views: 24

Comment

You need to be a member of Atheist Nexus to add comments!

Join Atheist Nexus

Comment by sacha on May 26, 2010 at 11:42pm
Sacha, I read with interest the article from your link below. I believe I am better understanding the rules, but I have some questions:
1. If I just have news to post at A/N, I can paste the title, write a couple of sentences to summarize it, and post it at A/N, right?
2. If I am blogging, is it appropriate to have posted my ex-Christian story as I did or my "Letter to Atheism" even though these do not contain links or research, no more than one per day?


1. That is just fine. If you can write more commentary, great.
2. Yes, those are personal stories, perfect for a blog.

I think you got it!
Comment by Rudy Ruddell on May 25, 2010 at 8:43pm
Sacha, I read with interest the article from your link below. I believe I am better understanding the rules, but I have some questions:
1. If I just have news to post at A/N, I can paste the title, write a couple of sentences to summarize it, and post it at A/N, right?
2. If I am blogging, is it appropriate to have posted my ex-Christian story as I did or my "Letter to Atheism" even though these do not contain links or research, no more than one per day?
Comment by Rudy Ruddell on May 25, 2010 at 8:34pm
Okay, I welcome your comments. I just posted some news at A/N.
Comment by sacha on May 25, 2010 at 1:01am
It is extremely annoying to click on a blog and get nothing but a link. It's lazy and it's sole purpose is to direct traffic away from A|N. It shoves the real bloggers who take time to write paragraphs of their own words to the bottom. It's rude and it's inappropriate.

I just spent 20 minutes finding this discussion, because I feel you should read it and the comments. Perhaps you will understand why some of us are annoyed.

A different perspective

please take the time to read it. I spent 20 minutes finding it, it won't take you that long to read it.
Comment by Rudy Ruddell on May 25, 2010 at 12:59am
Thank you, sacha and uɐƃoɹƃ ɥɔןǝɟ for your constructive feedback. I am amazed at the energy you put into initiating a newby from FB. I heard you loud and clear.
Comment by sacha on May 25, 2010 at 12:45am
I may have bent a guideline, but I believe you broke rule number 3 a. regarding Ad hominem attacks when when you wrote: "If you can't be bothered writing anything," thereby insulting me and my writing. Perhaps next time someone makes a thought provoking statement with which you do not agree, you can click down the the next blog, rather than insulting the person who wrote it.

That is not Ad Hominem, nor is it insulting, it's true. You did not write anything in regards to the article you linked to. This is a tweet. A blog is like a journal. Let's look at two definitions, shall we?

Ad hominem
An ad hominem argument is any that attempts to counter another’s claims or conclusions by attacking the person, rather than addressing the argument itself. True believers will often commit this fallacy by countering the arguments of skeptics by stating that skeptics are closed minded. Skeptics, on the other hand, may fall into the trap of dismissing the claims of UFO believers, for example, by stating that people who believe in UFO’s are crazy or stupid. A common form of this fallacy is also frequently present in the arguments of conspiracy theorists (who also rely heavily on ad-hoc reasoning). For example, they may argue that the government must be lying because they are corrupt. It should be noted that simply calling someone a name or otherwise making an ad hominem attack is not in itself a logical fallacy. It is only a fallacy to claim that an argument is wrong because of a negative attribute of someone making the argument. (i.e. “John is a jerk.” is not a fallacy. “John is wrong because he is a jerk.” is a logical fallacy.) The term “poisoning the well” also refers to a form of ad hominem fallacy. This is an attempt to discredit the argument of another by implying that they possess an unsavory trait, or that they are affiliated with other beliefs or people that are wrong or unpopular. A common form of this also has its own name – Godwin’s Law or the reductio ad Hitlerum. This refers to an attempt at poisoning the well by drawing an analogy between another’s position and Hitler or the Nazis.

blog
A blog (a contraction of the term "web log")[1] is a type of website, usually maintained by an individual with regular entries of commentary, descriptions of events, or other material such as graphics or video. Entries are commonly displayed in reverse-chronological order. "Blog" can also be used as a verb, meaning to maintain or add content to a blog.

Many blogs provide commentary or news on a particular subject; others function as more personal online diaries. A typical blog combines text, images, and links to other blogs, Web pages, and other media related to its topic...
Comment by Rudy Ruddell on May 24, 2010 at 10:36pm
@uɐƃoɹƃ ɥɔןǝɟ:
Regarding me breaking rules, I respectfully disagree. I read the rules and guidelines and I found your concern about posting "without substance:"
"As such they are expected to have some substance and content, and be of at least passing interest to general site readers"
I believe my topic was of at least passing interest since four members responded to the blog. As to having substance, per dictionary.com I believe my blogs conform to the definitions below, but I believe that is a matter of opinion. Speaking of opinion, could it be that the reason you are objecting is that you disagree with my opinion?
BTW, I may have bent a guideline, but I believe you broke rule number 3 a. regarding Ad hominem attacks when when you wrote: "If you can't be bothered writing anything," thereby insulting me and my writing. Perhaps next time someone makes a thought provoking statement with which you do not agree, you can click down the the next blog, rather than insulting the person who wrote it.


sub·stance   [suhb-stuhns] Show IPA
–noun
4. subject matter of thought, discourse, study, etc.
5.
the actual matter of a thing, as opposed to the appearance or shadow; reality.
6.
substantial or solid character or quality: claims lacking in substance.
7.
consistency; body: soup without much substance.
8.
the meaning or gist, as of speech or writing.
9.
something that has separate or independent existence.
Comment by Jeffrey W Dixon on May 24, 2010 at 10:52am
I identify myself more as Libertarian than Republican, however, given that the Libertarian party has no real political standing, it feels like a wasted vote with them. However, I disagree that it is the Republican party dumbing down the educational system. The Democratic party has had control of the educational system in this country for over 40 years and the standards keep shrinking. Outside of their blind fear of evolution, Republicans favor much more beneficial educational policies. School vouchers is a great place to start.
Comment by Rudy Ruddell on May 23, 2010 at 7:14pm
Even if I agreed with the basic precepts of the Republican party, I would not be a Republican in order to disassociate myself with the Christian right, who is trying to dumb down our education system, take away gay and women's rights, and preventing life saving research. They do all this in the name of an ancient scripture that appears to be a copycat of ancient pagan religions.
Comment by Jeffrey W Dixon on May 20, 2010 at 12:33pm
I am a fiscal conservative and moderate on social issues. I am pro abortion, yet would not want to have my child aborted if I was aware it existed. But my personal feelings have nothing to do with whether I would want to restrict the rights of others.

Rudy, you say that many republicans are anti environment? If you are talking about the global warming, err, climate change issue, I would say that given all the information that has become exposed over the past few months on all the data manipulation, it is simply that we want more information before we start altering our lives and finances.

Actually, since atheists tend to be skeptical, I think it is the default position to question the data.

© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service