Call me...


Hello
T he atheist rejects the claim that there is a
supernatural entity or force that interacts with existence...
Because it is a claim without basis.

Atheism makes no claims whatsoever.
Atheism asserts nothing.
Atheism IS NOT an act or an action
IT IS a position
 It has no objective.
Comparatively / Conversely:
Anti-theism IS an act or an action
 It IS NOT a position
 It has an objective.
Not all ATHEISTS are ANTI-THEIST.
All ANTI-THEISTS are ATHEIST.

Sunday, October 12, 2014

Religions attaking the messenger




I ran into an item posted to YouTube (via the 'BigA') by 72daystar, that asked: "Is Criticism of Islam Racism?"
The entire concept is easy to convolute...

Once science has pointed out the genetic markers for how an Ideology or a culture fits in to the same African diaspora that every other racial identifier stems from...

THEN the two ideologies that are now famous for calling their critics 'racist' (Judaism and Islamism) will look much less indignant and pathetic, when they attempt to put critics on the defensive by simply calling them racist.

Because really, that is all that is being done.

The tactic is designed to baselessly put critics on the defensive by calling them racist. - It is an attempt to derail the critics message, to force the critic to stop criticizing, and work to show that they are not 'racist' - A quagmire situation.

Culture has has created an environment where, if one can find away to paint themselves as a 'victim', they gain an upper-hand via the pity of others.

Levying an accusation, has a natural tendency to be an attack, and the accused is naturally inclined to defend.

(NOTE: This is not a criticism of 72daystar, I am apt to agree with his thoughts - This is just an expansion on the concept, and an opportunity to take him up on his invite to dialog about it {@ circa 4:13 of his vid})

While OP (72daystar) raises some excellent points - I see them as completely separate - Racism being married to an ideologies criticisms does not dismiss the goal of the above noted tactic, nor does the marriage excuse the bigotry involved in accessing ways to attack other (actual) races (dark-skinned etc)

A working example - Being that;
Criticizing Buddhism, never finds itself looking like a attack on Asians.
Criticizing Christianity, never finds itself looking like a attack on (what?) - Caucasians.. Europeans.

72daystar does mention "exceptions" - and I think the key to that element revolves around how the above tactic is over looked.

The polarization that this topic presents, and the conversations about it, all seem to be unaware of the underlying tactic and how it pits against the marriage of bigotry.

As long as these conversation ignore the tactic - Neither the tactic nor the bigotry will ever be successfully disarmed - and the dialog will always inevitably steer into a quagmire.