Cliff Slips Across
That Line -- Again
Jason A. Young

Transparent Spacer
Yello Quote Graphic Rule

"The religionists are exploiting a tragedy to issue forth their propaganda. They are very practiced at doing this and immune to any human sensitivities about it because they do this almost any time somebody dies. Their emotions are so utterly scarred from conducting funerals and exploiting death and grief for personal gain and for the furtherance of their cause that they not only think nothing about doing this today, they will viciously attack anybody who thinks there's something wrong with what they are doing."

Yello Quote Graphic Rule
Transparent Spacer

Transparent Spacer
Yello Quote Graphic Rule

"I have only this to say to them: This tragedy will scar us all for life and has uprooted countless lives. Please let us deal with it the way we think is best. Please do not ask us to pray to a deity, not while we are wondering what kind of deity could have possibly been in charge on Tuesday!"

Yello Quote Graphic Rule
Transparent Spacer

Transparent Spacer
Yello Quote Graphic Rule

"Perhaps they see this too. Perhaps they see that this event could result in wholesale loss of religious faith on the part of Americans, as happened in Europe after World War II. Still popular is the notion that people cannot be moral without religious faith (it's a bigoted lie, but it's still almost as popular as it was during the times of Washington and Adams)."

Yello Quote Graphic Rule
Transparent Spacer

Transparent Spacer
Yello Quote Graphic Rule

"Perhaps they're thinking that they need to try to save religion from the inevitable fruit of its not being an effective explanation for the evil which befalls us."

Yello Quote Graphic Rule
Transparent Spacer

Transparent Spacer
Yello Quote Graphic Rule

"Nevertheless, I still try to have patience. I will grieve and I will speak out. If somebody thinks I'm evil for this, so be it."

Yello Quote Graphic Rule
Transparent Spacer

Graphic Rule

From: "Positive Atheism" <editor@positiveatheism.org>
To: "Jason A. Young"
Subject: Re: More Positive stuff at "Positive" Atheism
Date: October 01, 2001 7:42 AM
 

Whenever you cannot make a case against us, you folks so often fall back on trying to paint us as hypocrites by throwing our name back at us -- without first looking at our FAQ and finding out what we mean when we use the word Positive. How many times has a Christian called me a hypocrite for not conforming to that particular Christian's understanding of what the word positive ought to mean? I usually don't honor laziness or cocksureness, but I will state for the record that we use the word Positive in the sense of proactive; that is, when we find something to be a great evil, we will stand up and call it a great evil rather than remain quiet "for the sake of unity" or "because this is a great tragedy" or whatever. Positive Atheism also calls someone who lies to us a liar rather than trying to be polite about it.

This way, we can know which forms of religious expression to go after, because we don't think it's right to gratuitously and indiscriminately criticize all forms of religious expression. Most religionists mind their own business and would never think of lying to somebody or about somebody solely for the purpose of trying to convince others that theirs is a position of truthfulness.

Thus, "Positive Atheism" reserves its vitriol for intrusive expressions of religion, exploitative expressions of religion, and dangerous expressions of religion. After reading your attempt to persuade our readers that yours is a position of truthfulness, I hereby pronounce your religious expression to fall into all three categories.
 

Well, I did a search and was about to say that I've never debated you, when something dawned on me!

(Am I dealing with a patently dishonest person, here? That we have already established -- you are no regular liar, to be sure -- so we'd best bring out the good microscope, eh!?)

Then I did one final double-check and -- Aha!!!

I gotcha!!!

You changed your name so you could get through our filters! You did this after I quietly blocked your address because after patiently going numerous rounds with you, I discovered that you are utterly incapable of telling the truth! not even when it's in your own best interest to do so! Your e-mail address is not on our Forum log simply because you've never written anything worth posting!
 

I assume no such thing! I clearly stated the following (which you even pull-quoted):

Transparent Spacer
Grinn Quote Graphic Rule

Please do not ask us to pray to a deity, not while we are wondering what kind of deity could have possibly been in charge on Tuesday!

Grinn Quote Graphic Rule
Transparent Spacer

Please tell me how this shows me to assume anything about what you do or do not believe or know! If anything, this is an admission on my part that I don't know dude-a-lee squat about what you folks believe -- that I am completely baffled by it all -- that I could not fathom praying to an allegedly all-powerful and allegedly loving deity who was supposedly alive and alert and manning (Godding?) His post on that fateful Tuesday morning. I fully admit that I cannot see it, that I cannot begin to understand either what you believe or why you would believe it!

It's not something that I believe, but my President wants me to act as if I do believe it!

The difference between you and I is that you tell people that you do know about gods and demons and the like, whereas I admit that I don't know anything about any such things as gods.

And even though I don't know anything about gods, why does my President insist that I go around pretending that I do? Why does my President insist that I pray to gods, when I don't see how gods could possibly exist? Why does my President want me to pray to gods when everything that happened on September 11 only makes me wonder if there are any gods worth praying to?

And you call me "assuming"!
 

What!?

What did I say about George Washington other than to repeat the fact that the vicious and thoroughly refuted lie that morality cannot be maintained without religion was widely held during his time (as you have reiterated with a quotation backing up both what I said and that he agreed with it)? I didn't even mention that Washington and Adams themselves believed this lie (although each man did just that)!

Methinks you now owe us two more apologies!
 

How did I rewrite history? What did I say that is a lie?

The last several times we discussed this matter, I kept asking you this, but every time you just changed the subject!

It's very convenient for you to call me a liar but in over a dozen exchanges last time around, you still have yet to make your case.

That's why you don't have anything posted on the PAM Forum (at least under these two names). That's why this letter is slated to be buried a couple of layers deep in the to-be-posted folder structure, waiting for a real slow day, waiting till I'm all caught up and just don't feel like going to bed yet, waiting for one of those days when I'm so ugly-dawg pissed off at myself that I just sit here and go through the to-be-posted folder and post all the scathing denunciations of Cliff Walker that we have. That's when I'll post this thing, and no sooner!

Cliff Walker
Positive Atheism Magazine
Six years of service to
     people with no reason to believe

Graphic Rule

Material by Cliff Walker (including unsigned editorial commentary) is copyright ©1995-2006 by Cliff Walker. Each submission is copyrighted by its writer, who retains control of the work except that by submitting it to Positive Atheism, permission has been granted to use the material or an edited version: (1) on the Positive Atheism web site; (2) in Positive Atheism Magazine; (3) in subsequent works controlled by Cliff Walker or Positive Atheism Magazine (including published or posted compilations). Excerpts not exceeding 500 words are allowed provided the proper copyright notice is affixed. Other use requires permission; Positive Atheism will work to protect the rights of all who submit their writings to us.