As regards Fliss - she hasn't said anything other than she sees you have some good points (but doesn't say what they are) - and that double standards are bad.
I'm already against double standards, so that's fine by me.
"I had just fallen so easily into 'atheist bus campaign GOOD' camp that I and all my philsoc friends naturally occupy, that I had not given much thought to the rightness of it.
I felt that people had fallen into a societal area where of course they agreed with the campaign and hadn't actually stopped to carefully consider it. So, amid the celebrations of it, I thought it was important to address the other side. I was trying to make people examine their inherited beliefs - much like this campaign is trying to do. I agree with making people examine their beliefs. I don't agree with this slogan.
But you didn't say that people should carefully consider that there might be problem X, Y or Z, you said that you were "insulted or morally outraged" (grabbing that dictionary again) by people being in favour of it.
Seemed rather strong to me.
I do, entirely, agree with the slogan. I think that it's as close to factually correct as can be easily reached.
I deleted your first comment just because it was a replica.
Of course you agree with the slogan! I know. Fair enough. Celebrate away. I would defend your right to do so.
I don't agree with it. If we 're really going into dictionary definitions: (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/offensive), I find the tone of the slogan to be unpleasant and disagreeable.
I didn't say that I was offended by people being in favour of it, that's an entirely different point, and I'm not.
I suspect we're just reading different things into the tone in that case - as I clearly don't find it unpleasant. It does disagree with things that some people believe, but that's fine by me.
Which means it comes down to the two things you originally mentioned - whether it's fundamental atheism (which we clearly disagree over) and whether it will do anything good (which we clearly also disagree over).
At least we've now found our points of disagreement :->
I had assumed that if you found something offensive then you'd find people's support of it equally offensive. Sorry about that.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2009-01-09 03:22 pm (UTC)I'm already against double standards, so that's fine by me.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-09 03:57 pm (UTC)"I had just fallen so easily into 'atheist bus campaign GOOD' camp that I and all my philsoc friends naturally occupy, that I had not given much thought to the rightness of it.
I felt that people had fallen into a societal area where of course they agreed with the campaign and hadn't actually stopped to carefully consider it. So, amid the celebrations of it, I thought it was important to address the other side. I was trying to make people examine their inherited beliefs - much like this campaign is trying to do. I agree with making people examine their beliefs. I don't agree with this slogan.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-09 04:05 pm (UTC)Seemed rather strong to me.
I do, entirely, agree with the slogan. I think that it's as close to factually correct as can be easily reached.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-09 04:31 pm (UTC)Of course you agree with the slogan! I know. Fair enough. Celebrate away. I would defend your right to do so.
I don't agree with it. If we 're really going into dictionary definitions: (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/offensive), I find the tone of the slogan to be unpleasant and disagreeable.
I didn't say that I was offended by people being in favour of it, that's an entirely different point, and I'm not.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-09 04:41 pm (UTC)Which means it comes down to the two things you originally mentioned - whether it's fundamental atheism (which we clearly disagree over) and whether it will do anything good (which we clearly also disagree over).
At least we've now found our points of disagreement :->
I had assumed that if you found something offensive then you'd find people's support of it equally offensive. Sorry about that.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-09 05:08 pm (UTC)Ah ok that's good to know because it goes some way to explaining why people were quite so upset.