First off, I'm going to try to steer clear of anything political except that political extremists are included in my rant.

Why is it that extremists - be they religious, political, idealogocal - always accuse people of attacking them if those people happen to disagree? Why are we the dissenters not allowed to have our own opinions, & are labeled by the extremists as being closed-minded, bigoted, & hateful? WTF are their problems?

I've seen this kind of behavior across the board by all different kinds of extremists, but especially with right-wing Morg & Christian extremists.

I'm sure there are lots of reasons. Here's my take. Extremist positions are very hard to defend. The reason they're considered extreme is because almost all of the evidence points to something else. They are unable to justify their positions, so they feel that since their opinions are under attack they are also under attack.

It's always fun to turn their strategy against them: How DARE you not like chocolate ice cream!!! My ancestors fought for the right for us to have chocolate ice cream, and I'm not about to let you take that away from me!!! Only someone completely EVIL would not like chocolate ice cream! It's fun to hold the mirror up to them and show them how ugly they look.

Because you are attacking what they have come to identify with: ego.

Their political views, religious dogmas, sports teams, music, literature, hobbies, likes, dislikes and such stuff all make up a fictional character they pretend exists and with which they fully identify.

So their political view is just as much a part of them as your arm is a part of you. Showing someone like that their political view is silly is no different than trying to cut off their arm.

Since they identify with ideas, and ideas are always coming under attack, they are always under attack.

It's no way to live if you ask me..

Ya extremest have so much of their idenity tied up with their cause. you take that away and what have you got.

Religious zealots do become confrontational when called out on the real costs and true damages religions cause.

The zealots must resort to nasty personal remarks rather than counter actual facts.

When we look at the new atheists, that is the problem with Richard Dawkins. He makes his arguments based on logic. To religious sorts, logic is not important.

That is why I find the arguments of Christopher Hitchens to be much more effective. He treats religion and religious people the way they should be treated, with ridicule, scorn, and contempt.

In the United States, and particularly the LDS religions, they cower behind the first amendment and goodwill of the people. This is done while running a harmful theocracy in at least one state, promoting very harmful and hateful legislation such as Prop 8, and systematic tax evasion.

They need to be exposed on a national level, and many should be incarcerated.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/13/2013 02:18PM by deco.

I don't consider myself to be part of the "New Atheist" movement. I'm one of those regular old disbelievers. lol I always liked Hitchens far more than Dawkins though, & I miss his bold personality.

While I agree thatthe morg. promotes hatred and bigotry. I dont blame God for that. IMO, God is the shield they hide behind! When you rape pillage and steal ;that shocking; PUT GOD in front of it makes it ok. Just think of the power a corp. would have with the name of...oh wait.

bravo deco!!
beautifully worded

btw is your first name art? heh

What's wrong with them?

Typically, they lack education and/or experience. I'm running into this problem at work right now.

If there's no sensible counter argument an extremist goes for the person.

Notice on RfM how TBM-types attact emotions? "You're bitter, you need to move on, you're hateful and angry."

That's easier than trying to come up with logical reasoning for why the morg believes in angels with swords, or why they go after minor children leaving parents out of the loop.