Wait, you think religious fundamentalist are nuts.    I think that Atheist fundamentalists are nuts.  Oh wait you don't think they exist. Shows how much you know.  Just check out some of the followers of the paleolithic diet.

From reading through the comments I'd say you have an ax to grind with religion, especially "right wing" Christian Fundamentalism. Yet you don't appear to mention Islamic Fundamentalism. Interesting. If I had to tally up acts of violence by religious groups, I feel reasonably confident that Islamic Fundamentalists, poss the greatest threat, in the world, and a rising threat here in the US. Or do you consider Islamic Fundamentalists to be "right-wing". Just curious since the far left go out of their way to support them or at least make excuses for them. Everyone believes they are the "voice of sanity" ... so where is your spot in the tool shed?

Well obviously, there isn't really an 'atheist fundamentalists' perse, but certainly atheists have extremists that are as aggressive as religious fundamentalists.  If you like the parallel, you could take it with those tools who yap about "In god we trust" on the dollar bill. 

Wow.  What assumptions. 

"YEAH HE SAID BAD THINGS ABOUT MY MEGA CHURCH.  YER A BAD 'MERICAN AND PROBABLY AN ATHEIST AND A LIBRUL!"

Essentially, all fundamentalist means is an individual that gets to the roots (a la gets to the roots of that particular movement). 

I would ascribe Richard Dawkins as an atheist fundamentalist as well as Hitchens. 

Philosophically speaking, the basic philosophy question is that something is there than that nothing is there.  Nothing can sidestep the question of the fact that things do exist and they exist in their present form and complexity.  This all pertaining to the existence of man is not a greater problem than that anything exists at all.  Jean Paul Sartre (you probably haven't heard of him unless you study philosophy) was a current supporter to this thought and wasn't a religious 'fundamentalist' nor was he christian.

This is a flaw in the Atheist fundamentalist movement for they are trying to prove nothing is there.   If you move into the science field, science is always open to new things and trying to explain the world.  If you are coming with a Scientific perspective one should always have an open mind to the possibilities.

Dan, didn't mean to 'hicjack' your article.  I do agree with most of your posts and enjoy reading your posts.  I would be interested in hearing your response to nitro's question if you have an 'ax to grind with religion.

Dan_I

In their own way, they are very conservative (wanting to adhere to centuries old misunderstanding of traditions).  The left loves them for the simple reason they hate America.

Here's where we disagree Doc. I don't believe tradition and conservatism are the same. I'm not a religious person, yet I consider myself a conservative. It's a liberal talking point that conservatives live in the past or don't want anything to evolve.  Nor do I believe state sponsored backwardness is conservatism.

BTW Have you seen Nancy Pelosi's "attempt" to tap into religion with her infamous "the Word" is my favorite word speech? Pathetic.

Not at all.  Born and raised Roman Catholic----20 years of Catholic education, none the less.   

The difference is, I've managed to negotiate what little religious beliefs I maintain  against my political beliefs - in realizing that a 2000 year old document as interpreted by 70 year old white guys in Rome has exactly zip to do with how to best govern a country - but the same document might offer certain value in how to best govern my own personal decisions.  

Call it Chreaster Catholicism or being a Buffet Catholic if you like    

I do have a certain distaste for the fire-and-brimstone-moral-values types particularly those that are involved in the religious activist organizations like FRC, [Insert State] Family Association, whatever.  I find them duplicitous political hacks at the least and outright evil shitheads at the most.  At any rate, those folks only serve to devolve what should be relatively sophisticated Americans accepting of other's values, cultures, personal choices into knuckle draggers.  Not to start the ball rolling down another hill, but I can think of few things more disgusting than the pro-life crowd taking up arms over stem cell research.  It simply requires such a mental cartwheel to equate the two on a practical level (not to say that they're not, in theory similar) and then to believe that the rest of the country should perform perform the same mental cartwheel to put these beliefs into policy:  it's just bad.  It's bad for everybody. 

I mock them, yes; only when they're being stupid.  Take, for example, Nitro's "I don't hate the gays, I just really hate administrative man hours" which is a canard of the highest order.  One would either have to be an abject idiot to believe that, or they'd have to be covering up for twisted homophobic bend.  Of course, people like that will keep the fact that they're not real fond of gay folks 'in the closet' in favor of indisputably thin 'logic'.  I call it out a little harder than most....look...again....I'm from Chicago. We turned this: 

Into an art form.  I know it when I see it.  If the guy doesn't like queer culture he shouldn't be gay.  It's not that much to ask.  Otherwise let those folks serve their country, pay their taxes, own/operate businesses, cut their lawns, and cut you off on the express-way during rush hour. 

I think we're both in the same book, just amiss in semantics.  I've never really liked the term - not in the Dawkins sort of 'not like the term', but more or less that I think that there is a sufficient broadness to the Atheist .  If you're referring to dogmatic, extreme, atheists who you don't invite to parties because they can't shut up and will end up in a martini driven debate with some fuggin' Paulbot libertarian:  I know who you're talking about. 

I don't disagree with you in the core flaws of high energy atheism/ nor would I disagree in principle that Dawkins and Hitchens both aren't missing a few key plot points.  Though, on balance, I like Hitchens because he drinks like a fish, pisses people off, and holds up to the light the fact that the Abrahamic religions are similar.  That even despite Nitro's forest for the trees "YEAH WELL THE CHRISTIANS DIDN"T DO WTC IT WAS THE MUSLIMS AND THE GAYS.  FUGGIN GAY MUSLIMS HAVE NO PLACE IN MY ARMY", the core values of the big 3 are similar.  Despite the operational differences, it's not that difficult to see organizational similarities. 

To put it simply, yes, the  Christian fundamentalist movement is more 'modern' in the sense that Islamic fundamentalism blows shit up far more often, I don't think it is exactly a stretch of the imagination to say that there's a very clear hierarchical similarity between say Mullah Muhammed Ackbar declaring a fatwa's against comedy central meanwhile the Family Research Council declares a boycott against the same. Sure, a boycott is certainly preferred to blowing somebody up.  But both are fundamentally taking action against something that I think most people can agree is ethically appropriate.  Both are selecting what they deem an appropriate weapon, both are selecting an enemy for much the same reasons, and both have a clergy or clergy like individual calling the shots.

Incidentally, about a year ago the wife and I went to a BYOB Palaeolithic style restaurant.  The food really wasn't half bad.  Just saying. 

And that, is the longest comment I hope to leave anywhere:)

What a piece of work you are! It seems some shit for brains can't keep their discussions separate or relevant to their own topic when they are asked a legitimate question. So glad you're the "voice of sanity" LOL.... as long as others agree with you I suppose (which in the case of this topic, I was) . Isn't disparaging critics the Chicago way of shutting them down? But then what do most Americans expect  from Chicago except more of this:

They can't hear anything but their own echo. Of course I'll let the people here, who have read my comments for years, decide my character... not some chump that showed up last month, and was still shitting green when I was serving. You sir are in no position to mock anyone, get your own act cleaned up. Well, it's clear now what the "L" is for in your handle...must be tattooed on your forehead.

You asked a legitimate question.   I gave a legitimate answer.  I even cited some great examples in the process of explaining my answer, one of which was a clarion showing of the duplicitous nature of many of the arguments from moral values crowd, specifically your asinine attempts to cover up the fact that you don't like queer folks.  Just say it.  Administrative man hours? 

OH NOES!  CHICAGO WAY!  STUPID LIB-RUHL!  SAUL ALINSKY COMMUNIST PINKO! SOCIALIST!!!  OBAMA!!! COMMUNISM!!! GUNNA T DESTROY MY COUNTREEEEE!!!  YER MOCKIN MY WAYS!

Whatever will I do?

Which, if I haven't made clear in the past:  means absolutely dick. 

Or what? lulz.

OHHHHH YEAHS SLAM DUNK THAT'S A GOOD ONE!!!!!!!111111!!!!!!11111!!!!  Be honest: is this a bit?    I mean really:  is this just an act?  The lame insults, the "I'M OLD AND I SERVED IN THE MILITARY" routine?  Come on, it's got to be an act. 

Dan, I would like to discuss with you more about religion.  I need to do a few things today and I will just be cutting and pasting my response from your other blogg about here.  I do apologize and L-RD willing if I get the time will respond more appropriately to your lengthy response instead of cutting and pasting a response you have some where else.

Let me make things clear, I don't have a problem if someone is gay.  I do feel that homosexuality is wrong.  My homosexual friends that I hang out with (and this is a fair amount) know my stance and feelings about it.  I would rather hang out with my homosexual friends than some of my christians friends due to that the fact that most of my homosexual friends are real and open.

For marriage, I don't feel that true followers of the Bible (this  being the Tanack and the New Testament) and homosexuality are NOT compatible (as well as Islam and that is another post for another time. Trust me I've had debts about that and yes I've read the Qu'ran and all the Hadiths multiple times.). Homosexuals should be allowed to get equal benefits as married couple.  I am against churches doing gay marriages.  You'll be hard pressed to find a Mosque ever doing one.

The reason I feel about homosexual is due to what I believe as well as if you look at history specifically the histories of Roman Empire, Greek Empire, and the Babylonian Empire you'll see that these empires collasped not because of some external source but due to internal source.  All three countries were falling into the pit of everything is acceptable and major moral decay was going on.

This is why I feel homosexuality is not correct/right/good.  I also feel that pornography is not correct/right/good.  I also feel that prostitution is not correct/right/good.  Don't get me wrong, as a male, I think the naked females body is very beautiful.  I also feel that we were created as SEXUAL BEINGS.  So I am not saying sex is wrong.  What I am saying is that I feel that there are defined parameters (I couldn't remember how to spell that sneaky word) pertaining to sex.  These parameters are defined in G-D's word.

Speaking of G-D's word, isn't that a beautiful word, I mean the word. Nitro, you should get a kick out of that. Pelosie trying to please the chrstians is laughable. 

Dan, I wouldn't consider Pelosie a christian (she may consider herself a liberal christian and probably does).  The agrument would be that I don't know her and how can I make that claim?  I can see in her actions and what she says which would causes me to doubt whether she is.  The thing as well I can see her actions over time and not just a snip it.

People call me judgemental. I just thank them for that compliment.

No, you couldn't leave your opinion on the other topic there. I suggest you re-read your words quoted in my previous comment containing mock and example. My question was much more than "do you have an ax to grind". Your response was an attempt to demean.

Since you brought up my article here, let me say this. You seem to believe the military has an HR dept. to handle all personal issue. It doesn't. Once you build a case on an individual whatever the cause, which can take months, you might might be able to get the problem person somewhere to get help or discharged. I spent 70% of my time on 10% of the people with problems. Did your HR ever have to take you to traffic court? Visit people in drug/alcohol rehab? Pay problems, domestic issues, not enough freakin toilet paper? You say what you want about "Admin" in the military, but you and I both  know you're really talking out your ass  in an attempt to feel justified. Plenty of other veterans on these blogs (BFD, Tova, and Paladin come to mind, I'm sure their are others), ask them about their "HR" experiences in the military. And yes I'm against anything that would increase paperwork even 1/100th of a percent, especially during this time of war. I don't expect you to have a grasp on that, I also don't need you to pretend you do.

Everything seems black and white with you doesn't it. Gays, either you love'em or hate'em, right? Has to be one or the other. Sorry, it isn't that simple my friend. Other than it not being something I would choose for myself personally, I couldn't give a damn who is gay. Doesn't affect me one way or the other. I also don't care if you believe I'm a homophobe, been called much worse by much better than you. You seem to believe it matters somehow. Sorry to disappoint.

Been here a month and this act is already stale...find some new material.

A blogger whose opinion I do respect recently said " You have to vilify that which you cannot fight in the arena of ideas". Sage advice I'd say.

BTW I'm not old. Do you have Gerontophobia, come on say it You hate old folks.

Here's what, you'll be a lonely blogger on this site when people get to know your tactics better. Take it or leave it, your choice.

TPP Yeah I saw it (in fact I linked it somewhere). It was comical.

Not really. 

Again:  you're a laugh.  Here we have an issue of basic civil rights and you're digging your feet into the floor over 'paper work'.  

Actually, yes.  It is.  When you're advocating the notion that American's do not have a right to federal employment, is is absolutely, positively a black and white issue. 

Maybe you could come off of the "I'm a veteran" act too!

It's not vilifying.  It's simply holding your wingnut opinions up to the light for what they are. 

If you really believe that, why the "U R THE CHICAGO WAY" bit? 

Again, I know you have trouble keeping track of your own statements.  Really, I've become more than aware of how quickly your train of thought gets blown. 

You say:

In order for that statement to be true, you would have to be old.  

Yes.  My evil tactics of mocking idiots......oh noes!  Whatever will I do. 

Show me the document that states a persons  "civil right" to be gay or straight for that matter and I will apologize to you. Gay civil rights is a phase that group uses in a an attempt to equate themselves with the civil rights movement of the 60's in order to advance their agenda.

As I said before your pea brain has no concept of the time and effort wasted in the military on matters that would be better spent on readiness, training, and the current mission. Your attempts to trivialize it to anyone that knows is pointless. I would venture to guess even persons without military experience, yourself excluded, have some inkling of what constitutes wasted effort. since most everyone here is a taxpayer. But please continue rambling about my "homophobia" to an audience that has broached this topic on a number of occasions since you arrived. My position is adequately documented, no matter how much you jump up and down and make an ass of yourself.

Show me where I've stated that.

Now why would I do that...oh it's that little thing inside you that just twists in your gut. You've probably never been part of anything you could be proud of in your life is my guess and it chaps your ass to see anyone else in that capacity. Don't ask me to forfeit something I'm proud of to make your miserable life seem better.

Looks like anybody with an opinion differing yours is a wing nut, right? It must be eating you up inside... good. As for the the "Chicago" reference, you can't open the paper and not see it in action. Since you claim the area as your own and your actions are clearly expressed in your writing, it's really too easy to see that you fit the mold perfectly.

My point proved. Why would my statement on age indicate any thing other than your naivety. What an idiotic statement to make, but from the sound of it you'll be making plenty more of them. It's amusing.. Oh noes!!!! LOL

BWA HAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Oh god.  This is good.  Tell us again Nitro, about how you really are ok with gay folks, but you don't think they should be serving if they're 'out'.  Come on. 

Their 'agenda'?  Seriously?  'Agenda'?  Oh man. I'm breaking it out again just for you. 

So tell us about this agenda.  I really wish to hear more. Is it like a check list?  Do they have meetings?  But seriously man, I'm glad you're getting it off your chest.  That's good.  It really is.  The first step to getting yourself out of the stone age is admitting you're in the stone age.  But that's good for you.  Really. 

The 'agenda'?  BWA.  That's awesome. 

Well you made clear your advocacy that DADT should not be pulled because of the 'administrative man hours'.  That and apparently the agenda.  DADT amounts to saying that gay folks can't serve with a core aspect of their person openly.  So,---I know this is that damnable big boy logic and it moves real quick for ya:  you're actually saying that you don't want gay folks in the military. 

Yes.  Because I'm clearly hearbroken that I didn't spend my formative years with a true American roll model.  Like you. 

No.  You're a wingnut.  Tell us more of the agenda! Is it like a conspiracy for you?  Have they put bugs in your tra --house?  Did the aliens ever abduct you?  Perform experiments?  Have you ever been a member of, an officer in, or a financial contributor any organization dedicated to the violent overthrow of the United States government?   Tell us more. 

YEAH YEAH CHICAGO WAY YEAH OBAMA ALINSKY YEAH RADICAL LIBERAL AGENDA. Come on!  Bring something better. 

Once again, big boy logic nitro:  In order for you to have been 'serving' while I was 'shitting green', you would have to be old.