h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

No, no, I'm not here to say, 'atheists are demons' and stuff like that. I was just wondering a couple of things:

1) Why is everything targeted at Christianity. Don't you also bug Buddhists, Jews, and other people?

2) Are you guys just a group of atheists, or do you mean to annoy those with religion? After seeing some of the graphics...

3) Is this an agnostic group, an atheist group or both?

*Scuttles off so as not to disrupt the God-less-ness*

Thanks .

Welcome, Cheese. Although we've welcomed Christians to discuss our beliefs since inception, you are the first to take us up on it.

1) Most of us think that Judaism and Islam are just as annoying and destructive as Christianity. However, those two don't bug us, so we don't bug them.

2) The first part is answered below, and as for the second part... not exactly. The purpose of the Foundation is simply to provide a place where non-theists can relax and discuss their beliefs with others like them without a drive-by damning or being chased by people with white hoods and flaming crosses. It is also to educate others about why we believe what we do. Some of our members go out and annoy Christians (and I must say that I'm probably one of the worst about this, as I love few things as much as a spirited debate ), but it is not something the group as a whole is dedicated to.

3) We represent a wide range of ideologies here, from atheists and agnostics to Taoists and Wiccans. There are a whole lot more philosophical options out there apart from Christianity, agnosticism, and atheism. It's just one of the many things we seek to educate people about.

As for the graphics... we just thought they were funny.

Thank you . I myself enjoy a good arguement about religion also (although I don't think here is really the place to get into it).

As for Christians that critisize atheists, I think they're hypocrites for trying to push the Bible on others, for numerous reasons mentioned in the Christian Bible (esp. the New Testament). I'll not get into that here, but they violate the "code" they try to impose on others.

The white-hat burning cross people scare the sh*t out of me too...racists, sexists, intolerant of people not from their own denominations.

I skimmed over your 'Failure of Christianity to Stand up to Reason' Entry. I thought it was very well researched and written, and even though I don't necessarily agree with it, it was definitely an interesting read.

The graphics, IMO, are funny when you view them as funny .

I'm glad you liked the article. I just got the rejection letter for it this week, and I'm sooo proud!

I think this place is excellent for religious debates. For one thing, DNA fans tend to be of the more intelligent (or at least literate) portion of society, so I don't get into stupid arguments. Plus, with the way conversations can be posted to at later times, it gives people the opportunity to take a break and research what they are going to say, before they say it. In a real-time argument, you get a lot of "I read somewhere..." statements and other misquotes, but in this format, I can go back and check their source to verify what I am hearing, or check my own source to stop myself from spewing idiocy. I've learned a lot engaging in these debates, and that "Failure of..." article found itself expanded by about a third as a direct result of the arguments attached to it. It would have expanded further, but apparently there is a limit to how long an article can be.

Aww - shame! What did the rejection say?

This should tell you what sort of person I am... I delete my acceptances, and keep my rejection letters. Anyway, here's the skinny:

"This is well written and well argued but it is more biased towards opinion rather than fact. Perhaps it might work better if it presented more than one side of the argument and seemed less like a personal attack on one faith."

And here I thought I piled in quite an overwhelming collection of facts... but oh well... I never expected approval, due to the controversial nature. Still, lots of people have read it (as the voluminous forums attest), and I would probably hate what happens to it if it were edited, anyway. Oddly enough, I had to request this rejection... the article was stuck in editorial limbo for a few months, with the "submitted" thing removed, along with my right to edit the thing.

Hmm, maybe I'll try and write a piece from the other side of the divide, and see if we can't cross-link 'em in... gimme a weeek for exams to finish...