<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: More liars and the fools who follow them</title>
	<atom:link href="http://atheists.org/blog/2007/11/19/more_liars_and_the_fools_who_follow_them/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://atheists.org/blog/2007/11/19/more_liars_and_the_fools_who_follow_them</link>
	<description>A Blog of Atheist Thought</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 20:25:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: deak</title>
		<link>http://atheists.org/blog/2007/11/19/more_liars_and_the_fools_who_follow_them/comment-page-1#comment-69961</link>
		<dc:creator>deak</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Unknown, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-69961</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m gaining an understanding of why church activities attract so many people.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m gaining an understanding of why church activities attract so many people.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: atomictesting</title>
		<link>http://atheists.org/blog/2007/11/19/more_liars_and_the_fools_who_follow_them/comment-page-1#comment-69962</link>
		<dc:creator>atomictesting</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Unknown, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-69962</guid>
		<description>I was just about to post a link about this.  Beat me to it by literally a minute or two.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was just about to post a link about this.  Beat me to it by literally a minute or two.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mryder66</title>
		<link>http://atheists.org/blog/2007/11/19/more_liars_and_the_fools_who_follow_them/comment-page-1#comment-69963</link>
		<dc:creator>mryder66</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Unknown, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-69963</guid>
		<description>This is why we are having the drought.  God is punishing Georgians for err... not cleansing this guy?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is why we are having the drought.  God is punishing Georgians for err&#8230; not cleansing this guy?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: atomictesting</title>
		<link>http://atheists.org/blog/2007/11/19/more_liars_and_the_fools_who_follow_them/comment-page-1#comment-69965</link>
		<dc:creator>atomictesting</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Unknown, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-69965</guid>
		<description>MSNBC Video:&lt;br /&gt;
http://tinyurl.com/2q32jh&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Watch it and pay close attention to the language used.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&quot;We are a deeply religious nation.&quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&quot;Surveys show 90% of us believe in God, a quarter of us go to church once a week, but beliefs are changing.&quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&quot;...but, more than half &lt;b&gt;admit&lt;/b&gt; they know little or nothing about either faith...&quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&quot;We recognize all of the world&#039;s great religions as &lt;b&gt;speaking the truth&lt;/b&gt;.&quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Then listen to what they say about atheists:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&quot;In 1993 about 9% of Americans &lt;b&gt;claimed&lt;/b&gt; to have no religion but by last year that number had almost doubled.&quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Notice the language used is absolute when talking about religious people, yet sounds doubtful when talking about atheists.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It seems they manage to show their dislike for us in subtle ways.  Note that they use no vague or ambiguous language describing religions (except the charge that Mormons are nothing but a cult, which they were happy to state - though they made no other such statement about any other religion).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Why use a word like &quot;claim&quot; in reference to us when a solid word that has no ambiguous connotations could have been chosen?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Merriam Webster&#039;s has the following two definitions for &quot;claim&quot; (that could apply here):&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2: to take as the rightful owner&lt;br /&gt;
3 a: to assert in the face of possible contradiction&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Now, if they were using the second definition then why use it in a negative statement (not implying negative connotations but that the word itself is being used in a sort of double-negative way)?  For instance &quot;claimed to have no religion&quot; means taking, as a rightful owner, no religion  (an odd idea) - kind of like religion is a coat check.  Of course the second definition they give (3a) is the more common use of the term and most likely the best understood reason for the use of it in the sentence.  Why then, do we get the shaft of ambiguity in the face of all of the statements that imply &lt;i&gt;certainty&lt;/i&gt;?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I often wonder if I&#039;m the only one to notice these things.  When deciding what to put in a newscast and what not to, clearly the editors scrutinize every word used to maximize impact.  I think this is no mistake.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MSNBC Video:<br />
<a href="http://tinyurl.com/2q32jh" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/2q32jh</a></p>
<p>Watch it and pay close attention to the language used.</p>
<p>&#8220;We are a deeply religious nation.&#8221;<br />
&#8220;Surveys show 90% of us believe in God, a quarter of us go to church once a week, but beliefs are changing.&#8221;<br />
&#8220;&#8230;but, more than half <b>admit</b> they know little or nothing about either faith&#8230;&#8221;<br />
&#8220;We recognize all of the world&#8217;s great religions as <b>speaking the truth</b>.&#8221;</p>
<p>Then listen to what they say about atheists:</p>
<p>&#8220;In 1993 about 9% of Americans <b>claimed</b> to have no religion but by last year that number had almost doubled.&#8221;</p>
<p>Notice the language used is absolute when talking about religious people, yet sounds doubtful when talking about atheists.</p>
<p>It seems they manage to show their dislike for us in subtle ways.  Note that they use no vague or ambiguous language describing religions (except the charge that Mormons are nothing but a cult, which they were happy to state &#8211; though they made no other such statement about any other religion).</p>
<p>Why use a word like &#8220;claim&#8221; in reference to us when a solid word that has no ambiguous connotations could have been chosen?</p>
<p>Merriam Webster&#8217;s has the following two definitions for &#8220;claim&#8221; (that could apply here):</p>
<p>2: to take as the rightful owner<br />
3 a: to assert in the face of possible contradiction</p>
<p>Now, if they were using the second definition then why use it in a negative statement (not implying negative connotations but that the word itself is being used in a sort of double-negative way)?  For instance &#8220;claimed to have no religion&#8221; means taking, as a rightful owner, no religion  (an odd idea) &#8211; kind of like religion is a coat check.  Of course the second definition they give (3a) is the more common use of the term and most likely the best understood reason for the use of it in the sentence.  Why then, do we get the shaft of ambiguity in the face of all of the statements that imply <i>certainty</i>?</p>
<p>I often wonder if I&#8217;m the only one to notice these things.  When deciding what to put in a newscast and what not to, clearly the editors scrutinize every word used to maximize impact.  I think this is no mistake.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: atomictesting</title>
		<link>http://atheists.org/blog/2007/11/19/more_liars_and_the_fools_who_follow_them/comment-page-1#comment-69966</link>
		<dc:creator>atomictesting</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Unknown, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-69966</guid>
		<description>http://tinyurl.com/2ztzs6&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Another part of the same series.  Same ambiguous words about atheists.  They didn&#039;t even bother to interview an atheist.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://tinyurl.com/2ztzs6" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/2ztzs6</a></p>
<p>Another part of the same series.  Same ambiguous words about atheists.  They didn&#8217;t even bother to interview an atheist.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: what</title>
		<link>http://atheists.org/blog/2007/11/19/more_liars_and_the_fools_who_follow_them/comment-page-1#comment-69967</link>
		<dc:creator>what</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Unknown, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-69967</guid>
		<description>Atomic&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
You&#039;re not the only one to notice the wordsmithery of these frauds. They&#039;re scared and weak little people that know no limits to protecting their fragile psyche. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Atheists are strong, intelligent and competent people. Of course the believer knows and fears this. Even a small increase in the nonbeliever demographic would scare the beejeeezuz out of these fools but a two fold increase in 15 years ... </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Atomic</p>
<p>You&#8217;re not the only one to notice the wordsmithery of these frauds. They&#8217;re scared and weak little people that know no limits to protecting their fragile psyche. </p>
<p>Atheists are strong, intelligent and competent people. Of course the believer knows and fears this. Even a small increase in the nonbeliever demographic would scare the beejeeezuz out of these fools but a two fold increase in 15 years &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: justme</title>
		<link>http://atheists.org/blog/2007/11/19/more_liars_and_the_fools_who_follow_them/comment-page-1#comment-69971</link>
		<dc:creator>justme</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Unknown, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-69971</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s not just the big churches...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;The estranged wife of a pastor claims her husband blended his professional and personal finances so thoroughly that his church should be counted as an asset in their divorce.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
A judge agreed in a decision published this week to hear arguments on the claim, and he ordered a financial appraisal of the church. Lawyers said it could represent the first time anyone in New York state has tried to treat a religious institution as a marital asset.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The wife argues that her husband of 31 years used his Brooklyn church as a &quot;personal piggy bank,&quot; setting his own income, spending the congregation&#039;s tithes as he pleased and running a catering business from the building, according to the decision by state Supreme Court Judge Arthur M. Diamond. The couple&#039;s names were redacted from the decision.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
 http://apnews.myway.com/article/20071116/D8SV1II00.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s not just the big churches&#8230;</p>
<blockquote><p>The estranged wife of a pastor claims her husband blended his professional and personal finances so thoroughly that his church should be counted as an asset in their divorce.</p>
<p>A judge agreed in a decision published this week to hear arguments on the claim, and he ordered a financial appraisal of the church. Lawyers said it could represent the first time anyone in New York state has tried to treat a religious institution as a marital asset.</p>
<p>The wife argues that her husband of 31 years used his Brooklyn church as a &#8220;personal piggy bank,&#8221; setting his own income, spending the congregation&#8217;s tithes as he pleased and running a catering business from the building, according to the decision by state Supreme Court Judge Arthur M. Diamond. The couple&#8217;s names were redacted from the decision.
</p></blockquote>
<p>
 <a href="http://apnews.myway.com/article/20071116/D8SV1II00.html" rel="nofollow">http://apnews.myway.com/article/20071116/D8SV1II00.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GodFree&Glad</title>
		<link>http://atheists.org/blog/2007/11/19/more_liars_and_the_fools_who_follow_them/comment-page-1#comment-69975</link>
		<dc:creator>GodFree&Glad</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Unknown, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-69975</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t know what all the fuss is about.  Surely if they look hard enough they can find something in the holy book that will excuse, explain or even enocourage the sexual behavior the Archbishop exhibited when he jumped between the sheets with his brother&#039;s wife. For all we heathens know he might have been just setting a good example for the sheeple.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t know what all the fuss is about.  Surely if they look hard enough they can find something in the holy book that will excuse, explain or even enocourage the sexual behavior the Archbishop exhibited when he jumped between the sheets with his brother&#8217;s wife. For all we heathens know he might have been just setting a good example for the sheeple.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TXatheist</title>
		<link>http://atheists.org/blog/2007/11/19/more_liars_and_the_fools_who_follow_them/comment-page-1#comment-69976</link>
		<dc:creator>TXatheist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Unknown, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-69976</guid>
		<description>The FFRF puts out their paper Freethought Today and they always have a section that is called Black collar crime and this is typical of what you read on those two pages.  I will submit this to them for next months paper.  Thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The FFRF puts out their paper Freethought Today and they always have a section that is called Black collar crime and this is typical of what you read on those two pages.  I will submit this to them for next months paper.  Thanks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: alatham</title>
		<link>http://atheists.org/blog/2007/11/19/more_liars_and_the_fools_who_follow_them/comment-page-1#comment-69978</link>
		<dc:creator>alatham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Unknown, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-69978</guid>
		<description>AT,&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Thanks for the links.  I&#039;ve often noticed little things like that in the language people choose when talking about Atheists.  It&#039;s all bullshit, and their little language tricks will only delay the inevitable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For instance, go to Answers.com and type in Atheism and scroll down to the list of quotes, here&#039;s what I see listed on the front page:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;&quot;Small amounts of philosophy lead to atheism, but larger amounts bring us back to God.&quot;  - Francis Bacon&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&quot;Atheism is rather in the lip than in the heart of man.&quot; - Francis Bacon&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&quot;It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man&#039;s mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men&#039;s minds about to religion.&quot; - Francis Bacon&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&quot;I had rather believe all the Fables in the Legend, and the Talmud, and the Alcoran, than that this universal frame is without a Mind.&quot; - Francis Bacon&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&quot;I am a daylight atheist.&quot; - Brendan F. Behan&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&quot;We find the most terrible form of atheism, not in the militant and passionate struggle against the idea of God himself, but in the practical atheism of everyday living, in indifference and torpor. We often encounter these forms of atheism among those who are formally Christians.&quot; - Nicolai A. Berdyaev&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Not very kind are they?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>AT,</p>
<p>Thanks for the links.  I&#8217;ve often noticed little things like that in the language people choose when talking about Atheists.  It&#8217;s all bullshit, and their little language tricks will only delay the inevitable.</p>
<p>For instance, go to Answers.com and type in Atheism and scroll down to the list of quotes, here&#8217;s what I see listed on the front page:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;Small amounts of philosophy lead to atheism, but larger amounts bring us back to God.&#8221;  &#8211; Francis Bacon</p>
<p>&#8220;Atheism is rather in the lip than in the heart of man.&#8221; &#8211; Francis Bacon</p>
<p>&#8220;It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man&#8217;s mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men&#8217;s minds about to religion.&#8221; &#8211; Francis Bacon</p>
<p>&#8220;I had rather believe all the Fables in the Legend, and the Talmud, and the Alcoran, than that this universal frame is without a Mind.&#8221; &#8211; Francis Bacon</p>
<p>&#8220;I am a daylight atheist.&#8221; &#8211; Brendan F. Behan</p>
<p>&#8220;We find the most terrible form of atheism, not in the militant and passionate struggle against the idea of God himself, but in the practical atheism of everyday living, in indifference and torpor. We often encounter these forms of atheism among those who are formally Christians.&#8221; &#8211; Nicolai A. Berdyaev</p></blockquote>
<p>
Not very kind are they?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
