Anti-Semitism In France!

[anonemouse 1]

Here is an portion of an interview that Richard Dawkins, the author of The God Delusion did.

TM: Could you address a couple of reactions that I see in the media, either to atheism, in general, or to you and your book? One, people ask why are atheists so angry?

RD: That's a very curious misperception. We get accused of being angry or of being intolerant, but, if you were to look at critiques of one political party by the other... when Democrats criticize Republicans, or Republicans criticize Democrats, nobody ever says, "You're being intolerant of Republicans, or angry." It's just normal, robust argument.

People have gotten so used to the idea that religion must be immune to criticism that even a very mild and gentle criticism of religion comes across as angry and intolerant. That's yet another piece of consciousness raising that we've got to undertake.

TM: You and others are accused of being arrogant, condescending. What would you say to that?

RD: Exactly the same thing. Nobody says that a Democrat who dismisses Republican ideas is arrogant. They just assume that's what politicians do. They attack each other's ideas with good, robust give and take. That's exactly what people like me and Sam Harris are doing with respect to religion. Once again, the accusation of arrogance comes about because religion has acquired this weird protection that you're not allowed to criticize.

[Ron Cusano 0]

Be assailed by athiests in mass sure felt like what I described! Using the term "crawling out of the woodwork is just that, a term; an expression which is commonly used, and I never to my recollection compared anyone to a thief, liar, murderer, and the "bigot" adjective was directed at me by someone else!

Let me make a statement to all on this board. If I said anything that was taken as an affront against you personally, then I extend my apoligies. That was never intended. In the heat of argument, sometimes things get said that could have been worded differently.

I do not, however, make any apoligies for my arguments, aggressive as they may seem, because the redress I received was far for personal and vicious. In the heat of argument, sometimes things get said that could have been worded differently.

Telling someone that you feel like you are in Sodom while here, saying that atheists came crawling out of the woodwork, and comparing some with "thieves, liars, murderers and yes, even bigots", sounds like assailing to me.

The Anger of Jesus shown while money changers were desecrating a temple does not equate with your abusive innuendo while debating on-line.

[anonemouse 1]

Actually, Ron, I said that I doubted God would let bigots into heaven, or something to that effect. I never said or implied that YOU were a bigot. If you feel that comment was describing you, I am afraid that says something about how you secretly feel about yourself.

On the other hand, you directly implied that I was either a theif, liar, murderer, or bigot with this comment:

Yes, God accepts thieves, liars, murders and yes, even bigots, if they accept Jesus and repent of sin. That even includes you!

[BJean 16]

No Ron. The hatefulness displayed here has been mostly hatefulness on your part. Just because you exclaim that the phrase "... crawled out of the woodwork" is a fair characterization of others in your "defense" of your faith, doesn't mean that everyone here agrees with your characterization. You have so much to learn. You will never learn it if you continue to have one set of rules for yourself and another set for your opponents in this debate. You will never learn it if you don't really listen. You're so busy thinking up offensive things to retort with exlamations and exaggeration in your writing, it is obvious that you have no plan to really win anyone over to Christ here. You're just having fun slinging mud and barbs. For you, the more hostile it gets, the better.

"Have you joined the flat earth society yet?" "wackos and nutjobs" "do you realize how stupid this argument is" - all things that you put here on this particular page of this thread. There are many others on some of the earlier pages.

I guess as long as one of us is willing to give you an opportunity to voice your miserable thoughts, you're not going to bow out gracefully. Buh bye.

[Ron Cusano 0]

BJean,

I have no illusions that everyone will agree with my charactization here. It is what it is and you can either accept it or take it personally. "Crawling Out Of The Woodwork" is a commonly used expression, and you know it.

Yeah, some of the terminology I used was a bit extream, however many of the things that have beed said here, in accusation and attack against me, have been absurd and beyond reason, hense the "wacko and nut job" verbage. It is interesting that one seems to take issue with all that I have be called and the verbal barbs thrown in my directions. Yeah, there is a double standard in play here, but I don't believe it's on my part.

Calling the argument "stupid" was nothing but pure truth. Trying to make an argument that Jesus never existed is so outragous it is beyond stupid. Asking if someone had joined the "Flat Earth Society" was over the top, a personal afront, and I apoligize for it. I have no desire to make this personal.

I have attempted to engage in serious, intelligent exchange regarding a subject that came up as the result of an inquire I made of the mediator. When I asked questions to find out why she and others denied the existance of God, I was beset from all sides, and no one was interested in serious descussion of the subject, but rather went right for the throat. The things I said were not at all hateful, but rather defensive in the face of what I felt was an aggressive attack by many. I have all along ,and still do, welcome serious debate, discussion and exchange of ideas. When I say serious, I would hope that would mean being able to substanciate an expressed statement or idea with some sort of reasonable evidence, and be willing to consider an other opinion. If I told you that the moon was made out of cheese, would you just accept that or expect me to in some way make a serious argument it?? I have not found that here.

If you want to be vigorously honest and go back to the beginning of this thread, you just might find that the subject and the tone of the debate was inspired and set by your moderator.

No Ron. The hatefulness displayed here has been mostly hatefulness on your part. Just because you exclaim that the phrase "... crawled out of the woodwork" is a fair characterization of others in your "defense" of your faith, doesn't mean that everyone here agrees with your characterization. You have so much to learn. You will never learn it if you continue to have one set of rules for yourself and another set for your opponents in this debate. You will never learn it if you don't really listen. You're so busy thinking up offensive things to retort with exlamations and exaggeration in your writing, it is obvious that you have no plan to really win anyone over to Christ here. You're just having fun slinging mud and barbs. For you, the more hostile it gets, the better.

"Have you joined the flat earth society yet?" "wackos and nutjobs" "do you realize how stupid this argument is" - all things that you put here on this particular page of this thread. There are many others on some of the earlier pages.

I guess as long as one of us is willing to give you an opportunity to voice your miserable thoughts, you're not going to bow out gracefully. Buh bye.

[green 6]

Telling someone that you feel like you are in Sodom while here, saying that atheists came crawling out of the woodwork, and comparing some with "thieves, liars, murderers and yes, even bigots", sounds like assailing to me.

The Anger of Jesus shown while money changers were desecrating a temple does not equate with your abusive innuendo while debating on-line.

I did apologise for using the P-word. It was excessive and, well, Yiddish of me to have plowed that word into the conversation. On the other hand, your own conversational tactics have been less than clean. (Please read the above quote.) I guess we might call this an eye for an eye, eh.:heh:

I don't think that any of us here have any trouble with your message. Indeed there are some very impressive Christians who routinely post here. These are individuals who do believe and whose ongoing engagement in life is, by virtue of their belief, shown to be most attractive to the casual observer. These are individuals who sometimes cause Green to regret her inability to believe.

Cusano's approach towards his fellow men and women is very much different. This is an individual who seems to believe that folks will be attracted to the word of God by a campaign of harrassment, arrogance, and belittlement. The message is not the problem; the messenger is.

[anonemouse 1]

If you want to be vigorously honest and go back to the beginning of this thread, you just might find that the subject and the tone of the debate was inspired and set by your moderator.

No, it wasn't. The tone was set by YOU. Like someone else posted (I can't remember who), it isn't so much WHAT you say, as it is HOW you say it. From the first question you asked about her tag, you were insulting.

[Ron Cusano 0]

Green,

The "P" word is not an issue with me. It was said in the heat of discussion, perhaps out of fustration, so let's let it go.

If you go back and read the post you quoted and look at what was actually said and it's context, you will see I never called anyone those things at all. They were an example of how anyone cold get to heaven through Jesus, even YOU anbd even ME! I am as much unworthy as anyone else on my on merit.

Regarding the Sodom remark which was made to a fellow Christian, if you read the Sodom & Lot story, you will see that Lot was beset by a group of unbelieving men wishing to attack him. That is the analogy I used, it is what it felt like to me, was not directed at any one individual. I make no apoligies for it.

If you look at the last paragraph of the post you just made, it is a perfect example of the verbal assualts that have been made against me from day one! "It is not the message, it's the messenger"! Don't you think that's personal?? And that is pretty mild compared to what others have said.

I started this thread asking your moderator, who labled herself as a "token athiest" why she considered herself an athiest and how she arrived at her conviction that there is no God. It was an honest question coming out of a title she gave to herself. I understand that there are many on this board who consider themselves as athiests. Does anyone care to tackle this question. No one has addressed it seriously since this thread started!!

I did apologise for using the P-word. It was excessive and, well, Yiddish of me to have plowed that word into the conversation. On the other hand, your own conversational tactics have been less than clean. (Please read the above quote.) I guess we might call this an eye for an eye, eh.:heh:

I don't think that any of us here have any trouble with your message. Indeed there are some very impressive Christians who routinely post here. These are individuals who do believe and whose ongoing engagement in life is, by virtue of their belief, shown to be most attractive to the casual observer. These are individuals who sometimes cause Green to regret her inability to believe.

Cusano's approach towards his fellow men and women is very much different. This is an individual who seems to believe that folks will be attracted to the word of God by a campaign of harrassment, arrogance, and belittlement. The message is not the problem; the messenger is.

[green 6]

BJean,

I have no illusions that everyone will agree with my charactization here. It is what it is and you can either accept it or take it personally. "Crawling Out Of The Woodwork" is a commonly used expression, and you know it.

Yeah, some of the terminology I used was a bit extream, however many of the things that have beed said here, in accusation and attack against me, have been absurd and beyond reason, hense the "wacko and nut job" verbage. It is interesting that one seems to take issue with all that I have be called and the verbal barbs thrown in my directions. Yeah, there is a double standard in play here, but I don't believe it's on my part.

Calling the argument "stupid" was nothing but pure truth. Trying to make an argument that Jesus never existed is so outragous it is beyond stupid. Asking if someone had joined the "Flat Earth Society" was over the top, a personal afront, and I apoligize for it. I have no desire to make this personal.

I have attempted to engage in serious, intelligent exchange regarding a subject that came up as the result of an inquire I made of the mediator. When I asked questions to find out why she and others denied the existance of God, I was beset from all sides, and no one was interested in serious descussion of the subject, but rather went right for the throat. The things I said were not at all hateful, but rather defensive in the face of what I felt was an aggressive attack by many. I have all along ,and still do, welcome serious debate, discussion and exchange of ideas. When I say serious, I would hope that would mean being able to substanciate an expressed statement or idea with some sort of reasonable evidence, and be willing to consider an other opinion. If I told you that the moon was made out of cheese, would you just accept that or expect me to in some way make a serious argument it?? I have not found that here.

If you want to be vigorously honest and go back to the beginning of this thread, you just might find that the subject and the tone of the debate was inspired and set by your moderator.

I don't understand....I really don't. When the other side attempts to introduce material in order to support its side in this serious debate you dismiss this information as being nothing more than the findings of a few left-wing fringe kooks. In fact this material enjoys mainstream acceptance. In fact your approach to debate is to dismiss any information which does not agree with your world view; you have no regard to its academic and intellectual qualifications. Your notion of a debate is heads, I'm right, tails, you're wrong, nicht war?

You will continue to believe that you are right. Your ego is invested in this. You will continue to alienate those with whom you might have a dialogue or possibly even convert. Nobody likes a self righteous bully. Nobody likes a bully for that matter.

Your psychological approach towards your religion has much in common with everything that many westerners dread about Islam - that is to say a forced, aggressive, and bullying approach towards conversion. You stop short of threatening death. There has been nothing in your behaviour that would lead a thoughtful, sensitive individual to investigate your religion.

It is obvious that you are a cat who is set in his ways. You have given yourself over to your own belief set. I have spent a little bit of time loitering on your website in order to get to know you better. I don't agree with your beliefs and I find this business of Messaniac Judaism to be disturbing - indeed, I find it to be a form of racism - but this is your chosen trip.

Your beliefs are not offensive. Your aggressive attempts to proselytise are offensive as is your utter lack of respect towards those who have chosen different paths from yourself.

[Ron Cusano 0]

Green,

With all due respect, do you seriously consider arguments that Jesus never existed to be SERIOUS?? Even your Rabbi, Talmud, and Jewish historians acknowledge that He lived. That argument does not enjoy mainstream acceptance, and if you are an inlelligent human being, which I think you are, you can't really think otherwise.

I don't dismiss "information which does not agree with my world view", I dismiss information that has no basis in fact or can not be substanciated with evidence. Would't you?? If I told you a cow layed an egg, would you seriously consider that? Come on now! If someone wants me to consider an alternative viewpoint, present me with some real evidence to support it. Is that a lot to ask?

Am I convinced that what I believe is right! You bet I am, and it is not based upon blind faith or how I was raised. Am I willing to consider otherwise?? Not unless you can present me with evidence to make me change my belief system. Is there a problem here?

Believe me, I am far from a self-rightous bully! I was once an agnostic with little use for any God, so I fully understand where those that do not believe are coming from. I do not consider myself any better any anyone else. Just forgiven! If my zeal for what I believe comes across as self-righteousness, I again apoligize.

You as a Jew find my desire to share my beliefs with Jewish people as racism. If Jesus really was the Messiah, as many, many Jew have come to believe, do you still think you would be offended if I told you so? You can believe this or not, but my desire to reach Jewish people comes out of my love the God's people and my faith.

If you guys would give me half a chance, you might find out that I am not what you preceive me to be, and perhaps, what I am saying has some merit worthy of considering.

I don't understand....I really don't. When the other side attempts to introduce material in order to support its side in this serious debate you dismiss this information as being nothing more than the findings of a few left-wing fringe kooks. In fact this material enjoys mainstream acceptance. In fact your approach to debate is to dismiss any information which does not agree with your world view; you have no regard to its academic and intellectual qualifications. Your notion of a debate is heads, I'm right, tails, you're wrong, nicht war?

You will continue to believe that you are right. Your ego is invested in this. You will continue to alienate those with whom you might have a dialogue or possibly even convert. Nobody likes a self righteous bully. Nobody likes a bully for that matter.

Your psychological approach towards your religion has much in common with everything that many westerners dread about Islam - that is to say a forced, aggressive, and bullying approach towards conversion. You stop short of threatening death. There has been nothing in your behaviour that would lead a thoughtful, sensitive individual to investigate your religion.

It is obvious that you are a cat who is set in his ways. You have given yourself over to your own belief set. I have spent a little bit of time loitering on your website in order to get to know you better. I don't agree with your beliefs and I find this business of Messaniac Judaism to be disturbing - indeed, I find it to be a form of racism - but this is your chosen trip.

Your beliefs are not offensive. Your aggressive attempts to proselytise are offensive as is your utter lack of respect towards those who have chosen different paths from yourself.

[Persistance 0]

Ron:

Isn't it a little radical to ask to sabbotage France for something that only a few did? What about the KK in America? Or the guerrillas at Nicaragua? Or that people killing children at Brazil?

Should this countries be sabbotaged too?

No, I do not agree with any kind of violence,antisemitism or descrimination. PLease take people like me in account when asking to sabbotage a country!!! THanks....God Bless

[Persistance 0]

Ron:

Isn't it a little radical to ask to sabbotage France for something that only a few did? What about the KK in America? Or the guerrillas at Nicaragua? Or that people killing children at Brazil?

Should this countries be sabbotaged too?

No, I do not agree with any kind of violence,antisemitism or descrimination. PLease take people like me in account when asking to sabbotage a country!!! THanks....God Bless:confused:

[Persistance 0]

Alors,vous savoir pourquoi.....

[anonemouse 1]

With all due respect, do you seriously consider arguments that Jesus never existed to be SERIOUS??

I know you didn't direct this question to me, but I'll put my two cents in, anyway. The arguement that Jesus never existed is as serious as an arguement that he did. Neither one can be proven. Let me put it this way: Bill supposedly died 70 years ago. Jack writes that Jane told him that she had heard of Bill. Ellen writes that Karen said she learned from Cathy that Bill had done something amazing. There are lots of documents where the writers say they know people who have seen Bill, but none of the authors have personally seen him. No one living has a memory of ever seeing Bill. There are no historical artifacts or documents from the time he was supposedly alive confirming Bill's existence. Did Bill exist?

I can say there is a giant green cat lounging in my backyard. I can tell people there is a giant green cat lounging in my back yard. They can tell people there is a giant green cat lounging in my back yard. They can write that there is a giant green cat lounging in my back yard. That doesn't mean there IS a giant green cat lounging in my back yard.

[Ron Cusano 0]

Please reread my original post! I did not write that letter. It came from a Jewish women in France. Those were her words, not mine. I just passed her letter along for consideration. My focus was to bring the events taking place in France to light!

Ron:

Isn't it a little radical to ask to sabbotage France for something that only a few did? What about the KK in America? Or the guerrillas at Nicaragua? Or that people killing children at Brazil?

Should this countries be sabbotaged too?

No, I do not agree with any kind of violence,antisemitism or descrimination. PLease take people like me in account when asking to sabbotage a country!!! THanks....God Bless