This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

Comments by Nick LaRue

Go to: [Updated 15th Jan]- Atheists have no right... - Atheists face Muslim-led censorship from UCL Union

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 25 by Nick LaRue

I do think that your actions are actually completely intentioned to cause hurt to a lot of people and as such are utterly devoid of any humanity.

Emphasis mine.

This statement reminds so much of what Richard said in the God Delusion regarding how people tend to become 'hurt' by people being not respecting their religious dogma. I'm curious what explosion (excuse the pun) will happen when this reaches the Islamic world. Considering what the other cartoons did.

Tue, 10 Jan 2012 12:36:12 UTC | #906867

Go to: In Memoriam: Christopher Hitchens, 1949–2011

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 145 by Nick LaRue

I am greatly saddened by this news. As some others have said I woke up to it. The world has lost one of the great ones. I've watched countless videos of his debates and read God is Not Great. He was amazing.

I found this rather innocuous 'tribute' over at the telegraph.

American pastor Rick Warren, who delivered the invocation at President Barack Obama's inauguration, wrote: "My friend Christopher Hitchens has died. I loved & prayed for him constantly & grieve his loss. He knows the Truth now."

Some one should tell Rick that Hitch knew the 'Truth' way before the moment of his death and it's pricks like him who keep people from knowing it. How much of a 'friend' was Rick to Hitch I don't know but I find it his sentiments rather grating.

I hate xtian sympathies.

Hitch, RIP. You will be missed by many.

Fri, 16 Dec 2011 09:22:52 UTC | #899566

Go to: Atheists who hate atheists?

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 51 by Nick LaRue

Comment 36 by healthphysicist :

@35 Peter:

Of course I have. Science should be used to prove claims wrong (from wherever they originate)...that was my first post.

But it can't be used to differentiate theism from athiesm.


So the whole heart of your statement and argument, which is simply, 'There's no way to prove or disprove that god exists'.

Science can't prove a god doesn't exist, therefore your choice of atheism is arbitrary, hence you're no different than a theist. What utter BS.

This argument is so old and boring. A person is a theist for many reasons, up bringing, peer pressure, societal norms, and acceptance in believing in a god of some sort. It's only arbitrary as to what theism you're born into.

Atheism has to do with gaining knowledge as you grow and continuing questioning. They seem at polar ends if you ask me.

So what did you do? Toss a coin to determine if you wanted to be an atheist or theist? That would be arbitrary.

You're atheist because you thought about the idea of a god and dismissed it for some reason. That's different than being a theist, which is acceptance without questioning. Do you not get it?

Sun, 10 Jul 2011 17:16:17 UTC | #848266

Go to: Atheists who hate atheists?

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 30 by Nick LaRue

Comment 20 by healthphysicist :

@19 AtheistEgbert

Well point is believing or not believing in gods is completely arbitrary. In that way, atheism and theism are equally supported.

Those atheists who use science to support their atheism, don't understand the a priori assumptions they've made.

They start out assuming the Universe is NOT evidence of god, then use science (which is a priori restricted from appealing to a diety) to convince themselves that they have examined the evidence and there is no god.

That is concluding your initial assumptions.

Very much like most theists.

I'm sure there's a name for the argument your presenting but I can't be bothered to find it.

Since you haven't really stated, I'm assuming you to be a theist or someone who has some belief in some form of god? Maybe deist?

In any case the points you are making have been made by many before and have been dealt with thoroughly, not only here but in many atheist blogs and books.

Most of us who are atheists have come from some form of religion or other, We've been raised either culturally or fundamentally so our decisions to be an atheist is hardly arbitrary. When faced with the facts the idea of a god appears highly unlikely. Most atheist are 6.9 on Dawkins scale, we leave a little bit open for the possibility, however remote, of there being a god but live our lives (like some religious people do) as if there isn't one.

Atheists use science to support their ideas simply because it's usually learning about science that makes one start to question the idea of a god. The more you know the less likely you are to believe. This doesn't mean that all atheists use science as a means of becoming an atheist, some just use their holy books.

Most sophisticated theists use a form or deism as a means to bring science and religion in line with each other. Truth is most people who believe are not deists. They believe in their religion with some level of conviction and assume it is right. This is the difference between the religious and atheists. That's not to say that all atheists are like this but most are open to having their ideas questioned.

To sum up my thoughts, where we come from is a rather simple philosophy. Prove us wrong. We have the whole of science backing us up, what does your god have?

Sun, 10 Jul 2011 16:04:06 UTC | #848234

Go to: Surgeons carry out first synthetic windpipe transplant

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 1 by Nick LaRue

This technology amazes me, it's so sci-fi and I hope they continue to progress it to other organs. (I've seen work on heart, liver and other organs already which are in their infancy stages) This would be the ultimate in transplant technology and will go a long way in helping those who desperately need one. Imagine the lives it can save and no rejection drugs.

To steal a quote from RD and modifying it a bit, "Science gives you the ability to replace organs, religion...." you know the rest. :)

Sat, 09 Jul 2011 20:16:40 UTC | #848033

Go to: What about people who don't want to breed?

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 32 by Nick LaRue

I myself never wanted children and married twice now my wife a to hand I are not having children. We've just hit our 40s. The desire has never been there for me to be honest. I know lots of people say it's different for men but there are many guys who want children and there are men who have a change once they have them.

We have many reasons as to why we don't want children. Some can seem selfish when viewed from those who feel that it's imperative that you have children. I've often felt when talking to those who appeared obsessed with having children that they have sort of a selfish behaviour about them. Sort of an overwhelming desire. Maybe those who don't want to have children are lacking this?

Maybe, though this is just a thought, that maybe part of the control of population will be having individuals who simply don't want to breed. We are a very populace species so even though there are some controls in place already, disease, etc, why not this type of control? There are many unsuccessful breeders in other species why not ours? I also wonder if our prolonged existence (compared to earlier humans) has any effect.

As for sex drive I don't see that disappearing any time soon myself or changing much. I know that humans are, by far, probably the only species on the planet that has issues with regard to the this most basic of functions but lets face it, with close to 7 billion humans on the planet we're not exactly showing any signs of changing our ways.

Probably the biggest issues my wife and I have are finding friends who are like us or who are not over obsessed with their kids. I don't mind having friends who have children and I don't mind children it just drives me nuts when talking to adults the only conversation is about their children. I know there are groups out there where you can meet other childless couples.They're not always that great though.

Wed, 06 Jul 2011 19:49:36 UTC | #847037

Go to: Damon Fowler: in trouble for pointing out the law

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 5 by Nick LaRue

If there ever was a time for support of someone this would be it. I wish I had more money to help people like this. The young man needs the support of people who are on his side.

The good thing however is it appears that it's not just atheists who are agreeing with him, there's a whole slew of Christians too on his facebook page. Good to see that.

Support Damon

Fri, 20 May 2011 12:07:39 UTC | #628747

Go to: Why atheism has already won in America.

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 30 by Nick LaRue

I have to say I agree and disagree.

Definitely getting atheists into the main stream will help start the process and seeing so many shows with atheists is somewhat encouraging, I don't watch much TV so I didn't even know half these shows or what their content is. I must say however if the characters are being portrayed poorly then it just doesn't help the situation. Comedy is always good though.

That being said however you still have statistics showing majority of the US believing in some sort of god figure, whether hardcore or wispy. It's these statistics that drive politics. Belief in god to politics means Christian 99% of the time. Statistics is what they use to justify their positions, promises and policies. So until the statistics start changing and more people start to show they don't want religion as a main part of the government I don't see much changing.

Also because a large part of athletes wear their belief so openly and the adoration of the crows seem to suck it up. Once you start getting openly atheist athletes respected (if there are any) then I think you're onto something.

Thu, 19 May 2011 21:14:39 UTC | #628601

Go to: Which religion is the hardest to escape from?

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 4 by Nick LaRue

As the other posts have already stated Islam would be the most difficult and not solely based on the idea of being killed for leaving. Out of all the religions Islam is best at creating a 'family' like community which tends to be most Muslims social interaction. Very few Muslims have friends outside the Islamic community they create. Of course this kind of depends on certain factors but I've seen it first hand how people get absorbed into the whole thing.

As for leaving religion in general. I would say they're all hard to some extent. Even my family who is not overly religious find my being non religious difficult for them. This doesn't cause any issues between us but it just goes to show that even the most moderate of people who are believers can still see someone who is not religious as problematic.

Obviously the more strict the religious upbringing the more difficult it is to leave as your life basically revolves around your religion.

As I have pointed out in other discussions there are many who leave religious households and basically lose everything, family, friends, work, etc. Leaving your religion in some cases is devastating not just emotionally but in many other ways as well.

Sun, 15 May 2011 08:57:24 UTC | #626952

Go to: Can you share your struggle with religious family members?

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 38 by Nick LaRue

I don't have much advice dealing with religious family members, what I do have is advice on is being different. Which would be a good summarising of me.

I'm the 'different' one in my family. The non-religious one. The only one to travel overseas, to get married to someone from overseas, to live overseas. To go to college (so far). The only one not to have kids. I do things very differently than the rest of my family. I don't really fit in with them.

My wife is also different. She's the only one in her family that ever went to university and has a master's degree, most of her family only ask, why bother, instead of saying good for you. She really doesn't fit in with them.

The thing I'm trying to get at is being different is not a bad thing, what you need to find is other's like yourself. Those who are different. Those you can relate to. Those who will accept you for you.

Not all families are great things. I think we generally have this warped view that our families must accept us regardless. Truth is a family is no different than any other group you meet, some are good, some you get along with. You just happen to be carrying similar genes. That's the only difference.

You can't change people if they don't want to change. Leaving family behind can be painful and having hurtful words spoken by them, regardless that you know it's all BS, it's still hurtful. The only thing you can do is talk to them in general terms. Keep your conversations simple and at an adult level. If they start disrespecting you, end the conversation. Sooner or later they'll come around, reluctantly.

Anyway, enjoy being different. Revel in it. You've walked a long road so far and I for one applaud your efforts. :)

Thu, 12 May 2011 10:56:42 UTC | #626139

Go to: Please sign this anti-creationist petition

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 28 by Nick LaRue

Since I'm moving to the UK I felt obliged to sign it. Well that and because creationism is bull shit.

Sat, 30 Apr 2011 07:44:00 UTC | #620944

Go to: New Atheism – A "commoner’s" perspective

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 60 by Nick LaRue

Comment 59 by PaulinSydney :

I did not mean to apply my comment directly to you, Nick, or, indeed, anyone else posting on this board. I intended, rather, to comment on the culture of victimhood that seems to be developing in our society which equates victim status with moral goodness.

Sorry for the misquote above.

I didn't take your comment directly. I can't really fault your perception in general but I don't think many atheist have a victim complex. I know it's really easy to cry victim and a lot of that happens in many countries but I don't know if you'd find many atheists in that situation.

Perhaps I should not have composed my post while simultaneously reading a particularly whiny article about how unfair it is gays can't marry. (For the record, it is unfair we can't marry. It is not, however, the root of all problems in the world, nor is it the most vile form of persecution ever contemplated.)

I've met many gay people who have don't care one way or the other about getting married but would take up the option if it were available. I think it's a great idea personally, think of the economic benefits alone. But you are right, there are many other things more important but I am a firm believer in equal rights for all.

It is true that there are many forms of persecution, but it is also a statistical fact that white, middle-class men, regardless of their sexuality or belief system, are the least likely group in society to suffer any significant discrimination but also, it seems, (gay and straight, non-believers and believers, so very much believers) the first to cry "victim" when our privileged status is called into question. Again, I do not intend to efface the genuine suffering of some gays and some atheists in our authentically theistic and heterosexist societies. Violence, discrimination and psychological torment are to be deplored wherever they occur, and I did not mean to imply otherwise.

I have no doubt that 'white' guys have the least problems in all situations, though I haven't seen much in the way of statistics lately to show one way or the other. To me when I say atheists I don't mean white guys only I mean all atheists from all walks of life and cultures. We're a growing group and there are people from all over. My thoughts were never on 'white' guys but on atheists in general. As a group we need to expand beyond this image of old white guys. Nothing against them but we really need diversity and we need to help those in communities where being an atheist is highly detrimental to their lives. Which is why I get angry at accommodationists.

Fri, 29 Apr 2011 13:14:38 UTC | #620615

Go to: New Atheism – A "commoner’s" perspective

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 57 by Nick LaRue

Comment 54 by God 'N' Us :

Well Alan4discussion, before we answer that, shouldn't we first identify the chicken. Or should we more cryptcally say, 'we look forward to recieving your reply.

No idea what you're going on about. I'll assume troll until I can see otherwise.

Fri, 29 Apr 2011 10:23:45 UTC | #620570

Go to: New Atheism – A "commoner’s" perspective

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 56 by Nick LaRue

Comment 48 by Ballardian

I don't know - I find it somewhat unedifying to watch overwhelmingly white, middle-class, Western men scramble to claim some sort of mantle of victimhood. I do not wish to minimise the very real suffering of some gay men or some atheists, but really, if we're white and male, we're never going to be the most victimised person in the room.

I never said anything about someone claiming to be a victim I was stating that there are people who if they came out as atheists could/would have their lives changed as they know it in many different ways. This isn't being a victim it's a fact of reality. So what I claim is that secrecy aspect of things is similar to the gay community. Nothing else.

As for drawing the racists card that wasn't really necessary and also off the mark. There are many different types of persecution just because you don't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Fri, 29 Apr 2011 10:22:54 UTC | #620569

Go to: New Atheism – A "commoner’s" perspective

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 55 by Nick LaRue

Comment 51 by Free2011 :

I still am not up to the task of "coming out" to the public, although I do have discussions on religion and evolution with my wife, children and very close friends. Soon I'll have the guts but until then I look forward to more education from my new mentors.

Everyone has their own time and place to come out, if that is what they choose to do. I just felt it was my time to in my own way. I'm an atheist and quite happy to be one.

Fri, 29 Apr 2011 10:12:01 UTC | #620566

Go to: New Atheism – A "commoner’s" perspective

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 49 by Nick LaRue

Well we went on a slight curve I wouldn't say we completely veered. My post was a mix bag and was somewhat open to different talking points. Which is what I wanted.

One point that's sort of getting to me a bit is how a few people from the UK and even someone from the BSCE has pointed out that atheism isn't an issue in the UK. That no one says much about it at all. My thoughts on this however is, what about all those new faith schools? There's also been a change happening in the UK and Europe with a shift towards right wing policies. Though they may not be like the US it is however a contrast to the last decade or more.

So even though the UK right now is easy with religion and atheism my question is how long will that last? Kids are being indoctrinated in secluded pockets of reality. I don't see this as a good thing.

As for persecution of atheists I recommend anyone on here who hasn't seen any stories about it should go over to Friendly Atheistand read some Ask Richard counselling advice articles. There may be other places as well but there are plenty of stories that get highlighted here of how the simple decision to become an atheist can screw people's life's up. Heck if you read The God Delusion, Richard talks about atheist persecution in it.

So whether you like the comparison or not in some parts of this world, the US being one of them, atheist are stuck in a very similar way to the way gays were and still are in the gay movement. Which is why I feel that accommodationist should cut with the atheist bashing, especially those who want atheist scientist on their side.

Wed, 27 Apr 2011 12:21:57 UTC | #619892

Go to: New Atheism – A "commoner’s" perspective

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 34 by Nick LaRue

Comment 32 by Scruddy Bleensaver :

While I agree with you that we shouldn't be lumped in with the new agers in the "none" box, there's no response I consider more elegant than "none" to the question of what my religion is. I'd say we kick out the new agers, ufo believers, spiritualists and other woo-thinkers into the new category. Is "other" an option? That's where they ought to go.

I have to say I agree with you here. 'None' is our best option. 'Other' would suit those who are not really atheists.

Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:26:06 UTC | #619553

Go to: New Atheism – A "commoner’s" perspective

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 33 by Nick LaRue

Comment 30 by Eric G :

I am a bit tired of being called a militant atheist on another board I frequent. I attribute that terminology to fundies not accepting atheists. I'm not sure how to even go about combating this, but I think it's in my best interest to let it go. I do feel that we need to work harder to band together and overcome our stigmas. In this technology advanced day in age, it should be considerably easier. Maybe in the future, our stigma will quietly disolve, but I'm not too optimistic about that.

I personally wouldn't frequent a board that called me a militant atheist or one that called me shrill or strident. However a recommendation for you would to ask them to define 'militant' in a calm sensible way. Since they are using it they should understand what it means. If they're not immature that is. It's one thing to parrot words, it's another to use words without knowledge of why they are used. Militant is nothing more than a mud slinging word because we 'attack' religion, with words of course, not weapons. They seem to misunderstand the meaning of the word attack in this context. We use logic and reason when it comes to religion, something you're not supposed to do.

Sorry for straying from topic if I did, but it helps to get my thoughts out. Thanks Nick for posting and continue being you.

No you're not straying from the topic at all. These are the real issues and top level accommodationist need to understand the issues with the words they use. They forget that there are ordinary people trying to simply live their lives who are atheists. This is what my post is about. It's about freedom to be an atheist. Without stigma.

I'm glad you liked my post and thank you for posting. :)

Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:23:40 UTC | #619552

Go to: New Atheism – A "commoner’s" perspective

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 29 by Nick LaRue

I have no idea how I missed this earlier (I partly blame the threading at WEIT) and it would have been great one to give to OpenM1nded. Over at WEIT my comment which is number two on the A bright spot at The Chronicle and an open letter thread, I basically had my comment responded to by Kate, who appears to be a member of BCSE. Not only did she totally miss what I had said but completely ignored it and babbled nonsense. She's good at smoke and mirrors and does so throughout the thread.

This is accommodation in it's true form. Don't listen to criticism, don't respond correctly to questions or statements.

Mon, 25 Apr 2011 10:24:54 UTC | #619135

Go to: Cardinal warns of 'aggressive secularism'

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 18 by Nick LaRue

Comment 13 by Premiseless :

The real question ought to be what should replace it, and to this question we need to move on as swiftly as we are abled.

Easy answer to this one. Nothing. Why does religion need replacing? We have all we need already in our lives. Friends, family, loved ones and so on. What else do you really need in life? Why this desire to have more? Isn't it enough to love and beloved?

Communities are created by common interests all the time, no religion required. Just look at this website. Need I say more?

To give another angle, what we should be doing is supplying children with is critical thinking and realisation that they are loved for who they are as they grow. This is the only true thing one can really do.

Mon, 25 Apr 2011 08:23:13 UTC | #619103

Go to: Cardinal warns of 'aggressive secularism'

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 7 by Nick LaRue

What's with the attacks on secularism? What these people stupi... oh, yeah.

So is this kind of nonsense rampant in the UK cause I'm moving there soon. Or is this just the whiny RC church chucking a fit? Just an Easter thing maybe?

As I find myself saying increasingly often these days, when contemplating the antics of faith-heads: Pure Monty Python.


I have to agree with this. I can help but laugh and laugh and laugh some more.

Comment 7 by JuJu

I say we tag anyone espousing this persecution nonsense as a "New Apologist" or a "New Accommodationist"

I second this.

Mon, 25 Apr 2011 07:38:59 UTC | #619090

Go to: New Atheism – A "commoner’s" perspective

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 28 by Nick LaRue

Comment 24 by xmaseveeve :

Comment 14, Sruddy,

'in S&M gear of atheism singing 'YMCA" and exposing our buttocks to the world.'

Oh dear. Did someone put me on the internet?

That's hysterical!

Nice to meet you Nick. I see why you are using your real name and you seem like a special, thoughtful person. No one cares that I'm an atheist anyway. Like Scruddy, I've never been anything else. (It occurs to me that silly, frilly people did baptise me a catholic - I don't remember but I hope I laughed all through the ceremony.

Thank you for your kind words. I was baptised Anglican and attended church for very short period of my life as a child. I was generally brought up a cultural Christian and grew up in a somewhat European neighbourhood, lots of Catholics around. So a lot of my politeness to religion kind of stems from that period of my life. Though I must admit my first run in with Ash Wednesday was a bit awkward.

Welcome back, with your new name. For most of us, it's what's in a name? and the anonymity just gives us Chatham House rules. Although not everyone is honest on here, at least on here, you can be. Enjoy!

Though I have nothing against anonymity sometimes it's just nice to know who you're talking to in a general sense.I get why people want it, some will say for privacy, some for more insidious reasons, some just because. I just feel that I have nothing I have to hide and privacy, what's that really?

Mon, 25 Apr 2011 00:10:59 UTC | #619003

Go to: New Atheism – A "commoner’s" perspective

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 27 by Nick LaRue

Comment 25 by Rich Wiltshir :

YOU are one of the important people, Nick!

Your words have made it easier for someone come out. There's every reason for you, your friend's and loved ones to be proud.

I've posted this before: my wife was in her mid-forties and approaching death before she felt comfortable at announcing her atheism (even to atheist friends). She had feared people's reaction to my assertive and vocal badge-wearing, but was relieved when most people reacted positively and complimentary. She was a humble but deserving woman, uncharacteristically proud that she had spoken out. Now I strive to help others feel comfortable with their own victory over the manipulations of cults.

Nick, you've made my day. Thank you for showing that it is okay (and better) to reject the primitive superstitions so openly.

Thank you: my wife would've thanked you, too.

Thank you for your kind words and I am happy that my words have touched you in a way that makes you feel comfortable and confident in being you on the Internet.

Your wife sounded like a wonderful and brave woman and I'm glad she was able to get that feeling of freedom prior to her passing.

Sun, 24 Apr 2011 23:40:15 UTC | #618997

Go to: New Atheism – A "commoner’s" perspective

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 26 by Nick LaRue

Comment 23 by 0penM1nded :

What is an accomodationalist? Is that an atheist who simply just gets on with life and never looks for issues to discuss? Or is it something more insidious, e.g. an atheist who tries to further the casue of religion in some way?

There are generally two types of accommodationist, it doesn't matter if they're atheists, agnostic or even religious.

One type is accommodation of religion and science. Think Templeton Foundation here, gathering prominent scientist to say something 'nice' about religion as Richard would put it. There is also the issue with the NCSE and possibly the BCSE taking a more accommodationist slant and beating up on the Gnu Atheists scientist who should be their natural allies. Their motto, which is something you'll run across here I'm sure, is "You're not helping" meaning that atheists scientist who say not so nice things about religion, like Richard, are not making the NCSE and BCSE jobs any easier.

The other type of accommodation is the social and cultural argument. This idea that people 'need' religion or that religion gets people to do good things, etc. This is of course garbage but one that tends to appeal to people.

If you want to get feel for accommodation I would recommend this thread at WEIT. It's quite interesting, you have some prominent names running through it. A bright spot at The Chronicle and an open letter

Sun, 24 Apr 2011 23:26:20 UTC | #618995

Go to: New Atheism – A "commoner’s" perspective

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 22 by Nick LaRue

Hi Mbee, thanks.

I'm not much different than you. I'm still polite around religious people, I know many and I used to say I'm not religious or I have none to most people. However I am very comfortable of saying I'm an atheist now. I haven't had any backlash but I don't go out of my way to say it unless it comes up. Haven't got as far as getting a t-shirt or pin yet.

I used the term atheist because it 'fits' as far as I'm concerned. To many it has more meaning, both good and bad, to me it's nothing but one aspect of my life and becoming an atheist has allowed me to change over the years, in a lot of good ways.

So in essence this is sort my, I'm over the cloak of secrecy and I'm happy and proud to be who I am.

To a person of religion or some accomodationaists, they simply don't get that. That's what this post was all about.

Sun, 24 Apr 2011 10:23:04 UTC | #618748

Go to: A bright spot at The Chronicle and an open letter

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 11 by Nick LaRue

I read Jerry's site earlier today and now noticed there were more comments. It's completely unbelievable what's going on over there. I'm not going to get into it but Roger and Nick seem to be two peas in a pod.

Sun, 24 Apr 2011 09:47:24 UTC | #618740

Go to: New Atheism – A "commoner’s" perspective

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 16 by Nick LaRue

I suppose in that sense, the new atheists are the gay pride marchers in S&M gear of atheism singing 'YMCA" and exposing our buttocks to the world.

That's hysterical! I like it! Now if can just get that in a picture...

Sat, 23 Apr 2011 12:12:52 UTC | #618415

Go to: New Atheism – A "commoner’s" perspective

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 15 by Nick LaRue

Well, I can understand how you feel. I've spent months trying to understand the accommodationist mentality, and it is only recently that I understood it as a kind of ignorance and prejudice. Now I'll be beating that drum continuously until the message finally gets through.

Ignorance and prejudice sounds about right to me. Now if we can get them to understand that, that would be something.

Sat, 23 Apr 2011 12:11:56 UTC | #618414

Go to: New Atheism – A "commoner’s" perspective

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 11 by Nick LaRue


Being anonymous is a choice. It's up to you. I've just decided I can't be bothered with it. I'm not calling on people to drop being anonymous or anything of the sort. Those decisions are yours to make if you wish to make them.

Lots of people however do choose anonymity for the sake of people not knowing that they are atheists and they have a long road ahead of them to even contemplate being an 'open' atheist let alone one who would be public about it here. These are the people who need support of people like us and the 'elites'.

What I am angry about, upset about, is that accomodationist do their utmost to stall this process of having atheist seem like 'normal people'. It may not matter in your country, town, city, but there are many places where it does. This is what my post is about in truth. I just want to be me and I want others to have that same freedom of expression. With the same choices.

Sat, 23 Apr 2011 10:12:08 UTC | #618373

Go to: New Atheism – A "commoner’s" perspective

Nick LaRue's Avatar Jump to comment 9 by Nick LaRue

@Mumbo-jumbo, thanks. I have sometimes fallen in with accomodationists over the past few years as well then I started reading PZ to keep perspective.

@Schrodinger's Cat

Nothing wrong with being anonymous.

I guess growing up in the UK must be a bit different than other places where there seems to be a tinge of religiousness to everything. The idea of being polite to religion is ingrained in most of us and treating it with it's undeserved respect is sometimes difficult to let go. Such as it was for me.

In just recent times I was working at an office where quite a few people were openly religious and one or two were creationists. Needless to say when the topic comes up you have to choose whether you keep your thoughts to yourself or let fly. I've decided that I rather let fly.

The new office I have colleagues who simply don't care. Which is fine with me.

Maybe people in the UK are simply too polite? (jk)

Sat, 23 Apr 2011 09:33:10 UTC | #618354