Thursday, April 21, 2011

TBM Email Part 3


This is the closing of the 1st email from a TBM to an Atheist Friend, not me. I highly recommend at least skimming parts 1 and 2 so you can understand why I am getting annoyed by this part. Also, fyi, TBM stands for True-Believing Mormon, or True-Blue Mormon. Some people have mentioned they don't know what that means, lol.

Finally getting to the closing of this email:
I don't expect any of what I've written to convince you of anything, nor am I trying to. I'm certainly no scholar; what I've written above is my crude attempt to paraphrase CS Lewis, GK Chesteron, and other 20th century thinkers.” – I don’t think there is a single statement here that he actually believes.

Logical and secular arguments can never give one a belief in God-.” – No shit Sherlock, that’s why we don’t believe in God! Lmao!

but they can expose the logical fallacies of atheism.” – Which were what exactly? Given his email it was that atheism claims to know how every electron acts, that morality is kaput, that the great thinkers were actually Christian, and that pride is at the root of all atheism … oh, and immorality is at the root too. How the f*** are these logical fallacies? I would be more cordial if I was talking to this man face to face, but at least when I sit here, copy and paste the convo, then reply to his comments, and I can’t help but think of how ridiculous this all is.

And this is why God is always possible to know, but atheism is impossible to ever know. David Hume wrote, as he was dying-” Atheism is impossible to know … I think that’s why people admit a level of agnosticism to their atheism. I’m betting he’s a Gnostic believer. And then David Hume on his deathbed … how typical. Of course you can find statements about his deathbed on Christian sites alongside other statements, even for big-time atheists. Hume did say, quite blatantly that he did not believe he would be immortal, nor wanted it, but that he was approaching annihilation. Hume did not retract his atheistic views.

You write that I should be happy for you, but I am afraid I cannot be happy for you.” – Right there, bold and clear. An obvious sign of religious authoritative brainwashed indoctrination is when someone says they don’t believe in your God and are still happy, and you either don’t believe them, or can’t be happy for them. At another point he even asserts that the atheist friend is still miserable, so she’s not even truly happy. Bruce, a friend, had a similar encounter when a person he knew said, “you[atheist] will be so miserable you won’t even know you’re miserable.” … Let’s allow that to sink in a little, okay?


If you were to marry, why would a husband feel compelled not to cheat? Prototypically, Sartre the liberal, and Ayn Rand the libertarian both consciously cheated on their spouses multiple times.” – Oh those moral arguments again, you trickster you. Of course our atheist friend here will only marry another atheist, Mormon-think right there. Being that there aren’t that many atheists in the world we actually marry outside of our ‘religion’ fairly often. And how do you unconsciously cheat on your spouse?

And what does cheating liberals have to do with atheism? Now being liberal means atheist too? Or that you’ll cheat? Like Newt Gengrich [sic?] hasn’t ever cheated on anyone, or that Catholic priests didn’t abuse children, or that Joseph Smith didn’t cheat on Emma! Or have sexual congress with at least 32 women other than his wife. Lol. Or that bishops in the LDS church sometimes get a little too friendly with Relief Society Presidents or those little kids they have to interview, all alone, for 30 minutes. And on this whole bad marital relations argument, let’s not forget that time and time again it seems atheists have a much lower divorce rate than almost any theist group (I believe Catholics actually don’t divorce very often either.)

The cold logic of atheism gives no reason why they shouldn't. Such is the morality brought about by determining it based upon one's own intellect and reason.” – So we shouldn’t use intellect and reason to help in determining what’s best for the human race or how to live ethically? This is a logical fallacy, probably several, first most likely an ‘Is-Ought Problem,’ and definitely a ‘False Dichotomy.’ Who said that logic and intellect and reason can’t help someone to understand that living with a spouse in a happy and fulfilling relationship should be nurtured and sustained for future happiness, fulfillment, and support? Is that not reasonable!? Is that not logical?! Is that not using your intellect to say ‘oh, I have it good and I’m content … should I go cheat on my spouse or should I keep things going the way they are and try to find ways to make it even better?’

What an idiotic statement. Things like this just make me more annoyed with all the morality arguments thrown at me. I’m so glad that this is the generally the type of argument you get from theists so that I don’t have to actually think half the time when I’m answering. Saying just about anything will be more intelligent than what I’ve just read and replied to. In fact, I award this person no points for his irrational thoughts.

Our Atheist Friend did reply to the pride question with taste, “What about the link between pride and mormonism? Goodness, you could replace "atheism" with "mormonism" and your argument would be just as effective.” – You earn a point atheist friend!!!

Atheist Friend, “I think you still don't quite understand what atheism is.” – Point!


Maybe this is what he thinks atheism is.

Atheist Friend, “You are obviously a very happy mormon; many people are very happy Muslims, or Buddhists, or atheists.” – True, but Mormons don’t believe that. Many actually don’t as nearly all of my TBM friends that know I don’t believe have said so and are simply following the BoM Alma teachings along with statements made by General Authorities even at the last Gen. Conf. You have to be a very liberal Mormon or doubter to admit that people outside the religion are truly happy.

And that wraps up the first email. There actually is a second, but I may avoid that one for the sake of seeming too mean to the poor TBM. Or rather, I already typed up my replies because his second email completely goes off the deep end into absurdities and I couldn’t resist. I must warn you, dear readers, that the second email is considerably worse. So much worse that I sum it up in nearly half the space as the first one.

For now, though, I will take a break from replying and do other posts till I feel like copying and pasting again. Thanks ya'all.

2 comments:

  1. I especially love how he told her that if she were to marry, being an atheist - it was likely that her spouse would cheat on her. Is he also saying that being an atheist, she is likely to cheat on her spouse?
    It all goes back to his hedonism *bullshit* debate.

    ReplyDelete
  2. One thing I do find curious is that I would expect atheists to be more true to themselves in marriage; if they weren't happy I would expect them to move, ask for an open relationship, or to get a divorce. However, studies just don't say that, atheists are one of the lowest divorce rate groups and also one of the most loyal in marriage.

    I've truly been wondering how this lines up, but it may be that atheists could be more likely to have sex before marriage and draw out the 'courtship' which means they would get to know each other better BEFORE getting married. It could also be a sign of how atheists may not be involved in as many organized service groups but outperform theists in random acts of kindness, in the sense that atheists feel more compassion to the everyday man or woman, and in this case, their spouse. Just some ideas.

    ReplyDelete