MySpace Deletes Largest Atheist Group in the World.

[Stile]

While they obviously have the right to delete the group, people would be up in arms if a shop decided not to serve disabled people.

They wouldn't be up in arms if the disabled people were organizing with the intent of disabling other healthy people. Nice analogy, StarWorms!

 

[brennan]

Welcome back Curt.

 

[CurtSibling]

I saw a thing on the news earlier about teaching non-traditional families in schools and the religious nut actual sad " Who cares." in response to the non-nut saying " What about the people who aren't christian?" The nut then went on about if her side was muslim every one would be tripping over them self to appease them but the christians are fair game and no one cares about their feelings.

Sounds like one of those religious people who are so swamped in political
programming that he has lost all sight of what common sense really is...

...

 

[CurtSibling]

Welcome back Curt.

I would say: 'It's good to be back' - But that is a Gary Glitter song!

 

[JollyRoger]

If this story is true, I cannot believe that Myspace was willing to persecute Christians by allowing the atheist group to get so big in the first place.

 

[Phlegmak]

I saw a thing on the news earlier about teaching non-traditional families in schools and the religious nut actual sad " Who cares." in response to the non-nut saying " What about the people who aren't christian?" The nut then went on about if her side was muslim every one would be tripping over them self to appease them but the christians are fair game and no one cares about their feelings.

And which nuts were these? Were these the reporters speaking or interviewees?

 

[Luckymoose]

Another reason MySpace is the worst invention ever.

 

[JollyRoger]

Maybe they should change the name to ThySpace to make the desired demographic more obvious.

 

[Rambuchan]

Another reason MySpace is the worst invention ever.

Or rather, another reason to believe that Rupert Murdoch's 'cultural institutions' do not observe, nor promote, basic democratic freedoms.

 

[Babbler]

I don't care about MySpace, and last I checked they were a private company, so I really couldn't care less.

QFT.

In fact, I doubt that the group was any good, given it was on Myspace...

 

[skadistic]

And which nuts were these? Were these the reporters speaking or interviewees?

They were interviewees. Talking heads that they have on often. I think the religious nuts name is Wendy something. She went on about how the Duke boys were total scum and were guilty guilty GUILTY!!!!! And even when it was shown they weren't she still insisted the boys were evil and did something that night to that poor, lying, drug addicted stripper.

 

[skadistic]

Or rather, another reason to believe that Rupert Murdoch's 'cultural institutions' do not observe, nor promote, basic democratic freedoms.

Being privately owned they don't have to.

 

[MobBoss]

Many religionists are good at alienating themselves.

I also love the way you pretend to be objective.

You hate atheists, no need to allude otherwise.

...

Sorry, Curt, but thats simply not true. I dont hate athiests. In fact, in our exchange in PMs over the years, I at least had the impression that you and I would be happy to have a drink in a pub together in a friendly manner should the opportunity ever present itself.

And there are definitely other athiests here (Perf and Fifty for starters) that I most certainly would take up the invite to have a beer with and can most certainly be friendly with.

While I may disagree totally on some very fundamental issues with athiests it doesnt mean I hate them. To be more precise, I feel sorry for them. Be that as it may, I am not the type of person that would simply walk by an athiest if he/she were bleeding on the street or needed help.

Again, disagreement =/= hate.

 

[Grisu]

My page is still up.

Call me a skeptic but something is fishy here.

according to the article, they deleted the group, not individual users. But you're right, it's a bit strange that they're no other sources around...

 

[aneeshm]

Or rather, another reason to believe that Rupert Murdoch's 'cultural institutions' do not observe, nor promote, basic democratic freedoms.

Democracy, as far as I am aware, is a system of the organisation and distribution of coercive power within a state/society. It is not, as far as I am aware, a method of corporate governance. Nor am I aware of any reason why it should be.

The statement above is, IMO, as ridiculous as saying that calculus does not provide all the essential nutrients required for a balanced diet.



Of course, that doesn't change the fact that this decision sucks.

 

[Leonel]

The whole thing is ridiculous. It's not they were saying "lol religion iz dum" and actively making trouble with theists.

 

[.Shane.]

Being privately owned they don't have to.

I'm not sure about that. Private entities can't, say, fire you for your religious beliefs. So, I'm not sure about the legality of them deleting a group for, essentially, a religious belief.

And, while I don't want or care to debate "is atheism a religion", the point is, for people who actually get it and don't want to just flex their e-penii debating semantics, is that athiesm is a perspective on religion. So, in that sense, I'd think, for example, you can't fire someone for being atheist.

Now, these are employees, its not that type of relationship. But, can, say, a hotel refuse to rent rooms to people based on their religious convictions? That might be a more apt comparison.

Oh, and didn't the OP mention it was agnostics also? Agnostics actually do profess a belief in a higher power.

 

[CurtSibling]

Sorry, Curt, but thats simply not true. I dont hate athiests. In fact, in our exchange in PMs over the years, I at least had the impression that you and I would be happy to have a drink in a pub together in a friendly manner should the opportunity ever present itself.

Why do I always get deja vu in these debates?
(sorry to use French speech to a such a steadfast Republican)

This kind of thing is an extension of the 'play wounded' religious tactic.
The predictable appeal to the sense of good sport and camaraderie.

I have seen it so many times, and it will not defang my stance this time.

And there are definitely other athiests here (Perf and Fifty for starters) that I most certainly would take up the invite to have a beer with and can most certainly be friendly with.

I am sure you would all end up brawling in the local sheriff's cell by the end of the night!

While I may disagree totally on some very fundamental issues with athiests it doesnt mean I hate them. To be more precise, I feel sorry for them. Be that as it may, I am not the type of person that would simply walk by an athiest if he/she were bleeding on the street or needed help.

So you have became a big tree-hugging, cuddly care bear?
What happened to the iron-hearted crusader I used to know and loathe?

How disappointing!

 

[warpus]

The only reason I care is because people at my school tend to communicate more through myspace than any other means. So, I don't want my account deleted because of some jerk who also happens to be an athiest was pissing someone off.

People communicate using myspace?

I have never even considered such a use for this site. That must be incredibly inefficient.

 

[toh6wy]

I don't know whether the people at Myspace are intolerant of viewpoints differing from their own, coldly pragmatic in their quest for a greater profit, or just pathetically weak-willed, but I do know that what they've done is despicable.

And ya know, getting zinged like that from an Athiest, REALLY, and I mean REALLY makes me feel more empathy for the athiests in the OP story. I mean, really...it does.

What if he was a Christian who simply dislikes hypocrisy and inconsistent viewpoints?