former Southern Baptist preacher claims atheists are tiptoeing around Islam (2 of 2)

The Atheist Experience #684, 11/21/2010. Lee from Richmond, a former Souther Baptist preacher turned atheist, believes that atheists are tiptoeing politely around the Islamic religion and neglecting to extend the same politically correctness towards Christianity. Martin and Matt disagree with this statement and attempt to show him the flaws in his premise. (1 of 2)

http://www.atheist-experience.com/

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• Atheist Experience
• atheism
• atheists
• Martin Wagner
• Matt Dillahunty
• religion
• preacher
• Christian
• Christianity
• Baptist
• Southern Baptist
• Muslim
• Islam
• ground zero mosque
• Fred Phelps
• FCKH8

[adobePC]

The caller is a jerk. We have religious freedom in the USA.

[Stairc]

@n800064447 If you think Matt interrupted too much, that's something else. From my viewing what I got was this (truncated).

1) Caller makes accusation that atheists are soft on Islam

2) Hosts disagree and bring up examples

3) Caller cites the mosque controversy

4) Hosts refute this by saying they have nothing to critique int he first place

5) Caller makes a flawed analogy to other cases

6) Hosts demonstrate the flaw

7) 5-6 are repeated a LONG time. Caller's refusal to acknowledge flaw ends it.

[BTCforlife]

@n800064447 The guy explained himself just fine. He for some reason thought that the people building the community center were "being jerks" and the building was an "in your face" and should not be allowed.

The problem came when he refused to admit that his argument was flawed.

His comparison to the Phelps' was a failure. And he was too much of a baby to admit it.

The hosts then spent 4 minutes explaining it to him while he dances in circles ignoring every point they make.

[J0NA5TeVi]

from 2:30 on is the shit!

[theblueguy2]

I lol'd hard when he said "I don't care if theyre building a mosque or a BOMB-FACTORY" x)

[n800064447]

@Stairc I have to disagree because I think they never gave him a chance to really explain himself. Matt seems to have a habit of interrupting people and not letting them talk. I'm not much of a fan of his as some of the other hosts. He's too hot tempered.

[Stairc]

@n800064447 I can understand where you're coming from, but you're just wrong. I wouldn't disapprove of an unrelated baptist group being near a site that the westborough baptist church had attacked. The only reason to blame the unrelated baptist group for the westborough's actions or, in any way, think they're connected is if you're using bigotry. The caller only moved to falsehoods about terrorist funding much later, they couldn't get him past his original flawed analogy.

[n800064447]

@Stairc And you at *least* have to admit now that his point wasn't about legality, but about expressing disapproval, just like I might disapprove of coke companies going into schools. If you at *least* admit to this, then you have to admit that the hosts, who spent the larger portion of the video discussing legal issues, missed the point and completely judged the caller before listening to him fully. If you do not admit it, then please let me know how legality ties into his point..

[n800064447]

@Stairc AND once again, you guys completely miss the point because you think he is lumping all muslims together when he wasn't. AGAIN, he may be wrong in his FACTS, but he WAS not implying all muslims were the same. He was MISTAKEN that the building owner was directly tied to some organization. EXPLAIN that to him RATIONALLY, do NOT yell at him about some unrelated POINT! (caps are for emphasis)

[n800064447]

@Stairc This is all implications...I did say, use his words, not what you implied. The analogy was not false. His analogy was the westborough church. He believed that the building owner was directly funded by some terrorist organization (as he was trying to explain), so the analogy would be accurate. If it was true that it was an unrelated organization, then make the darn point!! Stop talking about other issues like legality! Once again, he was perhaps wrong, but not a bigot.