Post by Pompadoodle on Aug 3, 2010 16:52:39 GMT -5
You know what's sad? I've gotten this thread and the Evidence thread so confused it took me a full minute to figure out why my post from earlier today wasn't in here.
Speaking just about Christianity since that's where my bias lies, the problem with that Pomp is you're assuming it's a bad thing to believe, submit, conform, obey. I can understand why you think this given your view of God, but for folks like me those four things are all right and proper. We are believing what is true. We are submitting and obeying our perfect Lord and Savior. We are conforming to the highest standards of righteousness.
I agree about the sliding scale. I guess it really all depends on how we define "fanatic." It's often associated with the violent side of religions, but you can be fanatic about something without becoming violent and dangerous. What do you say, Pomp? Am I a fanatic?
Of course I think its a bad thing to believe, submit, conform and obey. And its not just a matter of my being an atheist. I'm also a left-wing ultra-libertarian. People with my sort of worldview don't think that submitting to and obeying anything is a good move.
I guess we all have our own ideas about what exactly a fanatic is. For me, its more about intolerance rather than violence per se, although clearly the 2 are closely linked. I'd say that a fanatic is someone who, because of their strongly-held religious or political convictions, is unwilling to tolerate the beliefs and/or lifestyles of others. The Westboro Baptist Church aren't violent (yet), but they are about as intolerant as one could possibly be. Which makes them wild-eyed fanatics in my book.
You're a tolerant guy, so by my definition, you are not a fanatic. Just someone with strongly-held views. Which is fine, good even. Much better than not caring, or not bothering to think.