Texas Shooter: "Church-goers are stupid"

Pintman Paddy Losty · 07-11-2017 01:06PM #1

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4851812/texas-church-shooting-boy-family-murdered-devin-kelley-26/

It appears the shooter in the awful Texas church massacre was a dedicated atheist who hated religion. Apparently he used to rant online about religion and preached his atheism on Facebook.

Atheist groups have distanced themselves from him in the aftermath and condemned his actions but I wonder was this a case of militant atheism going too far and causing someone with mental health problems to become radicalized.

The media generally has no issue in linking Muslim terrorists to radical Islam however there appears to be a reticence to link this attack to radical atheism.

Sometimes the scorn and derision that is heaped on believers can be a bit much. Maybe this is the result when that type of attitude festers and the wrong person is brainwashed.

magicbastarder · 07-11-2017 02:09PM

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

I wonder was this a case of militant atheism going too far and causing someone with mental health problems to become radicalized.

i think you have it the wrong way round there. the mental health problems led to him 'going too far', not the converse.

i guess the acid test would be if he had not been an atheist, would he have never murdered anyone, but that's something we can just guess at. my guess is he'd have found his reasons to do it anyway.

silverharp · 07-11-2017 03:11PM

he had family connections to people in the church so that muddies the argument too. Ive yet to hear about a strand of atheism that suggests using terrorism to kill Christians?

NIMAN · 07-11-2017 03:15PM

People are allowed to be stupid, doesn't mean they deserve to die.

It's no-ones right to decide what others should believe.

branie2 · 07-11-2017 05:06PM

He shouldn't have called them stupid

smacl · 07-11-2017 05:10PM

branie2 wrote: »

He shouldn't have called them stupid

True, but hardly significant when compared to shooting them. The problem in the states clearly seems to be gun control.

MrPudding · 07-11-2017 05:27PM

branie2 wrote: »

He shouldn't have called them stupid

So is he (or anyone) not entitled to their opinion? Atheist are called a lot worse by the religious. Two wrongs don't make a right, but if the religious are entitled to call me names for my not believing in gods then I should be entitled (should I wish to do so) to call them stupid for believing in obvious nonsense.

MrP

branie2 · 07-11-2017 05:30PM

It's name calling, not opinion

nozzferrahhtoo · 07-11-2017 05:37PM

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

The media generally has no issue in linking Muslim terrorists to radical Islam however there appears to be a reticence to link this attack to radical atheism.

The difference there is you can not so easily create a causal narrative between the two, beyond the correlation. If the guy hated believers then that was an attribute of him, not his atheism.

There is nothing I can see about the phrase "I see no reason to suspect there is a god" that links to "Therefore I must go and shoot up a room full of theists".

However linking the doctrines of many religions to actions of violence and more is much easier to do. One can argue they have interpreted the documents wrong of course, but usually not while being unable to see how and why they interpreted it as they did.

There is nothing in "I see no reason to believe there are gods" that can motivate, or retrospectively be used to justify, such actions. However there are many actions performed by the religious that were motivated by, or retrospectively justified by, reference to their religion or holy texts.

This is no small difference.

Saruhashi · 07-11-2017 05:43PM

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4851812/texas-church-shooting-boy-family-murdered-devin-kelley-26/

It appears the shooter in the awful Texas church massacre was a dedicated atheist who hated religion. Apparently he used to rant online about religion and preached his atheism on Facebook.

Atheist groups have distanced themselves from him in the aftermath and condemned his actions but I wonder was this a case of militant atheism going too far and causing someone with mental health problems to become radicalized.

The media generally has no issue in linking Muslim terrorists to radical Islam however there appears to be a reticence to link this attack to radical atheism.

Sometimes the scorn and derision that is heaped on believers can be a bit much. Maybe this is the result when that type of attitude festers and the wrong person is brainwashed.

I'm not sure there are any atheist groups who could be capable of "radicalizing" people to this degree.

I'd be more concerned about this guys ability to access a gun rather than his ability to access atheist content online.

jigglypuffstuff · 07-11-2017 07:06PM

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

The difference there is you can not so easily create a causal narrative between the two, beyond the correlation. If the guy hated believers then that was an attribute of him, not his atheism.

There is nothing I can see about the phrase "I see no reason to suspect there is a god" that links to "Therefore I must go and shoot up a room full of theists".

However linking the doctrines of many religions to actions of violence and more is much easier to do. One can argue they have interpreted the documents wrong of course, but usually not while being unable to see how and why they interpreted it as they did.

There is nothing in "I see no reason to believe there are gods" that can motivate, or retrospectively be used to justify, such actions. However there are many actions performed by the religious that were motivated by, or retrospectively justified by, reference to their religion or holy texts.

This is no small difference.

Its nonsense to state that a religious person is driven by their beliefs, yet an atheist person is not...that makes zero sense

Actually the though process is very simple in this case

I see no reason to believe there is a god, therefore I CAN go and shoot up a room full of theists..Then ill kill myself or get killed and there will be no such consequence (In other words, unanswerable to anyone)

In case you didn't realise....he went into a church and attacked a bunch of religious people. Its absolutely clear what he did and why he did it. Ive said it before that extreme anything is bad...I still hold that same viewpoint..this just reinforces it

If he went into a supermarket and started randomly attacking people, you may have a case in point...but its very easy to link his crime to his militant atheist beliefs (Worldview)

If the atheism "goggles" come off that is...

jigglypuffstuff · 07-11-2017 07:08PM

smacl wrote: »

True, but hardly significant when compared to shooting them. The problem in the states clearly seems to be gun control.

and if he went in there hacking people up with a chainsaw...would it be DIY control?

The problem lies in extreme world views imo

Look at all the terrorist attacks with trucks at the moment....would you suggest vehicle control as a measure

looksee · 07-11-2017 07:21PM

pone2012 wrote: »

Its nonsense to state that a religious person is driven by their beliefs, yet an atheist person is not...that makes zero sense

It makes perfect sense, a religious person has beliefs to be driven by, an atheist does not.

Actually the though process is very simple in this case

I see no reason to believe there is a god, therefore I CAN go and shoot up a room full of theists..Then ill kill myself or get killed and there will be no such consequence (In other words, unanswerable to anyone)

So why does it not happen more often? Indeed, at all?

In case you didn't realise....he went into a church and attacked a bunch of religious people. Its absolutely clear what he did and why he did it. Ive said it before that extreme anything is bad...I still hold that same viewpoint..this just reinforces it

And it is just co-incidence that the people he went to shoot were his family, whom he had already been violent towards, including his mother-in-law whom he had very recently contacted/threatened? I think he can be described as mentally sick as well as violent and bad tempered, but the religious aspect was not the prime reason for the attack

Edit, I will agree with you that 'extreme anything' is bad, and I do not dispute that he had extreme atheist views, but otherwise you are really searching for an argument.

smacl · 07-11-2017 07:45PM

pone2012 wrote: »

and if he went in there hacking people up with a chainsaw...would it be DIY control?

The problem lies in extreme world views imo

Look at all the terrorist attacks with trucks at the moment....would you suggest vehicle control as a measure

Nope. You get extreme views everywhere, even in our very own community of boards.ie. People don't tend to die or get maimed as a result. Pissed off, no doubt. Carded or banned, yep. Brutally murdered or maimed, no so much.
Have a quick look at deaths by terrorist attack versus gun deaths in the US.

To suggest easy access to guns is a lesser problem than extreme views in the states is utter nonsense.

magicbastarder · 07-11-2017 07:49PM

pone2012 wrote: »

and if he went in there hacking people up with a chainsaw...would it be DIY control?

well, yes. if 30,000+ people died in chainsaw related incidents every year in the states, you can be damn well sure there would be a crackdown on them.

jigglypuffstuff · 07-11-2017 08:31PM

looksee wrote: »

It makes perfect sense, a religious person has beliefs to be driven by, an atheist does not.

Sorry but I dont buy that cop-out..Its blatantly obvious that athesim can be, and often is used as a belief system. The minute someone goes into stating that they know something absolute about the existence of god...they are making an a statement founded on assumptions (or beliefs, if you would)...And as they believe something...we know thoughts precede action....So im sure you get where im going here?

So why does it not happen more often? Indeed, at all?

But it has happened historically....and ive seen it mentioned numerous times on this forum...As to why it isnt as common contemporarilty...I would argue athesim has not diffused as much as religion (If you do a survey, and maybe theres already been one...the gap on a global scale is huge). But make no mistake...extremist anything will produce bad results

And it is just co-incidence that the people he went to shoot were his family, whom he had already been violent towards, including his mother-in-law whom he had very recently contacted/threatened? I think he can be described as mentally sick as well as violent and bad tempered, but the religious aspect was not the prime reason for the attack

Edit, I will agree with you that 'extreme anything' is bad, and I do not dispute that he had extreme atheist views, but otherwise you are really searching for an argument.

Actually im in agreement with you to some extent...Ive exhausted the argument that a lot of the extremist attacks are not primarily religious based....

People are evil...regardless of what beliefs they claim...the belief systems take too much heat imo...But to specifically attack a church and 26 people tells me there was more to this than a family fued..at least in my opinion

If you give an evil, killer a gun...they dont need a belief system to tell them too...but it helps to point the finger at it when things go awry

Pherekydes · 07-11-2017 08:47PM

pone2012 wrote: »

Sorry but I dont buy that cop-out..Its blatantly obvious that athesim can be, and often is used as a belief system. The minute someone goes into stating that they know something absolute about the existence of god...

That isn't the meaning of atheism.

jigglypuffstuff · 07-11-2017 09:01PM

Pherekydes wrote: »

That isn't the meaning of atheism.

Perhaps not "your" version...bu to many blatantly claiming no existence of a god, is the very foundation of atheism

looksee · 07-11-2017 09:14PM

pone2012 wrote: »

Perhaps not "your" version...bu to many blatantly claiming no existence of a god, is the very foundation of atheism

It doesn't matter how many times you repeat that atheism is a belief system, it will not make it so.

'blatantly claiming no existence of a god is the very foundation of atheism' - that is not what you argued the first time, you have changed your tack. Not sure why you are using the words 'blatantly' and 'claiming', but atheists would not argue with you that atheism is essentially a lack of belief in a god or gods. They are not making any 'claims', religious people are the ones making claims.

Pherekydes · 07-11-2017 09:15PM

pone2012 wrote: »

Perhaps not "your" version...bu to many blatantly claiming no existence of a god, is the very foundation of atheism

That's not the meaning of atheism.

Atheism claims nothing. Atheism is the lack of belief in a god or gods.

Stop misrepresenting atheists.

Edited to add: if I went into the Christianity forum and claimed something that was anathema to that forum's regulars I would be shown the door.

jigglypuffstuff · 07-11-2017 09:26PM

Pherekydes wrote: »

That's not the meaning of atheism.

Atheism claims nothing. Atheism is the lack of belief in a god or gods.

Stop misrepresenting atheists.

Edited to add: if I went into the Christianity forum and claimed something that was anathema to that forum's regulars I would be shown the door.

Oh dear.....

Source : Cambridge Dictionary

Athesim : Noun

the belief that God does not exist

Source Oxford

Disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

Source : Merriam - Webster

Definition of atheism

1 a :a lack of belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods
b :a philosophical or religious position characterized by disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods

Honestly, I think it is you who should stop misrepresenting atheists....As you might have missed, there are weak and strong positions...as illustrated above....because you appear to occupy the weak position (or at least claim it as exclusively atheist). It would be like me claiming only Catholics are Christians..the rest are not

In reality you've misrepresented them...by excluding a large subset

jigglypuffstuff · 07-11-2017 09:31PM

looksee wrote: »

It doesn't matter how many times you repeat that atheism is a belief system, it will not make it so.

'blatantly claiming no existence of a god is the very foundation of atheism' - that is not what you argued the first time, you have changed your tack. Not sure why you are using the words 'blatantly' and 'claiming', but atheists would not argue with you that atheism is essentially a lack of belief in a god or gods. They are not making any 'claims', religious people are the ones making claims.

Please dont misrepresent me...what I said was..to many ...I did not say to all

Clearly I made a distinction between some....and all...I am well aware of weak/strong positions....ie we were discussing athesim in an extreme form (that is at its strongest)...Im also aware of the weak position...ie what you seem to collectively refer to as " lack of belief"

Are you suggesting that a strong disbelief in a diety...that is to claim there is none...is not a position in athesim? Because as illustrated...It most certainly can be

Pherekydes · 07-11-2017 09:33PM

pone2012 wrote: »

Oh dear.....

Source : Cambridge Dictionary

Athesim : Noun

Source Oxford

Source : Merriam - Webster

Honestly, I think it is you who should stop misrepresenting atheists....As you might have missed, there are weak and strong positions...as illustrated above....because you appear to occupy the weak position (or at least claim it as exclusively atheist). It would be like me claiming only Catholics are Christians..the rest are not

In reality you've misrepresented them...by excluding a large subset

So nothing in any of those about claims. Well done. We are finally on the same page.

magicbastarder · 07-11-2017 09:37PM

classic A&A; a thread about a mass shooting turns into a debate about what 'atheism' means.

looksee · 07-11-2017 09:38PM

If you looked back over the posts in A&A you would find that Pherekydes' definition is the one accepted here. Those definitions are carelessly constructed and need to be addressed. Even then, with the definitions given, it is still a long way from being a belief system.

looksee · 07-11-2017 09:41PM

magicbastarder wrote: »

classic A&A; a thread about a mass shooting turns into a debate about what 'atheism' means.

But this is A&A where the thread was not opened to discuss a mass shooting - which is being dealt with elsewhere - it was to try and make it a 'belief based' shooting. Which it wasn't, so now we are just rambling around semantics.

Cian_ok · 07-11-2017 09:42PM

smacl wrote: »

Have a quick look at deaths by terrorist attack versus gun deaths in the US.

To suggest easy access to guns is a lesser problem than extreme views in the states is utter nonsense.

Careful. Between 55% and 66% of gun deaths in the USA are suicide. The numbers above include suicide.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

looksee · 07-11-2017 09:46PM

Cian_ok wrote: »

Careful. Between 55% and 66% of gun deaths in the USA are suicide. The numbers above include these.

Yes, as it clearly states at the top of the chart.

Cian_ok · 07-11-2017 09:48PM

looksee wrote: »

Yes, as it clearly states at the top of the chart.

True. But not the extent of suicides

smacl · 07-11-2017 10:57PM

Cian_ok wrote: »

Careful. Between 55% and 66% of gun deaths in the USA are suicide. The numbers above include suicide.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

Still hardly comparable to terrorist related death nor an argument for easy access to firearms. You enable easy access to tools designed to kill people and people get killed. Not exactly news.

robindch · 08-11-2017 12:49AM

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

[...] I wonder was this a case of militant atheism going too far and causing someone with mental health problems to become radicalized.

You need wonder no longer - mainly because atheists don't do "radicalization". Yes, atheists might laugh at religious people from time to time, but realistically, this is more likely to result in atheists showing up at a religious service in a clown suit with a honker, rather than fatigues and a semi-automatic rifle.

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

The media generally has no issue in linking Muslim terrorists to radical Islam however there appears to be a reticence to link this attack to radical atheism.

I think you mean to say that trash media outlets are much happier linking islam with terrorist acts carried out by believers in islam, than they are linking - for example - white supremacy with terrorist acts carried out by white supremacists.

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

Sometimes the scorn and derision that is heaped on believers can be a bit much.

Years ago in western countries, non-believers in the local state religion were asset-stripped, then executed and religious believers remained generally silent. Now that religious believers are no longer able to get the state to kill non-believers, they're upset that their beliefs are being laughed at? Honestly! :rolleyes:

Texas Shooter: "Church-goers are stupid"

Comments