5 ms·

Because the second sentence mentions the Bible? Or some other reason? If it’s the former, I’m a Christian but I don’t just close out articles if they’re writte

by _gabe_ 3y ago

Because the second sentence mentions the Bible? Or some other reason? If it’s the former, I’m a Christian but I don’t just close out articles if they’re written by Richard Dawkins or quickly proclaim that they’re an atheist. There’s still a very real chance that they have some wisdom to share. Just because people share a different religious view than me doesn’t mean I can’t learn from them.

yohannparis 3y ago
I stopped when they grouped the NYT journalists with murderers and drug-dealers. Clearly someone biais, that also use the bible to make their points. No thank you.
- Amorymeltzer 3y ago
  I don't agree with the grouping, but he is making a very specific, personal reference: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slate_Star_Codex#New_York_Times_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slate_Star_Codex#New_York_Time...>. It's referenced elsewhere as well, as noted in this comment here: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38734207 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38734207>
- CoffeeOnWrite 3y ago
  That's a half-joke, for what it's worth.
- LeifCarrotson 3y ago
  It's because in Scott's recent past, an NYT journalist lied about wanting to write a positive article about him and being OK with using his pseudonym, then instead wrote a very negative article and doxxed him instead. The author is a psychiatrist with some unstable patients, and a blogger with some controversial opinions. It's a whole thing, I read that and chuckled at the tongue-in-cheek humor.
ptaffs 3y ago
As an atheist, mention or quotes from the bible are interesting to me because they help explain our current culture. I'm just challenging your proposal that (all) atheists are not curious.
- _gabe_ 3y ago
  Ah sorry for the confusion! I chose atheism because it seems diametrically opposed to Christianity in the US, but my intention wasn’t to single out atheists :) . The same sentiment I voiced in my first comment could be said about any religion or belief system: I won’t close an article with Buddhist, relativist, Muslim, etc views just because they mention their belief system.
mgaunard 3y ago
I'm an atheist; I've read and studied the Bible as part of my catholic education 25 years ago. Not that I'm strongly against it, but my attention is challenged by many things, and a man who starts an article about becoming a father with a clear sex-is-for-procreation Bible quote makes it sound like his experience of life is not relevant to mine.
- tasuki 3y ago
  > a man who starts an article about becoming a father with a clear sex-is-for-procreation Bible quote makes it sound like his experience of life is not relevant to mine It's not like he believes any of it. He just quotes the bible because that makes for a funnier article.
- galdosdi 3y ago
  You're behaving foolishly. If you spend just a moment looking at it you'd see the author isn't even taking the religious text he's quoting seriously! So your great fear of accidentally interacting with a religious individual is overblown. Well, since you chose not to read it, and continue to choose thusly in similar situations, you'll never really be able to confirm or deny whether or not"his experience of life is relevant" to yours. Not sure what the point of engaging in discussion on an article you admit to refusing to read is... So you are basically refusing to read this simply because the author is even willing to be aware of what's in the bible. What a bizarre and anti intellectual stance. I've been seeing this strange kind of attitude more lately -- for example, I encountered a young person who refused to read books that were more than 20 years old "because they might have bigoted ideas in them since they're old" But avoiding reading about the past because it scares you is a great way to remain stupid and cede control of the world to others without such hangups. > God smote Onan, starting a 4,000-year-old tradition of religious people getting angry about wasting sperm on anything other than procreative sex.
  - mgaunard 3y ago
    I'm not "refusing" to read it. I just reacted on a comment.

by _gabe_ 3y ago

yohannparis 3y ago

I stopped when they grouped the NYT journalists with murderers and drug-dealers. Clearly someone biais, that also use the bible to make their points. No thank you.

Amorymeltzer 3y ago
I don't agree with the grouping, but he is making a very specific, personal reference: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slate_Star_Codex#New_York_Times_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slate_Star_Codex#New_York_Time...>. It's referenced elsewhere as well, as noted in this comment here: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38734207 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38734207>
CoffeeOnWrite 3y ago
That's a half-joke, for what it's worth.
LeifCarrotson 3y ago
It's because in Scott's recent past, an NYT journalist lied about wanting to write a positive article about him and being OK with using his pseudonym, then instead wrote a very negative article and doxxed him instead. The author is a psychiatrist with some unstable patients, and a blogger with some controversial opinions. It's a whole thing, I read that and chuckled at the tongue-in-cheek humor.

ptaffs 3y ago

As an atheist, mention or quotes from the bible are interesting to me because they help explain our current culture. I'm just challenging your proposal that (all) atheists are not curious.

_gabe_ 3y ago
Ah sorry for the confusion! I chose atheism because it seems diametrically opposed to Christianity in the US, but my intention wasn’t to single out atheists :) . The same sentiment I voiced in my first comment could be said about any religion or belief system: I won’t close an article with Buddhist, relativist, Muslim, etc views just because they mention their belief system.

mgaunard 3y ago

I'm an atheist; I've read and studied the Bible as part of my catholic education 25 years ago. Not that I'm strongly against it, but my attention is challenged by many things, and a man who starts an article about becoming a father with a clear sex-is-for-procreation Bible quote makes it sound like his experience of life is not relevant to mine.

tasuki 3y ago
> a man who starts an article about becoming a father with a clear sex-is-for-procreation Bible quote makes it sound like his experience of life is not relevant to mine It's not like he believes any of it. He just quotes the bible because that makes for a funnier article.
galdosdi 3y ago
You're behaving foolishly. If you spend just a moment looking at it you'd see the author isn't even taking the religious text he's quoting seriously! So your great fear of accidentally interacting with a religious individual is overblown. Well, since you chose not to read it, and continue to choose thusly in similar situations, you'll never really be able to confirm or deny whether or not"his experience of life is relevant" to yours. Not sure what the point of engaging in discussion on an article you admit to refusing to read is... So you are basically refusing to read this simply because the author is even willing to be aware of what's in the bible. What a bizarre and anti intellectual stance. I've been seeing this strange kind of attitude more lately -- for example, I encountered a young person who refused to read books that were more than 20 years old "because they might have bigoted ideas in them since they're old" But avoiding reading about the past because it scares you is a great way to remain stupid and cede control of the world to others without such hangups. > God smote Onan, starting a 4,000-year-old tradition of religious people getting angry about wasting sperm on anything other than procreative sex.
- mgaunard 3y ago
  I'm not "refusing" to read it. I just reacted on a comment.