FSTDT Forums
Community => Religion and Philosophy => Topic started by: rageaholic on January 17, 2012, 03:10:32 pm
-
Yeah, I'm bored so I made the list of fundies.
-The apologetic: Relies on really bad logic and reasoning to try to prove god. They attempt to approach things scientifically and logically, but the logic is simplified and doesn't take into account third options (ie: others religions may be right). They often fail to understand the concepts they are critiquing (mainly evolution) so their arguements also fail. Think of venomfangx of youtube fame for an extreme example of one.
-The Ranting Fool: Not so much fundie as they are bigoted jerks. They rant on feminists, homosexuals, Muslims, blacks, gays, or anyone who they don't like. However, they aren't necessarly religious, and if they are, it doesn't show so much, nor do they use it to justify their views. Some are rather extreme and scary (particularly the racists and sexists) but for the most part, they just come across as grumpy old men who have never come out of their time period.
-The political fundie: The most dangerous. These are the ones who have political power, and in some cases, try to run for President. They are almost always Republican (Rick Perry, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman). It's hard to tell if their really religious or if they are just using religion to appeal to the masses, but either way, they are a scary bunch.
-The Cult Leader: The most extreme and evil of the bunch. They are like the political fundies only on a smaller scale. However that doesn't make them any less influencial. They are very good at mind games and use them to control people in their community. They are the ones who use the bible to advocate horrific ideas, such as child abuse, treating women as property (and blaming them for what happens), and in some extreme cases, murder. To keep those in line, they claim that the outside world is evil and will corrupt your soul. Think Fred Phelps, Michael Pearl, Jack Hyles, Ronald E Williams, and David J Stewart. What makes them dangerous and scary are that they are viral, creating...
-The Paranoid Extremist: These are the ones who are sucked into the cult. They are paranoid about... well just about anything. Every second they live they live for "god" and think that even fellow Christians are going to hell. They most likely live in constant fear and depression about the devil, hell, and the rapture. They worry about every little sin possibly sending them to hell, and are completely shut off from any media unless it's faith related. Think most of the people on rapture ready.
-The conspiracy theorist: Similar to the Paranoid Extremist and the Cult Leader, they live in paranoia and fear, thinking that nothing on earth is as they see it. However, these guys are not necessarly religious, they just have some very scary ideas.
-The Street Preacher: The ones going on the street telling all the pedestrians they are going to hell. They typically go after women who they think are dressed immodestly or gay people, trying to "save" them. However, this usually doesn't go over well with some of the people who strike back against them. Usually this just feeds their ego, believing they are being persecuted for Christ. For an example of one,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObmTojbmw94
Feel free to add your own, comment, or critique.
-
Flame Warriors (http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/) is always good for categorizing Internet users in general. While most fundies are some variety of Deacon, Artful Dodger and Ferrous Cranus tend to show up among creationists a lot.
Another category of fundie would have to be The Prophet of Doom. This guy will make predictions of the imminent Rapture/Apocalypse/End of Days/whatever using questionable readings of the Bible or some other equally-improbable method and convince enough gullible people into following him and threaten even more people. When the world inevitably fails to end on schedule, he will simply start over with another prediction and repeat until people finally stop listening.
-
I was just thinking, the idea is similar to Flame Warriors, but different. Maybe Flame Warriors should have a subpage for Fundies?
I've been reading about the whole issue over the banner, & this one guy gave me 2 ideas for categories, though I'm not sure what you'd call them.
One talks horrible, hateful shit towards you. You're going to Hell. You deserve to be hated & beaten up. You're a cunt. You're stupid. Everyone agrees with me &, consequently, hates you. Et cetera. But what's the source of his beef with you? You're persecuting him, of course! Also, if you so much as swear, it shows what a hateful ad hominem-prone individual you are.
Another lists incredibly looooooong obviously copy/pasted lists of "evidence" against evolution. This somehow proves Creationism. The evidence is usually so incredibly wrong that you can shoot down 90% of it on an elementary school education. If you fail to rebuke EVERY SINGLE THING, you lose. If you do manage to tackle the whole list, don't you have something better to do? A good example is "101 Scientific Facts in the Bible," which is notable for the vast majority of its entries not only being incorrect, but having nothing to do with scientific issues.
-
Flame Warriors (http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/) is always good for categorizing Internet users in general. While most fundies are some variety of Deacon, Artful Dodger and Ferrous Cranus tend to show up among creationists a lot.
Another category of fundie would have to be The Prophet of Doom. This guy will make predictions of the imminent Rapture/Apocalypse/End of Days/whatever using questionable readings of the Bible or some other equally-improbable method and convince enough gullible people into following him and threaten even more people. When the world inevitably fails to end on schedule, he will simply start over with another prediction and repeat until people finally stop listening.
I think the Prophet of Doom would probably be a subcategory of the Klaxon.
-
Wow that flame warriors is pretty neat. It's like a TVtropes for message board users.
Apologetic: Ferrous Cranus.
Ranting Fool: Troglodyte
A lot of others would be Klaxons (particularly the doomsday and hellfire preachers).
Religious types who comment on blogs come across as Furious Typers.
-
The copypasta fundie goes to his/her favorite creationist/fundie site and copies an "irrefutable proof" of something. This will be posted on any message board if it has users that might disagree. Once the "perfect argument" has been pasted and posted, the responses no longer matter. The fundie has already taken the original site's word that it's airtight, so he/she doesn't have to bother actually reading any further. The fundie need not have any actual understanding of the argument -- the preformed argument is seen as an automatic win button regardless of what it actually says. The only things the fundie will ever type is [CTRL]-C, [CTRL]-V, and short phrases indicating the other side has lost*.
*the game.
Sorry, I had to do that.
-
The bestest freind;
Presents himself as your bestest freind, cheerfully explains that he used to be "just like you", then procedes to demonstrate how unlike you he was, and how absurdly out of touch with reality he is.
"I was once just like you, always hating Gawd, always looking for new ways to sin. I used to snort acid and LSD, I used to go to gay orgies all the time, I used to listen to *nigger music*, I used to be in an interacial sex gang that commited blasphemies in the name of evolution"...
* Yes I realy met one who calls it that
-
Another lists incredibly looooooong obviously copy/pasted lists of "evidence" against evolution. This somehow proves Creationism. The evidence is usually so incredibly wrong that you can shoot down 90% of it on an elementary school education. If you fail to rebuke EVERY SINGLE THING, you lose. If you do manage to tackle the whole list, don't you have something better to do? A good example is "101 Scientific Facts in the Bible," which is notable for the vast majority of its entries not only being incorrect, but having nothing to do with scientific issues.
Gish Galloper, or Gishite. (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop)
-
What about the fundie who claims they're always being oppressed? And the Dominionist?
-
Another lists incredibly looooooong obviously copy/pasted lists of "evidence" against evolution. This somehow proves Creationism. The evidence is usually so incredibly wrong that you can shoot down 90% of it on an elementary school education. If you fail to rebuke EVERY SINGLE THING, you lose. If you do manage to tackle the whole list, don't you have something better to do? A good example is "101 Scientific Facts in the Bible," which is notable for the vast majority of its entries not only being incorrect, but having nothing to do with scientific issues.
Gish Galloper, or Gishite. (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop)
"Shite" being the key word there. ::)
-
The bestest freind;
Presents himself as your bestest freind, cheerfully explains that he used to be "just like you", then procedes to demonstrate how unlike you he was, and how absurdly out of touch with reality he is.
"I was once just like you, always hating Gawd, always looking for new ways to sin. I used to snort acid and LSD, I used to go to gay orgies all the time, I used to listen to *nigger music*, I used to be in an interacial sex gang that commited blasphemies in the name of evolution"...
* Yes I realy met one who calls it that
They also like to follow you around like a damn puppy & try to make you feel guilty if you're too good at proving them wrong.
It doesn't work.
I like the Evilutionary Skolar (a term I just made up). They know everything there is to know about evolution, inside & out. The only problem is that 99.9% of their information, from basic definitions to facts about evidence, are completely utterly wrong. Anything you say to correct them is a cleverly phrased lie. Often quote Hovind, as well as some bizarre made-up-on-the-spot statistic about how unlikely life is that they can't even begin to write a proof for.
Related, the Easy Evangelist. They are convinced that the problem is that you just haven't HEARD it before. And this is obviously true because sometimes you rephrase the argument with a more negative emphasis, which you OBVIOUSLY wouldn't do if you really UNDERSTOOD it. They have the patience & tenacity to type TL;WDR whiney-sounding appeals against atheist persecution, but their patience for someone trying to stick to debating a particular topic is inversely proportional to how much power they have on the board. Think about it. They will pray for you.
-
Related to the Easy Evangelist, the Sad Evangelist. The one who just looks at you disapprovingly and tries to reverse psych you by saying that you can come to the fold any time and you will be prayed for. No ranting, just quiet disapproval. The "I'm not mad, I'm just disappointed" approach.
-
Related to the Easy Evangelist, the Sad Evangelist. The one who just looks at you disapprovingly and tries to reverse psych you by saying that you can come to the fold any time and you will be prayed for. No ranting, just quiet disapproval. The "I'm not mad, I'm just disappointed" approach.
So the mom approach?
-
Are they the same ones that ask why you're so angry at God that you feel the need to rebel?
-
Related to the Easy Evangelist, the Sad Evangelist. The one who just looks at you disapprovingly and tries to reverse psych you by saying that you can come to the fold any time and you will be prayed for. No ranting, just quiet disapproval. The "I'm not mad, I'm just disappointed" approach.
So the mom approach?
Also the Pity Approach. "It's sad you don't feel god's love for you. There is blah blah blah that you don't get to whatever." Not dangerous, but annoying/insulting as hell.
-
Related to the Easy Evangelist, the Sad Evangelist. The one who just looks at you disapprovingly and tries to reverse psych you by saying that you can come to the fold any time and you will be prayed for. No ranting, just quiet disapproval. The "I'm not mad, I'm just disappointed" approach.
So the mom approach?
Also the Pity Approach. "It's sad you don't feel god's love for you. There is blah blah blah that you don't get to whatever." Not dangerous, but annoying/insulting as hell.
Also pretty manipulative. They are really good at spinning their "do what I say or burn" message into god showing his love for you. I remember seeing a youtube video of evengelists doing their thing. To be more specific, these people were pulling the "have you ever lied? Have you ever stolen? ect ect" to make people feel like they deserve to go to hell for their sins, thus giving them the "good news" that Jesus died for their sins and they won't have to. I responded with "Epic Fail" because I that's exactly how I see that tactic. Some Christian responded that it wasn't fail, that was love! I believe I responded that threatening people with hellfire wasn't love. I didn't get a response. I don't know what I'd call these fundies. They were a combo of street preacher and apologist.
Another one I've ranted about before is what flame warriors would call a therapist. These are the ones who use a form of adhomein to appeal to your motivations. If you explain your deconversion, they'll claim that you're just angry at god. If you say you don't believe, you're just lying because you don't want to be judged. The thing is, these people don't even have to be part of a religious discussion, nor do they have to be religious to get under your skin.
-
I like to call
Related to the Easy Evangelist, the Sad Evangelist. The one who just looks at you disapprovingly and tries to reverse psych you by saying that you can come to the fold any time and you will be prayed for. No ranting, just quiet disapproval. The "I'm not mad, I'm just disappointed" approach.
So the mom approach?
Also the Pity Approach. "It's sad you don't feel god's love for you. There is blah blah blah that you don't get to whatever." Not dangerous, but annoying/insulting as hell.
Also pretty manipulative. They are really good at spinning their "do what I say or burn" message into god showing his love for you. I remember seeing a youtube video of evengelists doing their thing. To be more specific, these people were pulling the "have you ever lied? Have you ever stolen? ect ect" to make people feel like they deserve to go to hell for their sins, thus giving them the "good news" that Jesus died for their sins and they won't have to. I responded with "Epic Fail" because I that's exactly how I see that tactic. Some Christian responded that it wasn't fail, that was love! I believe I responded that threatening people with hellfire wasn't love. I didn't get a response. I don't know what I'd call these fundies. They were a combo of street preacher and apologist.
Another one I've ranted about before is what flame warriors would call a therapist. These are the ones who use a form of adhomein to appeal to your motivations. If you explain your deconversion, they'll claim that you're just angry at god. If you say you don't believe, you're just lying because you don't want to be judged. The thing is, these people don't even have to be part of a religious discussion, nor do they have to be religious to get under your skin.
I like to call the last group the "telepaths" because they claim to know what you are thinking.
-
Faux-telepaths. Since they probably don't even think temselves.
-
Ah yes, telepaths. The ones who believe they know more about you than you do.
I've had one Christian friend insist that I must have chosen to be bisexual or been tricked into believing it somehow, despite my telling him I made no such choice and wasn't prompted by anything. In a conversation over the Internet with another said "telepath", I mentioned I was bi and was greeted with "No you're not. There's no such thing as bi." Said person then recommended I read the Quran in order to understand better.
Another frequently-quoted statement along similar lines is used in response to deconversion stories.
"You were never really a Christian to begin with. If you were, you would know God's presence/have a personal relationship with Jesus/be filled with the Holy Spirit and would not have fallen away."
-
Ah yes, telepaths. The ones who believe they know more about you than you do.
I've had one Christian friend insist that I must have chosen to be bisexual or been tricked into believing it somehow, despite my telling him I made no such choice and wasn't prompted by anything. In a conversation over the Internet with another said "telepath", I mentioned I was bi and was greeted with "No you're not. There's no such thing as bi." Said person then recommended I read the Quran in order to understand better.
Another frequently-quoted statement along similar lines is used in response to deconversion stories.
"You were never really a Christian to begin with. If you were, you would know God's presence/have a personal relationship with Jesus/be filled with the Holy Spirit and would not have fallen away."
Well, duh, you aren't a "Real" Christian unless you believe EXACTLY what that person does.