(all comments at bottom of post)

(LOL, ain't that the truth!)

Ok, to your point. Taken, & here's the thing: I don't think I
ever really disagreed, at least in spirit. IOW, I don't think
I expressed myself clearly enough, but I've always understood
that what makes a theist a theist is the belief that god/s do
exist. Perhaps if I bring you back to my original comments in
the thread, I can show you my line of thought, which perhaps
went astray in an effort to provide you quick answers.

Below is a sequential series of exchanges between Mark & I,
and you & I. I've tried to provide everything relevant to
the conversation, if anything was omitted it was accidental.

***begin quotes***:

I replied:
Not at all. First, I didn't consider her a goddess. Second,
even those who "worshiped" her didn't consider her divine,
as far as I could tell. People may have worshiped her like
people worship money, sex, or celebrities, but this kind of
worship isn't theistic. What would be theistic, in my view,
is if they thought she had powers that other humans didn't
possess, & along with those powers the ability to alter our
world or lives in ways an ordinary human being could not.

I replied:
I haven't met anybody yet who claims to "believe in god", who
defines such belief as the belief in Princess Diana, or Stalin.
I appreciate that people have claimed this about those who said
they "worshiped" Stalin, or adored Diana, but again I've _yet_
to actually meet someone who says this about themselves. We use
the term "god" figuratively, I believe, when we talk this way.
IOW, it's like saying "money is his god", or "sex is his god".
We really don't think that because of this ...

read more »

Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt wrote in message <00529.072950.7E8.rnr.w1...@mmalt.guild.org>...

You're welcome.

Not really. Alt.atheism probably has more than its share of
materialists: such people tend to be more sure of their
footing and hence more vocal and argumentative.

In Real Life, I meet more vague afterlife believers
than I see around here, but that isn't very precise.
Sorry.
--
Niall #36 [real address ends in se, not es.invalid]

Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt wrote in message <00529.083144.4s2.rnr.w1...@mmalt.guild.org>...

This is exactly what I was getting at, but I am not sure how to do it.
I would suggest asking your volunteers to try putting themselves
in an atheist's shoes, but I am afraid they wouldn't be able, they
would baulk even at trying.

Perhaps if you asked them to imagine dying in hospice care
in Japan, and being visited by a follower of Shinto it might
help. They probably know bugger all about Shinto, but it
certainly is not a "People of the Book" kind of religion which
they could map to their own and pretend that its all about the
same god.

How much cobblers would they be willing to listen to from
a Shinto priest? How would they feel if he condescended
to their silly Western beliefs?

I didn't mean to knock Liz or others suggestions, just to note
that I'm not bothered personally by God-talk in general.

To be fair, if the drugs were not working just right I might very well
not be in any mood for this kind of thing. They'd need to listen and
*hear* to find out.
--
Niall #36 [real address ends in se, not es.invalid]

"I have a suggestion here - usually the problem is
 with the use of religious terms such as 'god',
 'heaven', etc. - phrases like 'god only knows' etc.
 can be quite common in a believer's speech.  Due
 to the similarity in the words, it might not be
 hard for them to switch to saying 'goodness' instead
 of 'god'.  'Goodness only knows' is, IMO, much less
 likely to be offensive to anyone."

"Second suggestion, from my wife (I mentioned this
 thread to her to see if she had any suggestions :) )
 - have you looked at the Army chaplain's handbook?
 The Army tries to train its chaplains to deal with
 various groups when they are hurt or dying ...  They've
 almost certainly dealt with these problems, and come
 up with some sort of solutions."

"My wife is brilliant." :)

That would have been my take on it but I wanted to see some other
opinions.

Jayne

[Andrew's story]

[details of study snipped]

This was an extremely useful study for me, Fish.  Thank you very much.

[rest of chart snipped]

This is fascinating and I'm going try find this source.  In case I
can't, could you tell me if these dimensions are supposed to be
mutually exclusive? I would describe myself as exhibiting most of the
characteristics from both the intrinsic and quest columns.  Is that
possible?

Thank you very, very much for your input.

Jayne

On Mon, 29 May 2000 16:33:28 +0100, "Niall McAuley"

[-----]

I didn't feel knocked.   :)   God-talk in general doesn't bother me
either.  God-talk-as-if-belief-were-a-foregone-conclusion-for-
everybody is irritating to me.  It would be especially irritating if I
were confined to a bed in a hospice and couldn't absent myself from
the source.  When someone is very ill, she can control so little of
her own life.  The patient's existence is ruled by doctors and
schedules for medicines and even the most personal functions require
the assistance of health care workers.   It is difficult enough to
cope with this loss of control without having to deal with someone's
careless assumptions seemingly assaulting the last bastion of control,
that of one's thoughts.

Liz #658   BAAWA

It's an incredible con job when you think about it, to
believe in something now in exchange for something after
death.  Even corporations with their reward systems don't
try to make it posthumous.  -- Gloria Steinem

On Fri, 26 May 2000 13:48:10 EST, jay...@spambait.guild.org (Jayne Kulikauskas
but replace spambait by mmalt) wrote:

(coming in a bit late, partial piggy back and comments)

]>
]>> Please do not construe the following as insulting, I am responding to
]>> your request and hope it will be helpful.
]>
]>Thank you.  I will take it in the spirit it is given.
]>
]>> As I have been heavily socialized within both an orthodox and later in a
]>> liberal christian manner, it took some time to get over the paradigm "If
]>> there was no God then what is the true meaning of life".  If it were not
]>> for striving to follow God's will….then what are we here for?  This is
]>> sometimes a hard frame of mind to shake AND if you are to be successful
]>> in administering comfort of a non-spiritual nature you will have to
]>> learn how to do this.
]>
]>I think you are right. I suspect it is true for many theists and it is
]>certainly true for me that my faith in God is predominantly about
]>creating meaning. This is so central to the way I think that it can
]>cause an obstacle when I try to empathize with atheists. And, of
]>course, empathy is essential in this situation.

"Creating" meaning is generating a fiction the individual needs to
reduce/eliminate a terror.  The Cerebral Cortex is the 'story generator.'  I
would question 'why' a person would need to generate fiction rather than
tracking down, and coming to terms with, the item(s) that are bothersome.

The above is not (nor is anything in this post) an attack.  Perhaps it would be
helpful to ask each individual theist the question and get them to realize the
fictional story they generate is a need *they* have and to get them to realize
that *their* needs are not the needs of others.

To put it another way the theist is thirsty so they get a drink of water.  The
atheist is not thirsty and has no need to drink and does not appreciate those
trying to foist off their imaginary canteen.

]>> I find nothing more ridiculous and sometimes
]>> insulting when a religious person tells me in a moment of hardship "It's
]>> God's will" OR "God has a plan".  Or "God is testing you".
]>
]>These are kind of dumb things to say, even to theists.  Regardless of
]>a person's beliefs, they don't need to hear this when they are
]>suffering.
]>
]>> Your quest reminds me of something I saw in the movie Gandhi.  A Hindu
]>> claimed to Gandhi that he could never be forgiven since he had killed
]>> Muslims and orphaned Muslim children .  Gandhi's response to the Hindu
]>> was for him to adopt a Muslim child and raise him as a Muslim.
]>>
]>> If your goal is to improve the human condition upon death without
]>> injecting your spiritual nature, then you should try to understand (yes
]>> even live) as an atheist.
]>> What would that mean?  I think you will find that the depth of feeling,
]>> the expression of empathy, dreams and aspirations and all the
]>> characteristics you attribute to theists are no different in atheists.
]>
]>The time I spent on a.a in the past was largely for the purpose of
]>learning to understand atheists.  I think that I have been able to get
]>past the labels and stereotypes and see the common humanity I share
]>with them.  I did eventually learn to see atheists as individuals.  
]>
]>However, it took me some time and effort.  I'm trying to think of how
]>to communicate this in the short time available to train the
]>volunteers.

One must be able to see 'outside the flock.'  Are all theists carbon copies of
each other?  Since they are not, there is no reason not to see those outside the
flock as individuals.

The only difference between an atheist and a Christian is a lack of belief
concerning one particular imaginary buddy.  The atheist lacks belief in one more
imaginary critter than the theist.

At this point you might bring is Maslov's heirarchy.

]>> If you were to take God out of your life,  what would give you meaning?
]>> Maybe good friends and a family to be remembered by?  Maybe the
]>> experiences you had and would like to pass down to a loved one.  Maybe
]>> the expression of love and caring you wish to share with others.   All
]>> of these attributes are no different in the atheist.
]>
]>I wonder if asking these questions would get through to the
]>volunteers. I would not have been able to answer them until fairly
]>recently. When I imagined life without God, I could not see any
]>meaning. It was terrifying and distressing.  I became a theist, not so
]>much because I believed God existed, but because of my horror at the
]>thought of God not existing.

Again,  *your* emotional reaction to an imaginary and undefined three letter
string.  Why the emotional reaction?

What might help is the utilization/substitution of other deity constructs you
lack belief in with the questions.  Meaning eliminate the letter string g-o-d
and put in Zeus, for instance.  Discuss that and then help the students to
realize that to those outside their religion that *their* particular critter
*is* Zeus.

When I was a theist, my horror and terror was about this monstrocity that not
only knew my every thought but was writing each and every little thing down in a
book and would extract a horrible and eternal retribution after my death rather
than providing bits of assistance along the way.

]>Even now, when I am firmly convinced that atheists can lead good and
]>meaningful lives, I find it extremely difficult to imagine myself
]>living without God.  

Which is a lack in you.  Do you have any difficulty in imagining yourself living
without Zeus?  Ra? Tiamat the Dragon?  The Frost Giants?
Once again, I think what would help is to explore items and generate 'credit' to
something else and then explore.  This, imo, pulls the emotions out and brings
the intellect to the forefront.

]>I do agree with you on the goal.  I want the volunteers to see that
]>they must not assume that atheists have no meaning in their lives.
]>I'm just doubtful that these questions will help them to see that.

Questions can, as long as the emotions are kept out of the equation.

]>> Good luck with your endeavor.
]>
]>Thank you for your good wishes and your help.  Your ideas have been
]>thought-provoking and I believe that thinking is a good thing.
]>
]>Jayne

Stoney

On Fri, 26 May 2000 19:09:00 EST, jay...@spambait.guild.org (Jayne Kulikauskas
but replace spambait by mmalt) wrote:

(snip)

]>> I guess what I'm trying to say is that people are people. We all
]>> want to be treated with respect and caring. We all want our
]>> dignity.
]>
]>If I can just get that across in the training, I will consider it a
]>success.

My previous post was on the right track.
Andres's quotes provided more information.

Once again, I'd suggest bringing in Maslov.  I'd also bring in the person
getting to know the individual as a person not just "the patient in bed 3."
There could even be a couple paragraph synopsis clipped to the chart to assist.

An item from when I was going through management school in the military.  It
dealt with couseling and the rock/hardplace possibilities.  Each of us at one
point was the 'counselor' as well as the 'counselee.'

Each person was given a 'scenario' and the 'counselee' was given about 10
minutes to contemplate the situation s/he was in as "Adam/Adrienne Barnes."

I don't recall the scenario from when I was the "couselee", but I do remember I
had the "counselor" in tears because I was able to  bring the scenario to life.
Imo, bringing a scenario to 'life' is the key.  A sterile exercise is a sterile
exercise and is point-less square filling.

During each item the others in the class are listening to the interchange,
listening, observing techniques, action/reaction, and by-play.

]>Jayne

Stoney

On Sat, 27 May 2000 18:23:02 EST, jay...@spambait.guild.org (Jayne Kulikauskas
but replace spambait by mmalt) wrote:

]>
]>>
]>> : Do you think that it is common for atheists to have such a negative
]>> : reaction to the word "spiritual"?
]>>
]>> Depends on the use of the term.  I like what you said above:
]>>
]>> : It refers to the human spirit -- to our emotional, aesthetic and
]>> : social apsects.
]>>
]>> That, I can dig.  But I admit to getting turned off when the usage
]>> refers to all aspects religious (mainstream or personal) and/or
]>> having to do with invisible boojums like souls and, well, spirits.  It
]>> is this latter usage that one finds most prevalent (sp?) in society.
]>
]>Now that I think about it, that probably is the prevalent usage.
]>
]>> : If so, it would be important to let volunteers know that they should
]>> : avoid it when speaking to atheists.
]>>
]>> Yes, by all means have warn volunteers against this "religious" usage!
]>
]>Thanks.  This gives me an idea. It might worth while to compile a list
]>of "hot button" words that would tend to have negative connotations
]>for atheists.  It's obvious that one wouldn't talk about gods, but
]>there may be more subtle things to watch out for.  Any suggestions?

(brainstorming)

Faith, Salvation, Pascal's Wager, Heaven/Hell, their *testimony.*.

]>Jayne

Stoney

Jayne Kulikauskas posted to alt.atheism:

Yeah, you left without answering all my questions!!  :)

Just wanted to say Hi!!

--
Elroy Willis
BAAWA (Undercover News Division)
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news
Faith is to the human what sand is to the ostrich

[]

It's still helpful.  Do you (or anyone else) have ideas about other
ways that a.a atheists tend to differ from atheists in general?

Jayne

[]

I think that what we are talking about here is empathy.  I'm not sure
to what degree this can be taught.  It is a quality we are looking for
in volunteers.  Perhaps people who are already good at empathy could
apply it to atheists with only a bit of information and encouragement.

[]

Yes, I think we need an exercise something like this.

Jayne

[]

I just had an ironic thought.  This whole concept could be summed up
as "Do not take the name of the Lord in vain."  That appeals to my
sense of the incongruous.  The advice from atheists is to follow one
of the 10 Commandments.

I have been looking at some chaplaincy materials though not that
particular one. However, I especially wanted to hear ideas from a
variety of atheists.

I guess you better keep her then. <g>
--
Jayne

[]

This is a very good point. The idea about the importance of leaving
the clients in control is already taught. I think it might be
effective to show that respect for other's beliefs is an extension of
that.

Jayne

Good to see you, Stoney.

[]

I can't this working. In the theist's mind it is not a fictional story.
I think that most theists would feel attacked by this approach whether
it is meant as one or not.

It might be possible to convey the idea that from an atheist's
perspective theists believe in imaginary beings.  I certainly won't
get anywhere telling people that they believe in imaginary beings.

[]

Perhaps I could give examples of stereotypes about groups that they
belong to as a way to increase their awareness of the limitations of
stereotypes.

If I used the word "imaginary" I would lose my audience.  

How exactly did you have in mind?  I don't see how it applies.

[]

I think that asking this would make most theists feel threatened.

This, on the other hand, I think could work. It might give them a feel
for what atheists believe.

I'm afraid that many theists would react to this by saying (or at
least thinking) that you had been taught about God wrong. I suspect
that they would be very tempted to tell you what (in their minds) God
is really like.  I don't think it would get an empathy reaction.

I will grant you that.

This sounds more like an exercise to lead people to become atheists
than to help them to understand atheists.

No, I want to reach them at an emotional level. They need a gut
understanding of the importance of accepting atheists as is. I don't
want them to rely on intellect.

Anyhow, thanks for all the ideas.  

Jayne

I had a great answer to one of them that involved translating the
names of the Greek pantheon and showing their relation to Jungian
archetypes.  But you only ask more questions when I answer one.  It's
like fighting the Hydra.  <g>

Hi to you too.

Jayne

[]

I see this idea having a lot of potential.  Simply the exercise of
role-playing an atheist would help them, but allowing the others
to critique the performance would make it even better.

Thanks.

Jayne

[]

Ok. I'll keep these in mind.  Thanks.

Jayne

Jayne Kulikauskas posted to alt.atheism:

Well, that's one reason my parents quit taking me to church (I think it
was a request from the sunday school teacher).  He asks too many
questions!!  :)

I won't ask you any more questions.  Just wanted to say Hi.

--
Elroy Willis
BAAWA (Undercover News Division)
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news
Faith is to the human what sand is to the ostrich

Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt posted the following
to alt.atheism:

You're very welcome, Jayne. I personally find psychological studies to
be quite interesting and many times quite revealing (enlightening) as
well.

<snip>

Not at all.

Very. The authors state on pages 25-26:

"One criticism of intrinsic religion is that when measured, it is not
distinguishable from simple orthodoxy or religiosity. People for whom
their faith is very significant are likely to agree with the intrinsic
items. Quest religion might offer us a possible means of making this
distinction. Our reading of Allport and Batson suggests that a true
intrinsic orientation could combine a quest perspective with the other
elements now found in measures of intrinsic faith. For example, those
scoring high on intrinsic religion and high on quest may be "true"
intrinsics -- that is, if they also score low on extrinsic religion.
Scoring high on intrinsic religion and low on quest may illustrate a
simplistic religiosity or a narrow orthodoxy. This kind of thinking
might also be used to identify "pure" questers or intrinsics. Initial
work toward this end has been reported, but it used an old and
questionable form of the Quest scale, plus less refined indices of
intrinsic and extrinsic religion than are available today.[113]
Obviously, more research is necessary to access these possibilities."

NOTES

[113] McIntosh and Spilka (1990).

REFERENCES

McIntosh, D. N., & Spilka, B. (1990). Religion and physical health:
The role of personal faith and control beliefs. In M. L. Lynn & D. O.
Moberg (Eds.), *Research in the social scientific study of religion*
(Vol. 2, pp. 167-194). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

You're very welcome, Jayne.

Since you liked that study so much, perhaps this one might interest
you as well. :)

==================================================================
Religious Prosocial Motivation: Is It Altruistic or Egoistic?
(Batson et al., 1989)

In the first of two studies, participants were told that they could
volunteer to help out a 7-year-old boy with a rare genetic disorder,
but that even if they were willing to help, they would have to pass a
sort of physical fitness qualifying task before they could participate
in a walkathon. Some participants were led to believe that the
qualifying standard was relatively easy; others were told that it was
"extremely stringent." Batson et al. reasoned that when the standard
was described as difficult, it would be easy to volunteer because
there wasn't much chance that a participant would actually have to
follow through with the volunteer commitment. Consistent with their
expectations, the researchers found that an extrinsic orientation was
negatively correlated with volunteering for both the easy and
difficult qualifying standards (r = -.37, on average). Intrinsic
scores, however, did not correlate with volunteering when the standard
was easy, but they were positively correlated (r = .50) when the
standard was difficult. Although other interpretations are possible,
Batson et al. have suggested that this supports their contention that
intrinsically inclined people want to look like helpers, but only if
there is actually just a small chance of their having to carry through
with the assistance.

Quest scores did not correlate with helping in either the easy or
difficult conditions. Furthermore, those who volunteered were actually
asked to proceed with the qualifying task (stepping up and down from a
block for 30 seconds). There was evidence that intrinsically inclined
individuals tried harder in the difficult condition only if they had
not volunteered to help. Quest scores, on the other hand, were
positively related to performance on the qualifying task only for
those who had volunteered to help. Batson et al. have interpreted
these rather complex findings as being consistent with Batson's
earlier research findings. First, intrinsics' motivation for helping
stemmed from a personal need to appear helpful (without actually
having to help), rather than from the needs of others. Second,
questers' motivation for helping was really generated by the needs of
others, since they worked hardest when they thought it would be
difficult to qualify to help.

A second investigation reported in the same article focused on a
different helping context -- an undergraduate who was coping with a
family tragedy and needed help from others to support her siblings.
The pattern of correlations suggested that extrinsics were less likely
to volunteer and questers were more likely to volunteer when there was
little pressure to do so, but intrinsic scores were unrelated to
offering assistance under either high- or low-pressure conditions.

Batson, C. D., Oleson, K. C., Weeks, J. L., Healy, S. P., Reeves, P.
J., Jennings, P., & Brown, T. (1989). Religious prosocial motivation:
Is it altruistic or egoistic? Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 57, 873-884.

---------------
Hood, R., Spilka, B., Hunsberger, B., Gorsuch, R. (1996, p. 358). The
psychology of religion: An empirical approach (second edition), New
York: Guilford.

--
          "Fish"  (David B. Trout)
              Alt.Atheism #623
                ICQ# 25302291
            f...@infidels.org.god
       (remove "god" to reply by email)

*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
"The intelligent man portions his belief to the evidence"  -- Hume
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

In article <00529.170543.6N6.rnr.w1...@mmalt.guild.org>,
jay...@spambait.guild.org (Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by

I think a.a atheists are generally more vocal and "conscious" of their
atheism. I'd be willing to bet that the great majority of atheists in
general are simply not interested in the question -- they just don't think
of religion as something that applies to them (or hardly at all). If
someone defined the terms and asked them, they'd probably say "Yeah, well,
I guess I'm an atheist then" and forget about it. There are plenty of
people like that around, they're just not very noticeable. One of my best
friends is (probably) one: I've known him for over ten years, and we've
talked about just about everything under the sun -- but I still don't know
"what he is" in terms of religion. The subject just doesn't interest him.
He'd rather spend his time writing, reading, playing punk rock, taking
road trips to Indian reservations, or 'chasing trashy women' as he puts
it.

-- Petteri

Gutta cavat lapidem non vi, sed semper cadendo. |a.a #1442. EAC, Cmsr
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Remove spamblock and reply by e-mail, or I may not see your post.

In article <00528.194946.1Y2.rnr.w1...@mmalt.guild.org>,
Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt <jay...@spambait.guild.org> wrote:

You and me, both. :-)

I'll post it at the end of this message, which I will attempt to cc to
you.

Certainly.

No problem.

At now for the repost from Phoenix.  As a disclaimer, this composition is
directed specifically towards dealing with those suffering from suicidal
depression, but I think that the idea is easily transferrable to general
care.

--- begin ---

As you’ve probably noticed, this collection of poetry isn’t very friendly
to the whole concept of God or to religion in general.

Although I was, and am still, an atheist, I  think that my feelings
towards religion, at this point in time, were closer to outright
anti-theism.  Although they have substantially mellowed since them
(largely due, ironically enough, to my frequent participation in
talk.atheism), I do think that it is understandable how, during this
period, I could be so hostile to religious belief.

All too often when one is suffering from any sort of emotional difficulty
that leads to despondence and self-destructiveness, well meaning people
are apt to insist that the only real way to achieve mental health and
emotional happiness is through God.  Sometimes, such as with Alcoholics
Anonymous, it doesn’t even seem to matter which god you believe in, just
so long as you have one.

This is neither the time nor place do debate the fine points of theology,
but I know, as a matter of fact, that religion is not a prerequisite for
happiness and, even at the lowest ebb of my life, I felt that it would be
a betrayal to all that I believe if I were to simply adopt a religion in
order to get a quick-fix of happiness.  Because of this, it really
frustrated me to have to spend any amount of my mental energies fending
off efforts to convert me, particularly when I needed every single ounce
of energy that I had to direct towards my self-healing.

Now, before I get a slew of angry e-mails, I don’t have any objection to
anyone who feels that religion has been of help, or who believes that it
can be of help.  If that’s what it takes to let you conquer your personal
demons, then more power to you.  All that I ask, and all that I have ever
asked, is that people grant me the same respect in making up my mind on
these matters and I have granted them.

I  will say, however, that trying to evangelize someone who is depressed
and emotionally vulnerable is something that is of such a contemptuous
nature that it is scarcely fathomable that any god worthy of the title
would endorse such measures.  If you  know someone in need of help who
does not want to join your faith, help them first.  Once they are back on
their feet and capable of attending to other matters, then would be the
time to present them with an encouragement to join your faith.

--- end ---

Again, I hope this helps.

--
I'm giving the bird to spam; remove the middle finger to reply to me.
*-----------*------------------*-----------------------*------------*
Christian Fundamentalism: The doctrine that there is an absolutely
powerful, infinitely knowledgeable, universe spanning entity that is
deeply and personally concerned about my sex life.
*-----------*------------------*-----------------------*------------*
                     http://www.wco.com/~anrwlias

In article <MPG.139c098d9644f91498a...@news.earthlink.net>,

[Personal anecdote vis-a-vis praying intern]

[...]

It's a valid question and you raise reasonable points.  All I can say to
that is that I *prefer* to give him the benefit of the doubt.  The
alternative is to remain angry at him and that is something that I'd
rather not do any longer.

--
I'm giving the bird to spam; remove the middle finger to reply to me.
*-----------*------------------*-----------------------*------------*
Christian Fundamentalism: The doctrine that there is an absolutely
powerful, infinitely knowledgeable, universe spanning entity that is
deeply and personally concerned about my sex life.
*-----------*------------------*-----------------------*------------*
                     http://www.wco.com/~anrwlias

Jayne Kulikauskas but replace spambait by mmalt wrote:

I would suggest, as others have mentioned, that you give the care-givers the
following scenario:

"You have a strong belief in god and the christian religion.  Two years ago,
you found yourself to have cancer.  Despite your prayers and the best medical
science can do, you realize that your life will soon end.  You have accepted
this fact and now wish to end your life praying, speaking with those who
meant the most to you, and remembering your life fondly.

Now imagine that as you are doing so, a person of another religion - perhaps
Jehovah's witness or muslim, whatever - is given the task of taking care of
you.  Suppose this person tells you that you are going to hell because you
believe the wrong religion.  Or suppose that this person treats you with the
assumption that you've just "turned from Allah" and need to turn back to
him.  Would this upset you?  Imagine how your relaxation and acceptance of
death would be spoiled by such an attitude - even if the care-giver's
arguments are meaningless and unconvincing to you.

This is how an atheist will feel if you preach to him."

In a sense, this will cause your palliative care-givers to treat atheism as a
religion, a concept which I would normally approach with fangs bared.  In
this case, however, I think the attitude of "don't disturb another's
'religion'" or philosophy of life, is a valid teaching instrument.

My 2 cents, hope it's useful.

Greg.

--
alt.atheism atheist #911, BAAWA Knight
"I'd worship Satan, but I'm going to hell anyway,
 so why bother?."
EAC Homepage:  http://eac.home.dhs.org