Contradict? Not so much. The atheist believes there is no god, the atheist clubs support its members and try to spread that belief.

The problem you face is that extremism has a long and fairly well known history among atheist regimes.

And who are the "anti-theists" if not atheists?

If you are asked the question, "Do you believe in god," there are basically three answers: yes, no, I don't know. Those answers map to: theist, atheist, and agnostic.

No, that isn't it. The common thread there is atheism, not "defending science." Besides, there are already science clubs in many schools. Why do something redundant? It's about atheism, supporting and spreading the atheist belief ... or should I say faith?

Actually no, you don't. You've just demonstrated that yet again.

I hate to burst your bubble but your "fan base" is hardly universal.

Disruption is harm. You don't have a right to disrupt other people's events.

You speak for yourself.

You must not have understood what he wrote, that isn't it at all.

You're replying to the wrong person. What I replied to is below, which also has nothing to do with the number of the beast. Why didn't you reply to that? Or was it your ox being gored?

----

Because they were left out of the initial statement, which was probably from an atheist.

You're a little late. The sub-thread was about slandering religion to start with.

In short, you don't accept the findings of the National Science Foundation. Fine.

Actually I'm the one that has it right and you're the one that has it ass backwards. Those hijackers were Islamic extremists acting as members of the international terrorist organization al Qaida, not as members of the Saudi government, its armed forces, or organizations under its control. How is it that you don't get that? Is everything that US citizens do outside the country at the order of the US government? Clearly not.

Maybe you haven't heard but al Qaida is fighting against the Saudi government and wants to overthrow it.

Once again you have it completely wrong. The US and UK didn't "fuck them over," they helped Iran recover from a coup. The Prime Minister had effectively overthrown the government having faked an election, dissolved the parliament, was ruling by decree, and ignoring the last check on his power - the right of the head of state, the Shah, to dismiss the Prime Minister. Restoring the Shah to power gave Iran a chance.

Question: Does the Soviet Union still rule Afghanistan? Does the Soviet Union still rule Eastern Europe? No? Apparently the factions you favor can take no part of the credit for that.

That is pretty much nonsense. The problem of Islamist extremism has been growing for decades in the Middle East and South-West Asia. Maybe you've heard of the bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon? The problem is decades older than even that.... in its current form.

Why don't we ask the atheist communists that imprisoned, tortured, and murdered people for going to church?

Oh oh! Looks like we have some anti-science moderators that don't accept the conclusion of the National Science Foundation. The horror!

It's an almost completely irrelevant point. They were Islamic extremists acting as part of the international terrorist organization al Qaida, not part of the Saudi government. By a similar token, if the IRA had conducted the attack would you blame the Irish government or the country of Ireland? No.

The only actual censorship is going on at the colleges, which is why that is a bigger problem. There isn't any censorship going on when used to prevent disruption of events. They would probably see less use if demonstrators wouldn't disrupt the actual events, using the heckler's veto, to harm the free speech rights of other people. You don't speak for all people that believe in smaller government. Even smaller government is expected to maintain law and order.

So you think that the National Science Foundation acted rashly after years of study? Darn them and their precipitous action!