Why do atheists love using red herring when they defend their non-beliefs?

Answer 1

what? Is this supposed to make sense?

Answer 2

The atheists I know do not defend anything, let alone use "red herrings". They face facts.

The question, as posed, leads me to wonder if its writer has ever gotten to know any actual atheists. My guess is that he has just been suckered by swallowing hook line and sinker what some dumb fundie pastor has told him atheists are.

Every baby is born as an atheist, free from beliefs and non-beliefs. Becoming a believer is only accomplished through indoctrination, usually by somebody with an agenda.

Answer 3

Hm.... LOOK AT THAT BUNNY OVER THERE!

See? Atheism is defended.

*giggle* Get it?

Oh, and for those who don't know:

Red Herring Logical Fallacy:

The Red Herring, also known as Ignoratio elenchi or irrelevant conclusion, is the logical fallacy of presenting an argument that may in itself be valid, but which proves or supports a different proposition than the one it is purporting to prove or support.

When this logical fallacy is used in an attempt to intentionally confuse or distract someone else, it is known as a "red herring". This phrase is thought to have originated from the use of smoked herring fish to distract dogs following a scent trail. The herring's strong smell could obscure the real trail and lay a false one.

The basic idea is to "win" an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic. This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:

1) Topic A is under discussion.
2) Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A).
3) Topic A is abandoned.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because merely changing the topic of discussion hardly counts as an argument against a claim.

EXAMPLE: I don't think homosexuals should be parents. See, pedophiles are disturbed and dangerous. They harm and traumatize children. Why should we consider homosexuals fit to raise children if pedophiles aren't? (While it is true that pedophiles are mentally unsound and a danger to children, the arguer has not adequately or conclusively demonstrated that pedophilia in any way relates or equates to the topic at hand [same sex parenting or even homosexuality in general], and thus arguing that restrictions applicable to pedophiles should also be applicable to homosexuals is fallacious.)

Answer 4

whachutalking bout?

a type of logical fallacy in which one purports to prove one's point by means of irrelevant arguments (see Ignoratio elenchi).

in literature, a plot device intended to distract the reader from a more important event in the plot, usually a twist ending. Most often, a red herring takes the form of a character.

in detective work, mystery fiction, and puzzle-solving, a false clue which leads investigators, readers, or solvers towards an incorrect solution.

in adventure games, an item or object of no practical use; its purpose may be to frustrate the gamer who tries to find the intended use for it.

in finance, a red herring is a preliminary prospectus for a debt or equity offering that lists everything except the price and size of the offering.

Answer 5

Why do you describe their arguments as red herrings? I clicked on this question expecting to find an explanation of your accusation, but did not find one. The mere assertion that someone's argument is a red herring does not make it one.

A red herring is generally defined as something which is not only irrelevant, but raised to distract the interaction from a particular pathway. Criminals running red herrings under the noses of detectives to put them off the scent, so to speak.

Answer 6

Because the God mentioned in the Old/New Testament is actually real, and us Atheists are mean evil manipulative bad people full of hatred and only care about persecuting Christianity. We have no sense of logic and are simply bad people with no other purpose other than being bad so we can live in hell for eternity.

Answer 7

The same reason that Xians use red herrings to defend their silly beliefs.

Answer 8

Why do you love taunting people that don't believe as you? How can you love "god" whom you haven't even laid eyes on and hate your brother whom you have? If someone doesn't believe in the same thing you do be happy for them and continue living YOUR life, why all the anger?

Answer 9

ROTFLMAO!!!
Oh it's always amusing to be accused of something that christians thrive on!
If anyone obfuscates about the subject of religon, it's christians. Why? Because they KNOW it's all a load of B.S. but they've been brainwashed into not thinking for themselves for so long...

Answer 10

How can you expect people to give you a straight answer if you don't even cite any supporting argument?

Answer 11

Awww, look at the cute little clown, you want a rubber chicken??