His mother smells like cheese.

RTFA.

In the spirit of TFA I told his mom sucks donkey d*cks.

Meaner and nastier, just like he expects.

This is the kind of guy you find out later is a hardcore pedophile or something. I mean, just look at him!



Those bug eyes hide some terrible secret, I'm certain.

What is it with atheists these days? It seems like over the last few years something has really gotten into their godless craw.

Gee, I have no idea. It certainly has nothing to do with religionists trying to shove Creation Science and Intelligent Design into science classrooms. It's just one of God's little mysteries, I suppose.

"What is it with atheists these days? It seems like over the last few years something has really gotten into their godless craw."

Ummm... smarmy crap like this?

At least older forms of atheism honestly wrestled with these questions and recognized the problems such issues raised if God did not exist. Sam Schulman, writing for the Wall Street Journal, summed it up nicely when he said, "The new atheists are separated form the old by their shallowness.


Given some of the folks who pass for atheists around these parts, I'd say it'd be difficult to refute that last point. I think i've only seen 2 farkers who were polite and intelligent about their beliefs (or non-belief if you prefer). The rest are varying grades of slobbering idiot or straight up bigots.

FTA:
"Because atheism is arrogant in its stance and simplistically dismisses life's ultimate questions such as, "Why am I here?", "Am I significant and valuable?", "Does life have meaning?"

I'm here, asshat, because my mother gave birth to me; no other reason. I am as significant and valuable as I want to be, not how you perceive me to be. Yes, life has meaning. Period. End of sentence.
Now, STFU and GBTW.

While this guy is a tool, there are a lot of atheists who are mean douchebags. Not that I'm so much sorry they exist, but I do try to distace myself from them.

FTFA

Expect more of this approach to come in the next few years. Christians - in particular - can expect more name-calling from these intellectually inept neo-atheists because Christians won't call for jihad against those who ridicule them.

Right and all those Christians praying for God to smite the Supreme Court if they don't overturn Roe vs Wade are just kidding. What about the Phelps pack and their rationale? Need I get into the TV evangelists and other celebrities of the modern "Christian" world?

This guy's mother raised her kid to be a dumbshiat.

scruffy1: Right and all those Christians praying for God to smite the Supreme Court if they don't overturn Roe vs Wade are just kidding. What about the Phelps pack and their rationale? Need I get into the TV evangelists and other celebrities of the modern "Christian" world?

So because some fringe group is being an asshole, you somehow think that justifies being a bigger asshole in return?

Nice philosophy ya got there.

Weaver95: So because some fringe group is being an asshole, you somehow think that justifies being a bigger asshole in return?

No, dear heart. It's the increased attempts to merge church and state that have this particular atheist's shorts in a knot. I love you anyway.

Weaver95: So because some fringe group is being an asshole, you somehow think that justifies being a bigger asshole in return?

Nice philosophy ya got there

Nope a person is an asshole regardless of anything. And I was referring to this part in his argument: can expect more name-calling from these intellectually inept neo-atheists because Christians won't call for jihad against those who ridicule them. Not to Christians in general.

Personally I could care less what religion a person is or if they are agnostic, atheist or on the fence but once they begin to make accusations about groups they may not agree with then I get testy.

MorrisBird: No, dear heart. It's the increased attempts to merge church and state that have this particular atheist's shorts in a knot. I love you anyway.


I'll worry about that when it happens - which isn't going to be any time soon.

scruffy1: I could care less

Then why don't you? Atheist and grammar nazi. Two, two, two annoying posters in one!

Why should atheists be polite? No one is polite in pointing out a violent lunatic on the street who claims to see invisible apparitions. No one is polite in mocking the bizarre and dangerous idiocy spouted by Tom Cruise and his kooky space alien friends. Why should a Mormon's crazy beliefs in a Midwestern Jesus be any more rationally considered? Or a person's faith that a man who was able to do parlor tricks and eventually became a zombie that died for all our sins?

What is it going to take to realize that the same condescension you feel towards a child that believes in the tooth fairy is no different from the pity we feel towards those that believe in an invisible sky bully?

That said, unless I am asked, I don't typically share my beliefs. It's only when someone who believes in ghosts and bogeymen wants to force their specious beliefs on the public, like innocent school children. Or want to use tax monies to fund attacks on science or personal freedom in the name of their specific supernatural delusion.

THEN I will speak out. Don't expect any less.

Weaver95
I'll worry about that when it happens - which isn't going to be any time soon.

Tanslation: I don't care if it happens.

MorrisBird: Then why don't you? Atheist and grammar nazi. Two, two, two annoying posters in one!

Because I'm bored on a rainy Sunday afternoon and I wanted to procrastinate further on what I should be doing by commenting on an argument.

Thread's dead. Was it because I was too polite?

Oh, and it's funny how the author is desperately trying to coin the nonsense phrase "Neo-Atheists" to have the same publicly negative connotation that "NeoCon" and "Conservatism" presently enjoy.

It reminds me when the Gospel Of Thomas/Might Dog/Afternoon Delight tried and failed to interject "Neo-Liberal" into his pathetic tirades.

If you look into your heart and understand why you dismiss all other religions than your own, you will understand why I reject yours. I don't know the source of this quote that I paraphrased, but it was a wise person.

Action Replay Nick: Weaver95
I'll worry about that when it happens - which isn't going to be any time soon.

Tanslation: I don't care if it happens.

Your translator is broken.

Look, if you keep going around saying things like 'OMG TEH CRISTIABLSSS GONNA GETZ MEEZZZ' then don't be surprised when nobody takes you seriously. Not everything that happens on the campaign trail or in a courtroom means that there's a vast christian conspiracy in place to take over the country.

We're far more likely to have a massive economic collapse compounded by weak legislative oversight and a strong judtical and executive branch fighting for control than we are to have some giant takeover by baptists.

Weaver95: We're far more likely to have a massive economic collapse compounded by weak legislative oversight and a strong judtical and executive branch fighting for control than we are to have some giant takeover by baptists.

With all due respect, I'm going with the global warming thingy.

Weaver95

I don't think any "christiablsss gonna getz meezzz" but re: "vast christian conspiracy in place" there isn't much consipracy there, Christians for the most part already run the country, and some of them are crazy. It's important to keep an eye on what they're up to.

MorrisBird: With all due respect, I'm going with the global warming thingy.

Maybe global warming will lead to a new species of giant Baptists to emerge and create a massive economic collapse in order to join church and state as an emergency measure to get us through this horrible impending tragedy.

/I think I lost a comma or period in there somewhere.

Weaver95: some giant takeover by baptists.

See, that's not how it works. NO ONE thinks baptists will rise up and overthrow the government. It's more insidious than that. Pass a bill to legitimize "intelligent design" here, force prayer in schools there, strangle scientific research because a dude in a funny hate half-way around the world doesn't cotton to it...

All of these things are done quietly and with the best of intentions, but all together they degrade personal freedoms and generally dumb down the populace.

We need MORE science, MORE rational thought; not less.

People in Mississippi actually pay this man. Think about it.

Good Riddance

MorrisBird: Weaver95: We're far more likely to have a massive economic collapse compounded by weak legislative oversight and a strong judtical and executive branch fighting for control than we are to have some giant takeover by baptists.

With all due respect, I'm going with the global warming thingy.

Same end of the world scenario as the Book of Revelations, just with different writer.

Weaver95: Same end of the world scenario as the Book of Revelations, just with different writer.

I'll miss you. But, I'm not healthy and I don't have to worry about the apocalypse. Be well, live long and prosper.

MorrisBird: Weaver95: Same end of the world scenario as the Book of Revelations, just with different writer.

I'll miss you. But, I'm not healthy and I don't have to worry about the apocalypse. Be well, live long and prosper.

speak for yourself, i'm planning on living forever.

Christ, living forever would be horrible. What do you do once you've done everything you can and want to? You'd go insane, I suspect.

Weaver95: i'm planning on living forever.

Best wishes on that.

Weaver95:

Same end of the world scenario as the Book of Revelations, just with different writer.

Global warming experts want to AVERT catastrophe. Christians, on the other hand, are waiting anxiously for it to occur.

Seems fundamentally different, don't you think?

MorrisBird: Weaver95: i'm planning on living forever.

Best wishes on that.

So far, so good!

Action Replay Nick: Christ, living forever would be horrible. What do you do once you've done everything you can and want to? You'd go insane, I suspect.

you do it again. Then you find new stuff to do.

SilentStrider: Then you find new stuff to do.

Are we talking macrame here? Because I definitely can't do that. I have essential tremor. An eternity of dropped stitches would totally suck.

The hard-core neo-Christians have gone the way of the freak show too.

Oy. Go away, god man.

MorrisBird: Are we talking macrame here? Because I definitely can't do that. I have essential tremor. An eternity of dropped stitches would totally suck.

no macrame, no.

The man appears to confuse atheism with anti-theism. He should know the difference, and the fact that he pretends there is none is a bit disingenuous and disrespectful of people who share one of those ideas and not the other.

Weaver95: Given some of the folks who pass for atheists around these parts, I'd say it'd be difficult to refute that last point. I think i've only seen 2 farkers who were polite and intelligent about their beliefs (or non-belief if you prefer). The rest are varying grades of slobbering idiot or straight up bigots.

Your entire premise is invalidated because you used Fark as your sample space. The majority of farkers "are varying grades of slobbering idiot or straight up bigots". Why should the atheists be any different than anyone else on Fark?

Weaver95:
Given some of the folks who pass for atheists around these parts, I'd say it'd be difficult to refute that last point. I think i've only seen 2 farkers who were polite and intelligent about their beliefs (or non-belief if you prefer). The rest are varying grades of slobbering idiot or straight up bigots.

This is true of most people in general, regardless of the belief. Critical thinking is not something most people prize, and so no matter what they believe (or don't believe) they end up in dogmatism. People who are educated about these matters (philosophers of religion, theologians, etc.) all tend to have very reasonable, balanced views because... they're educated!

/Best way to deal with a slobbering moron is to tell him (it's almost always a him) to come back after he's done some reading on the subject. Reading is anathema to these people.

Lane83: Best way to deal with a slobbering moron is to tell him (it's almost always a him) to come back after he's done some reading on the subject. Reading is anathema to these people.

No, because then you're just being an elitist. If they're really clever, they might accuse you of doing an "argument from authority" fallacy.

There are some classes of stupid that are just best left alone.

In during flamewar.

Also, in before Article VI Paragraph 3 of the U.S Constitution.

/no religous test, etc.

t3knomanser: No, because then you're just being an elitist. If they're really clever, they might accuse you of doing an "argument from authority" fallacy.

I also get "unoriginal" a lot, or that I only think I know things because Dead White Guys said them in really old books. Those are my favorites. Like I can't read something and critically evaluate it and say, "Hm, yeah, I agree with this!"

I actually had someone tell me the other day (not a fellow law student, Odin be praised) that I shouldn't cite precedential cases in my briefs. "Doing so makes you look unoriginal," he said. "I'd much rather you come up with a convincing argument on your own instead of just telling the judge what some other case said."

It's reasons like those why my professors taught me how to write a "I can no longer represent you..." letter.

Lane83: to write a "I can no longer represent you..

Do not want as an associate.

"But the tone has turned sour with each of these atheist authors resorting to ridicule rather than reason. Its as if - given their continued decline in influence - they are making a desperate last stand: they can't win with arguments and so they make belief itself not only an object of intellectual derision, but also a cause for personal embarrassment. And they pull no punches in their printed tirades."

I take real issue with this quote for one reason; I don't believe he actually read ANY of the books he mentioned if he believed the premise of *most* of them (Dawkins doesn't know his religious studies nearly as well as, say Hitchens). If he had read Hitchens' book in particular, he'd realize that (particularly when referencing christianity and the new testament) Hitchens has read that book cover to cover multiple times; he says so quite clearly in the introduction of his book when he outlines his school experience as a youth.

The majority of secular people *(not JUST atheists) are relatively well versed in religion, if not scripture itself.

second...
'neo-atheism' isn't a word. It's not a term that means ANYTHING, other than some derogatory label (which he made up on his own, as far as I can tell) to categorize a group of authors who do take serious issue with religion, particularly when religion interferes with politics and other 'secular' elements of our life (this ties in with my first point as to suggest he has never read any of the material he mentions).

thirdly...using a radio debate from 1948? was that REALLY the best example he could find of a theist vs. atheist debate (which wasn't even an atheist, it was an agnostic)? Could he really have not found something far more relevant?


I realize this is an opinion piece in a stupid little newspaper, but really, do some godamned research before you publish something.

Outtaphase: The man appears to confuse atheism with anti-theism. He should know the difference, and the fact that he pretends there is none is a bit disingenuous and disrespectful of people who share one of those ideas and not the other.

just gonna quote this for emphasis, it's important.

CanadianCommie: If he had read Hitchens' book in particular, he'd realize that (particularly when referencing christianity and the new testament) Hitchens has read that book cover to cover multiple times; he says so quite clearly in the introduction of his book when he outlines his school experience as a youth.

This. Great read. I detest Hitchens' politics but he's spot on with GiNG