If you're an Atheist, then there is no moral difference between killing a man and blowing out a candle.

There is no right and wrong, there are only results. If by killing and stealing you are able to succeed, then you win. The law of the tooth and claw. Survival of the fittest.

Excen: MorganFreeman:
I believe you were referring to every mistaken belief that telepathic communication with an invisible omnipotent sky wizard is possible throughout the entire span of human history, but I could be wrong.

/It's a friggin' pop-culture reference, isn't it

Nooooo. Believe me, I view people who "talk to God" as schizophrenics and psychopaths. Honest mistake, I left a quote of someone else out of that post.

Now kids, see how MorganFreeman reacted rationally without depending on the guidance of a deity? Discuss.

Your dog isn't talking to you, is it?

/Yes, I'm well aware that Gacy made up the talking-dog stuff. . .

Gacy? Wasn't that Son of Sam?

vertiaset: What are these "genetic components". Can you find them on a map of the genome?

Can we find "maternal instinct" on a map of the genome, yet? Does this mean it doesn't exist?

Sorry but fark you. I don't care if it is advertising something you don't like. It doesn't infringe on your rights.

Excen: MorganFreeman:
I believe you were referring to every mistaken belief that telepathic communication with an invisible omnipotent sky wizard is possible throughout the entire span of human history, but I could be wrong.

/It's a friggin' pop-culture reference, isn't it

Nooooo. Believe me, I view people who "talk to God" as schizophrenics and psychopaths. Honest mistake, I left a quote of someone else out of that post.

Now kids, see how MorganFreeman reacted rationally without depending on the guidance of a deity? Discuss.

Your dog isn't talking to you, is it?

/Yes, I'm well aware that Gacy Berkowitz made up the talking-dog stuff. . .

Fixed.

letrole: If you're an Atheist, then there is no moral difference between killing a man and blowing out a candle.

There is no right and wrong, there are only results. If by killing and stealing you are able to succeed, then you win. The law of the tooth and claw. Survival of the fittest.

Your surname is Le Trôle.

JasonOfOrillia: My local Baptist congregation is having a sermon on my street right now and my lights are off and door is locked so I am getting a kick out of these replies.

/now they are singing a hymn. Certainly more vigorous than the Papists or the Anglicans.
//Now they are proclaiming the good news again.

Dude! You have an obligation to hang your stereo out your windows blasting metal if there is a church disrupting the peace and quiet of your home!!! I suggest blasting Slayer or In Flames or Killswitch Engage as loud as your stereo will go, but anything harder than Black Sabbath will do!

DO IT!!! DO IT NOW!!! DON'T BE A PUSSY, SHOW THOSE BIBLE THUMPERS WHO CAN MAKE MORE NOISE!!!

letrole: If you're an Atheist completely amoral person, then there is no moral difference between killing a man and blowing out a candle.

There is no right and wrong, there are only results. If by killing and stealing you are able to succeed, then you win. The law of the tooth and claw. Survival of the fittest.

...and you're all set! Welcome to reality, trollzilla!

There is no right and wrong, there are only results. If by killing and stealing you are able to succeed, then you win. The law of the tooth and claw. Survival of the fittest.

That's not atheism that's anarchy. "No rules" does not sum up atheism, it sums up what you like to think atheism is.

Boy am I glad I don't live in the US where adults are basically 200+ lbs children!

letrole: If you're an Atheist, then there is no moral difference between killing a man and blowing out a candle.

There is no right and wrong, there are only results. If by killing and stealing you are able to succeed, then you win. The law of the tooth and claw. Survival of the fittest.

That's an idiot's view of things.

If you think that being good is only good because God says so, you're a fool.

letrole: If you're an Atheist, then there is no moral difference between killing a man and blowing out a candle.

If you are an insurance salesman, there is no difference between listening to the radio and spitting on a snake.
If you are a lion tamer, there is no difference between folding a paper airplane and ordering out for pizza.
If you are an artichoke farmer, there is no difference between having your tonsils out and painting a Volkswagen.

Discuss.

CruiserTwelve: W. T. Fark: First sensible thing I've ever heard you say.

So a post is only sensible if you agree with it. I see how that works now.

aaaaaaaaaand back to being an idiot again

Gacy, Ramirez, Berkowitz, whoever. All three of them would wear my scrotum as a yarmulke.

/Although it'd be closer in size to a hijab. . .

Excen: Gacy, Ramirez, Berkowitz, whoever. All three of them would wear my scrotum as a yarmulke.

/Although it'd be closer in size to a hijab. . .

...I wonder if Ed Gein was a Christian...

Quantum Apostrophe: Boy am I glad I don't live in the US where adults are basically 200+ lbs children!

I'd totally rip on you Queeb, well, if I didn't enjoy your women so much.

/heading to Montreal in a couple weeks
//thank god

Corvus: So my city having a giant cross on public land is ok but people privately having a billboard like this is not?

I immediately thought of San Diego, where I live.
(checks profile)

Yep. Cool deal. Fark party, y'all?

MorganFreeman: Excen: MorganFreeman:
I believe you were referring to every mistaken belief that telepathic communication with an invisible omnipotent sky wizard is possible throughout the entire span of human history, but I could be wrong.

/It's a friggin' pop-culture reference, isn't it

Nooooo. Believe me, I view people who "talk to God" as schizophrenics and psychopaths. Honest mistake, I left a quote of someone else out of that post.

Now kids, see how MorganFreeman reacted rationally without depending on the guidance of a deity? Discuss.

Your dog isn't talking to you, is it?

/Yes, I'm well aware that Gacy made up the talking-dog stuff. . .

Gacy? Wasn't that Son of Sam?

Yep, Son of Sam was the one who "talked to his neighbor's possessed dog"--David Berkowitz. Gacy was the killer clown who raped and killed more than thirty boys.

/yes, I read way too much about serial killers, why do you ask?

genner: PlatinumDragon: If you don't believe in a imortal soul why do you care about what happens 100 years from now?

Why is belief in an immortal soul related, at all, to concern about the future of humanity?

Simple you'll be dead in a 100 years. With no soul no continue and no god to reward you why do you care?

What a self-centered and irresponsible outlook.
I care because humans are a species that functions on social ties. I have empathy for my fellow humans, and I hope to make others lives better both now and in the future. Are you only nice to people because you think you'll be rewarded for it later? Because if so, you aren't a very good person.

Quantum Apostrophe: Boy am I glad I don't live in the US where adults are basically 2300+ lbs children!

FTFY. Never underestimate the power of the Sunday potluck.

/You know that stereotypical picture of the fat American? Add 50-100 pounds if they are Christian.

And fark tells us: Pretty much any religious sign whatsoever will be protested against.

And subby, I'm not sure that this would be militant atheism per se. It's pretty mild. If you are a good person you can become an atheist and still act good? That's nice and all, but aren't the going against their best selling point?

Gawdzila: Are you only nice to people because you think you'll be rewarded for it later? Because if so, you aren't a very good person.

Sounds very Republican.

Sarcastica75: MorganFreeman: Excen:

/Yes, I'm well aware that Gacy made up the talking-dog stuff. . .

Gacy? Wasn't that Son of Sam?

Yep, Son of Sam was the one who "talked to his neighbor's possessed dog"--David Berkowitz. Gacy was the killer clown who raped and killed more than thirty boys.

/yes, I read way too much about serial killers, why do you ask?

You can wear my scroat as a hat anytime!

/Fancy a spot of tea, guv'nah?

omg - it's bad for business ??

that's their bottom line ??

i guess $$ is the new religion

Mayah: And fark tells us: Pretty much any religious sign whatsoever will be protested against.

And subby, I'm not sure that this would be militant atheism per se. It's pretty mild. If you are a good person you can become an atheist and still act good? That's nice and all, but aren't the going against their best selling point?

Atheists don't recruit, they gather. That's the whole point of the billboard. It's for people who already believe what they do. Furthermore, I'm not sure it makes sense to become an atheist. Was religion installed in me at birth? I mean, they tried, but it's not like I believe anything different than what I did in the first place. I accept that there are questions I don't have the answers to and things I don't understand.

big mama needs to stop over eating and start exercising....her fatness is going to cost me tax dollars. Oh snap I went there...burn the fatties!

reklamfox: That's not atheism that's anarchy. "No rules" does not sum up atheism, it sums up what you like to think atheism is.

Not true. The Eskimos, when we still called them Eskimos, had some very harsh practises. It was only in the last century that the following began to be discouraged, mainly by Christian missionaries.

If I want something that you have, and I take it by force in public, it is not theft.

If I do not like you, and I bash your brains in public, it is not murder.

If you are old or infirm and you become a burden, you are left to die on the ice.

If her firstborn is a girl, the mother must smother the infant.

There are more flaws with the concept of religion than there are in a Pauly shore movie.

safety-math: I think religious billboards are silly in general. An atheism one, maybe even more so, because some god-fearing motorist isn't going to see it and suddenly have a revelation..."Wait! You don't have to believe in God to be a good person?!" Realizing that, when one has been brought up Christian, takes a lot more effort. In most cases, anyways.

Well, it's not really about converting people. Otherwise it would say something more like "Big Mama" Reed thinks it does, and whether it was intentional or not, it's probably also a thought seed for some. People who aren't necessarily against the idea of other people not believing the way they do might think about it if the basic premise is stated for them.

/People need to know there are other people like them around, some even like to know them in person

letrole: There is no right and wrong, there are only results. If by killing and stealing you are able to succeed, then you win. The law of the tooth and claw. Survival of the fittest.

People with an incomplete knowledge of evolution think this, but they're wrong.

Fitness has more to do with ability to survive than ability to hurt others. Humans don't have claws or big teeth. They're not particularly strong or particularly fast. The secret to our success is our ability to cooperate to achieve a goal.

Stealing and murder sow mistrust within the group, and as such make us less likely to cooperate and therefore less fit, in an evolutionary sense.

Since you're not an atheist, I can see why you're confused. I hope you've learned something.

The only really good reason for a billboard sign like this I can see is that there are lots of young people who don't "get" the whole organised religion thing and have trouble believing in the traditional Judeo-Christian concept of a supreme being. And a lot of those will have been brought up to believe that if they are non believers, they're bad people, they will be punished for it, they aren't "opening themselves up to God" and other silliness, and probably these kids are agonizing with this on a regular basis. Being told "Hey, look, you're not a bad person, and you're not doing anything wrong by not believing what noone else can prove either" is not a bad message to get out to those folks.

Hindmost: What about the tooth fairy? Also not real, but sure as shiat not paying to broadcast that to the commoners. wtf?

Because the tooth fairy does not have a gaggle of followers trying to sway the laws that govern all of us.

DaShredda: There are more flaws with the concept of religion than there are in a Pauly shore movie.

QUOTED FOR TRUTH AND GREAT JUSTICE

/Although Biodome was pure flawless victory. . .

letrole: reklamfox: That's not atheism that's anarchy. "No rules" does not sum up atheism, it sums up what you like to think atheism is.

Not true. The Eskimos, when we still called them Eskimos, had some very harsh practises. It was only in the last century that the following began to be discouraged, mainly by Christian missionaries.

If I want something that you have, and I take it by force in public, it is not theft.

If I do not like you, and I bash your brains in public, it is not murder.

If you are old or infirm and you become a burden, you are left to die on the ice.

If her firstborn is a girl, the mother must smother the infant.

The Inuit had plenty of religion before the Christians came. they worshiped gods. But they were mean gods. Kind of like the one that told medieval Christians to burn innocent women at the stake for witchcraft. It occurs to me that maybe nice people worship nice gods, and mean people worship mean gods. almost as is the problem sprang from human nature, rather than particular beliefs.
Naa - that's just too far-fetched :D

DamnYankees: Anti_illuminati: Stalin's brutality was not atheistically motivated. But keep believing what you're told - it would hamper your arguments otherwise.

Do you not think that someone, somewhere in Russia was killed because they were religious?

I know I'm late but do you realize they were really killed not because of their religion but because they supported and enjoyed the support of the Czar.

ReverendJasen: Hindmost: What about the tooth fairy? Also not real, but sure as shiat not paying to broadcast that to the commoners. wtf?

Because the tooth fairy does not have a gaggle of followers trying to sway the laws that govern all of us.

There is fluoride in a majority of water systems in the US.

/Just sayin'

vertiaset: One of my main problems with atheists is that all too often in abandoning their faith they also abandon any sense of morality.

Then you're another idiot.
"God" does not equal morality--and it never has. But that's a fine excuse to persecute those who don't share your beliefs.

khonshu: yay! atheism thread:

I remember back from school that I was a ENT J/P ... this fits me bout right, haha.

The World is divided into armed camps ready to commit genocide just because we can't agree on whose fairy tales to believe. In the end, Religion will kill us all. ~Ed Krebs

I respect that many members of my family are Christians - I choose to think for myself, but that quote above pretty much sums up where we're headed...

Excen: There is fluoride in a majority of water systems in the US.

Precious bodily fluids, etc.

That's exactly it, they were told by CHRISTIAN missionaries. That doesn't mean it was right, it was just different. What if they had been reached by another society first? You site that as proof that God created morals and without him there can be no morals, yet the things you cite such as: If I do not like you, and I bash your brains in public, it is not murder these are all things that can be associated with the Islamic faith in the middle east where it is totally moral to kill a woman for not wearing a head scarf.

That came from faith, is it immoral? Or is it immoral just because it didn't come from YOUR faith? I'm an atheist who spends the weekend volunteering at the local food bank and I have never murdered anyone.

vertiaset: What are these "genetic components". Can you find them on a map of the genome?

Unfortunately, I no longer have university access to scientific journals, or I would be more capable of providing links to specific articles on the subject. Beyond this, the most referenced article I know of is "The Evolutionary Origin of an Altruistic Gene" by Nedelcu and Michod in the May 23, 2006 issue of Molecular Biology and Evolution (currently trying to find a link to the abstract, the Oxford Journal site has the reference to this still in tact, but I cannot find the abstract in the archives).

vertiaset: So you are a moral relativist. So, if you were ... say ... an Aztec and you believed, truly believed, that if you did not rip the living heart out of men and women on a daily basis that the sun would not rise tomorrow, are your actions in doing so "good"?

Not a moral relativist, truly. I see morals as simply not being universal, but we have useful methods of measuring the effectiveness of morality such as socioeconomics of a society. I would say, simply, the best morality is one which minimizes harm to others, and we can argue harm from then on.

However, you're effectively asking me that if I were a different person in a different situation would I act differently? I don't see the point of the question since I currently disprove of such sacrifice and the idea people could practice and praise such an action is abhorrent to me.

vertiaset: Is this correct understanding of your viewpoint?

No. I stated an often overlooked fact. If the deity determines what is good and evil, this does not make good and evil absolutes. The concepts are still arbitrary and dependent upon the will of the deity. If one wishes to argue the deity cannot alter concepts such as good and evil, obviously something greater set those concepts firmly, but the same rules apply to this "something".

This is why moral absolutes fail for an argument.

reklamfox: I have never murdered anyone.

YET.

The Z Spot: khonshu: yay! atheism thread:

I remember back from school that I was a ENT J/P ... this fits me bout right, haha.

On that note, I wonder what would happen if there were a giant Myers-Briggs test for all the users on Fark. I wonder what the average personality is...

ReverendJasen: vertiaset: One of my main problems with atheists is that all too often in abandoning their faith they also abandon any sense of morality.

Then you're another idiot.
"God" does not equal morality--and it never has. But that's a fine excuse to persecute those who don't share your beliefs.

Exactly. And where exactly did you conduct this study, vertiaset? Liberty?

vertiaset: Now contrast this with Stalin and Mao who, as ATHEISTS in the name of ATHEISM killed thousands of Russian Orthodox Clergy, and more recently Tibetan Buddhist priests and monks.

Preposterous.
You confuse atheism for being the goal instead of the method. People like Stalin banned religion because they thought it was necessary to bring about socialism, not because they were trying to promote atheism. Religion has had the power to unite and strengthen resistance in the oppressed, something people like Stalin and Mao would obviously want to avoid.


Critical thinking, facts and historical perspective ... learn it.

I give you the same advice.

abb3w: Khanmots: And yes, I believe that it requires faith to believe in the existance of God... or to actively deny the existence of God.

The latter, however, does not require any more faith than denying that there is a cauliflower occupying your cranial cavity in place of a brain.

Well, one could perform a test to see if there is indeed a califlower occupying one's cranial cavity. One might even suspect that the existance of such a califlower would create observable side-affects on one's external behavior...

How about if we try a more appropriate analogy without the flaw of detectability?

We'll keep the general form, but lets substitute a different object... say we're talking about invisible, inherently indetectible, insubstantial, etc, etc, flying unicorns in one's cranial cavity instead? Now that we've tacked on all of those indetectable-type words onto the beginning of the postulated flying unicorns it's impossible to detect such a beast. How do you know that those don't exist?

Personally, I believe that such flying unicorns don't exist. However, I make no claims as to the correctness of my belief, as thier existence or not is inherently unknowable.

Heck, for all I know, there's a law of physics that creates a flock of insubtantial indetectible beings each and every time they are mentioned on fark. In which case my disbelief in indetectable flying unicorns flys in the face of how the universe works. I don't believe that either, but again, I have no way of knowing.

In short, to believe or disbelieve in something whose existence is unknowable requires faith. Doesn't matter if that's the aforementioned unicorn, the tooth fairy, God, or even an undetectable califlower...

So, basically, the sign is reaching out to atheists and letting them know that they can still be good and not believe in God.

The Christians oppose this.

Are they saying that they want their atheists to be bad, so they can continue to hate on them?

vertiaset: So, all of you "moral" atheists. Where does your sense of morality come from anyway? Is there "good" and "evil". Are these universal or do they vary from person to person or society to society?

This is a sincere query and is not intended as sarcasm.

I don't consider myself an atheist now but I have been one in the past.

I would say that the reason an atheist would be inclined to do good to others is that if there is no afterlife then this life is all we have. Once you are dead that's it, it's done. It sounds callous at first but if you think about it it means there is nothing more precious than life, this life. When someone dies needlessly it can be seen for the real tragedy that it is. That person will never again get to experience life; the precious gift gas been stolen from them.

Even if you don't believe that yourself think about it for a minute. Imagine a "what if" existence without a creator. The mere fact of our existence itself, by random chance alone, and the existence of the universe itself suddenly seems much more amazing and marvelous.

Atheist =/= Nihilist. It also does not cause a lack of wonder or lack of morality. People as individuals of course can see things any number of ways, though.

Hope that answers some questions or gives a new perspective.


For the record, I myself am torn on the matter. I guess you could say I'm 50% atheist and sometimes this percentage varies. But my moral foundation does not rely on religion. I had a friend who "found" Jesus and that went well enough for awhile. But when he fell out of it he went right back to "sinning". Religion was his moral foundation and once it was gone his morals flew right out the window to some degree. This is something that scares me about the hardcore fanatics. If all that is keeping them moral is their religion, what happens if they lose their faith? Or their "fear of God"?

vertiaset

Is it fun to waste words?