If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ABC)   It's your choice, Atheists - the water of life, or the blow dryer of death and hell   (abcnews.go.com) divider line 657
    More: Amusing  
•       •       •

15464 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 Jul 2010 at 3:44 AM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



657 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-07-16 11:21:36 PM
Atheists are almost as bad as religious people, their saving grace is they haven't yet slathered millions in the name of Atheism.
 
2010-07-16 11:22:44 PM
That is farking retarded and you should stop it.
 
2010-07-16 11:32:00 PM
If by "water of life" you mean "usquebaugh", then I'm all for it.

/Talisker 18, please.
 
2010-07-16 11:32:07 PM
I'll take the water of life please.

www.klwines.com
 
2010-07-16 11:32:09 PM
I'll gladly stand up for atheists when they're not being assholes, but clearly, they're just being assholes here.

If you don't believe in God or Gods or whatever, fine. That's awesome. But being entirely anti-religious is just obnoxious.
 
2010-07-16 11:33:21 PM
I'll have the chicken, then.
 
2010-07-16 11:34:53 PM
shivashakti: But being entirely anti-religious is just obnoxious

Not half so obnoxious as religion. It's not the religious I have a problem with- it's religion. And honestly, it's not even religion I object to, as much it is faith. Faith is a horrible tool for interacting with the world, religion is just a symptom of a much deeper problem.
 
2010-07-16 11:38:58 PM
rcain: I'll take the water of life please.

Slainte!

*clinks glass*
 
2010-07-16 11:45:49 PM
That is the stupidest shiat I have seen in a long time.

I don't believe in the biblical God but I'm not childish enough to "de-baptize" myself, as if that means anything.

Everyone involved in this needs to hit themselves with a hammer. twice....
 
2010-07-16 11:48:39 PM
Lame in so many ways.
 
2010-07-17 12:08:32 AM
'Swallow the leader' made me laugh.
 
2010-07-17 12:13:00 AM
t3knomanser: Not half so obnoxious as religion. It's not the religious I have a problem with- it's religion. And honestly, it's not even religion I object to, as much it is faith. Faith is a horrible tool for interacting with the world, religion is just a symptom of a much deeper problem.

I don't see what's so bad about faith unless it's in the hands of fundamentalists. But most religious people I know aren't like that.
 
2010-07-17 01:18:22 AM
shivashakti: But most religious people I know aren't like that.

the Night-elf priestesses in WoW aren't a good model for religious people in general.
 
2010-07-17 01:26:22 AM
zymosan: Atheists are almost as bad as religious people, their saving grace is they haven't yet slathered millions in the name of Atheism.

When they do, I hope they're slathered in a fine wild mushroom demi-glace.
 
2010-07-17 01:26:36 AM
shivashakti: t3knomanser: Not half so obnoxious as religion. It's not the religious I have a problem with- it's religion. And honestly, it's not even religion I object to, as much it is faith. Faith is a horrible tool for interacting with the world, religion is just a symptom of a much deeper problem.

I don't see what's so bad about faith unless it's in the hands of fundamentalists. But most religious people I know aren't like that.


To my mind, it's equivalent to an adult who believes in Santa Claus. Nothing against them, but neither do I think they're fully mature or really capable of reason. Everything the believer does is influenced by how it fits into the fairy tale.
 
2010-07-17 01:35:29 AM
mediablitz: That is the stupidest shiat I have seen in a long time.

I don't believe in the biblical God but I'm not childish enough to "de-baptize" myself, as if that means anything.

Everyone involved in this needs to hit themselves with a hammer. twice....


Oh, I dunno. I think it's funny, if imminently silly.
 
2010-07-17 01:42:21 AM
Benevolent Misanthrope: mediablitz: That is the stupidest shiat I have seen in a long time.

I don't believe in the biblical God but I'm not childish enough to "de-baptize" myself, as if that means anything.

Everyone involved in this needs to hit themselves with a hammer. twice....

Oh, I dunno. I think it's funny, if imminently silly.


It was funnier the first time. (new window)

/Oy.
 
2010-07-17 01:59:48 AM
This all seems rather pointless. As a Christian, once you are baptized, you've effectively given yourself to Jesus, and you've promised him that you will always follow him, even when you're not following him in your life. You may be going astray, but He will always be there. That's what being baptized symbolizes. God said that all who are baptized will enter Heaven, and you cannot lose that just because someone has "de-baptized" you. God is always waiting, waiting for them to turn their lives around.
 
2010-07-17 02:01:54 AM
Benevolent Misanthrope: To my mind, it's equivalent to an adult who believes in Santa Claus. Nothing against them, but neither do I think they're fully mature or really capable of reason. Everything the believer does is influenced by how it fits into the fairy tale.

That's the problem with today's atheist. Many act as if there's a complete dichotomy between reason and faith, which is bullsh*t.

Keep in mind that many of the world's scientific discoveries prior to the Enlightenment were made by people of faith. Reason and faith are not mutually exclusive.

Charles Darwin and Newton were religious and are buried in a church.

There are people much more intelligent than you or I who believe in a God.
 
2010-07-17 02:49:58 AM
ignite ice: This all seems rather pointless. As a Christian, once you are baptized, you've effectively given yourself to Jesus, and you've promised him that you will always follow him, even when you're not following him in your life. You may be going astray, but He will always be there. That's what being baptized symbolizes. God said that all who are baptized will enter Heaven, and you cannot lose that just because someone has "de-baptized" you. God is always waiting, waiting for them to turn their lives around.

Wait so since I was baptized at 3 by my parents to shut my Grandmother up I'm in?
 
2010-07-17 02:53:44 AM
Really, if a bunch of atheists truly want to blow each other with hairdryers, who does it hurt? Ignore them and move on. For me, it's about as stupid and meaningless as any religious ritual, but if it gives people peace of mind, whatever. As long as what you're doing doesn't impose on others, I don't really f*cking care what you do, although I reserve the right to personally think it's pointless. Seeing as churches frequently go all fire and brimstone on atheism, I don't really see the serious offensiveness of "we're participating in a ritual that symbolically (to us) reverses our initiation into a religion of which we no longer wish to be a part." I think it's stupid, but that's my opinion. If we have to give the religious the benefit of the doubt, we should give it to these tards, too. What if it actually means something to them? Ritual is very important for human beings.

But really, this is about as interesting a news story as an embedded reporter in Sunday mass. Is there NOTHING more exciting going on than hair dryer shenanigans? Or was the reporter hoping for lots of 'blowing' double entendres...

horse-pheathers: If by "water of life" you mean "usquebaugh", then I'm all for it.

rcain: I'll take the water of life please.

Amen, brothers.
 
2010-07-17 02:59:26 AM
jekxrb:
Amen, brothers.


Slainte! *clink*
 
2010-07-17 03:00:44 AM
Gwendolyn: Wait so since I was baptized at 3 by my parents to shut my Grandmother up I'm in?

farm5.static.flickr.com

/I love the inclusion of 'hoarders'. A&E should do a show about the 7 circles of hell and the real-life people who are going to each one.
 
2010-07-17 03:07:41 AM
horse-pheathers: Slainte! *clink*

Wi' usquabae, we'll face the devil!

/slàinte mhath!
 
2010-07-17 03:09:40 AM
The whole idea of being an atheist is that you don't need to organize, conduct ceremonies, or partake in rituals. They're doing it wrong.
 
2010-07-17 03:22:16 AM
ignite ice: As a Christian, once you are baptized, you've effectively given yourself to Jesus

The thing that's happening now, is the choice is being made by parents for children at a young age when they are incapable of making that choice for themselves. So how can someone, who doesn't even know themselves yet, give themselves to someone or something? I mean really, the only thing a baby is aware of is when food is there, if he/she is wet, or it's time to sleep.
 
2010-07-17 03:27:39 AM
"It is teaching children that the world works in other ways than it does," he said. "This can be extremely dangerous."

"They are practicing child abuse in teaching that the world operates in ways other than it does," he told the convention crowd...

Come forward now and receive the spirit of hot air...

For Kagin, this struggle between godless and god-fearing hits very close to home: his son, Steve Kagin, is a fundamentalist minister in Kansas.

He founded Camp Quest, a secular summer camp for young nonbelievers, many of whom, he says, have been harrassed or hounded for their lack of faith.

And then there's this interesting twist. His own son, Steve Kagin, is a fundamentalist minister in Kansas.


Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. ~ Philip Dick
 
2010-07-17 03:32:05 AM
GreenAdder: The whole idea of being an atheist is that you don't need to organize, conduct ceremonies, or partake in rituals. They're doing it wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-theist (new window)
 
2010-07-17 03:32:22 AM
SpaceyCat: The thing that's happening now, is the choice is being made by parents for children at a young age when they are incapable of making that choice for themselves. So how can someone, who doesn't even know themselves yet, give themselves to someone or something? I mean really, the only thing a baby is aware of is when food is there, if he/she is wet, or it's time to sleep.

Oh, no. That's it. I've had this conversation before. It's a slippery slope. First it's the "involuntary baptism" debate, and then suddenly someone says he wants his foreskin back.
 
2010-07-17 03:47:58 AM
Stupidity really does transcend any other differences we may have.

""According to my mother I screamed like a banshee, and those are her words, so you can see that even as a young child I didn't want to be baptized. It's not fair. I was born atheist and they were forcing me to become Catholic."

I...I don't have the words. Someone help me with an epic facepalm pic
 
2010-07-17 03:52:53 AM
Well, we're out of cake!
 
2010-07-17 03:53:17 AM
zymosan: Atheists are almost as bad as religious people, their saving grace is they haven't yet slathered millions in the name of Atheism.

After seeing shiat like this we'll probably start with our own.
 
2010-07-17 03:54:45 AM
zymosan: "Atheists are almost as bad as religious people, their saving grace is they haven't yet slathered millions in the name of Atheism."

So what makes us 'bad'? I don't see anything harmful in the OP. Just some goofy group therapy dealie.

Atheists are at the forefront of the fight for gay rights, and to keep creationism out of public science classrooms. We can be counted on to actually get off of our asses and take political action to defend the separation of church and state. We've supported stem cell research all through Bush's ban, and were the first to cheer it's repeal.

When people like you, sitting on the sidelines, take potshots at us because atheism itself leaves a bad taste in your mouth, it hurts. Presumably you support our causes, but because we're the ones advancing them, you'd rather shiat all over us than help.
 
2010-07-17 03:56:26 AM
jekxrb: Really, if a bunch of atheists truly want to blow each other with hairdryers, who does it hurt? Ignore them and move on. For me, it's about as stupid and meaningless as any religious ritual, but if it gives people peace of mind, whatever. As long as what you're doing doesn't impose on others, I don't really f*cking care what you do, although I reserve the right to personally think it's pointless. Seeing as churches frequently go all fire and brimstone on atheism, I don't really see the serious offensiveness of "we're participating in a ritual that symbolically (to us) reverses our initiation into a religion of which we no longer wish to be a part." I think it's stupid, but that's my opinion. If we have to give the religious the benefit of the doubt, we should give it to these tards, too. What if it actually means something to them? Ritual is very important for human beings.

But really, this is about as interesting a news story as an embedded reporter in Sunday mass. Is there NOTHING more exciting going on than hair dryer shenanigans? Or was the reporter hoping for lots of 'blowing' double entendres...


This.

GreenAdder: The whole idea of being an atheist is that you don't need to organize, conduct ceremonies, or partake in rituals. They're doing it wrong.

And also, this.

I was once a member of the Freedom From Religion Foundation. Then it occurred to me that organized atheism is ridiculous.
 
2010-07-17 03:57:11 AM
jekxrb: Really, if a bunch of atheists truly want to blow each other with hairdryers, who does it hurt? Ignore them and move on. For me, it's about as stupid and meaningless as any religious ritual, but if it gives people peace of mind, whatever.

While you're right, in that whatever they want to do is their business, it's just silly because once you get into this sort of absurd ritualism revolving around atheism then it's just a religion of another color.

It's forgoing logic and reality for some storybook version of same where everything you say is always rational and logical because you don't believe in a god, which makes it no different than the religious claptrap that they loathe.

/amazed that the spellcheck had no problem with claptrap
 
2010-07-17 03:58:41 AM
As an Atheist, these fools really give us a bad name. A true Atheist would not really give a shiat nor push their godless beliefs upon people. Only the crazy ones do.
 
2010-07-17 03:58:52 AM
shivashakti: "I don't see what's so bad about faith unless it's in the hands of fundamentalists. But most religious people I know aren't like that."

You don't recognize the importance of basing our beliefs on reason and evidence, as opposed to tradition, emotion and authority?

How do you think atrocities happen?
 
2010-07-17 04:00:32 AM
Zamboro: zymosan: "Atheists are almost as bad as religious people, their saving grace is they haven't yet slathered millions in the name of Atheism."

So what makes us 'bad'? I don't see anything harmful in the OP. Just some goofy group therapy dealie.

Atheists are at the forefront of the fight for gay rights, and to keep creationism out of public science classrooms. We can be counted on to actually get off of our asses and take political action to defend the separation of church and state. We've supported stem cell research all through Bush's ban, and were the first to cheer it's repeal.

When people like you, sitting on the sidelines, take potshots at us because atheism itself leaves a bad taste in your mouth, it hurts. Presumably you support our causes, but because we're the ones advancing them, you'd rather shiat all over us than help.


Dismissing this as a 'silly group therapy dealie' is letting it off a little light, don't you think? It's adding ritualism to an ideology that has nothing but contempt for ritual. They're sort of missing the point
 
2010-07-17 04:01:43 AM
HawgWild: Well, we're out of cake!

Didn't expect suck a run!
 
2010-07-17 04:01:45 AM
As an agnostic who was baptized, this is the exact reason why I refuse to insult religion on Fark. Atheists have become just as devout as the religions they wish to condemn.
 
2010-07-17 04:02:41 AM
Zamboro: How do you think atrocities happen?

They start with James Cameron getting an idea for a movie...
 
2010-07-17 04:04:24 AM
RookStar: As an Atheist, these fools really give us a bad name. A true Atheist would not really give a shiat nor push their godless beliefs upon people. Only the crazy ones do.

Lol... what?

Being an atheist has nothing to do with whether or not you want to tell other people that their beliefs are illogical. It doesn't make you a "better" atheist if you keep to yourself, and that is certainly what you are implying. You're saying that an atheist who doesn't care what others believe is a true atheist, when in fact, the definition and "requirement" of being an atheist has absolutely nothing to do with your tolerance of other religions.
 
2010-07-17 04:04:35 AM
shivashakti
There are people much more intelligent than you or I who believe in a God.


There are people much more intelligent than you or I who believe in wacky conspiracy theories too. What's your point?
 
2010-07-17 04:04:44 AM
Schlock: "Dismissing this as a 'silly group therapy dealie' is letting it off a little light, don't you think? It's adding ritualism to an ideology that has nothing but contempt for ritual. They're sort of missing the point"

Atheism includes contempt for ritual? I'm an atheist. I see nothing inherently wrong with ritual as a means for symbolically marking important transitions. I like holidays for instance.

What I see are people who were baptized into a religion when they were too young to understand any of it. It's akin to me pointing at a Christian and telling them they are now an atheist, and they haven't any choice in the matter. And when these people, struggling with discomfort surrounding that baptism, invent a ritual that helps them psychologically cope, they are mocked for it....by the religious. The people responsible for the baptism in the first place. It's perverse. Like dousing a Jew's house in pig blood and then laughing at him as he hoses it off.
 
2010-07-17 04:05:01 AM
GreenAdder: Zamboro: How do you think atrocities happen?

They start with James Cameron getting an idea for a movie...


Ok that genuinely made me laugh
 
2010-07-17 04:05:11 AM
I am not a believer, but I am completely disgusted by this level of disdain for an intimate and personally compelling act love performed by a parent for their child. Why would anyone erase such a powerful sentiment as baptism? i can understand wanting to be baptized into a new sect, such as during the Protestant reformation. But atheism is supposed to be an anti-conversion into something that is not religious. Baptism at least makes concrete a level of parental care for a child that shows their love is stronger than their own death; that the child matters eternally to them and they think of their child those extended terms. Erasing and defiling that level of parental care and commitment for less than a deity is just...well, it mocks everything that humanism could and should stand for. I am ashamed that my atheism will be compared to this douchebag's religion masquerading as atheism (wherein he elevates his act of defilement above the real bonds that connect humans).
 
2010-07-17 04:05:18 AM
horse-pheathers: If by "water of life" you mean "usquebaugh akevitt/aquavit", then I'm all for it.



FTFY

But seriously - this pic made me lol, literallly. Then I had some akevitt and felt better.

a.abcnews.com
 
2010-07-17 04:06:15 AM
shivashakti "There are people much more intelligent than you or I who believe in a God."

STUDIES OF STUDENTS

Thomas Howells, 1927
Study of 461 students showed religiously conservative students "are, in general, relatively inferior in intellectual ability."

Hilding Carlsojn, 1933
Study of 215 students showed that "there is a tendency for the more intelligent undergraduate to be sympathetic toward atheism."

Abraham Franzblau, 1934
Confirming Howells and Carlson, tested 354 Jewish children, aged 10-16. Found a negative correlation between religiosity and IQ as measured by the Terman intelligence test.

Thomas Symington, 1935
Tested 400 young people in colleges and church groups. He reported, "There is a constant positive relation in all the groups between liberal religious thinking and mental ability... There is also a constant positive relation between liberal scores and intelligence..."

Vernon Jones, 1938
Tested 381 students, concluding "a slight tendency for intelligence and liberal attitudes to go together."

A. R. Gilliland, 1940
Contrary to all other studies, found "little or no relationship between intelligence and attitude toward god."

Donald Gragg, 1942
Reported an inverse correlation between 100 ACE freshman test scores and Thurstone "reality of god" scores.

Brown and Love, 1951
At the University of Denver, tested 613 male and female students. The mean test scores of non-believers was 119 points, and for believers it was 100. The non-believers ranked in the 80th percentile, and believers in the 50th. Their findings "strongly corroborate those of Howells."

Michael Argyle, 1958
Concluded that "although intelligent children grasp religious concepts earlier, they are also the first to doubt the truth of religion, and intelligent students are much less likely to accept orthodox beliefs."

Jeffrey Hadden, 1963
Found no correlation between intelligence and grades. This was an anomalous finding, since GPA corresponds closely with intelligence. Other factors may have influenced the results at the University of Wisconsin.

Young, Dustin and Holtzman, 1966
Average religiosity decreased as GPA rose.

James Trent, 1967
Polled 1400 college seniors. Found little difference, but high-ability students in his sample group were over-represented.

Plant and E. Minium, 1967
The more intelligent students were less religious, both before entering college and after 2 years of college.

Robert Wuthnow, 1978
Of 532 students, 37 percent of Christians, 58 percent of apostates, and 53 percent of non-religious scored above average on SATs.

Hastings and Hoge, 1967, 1974
Polled 200 college students and found no significant correlations.

Norman Poythress, 1975
Mean SATs for strongly anti-religious (1148), moderately anti-religious (1119), slightly anti-religious (1108), and religious (1022).

Wiebe and Fleck, 1980
Studied 158 male and female Canadian university students. They reported "nonreligious S's tended to be strongly intelligent" and "more intelligent than religious S's."

STUDENT BODY COMPARISONS

Rose Goldsen, 1952
Percentage of students who believe in a divine god: Harvard 30; UCLA 32; Dartmouth 35; Yale 36; Cornell 42; Wayne 43; Weslyan 43; Michigan 45; Fisk 60; Texas 62; North Carolina 68.

National Review Study, 1970
Percentage of students who believe in a Spirit or Divine God: Reed 15; Brandeis 25; Sarah Lawrence 28; Williams 36; Stanford 41; Boston U. 41; Yale 42; Howard 47; Indiana 57; Davidson 59; S. Carolina 65; Marquette 77.

Caplovitz and Sherrow, 1977
Apostasy rates rose continuously from 5 percent in "low" ranked schools to 17 percent in "high" ranked schools.

Niemi, Ross, and Alexander, 1978
In elite schools, organized religion was judged important by only 26 percent of their students, compared with 44 percent of all students.

STUDIES OF VERY-HIGH IQ GROUPS

Terman, 1959
Studied group with IQ's over 140. Of men, 10 percent held strong religious belief, of women 18 percent. Sixty-two percent of men and 57 percent of women claimed "little religious inclination" while 28 percent of the men and 23 percent of the women claimed it was "not at all important."

Warren and Heist, 1960
Found no differences among National Merit Scholars. Results may have been effected by the fact that NM scholars are not selected on the basis of intelligence or grades alone, but also on "leadership" and such like.

Southern and Plant, 1968
Studied 42 male and 30 female members of Mensa. Mensa members were much less religious in belief than the typical American college alumnus or adult.

STUDIES Of SCIENTISTS

William S. Ament, 1927
C. C. Little, president of the University of Michigan, checked persons listed in Who's Who in America: "Unitarians, Episcopalians, Congregationalists, Universalists, and Presbyterians [who are less religious] are... far more numerous in Who's Who than would be expected on the basis of the population which they form. Baptists, Methodists, and Catholics are distinctly less numerous." Ament confirmed Little's conclusion. He noted that Unitarians, the least religious, were more than 40 times as numerous in Who's Who as in the U.S. population.

Lehman and Witty, 1931
Identified 1189 scientists found in both Who's Who (1927) and American Men of Science (1927). Only 25 percent of those listed in the latter and 50 percent of those in the former reported their religious denomination, despite the specific request to do so, under the heading of "religious denomination (if any)." Well over 90 percent of the general population claims religious affiliation. The figure of 25 percent suggests far less religiosity among scientists. Unitarians were 81.4 times as numerous among eminent scientists as non-Unitarians.

Kelley and Fisk, 1951
Found a negative (-.39) correlation between the strength of religious values and research competence. [How these were measured is unknown.]

Ann Roe, 1953
Interviewed 64 "eminent scientists, nearly all members of the prestigious National Academy of Sciences or the American Philosophical Society. She reported that, while nearly all of them had religious parents and had attended Sunday school, 'now only three of these men are seriously active in church. A few others attend upon occasion, or even give some financial support to a church which they do not attend... All the others have long since dismissed religion as any guide to them, and the church plays no part in their lives... A few are militantly atheistic, but most are just not interested.'"

Francis Bello, 1954
Interviewed or questionnaired 107 nonindustrial scientists under the age of 40 judged by senior colleagues to be outstanding. Of the 87 responses, 45 percent claimed to be "agnostic or atheistic" and an additional 22 percent claimed no religious affiliation. For 20 most eminent, "the proportion who are now a-religious is considerably higher than in the entire survey group."

Jack Chambers, 1964
Questionnaired 740 US psychologists and chemists. He reported, "The highly creative men... significantly more often show either no preference for a particular religion or little or no interest in religion." Found that the most eminent psychologists showed 40 percent no preference, 16 percent for the most eminent chemists.

Vaughan, Smith, and Sjoberg, 1965
Polled 850 US physicists, zoologists, chemical engineers, and geologists listed in American Men of Science (1955) on church membership, and attendance patterns, and belief in afterlife. Of the 642 replies, 38.5 percent did not believe in an afterlife, whereas 31.8 percent did. Belief in immortality was less common among major university staff than among those employed by business, government, or minor universities. The Gallup poll taken about this time showed that two-thirds of the U.S. population believed in an afterlife, so scientists were far less religious than the typical adult.
 
2010-07-17 04:06:16 AM
I just want to know what Obi-wan Kenobi is doing with that hairdryer...
 
X15
2010-07-17 04:07:01 AM
As an atheist I find this an amusing when performed for the sole purpose of needling theists. But if someone truly feels they need this then they're an agnostic, not an atheist.
 
Displayed 50 of 657 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report