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.

(AlterNet)   Columnist attempts to debunk 10 myths about atheists, manages to prove 9 of them are true   (alternet.org) divider line 917
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

38415 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Sep 2011 at 11:58 AM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



917 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | » | Last | Show all
 
2011-09-14 04:05:05 PM  

Leeds: Resin33: Everyone is born an atheist.

I'm not 100% sure if that's true. There is ongoing research into determining the differences in the brains of theists. It is possible that believing in the gods (or feeling a need to) is a medical condition and if so, it is likely one you are born with.

// Not kidding, several articles have even been linked on Fark


Being susceptible to holding a believe, doesn't mean you're born with it.
 
2011-09-14 04:05:12 PM  

StoPPeRmobile: What about atheists in the military?


This is not the stated purpose of said killing. It's not like the military says, "Let's kill these people just because they are Muslim", which is different than the Crusades, Islamic extremists, etc.
 
2011-09-14 04:05:16 PM  
in late but whatever:

Isaiah 46:7


I play this card whenever the old folks get preachy with me.

/shrug
 
2011-09-14 04:05:47 PM  

RolandGunner: pwhp_67: pwhp_67:
The Catholic Church says homosexuality is wrong.

Homosexuality has been observed as naturally occurring in nature.

Therefore, stating as fact that homosexuality is a sin and an offense to some god who allegedly created nature, is a lie.

That argument only works if you assume there is no free will. Part of the point of morality is to separate humanity from the natural world as a matter of choice. The animal kingdom is full of naturally occurring behaviors that most people would consider immoral when humans do it to one another. An imbalance in an ecosystem -- like a loss of an apex predator -- leads to a natural destruction of the ecosystem.

If a deer population spikes due to the loss of an ecosystem's apex predator and those deer proceed to overfeed on the trees to the point of deforestation (something that happened in Yellowstone), we don't consider the deer immoral. Most of us consider the clear cutting of a forest by humans to be immoral, however.

I'm not arguing that homosexuality is immoral, just that your argument is very flawed.


How does this work with an omnipotent being? Or, were there 2 gods? The omnipotent one and his dumb brother that got the job of, judge of mankind? How could you create a man, knowing that he would not follow your authority to your liking, and then be surprised it doesn't work out that way.

If the "entity" isn't omniscient then why even listen to it? Just because it will smite you or rock an earthquake?

/ateapotist
 
2011-09-14 04:05:52 PM  

G2V: Typically the one I see bandied about (and displayed on internet flame filled forums) is an active and conclusively felt belief that there are no Gods, rather than merely an absence of belief.


Well, I do argue against some theistic claims, like creationism and intelligent design. The creationist book Of Pandas and People claims that creationism/ID means that "the various forms of life began abruptly through the agency of an intelligent creator with their distinctive features already intact. Fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers, beaks, and wings, etc."

So, I would be in the camp that affirmatively denies the existence of the god as literally described by the Christian Bible -- because the evidence so clearly militates against the Bible story. Still, while I actively disbelieve in the stories set out in Gensis, I do not affirmatively claim that supernaturalism -- as a class of phenomena or beings -- does not exist, that gods don't exist. I have no way of knowing that; I just have no belief that they do.

I suspect that you may be avoiding the atheist label because you don't like what some other atheists have said -- you don't like their condescending certainty. But, atheism isn't just the people who shout, "there is no god!" The people who say, "I don't know...but, I don't believe in a god" are atheists, too.
 
2011-09-14 04:06:01 PM  

MrEricSir: Satanicpuppy: Now, I don't find this to be compelling proof of anything, however, just as I would take several billion people of all walks of life screaming about ear pigeons much more seriously than 1 random hobo, I take the billions of religious people seriously enough to acknowledge that, despite the fact that I have no evidence of a real phenomena, the volume of reports suggests that is possible that something is there, and I'm not going to utterly discount that just because it doesn't agree with my personal experience.

So you believe in truth by consensus?


Wow, so, in your world, possibility and truth are the same thing! You must spend a lot of money on lottery tickets!

Do I believe in a god espoused by some traditional religion? No. Do I accept the possibility that there may be some external physical basis for the shared belief of the vast majority of humanity? Yes. Science has dug into it before, and found little, but its possible with better tools, we might find something that would increase our understanding of ourselves or the world.
 
2011-09-14 04:06:37 PM  
Err.. 45:7

Isaiah 45:7 . I don't read the bible much anymore and the old folks apparently don't bother me
enough anymore for me to remember the exact scripture. lol.
 
2011-09-14 04:06:44 PM  

pwhp_67: See? God hates homosexuals and so he makes people born that way.




Homosexuality is a Learned Behaviour. The instinct for sex involves thrusting and groping and kissing and so forth. If you get horny at the sight of a naked man, or if you get horny at the sight of a naked woman, it is only because you have been taught to make that association.

Bushmen don't have any more interest in female breasts than they do in elbows. The Western fascination with breasts is not instinctive. Certain deviants find stinky feet to be objects of desire. There is very little 'hard-wiring' involved in sexual attraction. You grope and fondle and kiss with whatever you've been taught to be appropriate.
 
2011-09-14 04:07:05 PM  

Hyperbolic Hyperbole: I am unlike any of the usual trash that wades through these threads.


Either you're a troll, or delusional. Because, in reality, you are exactly like the trash in these threads. Whether or not your a regular has nothing to do with your trashy post content, bad reasoning, insult flinging, etc.

You may not be in these threads often, but you blend in so well that no one would ever guess.
 
2011-09-14 04:07:42 PM  

letrole: Homosexuality is a Learned Behaviour.


[citation needed]
 
2011-09-14 04:08:00 PM  

Sofa King Smart: 1. to control a group by making them all members of the same 'group' and 2. taking money from them.


you know, I do have a lot of issues with organized religion, mostly because Jesus wasn't really trying to build a religion, so much as a formalish network of people believing it was terribly important to help people regardless of society's view of whether or not they deserve it. In fact, special emphasis on helping people society says doesn't deserve it. And carrying out these duties even if, or perhaps especially if, it breaks them.

Even the organized religions of his day were doing it wrong. But there are certain traditions and things that I do feel are spiritually important, which is why I remain.

If I can point out two single truths can be derived from this thread

Religion =/= God
Atheism =/= Intellect
 
2011-09-14 04:08:04 PM  

Hyperbolic Hyperbole: What I see in this thread is this - atheists, or in American parlance, angry ex-Christians, believing that they are correct with absolutely no proof that they are correct, and argue with the sheer inability to see their own folly, nor believe there is any possible intellectual endgame other than their own conclusions, and everyone who agrees joins the club for "smart" people. They argue semantics like the sign and signified are the very particles of existence. They argue as though their opponents (and they see them as opponents because of their fundamentalist Christian upbringing that they hated and now rail against at every opportunity as though fundmentalist American Christianity is the very soul of Jesus himself and not the perverted backwater cousin that everyone listens to just to hear how stupid he can be) believe every equal and opposite belief with the same incredible fervor that they themselves hold their own. And it's incredible how ludicrous you make yourselves look while you do it.


Unfortunately for you:

a) I have never been a Christian.
b) I am not an atheist
c) You are still a fool that does not understand basic debate logical argument, and so attempts to substitute insult and arrogance where you lack intelligence and sound argument.

You do live up to your login name, even as you otherwise fail rather abjectly.
 
2011-09-14 04:09:53 PM  

Hyperbolic Hyperbole: Sofa King Smart: ftfm.

Your ability to take generic statements and mold them to your own beliefs are staggering. It's obvious to me that you must be right about everything you say with that kind of power to change some nouns and clauses.


my 'altered' version made equally as much sense as your 'original' version. The changes were made to help you see the rather generic quality of your original statements... it pleases me that you are able to discern my 'rightness'.
 
2011-09-14 04:11:33 PM  

Sofa King Smart: The changes were made to help you see the rather generic quality of your original statements


> implying I did not know how generic I was being to begin with
 
2011-09-14 04:11:39 PM  

RolandGunner: If a deer population spikes due to the loss of an ecosystem's apex predator and those deer proceed to overfeed on the trees to the point of deforestation (something that happened in Yellowstone), we don't consider the deer immoral. Most of us consider the clear cutting of a forest by humans to be immoral, however.


So you are saying that if homosexual population peaks and no one is reproducing that is ok. But genocide is bad? That's just weird.
 
2011-09-14 04:12:38 PM  

Leeds: Resin33: Everyone is born an atheist.

I'm not 100% sure if that's true. There is ongoing research into determining the differences in the brains of theists. It is possible that believing in the gods (or feeling a need to) is a medical condition and if so, it is likely one you are born with.

// Not kidding, several articles have even been linked on Fark


Hunters and farmers! Hunters have ADD or ADHD, and farmers believe in absolute authorities. Hmmmm.
 
2011-09-14 04:13:13 PM  

letrole: Homosexuality is a Learned Behaviour. The instinct for sex involves thrusting and groping and kissing and so forth. If you get horny at the sight of a naked man, or if you get horny at the sight of a naked woman, it is only because you have been taught to make that association.


No. Physical attraction to a sex is not "learned."
 
2011-09-14 04:14:03 PM  

pwhp_67: letrole: You used the statement in support of the greater argument. The statement is completely insane. You cannot justify human behaviour by behaviour observed in nature. Unless, of course, you do indeed think it's ok to kill and eat newborns.


I only added the bit about it occurring in nature because so many religious people have claimed that it isn't natural. If it occurs in nature, how can it be unnatural? They used to believe, and many still do, that it is a choice that people make and that it can't be the way that person was born. This is not true. If you keep insisting that it is then you're a liar.

We've been lied to by religious leaders is a true statement. And we can know we've been lied to...


Let me save you some aggravation. The guy you're talking to calls himself letrole. Read that out loud.

Don't feel bad, though. He's gotten me to bite, in the past, too. You kind of have to admire a troll that can succeed even when his name tells you what he's doing.
 
2011-09-14 04:14:55 PM  

impaler: Leeds: Resin33: Everyone is born an atheist.

I'm not 100% sure if that's true. There is ongoing research into determining the differences in the brains of theists. It is possible that believing in the gods (or feeling a need to) is a medical condition and if so, it is likely one you are born with.

// Not kidding, several articles have even been linked on Fark

Being susceptible to holding a believe, doesn't mean you're born with it.


The most recent article I read on this topic suggested that when undergoing sensory deprivation, theists often felt the presence of "another" whereas atheists simply felt the lack of sensory data.

If that finding is backed up by other research I would say that it might be a genetic flaw of some sort.
 
2011-09-14 04:15:49 PM  

Some 'Splainin' To Do: Let me save you some aggravation. The guy you're talking to calls himself letrole. Read that out loud.

Don't feel bad, though. He's gotten me to bite, in the past, too. You kind of have to admire a troll that can succeed even when his name tells you what he's doing.


Let... roll???
 
2011-09-14 04:16:30 PM  

impaler: Mikey1969: I'm not sure how many Atheists protest funerals and kill abortion doctors

Atheists would kill doctors that DON'T perform abortion!


Care to back up that assertion with a fact of any kind?
 
2011-09-14 04:17:09 PM  

Some 'Splainin' To Do: Let me save you some aggravation. The guy you're talking to calls himself letrole. Read that out loud.


My surname is Le Trôle.
 
2011-09-14 04:17:33 PM  

letrole: I see



No, no you don't. But that's OK. When people like you start agreeing with me I get worried...
 
2011-09-14 04:17:56 PM  

impaler: Leeds: Resin33: Everyone is born an atheist.

I'm not 100% sure if that's true. There is ongoing research into determining the differences in the brains of theists. It is possible that believing in the gods (or feeling a need to) is a medical condition and if so, it is likely one you are born with.

// Not kidding, several articles have even been linked on Fark

Being susceptible to holding a believe, doesn't mean you're born with it.


This. Irrational belief is a function of the human mind. We really are not that rational, when you get right down to it. Everyone has a belief system of some kind that they will defend automatically and vehemently regardless of the actual truth of those beliefs - it's just that system doesn't always center around religion. It can be nationalism, an ideology of some kind, a philosophical credo, a profession, even a sports team. The best you can ever manage to do is decide what it is you will believe in, and even then it's not completely under your control; your socialization and culture have an enormous impact.

Evolutionary psychologists speculate that we developed this capacity because it is easier to simply assume something is true and go with it in terms of cognitive load than it is to work something out from first principles every time. In an ideal world, we would work something out properly once, and then just believe it from then on, but the two capacities are not causally linked, that is, it is not necessary to reason through a proposition carefullly before engaging the capacity for irrational belief in that proposition.

It remains that conceptually a newborn infant is an atheist, of the subset of atheist usually described as a non-theist, that is, one who has never been exposed and/or cannot understand the concept of theism. It can apply under other circumstances as well. For example, my younger brother has Down's syndrome and has been deaf since birth. He is literally unable to understand something as abstract as the concept of God, because he is physically unable to be taught the concept, and lacks the mental capacity to seek to learn it on his own. He's a non-theist, and thus an atheist - but he's never made any active choice in the matter.
 
2011-09-14 04:18:17 PM  

Leeds: The most recent article I read on this topic suggested that when undergoing sensory deprivation, theists often felt the presence of "another" whereas atheists simply felt the lack of sensory data.

If that finding is backed up by other research I would say that it might be a genetic flaw of some sort.


Is this an observed thing (via brainwaves, etc.) or from discussions with the subject. If it is observed it is interesting. If it is from discussions, it would be expected...something about footprints in the sand.
 
2011-09-14 04:19:02 PM  

Some 'Splainin' To Do: You kind of have to admire a troll that can succeed even when his name tells you what he's doing



Meh, I'm bored and FARK now has more trolls than non-trolls so who else is there to talk to? Thanks mods...
 
2011-09-14 04:20:02 PM  

Hyperbolic Hyperbole: you know, I do have a lot of issues with organized religion, mostly because Jesus wasn't really trying to build a religion, so much as a formalish network of people believing it was terribly important to help people regardless of society's view of whether or not they deserve it. In fact, special emphasis on helping people society says doesn't deserve it. And carrying out these duties even if, or perhaps especially if, it breaks them.


hey we agree... the teachings of Jesus have almost nothing to do with modern Christianity.. any of the various flavors... they have all been twisted and altered to promote something each particular group wants or hates... however we disagree in that you remain 'part of the problem' by continuing to support the existing control structure. I chose to abandon religion altogether.
And even worse, I abhor the power that the 'religious right' exerts in American politics when the things they fight for (tax cuts for the rich, tax cuts for corporations, changing laws to favor corporations over individuals, cutting funding for programs for the poor...) should disgust an actual 'Christian'. Jesus himself would be hung on a cross today by the typical tea party GOP supporter.
 
2011-09-14 04:20:37 PM  

letrole: pwhp_67: See? God hates homosexuals and so he makes people born that way.



Homosexuality is a Learned Behaviour. The instinct for sex involves thrusting and groping and kissing and so forth. If you get horny at the sight of a naked man, or if you get horny at the sight of a naked woman, it is only because you have been taught to make that association.

Bushmen don't have any more interest in female breasts than they do in elbows. The Western fascination with breasts is not instinctive. Certain deviants find stinky feet to be objects of desire. There is very little 'hard-wiring' involved in sexual attraction. You grope and fondle and kiss with whatever you've been taught to be appropriate.


So if you never were turned on by National Geographic that means you were not taught that breasts were awesome?

/breasts
 
2011-09-14 04:21:28 PM  
A typical atheist:
t3.gstatic.com
 
2011-09-14 04:22:10 PM  

Mike Chewbacca: Nick the What: Agreed. When I drive home after work, I will see exactly 4 church billboard signs proclaiming some form of theism.

And I bet you'll see none like this:

[www.metroplexatheists.org image 426x420]


Nope, those are pretty rare. I've heard of them, but haven't ever seen one. Jesus billboards, on the other hand, I see all the time...
 
2011-09-14 04:22:23 PM  

impaler: Ant: Satanicpuppy: fark, I don't believe in god.

So, you're not a theist?

They should make a word for that.


Boy, wouldn't it make you happy if you could hang your little word on me, and thereby codify a lifetime of thought and skepticism down into the sort of simpleminded 1/0 dichotomy that never applies in the real world.

I think what you should really think about is why a person like myself, who quite comfortably identified as an atheist for more than a decade, now views the word as a label applied to demi-religious jerks. It's like the baggage from the Libertarian political party which has oozed down and polluted the previously inoffensive word "libertarian".

The reason you need articles like the one we're ostensibly talking about is because a group, lets call them big "A" Atheists, have made such pricks of themselves that what once was a simple descriptive word "atheist", now comes with so much baggage that it's developing a negative stereotype.

Honestly, the best thing about self-identifying as an agnostic (which is a perfectly valid, though, yes, incomplete label for what I believe), is that it pulls all the strident "agnostics are just pussy atheists" types out of the woodwork.
 
2011-09-14 04:22:35 PM  

doglover: Atheists come in two flavors:

Atheists with problems. These people are atheists like Adam Carola. They only bring up their atheism when prompted and don't try to convert you or even argue about it. They have other fish to fry. Half the time, you might not even notice they're atheists unless you ask them directly about it.

Atheists without problems. These people are like any other missionaries. They are out to tell you how great it is to be an atheist and how and why you should be an atheist too. These people have nothing meaningful in their lives to deal with. If they did, they'd be too busy dealing with it.


Substitute the word "atheist" with "true Christians/Muslims/Jews" and you'd have an accurate representation of the religious.
 
2011-09-14 04:23:48 PM  

joethebastard: letrole: Homosexuality is a Learned Behaviour.

[citation needed]


Prison. The Navy. Worse yet, a naval prison.

Homosexuality is often a compromise for those who are unable to form normal relationships. Any port in a storm, as it were.
 
2011-09-14 04:24:02 PM  

Leeds: The most recent article I read on this topic suggested that when undergoing sensory deprivation, theists often felt the presence of "another" whereas atheists simply felt the lack of sensory data.

If that finding is backed up by other research I would say that it might be a genetic flaw of some sort.


That's interesting, but that doesn't address why they became a theist or an atheist in the first place. That immediately runs into the nature vs. nurture argument; for all we know that is simply the subjective interpretation of similar physiological responses within the normal range of variation as perceived and understood through different sets of conceptual filters. Self-report methodologies have to be really, really careful to try and screen out perceptual biases that derive from socialization, and this is a huge one.

I would want to see fMRI evidence that there is a functional difference in average brain activity between theists and atheists under such conditions before I would trust it. Self-report leaves too much room for biases deriving from socialization as well as actual inherent bilogical differences.
 
2011-09-14 04:26:18 PM  

KiltedBastich: impaler: Leeds: Resin33: Everyone is born an atheist.

I'm not 100% sure if that's true. There is ongoing research into determining the differences in the brains of theists. It is possible that believing in the gods (or feeling a need to) is a medical condition and if so, it is likely one you are born with.

// Not kidding, several articles have even been linked on Fark

Being susceptible to holding a believe, doesn't mean you're born with it.

This. Irrational belief is a function of the human mind. We really are not that rational, when you get right down to it. Everyone has a belief system of some kind that they will defend automatically and vehemently regardless of the actual truth of those beliefs - it's just that system doesn't always center around religion. It can be nationalism, an ideology of some kind, a philosophical credo, a profession, even a sports team. The best you can ever manage to do is decide what it is you will believe in, and even then it's not completely under your control; your socialization and culture have an enormous impact.

Evolutionary psychologists speculate that we developed this capacity because it is easier to simply assume something is true and go with it in terms of cognitive load than it is to work something out from first principles every time. In an ideal world, we would work something out properly once, and then just believe it from then on, but the two capacities are not causally linked, that is, it is not necessary to reason through a proposition carefullly before engaging the capacity for irrational belief in that proposition.

It remains that conceptually a newborn infant is an atheist, of the subset of atheist usually described as a non-theist, that is, one who has never been exposed and/or cannot understand the concept of theism. It can apply under other circumstances as well. For example, my younger brother has Down's syndrome and has been deaf since birth. He is literally unable to understand something as abstract as the concept of God, because he is physically unable to be taught the concept, and lacks the mental capacity to seek to learn it on his own. He's a non-theist, and thus an atheist - but he's never made any active choice in the matter.


I've seen variations on this assertion a million times, and I've never seen any of them with any actual citations or descriptions of the process. Yes, this is how it looks from the outside, but don't say what it is until you can trigger it with a probe.

/There is a reason Psychology is a liberal arts degree, eh?
 
2011-09-14 04:26:34 PM  

StoPPeRmobile: So if you never were turned on by National Geographic that means you were not taught that breasts were awesome?


When coloured men look at National Geographic is it like actual porn for them?
 
2011-09-14 04:27:51 PM  

FireBreathingLiberal: 1. Do the right thing for fear of eternal suffering and damnation?


Everyone does the right thing for the same reason: because it is uncomfortable to feel guilty.

Nobody really, truly does what they believe is right based on some nebulous future promise of eternal suffering. Use your common sense. People are effectively motivated by the same shiat: avoiding discomfort and trying to get their dicks wet.

There is not some grand dichotomy between your thoughts and the thoughts of the the religious, except for probably about 90 minutes a week, and to be honest, our minds wander a lot during those 90 minutes. Religious people are not brain-damaged, they are not sub-human and you are in all likelihood worse people if there is some kind of moral difference.

Setting up this gulf between the groups is something assholes do to demonize and de-humanize their enemies. Don't be that asshole. Religious people are not your enemy, they make your water safe to drink, fly your planes around and watch your kids while you're at work. It makes you seem disingenuous at best to cheerfully live among them yet revile them in private. At worst, it makes you seem paranoid and delusional.
 
2011-09-14 04:27:56 PM  

impaler: Mike Chewbacca: Nick the What: Agreed. When I drive home after work, I will see exactly 4 church billboard signs proclaiming some form of theism.

And I bet you'll see none like this:

[www.metroplexatheists.org image 426x420]

I think I've pretty much seen every single atheist sign that has been put up in the entire US, at least in the past 10 years. Because they always created such tabloid outrage.

I've never seen one in person though.


Exactly. We get to put up with hundreds of religious signs but if ONE atheist billboard gets put up, everyone wants to burn all of us atheists in the town square.
 
2011-09-14 04:28:09 PM  

letrole: Some 'Splainin' To Do: Let me save you some aggravation. The guy you're talking to calls himself letrole. Read that out loud.

My surname is Le Trôle.


Sure it is. In the same way that The Riddler's name is Edward Nigma, no doubt.

Don't get me wrong: I'm not a big fan of trolling, but I've always been impressed by the quality and subtlety of your work. You really have managed to perfect the art.

I just felt a bit sad for the guy and thought it'd be nice to let him off of the hook.
 
2011-09-14 04:28:23 PM  

letrole: joethebastard: letrole: Homosexuality is a Learned Behaviour.

[citation needed]

Prison. The Navy. Worse yet, a naval prison.

Homosexuality is often a compromise for those who are unable to form normal relationships. Any port in a storm, as it were.


Individuals who return to normal heterosexual behaviours when the opportunity arises, as opposed to actual homosexuals who are never interested in heterosexuality in the first place.

This is how I know you have never studied the psychology of sexual behaviour. This behaviour has been studied, and it is markedly different from full homosexual orientation.

Not that I really expect a troll like you to actually bother to learn something that would differ from your worldview. You certainly have given every reason to believe you are incapable of learning from new evidence that contradicts your existing beliefs.
 
2011-09-14 04:29:25 PM  

Shazam999: Dimensio: Shazam999: Dimensio: Shazam999: Atheists are douches.

Your use of a personal attack does not constitute a logical argument.

Are you a nice person? Do you care if people think you are? If you don't, then why do you care so much about what other people think?

You have still presented no logical argument.

Do you care what other people think?


You have still presented no logical argument.
 
2011-09-14 04:30:56 PM  

I May Be Crazy But...: daxxenos:
You're quite right. Let's junk all this religious dogma that keeps interfering with what we want to do. I personally feel we should get rid of all these religious laws that slop over from this whole God thing. I mean, really, "Thou shalt not kill?" That's the first one I'd get rid of. Democrats should be used as targets. Along with their wives, children and pets. Morality is a phoney, religious construct. I should be able to rape, torture and steal to my own satisfaction. Atheists would be the first to agree. Right?

As an atheist, I have a few reason for being moral. But they all really come back to the Golden Rule. You remember that one, right? "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

Because I am not special. And I don't want to be killed. I don't want to be raped. Or tortured. Or have my things stolen. So I assume others are the same, and cannot justify doing it to them. They are my equals and I will treat them as such.

So when I'm told that there is no atheist morality by a person who believes that they are one of their god's chosen people, I can't help but conclude that their moral code is based on something different than mine. For the simple reason that they believe they are special.

So I do understand why they might have trouble understanding the basis for mine. But it would be nice if they tried.

"Therefore all things whatever ye desire that men should do to you, thus do ye also do to them; for this is the law and the prophets"

Matthew 7:12 (You left that citation out. I'm sure it was just accidental.)

I was under the impression that you wanted to scrub all corrupting traces of religion from from the Earth? Which is it to be? Do we accept that Biblical morality, with two thousand years of relative success at a basic, individual level works?

One thing you twits like to ignore is that, ultimately, religion is a personal decision between a man and his Deity. Every King, dictator, President, and leftist hypocrite like to wave religion as a justification, or blames religion if some silly morality stands in the way of an "I Wanna!"

Or do we bag the whole Christian concept, and elect you and your morality as the New God? I'm still for gutting you like a deer, setting your entire family on fire, and going home guilt free, based on an atheist contempt for God and your sneering mockery of anyone who believes in such moral restrictions.

Hot flash: You ARE NOT EQUAL! Some people are better than you. Like me. I'm sure there are Libs are worse than you. Suck it up. It's REALITY. Equality Fiction is a popular justification for oppressors. It keeps the sheep from growing teeth.

This is why libs always wind up on the Left side of the Intellectual Bell Curve.

 
2011-09-14 04:31:14 PM  

Ant: Not a theist? You're an atheist, regardless of what you do or do not know.


Atheism is alone in that it is a classification based on not possessing certain thoughts. Conveniently makes it impossible to talk about, but inconveniently makes a fire hydrant atheist, rendering the title effectively meaningless. Please don't trot this one out any more.
 
2011-09-14 04:31:24 PM  

letrole: StoPPeRmobile: So if you never were turned on by National Geographic that means you were not taught that breasts were awesome?

When coloured men look at National Geographic is it like actual porn for them?


They show anal in National Geographic now?
 
2011-09-14 04:31:26 PM  

give me doughnuts: wiregeek: Sticky Hands: Atheists are like onions.

delicious when diced in my mashed potatoes?

What kind of Philistine puts onions in mashed potatos?


farking THIS.

we had some sodexho guys do that once. i stopped eating there after that.
 
2011-09-14 04:31:36 PM  

impaler: letrole: Homosexuality is a Learned Behaviour. The instinct for sex involves thrusting and groping and kissing and so forth. If you get horny at the sight of a naked man, or if you get horny at the sight of a naked woman, it is only because you have been taught to make that association.

No. Physical attraction to a sex is not "learned."


No, it's copypasta. He's going to say later his surname is le Trolé.
 
2011-09-14 04:32:46 PM  

StoPPeRmobile: letrole: StoPPeRmobile: So if you never were turned on by National Geographic that means you were not taught that breasts were awesome?

When coloured men look at National Geographic is it like actual porn for them?

They show anal in National Geographic now?


wat
 
2011-09-14 04:32:47 PM  

pwhp_67: Some 'Splainin' To Do: You kind of have to admire a troll that can succeed even when his name tells you what he's doing


Meh, I'm bored and FARK now has more trolls than non-trolls so who else is there to talk to? Thanks mods...


I don't think that Fark is particularly bad (especially compared to cesspools like 4Chan).

From my highly subjective recollection, the amount of trolling we get around here is on par with the amount that I remember from Usenet.

It's also kind of hard to moderate trolling since it's a fact that no matter how outrageous a troll gets, there's always going to be someone, somewhere who'd say the exact same things without any sense of irony or duplicity.
 
2011-09-14 04:33:23 PM  

Hyperbolic Hyperbole: If I can point out the obvious truth that can be derived from this thread

Religion =/= God =/= Intellect

 
2011-09-14 04:33:37 PM  

Satanicpuppy: I've seen variations on this assertion a million times, and I've never seen any of them with any actual citations or descriptions of the process. Yes, this is how it looks from the outside, but don't say what it is until you can trigger it with a probe.

/There is a reason Psychology is a liberal arts degree, eh?


Google scholar is your friend. It's out there, I read papers on it when I was doing my undergrad degree. And actually, psychology is normally offered as both a BA and a BSc because it straddles the line between the social sciences like sociology and anthropology and the physical sciences like biology and chemisty.

Furthermore, you just asserted that your incredulity is somehow more valid than the work of the specialists of several related disciplines of science, simply because you don't like the conclusion. Note therefore that your assertion that we don't all have irrational beliefs is itself an irrational belief that you hold despite the evidence. You yourself are an example of the phenomenon described.
 
Displayed 50 of 917 comments

First | « | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report