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  
•       •       •

38417 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 04:33:59 PM  

mccallcl: 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.


Loaded words are fun.
 
2011-09-14 04:35:42 PM  

mccallcl: 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.


I'll be sure to let my apolitical friends know that they don't exist.
 
2011-09-14 04:36:19 PM  

mccallcl: 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.


Fire hydrants are incapable of forming beliefs. Show me an entity that can form beliefs, that does not hold a belief in a deity, and I will then show you an atheist.
 
2011-09-14 04:37:08 PM  
so... are organisms that reproduce by penis fencing gay?
 
2011-09-14 04:37:23 PM  

Some 'Splainin' To Do: 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.


I put the most irritating trolls on ignore, and then I switch it to hide the posts of people who respond to the troll.

Some threads are just a wall of grey comment headers.

I actually don't block letrole, however, because he amuses me. A lot of professional tolls amuse me though...The ones I ignore are the perpetual poo throwing threadshiatters who wander from thread to thread spewing derp.
 
2011-09-14 04:38:02 PM  

daxxenos: 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.


You argue the point that morality can only originate from religion. This has been proven false time and again, but would you rather lash out with your barbaric fantasies than be reasonable.

The god of Abraham is a petulant, childish monster. Why would emulate him or his words? You don't need a recycled collection old oral traditions to tell you not to hurt people or steal from others. If you do, you are every bit the monster as your god.

The golden rule should be sufficient, but for others, it must be written down in a boring tome and rehashed loudly and publicly in order for it to sink in.
 
2011-09-14 04:39:27 PM  

impaler: 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???


Exactly!! Don't you see that he's trying to Rick Roll us!?
 
2011-09-14 04:42:03 PM  

KiltedBastich: 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.


Uh huh. I was a cognitive science major, and I thought I'd take a psych class...The only theories that weren't discredited theories from the philosophy of mind, were so oversimplified so as to be little better than an erratically factual cliffs notes of the brain.

So feel free not to tell me about the "science" of psychology.
 
2011-09-14 04:42:09 PM  

pwhp_67: Not collecting stamps is a hobby



Seeing that fark has several huge threads a week about not collecting stamps, where all the people who don't collect stamps talk very passionately about how great it is to not collect stamps, and how non-stamp collectors are better than every one else - yes I would have to agree simply by factual observation that not collecting stamps is, in fact, a hobby.
 
2011-09-14 04:42:11 PM  

justtray: He was saying that when Theists come and say God exists because xyz, (2+2 = 7), and then you point out that that's not factually correct, 2+2 actually equals 4, that is not being aggressive or rude.


In what scenario are theists doing this? How often does someone come and say God exists to you? In your mind, does the very existence of the Bible cry out in a tiny voice all the time?

Maybe it's because I don't live in some small-town middle-American shiathole, but nobody talks about religion in my circle of peers, and if they did, we'd be polite because we are polite. It's like if you brought up that your mom was beautiful and someone chimed in that she's ugly. It doesn't matter if your mom is ugly, your mom is important to you and the belief that your mom is beautiful helps shape your identity. Therefore, for me to point out that your mom is in fact an ugly person is rude.

This is why people think atheists are aspy jerks: because they manage to pretend not to understand human nature for huge stretches of time while they are discussing religious thought.
 
2011-09-14 04:42:34 PM  

snuff3r: i need you to keep your personal beliefs to yourselves.


Who cares what you need?
 
2011-09-14 04:42:35 PM  
 
2011-09-14 04:47:28 PM  

Satanicpuppy: Uh huh. I was a cognitive science major, and I thought I'd take a psych class...The only theories that weren't discredited theories from the philosophy of mind, were so oversimplified so as to be little better than an erratically factual cliffs notes of the brain.

So feel free not to tell me about the "science" of psychology.


Then you did not take a very good psych class, and have since used it as the basis for your irrational beliefs about your own rationality, when your existing training should be sufficient for you to know all about the heuristics and biases inherent to human reasoning processes, and therefore why a sample size as small as you had is not a good basis for an informed an opinion, as well as the way humans selectively attend more to information that confirms their existing beliefs than those that disconfirm those beliefs, which after all is the entire reason why the scientific method is needed in the first place.

In other words, that you hold the position you are now defending while claiming a background in cognitive science makes it worse, not better. You should already know better that to assume you do not have irrational beliefs.
 
2011-09-14 04:47:30 PM  

impaler: Satanicpuppy: And you wonder why people feel the need to put out articles debunking the "myth" that atheists are aggressive and rude?

See, for the vast majority of agnostics, the whole god/no god question is irrelevant. They just don't give a shiat. Then you come along, and you say, "Well, you don't believe in god, that means you're on my team, and you have to wear this shirt, and read these books, and have all these other beliefs that I have."

And when the poor agnostic says, "Hey, I don't think I believe this stuff..." you tell him he's wrong.

Uh?

Person1: "2+2 = 7!"
Person2: "No. 2 (1,2) plus 2 (3, 4) equals 4. 2+2=4"

Is person2 really being aggressive and rude?

Pointing out the meaning of words isn't someone trying to convert you to "their team." It isn't aggression, it isn't rudeness, and it certainly isn't a demand that you have to wear t-shirts or read books.


No, it's more like

Catholic: 1/0 = INFINITY!!!!
Agnostic: 1/0 is undefined.
Atheist: Guys, don't you are all stupid. if you take 1 cookie, and divide it among zero people, than every person (there aren't any people,) has zero cookies. That's why 1/0 is 0.
Agnostic: no! it's undifined!
Atheist: shut up.
Agnostic: ok.
Catholic: ITS INFINITY
Atheist: No.
Catholic: yes.
Atheist: no.
Catholic: yes.
Atheist: no.
...

Stereotyping is fun.
 
Ant
2011-09-14 04:47:53 PM  

Satanicpuppy: 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.


What do you mean never applies in the real world?

Let's try some 1/0 simple-minded dichotomies:

Are you a human? yes/no
Are you a professional race car driver? yes/no
Do you believe that leprechauns exist? yes/no
Do you believe that gods exist? yes/no

All of those can be answered by a yes or a no
 
2011-09-14 04:47:53 PM  
Religious joke time!
Q. What did the atheist say after he witnessed the rapture?
A. "Well, I'll be damned..."

/narf!
 
2011-09-14 04:48:47 PM  

KiltedBastich: 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.


So it's learned. Thanks for confirming that. The earlier it's learned, the less chance that there's some sort of reversion (or even conversion) to normal behaviour. Round and Round We Go.


KiltedBastich: 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.

I find your simplicity engaging.
 
2011-09-14 04:49:43 PM  

KiltedBastich: Satanicpuppy: Uh huh. I was a cognitive science major, and I thought I'd take a psych class...The only theories that weren't discredited theories from the philosophy of mind, were so oversimplified so as to be little better than an erratically factual cliffs notes of the brain.

So feel free not to tell me about the "science" of psychology.

Then you did not take a very good psych class, and have since used it as the basis for your irrational beliefs about your own rationality, when your existing training should be sufficient for you to know all about the heuristics and biases inherent to human reasoning processes, and therefore why a sample size as small as you had is not a good basis for an informed an opinion, as well as the way humans selectively attend more to information that confirms their existing beliefs than those that disconfirm those beliefs, which after all is the entire reason why the scientific method is needed in the first place.

In other words, that you hold the position you are now defending while claiming a background in cognitive science makes it worse, not better. You should already know better that to assume you do not have irrational beliefs.


Uh huh. Go play with your electrodes and your mice.
 
2011-09-14 04:50:15 PM  
It's nice to see people standing up for what they don't believe in...
 
2011-09-14 04:50:16 PM  

Some 'Splainin' To Do: I'll be sure to let my apolitical friends know that they don't exist.


Go for it, although that is an odd conclusion to draw from what I posted! You may wish to tell them that "apoliticism" is not very useful to talk about instead, which is way closer.

KiltedBastich: Show me an entity that can form beliefs, that does not hold a belief in a deity, and I will then show you an atheist.


And then what? What can we say about that person otherwise? Why would it be even useful to label them?

/dogs are atheist
//"entity that is capable of forming beliefs but does not have a belief in a deity" is getting warmer, but you're still not close to the actual, working definition in all of our minds, except that definition has an attack surface and is therefore not as fun to trot out with a smug "a-hah!" vibe
 
2011-09-14 04:51:22 PM  
daxxenos:

So tell me, if you believe your God commanded you to commit atrocities, like fly planes into skyscrapers, would you be morally justified in doing so? Yes or no.

If yes, then you sympathize with the 9/11 terrorists' position, and ultimately you would have to be commanded by your bible to stone adulterers and kill non-believers. Why aren't you doing so then?

If no, then congratulations! You share secularly defined morals and ethics, and you've made a moral determination without the input of a God or a holy book.
 
2011-09-14 04:51:56 PM  
Last weekend I was mowing my lawn and I saw this Spider trying to get out of the way. I stopped and ushered him out of danger.

No moral compas my ass.
 
2011-09-14 04:52:17 PM  

letrole: So it's learned



Nope. But keep on reminding us why we don't take you seriously...
 
2011-09-14 04:53:01 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]


It's curious that atheists feel compelled to evangelize just like the theists they loath.
 
2011-09-14 04:53:55 PM  

Rent is too damn high: daxxenos:

So tell me, if you believe your God commanded you to commit atrocities, like fly planes into skyscrapers, would you be morally justified in doing so? Yes or no.

If yes, then you sympathize with the 9/11 terrorists' position, and ultimately you would have to be commanded by your bible to stone adulterers and kill non-believers. Why aren't you doing so then?

If no, then congratulations! You share secularly defined morals and ethics, and you've made a moral determination without the input of a God or a holy book.


Strawman. Religious ethics are nearly indistinguishable from secular ethics (e.g "laws") since both are the product of human behaviour.
 
2011-09-14 04:53:56 PM  

mccallcl: justtray: He was saying that when Theists come and say God exists because xyz, (2+2 = 7), and then you point out that that's not factually correct, 2+2 actually equals 4, that is not being aggressive or rude.

In what scenario are theists doing this? How often does someone come and say God exists to you? In your mind, does the very existence of the Bible cry out in a tiny voice all the time?


You're standing in the middle of a huge debate about the very subject, and you wonder where this is happening?

No one is saying that all theists compulsively go around arguing theism 24/7, but it's kind of disingenuous to claim that no one ever tries to argue that their God exists.

Maybe it's because I don't live in some small-town middle-American shiathole, but nobody talks about religion in my circle of peers, and if they did, we'd be polite because we are polite. It's like if you brought up that your mom was beautiful and someone chimed in that she's ugly. It doesn't matter if your mom is ugly, your mom is important to you and the belief that your mom is beautiful helps shape your identity. Therefore, for me to point out that your mom is in fact an ugly person is rude.

That's fine. However, it's equally true that quite a few people seem to get upset by the mere fact that someone is an atheist because they take the simple fact of their atheism as an implied rebuke.

I'll give you a personal example. I do not go out of my way to advertise my atheism, nor do I try to seek out arguments, but if someone asks me about my religion, I will tell them I'm an atheist.

Can you guess what the most common response is? Why. As in, "Why don't you believe in God?"

If you think about that, it's kind of remarkably rude. No polite person would ever respond to someone who said they were Jewish by immediately asking them why they don't believe in Christ, but it's considered perfectly normal and acceptable to interrogate someone when they say that they don't believe in God.

But... oh goodness... whenever any atheist questions religion in any context, suddenly we're all rude monsters who probably piss on our neighbors potted plants when they aren't looking.

This is why people think atheists are aspy jerks: because they manage to pretend not to understand human nature for huge stretches of time while they are discussing religious thought.

I would politely suggest that you, yourself, are engaging in quite a bit of projection, there. Any time you're ascribing characteristics to an entire group based upon your own limited interactions with that group, you're engaging in the same jerky behavior that you're assigning to us.

The bottom line is, if you want to believe in a god, that's fine by me (as long as you don't try to force those beliefs into law), but if you're going to ask me why I'm an atheist, you should probably be prepared to hear the answer.
 
Ant
2011-09-14 04:54:43 PM  

Hyperbolic Hyperbole: Riddle me this, Epicurus - would a just Creator allow hackers to obtain naked photos of Scarlett Johannsson? shiat yeah he would. (NSFW)

Theists - 1
Atheists - 0


Halle-farking-lujah!! I have seen the light!
 
2011-09-14 04:54:53 PM  

Some 'Splainin' To Do: I just felt a bit sad for the guy and thought it'd be nice to let him off of the hook.


Stove Hot.

How else will they learn?
 
2011-09-14 04:55:19 PM  

vonster: 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]

It's curious that atheists feel compelled to evangelize just like the theists they loath.


Saying, "Hey, you atheists out there, you're not alone" isn't the same thing as proselytizing.
 
2011-09-14 04:56:56 PM  

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


Well, I wouldn't say that is 100% correct. Our sense of sexuality and what we find attractive is a process that takes time to map. One does not simply learn what one is going to find attractive. It is a reiterative process that an individual is not the only influence of.
 
2011-09-14 04:57:39 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.


So when did people first "learn" to be homosexual? If it doesn't occur naturally, your proof would be in being able to nail down specifically when and where homosexuality was introduced to humans, and by whom.

Otherwise, you're just talking out your ass...

BTW: Gay people thrust, grope, kiss "and so forth", just in case you were confused.

Of course, if what you are saying is that people have to "learn" to get horny at the sight of a naked individual, whether they are Gay or Straight, I sure would like to know when that "class" took place, because I don't remember it. I've always been attracted to women, but since I never was "taught" to be attracted to women, I just always thought that I was "born" Straight, but I guess you have proof otherwise.

According to YOUR logic, we're all born Bisexual and "learn" whether or not to be heterosexual or homosexual.

Please don't hesitate to clear up further muddy the issue...
 
2011-09-14 04:57:40 PM  

pwhp_67: Nope. But keep on reminding us why we don't take you seriously...


Is that the royal "we", the forum "we", or the more than one dude rattling around inside your skull "we"?
 
2011-09-14 04:59:39 PM  

Shazam999: What's the one where you don't care if He's real or not?

That's the one I tend to be.

Atheists are douches.


There needs to be a name for us folks who just don't give a shiat whether "god" exists or not.
Apathists, maybe?
 
2011-09-14 05:00:47 PM  

letrole: So it's learned. Thanks for confirming that. The earlier it's learned, the less chance that there's some sort of reversion (or even conversion) to normal behaviour. Round and Round We Go.


No, dum-dum. Those men were never actually homosexual. They were just opportunists with no other options. If you interviewed them, you'd find most were fantasizing about women, because they never stopped being heterosexual despite having no heterosexual outlets.

Actual homosexual men are not interested in women in the first place, and this can be demonstrated.

letrole: I find your simplicity engaging.


I find your willful ignorance pitiable, and your inability to understand that human sexuality is complex and mostly innate laughable.

Satanicpuppy: Uh huh. Go play with your electrodes and your mice.


Do you see what you just did there? You simply dismissed out of hand the points I raised because they contradict your existing beliefs.

Small sample sizes leading to skewed understandings is established fact. The confirmation bias is established fact. Yet you engaged in both of those errors, and dismiss my pointing it out to you out of hand because it contradicts your pre-existing beliefs.

That is the very essence of an automatic defense of an irrational belief. Whether or not you choose to try and learn from that, you have just amply demonstrated it to anyone else reading the thread.
 
2011-09-14 05:00:50 PM  

mccallcl: In what scenario are theists doing this? How often does someone come and say God exists to you?


Ever been on Facebook? It happens. All. The. Time. Usually it's just some ninny posting something about "let's pray for this urban legend child to recover from his traumatic brain injury/illness" but sometimes it's "I got in a minor fender bender yesterday" and someone responds with "Praying for you!" Gee, farking thanks. How about you take me to the car place instead and you know, actually do something helpful?
 
2011-09-14 05:01:26 PM  

Mikey1969: 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.

So when did people first "learn" to be homosexual? If it doesn't occur naturally, your proof would be in being able to nail down specifically when and where homosexuality was introduced to humans, and by whom.

Otherwise, you're just talking out your ass...

BTW: Gay people thrust, grope, kiss "and so forth", just in case you were confused.

Of course, if what you are saying is that people have to "learn" to get horny at the sight of a naked individual, whether they are Gay or Straight, I sure would like to know when that "class" took place, because I don't remember it. I've always been attracted to women, but since I never was "taught" to be attracted to women, I just always thought that I was "born" Straight, but I guess you have proof otherwise.

According to YOUR logic, we're all born Bisexual and "learn" whether or not to be heterosexual or homosexual.

Please don't hesitate to clear up further muddy the issue...


Maybe this visual aid will clarify the issue for you:
i18.photobucket.com
 
kgf
2011-09-14 05:01:31 PM  

LL316: kgf: Shazam999: What's the one where you don't care if He's real or not?

That's the one I tend to be.

Atheists are douches.

If you don't care and you don't believe, you're already an atheist, so you just called yourself a douche.

If you don't care and you do believe, you're an idiot because you don't realize the absurdity of your own viewpoint.

So which is it - douche or idiot? I'm guessing you're an idiot.

He's an idiot because you're too small minded to grasp what he meant?


What he meant was to insult atheists, and his means of doing so was to say something clever, but it wasn't clever at all, it was stupid becuase he didn't think it through. Me not wasting my time trying to get some meaning out of something that makes no sense does not make me small-minded. But now I've wasted that time anyway and come to the conclusion that he is one of those people who cover their ears and make ambulance noises so as not to hear things he doesn't want to think about. That's small-minded.
 
2011-09-14 05:02:14 PM  

vonster: t's curious that atheists feel compelled to evangelize just like the theists they loat


When group A believes that group B deserves to be tortured, then group B might just be a tad vocal.
 
2011-09-14 05:02:42 PM  

mccallcl: Some 'Splainin' To Do: I'll be sure to let my apolitical friends know that they don't exist.

Go for it, although that is an odd conclusion to draw from what I posted! You may wish to tell them that "apoliticism" is not very useful to talk about instead, which is way closer.KiltedBastich: Show me an entity that can form beliefs, that does not hold a belief in a deity, and I will then show you an atheist.


I was snarking at your contention that the word atheism is unique in describing an absence of beliefs, which is why I provided a counter-example.

If you want to be serious, the reason that atheism gets talked about is simply because theism is simultaneously ubiquitous and it has a discernible impact on the lives of those who aren't part of it.

If history had never had an religious crusades (and I'm not limiting those to the Christian Crusades), if people weren't seriously trying to push Creationism as a valid alternative to evolution, if people weren't making policy decisions based on religious scriptures, and so forth and so on, then this really would only be a topic of academic interest.

But we don't live in a world where religion is irrelevant. Religion is such a prominent part of our culture that those of us who lack it do stand out and do, indeed, often find ourselves under attack for being apart from everyone else.

In the context of the real world, religion matters, and so does a lack of religion, and it's kind of silly to suppose that this is just because of some sort of semantic quirk.
 
Ant
2011-09-14 05:03:52 PM  

jso2897: Shazam999: What's the one where you don't care if He's real or not?

That's the one I tend to be.

Atheists are douches.

There needs to be a name for us folks who just don't give a shiat whether "god" exists or not.
Apathists, maybe?


Apatheists is a term that has been used.
 
2011-09-14 05:04:22 PM  

snuff3r: I got as far as "pleading for tolerance of atheists".

As an atheist i couldn't care less what you religious people believe - personally, i think you're all braindamaged to have not let go of the beliefs I had as a six year old. But in the course of my day, i couldn't give a rats ass about any of you and what you believe in. I don't want to hear it. I don't want to be aware of it. I don't want you to force your beliefs on me or my kids. I want you to keep it to yourselves. Religion shouldn't play a part in politics, the office, the classroom and especially in regards to how the country is run.

If you step over that line, then I will make it clear where I stand. Religious people can call me rude, lacking in morals, etc, but honestly, i can't see past the shiat you're displaying far enough to allow me the ability to care what you think.

I don't need you to tolerate me, i need you to keep your personal beliefs to yourselves.


Way to proove that #3 is often actually true, especially on Fark.
 
2011-09-14 05:04:51 PM  

KiltedBastich:
That is the very essence of an automatic defense of an irrational belief. Whether or not you choose to try and learn from that, you have just amply demonstrated it to anyone else reading the thread.


I didn't defend psychology, I attacked it! How can you said I defended an irrational belief? Prescribe yourself a valium man.
 
2011-09-14 05:05:06 PM  

Mikey1969: According to YOUR logic, we're all born Bisexual and "learn" whether or not to be heterosexual or homosexual.


Not bisexual. More like unformed, and then the influences of society and proper role models and peer pressure take their course.

We're all born as thieves and liars and murderers and sadists as well. It's only the structure of society that discourages these traits.
 
2011-09-14 05:05:47 PM  

vonster: 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]

It's curious that atheists feel compelled to evangelize just like the theists they loath.


Wow, you couldn't possibly have misinterpreted that sign worse than this... All they're saying is 'Hey, we're out here too...', they aren't telling you anything about how it's time to repent, how Gays are going to Hell, how the magic Sky Wizard is counting how many times you show up at a certain building on a Sunday, none of that. Sorry, you majorly fail on this "point", but thanks for trying, it goes a little closer to setting a Fark record for comments, but we have a lot farther to go to get the record, so feel free to message back with some wild misinterpretation of this post, if it will make you feel better.
 
2011-09-14 05:06:36 PM  

letrole: Some 'Splainin' To Do: I just felt a bit sad for the guy and thought it'd be nice to let him off of the hook.

Stove Hot.

How else will they learn?


Oh, come on. You can let one measly fish get away, can't you? Especially since you have people who are still biting in spite of the fact that I outed you.
 
2011-09-14 05:06:37 PM  

jso2897: Mikey1969: 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.

So when did people first "learn" to be homosexual? If it doesn't occur naturally, your proof would be in being able to nail down specifically when and where homosexuality was introduced to humans, and by whom.

Otherwise, you're just talking out your ass...

BTW: Gay people thrust, grope, kiss "and so forth", just in case you were confused.

Of course, if what you are saying is that people have to "learn" to get horny at the sight of a naked individual, whether they are Gay or Straight, I sure would like to know when that "class" took place, because I don't remember it. I've always been attracted to women, but since I never was "taught" to be attracted to women, I just always thought that I was "born" Straight, but I guess you have proof otherwise.

According to YOUR logic, we're all born Bisexual and "learn" whether or not to be heterosexual or homosexual.

Please don't hesitate to clear up further muddy the issue...

Maybe this visual aid will clarify the issue for you:
[i18.photobucket.com image 470x576]


LOL, that really DID help. Thanks!
 
2011-09-14 05:07:03 PM  

Elemental79: vonster: t's curious that atheists feel compelled to evangelize just like the theists they loat

When group A believes that group B deserves to be tortured, then group B might just be a tad vocal.


Wait, now I'm confused, which is group A, and which is group B?

You know what's wrong with modern society? Everyone fights over who gets to be the one with the persecution complex. Get over yourselves.
 
2011-09-14 05:07:44 PM  

Satanicpuppy: Strawman. Religious ethics are nearly indistinguishable from secular ethics (e.g "laws") since both are the product of human behaviour.


Not a strawman because I didn't represent anyone else's opinion on the matter, I'm asking a question about their opinion. You're looking for false dichotomy, but anyways I agree that they are both the product of human behavior. But, religious values can differ greatly from humanistic/secular values. For instance, terrorism is unjustifiable by humanistic and secular values (unless you've found a secular humanist that believes terrorism is justified, and no, I don't find Robespierre to be particularly humanistic), but in religious contexts, terrorism is often considered justified.
 
2011-09-14 05:07:45 PM  
Late to the party, but I have to point this one out:

3) Atheists are aggressive and rude. [....] This myth only persists because belief is unconsciously privileged over atheism, causing people to believe it's somehow ruder for an atheist to say, "I don't believe in God and here's why" than for a believer to intrude in your personal space with pamphlets, attack people when they're feeling low with religious claims, knock on your door to proselytize, or force your children to recite religious language in school.

Bullshiat, I find them both to be equally annoying.

Proselytizers of all creeds: I don't give a flying fark what you believe or disbelieve in, and no, I'm not interested in joining, now stop blathering about it. If I want more information about ____, I'll seek it out myself.
 
2011-09-14 05:08:56 PM  

Elemental79: vonster: t's curious that atheists feel compelled to evangelize just like the theists they loat

When group A believes that group B deserves to be tortured, then group B might just be a tad vocal.


You don't say?

t1.gstatic.com

/realizes liberal and atheist aren't the same thing
 
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 »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report