I drunk what: FTDA: I drunk what: aagrajag: AverageAmericanGuy: DammitIForgotMyLogin: AverageAmericanGuy: aagrajag: AverageAmericanGuy: jso2897:How can I "reject" that which I never possessed the capacity to accept to begin with? Would you say that I "refuse" to sprout wings and fly? It may not be as easy to comprehend what goes on in other people's heads as you seem to think it is.Do you accept that there are people who believe in God?Only grudgingly. It depresses me.And you refuse to also believe?If you're seriously leading up to the idea that not believing in the existence of something is the same as rejecting it, perhaps you'd let me know why you've rejected the check for $1m that I just placed in your handsAre you comparing a physical thing (a check) with a spiritual thing (God)?Note that AverageAmericanGuy has now subtly shifted the argument such that it now rests upon the definition of "spiritual". Which is easily one of the most vague, hazy concepts evar. You can't win here, guys.can you touch it with your tongue? No. then it's not real and your an idiot who believes in unicorns, fairies and invisible sky wizardsyou should not be allowed to own firearmsnice try religious retardsAll four of the people that you replied to are professed Atheists or Anti-Theists. Calling them religious retards shows your lack of reading comprehension. Congrats on winning your award.[i1197.photobucket.com image 399x582]no thanks, i already got one didn't you notice the badge next to my logon? work the jaw sweety
Z-clipped: aagrajag: Z-clipped: monkey_licker: Atheism is also perfectly rational, if you make the same presuppositions that atheists make.The point is to make as few presuppositions as possible. You're ascribing presuppositions to atheists that are really just re-statements of your own bald assertions. 99.99% of atheists don't deny the possibility of a god's existence. We just tend to assign it a more realistic probability (on par with that of unicorns and the Tooth Fairy) since we realize that wanting something to be true doesn't actually increase its likelihood.monkey_licker: and in some extreme branches of atheism, worthy of destruction.Whothewhatnow?monkey_licker: I don't understand why it can't be that simple. Why does either side feel compelled to denigrate and attack anyone who disagrees?Burning people at the stake, decrying them as incapable of morality, and passing laws that force them to the sidelines of society are not quite the same as making some smug remarks on the internet. Have some perspective.Hey now, they haven't done that since we removed their legal ability to do so; credit where credit is due, right?Well, the other night I was at a restaurant, and a Christian line cook burned... my steak... so close enough. /I said mid-rare, you Jesus-loving heretic!
Martian_Astronomer: Ah yes, this guy. He was the guy who made a splash a while ago for suggesting that there were certain aspects of religion that atheists should adopt for both holistic and PR reasons, and most of what I've read about him since then has been along those same lines. As such, I tend to have mixed feelings. On the one hand I understand that people find comfort, grounding, and community in ceremony, codes, traditions, etc., so I don't object to that, per se - do what you need to do to stay sane.However, I also tend to agree a lot with a few criticisms of his ideas. First, part of what gives religion its ability to gain/retain adherents is its coerciveness. At the worst, this can be "do X or Hell," but even in more positive communities, you're still getting a message that "belonging to X is a better way/the best way/the only way to truly live." An atheist community won't have that luxury of being able to say that. We've already got a religion that draws from various traditions but doesn't make you believe any of them: The Unitarian Universalists. They can be nice people, but they lack a great deal of what people find motivating about religion.The second criticism I agree with is that it's incredibly condescending and paternalistic to imply "Well, the little people are so stupid that they will never break free from harmful religions unless we introduce a pseudo-religion to act as a palatable substitute." Not only is this tremendously disrespectful to people that you want as your allies, but many of the people who have left religious communities are very, very sensitive to any institution that tries to establish creeds, create organized structures for endorsing standards of behavior, or act authoritarian. Some atheists admire or miss religious traditions and might be open to the idea, but a lot of them want absolutely nothing to do with anything that even resembles a religion, so if you tell them there's an "atheist church" that they ought to join they will tell you you ...
Two16: No no no... please read my response, then post back to me.
FTDA: I noticed the, "I waste $60/year to feel special,"
Mega Steve: OtherLittleGuy: Dead for Tax Reasons: Thou shall not laugh at believers for talking to their invisible friend in the sky[picturespoilers.files.wordpress.com image 704x550]Harvey > God
monkey_licker: Farking Canuck: This is a strawman ... please do not tell us, a vast, culturally and educationally diverse group, what we think and/or why we think it.For most atheists it boils down to this: The religious claim god is real. The atheists asks to see the evidence supporting this claim. The religious offer none.It is this simple: Non-trivial claims require evidence. Extraordinary claims required extraordinary evidence.You aren't saying anything different from what I said. You are asking for empirical evidence. It is the only evidence atheists will accept. There is a fundamental mismatch because that request is based on the assumption that empirical knowledge is the only valid type of knowledge. I do not live under that assumption.
FTDA: All four of the people that you replied to are professed Atheists or Anti-Theists. Calling them religious retards shows your lack of reading comprehension. Congrats on winning your award.
Farking Canuck: 100% wrong. I am asking for any evidence of any type. But it has to have some form of quality.
Farking Canuck: * For some reason he feels that atheists, who have no relationships with each other, no leadership, no rules or tenants, come from all different societies, are somehow all clones and are participating in some kind of group-think.
Farking Canuck: FTDA: All four of the people that you replied to are professed Atheists or Anti-Theists. Calling them religious retards shows your lack of reading comprehension. Congrats on winning your award.IDW is a religious person trolling as a strawman atheist. Don't try to reason with him or he'll post pictures of stormtroopers*.* For some reason he feels that atheists, who have no relationships with each other, no leadership, no rules or tenants, come from all different societies, are somehow all clones and are participating in some kind of group-think.
letrole: Atheism is a Religion.
macadamnut: Eating babies is a religion.
phrawgh: letrole: Atheism is a Religion.Not stamp collecting is a hobby./thanks for playing//You thought you could sneak that in after the thread got cold?
huntercr: Maybe not a religion... yet.
huntercr: If all atheists did was mind their own business and go on with their hobby of "not stamp collecting" your analogy would make sense.
monkey_licker: There is no shortage of apologetics literature by the likes of William Lane Craig, Lee Strobel and Alvin Plantinga. Have you read any of these works?
doczoidberg: Aw, man.I thought half the fun of being an atheist was not having to obey a bunch of rules.
monkey_licker: Fair enough. There is no shortage of apologetics literature by the likes of William Lane Craig, Lee Strobel and Alvin Plantinga. Have you read any of these works? I can't give a defense of the Christian faith on Fark, and I won't even try. There are wiser men than I who have written extensively on the issue and I would direct anyone interested to check them out.If you have read them and you still choose to be an atheist, that is all well and good.
monkey_licker: Why must so many atheists belittle and attack people of faith? Why must so many Christians get angry and agitated because atheists have a different worldview?
Marcintosh: Well this went down hill fast
huntercr: Sorry man I usually stay relatively neutral on religion threads, but that's not a fair analogy. Modern Atheism has had an explosion of growth in "philosophy", and public fandom in the last 10 -15 years. Dawkins is held on high as the current prince of Atheism and has active followers that try to convince people to leave their religion. That's darn close to worship. Maybe not a religion... yet.
Surool: Marcintosh: Well this went down hill fastYou want to know what is really funny? Christians think atheism is all about them.
Marcintosh: REALLY? I never thought of that - not being a jerk or sarcastic - never thought about it.OTOH, I'm not really concerned about what others think because I'm not that way.You do what you want and I'll be over here doing what I want.The only time I'd be concerned is if you get hurt.weird world, but then again, that's why it's called Dogma I guess.
If you like these links, you'll love
All the submissions, none of the calories.
Sign up for the Fark NotNewsletter!
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Sep 24 2017 03:35:29
Runtime: 0.358 sec (357 ms)