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.

(CNN)   The official Atheist church just launched last year, but there's already a schism in the congregation. That religion of yours is getting complicated, guys   (religion.blogs.cnn.com) divider line 102
    More: Amusing, Pippa Evans, Cat Stevens, Godless Revival, central planning, live better, house band, East London  
•       •       •

7842 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 Jan 2014 at 4:28 AM (36 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2014-01-06 12:49:52 AM
6 votes:
after a schism, a question: can atheist churches last?

Catholic
Baptist
Christian
Methodist / Wesleyan
Lutheran
Presbyterian
Protestant
Pentecostal/Charismatic
Episcopalian/Anglican
Mormon / Latter-Day Saints
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
Congregational/United Church of Christ
Jehovah's Witness
Assemblies of God
Evangelical
Church of God
Seventh-Day Adventist
Orthodox (Eastern)
Holiness/Holy
Church of the Nazarene
Disciples of Christ
Church of the Brethren
Mennonite
Reformed/Dutch Reform
Apostolic/New Apostolic
Quaker

Christian Science
Christian Reform
Independent Christian Church
Foursquare Gospel
Fundamentalist
Born Again
Salvation Army
2014-01-06 12:45:02 AM
5 votes:
He also said he advised them to leave the dive bar "where women wore bikinis," in favor of a more family-friendly venue.

You know, now that I think about I don't like this "family friendly" idea. Just as I don't think children should be indoctrinated into religion I wouldn't want them indoctrinated into atheism. Let them grow up and make up their own minds.
2014-01-06 04:43:58 AM
3 votes:
After a schism, a question: Can atheist churches last?

Headline in the form of a question, so the answer is as always the exact opposite of what is being implied, e.g. in this case atheist churches can, in fact, last.

On a more serious and less meme-y note, there are already plenty of atheist social clubs based around community-building, arbitrarily fabricated ritual, and tongue-in-cheek references to theist religions.  And some of the freemason lodges are going on two or three centuries old now... so, historically, the answer is also yes.

IronTom: If they believe in nothing, how can there be a schism?

Did they divide by zero?


"Atheist" is an adjective describing an organisation or philosophy, not a noun naming a specific philosophy in itself.

There are plenty of atheist organizations and philosophies around, 99% of logic-based philosophy is by definition atheist (including, interestingly, most religious philosophy, since the entire point there is to prove that the morality of x religion is a basic law of the universe whether you believe in that religion or not).  Several  religions, interestingly, are even atheist, and not just the entertaining modern ones like the Jedi or the Subgenius guys... Taoism, a religion four centuries older than Christianity, has a number of schools that are atheist.

So, no, atheists don't "believe in nothing" necessarily, they just believe in a set of things that don't include a god or gods.  Which, in complete and utter honesty as an atheist myself, I have to admit frequently still includes frivolous bullshiat of both the supernatural and pseudoscientific variety.  Social darwinism, telepathy, animism, homeopathy, etc... plenty of atheists in the ranks of the followers of all sorts of dumbass woo.
2014-01-06 01:42:56 AM
3 votes:
Welcome to my Not Collecting Stamps club!  We don't collect stamps here, so let's get together and talk about not collecting stamps.
2014-01-06 10:48:39 AM
2 votes:

Confabulat: I'm an atheist and these people are all assholes.

I don't need to join a damn club to be an atheist. Are you just lonely?

What awful human beings.


I'm an atheist, but also.an anthropologist. Religious communities are the basis for small scale community organization. And religion is hard-wired into us; we can see that in how LSD triggers religious euphoria. We have frigging chemical receptors in our neurons that trigger long term religious feelings.

To deny that religious participation is the human norm is an irrational ideological position that ignores scientific studies across many disciplines and through many methodologies.

At the end of the day most people desire communal rituals and ceremonies, need life skills counseling and mentorship and be sermonized to.

Why ignore those tendencies wired into most of us just because of a difference of opinion over the existence of a deity? Simply because you don't feel the need for such things does not invalidate the social needs and desires of most other people.

Plus call yourself a church and you can get away with so much more without IRS or SEC backlash. There are incentives built into the system to favor religions because of how valued they are to society.
2014-01-06 10:48:03 AM
2 votes:

dfenstrate: On the other hand, the judeo-christian tradition has a few thousand years of history, and gave birth to the enlightenment, which gave non-believers footing to criticize religion to begin with.


img.fark.net


Athiests love to preach about how religion is brainwashing and population control, (I know, I did the same.... when I was a teenager.), but when it comes time to replicating the positive functions religion performs, they come up rather dry. Or they make silly 'churches.'

Any positive functions can be done without the religious component.

Nobody cares what you did as a teenager. Your attempts to equate the other people's application of logic and reason to your rebellious years is pathetic.

Only a tiny percentage of atheists have/are participating in these "silly churches". As a religious person, please explain why you thing churches are silly? I have my own opinions but I am curious about yours.
2014-01-06 09:11:10 AM
2 votes:
Eh, I've been an atheist for about 40 years (was raised a Catholic.)  Religious or not, people generally want to do some sort of good on a philosophical level.  My moral code is quite flexible and adaptive, barely qualifying for the word code.  It's largely based on some of the commandments/Socrates greatest good/know thyself/know your audience.

That said, I HATE people who preach at me or lecture me.  Any discussion worth having has to be a two way exchange of ideas.  I have no great desire to influence or change anyone's way of thinking.  But, there are certainly people out there who want everyone to think and act exactly like themselves.  These people often seem to lead congregations, and they're always pushy enough and inflexible of thought enough to scare me.

TLDR version: Righteous people suck, no matter the religion/atheist/political slant they're pushing.
2014-01-06 09:01:07 AM
2 votes:

fusillade762: He also said he advised them to leave the dive bar "where women wore bikinis," in favor of a more family-friendly venue.

You know, now that I think about I don't like this "family friendly" idea. Just as I don't think children should be indoctrinated into religion I wouldn't want them indoctrinated into atheism. Let them grow up and make up their own minds.


Everybody is born an atheist.
2014-01-06 07:44:03 AM
2 votes:

namatad: rational thought is not a religion, nor brain washing


Hey, just because you're an atheist doesn't mean you're rational. See: Ayn Rand.
2014-01-06 07:43:57 AM
2 votes:

Felgraf: Apparently thinking critically is only OK if you criticize religion


Basically. It's the same with the people who hate one group of people for hating a third group. Applying actual objective thinking and discovering a flaw in your side is not cool. But tearing the other guys apart? Go for it.
2014-01-06 07:38:27 AM
2 votes:

Egoy3k: Nationalism, schizophrenia, drugs/alcohol, PTSD, etc etc call all cause good people to do bad things. Then again i'm pretty sure nobody ever told you that religion was the sole cause of good people doing bad things.


... You've *never heard* that quote before? It crops up FREQUENTLY in religion/atheism threads.

" Frederick Douglass told in his Narrative how his condition as a slave became worse when his master underwent a religious conversion that allowed him to justify slavery as the punishment of the children of Ham. Mark Twain described his mother as a genuinely good person, whose soft heart pitied even Satan, but who had no doubt about the legitimacy of slavery, because in years of living in antebellum Missouri she had never heard any sermon opposing slavery, but only countless sermons preaching that slavery was God's will. With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil - that takes religion.  " Steven Weinburg (taken from wikiquote).

So. Uh. Yes. I have heard people say that, and it's parroted FREQUENTLY in religion/atheism threads (Often crops up at least once a thread, though that could very well be observer/sampling bias. I may simply be remembering it because it triggers the "THIS IS A TERRIBLE ARGUMENT AND AS A PHYSICIST YOU SHOULD KNOW BETTER, fark half our our PhD's and Bachelor's degrees are TRAINING in critical thinking. Come on man!" parts of my brain).
(it is a very specific part of my brain, apparently)
 And when I point out that it's falling prey to a LOT of the same logical fallacies that *Allow* religions/religious people to do evil things (People who do bad things always have trait X! I do not have trait X, therefore if I do it, it's probably not a bad thing), and when I mention that the quote shows a remarkable lack of critical thinking and honestly an ignorance of history(because, as you said, you can EASILY shove nationalism into that gap. fark, we've *Seen it happen*), I've had people get quiiiteee pissed at me because. Um. I'm not sure. Apparently thinking critically is only OK if you criticize religion, and not well-liked atheists, or something?
2014-01-06 06:51:37 AM
2 votes:
I sympathize with them and understand their goals here I really do.  The positive social aspects or a weekly gathering with unified purpose and numerous.  Church creates a community that can help members in need when tragedy strikes and help the wider community as well.  They are simply trying to do away with god and keep those, and other, positives.  The thing is that it's much much harder to form a group based on a lack of belief in something because that doesn't narrow down the conflicting motives, views or opinions that will cause friction within the group.  I'm not saying it's impossible but it is much more difficult.
2014-01-06 06:32:51 AM
2 votes:
Atheist church has got the be the dumbest thing I've ever heard of.  As one of our famous prophets said "The best part of being an atheist is it takes so little of your time".
2014-01-06 06:29:56 AM
2 votes:
"Compassionate Conservatism"
"Moral Majority"
"Random Order"
"Fresh Frozen"
"Recorded Live"
"Military Intelligence"
"Religious Education"
"Government Integrity"
"Atheist Church"
2014-01-06 06:18:32 AM
2 votes:

Prophet of Loss: But you do believe in something jackass, you believe that the universe, life, and everything is a accident.


You do realize that atheism is generally about  not anthropomorphising statistical and natural forces, right?  And that something being an "accident" requires that one anthropomorphize statistical and natural forces?

I'm actually rooting for trolling here because if you're actually mouthing off so loudly with a declaration that is essentially "hey, look at how stupid I am over here and how I fail to understand the basic definitions of words and shiat" then I'm going to actually have to feel kind of sad for how terrible you are and how much your mental deficiencies must make your life suck.
2014-01-06 06:17:42 AM
2 votes:

Prophet of Loss: Lenny_da_Hog: Prophet of Loss: But you do believe in something jackass, you believe that the universe, life, and everything is a accident.

I'm an atheist and a determinist. Nothing is an accident. Everything happens the only way it can happen.

Quantum physics disagrees with you.


No, it doesn't, unless you read science fiction.
2014-01-06 05:24:33 AM
2 votes:

DubyaHater: You're one of those militant<...>


That's not how "militant" works.

When I meet an adult with unimpaired cognitive facilities who professes to believe in sky faeries I will call them out on it because it is hilarious and weirdly disturbing.

If my taunting them results in the sort of childish pique witnessed in adolescents discovering Santa Claus was a lie, well that's just funnier still...
2014-01-06 05:18:14 AM
2 votes:

namatad: fusillade762: He also said he advised them to leave the dive bar "where women wore bikinis," in favor of a more family-friendly venue.

You know, now that I think about I don't like this "family friendly" idea. Just as I don't think children should be indoctrinated into religion I wouldn't want them indoctrinated into atheism. Let them grow up and make up their own minds.

all religion is brainwashing
atheism is not a religion

rational thought is not a religion, nor brain washing


You're one of those militant, "born-again" atheists. The "I'm right and anyone who thinks different is an idiot" atheists. I've heard certain denominations of Christians say their church is not a religion, just the truth.
/check your superiority at the door
//and your fedora
2014-01-06 04:36:06 AM
2 votes:
Either you're drinkin with me or you're drinkin against me.
2014-01-06 02:39:03 AM
2 votes:
martinbaena.files.wordpress.com
2014-01-06 01:49:38 AM
2 votes:

hardinparamedic: Given the way the areligious and non-Christians have been treated in the United States ever since McCarthy launched his witch hunts, and even before, I think they have every right to be assholes if they choose to do so.


That's not true. I've been an atheist my whole life and that gives me no excuse to be an asshole. I do that all on my own.
2014-01-06 01:38:01 AM
2 votes:

Confabulat: I'm an atheist and these people are all assholes.

I don't need to join a damn club to be an atheist. Are you just lonely?

What awful human beings.


They're assholes, but the important thing is that people can realize just why they might be assholes.

Given the way the areligious and non-Christians have been treated in the United States ever since McCarthy launched his witch hunts, and even before, I think they have every right to be assholes if they choose to do so.
2014-01-06 01:34:24 AM
2 votes:
I'm an atheist and these people are all assholes.

I don't need to join a damn club to be an atheist. Are you just lonely?

What awful human beings.
2014-01-06 01:09:46 AM
2 votes:
If they believe in nothing, how can there be a schism?

Did they divide by zero?
2014-01-06 01:04:58 AM
2 votes:

fusillade762: He also said he advised them to leave the dive bar "where women wore bikinis," in favor of a more family-friendly venue.

You know, now that I think about I don't like this "family friendly" idea. Just as I don't think children should be indoctrinated into religion I wouldn't want them indoctrinated into atheism. Let them grow up and make up their own minds.


all religion is brainwashing
atheism is not a religion

rational thought is not a religion, nor brain washing
2014-01-06 01:01:11 AM
2 votes:
Say what you want about the tenants of National Socialism, but at least it was an ethos.
2014-01-06 12:16:29 AM
2 votes:
rule one of atheism: no vegans

no really
that was the first rule
well it is the first rule in my church of atheism


our three sacraments are:
sex
drugs
gambling
and meat

of four sacraments
2014-01-06 12:02:13 AM
2 votes:
Trilbies vs Fedoras?
2014-01-07 08:48:38 AM
1 votes:

s2s2s2: Farking Canuck: I am also without belief in unicorns and without belief in big foot.

So you allow for the possibility of Unicorns and Bigfoot. I'm glad to see you still have hope for a fantastical future.


Of course I do. To precisely the same amount I allow for the possibility of a magical, invisible, bearded white man who lives in the sky. That is to say that the available evidence extraordinarily strongly supports the position of non-existence but, since I cannot claim absolute knowledge, I must allow for the infinitesimally small possibility that these things exist. I take the position of non-existence, i.e. I am without any of them, but I allow for the possibility.

It is the only logical, rational position.
2014-01-07 05:06:56 AM
1 votes:

s2s2s2: I'm trying to demystify the word religion. It became associated almost exclusively with theists, because people are stupid, and forgot what it actually means.


Wow.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=religion

It's been "associated almost exclusively with theists" for 800 years dude, your crusade on fark is not going to change that.
2014-01-07 01:27:29 AM
1 votes:

ciberido: but the backlash proves just how serious the misogyny really is.


I disagree. 99% of the backlash was internet trolls trolling an easy target.
2014-01-06 11:56:03 PM
1 votes:

Farking Canuck: s2s2s2: I'd say when atheists are founding assemblies called "church" the relevance of the word "religion" is pretty damned pertinent

And you'd be wrong. They chose church for a variety of reasons but none of which have to do with religion. They could have called it "meeting" or "club" and you would probably still make the same argument.

s2s2s2: But when people bring disbelief into the realm if moral duty, they make it a religion, by definition.

Who the fark feels it is their moral duty. Do you have some imaginary atheist friends that you are speaking for? 'Cause I know you are not speaking for any atheists I've ever met or talked to.

s2s2s2: I'm trying to demystify the word religion.

You're trying to force your definition. Sorry Charlie,when you get coronated as king of the English language you can do this ... until then tough shiat

.s2s2s2: If atheists(apparently what the cool agnostics call themselves, because they don't like accuracy, either)

Accuracy like taking the word from the Greek roots atheos which translates directly to "without god". I like accuracy very much that's why I use the correct word for myself. You don't get to tell me what definition I must use when I am choosing the name I call myself.

Your ego is about the size of Rhode Island. Get over yourself.


1: Yup, I'd be right, and I have shown why.

2: Dawkins. Hitchens. O'Hare. But you don't know them, so they don't count. Plus, two of them are dead.

3: No, I'm consistently using a real definition, and you are claiming that I'm not, so you can claim I'm equivocating.

4: "Without" doesn't mean "maybe with". Yes, you are free to force your preferred definition. Doesn't eliminate the actual meaning.

5: Texas, buddy. I'd have to get over myself though, you certainly aren't getting over on me.
2014-01-06 07:03:37 PM
1 votes:

gimmegimme: Wow, those are extreme strawmen.

I'm sorry.  Strawpyrsyns.


I'm sorry, you don't seem to know the definition of a strawman. Hint: When a citation is provided to their own words, it's not a strawman.

You also seem to be engaging in the Fallacist's Fallacy to dismiss an argument inconvenient to your world view.
2014-01-06 06:52:22 PM
1 votes:
All this thread tell us is that atheists are at least as big a bunch of w*nkers as the religious mob.

Oh, and have an equally poor understanding of what 'science' is.
2014-01-06 06:49:39 PM
1 votes:

Farking Canuck: s2s2s2: Scientific research can reduce superstition by encouraging people to think and view things in terms of cause and effect. Certain it is that a conviction, akin to religious feeling, of the rationality and intelligibility of the world lies behind all scientific work of a higher order... This firm belief, a belief bound up with a deep feeling, in a superior mind that reveals itself in the world of experience, represents my conception of God. In common parlance this may be described as "pantheistic" -Einstein

Einstein explicitly denied being an atheist. You cannot use a quote from him to represent atheism. Nice try though.

s2s2s2: Then the statement that there is no god is likewise idiotic. It is made by more than a few atheist. It is the loudest voice, because those that simply don't care, don't talk about it much.

The vast majority of atheists do not make the claim of absolute knowledge of the non-existence of gods. It is an illogical position. The religious like to dishonestly claim that this is the position of atheists when, in reality, the vast majority of atheists simply take the position that there is no god based on the available evidence.

You can continue arguing against what an infinitesimally small fraction of atheists believe or you can take the intellectually honest position of arguing what the people you are actually arguing with believe. The vast majority of theists choose the former because it is much easier and, in my experience, they have little concern with being honest when they are arguing in the name of gawd.

s2s2s2: So long as we don't look too closely at the meaning of the word "religious", sure.

You are the one who has decided to stretch the meaning of religious to include people who chose not to accept the claims of the religious. Where do you get off complaining when others do the same??

And sticking your fingers in your ears and running around screaming "I'm still winning" is great for convincing yourself. The rest of us not so much.


I didn't stretch anything. I narrowed my target down early on. I said some atheist are religious in their fervor.
And that because of them atheism is a religion. I don't think it is, to you. But what it is to you, isn't the be all end all. You(and others) have had to mischaracterize my position to claim I'm losing. That is failure.
2014-01-06 06:18:31 PM
1 votes:

IlGreven: hardinparamedic: log_jammin: long story short, you're either with them or you're a misogynis

Sounds like the opposite of Men's Rights Activists. Either you agree blanket with them, or you're a man-hating misandrist or something.

I've never met such a Men's Rights Activist.  I have, however, met plenty of Feminists who say they have met such a Men's Rights Activist.


Here. Now you can't repeat this lie anymore, since you've used it multiple times..
2014-01-06 05:10:38 PM
1 votes:

Farking Canuck: citation needed] - please show someone out there that ascribes the properties of a god to a lack of gods.


Scientific research can reduce superstition by encouraging people to think and view things in terms of cause and effect. Certain it is that a conviction, akin to religious feeling, of the rationality and intelligibility of the world lies behind all scientific work of a higher order... This firm belief, a belief bound up with a deep feeling, in a superior mind that reveals itself in the world of experience, represents my conception of God. In common parlance this may be described as "pantheistic" -Einstein

Farking Canuck: Requiring evidence before accepting claims


Then the statement that there is no god is likewise idiotic. It is made by more than a few atheist. It is the loudest voice, because those that simply don't care, don't talk about it much.

Farking Canuck: A tiny percentage of atheists are forming "churches". And even though some of this tiny group is calling them churches, there is still nothing religious about these gatherings.


So long as we don't look too closely at the meaning of the word "religious", sure.

Farking Canuck: There is no betrayal here. It is simply a case of you repeating religious talking points (even though you claim to be non-religious) and your arguments getting decimated.


You never win at "spot the sarcasm" do you? No one has decimated my arguments. People have flailed wildly avoiding actually answering my points, appealing to the ever changing meaning of words so they can cherry pick a definition that suits them, and making statements like "Then everything is religious". Utterly ridiculous and moronic.

omeganuepsilon: I get on fark religiously. =\= Fark is a religious experience.


I didn't say that doing something religiously was a "religious experience" I said it was a religious practice. If you state that you get on fark religiously, then you have used the word correctly, and admitted to religious practice.

omeganuepsilon: You're in over your head, Junior.


The bottom of my toes aren't even damp.

Stop confusing the word "religious" with the word "spiritual".
2014-01-06 02:44:33 PM
1 votes:

Epicedion: By your own words.


Or rather by your failure to understand my words, accept objective fact.

You started failing to properly counter presented facts, and just tried to throw a big blanket over it and call it everything. I am not bound to, nor obligated to "everything" accepting that something exists is not being bound, nor obligated, to it.

If you really care about science being properly represented, recognize that you are not the person for the job.
2014-01-06 02:02:05 PM
1 votes:

s2s2s2: Yeah, if it fits the definition of religion, I feel free to apply the word.


Hence, everything is a religion. That makes the word useless. Congratulations, everything is everything and your contributions are meaningless.
2014-01-06 01:38:05 PM
1 votes:

Epicedion: s2s2s2: If you go to the bar, every Wednesday night, and treat it with a high level of respect, bordering on reverence, then yes. That would be religious practice. The word religion means "to bind", or "obligation". If you think we should use the original meaning of the word religion, and you think science is super important....guess what you have.

You've now classified anything that anyone holds in high regard and/or does regularly as "religion." School is religion, daily walks in the park are religion, and picking up your kid from daycare is a religion. Is there anything that's not a religion?


Incorrect. Colloquialism and the changing nature of language have removed the notion of those things as religious. The word religion can accurately be applied to any binding or obligatory practice. If you do not like this,that is not my problem, but you are rejecting objective fact.

The fact that people get their panties in a twist over this fact is further proof that they revere their status as atheists, and therefore are religious.
2014-01-06 01:37:29 PM
1 votes:

Egoy3k: ciberido: It was formed in the aftermath of Elevatorgate because there was a sense that too many vocal atheists were misogynistic, racist, or homophobic and that the "face" or "voice" of modern atheism was too white/male/heterosexual.

Not surprisingly, those atheists who weren't big fans of feminism to begin with don't much care for "Atheism+."

I'm a fan of feminism and I think that 'elevatorgate' is the stupidest thing ever. As such I'm not a huge fan of Atheism+ but that doesn't mean I hate women.

/The misogynist backlash for 'elevatorgate' was shameful but that doesn't mean that  the actual incident wasn't stupid and pretty harmless.


"Elevatorgate"  was the backlash. More specifically, it was the insistence by prominent atheist figures that the misogynist backlash the woman received for speaking out was not really misogynist, or at least not as bad as religious misogyny so she needed to get over it.

The incident in which Rebecca Watson was propositioned by a man in an elevator prompted an initial comment from her which amounted to "don't do that, it's creepy".  If it had stopped there, there would be no controversy.
2014-01-06 12:32:44 PM
1 votes:

s2s2s2: Egoy3k: So it is your position that young earth creationists are morons but other theists are not.

Every ism has morons. Plenty of moronic atheists in this thread, alone. I'm glad you included this important qualifier:

Egoy3k: our current understanding of the universe.

...because it's going to change, dramatically, and people who don't keep up are going to have some moronic ideas about the universe that they got from "believing in" science.

If you can't do the work of science to reach scientific conclusions, you still only have belief. And if science will ultimately upend old conclusions for new ones, all the old ones were belief, too; no matter how much math was involved.

gimmegimme: s2s2s2: gimmegimme: s2s2s2: gimmegimme: colon_pow: isn't that just darling?  the hipsters want to play church just like the gays want to play house.

[religionpoisons.files.wordpress.com image 450x266]

Nothing better to dissuade the religious than quotes from fictional figures.

[www.atheistmemebase.com image 545x380]

Do you think that's a counterpoint?

Geez...I guess you're right.  Religious people really don't like quotes from fictional figures.

Please look up the word I bolded.


You're not making sense.  Are you denouncing the word of the Lord?  The Judeo-Christian God told people to sell their raped daughters to the rapists.  Did the Bible report this rule incorrectly?
2014-01-06 12:27:17 PM
1 votes:

Lenny_da_Hog: dfenstrate: On the other hand, the judeo-christian tradition has a few thousand years of history, and gave birth to the enlightenment, which gave non-believers footing to criticize religion to begin with.

That's a pretty stupid historical analysis.

Religion brought us the Dark Ages, between the Light of Rome and the Enlightenment. It crushed history, science, and the arts for hundreds of years.


No it didn't.
2014-01-06 12:26:50 PM
1 votes:

ciberido: mamoru: log_jammin: they're still better than those atheism+ people.

now THOSE people are assholes.

How so? And, I really do mean that as an honest question. I'm just an (apathetic agnostic) atheist, so don't really know much about all of these "official" factions and movements and such. What are the atheism+ people and what makes them assholes?

I'm only going by what I've read on the Internet, so take this with a grain of salt, but my understanding is that Atheism+ is (or at least is supposed to be) Atheism plus progressive/leftist social causes, particularly feminism and gay rights.  It was formed in the aftermath of Elevatorgate because there was a sense that too many vocal atheists were misogynistic, racist, or homophobic and that the "face" or "voice" of modern atheism was too white/male/heterosexual.

Not surprisingly, those atheists who weren't big fans of feminism to begin with don't much care for "Atheism+."

Again, this is just what I've read, so I would welcome input from anyone who has more direct knowledge.


Yeah Atheism+ people are crazy.  Luckily, the organization is collapsing under the weight of its insanity.  This video from Thunderf00t is a pretty good start for understanding.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95LG9crl3yo

Basically: there's a schism in the movement because some people want the atheism/secular/critical thinking movement to be about atheism and secularism and critical thinking and other people want the ASC movement to be about preventing sexist toy stores from labeling some toys by gender.
2014-01-06 12:08:54 PM
1 votes:

dfenstrate: On the other hand, the judeo-christian tradition has a few thousand years of history, and gave birth to the enlightenment, which gave non-believers footing to criticize religion to begin with.


That's a pretty stupid historical analysis.

Religion brought us the Dark Ages, between the Light of Rome and the Enlightenment. It crushed history, science, and the arts for hundreds of years.

You're saying that since the church put us all in prison and starved us that it's responsible for us breaking out of prison to find food. Therefore, the church fed us.
2014-01-06 11:49:34 AM
1 votes:

colon_pow: isn't that just darling?  the hipsters want to play church just like the gays want to play house.


religionpoisons.files.wordpress.com
2014-01-06 11:19:39 AM
1 votes:

gimmegimme: As Hitchens points out, religion makes otherwise decent people do terrible things.


No it doesn't. Mental illness does. Now, you can say that someone who is religious has a mental illness, but scientifically speaking, the mental illness allows for the religion, not the other way around. That dude has no religious basis for his bombing a building. He may have had a political one.

That dude wasn't "otherwise decent".
2014-01-06 11:13:57 AM
1 votes:

Egoy3k: They simply believe more unfounded nonsense than a less literal theist, but at the end of the day both mainstream theists and young earth creationists both believe in magic.


Is the science settled on whether or not something can live outside of our known reality, aka, The Supernatural?
2014-01-06 11:05:38 AM
1 votes:

Lenny_da_Hog: I'm an atheist and a determinist. Nothing is an accident. Everything happens the only way it can happen.


Even your belief system?
2014-01-06 11:04:39 AM
1 votes:
Because the meanings of words change, yes, it is. It's deity is the importance of ridding society of the notion of deities. Atheists gather, organize, and proselytize.

You may not be a religious atheist, but plenty are. Just like someone can believe in god and not be religious, someone can not believe in god, and be religious.

Atheism is a religion, because some atheists practice it like one.

Convincing someone of anything that has no proof is brainwashing.


You're equivocating the literal and metaphorical meanings of the word "deity" here. When you say the more common "his god is money" you don't literally mean that the person worships money as a literal god. What you mean is that the person holds money in as high regard as someone would a god.

Addressing your other points, the Sierra Club gathers, organizes, and proselytizes. So does your local union. Or HOA. None of these are religions.
2014-01-06 11:00:59 AM
1 votes:
gimmegimme:
The Holocaust?  The Crusades?  Slavery?  Subjugation of women?  Of homosexuals?  The development of incredibly creative torture implements?  I'm not sure those gifts of religion are very constructive.

Given a timeline of centuries to millenia, what is your basis for saying that athiests would consructed  better societies? You do know that Godless commies have murdered a few hundred million people within the last hundred years, don't you?

Here's something science did for us:

(picture of moon landing.)

Amazing, innit?


How did you arrive at the premise science and religion is an either/or choice?

I bet if you took a poll of the engineers who made that happen, a great many of them were faithful.

I suppose you might have started out with young-earth creationists as your model for all religious people, but that would be rather silly. For the record, I think they're morons, too.
2014-01-06 10:51:17 AM
1 votes:

dfenstrate: RedTank: Perhaps you shouldn't base your opinions on Atheists from a small samples size of anonymity from the Internet. I've met plenty of smug self-satisfied people in my life and if I hated them for it I would undoubtedly hate everyone by now and I'd be living in a cave.

I don't base my opinion of Atheists on Internet commenters. I was calling out obnoxious behavior by some atheists, behavior I've seen in this thread in particular.

I can understand atheism as a lack of belief in a higher power. I'm sympathetic to it, actually.

I just don't see that Atheists (as some sort of guiding philosophy or movement) have any real ground to criticize what  constructive religions have done for humanity, and they have precious little ground to say they can do better.


The Holocaust?  The Crusades?  Slavery?  Subjugation of women?  Of homosexuals?  The development of incredibly creative torture implements?  I'm not sure those gifts of religion are very constructive.

Here's something science did for us:

blog.zap2it.com

Amazing, innit?
2014-01-06 10:48:11 AM
1 votes:

RedTank: Perhaps you shouldn't base your opinions on Atheists from a small samples size of anonymity from the Internet. I've met plenty of smug self-satisfied people in my life and if I hated them for it I would undoubtedly hate everyone by now and I'd be living in a cave.


I don't base my opinion of Atheists on Internet commenters. I was calling out obnoxious behavior by some atheists, behavior I've seen in this thread in particular.

I can understand atheism as a lack of belief in a higher power. I'm sympathetic to it, actually.

I just don't see that Atheists (as some sort of guiding philosophy or movement) have any real ground to criticize what constructive religions have done for humanity, and they have precious little ground to say they can do better.
2014-01-06 10:45:18 AM
1 votes:

Egoy3k: lordjupiter: Egoy3k: dfenstrate: As to whether atheists suffer from self-righteousness more than others- I refer only to the lecturing, smug self-satisfied atheists, many of whom have participated in this very thread.

I love it when someone accuses someone else of being 'smug' in the most condescending manner possible.  It's like calling out a typo with poor grammar.

Do you really love it?

Yes?


Do you love it as much as  dfenstrate did in regards to hatred of smug Atheists?   dfenstrate called out smugness and then you called him out for his smugness and then you get challenged by lordjupiter for a certain hypocrisy in your love of the situation and now here I am doing it to you...  I love calling out people who call out people whom call out people.  I love it for it's lunacy and circular logic.
2014-01-06 10:40:26 AM
1 votes:

omeganuepsilon: They can defer to factual information.
IE not teaching creationism(which debilitates the potential of the students, ie tomorrows leaders and workers).

That alone is worth pushing some boundaries, a better educated populace. Also, separation of church and state, and equal rights.

I love how undercover believers(or alternatively, anarchists) come in here and badmouth teh "smug" while denying and denigrating the factual legitimacy of atheism as a cultural/social movement. Damned uppity atheists trying to improve society!


Oh, you can try to improve society. I just don't see any basis to brag about how great your movement is, or to say it'll be a successful long term project.

On the other hand, the judeo-christian tradition has a few thousand years of history, and gave birth to the enlightenment, which gave non-believers footing to criticize religion to begin with.

Athiests love to preach about how religion is brainwashing and population control, (I know, I did the same.... when I was a teenager.), but when it comes time to replicating the positive functions religion performs, they come up rather dry. Or they make silly 'churches.'

My argument is that religion fulfills a basic human need, and that need doesn't go away when some athiests start yapping about sky wizard this and santa claus that. If Athiests cannot understand that need; and cannot fill it, they will only ever be a small segment of society; eternally frustated that they're not as important and prominent as they think they should be.

Maybe something good will come of all this Athiest 'church' turmoil, but right now it looks like a cargo plane cult.
2014-01-06 10:38:25 AM
1 votes:

dfenstrate: A shared dogma helps limit and mend rifts within a sect. Lacking scripture, the dogma/practices/mores of this atheist church can only be based on what members can talk each other into from week to week


Perhaps it's time Atheists wrote a book about it all then?  I suppose that would be a bit too on the nose....

dfenstrate: As to whether atheists suffer from self-righteousness more than others- I refer only to the lecturing, smug self-satisfied atheists, many of whom have participated in this very thread.


Perhaps you shouldn't base your opinions on Atheists from a small samples size of anonymity from the internet.  I've met plenty of smug self-satisfied people in my life and if I hated them for it I would undoubtedly hate everyone by now and I'd be living in a cave.
2014-01-06 10:36:34 AM
1 votes:

namatad: atheism is not a religion


Because the meanings of words change, yes, it is. It's deity is the importance of ridding society of the notion of deities. Atheists gather, organize, and proselytize.

You may not be a religious atheist, but plenty are. Just like someone can believe in god and not be religious, someone can not believe in god, and be religious.

Atheism is a religion, because some atheists practice it like one.

Convincing someone of anything that has no proof is brainwashing.
2014-01-06 10:35:57 AM
1 votes:
The major churches should be starting up "membership not required" activities for just this purpose. Let college kids do volunteer work instead of attending services and just wait out their rebelliousness until their spirituality matures beyond the "I don't believe in Santa Claus" phase.

Does anyone already do this?
2014-01-06 10:18:43 AM
1 votes:

RedTank: You are describing any flawed religious person in their zealously. The issue of faith in that "they recognize nothing higher than their own limited intellects and egos " is unimportant to the outcome and unimportant in regards to the perception by other people outside their group...


A shared dogma helps limit and mend rifts within a sect. Lacking scripture, the dogma/practices/mores of this atheist church can only be based on what members can talk each other into from week to week.

As to whether atheists suffer from self-righteousness more than others- I refer only to the lecturing, smug self-satisfied atheists, many of whom have participated in this very thread.
2014-01-06 10:08:03 AM
1 votes:

Confabulat: I'm an atheist and these people are all assholes.

I don't need to join a damn club to be an atheist. Are you just lonely?

What awful human beings.


Yea, this. As there is a direct correlation between the number of humans in a group and how farking stupid that group becomes, I'll stick with not being part of the idiocy that is a church. Any church.
2014-01-06 10:07:55 AM
1 votes:

miscreant: Farking Canuck: I love how big a deal it is when a tiny percentage of atheists decide to organize a church-like meeting.

They can do what they want ... they do not represent all atheists. We are not an organization. We do not have any rules, guidelines, leaders, etc.

It is likely made up of people who likely miss the meeting/social part of religion but don't miss the fairy-tales. Who cares?

Religious people care because it fits the letrole narrative of "atheism is a religion!"

Which is the theological equivalent of the "both sides are bad" philosophy. If atheism is just another religion, then you can ignore it just like you would any other religion besides your own, because then it's all subjective.


And they'd have a point if these atheist churchgoers were more than a tiny, tiny fringe group.

What religious people want this to mean: Atheists miss church.

What it really means: Only a tiny fraction of atheists miss church. But they don't miss the fairy-tales so they invented one that is based on reason and humanistic values.
2014-01-06 10:04:55 AM
1 votes:

dfenstrate: RedTank: When humans collaborate and congregate for anything at all that revolves around perpetuating a message then it always goes to shiat when the survival of said congregation relies solely upon the spreading of said message.

This athiest 'Church' has a bigger problem then normal, because they recognize nothing higher than their own limited intellects and egos; hence nothing they can defer to.

A lack of faith is one thing, a smug self-satisfied lecturing atheist is just a bit too precious about his own perfect rationality; as if s/he has risen above such a common and often helpful part of the human experience.


You are describing any flawed religious person in their zealously.  The issue of faith in that "they recognize nothing higher than their own limited intellects and egos " is unimportant to the outcome and unimportant in regards to the perception by other people outside their group...  If your claim is that Atheists suffer from their self righteousness more than the average religious person then I may agree to that only because they are a new "religion" with a bit more to "prove" than other established and aged groups.
2014-01-06 09:31:29 AM
1 votes:

Confabulat: I'm an atheist and these people are all assholes.

I don't need to join a damn club to be an atheist. Are you just lonely?

What awful human beings.



I think you could join the club if you wanted to "spread the word".  The awful human beings are the religious leaders perpetuating religious dogma.
2014-01-06 09:03:27 AM
1 votes:

Farking Canuck: I love how big a deal it is when a tiny percentage of atheists decide to organize a church-like meeting.

They can do what they want ... they do not represent all atheists. We are not an organization. We do not have any rules, guidelines, leaders, etc.

It is likely made up of people who likely miss the meeting/social part of religion but don't miss the fairy-tales. Who cares?


Religious people seem to care a lot about these freaks.
I sure as shiat don't - they have nothing to do with me.
2014-01-06 09:01:22 AM
1 votes:

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Saying that atheism is a religion is an insult to religions.


Not to mention male pattern baldness and stamp collecting.
2014-01-06 08:58:47 AM
1 votes:
I love how big a deal it is when a tiny percentage of atheists decide to organize a church-like meeting.

They can do what they want ... they do not represent all atheists. We are not an organization. We do not have any rules, guidelines, leaders, etc.

It is likely made up of people who likely miss the meeting/social part of religion but don't miss the fairy-tales. Who cares?
2014-01-06 08:30:58 AM
1 votes:
If there are women in bikinis, it's not a dive bar. Dive bars serve hard drinks to men who want to get drunk fast, and they don't need any characters around to give the joint atmosphere.

Best bar in Manhattan, if you actually want to go to a bar and just drink.
2014-01-06 08:28:21 AM
1 votes:

jaybeezey: and nothing that man doesn't know.


...about that.... 

No.

What they should be taught is that inserting "magic" in place of "I don't know" is wrong. Hurting people because they refuse to accept your demented interpretation of magic is evil.
2014-01-06 08:17:05 AM
1 votes:

Egoy3k: Without religion good people are good and bad people are bad, with it good people can act bad.


Wow I messed it up too, see how easy it is?

Lets try;

It takes outside justification for good people to act bad, religion is a commonly used to justify atrocities.
2014-01-06 08:16:40 AM
1 votes:

DerAppie: I see no reason to be all inclusive.


Depends one one's agenda.

You want government laws to not be based in religion(ie gay laws, equal rights for women/races, etc)?
 Inclusion is a good idea.
You want religion to not taint or even replace real education?
Inclusion also works well here.
You want local public offices to not fall into a setup similar to Dominionism because they're all of the same religion?
Inclusion here is great.
(Or Sharia Law or other similar control schema's)

There is some valid reasoning to be as inclusive and friendly as possible. You can have a cause and not have a doctrine. You can believe in something(equal rights), without BelievingTM in magic, sky gods(and obedience thereof), worship, etc.

If your agenda is to more simply have friends and hang out in a bar, well, that's easy, you can even join a "club".
2014-01-06 08:03:21 AM
1 votes:

namatad: rule one of atheism: no vegans

no really
that was the first rule
well it is the first rule in my church of atheism


our three sacraments are:
sex
drugs
gambling
and meat

of four sacraments



I came in here to say that an atheist church was the dumbest thing I had ever heard of but you just changed my mind. I'm assuming you hold services at a bar Saturday night?
2014-01-06 07:57:42 AM
1 votes:

Felgraf: With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil - that takes religion.


Yes the literal interpretation of that suggesta that all evil acts done by good people are the result of religion.  Then again only a moron would take it that way.
2014-01-06 07:54:31 AM
1 votes:

doglover: Felgraf: Apparently thinking critically is only OK if you criticize religion

Basically. It's the same with the people who hate one group of people for hating a third group. Applying actual objective thinking and discovering a flaw in your side is not cool. But tearing the other guys apart? Go for it.


Heh, to be fair, I'm not sure I count as *atheist*. I'm not really sure... *what* I count as. Conditional Theist? ( For instance, I have a sort of... reverse-pascal's wager I've worked out in my head: If there is a god and they are *worth* worshiping, then what really matters most is simply helping your fellow man, and trying to leave the world a better place than when you came in. If there isn't a god... you've still tried to make the world better for the people to follow you, and that's a wonderful legacy to leave. If there s a god, but they'd punish you for not worshiping them, even if you tried to leave the world a better place/helped your fellows/etc? Theeeennn that's not a god worth worshiping in the first place)

I have half-jokingly reffered to myself as a "Pratchettist". (THE TURTLE MOVES.)

Maybe apatheist, but I'm not even sure that works, because I do toy with things in my head. (Pondering what I do and don't believe, working through potential implications of things, because.. I dunno, I'm strange, I guess.)

I think one of the reasons that quote frustrates me so is... well, the incredible lack of critical thinking, the lack of  knowledge of history, and frankly the engagement in magical thinking *while decrying magical thinking*, and it's coming from a physicist. It's sort of like how I don't expect someone who visits the creationism museum to display critical thinking skills/I am not surprised if one thinks the moon landing is faked (though it is still irritating), it doesn't compare to the frustration and anger I get when I encounter a physicist that's a conspiracy theorist.
2014-01-06 07:16:20 AM
1 votes:

Felgraf: memebot_of_doom: namatad: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Atheism_Plus


Take a look at the talk page.

so they are nice people
without god


Some are.  Some are complete assholes.

Nonsesne, I've been told repeatedly that for good people to do bad things, religion is required!

/which is kind of magical thinking of itself, given that it ascribes powers/abilities to the idea/organization that is 'religion' that, apparently, cannot be duplicated by any OTHER idea/organization...
//but I've also people get huffy when you point that out.


Nationalism, schizophrenia, drugs/alcohol, PTSD, etc etc call all cause good people to do bad things. Then again i'm pretty sure nobody ever told you that religion was the sole cause of good people doing bad things.
2014-01-06 06:55:15 AM
1 votes:

nulluspixiusdemonica: LonMead: You mean, kind of like the way you prefer to tell us what we should believe?

I told someone what to believe? Where?


Forgive me if I misunderstood you, but...

nulluspixiusdemonica:When I meet an adult with unimpaired cognitive facilities who professes to believe in sky faeries I will call them out on it because it is hilarious and weirdly disturbing.

If my taunting them results in the sort of childish pique witnessed in adolescents discovering Santa Claus was a lie, well that's just funnier still...


... Sounds an awful lot like you're telling someone what they should believe (yes, by denigrating someone's belief's, you are telling them that they shouldn't believe in them).

/just engaging my critical faculties here...
2014-01-06 06:52:54 AM
1 votes:

Prophet of Loss: But you do believe in something jackass, you believe that the universe, life, and everything is a accident.

Others believe differently.


My belief is conditional and based on evidence and reason.

But answer me this. What's the end game here? Why do people like you keep trying to conflate acceptance of scientific findings with faith? What do you think that you're trying to prove? That your unfounded belief, based on the scribblings of men claiming to be the voice of gods has the same gravitas as understandings based on empirical evidence and reason?
2014-01-06 06:51:10 AM
1 votes:

doglover: Danger Avoid Death: doglover: mamoru: what makes them assholes?

Anyone who puts a plus sign at the end of a word and calls it XXXX Plus is an enemy of learning and knowledge.

Damn. Does that mean I should turn down my invitation to join Fark+ then?

No, it just means you're an enemy of learning and knowledge.

[art.penny-arcade.com image 850x425]


The history of it is kinda interesting.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Atheism_Plus

The whole concept was proposed because many female skeptics and atheist con goers were tired of shiatbags like TAA and Thunderf00t acting like assholes and getting away with it.
2014-01-06 06:42:36 AM
1 votes:
nulluspixiusdemonica: I get that theists prefer to have someone tell them what to believe, but you really should think about engaging your critical faculties...

You mean, kind of like the way you prefer to tell us what we should believe?
2014-01-06 06:34:45 AM
1 votes:

Prophet of Loss: But you do believe in something jackass, you believe that the universe, life, and everything is a accident.

Others believe differently.


This is relevant how? Also, if you're referencing the atheists who discount the biblical farce of creation, you probably aren't processing that whole scientific method thing correctly and would likely need to go develop your own conclusions based on personal research and reflection..

I get that theists prefer to have someone tell them what to believe, but you really should think about engaging your critical faculties... 

Just because you believe in sentient purple spigots invading Saturn doesn't make it true.
2014-01-06 06:27:02 AM
1 votes:
i232.photobucket.com
2014-01-06 06:20:23 AM
1 votes:

Prophet of Loss: Quantum physics disagrees with you.



imgs.xkcd.com
2014-01-06 06:16:09 AM
1 votes:

Lenny_da_Hog: Prophet of Loss: But you do believe in something jackass, you believe that the universe, life, and everything is a accident.

I'm an atheist and a determinist. Nothing is an accident. Everything happens the only way it can happen.


Quantum physics disagrees with you.
2014-01-06 06:15:08 AM
1 votes:

Prophet of Loss: But you do believe in something jackass, you believe that the universe, life, and everything is a accident.


I'm an atheist and a determinist. Nothing is an accident. Everything happens the only way it can happen.
2014-01-06 05:49:21 AM
1 votes:

LonMead: omeganuepsilon:  It's not like it's convoluted, "There are a lot of people who believe in a lot of silly things. I hope you don't fall in line with that." is hardly indoctrination.  You sort of need a doctrine to do that.

Such as Atheism.


Responding to someone calling you "silly" by demonstrating that you don't understand the difference between someone pointing out that your extraordinary claim has no proof and them making an extraordinary claim themselves... isn't really a counter-argument so much as pointing out that they should have gone with "stupid" instead of "silly".
2014-01-06 05:47:39 AM
1 votes:
There has always been a human need for ritual of some sort.
I suspect that it's been both profound ignorance and the need for such ritual that has kept religion going for as long as it has.

I have yet to see a group, humanist, atheist or anything in between that instead of just providing communal entertainment proposed to talk about current social and ethical issues.  Professional organizations have these sorts of courses built right in to their professional licensing requirements under the term "professional ethics".

It would be brilliant accomplishment for any organization to gather people under the same roof to discuss ethical and social issues.  It would be even better if they could invite proponents of different sides of the issue to speak on these issues.  For example, next Sunday, the theme could be "Does absolute power corrupt?"  Jamie Dimon and Bill Gates would speak.

Until such an organization forms, I'll just stay home and watch documentaries.
2014-01-06 05:47:22 AM
1 votes:

Prophet of Loss: In before "Atheism is not a religion".

/quacks like a duck



Not believing in anything is a belief! You're a superstar amongst geniuses.

/quarks, Einstein
2014-01-06 05:42:25 AM
1 votes:
These people are fundie plants tasked with giving fundies an excuse to say atheists are a religion.
2014-01-06 05:41:17 AM
1 votes:

LonMead: omeganuepsilon:  It's not like it's convoluted, "There are a lot of people who believe in a lot of silly things. I hope you don't fall in line with that." is hardly indoctrination.  You sort of need a doctrine to do that.

Such as Atheism.


Citation Needed
2014-01-06 05:34:33 AM
1 votes:

nulluspixiusdemonica: Lenny_da_Hog: It basically means, "a member of a minority group that doesn't accept his or her subordination."

I've always understood it to be a lame straw-man mock-up used to denigrate the opposition without the need to refer to anything factual...


Naw. See "uppity" for a synonym.
2014-01-06 05:29:56 AM
1 votes:

nulluspixiusdemonica: That's not how "militant" works.


It's the modern usage.

You know, "I don't have anything against blacks, it's those *militant* blacks...." and, "I don't have anything against gays, it's those *militant* gays....," and, "oh, I love women, it's those *militant* feminists that get to me!"

It basically means, "a member of a minority group that doesn't accept his or her subordination."
2014-01-06 05:26:48 AM
1 votes:
Can I launch a not-a-windsurfer club and what the hell does that even mean? An atheist church is the stupidest thing I've ever heard of.
2014-01-06 05:25:00 AM
1 votes:
omeganuepsilon:  It's not like it's convoluted, "There are a lot of people who believe in a lot of silly things. I hope you don't fall in line with that." is hardly indoctrination.  You sort of need a doctrine to do that.

Such as Atheism.
2014-01-06 05:11:00 AM
1 votes:

fusillade762: He also said he advised them to leave the dive bar "where women wore bikinis," in favor of a more family-friendly venue.

You know, now that I think about I don't like this "family friendly" idea. Just as I don't think children should be indoctrinated into religion I wouldn't want them indoctrinated into atheism. Let them grow up and make up their own minds.


What? Tell me you're trolling. It's not like it's convoluted, "There are a lot of people who believe in a lot of silly things. I hope you don't fall in line with that." is hardly indoctrination.  You sort of need a doctrine to do that.
2014-01-06 05:08:09 AM
1 votes:

nulluspixiusdemonica: Prophet of Loss: quacks like a duck

Sincerely doubt your particular brand of mental aberration qualifies you for understanding why atheists identify themselves as such..

/barks like a frog


LOL, you sound like a lot of religious people I know ...
2014-01-06 05:05:45 AM
1 votes:
What a bunch of fruitcakes.

i.imgur.com
2014-01-06 04:52:42 AM
1 votes:
I think I want to start a 12-step program for non-addicts. I feel I'm missing out on all the sharing and stale donuts that addicts get.
2014-01-06 04:46:50 AM
1 votes:
So, we're gonna wind up with the Atheist Church, the Reformed Atheist Church, The Free-Will Atheists, the Mission Atheists, the Southern Atheists, the Seventh Day Atheists, Greek Orthodox Atheists, the First Church of Atheism-Scientist, the Atheist Witnesses, the Church of Jesus Martinez of Latter-Day Atheist, and Episcopalians. Where will it all end?

It's getting so you can't believe in God in peace around here anymore.

At least Atheists finally got a song.
2014-01-06 02:44:33 AM
1 votes:

gameshowhost: hardinparamedic: simplicimus: hardinparamedic: simplicimus: gameshowhost: Welcome to my Not Collecting Stamps club!  We don't collect stamps here, so let's get together and talk about not collecting stamps.

I don't have a collection of commemorative stamps from the 70's to the present day.

That's a shame. I hear that NASA had some really nice stamps in the 1970s.

That was a funny read. "Additional verification needed". Like there's a USPS center on the moon to cancel the stamps.

If you want a series of good laughs, read up on the Apollo, Gemini and Mercury programs. Those guys got away with a LOT in those days.

: /

Guys, please stay on topic.


24.media.tumblr.com

Hey, it is on topic. The crew of Apollo 8 were very religious.

They also weren't dicks.

upload.wikimedia.org

"And from the crew of Apollo 8, we close with good night, good luck, a Merry Christmas - and God bless all of you, all of you on the good Earth."
2014-01-06 02:37:34 AM
1 votes:

mamoru: How so? And, I really do mean that as an honest question. I'm just an (apathetic agnostic) atheist, so don't really know much about all of these "official" factions and movements and such. What are the atheism+ people and what makes them assholes?


long story short, you're either with them or you're a misogynist.
2014-01-06 01:47:11 AM
1 votes:

gameshowhost: Welcome to my Not Collecting Stamps club!  We don't collect stamps here, so let's get together and talk about not collecting stamps.


I don't have a collection of commemorative stamps from the 70's to the present day.
2014-01-06 01:13:29 AM
1 votes:
I'm sorry, I can't comment on all of this. I am too consumed with the need to deliver a punch in the face to the guy in the photo.
2014-01-06 12:53:13 AM
1 votes:
Well, this seems to working out as well as the Anarchist's Union.
 
Displayed 102 of 102 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report