[QUOTE=toaster468;42340280]No it takes more faith to be religious.[/QUOTE]
well that makes sense to have said that then. No doubt that is true.
I was saying that even if God literally stepped down from the heavens and slapped them in their face with his dick, they wouldn't even accept it. I was calling them stubborn as a brick. Atheism uses proof, if they had proof of god the "Worst form" wouldn't even accept it.
[QUOTE=CMB Unit 01;42340019]Dawkins really comes across as the worst kind of atheist. Belittling other people's views doesn't make them turn to yours, Dick.
[editline]...[/editline]
Btw, I am an atheist.[/QUOTE]
Lol Dawkins is fucking tame. Listen some of Christopher Hitchens's old videos and you'll have an aneurysm.
And I say faith because the "proof" in the bible mainly consists of stores about a magical hobo and his wacky adventures with a group of his friends.
[QUOTE=J!NX;42340210]the worst atheists are the ones who hyper polar atheist and wouldn't accept real proof if it was thrown in their fucking faces.
Those "I'm the only concious human being" assholes who think the world revolves around them and that if you're religious you're automatically a horrible human being. Looking to just start a religious debate where they hold their fingers in their ears, not to share philosophical ideas but to go "IM RIGHT UR WRONG!!!!". But they do it in a time that is not appropriate.
this is why I don't argue religion, only discuss it. Only immaturity and mindless bitching is sprouted from a religious debate.[/QUOTE]
You know whats funny but sad at the same time? The fact that the view you put forward also applies to a lot of the malcontents on this forum posting utterly uncompromising views, and in general everywhere, people become so entrenched in their own views (Or those of others, depending on how utterly shallow they are)
shit my automerge
[QUOTE=toaster468;42340240]But it takes MORE proof to be Atheist.[/QUOTE]
I was a bit confused by that in a way too.
Being atheist doesn't instantly imply you accept science as the be-all end-all of truth though, it's just very likely you will as without religion (or some for of deity), science is all that's left to explain shit to a sceptical mind. Though this does lead to the shitlords who don't understand the reasons someone may have a belief in a religion or deity, believing that everything they know is all that is there.
The annoying fuckers who caused this whole "lol fedora!!!! euphoric!!!!lel!" shit are the kind of tools who don't even have any knowledge in the religions they are deriding, who literally just go out and post dumb shit on the internet to insult followers of religion. That's not being an atheist, just an asshole. Dawkins isn't quite one of those, he has studied the religions he puts down, and does debate fairly (assuming his opponent isn't a total moron anyway), leading to actual discussion about the ideas and reasoning behind belief.
holy fuck not again
EDIT:
Ok that was embarrassing...
[QUOTE=toaster468;42340299]And I say faith because the "proof" in the bible mainly consists of stores about a magical hobo and his wacky adventures with a group of his friends.[/QUOTE]
Intelligent religious individuals don't actually look for proof in religion because that would defeat the point of faith. Most moderate and humble religious people are part of a religion and believe in god because they like the comfort that comes with it, not because it has more proof than science. It's just that believing that you will live in a giant white garden with angels and pretty stuff everywhere is a more comforting idea than rotting in the ground.
Both science and religion emanate from Man's absolute inability to understand and know everything that exists in the world. It's perfectly possible for both concepts to co-exist and only extreme atheists or extreme religious people would believe otherwise. See American Atheists and Creationists.
And I'm getting really tired of this "you have to respect other peoples beliefs!" bullcrap. When something is objectively wrong an flies in the face of all reasoning and evidence, then it deserves no respect and should be shat on at every opportunity.
[editline]28th September 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=toaster468;42340240]But it takes MORE proof to be Atheist.[/QUOTE]
lol
dawkins is the man who both coined the word "meme" AND made being anti-religious fashionable
he must be reddit's patron saint
[QUOTE=Mabus;42340301]You know whats funny but sad at the same time? The fact that the view you put forward also applies to a lot of the malcontents on this forum posting utterly uncompromising views, and in general everywhere, people become so entrenched in their own views (Or those of others, depending on how utterly shallow they are)[/QUOTE]
it seems to me that generally extremist atheism just involves being a royal asshole and extremist religion involves being mentally insane.
that's not to say religious people are more inclined to murder.
and anyone who is so snug and smug high and mighty about their shitty ideologies are assholes.
[QUOTE=toaster468;42340308]holy fuck not again
EDIT:
Ok that was embarrassing...[/QUOTE]
I know that feeling.
[QUOTE=Explosions;42340346]And I'm getting really tired of this "you have to respect other peoples beliefs!" bullcrap. When something is objectively wrong an flies in the face of all reasoning and evidence, then it deserves no respect and should be shat on at every opportunity.
[editline]28th September 2013[/editline]
lol[/QUOTE]
I accept other people's beliefs
I don't accept other peoples beliefs on other PEOPLE or beliefs that compromise and harm other peoples existence.
Religion isn't [U]really [/U]the issue, stupid idiots with stupid idiot ideas are, and people who actually have the balls to bring religion into politics at all.
Bringing religion into politics really fucks it up for everyone and helps no one.
[QUOTE=Explosions;42340346]
lol[/QUOTE]
Can I have some more arguments other than "lol"?
[QUOTE=Explosions;42340346]lol[/QUOTE]
He's not wrong though? To be religious all you need to do is switch off and accept your scripture as truth. To believe that science is the truth, you could just switch off, and accept that too. But it's more reasonable to try and understand it, and request proof if someone comes forward with something new.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;42340403]He's not wrong though? To be religious all you need to do is switch off and accept your scripture as truth. To believe that science is the truth, you could just switch off, and accept that too. But it's more reasonable to try and understand it, and request proof if someone comes forward with something new.[/QUOTE]
"To believe that science is the truth" what the fuck does that have to do with atheism.
Atheism: the lack of a believe in a deity or deities.
That's fucking it. I could believe that the world is flat and the moon is a reptillian hologram and still be an atheist. It has nothing to do with this "belief in science" bullshit.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;42340403]He's not wrong though? To be religious all you need to do is switch off and accept your scripture as truth. To believe that science is the truth, you could just switch off, and accept that too. But it's more reasonable to try and understand it, and request proof if someone comes forward with something new.[/QUOTE]
That's implying every single religious person in the world actually just takes the whole scripture as truth and never question it, which is not true. Just like how some people accept science as essentially a dogma and others constantly question it, a lot of religious folk constantly question and reflect on their own religion, that's why we have theologists and philosophers. See the current pope.
The religious people who blindly follow their book and never think twice about what they are doing are the same creationist dipshits who still believe literally in the genesis.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;42340403]He's not wrong though? To be religious all you need to do is switch off and accept your scripture as truth. To believe that science is the truth, you could just switch off, and accept that too. But it's more reasonable to try and understand it, and request proof if someone comes forward with something new.[/QUOTE]
Truth is not subjective.
[QUOTE=Explosions;42340423]"To believe that science is the truth" what the fuck does that have to do with atheism.
Atheism: the lack of a believe in a deity or deities.
That's fucking it. I could believe that the world is flat and the moon is a reptillian hologram and still be an atheist. It has nothing to do with this "belief in science" bullshit.[/QUOTE]
he's talking about GENERAL and mainstream atheism, of course.
[QUOTE=J!NX;42340366]I accept other people's beliefs
I don't accept other peoples beliefs on other PEOPLE or beliefs that compromise and harm other peoples existence.
Religion isn't [U]really [/U]the issue, stupid idiots with stupid idiot ideas are, and people who actually have the balls to bring religion into politics at all.
Bringing religion into politics really fucks it up for everyone and helps no one.[/QUOTE]
Cool that doesn't mean that it has to be "accepted". If I thought that Obama was a fraud and was actually a medieval gnome wearing a black man's skin, nobody should "accept" my belief.
[QUOTE=Samiam22;42340129]this sort of assumption that all atheists must be fedora-wearing sperglords is honestly worse than the atheists themselves.
and it doesn't make you look witty or original either.[/QUOTE]
To be fair, it's hard to translate sticking your fingers your ears and going, "NANANA, CAN'T HEAR YOU" into text.
[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyGunz;42340436]Truth is not subjective.[/QUOTE]
Depends on the truth.
[QUOTE=Explosions;42340447]Cool that doesn't mean that it has to be "accepted". If I thought that Obama was a fraud and was actually a medieval gnome wearing a black man's skin, nobody should "accept" my belief.[/QUOTE]
well, I accept most beliefs
sciontology and PETA and WBC can fuck off
[QUOTE=J!NX;42340445]he's talking about GENERAL and mainstream atheism, of course.[/QUOTE]
The word has a definition, and it doesn't change no matter who it happens to apply to.
This is why I hate labeling myself as an "ism" or "ist", or following any movement. You have to take on all the stereotypes and stupid shit people will put on you. I generally despise the stereotypical "atheist" persona.
[editline]28th September 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=J!NX;42340465]well, I accept most beliefs
sciontology and PETA and WBC can fuck off[/QUOTE]
Well you don't sound like you're consistent at all if you shun scientology and weird shit like that yet "accept" religions like Christianity. Seriously, just read the Bible. Read Genesis. You will no longer respect shit about that religion.
[QUOTE=Explosions;42340423]"To believe that science is the truth" what the fuck does that have to do with atheism.
Atheism: the lack of a believe in a deity or deities.
That's fucking it. I could believe that the world is flat and the moon is a reptillian hologram and still be an atheist. It has nothing to do with this "belief in science" bullshit.[/QUOTE]
I know the definition of atheism, it'd be a bit weird if I didn't seeing as I posted the damn thing earlier. I just got a bit confused for a bit there :v: It's pretty late. Anyway, I guess I was going by the general definition of an atheist, rather than atheism itself. Usually atheists tend to accept science fully, which does require proof.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;42340424]
The religious people who blindly follow their book and never think twice about what they are doing are the same creationist dipshits who still believe literally in the genesis.[/QUOTE]
Nobody completely follows their book, there's just varying degrees of how many passages that would be inconvenient for the believer to follow suddenly become "misinterpreted," "mistranslated," or "just a metaphor."
I have all the respect for Dawkins, I just don't think what he does is that big of a deal.
[QUOTE=Mingebox;42340509]Nobody completely follows their book, there's just varying degrees of how many passages that would be inconvenient for the believer to follow suddenly become "misinterpreted," "mistranslated," or "just a metaphor."[/QUOTE]
Well yeah as it goes the books get more and more outdated and people recognize that, that's why the bible was rewritten a pretty impressive number of times through history.
To be fair in like a century or even half one Christianism will probably be nothing like what it is today and will only mention the bible as a founding document with very minor relevance written by people from another civilization altogether.
sure...point out the bad parts of the bible when arguing against it being a moral compass, what about jesus forgiving a prostitute or the tax man? what about the lessons of forgiveness, compassion with others, and idk....not stealing, cheating, beating, or killing? seems like those are all good morals to live by and they're all in the bible.
i don't know anything on the koran but it would seem to have similar morals and then some.
no the problem with religion is too many people use it as an excuse to cover their own shortcommings and evils, just because you raped someone and there are depictions of rape in a book doesn't mean the book is responsible for you raping someone
I feel like you should consider what he's saying. He might be saying it in an asshole way but he's right. You can't blindly follow religious rules you must think about the morality of everything independent of what religious doctrine says
[QUOTE=Sableye;42340624]sure...point out the bad parts of the bible when arguing against it being a moral compass, what about jesus forgiving a prostitute or the tax man? what about the lessons of forgiveness, compassion with others, and idk....not stealing, cheating, beating, or killing? seems like those are all good morals to live by and they're all in the bible.
i don't know anything on the koran but it would seem to have similar morals and then some.
no the problem with religion is too many people use it as an excuse to cover their own shortcommings and evils, just because you raped someone and there are depictions of rape in a book doesn't mean the book is responsible for you raping someone[/QUOTE]
The problem isn't really with religion at all nah, it's with people being close-minded and cso ertain they hold the ultimate truth that they refuse to consider the thought they may be wrong :v:
And this doesn't just apply to religious people, the Nazis did it with science in Germany.
[QUOTE=Sableye;42340624]sure...point out the bad parts of the bible when arguing against it being a moral compass, what about jesus forgiving a prostitute or the tax man? what about the lessons of forgiveness, compassion with others, and idk....not stealing, cheating, beating, or killing? seems like those are all good morals to live by and they're all in the bible.
i don't know anything on the koran but it would seem to have similar morals and then some.
no the problem with religion is too many people use it as an excuse to cover their own shortcommings and evils, just because you raped someone and there are depictions of rape in a book doesn't mean the book is responsible for you raping someone[/QUOTE]
Yes, follow Jesus and give up everything now, care not for your future, your family, your profession, give it all up and just listen to him! The end of the world is coming soon! Prepare!
Getting your morals from a messianic doomsayer is an interesting proposition.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
