The New Atheist - Mock and Ridicule Believers

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
122

[quote]H factor wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

I’m thinking along the lines of the bare bone basics. Things like, there is more to the world than us, “good” is preferable to “evil”, there is reason for things, etc.
[/quote]

As an agnostic-atheist this fits me even though. I think science explains why things happen. I prefer what I view as good to what I view as evil. I think there is more to the “universe” than just humans on Earth. [/quote]

Right. That is the point.

If there is God, it doesn’t matter if you or I reject the notion or call it by a different name than I do. It is very much still there, communicating these things to you and I.

Like, I listen to a lot of hip-hop, and dont’ like the Dead. Lets say for the same of argument, you don’t like hip-hop but are really into the Dead. Just because the tones, arrangements and sounds are different doesn’t mean we don’t both hear music.

123

[quote]MattyG35 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
If you take all the religions the world has ever known, and put them in a colander with the right sized holes, you’d be left with a common core of basic principles, agreed?[/quote]

I don’t know, and that would depend on what you filtered, and the criteria you were using, eg do all have to have these for it to be considered common? 80%…etc

What if most don’t have love and respect your neighbours? Should it be agreed that those are wrong? That would get interesting
[/quote]

those would be wrong, at times we are all guilty of those. none are perfect.

i would have difficulty in the current age including core values of the muslims murdering thousands of innocent non combatants that “they believe” are their enemy.

can you have a more backwards core of beliefs in the 21st century?

…islamic murderers shooting an innocent mother’s two children as she begged for them to kill her and spare her children. they shot the children first so she could see her babies suffering than shot her. that guaranteed them 72 virgins in heaven.

the muslim leaders HAVE TO DEMAND this behavior END and tell these “soldiers of allah” they are not going to heaven, but rather a hell.

what about islam custom of cutting the clitoris off young women with a razor and without anesthesia? that is not a core value i treasure.

what about honor deaths when daughters are raped or wish to follow their dream? “cover yourself with a burka/burqa because your body is tempting men” and they will rape you, then we must kill you to save our honor. who’s honor? what honor?

their people live in fuckin dirt/sand floor huts. their leaders rape and murder their daughters and sisters. their jihad world trade center fucks spent the night at strip clubs before striking their “holy war” on thousands of non combatants sitting at desks in cubicles.

124

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

If there is God, it doesn’t matter if you or I reject the notion or call it by a different name than I do. [/quote]

Thing is, if this God that exists is the God that’s believed in around here, these things most definitely matter to Him, and, by extension, to all of us.

Ecumenism is probably impossible within Christianity and certainly impossible between Christianity and the rest.

I’m not tossing criticism at you–I haven’t been following your discussion–just making a point.

125

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

I’m thinking along the lines of the bare bone basics. Things like, there is more to the world than us, “good” is preferable to “evil”, there is reason for things, etc.
[/quote]

As an agnostic-atheist this fits me even though. I think science explains why things happen. I prefer what I view as good to what I view as evil. I think there is more to the “universe” than just humans on Earth. [/quote]

Right. That is the point.

If there is God, it doesn’t matter if you or I reject the notion or call it by a different name than I do. It is very much still there, communicating these things to you and I.

Like, I listen to a lot of hip-hop, and dont’ like the Dead. Lets say for the same of argument, you don’t like hip-hop but are really into the Dead. Just because the tones, arrangements and sounds are different doesn’t mean we don’t both hear music. [/quote]

I’m with you. So why do non-believers have such a hard time with how I get around day to day? Why do they say stuff like “atheism is a religion!” “You can’t be good without believing in something!” “You’re not wise enough to believe.” “Only a fool wouldn’t believe.” Some of these have been said in this thread. Some of these have been said very recently.

What are we arguing about again? Hell the thread is basically a “look at what atheists are doing” thread…coming right off the heels of a bunch of believers talking about how we shouldn’t judge the actions of a few.

It’s startling (imo) to see that kind of quick hypocrisy. FWIW I park by a woman with a bumper sticker that says “god doesn’t believe in atheists either.” You can’t say “stop attacking us” in the non-believers yet again.

128

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

If there is God, it doesn’t matter if you or I reject the notion or call it by a different name than I do. [/quote]

Thing is, if this God that exists is the God that’s believed in around here, these things most definitely matter to Him, and, by extension, to all of us.
[/quote]

To us, and in our perception sure. An omnipotent being might just not have the same issues.

It boils down to substance over form for me. It really won’t (I would dare say can’t) matter to an omnipotent being what form you subscribed to if the substance isn’t there, and conversely, you could go as far as out right object to the form, and still have the substance.

Take power for example. How many instances of power corrupting have happened across human history. I’d say damn near impossible to count if you dive down to the individual level. We are ultimately weak, every man has a price, eventually.

I can’t imagine a species so weak, so hell bent on trying to defy the harsh unforgiving laws of nature could even begin to interpret the messages of an omnipotent being in any detailed fashion. It would be sort of counter intuitive.

129

[quote]H factor wrote:
So why do non-believers have such a hard time with how I get around day to day? Why do they say stuff like “atheism is a religion!” “You can’t be good without believing in something!” “You’re not wise enough to believe.” “Only a fool wouldn’t believe.” Some of these have been said in this thread. Some of these have been said very recently. [/quote]

Because humans are selfish creatures by nature, for the most part. It is how we’ve survived. We come together, and work together, but for selfish reasons.

So couple that with something as personal, and introspective as religion, and the basis of the problems you speak of sort of jumps right out at you.

The issue is, and why you hear these things, really amounts to the conversation/argument always centers around “I think, I feel, I Know, we thing, we feel, we know, he thinks, he feels, he knows”. If the conversation was approached from a “if A is true then this, and if B is true then this” a lot of the messiness goes away, very quickly. (You also have to differentiate if people are talking about the God Concept, or are they actually thinking of a “man in the sky”.)

However, we’re also very emotional as well as selfish, so that won’t happen anytime soon.

As to the “atheism is a religion”, well, because it is true (depending on how you define your terms). It isn’t (well rather shouldn’t be taken as) an insult.

I would have to have you define your terms to further comment on it. For example, atheism is often interchanged with “super science” people who make spaghetti monster references. Are we talking about those atheists?

That isn’t an attack IMO, and I wouldn’t have taken it as one when I was a card carrying Militant Atheist either.

I think that is bumper sticker making a lot of assumptions though. And projecting human thought and emotion onto an omnipotent being, which is silly in my opinion. But it might just be a light hearted inside joke, much like the funny anti-Obama stickers I see once n blue moon.

130

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

If there is God, it doesn’t matter if you or I reject the notion or call it by a different name than I do. [/quote]

Thing is, if this God that exists is the God that’s believed in around here, these things most definitely matter to Him, and, by extension, to all of us.
[/quote]

To us, and in our perception sure. An omnipotent being might just not have the same issues.

It boils down to substance over form for me. It really won’t (I would dare say can’t) matter to an omnipotent being what form you subscribed to if the substance isn’t there, and conversely, you could go as far as out right object to the form, and still have the substance.

Take power for example. How many instances of power corrupting have happened across human history. I’d say damn near impossible to count if you dive down to the individual level. We are ultimately weak, every man has a price, eventually.

I can’t imagine a species so weak, so hell bent on trying to defy the harsh unforgiving laws of nature could even begin to interpret the messages of an omnipotent being in any detailed fashion. It would be sort of counter intuitive. [/quote]

I completely agree with you.

My point is that this is exactly counter to the substance of the world’s great religions, which, by and large, are mutually exclusive. And which are all very comfortable with the act of interpreting (what they say are) the messages of an omnipotent being.

131

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:
So why do non-believers have such a hard time with how I get around day to day? Why do they say stuff like “atheism is a religion!” “You can’t be good without believing in something!” “You’re not wise enough to believe.” “Only a fool wouldn’t believe.” Some of these have been said in this thread. Some of these have been said very recently. [/quote]

Because humans are selfish creatures by nature, for the most part. It is how we’ve survived. We come together, and work together, but for selfish reasons.

So couple that with something as personal, and introspective as religion, and the basis of the problems you speak of sort of jumps right out at you.

The issue is, and why you hear these things, really amounts to the conversation/argument always centers around “I think, I feel, I Know, we thing, we feel, we know, he thinks, he feels, he knows”. If the conversation was approached from a “if A is true then this, and if B is true then this” a lot of the messiness goes away, very quickly. (You also have to differentiate if people are talking about the God Concept, or are they actually thinking of a “man in the sky”.)

However, we’re also very emotional as well as selfish, so that won’t happen anytime soon.

As to the “atheism is a religion”, well, because it is true (depending on how you define your terms). It isn’t (well rather shouldn’t be taken as) an insult.

I would have to have you define your terms to further comment on it. For example, atheism is often interchanged with “super science” people who make spaghetti monster references. Are we talking about those atheists?

That isn’t an attack IMO, and I wouldn’t have taken it as one when I was a card carrying Militant Atheist either.

I think that is bumper sticker making a lot of assumptions though. And projecting human thought and emotion onto an omnipotent being, which is silly in my opinion. But it might just be a light hearted inside joke, much like the funny anti-Obama stickers I see once n blue moon.
[/quote]

I get all this, but try and see where we’re coming from. Recently (for some reason) it seems as if all that has been really talked about on here has been religion. And believers seem to make the same arguments over and over again. We answer these things and it isn’t good enough. Then if we start to push back a bit here comes the peanut gallery (trying not to get a “harold” circle jerk thread started by the guy on ignore who still trashes me). “Don’t judge us based off the actions of a few!” Ok…

Then this thread pops up doing that exact thing. It’s just annoying is all. Wait, we have believers who are doing what they just said we shouldn’t do. “Don’t mock and ridicule us.” Yet believers are free to quote us as fools, tell us we lack the wisdom to see the truth, etc. “You’re personally attacking me” right after shooting out personal attacks!

Believers on this site are saying things over and over again to non-believers that they are bothered about apparently and yet seem to feel the need to do what they complain about to us. How does that make any sense?

It doesn’t make any sense and it isn’t consistent. Some people on here want to be free to behave however they want, but will call out someone at the first sign of them doing it. Then they get defensive when people call them on it. Seems pretty childish.

132

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Seems people are angrier with Pat (anon guy on PWI) than Dawkins ( a bit of a media/cultural celebrity). Well, at least more time has been spent on Pat.[/quote]

And for the life of me, I cannot figure out why…Very bizarre.

133

[quote]H factor wrote:

Is get back on your meds nice? Those WERE your words. I called you a hypocrite because you said don’t judge believers on the words of a few people and then attempted to judge atheists on the words of one. You’re deliberately being obtuse. Everyone knows exactly why I posted what I did and so do you. You’re attempting to play it off like you “don’t get it.”
[/quote]
I am not playing, I don’t actually get it. Perhaps I am obtuse. You’ve seemed to take this as an opportunity personally attack me. You have some strange craving to turn everything back on me taking the slightest semantic to show that I am a hypocrite.
Perhaps you don’t understand context? What I said what is in the light of ‘Surely you cannot believe that what he said is right?’ It’s meant to be provocative. It’s meant to start dialog.

I haven’t read your rule book on how I should behave. But it’s clear you don’t understand me, nor what true hypocrisy is.

[quote]
Why would YOU get annoyed about non-believers talking about judging Christians on the actions of a few and then turn around and attempt to do the same. Why are you talking about being attacked while throwing out attacks? You’re getting defensive about stuff that YOU are doing. It’s strange. Honestly I just find it ironic when I read the thread because you JUST posted how annoying it was because you thought I was doing it. [/quote]
Well considering that I am being attacked, by you, I have every right to defend myself.
You’re reaching. You want to bash me, perhaps just call me names and shit and quit trying to make eloquent, profound character attacks in order that it may sound grounded in objective ethics or some kind of crap.
You clearly got a beef.

134

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

If there is God, it doesn’t matter if you or I reject the notion or call it by a different name than I do. [/quote]

Thing is, if this God that exists is the God that’s believed in around here, these things most definitely matter to Him, and, by extension, to all of us.

Ecumenism is probably impossible within Christianity and certainly impossible between Christianity and the rest.
[/quote]
Not true.

[quote]
I’m not tossing criticism at you–I haven’t been following your discussion–just making a point.[/quote]

135

[quote]MattyG35 wrote:
One of the more hilarious things I find with some religious folks is when they say regarding a scientific claim, something along that lines of “That evidence is invalid/insufficient/etc”, yet have no problem doing the mental gymnastics to accept their beliefs, that lack for more in evidence and aren’t subject to as intense scrutiny and investigation but instead are accepted as truth at face value, make sense to them.

Oh, the irony.[/quote]

Where is your evidence for this? Tossing something and hoping it sticks?

136

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]MattyG35 wrote:
One of the more hilarious things I find with some religious folks is when they say regarding a scientific claim, something along that lines of “That evidence is invalid/insufficient/etc”, yet have no problem doing the mental gymnastics to accept their beliefs, that lack for more in evidence and aren’t subject to as intense scrutiny and investigation but instead are accepted as truth at face value, make sense to them.

Oh, the irony.[/quote]

Where is your evidence for this? Tossing something and hoping it sticks?[/quote]

Jumping to conclusions as usual pat? Did you use your lolgic?

137

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]AceRock wrote:
I don’t believe in God, therefore, I suppose this could be directed at me, in a wildly general sense.

I never voted for Dawkins to be my leader.

Simply because this guy wants to advocate being a jerk in public to other people, he’s now appointed over me and stands as my representative? Calling myself the leader of the free world doesn’t make me the POTUS.

This also implies there is a group or a movement of which to be a leader. This is a false assumption. I don’t have an atheist/agnostic membership card. Or a mensa card, for that matter…

Pat, my man, I don’t believe you believe this.[/quote]

It’s not directed at you, at all.
Richard Dawkins, like it or not, is a very popular, celebrated figure of the New Atheist movement.
I understand, and here it often that atheists claim not to be part of a ‘group’ so to speak. But there are groups, rallies, websites w/ memberships for atheists.
And like it or not, from the outside looking in Dawkins is a leader and a major figure of the New Atheist movement. You may not see yourself as part of a group, but to us dumbass believers, it looks very much like a group, a movement.
Often well people think of atheism, he comes to mind. Whether or not he represents you, he represents your beliefs.

No, I absolutely do not think atheists, as a general rule agree with what Dawkins said here, but some do. I of course had some great conversations with atheists here and elsewhere that was mutually respectful and quite enjoyable.

Whether or not you consider Dawkins ‘your leader’, people associate atheism with Dawkins. If you walk around and tell people you’re atheist, chances are Dawkins is going to come up. And Dawkins is saying the ridiculous petty things. He’s damn sure no doing you any favors.

But no Ace, I certainly didn’t have you in mind when I posted this. I ran across it, and my jaw dropped. I couldn’t believe a supposedly educated and celebrated man would say such nonsense. So I posted it to have a conversation about it.
Who agrees, who disagrees and whatever comes of it. That’s all.
I don’t think you’re a bad guy. I don’t think you’re the type to mock and disparage believers.
You’re certainly entitled to think we are crazy and stupid, but I trust you know how to conduct yourself.
I believe in the transubstantiation, I am a proud, unashamed Catholic. I don’t expect most people here are going to call me names because of it. You may think I am an idiot, but you aren’t going to remove my dignity as a human being because of it. Apparently Dawkins would. And as many arguments as he has lost to theists, he really should be a bit more humble. Or maybe thats why he’s mad. Who knows.

He said something with shock value, so I figured I float it and see how others perceive it. [/quote]

I know it wasn’t personally directed at me from you, thus the “wildly general sense” from my post. I meant that as an agnostic/atheist/whatever, you asked a question to the demographic under which I fall.

I’m only an atheist because you call me so. It’s like an uncle or an American. I’m just sitting here and now I have a label. I do not self-identify as such.

On with it, then. I understand how your jaw dropped, that was quite a clip from whatever speech he was giving. I’m curious about the rest, but just like the infanticide clip, it’s been edited to show the worst. Not that I’m saying there’s any GOOD in the rest, just curious to let him hang himself further, I suppose.

To this New Atheist movement. I haven’t heard of it. Haven’t really heard of him other than here. Don’t care about it or him. Just hanging out and debating this stuff for fun and to procrastinate packing my house. :wink:

I don’t really know why people got beef with you, it’s a strange day I guess. It’s thread worthy, for sure. 'Til the next one, peace.

138

[quote]pat wrote:

I am not playing, I don’t actually get it. Perhaps I am obtuse. You’ve seemed to take this as an opportunity personally attack me. You have some strange craving to turn everything back on me taking the slightest semantic to show that I am a hypocrite.
Perhaps you don’t understand context? What I said what is in the light of ‘Surely you cannot believe that what he said is right?’ It’s meant to be provocative. It’s meant to start dialog.

I haven’t read your rule book on how I should behave. But it’s clear you don’t understand me, nor what true hypocrisy is.

[quote]
Why would YOU get annoyed about non-believers talking about judging Christians on the actions of a few and then turn around and attempt to do the same. Why are you talking about being attacked while throwing out attacks? You’re getting defensive about stuff that YOU are doing. It’s strange. Honestly I just find it ironic when I read the thread because you JUST posted how annoying it was because you thought I was doing it. [/quote]
Well considering that I am being attacked, by you, I have every right to defend myself.
You’re reaching. You want to bash me, perhaps just call me names and shit and quit trying to make eloquent, profound character attacks in order that it may sound grounded in objective ethics or some kind of crap.
You clearly got a beef. [/quote]

Your first post asked me if I was off my meds and you come back with I’m trying to bash you. You did EXACTLY what you attacked me for just days ago (which I never did ironically) and started a new thread to do it and now you’re attempting to backtrack and make it look like I’ve got something against you.

I don’t have anything against you. I was very surprised that someone who was annoyed at believers using the actions of a few to talk about a group would run back and make a thread doing the exact same thing. It just didn’t make sense, honestly thought it was a joke at first. I posted, you attacked me, and since then you’ve been trying to act like I’m deliberately trying to expose you.

I’m not trying to expose anything by quoting your words. You’re behind the 8 ball in this thread and you’re trying to pretend like you’ve got people after you or you’re some type of victim who has a right to defend yourself.

No one is attacking you. I have always liked you as a poster. I just don’t think you have been consistent with your arguments recently and I’m not the only one. People are pointing that out. It really shouldn’t bother you that much. Are you off your meds is a character attack. Perhaps you don’t understand is a character attack. Here’s your words where you go against what you say in this thread which people are doing to you is NOT a character attack. It is pointing out a logical fallacy.

So for the last time in this thread, relax man. I won’t speak for everyone else in here, but I have nothing against YOU. You can keep making posts all day long about how people need to start threads about you or whatever or how people are out to get you, but it’s your own paranoia. I think most people who have been quoting you from other threads are pointing out inconsistencies, not saying “let’s torch Pat.”

Like I said, bullshit internet discussion. We win some, we lose some. End of the day we all go back to sleep until we are bored enough to log back in. Have a fantastic day my man.

139

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:

Why do they say stuff like “atheism is a religion!”

[/quote]

Because objectively speaking, it is. A de facto religion. [/quote]

False

140

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
I’m not an atheist, more of an agnostic - I look at the incomprehensible vastness of the universe and it’s layer upon layer of complexity and other galaxies containing worlds and environments that I cant even begin to comprehend, and one can only wonder how it all began. Maybe “GOD” or some “intelligence” created the laws of physics and set it all into motion? I don’t know.

But what I DO know is that physics and science and evidence produced by the scientific method are the closest thing to “facts” that we have. And there is nothing in the world that will ever convince me that some guy born on earth 2000 years ago to a married woman who claimed to be a virgin and later got crucified for causing problems with the Romans has ANYTHING to do with the UNIVERSE. Just because it is written in some book that’s been added to, edited, translated and used as fact - it was written by people who believed the earth was flat!

LOL I mean, earth is just one tiny planet orbiting one tiny star in one tiny galaxy in a massive universe that’s over 13 billion years old… What makes your little book so much more special than the Japanese legend that the islands were created with drops from Izanagi’s spear? Or the Hindu religion? Brama and Vishnu are older than Jesus… Give me one shred of EVIDENCE that compels me to believe YOUR little fairy tale over any of the other THOUSANDS of fairy tales made up thousands of years ago by ignorant sheep herders who had no understanding of modern science?

How could ANYONE with an adult rational mind believe that? You might as well tell me you believe in Santa Clause.

I have enough tact to not be rude to people at parties and I think that everyone’s beliefs should be their own. But when Christians try to start LEGISLATING their little fairy tale, that’s when I have a problem. You don’t see Muslims trying to outlaw pork. You don’t see Hindus trying to outlaw beef. Why haven’t Christians tried to outlaw shrimp when it’s also mentioned in the Bible, but instead attack Homosexuals? Why can’t Christians just believe what they want to believe and accept the fact that other people might see it differently? Why do they need special legislation?

The hypocrisy is laughable and I have a very hard time respecting people with little minds that believe in fairy tales and who try and shove their bullshit down my throat with absolutely NO compelling argument. Just “faith”. I’m sorry, but I’m not just going to “take your word for it”.
[/quote]

Wow, a brilliant diatribe perfectly stating my thought process and position on the matter!