Assuming I understand the meme, I find the opposite to be true.
Young person is raised in a highly insulated and dogmatic faith. Wants out. Finds company with anti theists and gets the dogma and camaraderie they got in the old faith. Eventually they realize there are tons and tons of people atheist and otherwise who don’t think belief should be some type of blood sport.
Yeah. if they picked one and gave it mouth service and are anti all the rest. Well then that would be perfectly hunky dory. How dare they deny all rather than deny all minus one!
I have no idea what this meme format means, but it’s crazy to me people can blind themselves to the most fundamental truth about human existence with delusionals of eternal life where everyone you have ever met is singing kumbaya.
When we indoctrinate our youth into rejecting their sences and logic, how can our species ever expect to progress? Such a shame when you consider how special it is that this 3.4 billion year old blue ball of soup has been sustaining the evolution of carbon based self replicating automata for unfathomable periods of time. Now we carve wishful statues in lieu of embracing our own existence.
What is this quote in context? Why do you believe this is what atheists believe enough to reiterate it. I don’t think I’ve outsmarted anyone. I think some people believe in different things, nobody can be certain of anything other than holy words were written by men and not gods. How would you reconcile your belief that you have outsmarted non-believers. This is not deep.
You might not think you think that, but if you engage as many reddit sceptics do then you certainly act it. Mere belief and faith alone is not what makes organized religion a regressive agent in the west today, and yet I am still horrified to witness people be talked down to by self titled atheists, their beliefs mocked and belittled, their values treated as backwards even where they may be more progressive than the self proclaimed atheist’s.
Most importantly, this strand of “atheism” warrants dismissal because it is not actual non belief, it is just negating it, anti-belief. There is none of the work to deconstruct the values ascribed by the mythology, to understand them, and to reach new conclusions in the process of leaving faith, only the effort to call everyone else an idiot like the grown-up version of the brat that delights in ruining santa for younger kids. You haven’t left the faith you claim to, you’ve just stopped doing the rituals of it and given yourself an air of intellectual superiority for supposedly beating religion by not believing the mythology as literal history.
That’s a lot of words for saying some people and groups of people that also identify as a non believer can be really arrogant pricks. my response is, I agree, and this is true of basically ANY and most groups of peoples. It would be a simple task to ‘what about’ your generalization here by pointing out the many cruel, dismissive and disrespectful things thiests say and truly believe about others and their metaphysical doom.
A lot of atheists do not appreciate being a target of proselytizing and having what they feel is nonsense projected at them and their families. They don’t appreciate dogmas impacting laws, and history has shown the atrocities religious fervor can lead to when mobilized at a state level. People fear and often direct blame and scorn at the wrong people this again is true of most large groups. You maybe feel a target by those who have generalized you and your beliefs? Why perpetuate the cycle with more stereotypes that non believers will inherently act in a way?
We can’t know everyone’s experiences, none of us know where others are coming from, so remaining respectful and tactful is important when discussing things like religion and politics. We must keep in mind a lot of what we read online is written by children who are finding themselves and their beliefs. They may be inherently immature, may want to get a rise out of you or just don’t know how to be tactful in discussion. Some of us never learn from these types of interactions. Some of us learn to try.
An atheist does not believe in god, gods or other claims of supernatural phenomena. You can’t outsmart what doesn’t exist. Believers in those things are people who have been misled but that alone doesn’t make them stupid.
That doesn’t cut it; a purely semantic argument from an academic stance is cowardly and impotent. All “gods” and their related cults are an intrinsic obstacle to human development as a species. Don’t even get me started on the systemic exploitation of the mentally/emotionally vulnerable, or unchecked sexual predation on children. Fuck your religion, every religion. Full stop.
Also if you get a chance maybe read a sentence or two of that wiki article on ignosticism. Seems like your little rant assumed it’s some kind of religion. I guess you just saw the suffix ‘ism’ and got triggered but judging from your angsty sentiment it might be right up your alley.
That doesn’t cut it; a purely semantic argument from an academic stance is cowardly and impotent. All “gods” and their related cults are an intrinsic obstacle to human development as a species. Don’t even get me started on the systemic exploitation of the mentally/emotionally vulnerable, or unchecked sexual predation on children. Fuck your religion, every religion. Full stop.
So you consider that to be an ‘elucidated statement’ about ignosticism:
Ignosticism or igtheism is the idea that the question of the existence of God is meaningless because the word “God” has no coherency and an ambiguous definition.
Anti theists are basically what they claim they aren’t. Religious radicals who want to force their opinion of religion on others. Basically atheist jihadists. It’s cute.
I do want to force my ideologies. Because my ideologies don’t result in persecution of belief.
You can believe whatever the fuck you want but in my ideal world your beliefs end at your doorstep. Outside of your home or preferred church your beliefs means nothing to anyone. So all this external preaching and symbolism would be outlawed.
Should we do that with all ideologies? Should we also keep trans and radical lgbtq ideology out of the streets and schools? Shall we keep communism and Palestinian demonstrations indoors and out of the public eye? Remove red, trans and rainbow flags?
And yes, it is comparable to a religion. Some of these are things if you disagree on you get cancelled and labelled as essentially a heretic for. Basically excommunicated. With very little space for forgiveness either.
Or is it different because deep down what you actually mean is “stop expressing ideology I disagree with in the public space”.
Sure, limits on freedom of speech are necessary when it’s basically the incitement of violence or direct death threats. But anything beyond that is authoritarian and undemocratic.
If people should have the right to preach on the streets, then people should be allowed to fly pride flags and have parades. If Christians are allowed to do street sermons, so should Muslims. We live in a free society.
It’s just never going to happen. None of the religions I’ve been in contact with are limited to “asnwering questions we don’t have answers to so you can live happily”, they always add “…while you give me some money/power”, which requires the religion to spread, so it’s incompatible with the followers keeping it “inside their home”.
Add comment