There is no such thing as a fundie realist. You can only be a fundie in an ideology like religion or some kind of political system like communism. Not atheism which is just lack of belief in a higher power or God.
Yeah I'm an extremist atheist as soon as my lack of god orders me to die for him or be cast into eternal nothing as opposed to my eternal bliss of nothing I'll die nothing. Fundamentalist atheists are so scary they take not believing in god way too literally.I read a comment about atheism being as destructive as religion because it wasn't open to interpretation, what interpretation? like interpreting it in a way so you do believe in god?
To be fair, although it's mostly people making videos who are called militant atheists, there is the occassional person who blows up a church. They are much more rare, and are usually people who would blow up other things if not churches, but, um, I don't know what point I was trying to make.
@middlekk Varg Vikernes arguably fits that description, although that's the only instance I can think of, and even that's questionable for the reasons I already stated in my original comment.
Fundamental: Adheres to the basic and simplest rules or definitions. Atheism: Does not believe in a God, gods or other Supernatural Authority. Superfuous: Additions beyond those neccessary or redundant wording. Fundamental Atheism exists in the sense of the definitions of the word, but the "fundamental" part is superfluous, or redundant.
I can Imagine that a religious person would do such terrible things is when he is convinced that his actions are justified, and he is fighting for god and they will be rewarded by god himself after his death.
. to an athiest, why would an athiest do anything like that? this is the only life we have and we ought to make the best of it.
the mind set of a religious person is based on faith, an athiest mindset is based on reason. Very different.
while i agree that they are indeed way different, noting the violent christian fundies is kinda biased. I think a more valid point would have been noting that there have been christian fundies who take these drastic measures whereas no atheists who have been bombing churches or something like that
In Texas they just caught two atheists that had a long string of Church arsons. Read the news sometime. Eleven churches burned just this year. They caught Jason Bourque and he had lots of books on atheism when seized. Just search "jason bourque arson atheist" and see the news stories on it.
@ShaundalynChic There are screwballs in every group. The difference is that there's no dogma to interpret (falsely or otherwise, or take to ridiculous extreme) that these nutters were following.
I agree. That's my point. yet watching this video would lead you to believe that all on one side are violent & all on the other side are peaceful harm-no-one bloggers. That just isn't true, and the video maker should have known it wasn't true. It borders on being intentionally misleading, but I will give the benefit of the doubt that the maker is just oblivious to the real world (the one where there are screwballs in any large group as you said)
"Bad people do bad things, but for good people ... takes religion"
I actually had Weinberg's wife as a teacher in a class in college. The statements pretty obviously not true. Lots of good people do bad things for many motives. There are good people who fervently believe in global warming and good people who disbelieve that it is happening. Each side may do something in furtherance of what they think is good, but may really be bad. Same for vaccination of children. Good people on both sides.
O.o ?? Oh, really. Fundamental Christian: A book of thousands of words surrounded by billions of words of interpretations and acts. Fundamanetal Atheist: Still the same as the definition of Atheist. "Does not believe in a God, gods or other supernatural authority". Period.
There is nothing cut & dried about profiling dangerous, violent humans. Absolutist behavior is a symptom of mental illness; it can be hidden. Because it is based on phobias, it is easier to find it in the under-informed. This makes the religious fanatic an easy target, for those who wish to criticize an institutionalized mass delusional state. Being an atheist is not an automatic stamp of mental health, though it can be an indicator that a person in question, is far less likely to be a wack job.
Sure, some atheists are overconfident in their world view and treat religious people with contempt. But they do not have a belief system that by itself indoctrinates to certain behavior. Science is about knowledge, not about moral imperatives. Religion on the other hand tries to imposes certain behaviors and attitudes on "true" believers. The Bible itself sets a bad example, with its narratives of bloody violence against non-believers, child killing, and divine wrath / hatred.
It seems that many people who are commenting here have not understood the message of the video. I'm pretty sure that Eddy did not intend to say there are no violent atheists. The point is that fundamental Christians attacking atheists, or even liberal Christians, are much more common and extreme than atheist attacks against Christians. Usually the worst that Christian-hating atheists do is damaging inanimate objects like crosses and maybe churches. They're not killing people because of religion.
This is like when ignorant people claim that Christian Fundementalists and Moslem Fundementalists are on the same par. A Fundementalist is someone who adheres to their belief system fanatically and dogmatically. It is the Belief System ITSELF that dictates the level of harm that fundementalism can generate, not the fundementalism in and of itself; this is why Fundementalist Buddhists cause less trouble than Fundementalists Moslems.
Eddy I would suggest you look up calpurnpiso, he is a fundie in the way he acts, he believes that as fact julius caesar and jesus christ are the same person, that christianity was derived from a penis worshiping cult in egypt and that religious belief is part of schrizophrenia and all neuroscience and psychologists are in denial.
And he is 100% correct....backs it up with evidence and agrees with neurologists and psychologists. What do you have for evidence that makes him wrong?
@fantasy0coach most psychologists see god belief as false yes but schrizophenia nio. Otherwise all believers would be trying to treat god belief however they don't. What evidence neuroscience says that the brain is active in enjoying cinema or rock climbing as having a religious experience. The man is loon who wont be told by atheists or theists.
Calp is referring to fundamentalists. All Fundamentalists suffer schizophrenic behaviour. Your euphoria sensation example is also similar to schizophrenia when the euphoria stems from a disconnect between reality and imagination. This disconnect in essence, is the same as for schizophrenia.
I remember that Peter James Knight case. He refused to give the police his identity.
One of the major papers ran a story claiming he was probably influenced by the game "Blue Shift". The retarded journalist probably looked at a single screenshot of the game, saw a security guard, and thought it was about shooting security guards.
Three months later, they discovered who he was, and that he'd been living in a camp of sorts, with no electricity, let alone a computer or television.
The atheist camp, no matter how vociferously we criticize religion, can never be truly compared to fundamentalist Christians, Muslims or any other religion. As a whole, the differences are actually numerous and to me, anyone making the claim that atheists are somehow no different are simply spreading lies and are truly ignorant. Richard Dawkins... don't recall him ever bombing a church. Christopher Hitchens.... nope. Nothing's ringing a bell.
Ah my own thoughts in video form. Dawkins is a millitant atheist because he encourages critical inquiry against religion. Robbes Pierre was a millitant christian because he slaughtered people for not believing the right brand of his theology. Christians do themselves a massive disservice by using the term millitant atheist.
All you have to do to be a militant atheist is say that you are not convinced by the arguments for God's existence. To be called a militant Christian you need some munitions.
I refer to myself as a militant atheist, I love how people tell me I'm not different than a militant theist (in my case, an Ultra Orthodox Jew). Do you see me go out on the streets attacking women in busses and on streets? Do you see me burn trash on the streets to cause riots? Do you see me force my disbelief unto believers? My weapon is words, my weapon is knowledge, my weapon is facts. If that's not being different than a militant theist wacko, someone's got to check their own sanity.
So what about the atheist Harlan James Drake who killed anti-abortion protester James Pouillon and another man? Why did you leave him out? Drake shot Pouillon dead in Owosso, a small city about 10 miles west of Flint, Michigan. You are kind of blind to that I guess, even though that happened in 2009 and you are having to reach back to the early 1990s for most of your examples.
@ShaundalynChic I'm not too familiar with the story of Harlen James Drake, but it seems to me that the murder wasn't driven because of his atheism, unlike most of the examples shown above, that were caused/driven by the people's theism, their belief.
So why are anti-abortionists automatically fundamentalists while a professed atheist who shoots an anti-abortion protester, someone he had never met before, just because he was protesting, doesn't count the other way?
I am a pro-choice fundamentalist, like millions of other democrats. The lunatic fringe of the antiabortion protesters no more represents fundamentalism than Drake represents anyone but himself. But don't put videos on like this one pretending there aren't extremists everywhere.
@ShaundalynChic It's not hard to reach and find all the more examples of theists dangering the lives of others for their belief, just look at the events in Russia. I believe this video does refer more to the Christian terrorists rather than Islamic ones, but its is not hard to find more examples for that in recent news.
Yeah, I see a bunch of non-Christians like you killing people. See I can group you with them, just like you can try to group me with Chechen Muslims that I have nothing in common with. All nonChristians are murdering people all over the earth. Clearly not being Christian makes people murderous. That's the same logic you are using when you group Christians with Muslim fanatics.
So what about the atheist Harlan James Drake who killed anti-abortion protester James Pouillon and another man? Why did you leave him out? Drake shot Pouillon dead in Owosso, a small city about 10 miles west of Flint, Michigan. You are kind of blind to that I guess, even though that happened in 2009 and you are having to reach back to the early 1990s for most of your examples.
If they're not whipping out guns and shooting people, atheists can't be called militant. It's just a catch-phrase used by theists to paint us in a bad light.
In addition, as Matt Dillahunty has pointed out, even "atheists" like Stalin who killed millions of people, did NOT do so because of their atheism, as atheism is simply a response to the claim that god exists.
No no - in order to do what Stalin or Hitler did you have to ADD some extra philosophy or ideology (ie. dehumanization of Jews).
"Militant" irritates me, Its always used for Dawkins etc but if someone says "Militant Islam" you do not think of Osama going "this US policy is absurd, i'm going to write a very strongly worded letter, and set up a charitable foundation!"
You think of some beardy nutjobs with fucking GUNS.
@eddygoombah Yeah, I was being sarcastic. I tried to make it obvious, too. It's not so easy when these points are actually argued regularly. Poe's Law is inescapable.
@diin2live Ever heard of the no true Scots man fallacy, Hitler and Stalin may have been atheists, but they didn't kill people in the name of not having religion did they?
@diin2live utter and complete bullshit. there was never any killing "in the name of godlessness", not even by Stalin (as opposed to the oh so many killings in the name of god, allah, jesus, etc.) Oh, and by the way, Hitler was a religious man, probably a protestant christian. Also, LOOK UP the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, it will sound very familiar to you.
@Nalsii It shouldn't have taken any explanation; it was sarcasm. I expected people to realize the nature of my original comment immediately (eddygoombah did.) The fact that people repeatedly took it seriously is disappointing, to say the least. ...especially when it comes to people I tend to identify with: atheists. Regardless, fuck you.
@diin2live You fail again. Had I read your original comment, I most likely wouldn't have taken it seriously. However, I have NOT read it (and I really don't care about it now). I read only your last comment and I did take it seriously because that one did look serious, so save your "repeatedly took seriously" nonsense.
That aside, there's another group of people I'd expect you to identify with: jerks. So while you jerk, I'll go fuck, as requested. Regardless, have a nice day. I know I will :)
@Nalsii With the way you're bitching about it, I'm assuming you read a comment where I had to point out that my first was sarcastic. Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you suggesting that, because my latter comment was serious (identifying the sarcasm that eluded so many), my original must've seemed serious (the actual sarcasm)? Need I explain the flaws with this reasoning?
I'm glad that I can relate to the internet mastermind known as Nalsii. You, too, are a jerk.
@diin2live@diin2live I took the time and found your original comment and now I see where the problem is. You don't know when to stop trying to be sarcastic. You see, repeated jokes cease to be funny. I was replying to a comment where there were no traces of sarcasm left (your reaction to xchill) so that comment was nothing but stupid and you are a jerk for making it (and continuing to do so). And regarding your obsession with hand-fucking, you shouldn't overdo it. Remember: all with moderation.
@Nalsii Note that I wanted to include a smiley face at the end of my last reply but it happened to be a perfect 500 character comment. So, my apologies for the trouble this delay may have caused you. Here is your smiley face:
@diin2live Oh and since you brought it up: while you were making your perfect 500 character comment and adding an elaborate note to it in another comment, I had sex. With a beautiful redhead. And her hand actually a little bit too (though technically it wasn't "fucked"). I hope you enjoyed this story as much as I enjoyed your cordial smiley face :)
@Nalsii I enjoyed a brown-haired beauty at around 1am this morning, believe it or not. (First time in weeks too since we go to different universities. Shit was so cash.) Unfortunately, I only managed three hours of actual sleep before working the majority of today. So, I concede that your day was probably more enjoyable than mine.
I enjoyed your story as much as I enjoyed arguing with you. For that, I offer this sincere smiley. :)
@diin2live It perfectly explains why what you just said is a logical fallacy. Stalin was not purging religion because he belied it got in the way of an ideal communist society, he was not purging religion in the name of godlessness that's just a fabrication.
@XChillX42 I shall continue with my sarcasm that you and others consistently fail to recognize: If Stalin wasn't an atheist, he wouldn't have killed people in the name of his atheist faith.
@diin2live Hitler was a christian, in Mein Kampf he cites word for word that God was his influence in killing Jews.
In addition Stalin was an atheist, but his atheism did not compel him to kill so many people, he ideological values were. You might as well say that because Stalin didn't believe in Bigfoot, he killed many innocent people. I am an atheist and I find Stalin's ideological values to be repulsive, but they weren't motivated by atheism.
@porterwake, Hate to break it too you, but Hitler was no Christian. In fact, he has been quoted in saying,
""The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness ..."
But other then that, I agree with your statement. Stalin was never motivated by his Atheism to commit his horrible acts.
"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."
@porterwake, Does he refer to Jesus in that quote? Ummm, nope. Just a creator (Most religions tend to have that) and the fact he's defending himself against Jews (Believe it or not, Christianity isn't the only sect that hates Jews).
There's no reference to in that 'quote'.
You're really grasping at straws here. I recommend reading " Inside the Third Reich" or "A History of National Socialism", rather then using a book that was used primly for propaganda in Nazi Germany.
nobeliefs(dot)com(slash)hitler(dot)htm ---- Plenty of compelling quotes
I've read plenty on Hitler, he was a Christian alright. Inside the Third Reich is about Nazi structure, not personal beliefs.
Nice try though, but try to have a little more ingenuity when being creative with your witty last remark instead of copying me. I know mockery should be flattering, but not when it's from someone who can barely string together something genuine.
Hitler never attended a religious service in his adult life. this is very well documented. He used religious imagery in his speeches in manipulating a German nation that was used to that. But he can't be called catholic.
None of those pictures show Hitler attending worship services. A wedding is not a worship service. The famous picture of him leaving the Marine Church in Wilhelmshaven is mislabeled by the video. He was visiting the War Memorial inside the church accompanied by the foreign press. He didn't go to worship there. Hitler wasn't a brown shirt. The rest are images of diplomatic delegations from the Vatican. Every biographer of Hitler agrees that he never attended worship as an adult.
@Matur1n, like a fundie, you believe the written word before you believe your own two eyes. Even if Hitler never attended worship services, so what? I know firm Christians who don't attend. Jesus didn't like formal church gatherings either. Are you aware of the famous photo of Hitler praying? ww w nobeliefs com / hitler1 htm. And even if he used religion as a tool, then it's only proof of the gullibility of the religious - an even worse stance to take if you ask me.
"like a fundie, you believe the written word before you believe your own two eyes. "
First off I have seen video reels of him visiting the war memorial, so I have seen it with my own two eyes. You are the one wanting to deny historical truth. That is one of the most famous pictures of Hitler. It is before the war and he was accompanied by the foreign press and photographers. That's why the picture is famous, it was published all over the US/Britain. Why do you deny historical fact?
@Matur1n, I see the failure of my ways. Hitler was an atheist pretending to be a Catholic. Because, if people actually knew Hitler was a godless heathen, then they would've never carried out his orders to torture, slaughter, and oppress millions.
We can now add the Hutaree to that list. The self proclaimed christian militia who were recently arrested by the FBI for plotting to cowardly kill local cops.
Last year. 2009. Owosso, Michigan. Near Flint Michigan. The video is griping about events from the early 1990s yet ignores recent events. An atheist named Harlan Drake gunned down James Pouillon while he was protesting holding an anti-abortion sign. Just search the names Pouillon and Owosso and see local & Michigan news accounts. But it didn't get the national play the killings on the other side did. And guys like Rudolph are much more anti-government than they are religious types.
The sources I have found indicate that Mr. Drake was provoked by the placard that Mr. Pouillon was carrying. He pleaded insanity, which was upheld in court. He was not motivated by religious or political beliefs and no evidence he had animosity towards anti-abortionists or protesting against abortion. And no source even says he was an atheist, let alone motivated by it. Not a very good example, hell, not even an example I'm afraid.
Drake testified at trial that he planned the killings the night before, so he was hardly "provoked" as it was an assassination. Also it was widely reported that both pro-choice & atheist literature were ceased from his home. I am pro-choice myself, I just object to the video's implications that extremists on one side of the abortion debate are harmless & the other not. I also object to identifying fundamentalism with anti-abortionism. The 2 are different. Many fundamentalists are pro-choice.
So where are all the pictures of pro-choice theists killing people? Why are they all the radical anti-abortionists? When I put in "harlan drake testimony" into a search engine the first several have details of his testimony.
The Toledo newspaper has:
"The night before the shootings, Drake says he packed specific guns and bullets into a gym bag."At that evening, my thought was that they would be the best choice if i was going to shoot him the next day," Drake says.
I can find nothing that indicates he had 'pro-choice and atheist' literature siezed in his home, which was your statement. As I said, please PM me with those reports in support of what you are saying.
You do not have access to the literature. Fair enough.
Regarding the claims that the murders (including of a gravel pit owner) were premeditated and that the defendant was in posession of 'pro-choice and atheist literature', can we agree that these are unverified and ignorable for the purposes of assessing the claims in this video? And also that the defendant was suffering from mental health issues?
no, I'm just saying that the terms "Militant" or "fundamental" as used to describe outliers from the christian faith should not be used to described so called atheists.
@eddygoombah What I meant is, if the religious people are not religious and non religious were, they'd still have tendencies (the 'human factor') towards violence.
@phillippi2 I had a very similar debate with a friend of mind where I took the stance that religion makes normal people do wacky things, i.e.: jonestown. He had your perspective.
99.99% of fundy Christians have never killed anyone. But as far as "fundy" atheists, I have run into my share who are just as intolerant and just as bigoted as most fundy Christians.
100% of abortion doctors murdered in the name of god in the US were killed by a fundamental christian. The worst an atheist will get is annoying... which is the point of this entire video.
@papafox Little different. I find it deeply unlikely that any atheist has commited a murder solely because they are an atheist, while many murders have occured solely due to someone's religion.
I have to note there are far more religious people than non religious ones. And, I'd bet that if that was reversed, there would be more violence committed by atheists and agnostics than religious people; because of the 'human' factor.
@phillippi2 actually, if you look at the most secular/nonreligious nations like Sweden and Finland, crime rates are astonishingly low and standards of living are among the highest on average in the world. However, the most religious nations, like Afghanistan, are just the opposite. Additionally, the ratio between atheists in the real world (12%) is much higher than atheists in jail (0.21%). So I disagree with your comment
I'm not going to debate whether there would be less violence without religion. I think there probably would be, but I do want to point out something you may be ignoring in what you're pointing out.
Is Afghanistan brutal, and uncivilized because it's religious, or is it religious because it's brutal, and uncivilized?
Are people in Sweden, and Finland happy, and healthy with low crime, and high standards of living because they are less religious, or
less religious because they are happy, and healthy with high standards of living, and thus have no need for the comfort of religion.
The evidence I've seen shows a reverse causation from that generally cited by atheists. Which means fixing underlying issues that cause people to seek out comfort in the idea of an afterlife, or a God who is going to take care of you would be the best means to the end of religion.
China is the most atheistic nation. It's standard of living is quite low. I agree crime is low there, they just shoot anyone even accused of crime without a trial and bill their family for the bullet. Lot better example than frozen Finland.
China is the most atheistic nation. It's standard of living is quite low. I agree crime is low there, they just shoot anyone even accused of crime without a trial and bill their family for the bullet. Lot better example than frozen Finland.
By the way that .21 is not a true statement. That is a misreading of the study that it is taken from. The numbers tend to track the population quite closely.
@Whispermast where did you get that factoid? China's the most Atheist nation!? You're so wrong, Sweden has the most, China doesn't even make the top 20.
this perosn used the term militant, not fundamentalist.
i.e an agrresive and "all powerful" form of somehting, I admit that I sometimes act like that around religious people, trying to convert them, so in a sense this person was right.
@PureZOOKS I debate, but I don't try to "convert". people are free to believe what they want. However, in the conversation with this person, the terms "militant" and "fundamental" were used interchangeably
" However, in the conversation with this person, the terms "militant" and "fundamental" were used interchangeably"
.
Yeah, thats because Theists just use big "scare" words for shock value rather than actually understanding what they mean. Its just a knee jerk reaction thats more along the lines of their own psychological projection rather than anything else. Theists are the best tool against religion, they really are.
I've always liked the term "militant atheist". It's a tacit admission on the point of a religious person that, this is as bad as we're gonna get. What does a militant muslim, jew, christian, or any other faith do Oh that's right they use bombs, guns and the like. What do militant atheists do? They're dicks about it. Thanks for handing us the moral high ground guys.
A closed minded person can have a world view that excludes god from it and so in theory you can construct a closed-minded atheist who could be like a fundamentalist in their closed-mindedness - however as it says in Matthew 7 16 - by their fruits you shall know them and I have to say the number of murders by atheists is low compared to fundamentalist christians. Weird that?
The word "militant atheist" is used too often compared to militant christians. Militant christians refer to christians willing to use violence, militant atheists on the otherhand are vocal, this is what happens when you misuse the word "militant atheist". Militant atheist should refer to those atheists willing to use violence, it would be nice if people stopped cheapening the words "militant" and "racist", or else these words lose meaning.
@therock27374 Agreed, I don't care much for the use of militant either. I much prefer the fellow PZ Myers linked to (don't remember his name) who suggested the term "affirmative atheist".
"Fundy atheist"? One who's absolutely certain of a lack of belief? One who believes in a literal interpretation of no scripture? Has anyone even offered a coherent definition?
It's not impossible for an atheist to be dogmatic about their beliefs, it's just that it is necessary for a religious person to be dogmatic about their beliefs.
There is a need to do a study to see if there is a gene that is a proponent of unreasonable behaviour and of deluded thinking. Mind you, I have a feeling that Dawkins did state it quite eloquently when he titled his book "the god gene".
S'okay. He has talked about a 'God gene' before so I know where you're coming from. If you wanna look into it I think there's some in Thunderf00ts interview with him.
Funny how those of us who don't believe in god tend to hate less,kill less,oh and think more.
bulwyi 1 year ago 2
@bulwyi exactly what i was thinking.
spoddog1 1 year ago
cristians and muslims are the same fundamentalist , they are fanatics and they love god so much enough to kill in his name , hipocrits
zumbwanda 1 year ago
nutjobs sure love to project.
great vid goombah
TheHigherVoltage 1 year ago
There is no such thing as a fundie realist. You can only be a fundie in an ideology like religion or some kind of political system like communism. Not atheism which is just lack of belief in a higher power or God.
supersmash43 1 year ago 4
@supersmash43 exactly
eddygoombah 1 year ago
Yeah I'm an extremist atheist as soon as my lack of god orders me to die for him or be cast into eternal nothing as opposed to my eternal bliss of nothing I'll die nothing. Fundamentalist atheists are so scary they take not believing in god way too literally.I read a comment about atheism being as destructive as religion because it wasn't open to interpretation, what interpretation? like interpreting it in a way so you do believe in god?
explosivoification 1 year ago
To be fair, although it's mostly people making videos who are called militant atheists, there is the occassional person who blows up a church. They are much more rare, and are usually people who would blow up other things if not churches, but, um, I don't know what point I was trying to make.
ScottMcTony 1 year ago
@ScottMcTony
Cite source, please, of a church that was blown up by a "militant atheist".
middlekk 1 year ago
@middlekk Varg Vikernes arguably fits that description, although that's the only instance I can think of, and even that's questionable for the reasons I already stated in my original comment.
ScottMcTony 1 year ago
love the music... DJ Shadow is awesome. I love the song blood on the motorway.
pixelatedxdeath 1 year ago
Fundamental: Adheres to the basic and simplest rules or definitions. Atheism: Does not believe in a God, gods or other Supernatural Authority. Superfuous: Additions beyond those neccessary or redundant wording. Fundamental Atheism exists in the sense of the definitions of the word, but the "fundamental" part is superfluous, or redundant.
RyuDarragh 1 year ago
I can Imagine that a religious person would do such terrible things is when he is convinced that his actions are justified, and he is fighting for god and they will be rewarded by god himself after his death.
. to an athiest, why would an athiest do anything like that? this is the only life we have and we ought to make the best of it.
the mind set of a religious person is based on faith, an athiest mindset is based on reason. Very different.
emancoy 1 year ago
The music made this one haunting. It's appreciated that you have pointed out a difference that should be as easy to see as night and day.
scythiconatron 1 year ago
you forgot numbers like the 5480 people the pope kills per _DAY_ by telling that condoms cause HIV.
BalthazzarCH 1 year ago 18
while i agree that they are indeed way different, noting the violent christian fundies is kinda biased. I think a more valid point would have been noting that there have been christian fundies who take these drastic measures whereas no atheists who have been bombing churches or something like that
dhcrazy333 1 year ago
In Texas they just caught two atheists that had a long string of Church arsons. Read the news sometime. Eleven churches burned just this year. They caught Jason Bourque and he had lots of books on atheism when seized. Just search "jason bourque arson atheist" and see the news stories on it.
ShaundalynChic 1 year ago
im sorry i dont live in texas to hear this news. around where i live no such news has been presented
dhcrazy333 1 year ago
@ShaundalynChic There are screwballs in every group. The difference is that there's no dogma to interpret (falsely or otherwise, or take to ridiculous extreme) that these nutters were following.
DooMDrat 1 year ago 8
@DooMDrat "There are screwballs in every group."
I agree. That's my point. yet watching this video would lead you to believe that all on one side are violent & all on the other side are peaceful harm-no-one bloggers. That just isn't true, and the video maker should have known it wasn't true. It borders on being intentionally misleading, but I will give the benefit of the doubt that the maker is just oblivious to the real world (the one where there are screwballs in any large group as you said)
ShaundalynChic 1 year ago
@ShaundalynChic Bad people do bad things, but for good people to do bad things it takes religion.
kyagh 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Bad people do bad things, but for good people ... takes religion"
I actually had Weinberg's wife as a teacher in a class in college. The statements pretty obviously not true. Lots of good people do bad things for many motives. There are good people who fervently believe in global warming and good people who disbelieve that it is happening. Each side may do something in furtherance of what they think is good, but may really be bad. Same for vaccination of children. Good people on both sides.
ShaundalynChic 1 year ago
Fundamentalist Christians are terrorists. It's as simple as that. And the ones that deny that are just fucking stupid.
LtShock 1 year ago
O.o ?? Oh, really. Fundamental Christian: A book of thousands of words surrounded by billions of words of interpretations and acts. Fundamanetal Atheist: Still the same as the definition of Atheist. "Does not believe in a God, gods or other supernatural authority". Period.
RyuDarragh 1 year ago
powerful...
fattychunksings 1 year ago
There is nothing cut & dried about profiling dangerous, violent humans. Absolutist behavior is a symptom of mental illness; it can be hidden. Because it is based on phobias, it is easier to find it in the under-informed. This makes the religious fanatic an easy target, for those who wish to criticize an institutionalized mass delusional state. Being an atheist is not an automatic stamp of mental health, though it can be an indicator that a person in question, is far less likely to be a wack job.
DonQuixotedeKaw 1 year ago
How about the worst massmurderer in the bible ?
'god' himself.
Killing other tribes for not worshipping 'him'.
Drowning the whole world for........hmm not sure why. Animals too.
Killing all the 1st bornes of Egypt, because Pharaoh don't realease the Jews ?
Killing all humans in Sodom and Gomorrah because they are sinful ?
The babies too ???
Letting 'his' worshippers take 'women' that not have known a man, after they have killed their men, fathers, and brothers.
Hooray, what a guy..
BelieveNoGod 1 year ago
Sure, some atheists are overconfident in their world view and treat religious people with contempt. But they do not have a belief system that by itself indoctrinates to certain behavior. Science is about knowledge, not about moral imperatives. Religion on the other hand tries to imposes certain behaviors and attitudes on "true" believers. The Bible itself sets a bad example, with its narratives of bloody violence against non-believers, child killing, and divine wrath / hatred.
SkallagrimNilsson 1 year ago
It seems that many people who are commenting here have not understood the message of the video. I'm pretty sure that Eddy did not intend to say there are no violent atheists. The point is that fundamental Christians attacking atheists, or even liberal Christians, are much more common and extreme than atheist attacks against Christians. Usually the worst that Christian-hating atheists do is damaging inanimate objects like crosses and maybe churches. They're not killing people because of religion.
SkallagrimNilsson 1 year ago
This is like when ignorant people claim that Christian Fundementalists and Moslem Fundementalists are on the same par. A Fundementalist is someone who adheres to their belief system fanatically and dogmatically. It is the Belief System ITSELF that dictates the level of harm that fundementalism can generate, not the fundementalism in and of itself; this is why Fundementalist Buddhists cause less trouble than Fundementalists Moslems.
Klingschor 1 year ago
Eddy I would suggest you look up calpurnpiso, he is a fundie in the way he acts, he believes that as fact julius caesar and jesus christ are the same person, that christianity was derived from a penis worshiping cult in egypt and that religious belief is part of schrizophrenia and all neuroscience and psychologists are in denial.
bossman103 1 year ago
@bossman103
And he is 100% correct....backs it up with evidence and agrees with neurologists and psychologists. What do you have for evidence that makes him wrong?
fantasy0coach 1 year ago
@fantasy0coach most psychologists see god belief as false yes but schrizophenia nio. Otherwise all believers would be trying to treat god belief however they don't. What evidence neuroscience says that the brain is active in enjoying cinema or rock climbing as having a religious experience. The man is loon who wont be told by atheists or theists.
bossman103 1 year ago
@bossman103
Calp is referring to fundamentalists. All Fundamentalists suffer schizophrenic behaviour. Your euphoria sensation example is also similar to schizophrenia when the euphoria stems from a disconnect between reality and imagination. This disconnect in essence, is the same as for schizophrenia.
fantasy0coach 1 year ago
"militant atheists"
Makes me laugh every time :)
Vinifera7 1 year ago
I remember that Peter James Knight case. He refused to give the police his identity.
One of the major papers ran a story claiming he was probably influenced by the game "Blue Shift". The retarded journalist probably looked at a single screenshot of the game, saw a security guard, and thought it was about shooting security guards.
Three months later, they discovered who he was, and that he'd been living in a camp of sorts, with no electricity, let alone a computer or television.
DooMDrat 1 year ago
The atheist camp, no matter how vociferously we criticize religion, can never be truly compared to fundamentalist Christians, Muslims or any other religion. As a whole, the differences are actually numerous and to me, anyone making the claim that atheists are somehow no different are simply spreading lies and are truly ignorant. Richard Dawkins... don't recall him ever bombing a church. Christopher Hitchens.... nope. Nothing's ringing a bell.
TruthSurge 1 year ago
@TruthSurge About the only thing Hitchens has ever done harm to is his liver :P.
DooMDrat 1 year ago
@DooMDrat Liver abuse! why that scoundrel...
TruthSurge 1 year ago
Ah my own thoughts in video form. Dawkins is a millitant atheist because he encourages critical inquiry against religion. Robbes Pierre was a millitant christian because he slaughtered people for not believing the right brand of his theology. Christians do themselves a massive disservice by using the term millitant atheist.
GallusSapien 1 year ago
All you have to do to be a militant atheist is say that you are not convinced by the arguments for God's existence. To be called a militant Christian you need some munitions.
wilfredthebold 1 year ago 2
Great video, where do you find the time. Off to comb my hair now...oh...er
myjizzureye 1 year ago
I refer to myself as a militant atheist, I love how people tell me I'm not different than a militant theist (in my case, an Ultra Orthodox Jew). Do you see me go out on the streets attacking women in busses and on streets? Do you see me burn trash on the streets to cause riots? Do you see me force my disbelief unto believers? My weapon is words, my weapon is knowledge, my weapon is facts. If that's not being different than a militant theist wacko, someone's got to check their own sanity.
ChaoticShelly 1 year ago 2
So what about the atheist Harlan James Drake who killed anti-abortion protester James Pouillon and another man? Why did you leave him out? Drake shot Pouillon dead in Owosso, a small city about 10 miles west of Flint, Michigan. You are kind of blind to that I guess, even though that happened in 2009 and you are having to reach back to the early 1990s for most of your examples.
ShaundalynChic 1 year ago 2
@ShaundalynChic I'm not too familiar with the story of Harlen James Drake, but it seems to me that the murder wasn't driven because of his atheism, unlike most of the examples shown above, that were caused/driven by the people's theism, their belief.
ChaoticShelly 1 year ago 2
So why are anti-abortionists automatically fundamentalists while a professed atheist who shoots an anti-abortion protester, someone he had never met before, just because he was protesting, doesn't count the other way?
I am a pro-choice fundamentalist, like millions of other democrats. The lunatic fringe of the antiabortion protesters no more represents fundamentalism than Drake represents anyone but himself. But don't put videos on like this one pretending there aren't extremists everywhere.
ShaundalynChic 1 year ago
@ShaundalynChic It's not hard to reach and find all the more examples of theists dangering the lives of others for their belief, just look at the events in Russia. I believe this video does refer more to the Christian terrorists rather than Islamic ones, but its is not hard to find more examples for that in recent news.
ChaoticShelly 1 year ago
"just look at the events in Russia. "
Yeah, I see a bunch of non-Christians like you killing people. See I can group you with them, just like you can try to group me with Chechen Muslims that I have nothing in common with. All nonChristians are murdering people all over the earth. Clearly not being Christian makes people murderous. That's the same logic you are using when you group Christians with Muslim fanatics.
ShaundalynChic 1 year ago 2
So what about the atheist Harlan James Drake who killed anti-abortion protester James Pouillon and another man? Why did you leave him out? Drake shot Pouillon dead in Owosso, a small city about 10 miles west of Flint, Michigan. You are kind of blind to that I guess, even though that happened in 2009 and you are having to reach back to the early 1990s for most of your examples.
ShaundalynChic 1 year ago
If they're not whipping out guns and shooting people, atheists can't be called militant. It's just a catch-phrase used by theists to paint us in a bad light.
In addition, as Matt Dillahunty has pointed out, even "atheists" like Stalin who killed millions of people, did NOT do so because of their atheism, as atheism is simply a response to the claim that god exists.
No no - in order to do what Stalin or Hitler did you have to ADD some extra philosophy or ideology (ie. dehumanization of Jews).
Politicimo 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You couldn't list all the hateful shit caused by religion or in the name of religion.
no1saphead 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You couldn't list all the hateful shit caused by religion or in the name of religion.
no1saphead 1 year ago
You coudn't list all the hateful shit caused by religion or in the name of religion.
no1saphead 1 year ago
Richard Dawkins has been referred to as a militant atheist. He writes books and gives speeches.
WarmWeatherGuy 1 year ago
"Militant" irritates me, Its always used for Dawkins etc but if someone says "Militant Islam" you do not think of Osama going "this US policy is absurd, i'm going to write a very strongly worded letter, and set up a charitable foundation!"
You think of some beardy nutjobs with fucking GUNS.
Ainulindale21 1 year ago
But eddygoombah, Hitler and Stalin were atheists! Also, those people in your video weren't true Christians! etc. etc.
diin2live 1 year ago
@diin2live You're being sarcastic, right?
eddygoombah 1 year ago 3
@eddygoombah Yeah, certainly looks like sarcasm, but you can never really tell anymore.
theSAMOL 1 year ago
@eddygoombah Yeah, I was being sarcastic. I tried to make it obvious, too. It's not so easy when these points are actually argued regularly. Poe's Law is inescapable.
diin2live 1 year ago
@diin2live Ever heard of the no true Scots man fallacy, Hitler and Stalin may have been atheists, but they didn't kill people in the name of not having religion did they?
XChillX42 1 year ago
@XChillX42 Never heard of it. Stalin enforced atheism and killed people in the name of godlessness.
...
diin2live 1 year ago
@diin2live utter and complete bullshit. there was never any killing "in the name of godlessness", not even by Stalin (as opposed to the oh so many killings in the name of god, allah, jesus, etc.) Oh, and by the way, Hitler was a religious man, probably a protestant christian. Also, LOOK UP the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, it will sound very familiar to you.
Nalsii 1 year ago
@Nalsii Holy crap. Has anyone ever heard of Poe's Law? I already pointed out that my original comment was sarcastic.
diin2live 1 year ago
@diin2live Nobody bothers to read through your comments, that's why your sarcasm fails.
Nalsii 1 year ago
@Nalsii It shouldn't have taken any explanation; it was sarcasm. I expected people to realize the nature of my original comment immediately (eddygoombah did.) The fact that people repeatedly took it seriously is disappointing, to say the least. ...especially when it comes to people I tend to identify with: atheists. Regardless, fuck you.
diin2live 1 year ago
@diin2live You fail again. Had I read your original comment, I most likely wouldn't have taken it seriously. However, I have NOT read it (and I really don't care about it now). I read only your last comment and I did take it seriously because that one did look serious, so save your "repeatedly took seriously" nonsense.
That aside, there's another group of people I'd expect you to identify with: jerks. So while you jerk, I'll go fuck, as requested. Regardless, have a nice day. I know I will :)
Nalsii 1 year ago
@Nalsii With the way you're bitching about it, I'm assuming you read a comment where I had to point out that my first was sarcastic. Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you suggesting that, because my latter comment was serious (identifying the sarcasm that eluded so many), my original must've seemed serious (the actual sarcasm)? Need I explain the flaws with this reasoning?
I'm glad that I can relate to the internet mastermind known as Nalsii. You, too, are a jerk.
Now go enjoy fucking your hand!
diin2live 1 year ago
@diin2live @diin2live I took the time and found your original comment and now I see where the problem is. You don't know when to stop trying to be sarcastic. You see, repeated jokes cease to be funny. I was replying to a comment where there were no traces of sarcasm left (your reaction to xchill) so that comment was nothing but stupid and you are a jerk for making it (and continuing to do so). And regarding your obsession with hand-fucking, you shouldn't overdo it. Remember: all with moderation.
Nalsii 1 year ago
@Nalsii Note that I wanted to include a smiley face at the end of my last reply but it happened to be a perfect 500 character comment. So, my apologies for the trouble this delay may have caused you. Here is your smiley face:
:)
diin2live 1 year ago
@diin2live Oh and since you brought it up: while you were making your perfect 500 character comment and adding an elaborate note to it in another comment, I had sex. With a beautiful redhead. And her hand actually a little bit too (though technically it wasn't "fucked"). I hope you enjoyed this story as much as I enjoyed your cordial smiley face :)
Nalsii 1 year ago
@Nalsii I enjoyed a brown-haired beauty at around 1am this morning, believe it or not. (First time in weeks too since we go to different universities. Shit was so cash.) Unfortunately, I only managed three hours of actual sleep before working the majority of today. So, I concede that your day was probably more enjoyable than mine.
I enjoyed your story as much as I enjoyed arguing with you. For that, I offer this sincere smiley. :)
diin2live 1 year ago
@diin2live It perfectly explains why what you just said is a logical fallacy. Stalin was not purging religion because he belied it got in the way of an ideal communist society, he was not purging religion in the name of godlessness that's just a fabrication.
XChillX42 1 year ago
@XChillX42 I shall continue with my sarcasm that you and others consistently fail to recognize: If Stalin wasn't an atheist, he wouldn't have killed people in the name of his atheist faith.
diin2live 1 year ago
@diin2live Hitler was a christian, in Mein Kampf he cites word for word that God was his influence in killing Jews.
In addition Stalin was an atheist, but his atheism did not compel him to kill so many people, he ideological values were. You might as well say that because Stalin didn't believe in Bigfoot, he killed many innocent people. I am an atheist and I find Stalin's ideological values to be repulsive, but they weren't motivated by atheism.
Nice try though.
porterwake 1 year ago
@porterwake Trolololol. Poe's Law.
diin2live 1 year ago
Hehahoohoo GODWINS LAW :-D
porterwake 1 year ago
@porterwake, Hate to break it too you, but Hitler was no Christian. In fact, he has been quoted in saying,
""The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness ..."
But other then that, I agree with your statement. Stalin was never motivated by his Atheism to commit his horrible acts.
ThePissedOff 1 year ago
@ThePissedOff Eek, sorry man, educate yourself. Read Mein Kampf.
From Mein Kampf, HIS BOOK:
"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."
Nice try though.
porterwake 1 year ago
@porterwake, Does he refer to Jesus in that quote? Ummm, nope. Just a creator (Most religions tend to have that) and the fact he's defending himself against Jews (Believe it or not, Christianity isn't the only sect that hates Jews).
There's no reference to in that 'quote'.
You're really grasping at straws here. I recommend reading " Inside the Third Reich" or "A History of National Socialism", rather then using a book that was used primly for propaganda in Nazi Germany.
Nice try though.
ThePissedOff 1 year ago
@ThePissedOff *sigh*
nobeliefs(dot)com(slash)hitler(dot)htm ---- Plenty of compelling quotes
I've read plenty on Hitler, he was a Christian alright. Inside the Third Reich is about Nazi structure, not personal beliefs.
Nice try though, but try to have a little more ingenuity when being creative with your witty last remark instead of copying me. I know mockery should be flattering, but not when it's from someone who can barely string together something genuine.
Back to class boy.
porterwake 1 year ago
@diin2live They were both religious. Hitler in fact was a very 'strong' Catholic.
Elijah4President 1 year ago
@Elijah4President Hitler wasn't a Catholic. My comment was sarcastic anyway.
diin2live 1 year ago
@Elijah4President
Hitler never attended a religious service in his adult life. this is very well documented. He used religious imagery in his speeches in manipulating a German nation that was used to that. But he can't be called catholic.
Matur1n 1 year ago
@Matur1n, "Hitler never attended a religious service in his adult life."
This video: watch?v=kWvvSdxu9eo
has pictures of Hitler attending religious services in his adult life. Are you going to delete your comment now?
DarkMatter2525 1 year ago
None of those pictures show Hitler attending worship services. A wedding is not a worship service. The famous picture of him leaving the Marine Church in Wilhelmshaven is mislabeled by the video. He was visiting the War Memorial inside the church accompanied by the foreign press. He didn't go to worship there. Hitler wasn't a brown shirt. The rest are images of diplomatic delegations from the Vatican. Every biographer of Hitler agrees that he never attended worship as an adult.
Matur1n 1 year ago
@Matur1n, like a fundie, you believe the written word before you believe your own two eyes. Even if Hitler never attended worship services, so what? I know firm Christians who don't attend. Jesus didn't like formal church gatherings either. Are you aware of the famous photo of Hitler praying? ww w nobeliefs com / hitler1 htm. And even if he used religion as a tool, then it's only proof of the gullibility of the religious - an even worse stance to take if you ask me.
DarkMatter2525 1 year ago
"like a fundie, you believe the written word before you believe your own two eyes. "
First off I have seen video reels of him visiting the war memorial, so I have seen it with my own two eyes. You are the one wanting to deny historical truth. That is one of the most famous pictures of Hitler. It is before the war and he was accompanied by the foreign press and photographers. That's why the picture is famous, it was published all over the US/Britain. Why do you deny historical fact?
Matur1n 1 year ago
@Matur1n, I see the failure of my ways. Hitler was an atheist pretending to be a Catholic. Because, if people actually knew Hitler was a godless heathen, then they would've never carried out his orders to torture, slaughter, and oppress millions.
Seriously, you lose either way.
DarkMatter2525 1 year ago
@Matur1n, sorry, that link was: w ww nobeliefs com / nazis htm
DarkMatter2525 1 year ago
Great video. Thanks.
Vogter2100 1 year ago
We can now add the Hutaree to that list. The self proclaimed christian militia who were recently arrested by the FBI for plotting to cowardly kill local cops.
KasparHauser4 1 year ago
Not much of an equivalency is there? Add to the list of militant activities:
*Billboards promoting non-belief.
*Stealing communion wafers.
*Naming teddy bears Mohammed (remember that?).
*Every single person who ever did something violent who is an atheist.
*Er, help me out here guys.
;)
*
ChrisJMoor 1 year ago 5
@ChrisJMoor Don't forget shooting anti-abortion protesters.
Matur1n 1 year ago
@Matur1n
Really? When did this happen?
ChrisJMoor 1 year ago
Last year. 2009. Owosso, Michigan. Near Flint Michigan. The video is griping about events from the early 1990s yet ignores recent events. An atheist named Harlan Drake gunned down James Pouillon while he was protesting holding an anti-abortion sign. Just search the names Pouillon and Owosso and see local & Michigan news accounts. But it didn't get the national play the killings on the other side did. And guys like Rudolph are much more anti-government than they are religious types.
Matur1n 1 year ago
@Matur1n "On September 30 Drake was deemed incompetent to stand trial and was remanded into the custody of the Michigan Department of Mental Health."
A retard kills someone. Great example.
ubergossen 1 year ago
@Matur1n
The sources I have found indicate that Mr. Drake was provoked by the placard that Mr. Pouillon was carrying. He pleaded insanity, which was upheld in court. He was not motivated by religious or political beliefs and no evidence he had animosity towards anti-abortionists or protesting against abortion. And no source even says he was an atheist, let alone motivated by it. Not a very good example, hell, not even an example I'm afraid.
ChrisJMoor 1 year ago
Drake testified at trial that he planned the killings the night before, so he was hardly "provoked" as it was an assassination. Also it was widely reported that both pro-choice & atheist literature were ceased from his home. I am pro-choice myself, I just object to the video's implications that extremists on one side of the abortion debate are harmless & the other not. I also object to identifying fundamentalism with anti-abortionism. The 2 are different. Many fundamentalists are pro-choice.
ShaundalynChic 1 year ago
@ShaundalynChic
Could you please PM me with the URLs from where this information has been obtained? I could not find any such information from a quick googling.
And just a correction on a point: this video was about atheism versus (Christian) theism, not the abortion debate.
ChrisJMoor 1 year ago
So where are all the pictures of pro-choice theists killing people? Why are they all the radical anti-abortionists? When I put in "harlan drake testimony" into a search engine the first several have details of his testimony.
The Toledo newspaper has:
"The night before the shootings, Drake says he packed specific guns and bullets into a gym bag."At that evening, my thought was that they would be the best choice if i was going to shoot him the next day," Drake says.
toledoonthemove
ShaundalynChic 1 year ago
@ShaundalynChic
I can find nothing that indicates he had 'pro-choice and atheist' literature siezed in his home, which was your statement. As I said, please PM me with those reports in support of what you are saying.
ChrisJMoor 1 year ago
That was reported in newspapers at the time.
ShaundalynChic 1 year ago
@ShaundalynChic
You do not have access to the literature. Fair enough.
Regarding the claims that the murders (including of a gravel pit owner) were premeditated and that the defendant was in posession of 'pro-choice and atheist literature', can we agree that these are unverified and ignorable for the purposes of assessing the claims in this video? And also that the defendant was suffering from mental health issues?
ChrisJMoor 1 year ago
Comment removed
ChrisJMoor 1 year ago
This person thinks I'm a sexist racist arsonist/suicide bomber?
ManlySlut 1 year ago
@ManlySlut
no, I'm just saying that the terms "Militant" or "fundamental" as used to describe outliers from the christian faith should not be used to described so called atheists.
eddygoombah 1 year ago 5
@eddygoombah What I meant is, if the religious people are not religious and non religious were, they'd still have tendencies (the 'human factor') towards violence.
phillippi2 1 year ago
@phillippi2 I had a very similar debate with a friend of mind where I took the stance that religion makes normal people do wacky things, i.e.: jonestown. He had your perspective.
it made my head hurt.
eddygoombah 1 year ago
99.99% of fundy Christians have never killed anyone. But as far as "fundy" atheists, I have run into my share who are just as intolerant and just as bigoted as most fundy Christians.
papafox 1 year ago
@papafox
100% of abortion doctors murdered in the name of god in the US were killed by a fundamental christian. The worst an atheist will get is annoying... which is the point of this entire video.
eddygoombah 1 year ago 2
@eddygoombah
That would be more convincing if you could assure me that no atheist anywhere at any time had ever committed a murder. Otherwise it's meaningless.
papafox 1 year ago
@papafox Read the comment again
eddygoombah 1 year ago 2
@papafox That's pretty retarded...
XChillX42 1 year ago
@papafox Little different. I find it deeply unlikely that any atheist has commited a murder solely because they are an atheist, while many murders have occured solely due to someone's religion.
GriffinPilgrim 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"100% of abortion doctors murdered in the name of god in the US were killed by a fundamental christian. "
All two of them?
"The worst an atheist will get is annoying"
What about the atheist who killed the anti-abortion protester in Michigan?
Whispermast 1 year ago
@papafox They are intolerant of bullshit.
diin2live 1 year ago
@diin2live
Excellent example of intolerance.
papafox 1 year ago
I have to note there are far more religious people than non religious ones. And, I'd bet that if that was reversed, there would be more violence committed by atheists and agnostics than religious people; because of the 'human' factor.
phillippi2 1 year ago
@phillippi2 actually, if you look at the most secular/nonreligious nations like Sweden and Finland, crime rates are astonishingly low and standards of living are among the highest on average in the world. However, the most religious nations, like Afghanistan, are just the opposite. Additionally, the ratio between atheists in the real world (12%) is much higher than atheists in jail (0.21%). So I disagree with your comment
eddygoombah 1 year ago 3
@eddygoombah
I'm not going to debate whether there would be less violence without religion. I think there probably would be, but I do want to point out something you may be ignoring in what you're pointing out.
Is Afghanistan brutal, and uncivilized because it's religious, or is it religious because it's brutal, and uncivilized?
Are people in Sweden, and Finland happy, and healthy with low crime, and high standards of living because they are less religious, or
(cont)
TheNakedAtheist 1 year ago
(cont)
less religious because they are happy, and healthy with high standards of living, and thus have no need for the comfort of religion.
The evidence I've seen shows a reverse causation from that generally cited by atheists. Which means fixing underlying issues that cause people to seek out comfort in the idea of an afterlife, or a God who is going to take care of you would be the best means to the end of religion.
TheNakedAtheist 1 year ago
@TheNakedAtheist Less violence without religion... I don't think so! Less excuses.... yes!
ndjm00 1 year ago
China is the most atheistic nation. It's standard of living is quite low. I agree crime is low there, they just shoot anyone even accused of crime without a trial and bill their family for the bullet. Lot better example than frozen Finland.
Whispermast 1 year ago
China is the most atheistic nation. It's standard of living is quite low. I agree crime is low there, they just shoot anyone even accused of crime without a trial and bill their family for the bullet. Lot better example than frozen Finland.
By the way that .21 is not a true statement. That is a misreading of the study that it is taken from. The numbers tend to track the population quite closely.
Whispermast 1 year ago
@Whispermast where did you get that factoid? China's the most Atheist nation!? You're so wrong, Sweden has the most, China doesn't even make the top 20.
DrDDooM 1 year ago
The number of atheists in Sweden would just be a rounding error on the numbers of atheists in China.
ShaundalynChic 1 year ago
this perosn used the term militant, not fundamentalist.
i.e an agrresive and "all powerful" form of somehting, I admit that I sometimes act like that around religious people, trying to convert them, so in a sense this person was right.
PureZOOKS 1 year ago
@PureZOOKS I debate, but I don't try to "convert". people are free to believe what they want. However, in the conversation with this person, the terms "militant" and "fundamental" were used interchangeably
eddygoombah 1 year ago
@eddygoombah
" However, in the conversation with this person, the terms "militant" and "fundamental" were used interchangeably"
.
Yeah, thats because Theists just use big "scare" words for shock value rather than actually understanding what they mean. Its just a knee jerk reaction thats more along the lines of their own psychological projection rather than anything else. Theists are the best tool against religion, they really are.
ThatOneQuestion 1 year ago
@eddygoombah
Ah, so it was a coversation you were respnding to, so i retract my last statement.
PureZOOKS 1 year ago
I watch and learn !
no1saphead 1 year ago
I've always liked the term "militant atheist". It's a tacit admission on the point of a religious person that, this is as bad as we're gonna get. What does a militant muslim, jew, christian, or any other faith do Oh that's right they use bombs, guns and the like. What do militant atheists do? They're dicks about it. Thanks for handing us the moral high ground guys.
Prometheus46715 1 year ago
A closed minded person can have a world view that excludes god from it and so in theory you can construct a closed-minded atheist who could be like a fundamentalist in their closed-mindedness - however as it says in Matthew 7 16 - by their fruits you shall know them and I have to say the number of murders by atheists is low compared to fundamentalist christians. Weird that?
johncrwarner 1 year ago
Whats the music used in *this* video Eddy?
therock27374 1 year ago
The word "militant atheist" is used too often compared to militant christians. Militant christians refer to christians willing to use violence, militant atheists on the otherhand are vocal, this is what happens when you misuse the word "militant atheist". Militant atheist should refer to those atheists willing to use violence, it would be nice if people stopped cheapening the words "militant" and "racist", or else these words lose meaning.
therock27374 1 year ago
@therock27374 Agreed, I don't care much for the use of militant either. I much prefer the fellow PZ Myers linked to (don't remember his name) who suggested the term "affirmative atheist".
Great vid, eddy!
isylvan 1 year ago
"Fundy atheist"? One who's absolutely certain of a lack of belief? One who believes in a literal interpretation of no scripture? Has anyone even offered a coherent definition?
DeistPaladin 1 year ago
@DeistPaladin
You need to put out more videos! lol.
Politicimo 1 year ago
It's not impossible for an atheist to be dogmatic about their beliefs, it's just that it is necessary for a religious person to be dogmatic about their beliefs.
Gameboygenius 1 year ago
There is a need to do a study to see if there is a gene that is a proponent of unreasonable behaviour and of deluded thinking. Mind you, I have a feeling that Dawkins did state it quite eloquently when he titled his book "the god gene".
thedeeliciousplum 1 year ago
@thedeeliciousplum
Pretty sure he never wrote a book by that name, dude. He wrote on called The Selfish Gene, and then The God Delusion. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Lpoolboy 1 year ago
@Lpoolboy Oh, sorry. You are right. Um...I must have heard this a reference of a god gene in a lecture. Forgive my ignorance :(
thedeeliciousplum 1 year ago
@thedeeliciousplum
S'okay. He has talked about a 'God gene' before so I know where you're coming from. If you wanna look into it I think there's some in Thunderf00ts interview with him.
Lpoolboy 1 year ago
There are no 'fundamentals' of atheism, just like there are no 'rules' for not collecting stamps.
Bueller007 1 year ago
Damned straight, Eddy! Thanks for this
Christheatheist1 1 year ago