The Atheist cry of Theocracy (Debunked)

[Yourgodssuck]

I must be using the antidote wrong because this guy makes me happier that I’m an atheist not the other way. Anyway as John Stewart once put it Christians mistake persecution for not always getting their way. Traditions don’t always mean good. Public executions where a tradition in Christian Europe. Also I don’t care if you’re crazy on your own time, just don’t make me deal with your craziness in public. I don’t demand laws that legislate what you do in church. Just stay out of our business Fair?

[epicurusrex]

The French revolution was after the American revolution and has no bearing on why people left Europe seeking religious freedom. Additionally, it was the Deist Thomas Paine that stoked Robespierre's rage and ignited the French revolution, not Atheists. Doesn't it just suck when someone destroys your argument with facts?

[epicurusrex]

Additionally, it was Deists, not Christians that founded this nation (for fear of persecution by various Christian denominations). It got so bad that groups of Christians left Europe to avoid religious persecution, not from Atheists, but from other Christians. Your zeal in this matter makes it difficult to determine if you are willfully ignorant or just misinformed. Either way, stating the wrong answers emphatically makes them no more true.

[lonnyonline]

@epicurusrex Those that color history to fit their own agenda destroy true history and the lesson learned from the past.

[TheBadgeOfThe45]

@epicurusrex religious persecution, not from Atheists, but from other Christians.?

Sure, cause the French Revolution was sooooooooooo Christian that the Atheists did not have anything to do with it......sure sure Comrade ain't we all morons now.

[epicurusrex]

While I disagree with the accuracy of the premise, if it were true that America WAS created as a Christian nation would be irrelevant. As the writings of our forefathers confirm the living should not be governed by the dead. It was their cause for terminating the monarchy, it is our therefore our right to remove their Christian faith from the laws of the land.

[richotim]

Of course you're morons! research shows atheists to be better educated, less likely to commit crime and to be more productive in general. then a whole lot of tools spend their lives telling others about their imaginary friend and pretending that them being a bigot is them showing love.

[atheistcommonsense]

My 2nd vid of yours ive watched and i see why youre a laughing stalk!!! Of course the xtians dont use the courts, they have free reign genius. Putting nativity seens in public places, bible in public school, etc., is NOT allowed. It's sad that secular groups have to go to the courts to have these acts stopped.

[brodacious84]

If you want to be taken seriously, enable ratings.

[Buck2120]

Is this guy serious? Are we supposed to care what this idiot thinks?

[nseifred]

The problem with traditional values can be seen in the very root of the term. They are traditional and of the past. Just because they are old and from the past do not mean that they are superior. If you preach traditional values that means that you preach inequality. You believe men are superior to women, and that a husband or father has the right to treat his daughter or wife as a possession. You believe that the things that make us different should dictate our standing in society. Its wrong.

[Hitlerwasright35]

Making a religion out of Atheism itself, by being the very people they claim to be against. That's not what Atheism is! What happened to the simple definition of "a beliefe that their is no gods or higher powers"? Fellow atheist our very definition is being twisted for the wrong gains that we as real atheist fought hard to not be. We didn't want to be like a religion, atheism was for the individual, the point is do we really want to be what we were against in the first place?

[Hitlerwasright35]

Wow I kinda figured we were over this whole "Atheist v.s. Christian" thing, I mean I'm an Atheist plain and simple but I don't get up-in-arms over seeing a church, or something religious I just don't care. I generally hate secular extremists though, they give atheism a shitty name. I literally believe in the REAL freedom of religion, as in everybody from any religion have just as much right as I, or anybody does to living how they want. Secular extremism undermines REAL atheism by pretty much

[TenWhoWereTaken]

Your eyebrows are pretty damn good evidence against intelligent design. God must have Down's syndrome if he designed those.

Oh and speaking of Down's syndrome, nice one designing that, God, you cunt!

[prefuffle]

If you honestly believe America has Christian heritage. WELL THOSE TRADITIONAL VALUES ARE WRONG!

[44jackhammer]

NOT BLACK & WHITE? just adds to the craziness of the content of this ranting/delusion.

[KevZen2000]

Religionist want a theocracy, but they want to make it appear as rational, when in reality religion is far from reason, and rationality.Secularism, is what enables us to have the life in America, not religion.

[plightweisgoff]

"Unarguable christian heritage"? And what is that supposed to imply, exactly? Whose 'tradition', whose 'past'? What evidence do you have for your 'sandblasting atheists' straw-men? Considering the long history of censorship and socio-political exclusion practiced by Christians in the US (historically and currently), why should I believe you when you claim not to want hegemony, particularly when you lastly appeal to an imposition of your religious values on others? Weak.

[ExUnoPlures]

"they are the ones projecting"

meta-projection is so twisted!

[goosefish123]

Do you research any of your topics?

[DastardlyDawkins]

@odinata

So how many converts do you pull in every week for the atheist church?

I just witnessed a devastatingly accurate, extremely potent, demolition of your reductionist mindset... :)

So what video were you watching?

[odinata]

@DastardlyDawkins

I guarantee you create more atheists than you convert.

Idiot.

[DastardlyDawkins]

@odinata

Why would i want to convert you?

A line has been clearly drawn in the sand, stupid.

:)

[odinata]

@DastardlyDawkins

Who mentioned anything about me?

I'm not stupid enough to join your cult.

[DastardlyDawkins]

@odinata

You'd rather stick with the one you're with now, i understand.

[odinata]

@DastardlyDawkins

Are you drunk? You aren't making sense.

[DastardlyDawkins]

@odinata

Tell me, is being a sadistic bully still enough to secure a membership with your Atheist cabal, or are you also required to be a pathetic coward, a la Dawkins?

Which is it?

I'm confused.... :(

[odinata]

@DastardlyDawkins

Why aren't your religious opinions sufficient to replace scientific fact?

[DastardlyDawkins]

@odinata

You believe in a negative (A-Theism) right?

Yet, we know that a negative can never be proven.....Hmmmm....i'd say that makes you more F-aitheist, than atheist, wouldn't you?

Lol

[odinata]

@DastardlyDawkins

I don't believe in magical sky daddies making talking snakes and rib ladies.

You got a problem with that?

[DastardlyDawkins]

@odinata

Absolutely!

I deplore strawman arguments, for obvious reasons.

Now, getting back to more relevant issues ;

how do you ever expect to disprove God (thus validating your own belief system), when quite clearly, there's not a shred of evidence in existence to support your presumptions?

Or are you gonna come clean and admit this Atheism tag is nothing more than a 'Wooden Horse' - a convenient contraption used to conceal a far less palatable, far more insidious, political imperative?

[odinata]

@DastardlyDawkins

Your religious opinions are worthless.

[plightweisgoff]

@DastardlyDawkins

What need do we non-believers have to 'disprove god'? Are you and I really responsible or disproving any and all of the infinite #'s of possible metaphysical schemas that could exist? No... that would be asinine; instead, the burden of proof rests on the claimant. And as for this 'insidious political imperative' you posit... lol. Arguments from motive are SO funny.

[DastardlyDawkins]

@plightweisgoff

I think it was Michael Shermer who said, "Extraordinary claims, require extraordinary evidence", you claim there is no God, i say prove it.....what is there to discuss?

[plightweisgoff]

@DastardlyDawkins

Hmmm... I don't recall having made such a claim; indeed, there's no reason for me to, as no such god has been demonstrated to exist, no justification has been shown for metaphysical matters being demonstrable in the first place, and no need for positing such entities adequately explained in the slightest. Care to make a go at it, DD?

[ExUnoPlures]

@plightweisgoff as an atheist, i strongy disagree that the burden of proof lies only on the theist - the burden of proof is on anyone who ponders the question. you have beliefs about the proferred proposition ("god exists") and should be able to justify them.

and, if your neighbor told you your house was on fire but offered no proof, wouldn't you want to go find out whether s/he was telling the truth - wouldn't the burden be on you?

[plightweisgoff]

@ExUnoPlures

I have no beliefs about the proferred proposition, apart from recognizing that its validity not having been demonstrated, no justification has been shown for metaphysical claims being demonstrable in the first place, and no reasonable need for positing such entities has been made. Though I have no prob explaining how I came to these positions, I need not disprove someone else's whims.

[starsheild7]

@plightweisgoff So in other words, you don't believe in how this universe actually works & functions, nor do you believe in conciousness, otherwise you would have BIG claims that you need to prove (burden of proof on you).

[plightweisgoff]

@starsheild7

The study of how the empirical universe actually works and functions is called "physics"; metaphysics deals with absolute truth, ultimate causes, the 'Real' behind the veil of perspective and the senses... areas not shown to be accessible, meaningful, or needed. As for consciousness... what bearing does that have on this discussion? What claims do you BELEIVE I need to satisfy and why? Be specific.

[44jackhammer]

@ExUnoPlures the burden of proof would be on you (in the fire situation) if you claimed it to be true. if you are just trying to prove or disprove the claim, then there is no 'burden.'

you are somewhat right in the first section-about atheists needing to provide proof IF and ONLY IF they say definitively that no god nor gods exist. but the typical atheist knows that to claim something does not exist is a logical impossibility.

[ExUnoPlures]

@44jackhammer if your neighbor told you your house is on fire, you would assign a likelihood to the truth value of the claim and you would bear any responsibility for misevaluating it. if i were to ask you, do you think "god" exists, would you have nothing to say on the topic at all?

(cont.)

[ExUnoPlures]

...and i would agree that it would be an act of faith to say that it is 100% certain that any specific thing doesn't exist, however, i would also say it is 100% certain that meaningless words do not refer to anything(s) that exists (or that does not). for example, you can be confident in determining that my claim "mimzy exists" does not propose anything true to you because it doesn't propose anyting to you at all. for me, "god" is like "mimzy," a meaningless word.

[plightweisgoff]

@DastardlyDawkins

Ad hom... how cute. Is this really all you do in rebuttal?

[plightweisgoff]

@DastardlyDawkins

And like all such metaphysical lines in sand, yours washes away with the tides of reason.

[AhrimanAhura]

Because it would be easy, and perfectly normal, for an atheist to be elected to the Presidency. Right?

Oh. Well, Rhode Island is currently praising the bravery of a teenage Christian for standing up to the atheistic, socionazifasci-

Dammit.

[odinata]

The Evangelical Jihad is bound to fail, and this douche bag is a prime example of why.

[Laursaurus]

This is so true!

[stallmansfury]

Pane.

[calmreason]

Saudi America.

[GermanConquistador08]

Enough with the either out of context or false quotes from the founders alright? Its annoying.

[BlipDesign]

Well said. Religious bigots often justify their dislike of religion by implying that we want to establish an oppressive Christian Theocracy (while no Christian I've ever spoken to wants this.)

Christians supporting politicians that promote their values is no more the pursuit of a Theocracy than Liberals who vote for politicians that promote theirs are in pursuit of Communism.

[ExUnoPlures]

@BlipDesign "Religious bigots often justify their dislike of religion by implying that we want to establish an oppressive Christian Theocracy (while no Christian I've ever spoken to wants this.)"

is it not a very common refrain from the xtian right that the decline of america coincided strongly with taking the bible out of the schools? if people want to tax non-xtians with threat of imprisonment then use that money to force their children to learn that the bible is...

[ExUnoPlures]

...true, how is that not theocratic, as just one example? or, if people want to say well we can have christian prayers over the loudspeaker at the beginning of every school day, it's up to the principle/parents, how is that not theocratic?

[TCPRadio]

I like that you're telling it how it is Brock. Good stuff man!

[panda0100]

faith is the suspension of critical thinking. and it is not a virtue.

[panda0100]

mockery promotes critical thinking. so yes, i will mock your traditions.

[compendiumgravemind]

"The Bible is not my book, nor Christianity my profession." - Abraham Lincoln

"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason."

"In the affairs of the world, men are saved not by faith, but by the lack of it."

"Lighthouses are more helpful than churches." - Benjamin Franklin

[compendiumgravemind]

"As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation. But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed?" - John Adams



[compendiumgravemind]

"Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced an inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth." - Thomas Jefferson

[compendiumgravemind]

let me start off with one of my own quotes and im sure ill get a reply stating the opposite. then i will begin to bombard with quotes from every founding father. so before i begin do you still want to keep saying the founding fathers were christian?

"who doesent love our founding fathers, if it wasent for there very able minds this country would not exist. each did it without the praise of a god who favors some people over all people." - me

[Christheatheist1]

The definition of ignorance is not knowing. The definition of dishonesty is to know and lie anyway. You Brock, are a LIAR.

[24arimar]

@Christheatheist1 Absolutely. He doesn't cite a shred of evidence for anything he's saying. Saying something loudly and forcefully isn't enough to make it true. He doesn't mention the legislative oppression of gays, abortion rights, sodomy laws (which were widespread until very recently), "In God We Trust," teaching religious bullshit in science classes, or anything of the like. I believe the Bible recommends not being blatantly dishonest.

[BT3701]

Your right on Brock - keep the videos coming

[9pt9]

Another GREAT video Brock. Keep it up!!

[PatrioticPoison]

No, you're wrong.

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion" Treaty of Tripoli (1796, when George Washington was president)

[thereprieve]

@PatrioticPoison - Actually, you're wrong, twice. The first is no statement in the Treaty of Tripoli can be attributed to Washington (the treaty did not arrive in America until months after he left office); Washington never saw the treaty; it was not his work; and no statement in it can be ascribed to him.

The second mistake is to divorce a single clause of the treaty from the remainder which provides its context. It would also be absurd to suggest that President Adams...

[thereprieve]

... under whom the treaty was ratified, would have endorsed or assented to any provision which repudiated Christianity. In fact, while discussing the Barbary conflict with Thomas Jefferson, Adams said: "The policy of Christendom has made cowards of all their sailors before the standard of Mahomet. It would be heroical and glorious in us to restore courage to ours"...

[thereprieve]

... He also added: "The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were. . . . the general principles of Christianity. . . . I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God; and that those principles of liberty are as unalterable as human nature."

[LordWhorfinX2]

@thereprieve Boom, headshot.

[PatrioticPoison]

@thereprieve I stated WHEN George was president, not IT WAS FORMULATED by him.

Idiot. Learn how to read and see past your ignorance. Fucking moron.

[beefking69er]

The internet has become a central hub for the antisocial secular establishment to push their empty ideologies and attitude into every facet of the digital world.

Thank you for walking into the fire.

[NonStampCollector]

I listened to the first half through the ears of an armchair psychoanalyst, pondering how even an amateur like me can see your rant for what it is.

Then you cracked me up - you used the very word that had been resounding in my mind:

You accused the others of PROJECTION - after the way you spoke in wild exaggerations about these DANGEROUS LIBERAL SECULARISTS who want to fundamentally change the culture of your country. Which is nothing like the Christian right wants to do.

Projection?! Hilarious.

[MoMember88]

Brock so when two of the Republican nominees (Bachman and Perry) consider them selves Dominionist seeking Christians to control all areas of public office we are just supposed to ignore this. There wont be a openly Atheist president in the USA for some time because of the fear of back lash and you play the victim card when you are part of the majority and you have the nerve to feel that the ACLU protecting the establishment cause and similar acts are extreme

kindly fuck off I'm done with you.

[keizerbob]

American Christian heritage? Does separation of church and state in the constitution demonstrate this?

[moz2007]

@keizerbob 1st amendment "note the lacking term "seperation of church and state" reads :Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

[shine777]

the thing is... would a theocratic government really be a bad thing??? I mean... consider Christ being a good King governs His citizens good and well... would that be a bad thing? just a thought...

[riversonthemoon]

Keep ranting, angry man.

Who else will protect America and the world from those fanatical belligerent militant radical secular extremist zealots that want to ban Christmas?

Beware everyone! THEY are out there!

[RocknForJesus]

Don't Atheists believe in subjective morality? So whatever the government does is okay.

[Ryoka242]

unarguable, unquestionable? then why do people argue it and question it? If its so widespread agreed upon, then why are there hundreds of examples of a secular America way before there was a Christian America? Brock, if you are going to just cast aside any evidence and ignore everyone who opposes your viewpoint, then you'll never understand what America is truly about.

[DoctorTopper]

I like American Heritage. Remember BFR: Barbecue, Fireworks and Rock music

[matthewtaylorbrown]

I'm an atheist and agree with you, in most part.

[john42t]

@matthewtaylorbrown I'm an atheist too and I have quite some common ground with religious people such as Beck and Coulter, but for Brook Christianity is not so much about freedom but humility and traditions.

[Danmill23]

Your "them" poetry is empty.

[thetruthinlies23]

why do you always use such crappy lighting

[arivas713]

AGREE'D

[jxaxmxixn]

The way I see it...

Theocracy = Belief in methods that provide no proof of effectiveness.

Secular = Belief in methods that provide proof of effectiveness.

Some Theocratic and Secular beliefs do coincide, the Theocratic method is generally dangerous and negatively effective where the Secular method is ever seeking to decrease danger and become as positively effective as possible.

The Secular method can always be improved upon.

The Theocratic method can never be improved no matter its faults.

[jxaxmxixn]

@jxaxmxixn oops - double post - oh well...

[jordler]

this is why i like your videos. Don't like the left wing bashing tho.

[freethinker3161]

i don't disagree that some people take "the separation," to far. However i have never seen the republican party be run by so many radical fringe Christians as we have now. these proclamations by guys like Santorum and Perry bring on these fears of theocracy.

i still don't see what great christian values right out of the bible built the foundation of our country. i would love to see what parts of the bible directly influenced the constitution and bill of rights.

[jxaxmxixn]

The way I see it...

Theocracy = Belief in methods that provide no proof of effectiveness.

Secular = Belief in methods that provide proof of effectiveness.

Some Theocratic and Secular beliefs do coincide, the Theocratic method is generally dangerous and negatively effective where the Secular method is ever seeking to decrease danger and become as positively effective as possible.

The Secular method can always be improved upon.

The Theocratic method can never be improved no matter its faults.

[toolegit2quittttt]

aside from using "radical secular extremist agenda", this is one of your less crazy videos. good job.

[YhwhKhaiMostHigh]

Wow awesome! Straight to the point!

[TheUnmaskedMagician]

Pat Robertson and his kind want America to be a Christian theocracy

[cordlock]

Trying to tell other Christians that we think theyre morons is projection, it is not a serious or intellectually shared opinion of Atheists at large. Atheists know that all humans have irrational ways of defending there personal beliefs or preconceptions naturally. Fundamentalist Christians are not morons they use faith to justify the plethora of agendas in their life the same way any atheist person can try to link a pattern of behavior to an outside influence. Its a convenient way to react.

[Coquipirate]

Treaties are constitutionally binding. The treaty of Tripoli (John Adams) is still in effect. That would make saying the US was founded on Christianity in any sense or declaring war on Islam technically treason, no? lol Not that I'm so extreme as to make you obey the constitution.

[kailia666]

Yup, I sure see some projection. Just not the same projection that you see Brock.

[TheRichDarkEarth]

Why can't I down-vote this video?

[iviewthetube]

I tend to think the the US Constitution is one of the greatest documents ever written on this planet.

It is folks like Huckabee who would like to change it.

[SharpesAccomplice]

'Radical Secular Extremist Tyranny' - I laughed my pants off. I accuse YOU of the very projection of which you accuse secularists, sir. Who exactly is trying to ban you from reading the Bible or going to church?

[chupamiubre]

santorum said that adults and married couples should not have access to birth control how is this not theocracy?

[raw5069]

He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.

[charlesfloyb]

I didn't know secularists could be radical or extremeist. Learn something new each day.

[YOURINQUIRER]

You mean kind of like how conservatives cry "socialist" or "communist" every single time a Democrat tries to help people?

[oelsch]

@YOURINQUIRER Making people dependant on government is not helping them. And taking money from hard working people to keep them dependant and loyal voters is evil and wrong.

[YOURINQUIRER]

@oelsch So you're saying it IS kind of like how conservatives cry "socialist" or "communist" every single time a Democrat tries to help people & what's more: you agree with it. OK, just checking.

So when are you and Manscara here going to start making videos against corporate welfare and subsidies or does your god say it's OK when you steal from the poor and middle class to give to the rich?