Well i'm sort of an idealist. I believe that if we were to get rid of religion completely we would change humanity. We would evolve, no longer will scientific progression, nor progression of mankind will be oppressed by ancient texts and superstitions that tell what you can and cannot do. Though i don't think we should force it on to people, i'm sure in time people will start to realize such as i did, and my whole family did. The more knowledge we gain, the less we will depend on religion.
The only real mission of atheists is to guide believers to examine their own faith. I think that if people would really examine their beliefs rather than just accept them, then maybe some of the crazy religion-fueled hatred could be subsided. That being said, I'm a white teenage girl in a heavily hispanic and black part of Texas. Religion is everywhere, and I'm a small minority in my community. And to people here, "atheist" means "devil-worshipper".
Fundamentally no, I don't think we should take an offensive stance. However, religion continues to do damage the world over and as the constraints on the human race become ever greater, I feel that we must begin to throw off the shackles of dictatorist doctrine. So yeah, maybe we should, but only because God ('scuse the pun) forces our hand.
Hey Anton, I'm a secular believer. Meaning, I don't belong to a church, my body is my temple, blah blah, but I believe in 'god'. That said, nothing grinds my gears like 'preachers'. People don't need to go shoving their beliefs down others throats, but we should be with open arms to share our beliefs to those who ask. One thing that has me frustrated w/ the atheism movement, isn't their ideology, but that they seem to preach just as hard (if not harder) than the groups they deride which preach.
I think all of us who see the value in a 'completely' secular society should be much more outgoing, connected, and outspoken. In terms of just battling religious injustice in the world, a little bit goes a long way. If you can show even people you know, you're perspective, you've done a lot, even if they don't admit to accepting it. No matter what they will spread it.
New ideas are contagious and once spread inevitably lead to change. This idea of no god just hasn't been spread enough.
I am an atheist. For a very long time I thought the best way to get through life was to allow everyone to believe whatever they chose without question. After watching and listening to hours and hours of lecture, debates, and videos from theists and atheists, I now feel agitated and frustrated. As bad as this may sound to some, I feel the world needs to abort religion completely. Many of the silly rules and laws we laugh at that still exist today, are rooted in religion. Voters and politicians
We are not better than believers. We also should never try to convert someone into not believing. If a believer is ready to face truth then they will do it on their own just as (probably) all who don't believe have. No need to put ourselves "out there" though. Atheism isn't a movement, nor does it have a mission. Some people are never ready to accept that this is it. Those that eventually do usually have to find the strength within to be honest enough with themselves.
we should be intolerant towards intolerance and treat hate with hate. the goal should be to build a better life for ourselves as well as our incoherent co-existers. in what universe could it possibly make sense to allow our worst qualities; ignorance, fear and hate to overshadow everything else?
I take little issue with people's beliefs, whatever the belief may be. However, I cannot help but take issue when people commit harmful actions because some belief they hold. It's the actions, not the beliefs themselves, that matter. For example, if someone believes in Creationism, that's their right, and I'd never try to take that right away. But I will not tolerate their attempts to have Creationism taught in public science classes. I advocate skepticism and a secular society.
Because we care about humanity, because we know that knowledge and education is good, and religions promote ignorance and submission and brainwashing.
So we must fight superstitions that lead to ignorance.
@QRF11B For example the vast majority of the right wingers who run to be presedent wanting to return to biblical law, that kind of shit must be battled, did i say christians cant be good? No, i said "those who wish to return us to dogma"...
@QRF11B Ha, "they were spiritual" so damn what? The good deeds by the few doesnt wash away the horrific deeds by the MAJORITY.
Its like saying "Hitler gave the people of germany jobs and managed to save its crippling government and national identity, so lets ignore that he went off on genocide".
And where didi i say anything about the good few anyway, i was mentioning how the vast majority in the past were cruel and how those cruel people are trying to return the world to hell.
@QRF11B Oh and as for the whole "dont use percentages" why? You tried to make it seem like pol pot killed millions for darwinist ideals was worse, why should i not use the whole % argument and the genocides to rebuttle it?
@QRF11B Do you even know which crusade out of the dozen or so i am on about? 1st crusade, the "peoples" army tried to butcher anyone they came across for god (not the established army that comes after) the teutons and invasions of Scandinavia? Strictly the word of god (these were strictly(fpr the most part) warrior priests who did this work strictly against pagans only because they were heathen)
@QRF11B % wise, you have no leg to stand on, when the teutonics for example spread the word of christ they killed pretty much everyone they came across, the crusaders going to the holy land did the same, % wise they buttered and commited genocide to a greater deal then pol pot ever did, and thats just 2 crusader groups mentioned, yet alone the spanish and HRE problems or the mass killing in switzerland over a single word in the holy communion,
@QRF11B No, the christians just butchered the entire village man women and child putting them to the sword for believing in jesus the wrong way or not believing at all. (oh and that whole "darwinist" argument bs has been debunked and ridiculed so much that you using it makes me laugh).
Oh, and you did another fallacy many like too, the human population skyrocketed in the C20th so ofcourse more died under totalitarian regimes in that 100 years you pillock...
I was a passive atheist for many years, but The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins is convincing me otherwise. Religion is dangerous. I think we should be on the offensive as far as our values vs. theirs. Truth vs. Faith. Action vs. Prayer (inaction). Independent Thought vs. Blind Faith. The dangerous thing about religion is its ability to convince otherwise kind and sane people (though not always) to do horrible, ignorant, and oppressive things in the name of their deities. Call them out on it.
Proselytizing a religious dogma, and asserting its absolute certainty, behind the guise of philanthropy, under the mechanism of ultimate fear and social consequence, without a shred of demonstrable evidence, whereby life altering decisions ought to be based upon above any conflicting reason, is completely dissimilar the act of calling bullshit on the their con, however naive the presenter. Certainly it falls to each individual's ethics on their engagement, as well as their environment.B Safe ALL
It depends on the Situation. I'm an Atheist. If I tell a Christian that and they are cool with that ok. If they try to belittle me, I don't cuss them out but I debate them.
In a political forum, religion should have no credence whatsoever but it does influence poltics today, so yeah, we should be aggressive from that point.
I would personally like to see religion completely gone one day so I guess overall, we can be aggressive but not digressive in how we approach this.
@Anton , Yes we atheists should be on the offensive because truth matters. Believing fairies push up the flowers may not be harmful in itself to humanity, but it's not true. The stuff spewed out in the name of "religion" is detrimental to us all.
As an Atheist(Humanist) my selve I don't set out to make christians or muslims stop believing in god. I set out to discuss the matters of creasion, the "supernatural", evolution and other themes in wich we dissagree.
I believe that if you are able to make them see the logic in this, well they will kill religion all by them self :D
We should be "agressive" in a non-agressiv way. And in time we will be the ones victorious!
It would be an oversimplication to suggest that we -- as a group -- ought to be "more assertive" or "less assertive."
I would like to see some discussion on WHICH situations require some assertiveness including rudeness, mocking, ridicule, and even lawsuits. In contrast, some situations require a gentle touch.
I'm in a few chat rooms -- I get frustrated with atheists who jump on guest-Christians -- It has the effect opposite of desired.
But when Christians mess with education?? Fuck 'em!
Welcome to the club:) In a way, I agree with you, the problem is that we need to fight back. Do we just sit on the sideline and let religious people use the power of law to force their beliefs on us? Do they just get to continue to use tax money to promote their religion? Is fighting these thing make us "on the attack"? I don't think so.
Quite often a nonbeliever is forced into an offensive situation. I am a black nonbeliever living in the bible belt south. I can walk through my community and be totally inundated with everything Christian, from more than 50 churches to billboards to street preachers. If I were to tell a street proselytizer too loud I don't believe I would get surrounded by an onslaught of believers trying to change my wicked ways. If the most friendly billboard goes up about not believing, then it's an all out
@9Khaleel7 ouch! a non-believer, black at that, living in the south. You must have your work cut out for you. I don't think I could have a conversation like this with my family in the south. I would be speaking alien to them. I feel your pain.
To AntonTheSpot and all his friends and subscribers, GrapplingIgnorance has made a video response to this video and it's extremely well worded. I enjoyed it so much that I transcribed his words and posted them on his video and on my facebook wall after sharing the video. I would like to share his words with you in my next 11 posts. Whether you watch the video or not there is something more to learning by reading than just watching a video or listening. Reading has it's own benefits. Enjoy.
1 Youtuber AntonTheSpot asked in his video, link below, if and how modern Atheists should engage theists. He wants opinions for if it's just best to just sit back and let the believers sit back and just live submerged in their happy lives of delusions and if toss them a photation device of rationality are we being any better than they would be to attempt the injection of their religious faith into our lives? It's a good question in a large part because it shows a concern for avoiding hypocrisy.
2 I would guess that most Atheists are content to just be left alone and have no interest in debating or arguing over religious matters. Especially as long as people aren't proselytising on their doorsteps. They have no interest in going out of their way to do the exact thing they hope theist won't do to them. As a result many of those Atheists just don't bother to present any resistance to the overwhelming rush of theistic propaganda around them.
3 Depending on their community it usually doesn't seem to be worth the trouble. Here's where I stand on the matter. I don't have a problem with people being public about what they believe and why they believe it. In fact, I'm all for the greatest transparency possible about what the people around me believe and their explanations for why. The problems lie in how that expression has been done and the lack of open or honest discussion in response to it.
4 Teaching children that what you take in faith is factually true and having them stand in a public place to hand out literature advertising that the people they give it to will burn forever unless they accept Jesus, which is something that recently happened to me, does not fit my idea of healthy proselytization. However, if you wish to stand in a public square or post videos on a public website talking about what you personally believe and why than I'm all for it.
5 Provided that you are able to accept and consider honest scrutiny and criticism from those willing to offer it. The problem, from my perspective, is that religion in particular has been given so much of a free pass on such abrasive concepts as threatening eternal hellfire for disagreeing with it for so long that it almost seems impolite to publicly challenge it. It almost seems that religion gets the loudest public microphone, that just doesn't seem fair to me.
6 The result has been that those speaking out on religious matters or who have attached a religious rider onto their message have been spoiled with a false sense of entitlement. Now when they publicly talk about their god sending all the sinners of this world to a fiery pit for their infinite punishment and someone dares to oppose them many of them actually get offended by the person who stood up against what they were saying and that is where the public discussion really breaks down.
7 We get so swamped with fussing over who has the right to tell things to whom that we talk past each other and we miss one another’s message completely. It's considered a general rule of polite behavior to never discuss religion or politics because those are muddy issues that people tend to take very personally and unless both sides of the discussion are on strict agreement on all points discussed the danger of the conversation becoming a heated argument increases.
8 In the interest of real progress we need to talk to each other and listen to each other on the matters we consider important. Most christians who approach me to tell me that I'm going to hell if I don't accept Jesus aren't doing it because they hope to insult or offend me. They do it because they think they're saving me. So it's my job in that instance to listen to what they have to say and ask clear and open questions based on what they've told me. After doing so comes the important part.
9 They have to be willing to hear all my arguments against their position with composure and control equal to mine. If they aren't able to fulfill that last requirement they never should have approached me to make their points in the first place. If they aren't capable of even considering any error in their position, let alone having it explained to them, they aren't interested in actual dialogue and therefore their statements don't deserve public air.
10 The same concept applies to posting beliefs on public forums. I should be free to post a Youtube video explaining why I believe in leprechauns and warning people that are viewing it who don't that they might be missing out on their fair opportunities for pots of gold. However, for me to expect people's audience I better be willing to listen to and consider the comments and video responses voicing their arguments against what I believe. Provided they're giving more than just insults.
11 So in short, AntonTheSpot, coming on Youtube to present your arguments against an absurdity which you see most people being guilty of or to argue against those who have come here to support that absurdity is absolutely fine. As long as you're willing to behave fairly and maturely on both sides of the discussion.
[To see the whole series of comments transcribing GrapplingIgnorance’s response in order click View All Comments. Best wishes to you all, atheists and theists alike. Everyday we gain a better understanding of each other is a day the world becomes a better place for us all.]
@ABitOfTheUniverse With all due respect, this is the "comment" section, not the "short story" section. Make a video, you don't have to appear on camera or narrate, just scroll the text.
My mission is to help keep American citizens free from the encroachment of religion into our government.
I think we need to be intellectually honest, using reason and logic, when ever possible. I think that we should ask the hard questions that people either do not want to hear or have never heard before. I think that we should respond rationally to claims brought before us. Some people will be offended and some will actually think about what you stated.
@QRF11B The problem is when it comes to religion, thats never happened, every single time theres been a lessening of religion in any way shape or form, it strikes back with violence in a long protracted war lol. (examples throughout history of lesser christian sects/beliefs with more equality or freedom getting invaded or butchered by catholics for a good 600 years)
For me, the mission should be to stop the believers taking us all back a few decades to hundreds of years socially economically and scientifically.
Example, keep creationism out of science. Keep gay rights, not allow them to ban gays again (which many groups try to do and will do if allowed and nearly have in the US states last year alone) equal rights to women, equal rights for other religions as a whole and non belief (many religous try to make western nations require belief for gov positions
Hmmm... there is only one thing I can think of and that's the Golden Rule:
"One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself."
It can be found in almost every religion, ethical tradition, philosophy, belief... whatever you wanna call it. Alltho different words/sentences might be used, it's the best rule of them all but seems to be ignored the most, and that makes me sad.
@Qaletaqa The problem is, pretty much all of the relgions (bar buddhism asaik) ignore that golden rule either the page before, after or both in their holy books and doctrine lol.
I would say it depends on what you mean by "take the offensive". Should we go to their churches, homes, and workplaces, loudly proclaiming that they should convert to atheism, as they do for their religion? I think not: THEN we would be the same as them. However, that doesn't mean we shouldn't challenge them on the internet or when they come to us. If they go unchallenged in the public square, any number of irrational and potentially damaging views could proliferate.
There's a third option: Live openly as atheists, coexisting without trying to change believers' beliefs.
I'd say, take option 3, so long as the believers allow it. Talk about reasons for atheism with those who express interest, but don't proselytize. If some believers can't coexist, differentiate which believers can't and which can. At that point, a certain amount of "best defense" is called for against ONLY those who won't coexist. (continued)
(continuing) Even then, be clear about your goal. The purpose should not be to "convert" the believer to atheism. This is more than is needed, more than is often doable, and more than many third-party believers will tolerate. It is enough that they be persuaded to channel their belief in a new manner, one which allows for coexistence.
(And yes, having a clear policy about whether religion belongs in schools, for example, is required for coexistence. Good fences make good neighbors.)
Now obviously you can't go around directly telling people their beliefs are wrong, that's just gonna work against you. And I don't agree with alot of athiest/agnostic types who try to remove crosses or outlaw "Merry Christmas" or whatever, because maybe reality can be whatever we want it to be, in which case who are we to say someone else's religion is wrong. But I do think religious violence - which ultimately affects everybody - needs to be made obsolete somehow.
I think as a human it's our responsibility to try and steer our species away from a cliff if we see it in advance, and nuclear war is the most obvious threat that nobody talks about and it's beyond any one person/government's ability to solve.
Now you can either try to encourage people to seek out their own spiritual understanding of humanity and it's place in the universe, in which case those people will be far less likely to follow a religious call to arms against nonbelievers, or you can sit on the sidelines content in your own understanding. But just understand, if everybody sits on the sidelines, humanity is doomed. -continued-
I think one of the largest preventable threats to humanity on this planet is nuclear or biological weapons falling into the wrong hands. There are people who are indoctrinated and brainwashed from a young age by religion to hate and destroy nonbelievers, and I'm not just talking about muslim suicide bombers. All it takes is for one wacko to get their hands on one of these weapons to start a chain reaction that will affect us all, and given enough time sooner or later it will happen. -continued-
@QRF11B I would agree. I've noticed people addressing this issue and I see their positions. I suppose there is a noble cause in challenging what we deem as "willful ignorance". If this is evident, then I'm all in.
As a Christian, All I can say is that if more people thought the way you did, the world would be a better place. It's time we started treating each other as human beings instead of basing our opinions of one another on labels
Well i'm sort of an idealist. I believe that if we were to get rid of religion completely we would change humanity. We would evolve, no longer will scientific progression, nor progression of mankind will be oppressed by ancient texts and superstitions that tell what you can and cannot do. Though i don't think we should force it on to people, i'm sure in time people will start to realize such as i did, and my whole family did. The more knowledge we gain, the less we will depend on religion.
iMoreAsianR 2 weeks ago
The only real mission of atheists is to guide believers to examine their own faith. I think that if people would really examine their beliefs rather than just accept them, then maybe some of the crazy religion-fueled hatred could be subsided. That being said, I'm a white teenage girl in a heavily hispanic and black part of Texas. Religion is everywhere, and I'm a small minority in my community. And to people here, "atheist" means "devil-worshipper".
GaaraLover1792 1 month ago
Fundamentally no, I don't think we should take an offensive stance. However, religion continues to do damage the world over and as the constraints on the human race become ever greater, I feel that we must begin to throw off the shackles of dictatorist doctrine. So yeah, maybe we should, but only because God ('scuse the pun) forces our hand.
AtheistBadger 1 month ago
The short answer is that there is no mission.
MyNameIsBob212 1 month ago
they should be prepared to actively fight back when religion hinders their liberties... so yes.. they should be on the offensive
brianestoll 1 month ago
Hey Anton, I'm a secular believer. Meaning, I don't belong to a church, my body is my temple, blah blah, but I believe in 'god'. That said, nothing grinds my gears like 'preachers'. People don't need to go shoving their beliefs down others throats, but we should be with open arms to share our beliefs to those who ask. One thing that has me frustrated w/ the atheism movement, isn't their ideology, but that they seem to preach just as hard (if not harder) than the groups they deride which preach.
whiteflash707 1 month ago
@whiteflash707 I agree. This is what moved me to do this video. Thanks for commenting
AntonTheSpot 1 month ago
I think all of us who see the value in a 'completely' secular society should be much more outgoing, connected, and outspoken. In terms of just battling religious injustice in the world, a little bit goes a long way. If you can show even people you know, you're perspective, you've done a lot, even if they don't admit to accepting it. No matter what they will spread it.
New ideas are contagious and once spread inevitably lead to change. This idea of no god just hasn't been spread enough.
shabido1 1 month ago
- alike, base many, if not all, of their decisions on their religious beliefs. In my humble opinion, religion stifles progress, period.
TheMadBeach 1 month ago
I am an atheist. For a very long time I thought the best way to get through life was to allow everyone to believe whatever they chose without question. After watching and listening to hours and hours of lecture, debates, and videos from theists and atheists, I now feel agitated and frustrated. As bad as this may sound to some, I feel the world needs to abort religion completely. Many of the silly rules and laws we laugh at that still exist today, are rooted in religion. Voters and politicians
TheMadBeach 1 month ago
We are not better than believers. We also should never try to convert someone into not believing. If a believer is ready to face truth then they will do it on their own just as (probably) all who don't believe have. No need to put ourselves "out there" though. Atheism isn't a movement, nor does it have a mission. Some people are never ready to accept that this is it. Those that eventually do usually have to find the strength within to be honest enough with themselves.
GrundleTerror 1 month ago
we should be intolerant towards intolerance and treat hate with hate. the goal should be to build a better life for ourselves as well as our incoherent co-existers. in what universe could it possibly make sense to allow our worst qualities; ignorance, fear and hate to overshadow everything else?
westt44 1 month ago
I take little issue with people's beliefs, whatever the belief may be. However, I cannot help but take issue when people commit harmful actions because some belief they hold. It's the actions, not the beliefs themselves, that matter. For example, if someone believes in Creationism, that's their right, and I'd never try to take that right away. But I will not tolerate their attempts to have Creationism taught in public science classes. I advocate skepticism and a secular society.
fehlbarkeit 2 months ago
Yes we should ... we must !
Because we care about humanity, because we know that knowledge and education is good, and religions promote ignorance and submission and brainwashing.
So we must fight superstitions that lead to ignorance.
globalarte 2 months ago
No. Leave it to those of us with the balls to call them out on their bullshit. We are Antitheists.
ArkanumFour 2 months ago
@QRF11B For example the vast majority of the right wingers who run to be presedent wanting to return to biblical law, that kind of shit must be battled, did i say christians cant be good? No, i said "those who wish to return us to dogma"...
MitchofSmeg 2 months ago
@QRF11B Ha, "they were spiritual" so damn what? The good deeds by the few doesnt wash away the horrific deeds by the MAJORITY.
Its like saying "Hitler gave the people of germany jobs and managed to save its crippling government and national identity, so lets ignore that he went off on genocide".
And where didi i say anything about the good few anyway, i was mentioning how the vast majority in the past were cruel and how those cruel people are trying to return the world to hell.
MitchofSmeg 2 months ago
@QRF11B Oh and as for the whole "dont use percentages" why? You tried to make it seem like pol pot killed millions for darwinist ideals was worse, why should i not use the whole % argument and the genocides to rebuttle it?
MitchofSmeg 2 months ago
@QRF11B Do you even know which crusade out of the dozen or so i am on about? 1st crusade, the "peoples" army tried to butcher anyone they came across for god (not the established army that comes after) the teutons and invasions of Scandinavia? Strictly the word of god (these were strictly(fpr the most part) warrior priests who did this work strictly against pagans only because they were heathen)
MitchofSmeg 2 months ago
@QRF11B % wise, you have no leg to stand on, when the teutonics for example spread the word of christ they killed pretty much everyone they came across, the crusaders going to the holy land did the same, % wise they buttered and commited genocide to a greater deal then pol pot ever did, and thats just 2 crusader groups mentioned, yet alone the spanish and HRE problems or the mass killing in switzerland over a single word in the holy communion,
MitchofSmeg 2 months ago
@QRF11B No, the christians just butchered the entire village man women and child putting them to the sword for believing in jesus the wrong way or not believing at all. (oh and that whole "darwinist" argument bs has been debunked and ridiculed so much that you using it makes me laugh).
Oh, and you did another fallacy many like too, the human population skyrocketed in the C20th so ofcourse more died under totalitarian regimes in that 100 years you pillock...
MitchofSmeg 2 months ago
I was a passive atheist for many years, but The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins is convincing me otherwise. Religion is dangerous. I think we should be on the offensive as far as our values vs. theirs. Truth vs. Faith. Action vs. Prayer (inaction). Independent Thought vs. Blind Faith. The dangerous thing about religion is its ability to convince otherwise kind and sane people (though not always) to do horrible, ignorant, and oppressive things in the name of their deities. Call them out on it.
Cricket24 2 months ago
Proselytizing a religious dogma, and asserting its absolute certainty, behind the guise of philanthropy, under the mechanism of ultimate fear and social consequence, without a shred of demonstrable evidence, whereby life altering decisions ought to be based upon above any conflicting reason, is completely dissimilar the act of calling bullshit on the their con, however naive the presenter. Certainly it falls to each individual's ethics on their engagement, as well as their environment.B Safe ALL
MagneticPerturbation 2 months ago
It depends on the Situation. I'm an Atheist. If I tell a Christian that and they are cool with that ok. If they try to belittle me, I don't cuss them out but I debate them.
In a political forum, religion should have no credence whatsoever but it does influence poltics today, so yeah, we should be aggressive from that point.
I would personally like to see religion completely gone one day so I guess overall, we can be aggressive but not digressive in how we approach this.
TymesRhymes 2 months ago
@TymesRhymes I agree. I think religion gets too much fanfare in my opinion.
AntonTheSpot 2 months ago
@Anton , Yes we atheists should be on the offensive because truth matters. Believing fairies push up the flowers may not be harmful in itself to humanity, but it's not true. The stuff spewed out in the name of "religion" is detrimental to us all.
walkingmap 2 months ago
As an Atheist(Humanist) my selve I don't set out to make christians or muslims stop believing in god. I set out to discuss the matters of creasion, the "supernatural", evolution and other themes in wich we dissagree.
I believe that if you are able to make them see the logic in this, well they will kill religion all by them self :D
We should be "agressive" in a non-agressiv way. And in time we will be the ones victorious!
IamAWarHeroFromHalo2 2 months ago
@IamAWarHeroFromHalo2 yes, let them fall on their on sword. I like that approach.
AntonTheSpot 2 months ago
It would be an oversimplication to suggest that we -- as a group -- ought to be "more assertive" or "less assertive."
I would like to see some discussion on WHICH situations require some assertiveness including rudeness, mocking, ridicule, and even lawsuits. In contrast, some situations require a gentle touch.
I'm in a few chat rooms -- I get frustrated with atheists who jump on guest-Christians -- It has the effect opposite of desired.
But when Christians mess with education?? Fuck 'em!
TheHogTieChamp 2 months ago
Welcome to the club:) In a way, I agree with you, the problem is that we need to fight back. Do we just sit on the sideline and let religious people use the power of law to force their beliefs on us? Do they just get to continue to use tax money to promote their religion? Is fighting these thing make us "on the attack"? I don't think so.
christo930 2 months ago
Quite often a nonbeliever is forced into an offensive situation. I am a black nonbeliever living in the bible belt south. I can walk through my community and be totally inundated with everything Christian, from more than 50 churches to billboards to street preachers. If I were to tell a street proselytizer too loud I don't believe I would get surrounded by an onslaught of believers trying to change my wicked ways. If the most friendly billboard goes up about not believing, then it's an all out
9Khaleel7 2 months ago 3
@9Khaleel7 ouch! a non-believer, black at that, living in the south. You must have your work cut out for you. I don't think I could have a conversation like this with my family in the south. I would be speaking alien to them. I feel your pain.
AntonTheSpot 2 months ago
To AntonTheSpot and all his friends and subscribers, GrapplingIgnorance has made a video response to this video and it's extremely well worded. I enjoyed it so much that I transcribed his words and posted them on his video and on my facebook wall after sharing the video. I would like to share his words with you in my next 11 posts. Whether you watch the video or not there is something more to learning by reading than just watching a video or listening. Reading has it's own benefits. Enjoy.
ABitOfTheUniverse 2 months ago
1 Youtuber AntonTheSpot asked in his video, link below, if and how modern Atheists should engage theists. He wants opinions for if it's just best to just sit back and let the believers sit back and just live submerged in their happy lives of delusions and if toss them a photation device of rationality are we being any better than they would be to attempt the injection of their religious faith into our lives? It's a good question in a large part because it shows a concern for avoiding hypocrisy.
ABitOfTheUniverse 2 months ago
2 I would guess that most Atheists are content to just be left alone and have no interest in debating or arguing over religious matters. Especially as long as people aren't proselytising on their doorsteps. They have no interest in going out of their way to do the exact thing they hope theist won't do to them. As a result many of those Atheists just don't bother to present any resistance to the overwhelming rush of theistic propaganda around them.
ABitOfTheUniverse 2 months ago
3 Depending on their community it usually doesn't seem to be worth the trouble. Here's where I stand on the matter. I don't have a problem with people being public about what they believe and why they believe it. In fact, I'm all for the greatest transparency possible about what the people around me believe and their explanations for why. The problems lie in how that expression has been done and the lack of open or honest discussion in response to it.
ABitOfTheUniverse 2 months ago
4 Teaching children that what you take in faith is factually true and having them stand in a public place to hand out literature advertising that the people they give it to will burn forever unless they accept Jesus, which is something that recently happened to me, does not fit my idea of healthy proselytization. However, if you wish to stand in a public square or post videos on a public website talking about what you personally believe and why than I'm all for it.
ABitOfTheUniverse 2 months ago
5 Provided that you are able to accept and consider honest scrutiny and criticism from those willing to offer it. The problem, from my perspective, is that religion in particular has been given so much of a free pass on such abrasive concepts as threatening eternal hellfire for disagreeing with it for so long that it almost seems impolite to publicly challenge it. It almost seems that religion gets the loudest public microphone, that just doesn't seem fair to me.
ABitOfTheUniverse 2 months ago
6 The result has been that those speaking out on religious matters or who have attached a religious rider onto their message have been spoiled with a false sense of entitlement. Now when they publicly talk about their god sending all the sinners of this world to a fiery pit for their infinite punishment and someone dares to oppose them many of them actually get offended by the person who stood up against what they were saying and that is where the public discussion really breaks down.
ABitOfTheUniverse 2 months ago
Comment removed
ABitOfTheUniverse 2 months ago
7 We get so swamped with fussing over who has the right to tell things to whom that we talk past each other and we miss one another’s message completely. It's considered a general rule of polite behavior to never discuss religion or politics because those are muddy issues that people tend to take very personally and unless both sides of the discussion are on strict agreement on all points discussed the danger of the conversation becoming a heated argument increases.
ABitOfTheUniverse 2 months ago
8 In the interest of real progress we need to talk to each other and listen to each other on the matters we consider important. Most christians who approach me to tell me that I'm going to hell if I don't accept Jesus aren't doing it because they hope to insult or offend me. They do it because they think they're saving me. So it's my job in that instance to listen to what they have to say and ask clear and open questions based on what they've told me. After doing so comes the important part.
ABitOfTheUniverse 2 months ago
9 They have to be willing to hear all my arguments against their position with composure and control equal to mine. If they aren't able to fulfill that last requirement they never should have approached me to make their points in the first place. If they aren't capable of even considering any error in their position, let alone having it explained to them, they aren't interested in actual dialogue and therefore their statements don't deserve public air.
ABitOfTheUniverse 2 months ago
10 The same concept applies to posting beliefs on public forums. I should be free to post a Youtube video explaining why I believe in leprechauns and warning people that are viewing it who don't that they might be missing out on their fair opportunities for pots of gold. However, for me to expect people's audience I better be willing to listen to and consider the comments and video responses voicing their arguments against what I believe. Provided they're giving more than just insults.
ABitOfTheUniverse 2 months ago
11 So in short, AntonTheSpot, coming on Youtube to present your arguments against an absurdity which you see most people being guilty of or to argue against those who have come here to support that absurdity is absolutely fine. As long as you're willing to behave fairly and maturely on both sides of the discussion.
ABitOfTheUniverse 2 months ago
[To see the whole series of comments transcribing GrapplingIgnorance’s response in order click View All Comments. Best wishes to you all, atheists and theists alike. Everyday we gain a better understanding of each other is a day the world becomes a better place for us all.]
ABitOfTheUniverse 2 months ago
@ABitOfTheUniverse With all due respect, this is the "comment" section, not the "short story" section. Make a video, you don't have to appear on camera or narrate, just scroll the text.
WilliamPbrane 2 months ago
@ABitOfTheUniverse agreed
AntonTheSpot 2 months ago
My mission is to help keep American citizens free from the encroachment of religion into our government.
I think we need to be intellectually honest, using reason and logic, when ever possible. I think that we should ask the hard questions that people either do not want to hear or have never heard before. I think that we should respond rationally to claims brought before us. Some people will be offended and some will actually think about what you stated.
riverotter100 2 months ago
@QRF11B The problem is when it comes to religion, thats never happened, every single time theres been a lessening of religion in any way shape or form, it strikes back with violence in a long protracted war lol. (examples throughout history of lesser christian sects/beliefs with more equality or freedom getting invaded or butchered by catholics for a good 600 years)
MitchofSmeg 2 months ago
For me, the mission should be to stop the believers taking us all back a few decades to hundreds of years socially economically and scientifically.
Example, keep creationism out of science. Keep gay rights, not allow them to ban gays again (which many groups try to do and will do if allowed and nearly have in the US states last year alone) equal rights to women, equal rights for other religions as a whole and non belief (many religous try to make western nations require belief for gov positions
MitchofSmeg 2 months ago
Hmmm... there is only one thing I can think of and that's the Golden Rule:
"One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself."
It can be found in almost every religion, ethical tradition, philosophy, belief... whatever you wanna call it. Alltho different words/sentences might be used, it's the best rule of them all but seems to be ignored the most, and that makes me sad.
Qaletaqa 2 months ago
@Qaletaqa The problem is, pretty much all of the relgions (bar buddhism asaik) ignore that golden rule either the page before, after or both in their holy books and doctrine lol.
MitchofSmeg 2 months ago
I would say it depends on what you mean by "take the offensive". Should we go to their churches, homes, and workplaces, loudly proclaiming that they should convert to atheism, as they do for their religion? I think not: THEN we would be the same as them. However, that doesn't mean we shouldn't challenge them on the internet or when they come to us. If they go unchallenged in the public square, any number of irrational and potentially damaging views could proliferate.
deathtris 2 months ago
There's a third option: Live openly as atheists, coexisting without trying to change believers' beliefs.
I'd say, take option 3, so long as the believers allow it. Talk about reasons for atheism with those who express interest, but don't proselytize. If some believers can't coexist, differentiate which believers can't and which can. At that point, a certain amount of "best defense" is called for against ONLY those who won't coexist. (continued)
Reltzik 2 months ago
(continuing) Even then, be clear about your goal. The purpose should not be to "convert" the believer to atheism. This is more than is needed, more than is often doable, and more than many third-party believers will tolerate. It is enough that they be persuaded to channel their belief in a new manner, one which allows for coexistence.
(And yes, having a clear policy about whether religion belongs in schools, for example, is required for coexistence. Good fences make good neighbors.)
Reltzik 2 months ago
humans come from an ancient race
from another planet
havent u been watching the ancient aliens show on history
ancient aliens pwns atheist bullshit
they even have a segment where tehy expose the lies of human evolution
humans are not monkeys
gqunit69 2 months ago
believers pressing has always revolved around power and money. as non-believers have nothing to profit from pressing their is no need to press
TheBoxingCult 2 months ago
Now obviously you can't go around directly telling people their beliefs are wrong, that's just gonna work against you. And I don't agree with alot of athiest/agnostic types who try to remove crosses or outlaw "Merry Christmas" or whatever, because maybe reality can be whatever we want it to be, in which case who are we to say someone else's religion is wrong. But I do think religious violence - which ultimately affects everybody - needs to be made obsolete somehow.
Taurusaud 2 months ago
I think as a human it's our responsibility to try and steer our species away from a cliff if we see it in advance, and nuclear war is the most obvious threat that nobody talks about and it's beyond any one person/government's ability to solve.
Taurusaud 2 months ago
Now you can either try to encourage people to seek out their own spiritual understanding of humanity and it's place in the universe, in which case those people will be far less likely to follow a religious call to arms against nonbelievers, or you can sit on the sidelines content in your own understanding. But just understand, if everybody sits on the sidelines, humanity is doomed. -continued-
Taurusaud 2 months ago
I think one of the largest preventable threats to humanity on this planet is nuclear or biological weapons falling into the wrong hands. There are people who are indoctrinated and brainwashed from a young age by religion to hate and destroy nonbelievers, and I'm not just talking about muslim suicide bombers. All it takes is for one wacko to get their hands on one of these weapons to start a chain reaction that will affect us all, and given enough time sooner or later it will happen. -continued-
Taurusaud 2 months ago
@QRF11B I would agree. I've noticed people addressing this issue and I see their positions. I suppose there is a noble cause in challenging what we deem as "willful ignorance". If this is evident, then I'm all in.
AntonTheSpot 2 months ago
As a Christian, All I can say is that if more people thought the way you did, the world would be a better place. It's time we started treating each other as human beings instead of basing our opinions of one another on labels
TheCDVigil 2 months ago