Angry Atheists

A response to Artisticichic7's video, "Calm down atheists." In her video she decries the vitriolic, biting, shrill, combative atheists on youtube... so I thought I would respond with a vitriolic, biting, shrill, combative but REASONED rebuttal. I think atheism is, by and large, much less aggressive (if we use a meaningful definition of "aggressive") than mainstream and fringe religions both.

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• Jibberflabs
• atheism
• atheist
• secular
• secularism
• theist
• theism
• god
• debate
• first-cause
• theology
• god-debate
• religion
• religiosity
• spiritualism
• deist
• deism
• deity
• Jehovah
• Yahweh
• spirituality
• skeptic
• skepticism
• disbelief
• reason
• argument
• argumentation
• proselytizing

[H377H0UND]

Uh, I researched your arguments and you obviously don't do enough research.

For example, Daniel Houser's mom used religion as an excuse AFTER Daniel's first round of Chemotherapy. Second, Proposition 8 is the protection of gay marriage, proposition 22 is the ban of gay marriage.

[RobTheMonk8]

@H377H0UND

1) It's irrelevant to the point WHEN she made the appeal to religious value; it's only important that she did.

2) "Proposition 8" does NOT protect gay marriage; it was a constitutional amendment to insert language explicitly defining marriage as between a man and a woman... precluding same sex marriage. How one could interpret that as a defense of gay marriage is beyond me.

[H377H0UND]

@RobTheMonk8 Okay, I messed up on the Proposition 8 part, you're right. But you're right about the point that faith "can be" bad. Here's my question and give me your honest opinion. What if gay people decided strait people's rights to get married and it worked, would the theists learn what it's like? Why?

[RobTheMonk8]

@H377H0UND

I think it's unfair to prohibit behavior that doesn't harm anyone unwillingly; it doesn't matter who is doing the deciding and whose rights are being eroded. I suspect the theists would learn, but by way of the wrong lesson.

[MrLittletomdj]

@AEVautomatic LAST ONE.. phew...

The social contract is based on a mutually beneficial agreement for the individual's survival within a society. When it is deemed that actions of an individual are detremental to the well being of members within a society the populus judges those actions to be immoral. Slavery can be beneficial for the slave drivers but never for the slaves. Morality is an evolution of empathy. Objectively there is no right & wrong unless there is an objective pupose to life.

[MrLittletomdj]

@AEVautomatic "You said that a society decides what is morally right."

I didn't say that, what I said was society will judge individuals based on a general collective agreement of what is moral. You don't have to accept that status quo but, you will find yourself at odds with society if you don't. The idea of right and wrong is purely abstract. If the Germans had won, peoples view on the matter would probably be entirely different. It's an uncomfortable concept but that's not to say it's untue.

[MrLittletomdj]

@LiberalsUtopian Did you honestly just call Steven Hawkin a retard? FUCK YOU!

"For me the Jewish religion like all others is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions." - Einstien

"I have repeatedly said the idea of a personal God is a child like one" - Einstien

"From the viewpoint of a Jesuit preist I am and always have been an Athiest" - Einstien

At best he was a skeptic!

Chomsky - Peodophile = BULLSHIT

Dillahunty - Crossdresser = LOL!!

You're a twisted little fuck!

[MrLittletomdj]

@AEVautomatic The criminalization of pot is an example where agendas of corporations have influenced media into propergating misinformation. The media has created a fear of a relatively harmless drug. I'm convinced smoking pot is totally moral (subjective). A large percentage of my culture feel the same way. Well informed & unbiased people tend to agree. My point was not establish what is moral or not it was to establish that law doesn't reflect cultural morality in all cases.

[MrLittletomdj]

@AEVautomatic Morality is really just a complex evolution of empathy & empathy is just survival mechnanism of self aware social creatures like man. Empathy is not a product of reasoned logic, it's closer to being an instinctive sense. Our capacity to reason is grounded on the the information we are given. Whilst I agree morality is largely based on reason, it also forms from an emotional disposition to circumstances.

[MrLittletomdj]

@AEVautomatic "social contract" I meant the term figuratively in that it is an understanding rather than a literal signed peice of documentation. There's a degree of flexibility for moralilty within societies. The point at which something is deemed immoral by society is ill defined.

I mean morality is subjective to the individual but those values are largely instilled in the individual by the culture which they belong to.

[MrLittletomdj]

@AEVautomatic By "fair" I simply mean "with each participant having equal influence". This has nothing to do with right or wrong, it is just an expression of a balanced system.

[MrLittletomdj]

@AEVautomatic Y'know this is an interesting debate but, you've just fired out 5 responses in a row... I responded to one, not realizing how many comments you just made.. I would be happy to switch to a PM conversation, because so far you don't sound like a nutter. =D... I can't make my points clear with the old 500 character limit impeding the process. (if you agree I'll send you a proper message, oh and please read the first response too!!)