# Angry Atheist Monologue (Bad Boy Bubby)



## Adversor (Aug 11, 2011)

This is my first time opening a thread in this section so please excuse me if it isn't the right place for this.

I took the liberty to translate this monologue from the movie Bad Boy Bubby to Spanish. It contains a powerful message that will surely put your mind to think. Religious people will hate this video but it is not my intention to insult anyone with this. It is just a part from this movie that has been in my head since the first time I watched it and I just want to share it with all of you guys.

Enjoy...



"You see, no one's going to help you Bubby, because there isn't anybody out there to do it. No one. We're all just complicated arrangements of atoms and subatomic particles &#8212; we don't live. But our atoms do move about in such a way as to give us identity and consciousness. We don't die; our atoms just rearrange themselves. There is no God. There can be no God; it's ridiculous to think in terms of a superior being. An inferior being, maybe, because we, we who don't even exist, we arrange our lives with more order and harmony than God ever arranged the earth. We measure; we plot; we create wonderful new things. We are the architects of our own existence. What a lunatic concept to bow down before a God who slaughters millions of innocent children, slowly and agonizingly starves them to death, beats them, tortures them, rejects them. What folly to even think that we should not insult such a God, damn him! think him out of existence. It is our duty to think God out of existence. It is our duty to insult him. Fuck you, God! Strike me down if you dare, you tyrant, you non-existent fraud! It is the duty of all human beings to think God out of existence. Then we have a future. Because then &#8212; and only then &#8212; do we take full responsibility for who we are. And that's what you must do, Bubby: think God out of existence; take responsibility for who you are."


----------



## DVRP (Aug 11, 2011)

That was actually really interesting and made me think alot.


----------



## Guitarman700 (Aug 11, 2011)

That's all true. So very true.
"If god exists, then man is eternally a slave. As a lover of human liberty, there is only one course available to this god, and that is to cease to exist." - Mikhail Bakunin.


----------



## BucketheadRules (Aug 11, 2011)

Very true.

The best quote:

"It is the duty of every human being to think God out of existence. Then, we have a future. Because then, and only then, do we take full responsibility for who we are."


----------



## KingAenarion (Aug 11, 2011)

Great Australian movie 

Some interesting thoughts and points. As a Christian it's not offensive, namely because people are entitled to feel that way.

I feel that some of the Logic is flawed though.

"We arrange our lives with more order and harmony than God ever arranged the earth. We measure, we plot, we create wonderful music, we are the architects of our own existence"

Saying that humanity has more order than nature feels like a bit of a logical fallacy in this case. The idea that human society with all its values and flaws is more ordered than the natural world to me raises all sorts of philosophical and scientific alarm bells.

"What a lunatic concept to bow down before a God who slaughters millions on innocent children, who slowly and agonisingly starves them to death, beats them, tortures them, rejects them"

This is one concept that I do find kind of offensive. To say that "There is no God, but if there is, it's his fault for all the bad things in the world - not humanities fault" then to turn around and say that if we reject God that human nature will change because we'll take responsibility. If there is no God, and no belief in a God or gods, how would that change human nature. Yea sure it would remove religious doctrine from cultural psyches. It would remove religious wars and aggression (even though it is only the fundamentalists who propagate these ideological wars), but would it change human nature. Would it change the evolutionary urge to kill, to protect ones family at all costs? Would it eliminate nationalism, extremist views, paedophilia, rape, war? No... to blame God (if there is one) or religion for human nature is self-righteous arrogance. Yes religion is great vehicle for those who would abuse power to gain it in the first place, but it is still human nature and not the concept and belief systems that are the problem.

Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Religion doesn't oppress people, people oppress people.


----------



## The Somberlain (Aug 11, 2011)

The problem isn't one's belief; it's how dogmatically people believe in something, Christ or science


----------



## Explorer (Aug 11, 2011)

Very confusing, attempting to make points but ultimately failing. 

To argue that we have consciousnesses, and then to assert that we don't live, and that those consciousnesses don't die? The speech sounds like it was written to sound profound, but only as long as you don't listen to closely. I've heard lots of speeches which reach for "profoundi-ness," and this fits that cast to a "t." 

Superior and inferior creatures? It depends on your criteria. Given time, man can build tools to survive in the ocean, just as a virus can overcome homo sapiens sapiens' defenses and build order (from a virus viewpoint) out of the chaos of the human body. 

Ultimately, the speech was someone arguing that their viewpoint and framework for judging that viewpoint is correct, and that other viewpoints and frameworks for judgement are wrong... but without presenting any evidence for such other than assertions. As such, it falls into that same category as other arguments for why one religion should be considered superior to another, but ultimately falling back on "because I said so!" as an argument. 

Meh.


----------



## bostjan (Aug 11, 2011)




----------



## Adversor (Aug 12, 2011)

Hey guys, thanks for your replies. It sure is a very controversial subject and everybody has different opinions based on what we have learned and the environment we have grown with and this is the whole beauty of it, share points of view and discuss them with respect and responsability. This topic is endless, I know, but it sure makes you think for one minute... I will leave you all with my thoughts about the video.

Let's being with this:

Whenever this guy uses the term "god" he is obvioulsy not refering to the bearded man with long hair who performs miracles and lives in heaven, this man is clearly a non believer. What he means by "god" is the state of mind that most people live in nowdays. He is critizing how everything and all responsability is put upon that "god" that in his point of view, was invented by humankind for the sake of commodity. Although, I don't think he tries to offend anyone with this. What he is merely trying to do is to sound loud and capture attention to wake people up from their catatonic state and invite them to take full responsability for their own lives instead of just blaming everything on someone else. 

He also speaks about ourselves being our own architects and that we as human beings are beautiful beyond belief because we have the power to create and destroy with our mind and body. To tell you the truth, I don't think this man is an atheist in his point of view. He gives clear signals of being a spiritual person and that would make him a believer in his own sense because, in my point of view, he believes in the "god" that lives within him or his "spirit" that makes him a better person. He might be a traditional atheist/heretic for the persons that are tied to or were indocrinated by religion (also known as fanatics) but this man is clearly motivated by a positive spark within himself that is clearly *NOT* hate.


----------



## Cabinet (Aug 12, 2011)

Godspeed, Bubby


----------



## leandroab (Aug 12, 2011)

Not again.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 12, 2011)

leandroab said:


> Not again.



Well it hasn't gone downhill yet. Every now and then a religious thread does well. This one seems to be on the right track


----------



## Captain Shoggoth (Aug 12, 2011)

As an agnostic/atheist/skeptic I'm fully with the mindset that the Abrahamic God is a vile tyrannic entity, massively egotistical and insecure and certainly far from perfect but at the end of the day even in a purely atheistic civilisation there would still be pointless suffering.

Men butcher each other because it's in our nature, religion and the abuse of power it allows is just another means to that end.


----------



## Cabinet (Aug 12, 2011)

Captain Shoggoth said:


> As an agnostic/atheist/skeptic I'm fully with the mindset that the Abrahamic God is a vile tyrannic entity, massively egotistical and insecure and certainly far from perfect but at the end of the day even in a purely atheistic civilisation there would still be pointless suffering.
> 
> Men butcher each other because it's in our nature, religion and the abuse of power it allows is just another means to that end.


I don't think religion does the idea of God justice. Hell, I don't think we even have the appropriate language to describe God in it's ultimate potential.

I don't think we even have the ability to fully comprehend the idea of God.


----------



## Rev2010 (Aug 12, 2011)

Couldn't have said it better than KingAenarion.

I'm basically agnostic. Never been religious, never will be, but personally some atheistic attitudes can be as off putting as hardcore religious mentality. Basically, a lot of atheistic mindset is just so finite and made up - "There's no God, this is all pure chance, END OF STORY!!!". And hey, if you want to believe that it's your right too. But the way I see it is how could I possibly make a decision on something so grandiose with no way of proving or disproving it and probably not even having a brain physically and mentally capable of even approaching understanding of something so incredibly complex and outside of 4 dimensional thinking??

See, I don't invest in believing or disbelieving there's a single God, or even multiple Gods, whatever. The only thing I can say from my human mind is that the universe does seem to exhibit intelligent design. Gravity, light - the fact that living beings can even form organic receptors to translate the light into sight. Camoflauge - an animal doesn't even have to think to control it, it happens on it's own, two eyes for depth perception, etc.

Sure I understand the pure chance arguments and listen to them. I enjoy discussing all options. But when someone is fully set in the biblical god mentally and simply refuses to hear any other possibility.... well then there's no reason to waste time trying to discuss this sort of stuff with that person no? Same goes for the opposite side of the coin IMO.

Please don't anyone take offense!!! I am sincerely not trying to offend anyone here, don't think I said anything awful anyway - just saying. Of course this thread can go downhill easily, and probably will, but I felt like sharing my viewpoint.


Rev.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 12, 2011)

That's what I've been saying for a while. There are several militant atheists who are just as bad as the people they oppose. Everyone has an opinion but no one really knows for sure. Believing in God is just as stupid/smart as not believing. Everyone has their own opinion and it's pretty stupid to pick one as definitive truth over another.

Religion or lack thereof isn't the issue..it's people's need to impose views on others. People are the problem, not a belief structure.


----------



## DVRP (Aug 12, 2011)

For me the monologue just meant I'm accountable for my own actions and no one but me can control them. I'm the architect of my world. My decisions craft my world around me. I don't see a reason to read into the religious part of it, because in my eyes that's not its intent.


----------



## Dvaienat (Aug 12, 2011)

Great quote, I agree with it 100%. To me it is fairly obvious 'God' was thought up to answer the question of where life came from, in the days where man had no knowledge of science. It also served to control people and give hope, and was a great opportunity for man to exert his vile prejudices, and oppress women and homosexuals. Not to mention the fact that the 'God' in Abrahamic religions is evil - a genocidal maniac and dictator. In Christianity you have to accept Jesus as your savior or you will be tortured for eternity in Hell. That is a completely sick doctrine. Religion is a primitive and archaic control device and nowdays causes more harm in society than good.


----------



## Adversor (Aug 12, 2011)

NatG said:


> Great quote, I agree with it 100%. To me it is fairly obvious 'God' was thought up to answer the question of where life came from, in the days where man had no knowledge of science.



This.


----------



## The Somberlain (Aug 12, 2011)

Well, recently I had an idea to categorize systems of thought into "presecular," "secular," and "post-secular"

Presecular: there's an invisible bro in the sky taking care of you and telling you what to do
Secular: if I don't experience it, it doesn't exist
Postsecular: This is the hardest to explain, but anything that acknowledges that there are many great things that may or may not be out there and seeks for man to transcend his petty experience (e.g. Taoism, Buddhism, Huxleyan spiritualism, quantum physics, Structuralism, Idealism[as in Schopenhauer and Hegel, not sticking up for something stupidly])


----------



## BrianUV777BK (Aug 12, 2011)

Guitarman700 said:


> That's all true. So very true.
> "If god exists, then man is eternally a slave. As a lover of human liberty, there is only one course available to this god, and that is to cease to exist." - Mikhail Bakunin.





That actually makes more sense than anything I've read regarding the topic.


----------



## -42- (Aug 12, 2011)

This is one of those rants that I can't really get behind. The appeal of atheism (for me) rests in the fact that I am not obligated to believe in any formal tenants, that I have the personal freedom to believe (or rather not to believe). Because I have the freedom not to believe - to question as it were - I do not begrudge others the right to their faith. I don't think that we as a race have an obligation to 'kill God' because God is a personal choice in any secular nation.


----------



## Explorer (Aug 12, 2011)

A few posts in this thread have reminded me of a huge imposed dichotomy: "I don't believe in God because if He/She/It exists, then He/She/It exists in this particular form."

I always figured that, if there was truly a god of some sort, it was further beyond my reckoning and comprehension than understanding my balancing my checkbook (along with all the structures and thoughts behind such a balancing) is to my dog. 

I've always found that the most fascinating debates aren't between, say, atheists and Christians, or Christians and Muslims, but instead between two Christians, or two Muslims, or two anti-evolutionists. There is a huge amount of minutia which quite a few people are unaware of, and it's only when you hear an Old Earth creationist/Intelligent Design believer arguing with an Young Earth creationist can you appreciate how frail the underpinnings are for certain viewpoints... except, of course, for the one uniting factor, the need to argue against naturalistic science. 

I'm appreciative of how much agreement there is in science as a whole.

----



DrakkarTyrannis said:


> There are several militant atheists who are just as bad as the people they oppose.



I've pointed this out in "There's a war on Christmas!" threads, and in other type threads as well, but let me just say, finding three topics like these in less than a month...

http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/po...lone-fundamentalist-gets-books-banned-mo.html

http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/politics-current-events/162826-bible-belt-lawsuit-pits-atheist-against-sheriff.html

http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/po...twing-christian-terrorists-attack-norway.html

I have to call "bullshit" on the assertion that the militant atheists have come close to the militant Christians in these stories.

I'm happy to read some equivalent stories, though. 

I remember when people would talk about how negros were as bad as the Klan in wanting equal rights. That claim was also as obviously bullshit. 

Again, I don't see evidence of it in the news of the world, but I'm happy to be informed of what I've been missing so far.


----------



## Scruffy1012 (Aug 12, 2011)




----------



## Captain Shoggoth (Aug 12, 2011)

I'm with Explorer here, if a deity exists, the last place to look for it is in any religious book IMO. Far too human-orientated.


----------



## DVRP (Aug 12, 2011)

Captain Shoggoth said:


> I'm with Explorer here, if a deity exists, the last place to look for it is in any religious book IMO. Far too human-orientated.


----------



## Explorer (Aug 13, 2011)

Explorer said:


> I've pointed this out in "There's a war on Christmas!" threads, and in other type threads as well, but let me just say, finding three topics like these in less than a month...
> 
> http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/po...lone-fundamentalist-gets-books-banned-mo.html
> 
> ...



Update!

aslmm, a former member here, started attacking another member due to his hurt religious sensibilities, and called for that other member to kill himself (via PM and neg rep). I left only the link to that relevant thread in my quoting of myself. Those atheists are pretty bad, aren't they?

It actually doesn't seem so, and the atheists have quite a way to go to come close to matching, doesn't it seem?


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 13, 2011)

Explorer said:


> A few posts in this thread have reminded me of a huge imposed dichotomy: "I don't believe in God because if He/She/It exists, then He/She/It exists in this particular form."
> 
> I always figured that, if there was truly a god of some sort, it was further beyond my reckoning and comprehension than understanding my balancing my checkbook (along with all the structures and thoughts behind such a balancing) is to my dog.
> 
> ...



You can call whatever you like, but if you're seriously going to argue that there are no fanatical atheists..then you couldn't be any more wrong.


----------



## Bigfan (Aug 13, 2011)

Can someone please show me links to these "fanatical atheist" stories? I can't remember anything that can match the atrocities of 9/11 and Utøya (as examples). 

Not trolling, I'm just curious guys.


----------



## Waelstrum (Aug 13, 2011)

When asked to produce examples of fanatical atheists, people often like to give examples of Stalin and Pol Pot and those guys. The important point to be made, however, is that they didn't do those things in the name of atheism, they just happened to be atheists who also were monsters.

----

This rant seems a little weird to me; especially the idea of thinking god out of existence. If god is real, then you can't think him out of existence any more than ignoring a fire stops your house burning down. If god is not real, then he won't need any help from your thoughts to not exist, as he doesn't anyway.


----------



## Bigfan (Aug 13, 2011)

Exactly why I asked. I can't think of anything I would consider criminal carried out in the name of atheism/agnosticism. That would just be silly.


----------



## Rev2010 (Aug 13, 2011)

I hope what I'd originally said isn't the cause of this debate about some atheists being as bad as religious fundamentalists. If that is what this is stemming from let me clarify I wasn't in any way referring to the actions of said people. I was talking simply about the mindset and how some hardcore atheist can be just as off putting to "talk" to about this type of topic. In other words, just that if there's no flexibility in a person's thought, if they've already 100% made up their mind and are completely adamant in their view they can be just as annoyingly ignorant and forceful of their position. In that regard to me it's no different really than talking to a religious fundamentalist.

So, that wasn't in any way meant to mean atheists have claimed lives like religious extremists or anything like that.


Rev.


----------



## Explorer (Aug 13, 2011)

It wasn't in response to you, Rev2010. Somone specifically said what I quoted and responded to.

There is just this kneejerk response which surfaces in quite a few threads, where someone insists that hardcore atheists are just as bad as the worst we've seen from hardcore religionists.

I didn't get into the Crusades, or the Inquisition, or the fact that many in Asia who treat animals like shit feel that, since whoever has been reincarnated into that form probably did something bad, deserves to be abused.

Instead, I gave three clear examples of news stories over the past month, and asked for counterexample or two. 

None has been forthcoming. I suspect none will, and that lack will underline the falseness of the kneejerk response.


----------



## Hallic (Aug 13, 2011)

from a west-european point of view:

Religion/spirits/bigfoot/homeopaty 
What u crazy?

but then...

Ahhh ur american, that explains alot... you guys are crazy bunch(but we still love ya)


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 13, 2011)

Explorer said:


> It wasn't in response to you, Rev2010. Somone specifically said what I quoted and responded to.
> 
> There is just this kneejerk response which surfaces in quite a few threads, where someone insists that hardcore atheists are just as bad as the worst we've seen from hardcore religionists.
> 
> ...



 Give it up. I meant there are fanatical atheists who are just as bullheaded and ignorant as Crosstitutes. They crimes either side commit aren't the issue as I'm talking about mentality. Ignorance is ignorance regardless of what side it's from. People should just learn to leave other people the hell alone when it comes to personal views. You may not agree with the other person but that isn't a free pass to harass and pester them over it.


----------



## Explorer (Aug 13, 2011)

So, they have the same mentality... but in one case, that mentality gives rise to action, and not in the other case?

Out of curiosity, if it's not their mentality which leads to actions like those which have been discussed... what causes the actions?

I genuinely want to understand what you're saying, but that doesn't make sense to me. It sounds like you're deliberately limiting "bad" to someone's way of thinking, and then ruling out consideration of when that thinking leads to action. 

To choose an extreme hypothetical, it's like saying that Gandhi was as bad as Hitler in terms of his attempts to change the world... as long as you force everyone to ignore World War II and all of the other actions Hitler actively took against others.

I agree, it sounds like someone should give it up. I'm not sure it's me, though.


----------



## Rev2010 (Aug 13, 2011)

Explorer said:


> So, they have the same mentality... but in one case, that mentality gives rise to action, and not in the other case?



In no way trying to play devil's advocate just trying to use some logic here... but thinking about it maybe it's because Atheists don't have whole communities or countries of people living under that doctrine? See, when you have a whole country full of muslims, then along comes the Christian invaders it gives rise to hatred and a desire to oust them. Same basically goes for Christians that feel either other religions or the Government are imposing on their beliefs/way of life - hence the reason for acting out violently.

Not saying that is ever the wise choice, of course not. I'm just saying maybe we would see the same kind of reaction from Atheists if they had a whole large community or country then all of a sudden Christians moved in and won a court case to get creationism taught by default in schools. Somehow I think there might be some violence. Just sayin'


Rev.


----------



## Guitarman700 (Aug 13, 2011)

"Fanatical" Atheism is simply a reaction to religious people persecuting us. Do you know how many threats of death and bodily harm I get daily, simply because I deny the existence of gods? A metric fuck ton, and it gets old fast. It's not ignorance, it's a reaction TO ignorance and intolerance. We've been told to "Sit down and shut up" For far too long, and we're not going to do that anymore. Sorry if that offends you.


----------



## Captain Shoggoth (Aug 13, 2011)

I long ago gave up the anti-religion brigade (likely because I stopped being an angsty thirteen-year-old), and I have no personal problems with or hatred towards religion or Islam (in fact I'd probably say it's the 'best' of the Abrahamic faiths) but reading the Quran (I come from a Muslim family, most of whom don't know I'm a kuffar-a non-believer) just makes me irritated. Whoever wrote it (God if you're a believer) more often than not just comes across as an arrogant douchebag.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 13, 2011)

Explorer said:


> So, they have the same mentality... but in one case, that mentality gives rise to action, and not in the other case?
> 
> Out of curiosity, if it's not their mentality which leads to actions like those which have been discussed... what causes the actions?
> 
> ...



Much like how this is what..the sixth time you've tried to pick some retarded philosophy war with me? Much like atheists who can't seem to leave Christians alone due to their conflicting views..and vice versa. It would seem that if people just agreed to disagree and left it at that, there would be less issues. Try it.


----------



## Guitarman700 (Aug 13, 2011)

DrakkarTyrannis said:


> Much like how this is what..the sixth time you've tried to pick some retarded philosophy war with me? Much like atheists who can't seem to leave Christians alone due to their conflicting views..and vice versa. It would seem that if people just agreed to disagree and left it at that, there would be less issues. Try it.



We do. I don't go looking for antagonism, it finds me, becuase I'm a token atheist in a town full of people who hate people like me. All I want to be is left alone, sadly, I find that mighty difficult.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 13, 2011)

Guitarman700 said:


> We do. I don't go looking for antagonism, it finds me, becuase I'm a token atheist in a town full of people who hate people like me. All I want to be is left alone, sadly, I find that mighty difficult.



Well then would you be what I'm talking about? I'm a Satanist..I know all about it..however I don't make it my point to argue or make fun of Christians whenever I get the chance..some do. No sense in stirring the pot regardless of what side you're on. Regardless of who's the shit disturber, it's still wrong. Sometimes you just have to understand that other people think diferently and leave them be..instead of "no you're wrong and I have to prove it to you".


----------



## Explorer (Aug 13, 2011)

DrakkarTyrannis said:


> Much like how this is what..the sixth time you've tried to pick some retarded philosophy war with me? Much like atheists who can't seem to leave Christians alone due to their conflicting views..and vice versa. It would seem that if people just agreed to disagree and left it at that, there would be less issues. Try it.



Actually, the only times I found in searching that I pointed out something in your posts were here and in the Christian metal thread. There, your assertion was that there was nothing in the Bible which was dark, to which I gave numerous examples, You kept arguing that Revelations shouldn't be considered, only the parts dealing with God's infinite love. 

I'm not going after particular posters, but when someone makes comments which are patently false at a glance (Revelations shouldn't be considered as part of Scripture, atheists are just as bad as Christians in terms of oppression in spite of the inability to post a single example), I notice and point those things out. I'm not expecting those who are blind to their own mistakes to notice them, but it helps to challenge those assertions rather than have them gain strength through repetition.

*If you feel that my posts were out of line, or that I was attacking you directly, USE THE REPORT BUTTON. *Otherwise, consider the possibility that your statements are open to argument, and might even be wrong. 

As your neg rep to me shows...



DrakkarTyrannis as neg rep said:


> Let it go..it's getting sad-Drakkar



...you keep posting the same tired assertions without proof, keep being upset at real examples countering your assertions, and finally, rather than acknowledging the lack of proof, you just went the route of most neg rep...







I think the sadness is being attributed the wrong place. *laugh*


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 13, 2011)

Lol. Anyone seeing the coexist ad on the top of the page? Classic.


----------



## leandroab (Aug 13, 2011)




----------



## Waelstrum (Aug 13, 2011)

Rev2010 said:


> In no way trying to play devil's advocate just trying to use some logic here... but thinking about it maybe it's because Atheists don't have whole communities or countries of people living under that doctrine? See, when you have a whole country full of muslims, then along comes the Christian invaders it gives rise to hatred and a desire to oust them. Same basically goes for Christians that feel either other religions or the Government are imposing on their beliefs/way of life - hence the reason for acting out violently.
> 
> Not saying that is ever the wise choice, of course not. I'm just saying maybe we would see the same kind of reaction from Atheists if they had a whole large community or country then all of a sudden Christians moved in and won a court case to get creationism taught by default in schools. Somehow I think there might be some violence. Just sayin'
> 
> ...



Actually, the USA is disproportionately religious in comparison to many other first world countries. And to use you analogy: yes, in Australia most of us got really pissed of when some people tried to get intelligent design taught in science*. There were no death threats, or violence of any kind. Simply an explanation to the people who make this kind of decision of the difference between science and religion. It was shut down pretty fast.

Also, I noticed that you referred to atheism as a doctrine. It's a lack of religious doctrine, not a doctrine itself. There's no church of atheism, nor are there little groups that they go to (that I'm aware of, I realise they have them in America, but that's because they're much rarer there). Occasionally you'll see one that is bitter, like in the OP or the guy that burned a Quaran and a Bible (a dick move) but you'll probably find the same proportion of bitterness in atheists as one does in theists.




DrakkarTyrannis said:


> Lol. Anyone seeing the coexist ad on the top of the page? Classic.



I am now, but I think that's only because you said the word. 

*I did actually end up getting taught ID at school (in religious education). The entire class laughed at the whole thing or ignored it to have little teenage dramas, except the one or two religious kids sat at the front paying attention (to the delight of Father Tim, as his classes are always full of questions he can't answer). My particular group of friends went through a point by point rebuttal as it went on, and the whole class was quite amusing.


----------



## Nimgoble (Aug 14, 2011)

A RELIGIOUS DEBATE?! DON'T MIND IF I DO!


----------



## Rev2010 (Aug 14, 2011)

Waelstrum said:


> Also, I noticed that you referred to atheism as a doctrine. It's a lack of religious doctrine, not a doctrine itself. There's no church of atheism



Wasn't referencing atheism as a doctrine, I was referencing religions as having a doctrine, just the way my sentence typed out. But I know you got my point overall.

Sure no one has really seen violence on an atheistic end so far. But if such a hypothetic community of atheists existed then along came the muslims into their community wanting to enact Sharia law I still think you might find that would change. Atheists in the USA constitute about what, 2% of the population? If the number of Atheists were dramatically higher I would not be surprised to see some act out violently in response to religions affect on their society.

People are violent pure and simple. Being with religion or without has never stopped anyone from acting out violently to what they oppose.


Rev.


----------



## -42- (Aug 14, 2011)

I wouldn't say that there has been no violence on the atheistic end: List of atheists in politics and law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notable atheists on that particular list: Mao Zedong - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Joseph Stalin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Pol Pot - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

My atheism does not entitle me to a higher moral ground than someone else's Christianity, my actions do. Hopefully this can pull the soapbox out from under you guys.


----------



## Necris (Aug 14, 2011)

-42- said:


> I wouldn't say that there has been no violence on the atheistic end: List of atheists in politics and law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Notable atheists on that particular list: Mao Zedong - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Joseph Stalin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Pol Pot - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.



As stated before, doing horrible things in the name of atheism and being an atheist while doing horrible things are very different.


----------



## Wingchunwarrior (Aug 14, 2011)

Watching Free Willy 3 atm,Fuck Yeah


awww no Michael Madsen


----------



## -42- (Aug 14, 2011)

^If you read the articles you would note that both Stalin and Mao used atheism as a cornerstone of their policies.

Do these render thousands of years of religious oppression null and void? Of course not. Examples of 'atheist oppression' were asked for and provided.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 14, 2011)

-42- said:


> ^If you read the articles you would note that both Stalin and Mao used atheism as a cornerstone of their policies.
> 
> Do these render thousands of years of religious oppression null and void? Of course not. Examples of 'atheist oppression' were asked for and provided.



I would say that even if there were no documentation of what atheists have done to rival Christian atrocities, the mindset is just as damaging. Crosstitutes act like idiots thinking that they're somehow doing the lords work, angry atheists in response poke the hornet's nest giving Crosstitutes the validation they need to carry on more nonsense and the cycle just goes on and on and on. The whole "us against them" thing really needs to quit on both ends. If people would just quit pointing fingers a lot of tensions would fizzle out.


----------



## Explorer (Aug 14, 2011)

Lots of finger-pointing, and then...



DrakkarTyrannis said:


> ...If people would just quit pointing fingers a lot of tensions would fizzle out.



Way to lead by example... er.. wait a minute...


----------



## Mordacain (Aug 14, 2011)

Rev2010 said:


> I'm basically agnostic. Never been religious, never will be, but personally some atheistic attitudes can be as off putting as hardcore religious mentality. Basically, a lot of atheistic mindset is just so finite and made up - "There's no God, this is all pure chance, END OF STORY!!!"



Its funny. I considered myself agnostic for a long time and only recently changed that outlook after a bit of introspection (possibly fueled by the book Godless). 

It's really simple how I made the determination; it was really as simple as: "what does the majority of the evidence point to, god or no god?" In answering that question (no god, as there is evidence in support of that conclusion), another question formed: "If I had not been taught to believe in a god and knowing what science has taught me now, would I have ever thought to create the idea of a god." The answer to that question was "no," ergo the only logical conclusion was to disallow for the existence of a god, as there is no evidence for it and I would not have thought of a god-like entity had my mind not already been polluted by the idea from childhood.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 14, 2011)

Mordacain said:


> Its funny. I considered myself agnostic for a long time and only recently changed that outlook after a bit of introspection (possibly fueled by the book Godless).
> 
> It's really simple how I made the determination; it was really as simple as: "what does the majority of the evidence point to, god or no god?" In answering that question (no god, as there is evidence in support of that conclusion), another question formed: "If I had not been taught to believe in a god and knowing what science has taught me now, would I have ever thought to create the idea of a god." The answer to that question was "no," ergo the only logical conclusion was to disallow for the existence of a god, as there is no evidence for it and I would not have thought of a god-like entity had my mind not already been polluted by the idea from childhood.



Never thought of it that way. Makes me wonder that if a person were put in the situation you described, would the concept of God even come about? I'd say yes only because eventually someone would look for the "origin" of it all (kinda like the God Particle concept). Now if they would create the idea of an anthropomorphic being, that part I don't know, but I'm thinking someone would still create some kind of god as the ultimate answer to "why"


----------



## daemon barbeque (Aug 14, 2011)

DrakkarTyrannis said:


> Much like how this is what..the sixth time you've tried to pick some retarded philosophy war with me? Much like atheists who can't seem to leave Christians alone due to their conflicting views..and vice versa. It would seem that if people just agreed to disagree and left it at that, there would be less issues. Try it.



I see where you coming from, but I have to disagree.

You cannot agree or disagree with a belief, since it's a belief. You can share it, or not share it.
I am an atheist and I cannot discuss normal matters with religious people, ince they know always better. Their source is untouchable, undeniable, unchanged, holy, sacred etc.
And exactly this makes Religion dangerous. People get Authority for their bad actions from a script written by some guys some hundrets of years ago.

The one and only difference between an atheist and a believer is this "?"

If the religious people could use the "?" on daily basis, we wouldn't have all those atrocities, and Atheists like us wouldn't have to fight for our rights.

I like that movie BTW, it contradicts itself, but that is natural for philosophy. Trying to see things from different perspectives, and come to a conclusion at the end is normal.


----------



## Mordacain (Aug 14, 2011)

DrakkarTyrannis said:


> Never thought of it that way. Makes me wonder that if a person were put in the situation you described, would the concept of God even come about? I'd say yes only because eventually someone would look for the "origin" of it all (kinda like the God Particle concept). Now if they would create the idea of an anthropomorphic being, that part I don't know, but I'm thinking someone would still create some kind of god as the ultimate answer to "why"



I guess it really just depends on what information is out there when someone considers it. Many people choose to reject the idea that matter can come from nothing simply because the concept is too foreign to entertain as true even when there is evidence supporting it (as there is now).

Personally, I've agonized over the idea of god and existence since I was 10 years old and have probably spent waaaaay more time than I should considering every possible angle I could come up with. I still kinda wish I could believe in the bible as the idea of nothingness after death is still disturbing even though I accept it as the most likely scenario.

I actually just watched an episode of "Through the Wormhole" that sparked some thought on the afterlife & the possibility of a cosmic conscious that is possible within the laws of nature.

I guess, weighing in as the token Atheist, I can say I only believe in something that has evidence backing it up. I don't know if I can be considered the benchmark for how an Atheist views the world, but most of the ones I've met don't dogmatically believe in science; we all realize science is just a tool for discovery and is constantly being refined as more knowledge is accumulated.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 14, 2011)

daemon barbeque said:


> I see where you coming from, but I have to disagree.
> 
> You cannot agree or disagree with a belief, since it's a belief. You can share it, or not share it.
> I am an atheist and I cannot discuss normal matters with religious people, ince they know always better. Their source is untouchable, undeniable, unchanged, holy, sacred etc.
> ...



I get you and agree with you on many levels, however I don't think the "enemy" here is religion. There are people who are very religious and some of the most sane and nice people you'd ever want to meet. Much like there are atheists who are the coolest most level head people you'd ever want to see. I personally think the issue is the human need to be right. For every person that has a certain philosophy and lives a good life because of it, there are nutjobs who take that same philosophy and do horrible things. My only issue is it just makes me feel uneasy whenever people attack the philosophy without taking into consideration the people behind it.

I've played the argue with Christians game and I just learned that once all the shouting is over nothing changes and you both just end up looking foolish. It's easier to just let them believe what they want and don't bother them. Unfortunately some religious, and some non-religious, people don't adopt that mindset and things go wrong when they attempt to prove the flaws in the other side's way of thinking..


----------



## daemon barbeque (Aug 14, 2011)

DrakkarTyrannis said:


> . It's easier to just let them believe what they want and don't bother them. Unfortunately some religious, and some non-religious, people don't adopt that mindset and things go wrong when they attempt to prove the flaws in the other side's way of thinking..



That would be easy if they wouldn't put crosses with a agonizing Zombie on it to every classroom, poisoning young minds, raping and abusing the little children in the house of their dieties, asking me why my beard is not as the one from Muhammad, hitting young girls in their faces because they wore a basketball short in Ramadan. Heck, they kill each other because of small differences like if Maria would be more Holy or Jesus, or who has more right to live in Jerusalem.

As you see, none of this big bullshit is caused by reason, a well put "?" or atheism.

I don't want to live my or my beloved ones this kind of life, full of nutjobs everywhere. I belive in the "?", and I will fight for my and other's right to use it , freely, in the schools, at their jobs, on tv, without any limits.

Cheers man!


----------



## Church2224 (Aug 14, 2011)

I believe in God, he just pisses me off at times...We have not been on good terms in a while. 

Why can't people let just other people believe whatever they want to and just leave it at that? I mean seriously if you want to believe in God fine , if not that is fine too. Just let people do whatever they want to. 

As the great philosopher Churchaquinas one said-"It does not matter what one believes in, as all believe in something. But the real asshole is the one who presses their beliefs on to others and criticizes others for believing in what they do."

Not stating anyone here is, just following my very wise philosopher....


----------



## daemon barbeque (Aug 14, 2011)

Church2224 said:


> I believe in God, he just pisses me off at times...We have not been on good terms in a while.
> 
> Why can't people let just other people believe whatever they want to and just leave it at that? I mean seriously if you want to believe in God fine , if not that is fine too. Just let people do whatever they want to.
> 
> ...



see my above post. That is the reason


----------



## Rev2010 (Aug 14, 2011)

Mordacain said:


> It's really simple how I made the determination; it was really as simple as: "what does the majority of the evidence point to, god or no god?"



Yes, but while there is no "direct physical" evidence of God do you not think the order in the universe suggests some form of intelligent design? Do you really not think so? I've given several decent points and could lend dozens of others that would suggest some form of thought in the way everything works and functions. Absence of evidence never means something does not exist. 

That aside though, again, myself as an agnostic I am in no way saying I believe in a God or Gods. Just that there does seem to have been some intelligence in the way it all works. Now, coming from the idea of spontaneous creation - sure it's possible and I would never rule it out even though the human mind has difficulty understanding such a thing due to the nature of our universe. But fact is, there are only two possibilities that I can personally see (maybe there are more of course). One is that creation does spontaneously come from nothing. There other is that everything was ALWAYS there and merely changes form. See, I'm much more prone to believe that - that something was always there. The reason being is because even in our universe time is flexible. It speeds up when moving slower and also when further away from large masses as the larger the gravity the slower time moves. It slows down moving faster and when around large gravitational masses.

So, time is irrelevant and merely just an aspect of our universe. As a result, shouldn't the universe beyond what we see be timeless? If it is, then everything was always there. Even if there was an intelligence behind it it would not have been created, it was always there, plain and simple.

Again, not saying I believe in any standard stereotypical God(s), because I do not. But, I personally feel even if the universe itself is intelligent and we simply call it "nature" it can still be looked upon and having some form of intelligent design behind it.

Many thousands of years ago the idea of invisible micro-organisms would've been scoffed at. That's because there was no way to detect them at the time. Of course there was evidence of them, but the people of the time didn't know how to interpret it. Just because we can't detect any "current" physical presence of intelligence that led to the universes creation does not necessarily mean it simply isn't/never was there.

Just some food for thought. I'm enjoying this conversation and am glad it hasn't gotten out of hand as they usually do, and sadly probably will eventually lol.


Rev.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 14, 2011)

Rev2010 said:


> I'm enjoying this conversation and am glad it hasn't gotten out of hand as they usually do, and sadly probably will eventually lol.



I know. It sucks that religious threads never stay open


----------



## Mordacain (Aug 14, 2011)

Rev2010 said:


> Yes, but while there is no "direct physical" evidence of God do you not think the order in the universe suggests some form of intelligent design?



I don't think the apparent "order" in the universe is any indication of a creator. However, I don't subscribe to the idea the universe is ordered at all so design element is a non-starter for me.

In fact, when just looking at individual organisms and looking at their mutations and adaptations, its clear that if there was a designer, they could have done a much better job designing things so they would function better. 

As the to the universe itself, its readily apparent that it all derived in such a chaotic fashion that order itself is not a concept that comes to mind for me. Going to the subatomic level and looking at quantum particles, the lack of order becomes even more apparent.


----------



## Mordacain (Aug 14, 2011)

Rev2010 said:


> Absence of evidence never means something does not exist.



This is absolutely true, and the inverse is actually the basis for my thought process on whether or not I would have imagined a god, knowing what I know and having no reason to imagine one.

I would like to make a point with that statement as well. Many people don't really grasp the idea of the scientific method and so can see that statement and think it would apply. In theory, it does, but it would never come into play as the basis of the scientific method is to follow the evidence and make theories based on the evidence you have. As you acquire more evidence, it will allow you to prove or deny all or part of the theory.


----------



## Explorer (Aug 14, 2011)

Church2224 said:


> Why can't people let just other people believe whatever they want to and just leave it at that? I mean seriously if you want to believe in God fine , if not that is fine too. Just let people do whatever they want to.



That, I believe, is the point of the combination of freedom of religion and of governmental powers not being used to impose one group's religious views on another. As to why there were three threads on SS.org where people couldn't just let other believe (Christian extremist in Norway, book banning, Bible-belt sheriff), that's open to debate. 

I believe the most powerful amendment to the Constitution is freedom of speech, and one can look at the past 100 years of history and see how being able to ban information helps keep certain viewpoints or individuals on top. Being exposed to information which refutes dogma is too dangerous to the dogma's acceptance. 

Book bannings. Preventing two consenting adults from marrying. It's not so easy for some to just respect others' rights, especially when defending certain beliefs... even when respecting the rights of others is a core value of, say, Jesus. It's not the fault of Jesus, poor guy, but of the fundamentalists who ignore him.


----------



## atticmike (Aug 16, 2011)

I've been raised catholic and still question a lot. Keep in mind that without religion, regardless of the bad things, we may have never had rules or believes to protect and cherish whatsoever. 

The more I obtain from science, the more I doubt all these little things.

However, there is no proof for nothing. Even science is just a piece of mind we build on. Just because some ass invented the numeric system with maths and all that, we all go by it  Is it "the" system? I guess not. We're restricted to the wisdom we've built up ourselves. 

Remember how long we thought everything is based around the evolution theory? Now, that they found traces of animals living long before the evolution theory took place, that shit is refuted my friendZ. Still, there are schools teaching it their students.

Get to the borders of science, meaning the big bang, and try to explain it. If not, look for the explanation of scientists. If you're not gonna laugh, I pitty you 

I'm open to everything. If someone has a standpoint on whatever scientific result and is desperate to send me the message, I'll listen and think about it. Even start to doubt my believes as always. But then go back to the big bang and laugh about all of it. Either my religion or science. 

As long as you believe in something that is driving you, you should be fine! 

Deep shit my friends. You should keep politics and religion out of this forum. There are other places. Amongst all the silly rules on this board, I thought this was the least thing to put on paper? oO


----------



## Nimgoble (Aug 16, 2011)

atticmike said:


> I've been raised catholic and still question a lot. Keep in mind that without religion, regardless of the bad things, we may have never had rules or believes to protect and cherish whatsoever.
> 
> The more I obtain from science, the more I doubt all these little things.
> 
> ...



I...ummmmmm.....wat.

Okay, just a few things:

-Rules predate religion.

-There is, in fact, proof of "things".

-Just because the units of measurement are arbitrary, doesn't mean the formulas that we us them with are. We didn't invent math. We discovered it.

-What was that about the theory of evolution? What animals? When was the "theory of evolution" supposed to have taken place? Who refuted what?

-Why would we laugh at the borders of scientific understanding? And why the Big Bang, in particular?

-You said you're open to everything, then you state that you would listen to a theory and revert back to your religion, because it's one or the other... So...you're NOT open to everything... Or, rather: you're open to listening to other theories, but not open to changing your position if they conflict with your religion...

-Having some sort of belief system that drives you does not automatically make you fine. Hitler was rather driven, no?

-And then, finally, you enter in to a religious discussion by voicing your viewpoint and then finish it off by telling everyone they should keep this kind of discussion out of the forums? Is this not a bit hypocritical?


----------



## Rev2010 (Aug 16, 2011)

Nimgoble said:


> And then, finally, you enter in to a religious discussion by voicing your viewpoint and then finish it off by telling everyone they should keep this kind of discussion out of the forums? Is this not a bit hypocritical?



Even worse, we're being told what shouldn't be on the forum by a guy with 222 posts.


Rev.


----------



## Explorer (Aug 16, 2011)

atticmike said:


> I've been raised catholic and still question a lot. Keep in mind that without religion, regardless of the bad things, we may have never had rules or believes to protect and cherish whatsoever.



Just as Nimgoble asked, I'm wondering what animals you're referring to as existing before evolution. However, this bit I quote tells me you're unaware of the Code of Hammurabi, which predates anything you might quote as a religious origin for "the rules."


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 16, 2011)

atticmike said:


> I've been raised catholic and still question a lot. Keep in mind that without religion, regardless of the bad things, we may have never had rules or believes to protect and cherish whatsoever.
> 
> The more I obtain from science, the more I doubt all these little things.
> 
> ...



This won't end well....I'll just say I think you should do a little research..then revisit your statements.


----------

