Why atheism makes you mean

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by S.A.M., Nov 21, 2008.

  1. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Only atheists have the ego to nominate themselves as God.


    Those are dying societies. I bet they have negative population replacement. Unless they revert to theism, they have no future.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Good points, and not particularly well commented to by Sam.

    So how can you have a common denominator for prosociality? Which side of the fence would you like to argue from?

    Which were actually based in theism.

    Says who? Birth rate is a trend. The only problem would be if some radical, supremacist theists invaded them.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. SkinWalker Archaeology / Anthropology Moderator

    Messages:
    5,874
    Wow, an unexpected bit of BS and a dodge from SAM. I'm shocked. Shocked to find... [/Claude Rains]
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    Overpopulation has no future. The growth necessary for a capitalistic society is not sustainable.
     
  8. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Agreed with both of those posts.
     
  9. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Doesn't matter much if most of your population is aged. These are just cursory searches

    Japan

    New Zealand

    Europe
     
  10. Zephyr Humans are ONE Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,371
    A lot of people actually attribute the collapse of the Soviet Union to the cold war. You know, that decades long war whose goal was to destroy communism? Even if internal pressure was the final straw, the war may have contributed to that internal pressure in the first place. Secondly, when did China collapse?

    Are you calling Jesus an atheist?
     
  11. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    You think the fact that people had to stand in line for bread and required walls to be kept in had anything to do with it?
    Not at all. But the Romans who nominated him, probably were. [I'm a Muslim, remember?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ]
     
  12. Medicine*Woman Jesus: Mythstory--Not History! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,346
    *************
    M*W: I think you misunderstand atheists and what they believe. The fact is that we are all alive now and, at some point, each of us will die. Not a pretty picture, but the truth. There is no need to worry about death. It's gonna happen whether we fret about it or not.

    Humans do take death seriously. It marks a finality to one's existence. So to say that atheists "sweep the subject of death under the rug," is not the case at all. We accept death as a normal and expected part of life. You make it sound like atheists as a group are all in denial of death. I think it tends to be the opposite. Those who fear death sweep it under the rug, and I ask, what are they afraid of?

    *************
    M*W: Elderly people tend to get "grumpy and cold-hearted," because they are old and likely sick or just plain worn out. I don't think it has anything to do with their life about to come to an end that makes them cranky.
    *************
    M*W: I don't see the point in believing in an afterlife. That only gives false hope which is perpetuated often by their religions.

    Science as a type of membership in a "brotherhood" to save one from death (not likely) is an odd thing to say. There are some science fanatics who have their heads frozen for posterity in the hopes they'll be coming back. For now, there's not much hope in that direction, but who knows what will be scientific fact in another couple of millenia? For the immediate future, we are all subject to mortality.
    *************
    M*W: Atheists are atheists, because it was a conscious choice on our part. No one forced us to be atheists. In fact, that is something impossible to do. It is our choice. Therefore, I don't understand why you think atheists are bitter. We're not in the business of trying to fool ourselves that there is any kind of hope at surviving death! That is the hope of theists. In fact, believers hope there is a god or something greater than themselves to save them from their demise or at least give them a comfy place to believe they go to when they're dead. That is false hope. Atheists just don't feel that way. Atheists just don't have that "doomed" feeling. I am taking a liberty here of speaking for all, and I apologize to those who are of some other belief. The finality of life for atheists is not in death but in reason. There is no loss of hope, no bitterness, no tomorrow. It is what it is, and atheists see death for what it is.

    I think you are putting your own feelings and thoughts on death on atheists. I also think there is a smidgen of atheism in each of us, even if some theists don't understand it. I've always been curious about religious folk crying their hearts out at funerals. Even their bible tells them to rejoice. I guess it's mainly because they feel the loss of a loved one, but if they really believed in their god, you'd think they would at least express some happiness for their journey. If there were a god, death needn't been the end. Thus far, no one has come back and told us otherwise.
     
  13. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    They are.
    Sure you can. Lots of them, all kinds.
    Bullshit.
    Collapsed? The Vietnamese "society"? The Cambodian "society"? The Soviet Union "society"? The Chinese "society"? They were "atheist societies" (all of them,clear through?) and then they just collapsed (when?) from internal problems?

    But the Mayans, being theists, were brought down by outside agency of some kind ?

    You're jumping the shark there.

    btw:
    Some forms of theism appear to be not so good, eh?
    No, they probably weren't.
     
  14. Crunchy Cat F-in' *meow* baby!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,423
    I've never seen atheism breed this type of mean-ness:

    "
    A man identified as Sheik Youssef al-Ayeri said the killings are in line with Islam.

    "It's all right for Muslims to set the infidels' castles on fire, drown them with water .... and take some of them as prisoners, whether young or old, women or men, because it is one of many ways to beat them," he wrote in the al-Fallujah forum.

    "
     
  15. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Ever visited a gulag?

    btw, that was probably an israeli masquerading as a Muslim. Could I have a link to the forum? I'd like to investigate and check with the forum admin. You can PM me it.
     
  16. Crunchy Cat F-in' *meow* baby!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,423
    Gulags are an "in-the-name-of-communism" invention.

    You'll have to get the original link from a news agency. As far as I can tell, the forum is no longer online. Google "Sheikh Youssef al-Ayeri" and pick a news agency of your choosing.
     
  17. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
  18. Crunchy Cat F-in' *meow* baby!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,423
  19. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    No everyone has that quote. Its very interesting when everyone has the same quote within a day with no access to the person in question.
     
  20. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    iceaura
    you would agree that they are willing to forgo some liberty for the sake of the planet?
    then its not clear why you suggest communism doesn't approach any moral ethics ....
    for your enlightenment
    http://www.pekingduck.org/2006/10/social-darwinism-nationalism-and-humiliation-in-modern-china/
     
  21. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    Doesn't matter whether they're willing or not.

    What isn't clear about the situation ? You can build many different "moral ethics" on a communistic economic base - from Amish or Mennonite to industrial Bolshevik to the Red Guard to an Israeli kibbutz. Everything from military tyranny to San Francisco commune. None of these are "approached" any more than another.
    What does that have to do with Darwin's theory of evolution? Or "confessions" by Mao?

    edit in: seriously: How in hell do you guys manage to screw up this kind of stuff continually? I didn't even have to Google check to know that Mao never "confessed" his ideology was based on Darwin's theories. Some fundie says something like that, it's bullshit, every time. But how does it happen? How does a weblink about some guy asserting (plausibly) that Huxley's debunking of Social Darwinism was misunderstood by the Maoists in an influential way turn into a "confession" by "Mao" that his ideology was based on Darwinian evolution?
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2008
  22. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    iceaura
    whether they are willing or not simply indicates the consequences .... remarkably similar to the basis for forgoing certain "liberties" for the sake of coming in to line with god's nature
    so communism (in the marxist sense) plus darwinism equals what in terms of modern history?

    maybe you should dust off your google browser or something

    "The official Chinese nationalistic view in the 1920s and 1930s was heavily influenced by modernism and social Darwinism, ..... "

    If you think that is the view of a fundie, you've just lumped in over 99% of modern historians ....
     
  23. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    The only thing stranger than Sam's argument is her paranoia.

    Again: how do we know wider cooperation isn't just reciprocal altruism or the exercise of power and restraint?
     

Share This Page