Atheist Writes About The Arrogance Of Atheists

Submitted by: obay 6 years ago Science
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2010/12/29/2010-12-29_the_arrogance_of_the_atheists_they_batter_believers_with_smug_certainty.html

""They batter believers in religion with smug certainty,"" so reads the article. They sorta do, don"t they.
There are 111 comments:
Female 42
I`m only reading the first page of argument here, and all I can say is kudos to Animecha for being able to not only stand his own against an (allegedly) 50-59 y/o but completely blow his argument out of the water.

As for the "Bob" example, that`s agnosticism, which isn`t atheism, but I guess for some ignorant people, a duck is a pig because they`re both barnyard animals, which makes them the same, just like atheism and agnosticism are the same because not believing in a god and doubting the existence of a god are the exact same thing.
0
Reply
Male 147
Frankly this is no better than the schoolyard tactic of plugging your ears and repeating the exact same thing until either I walk away in frustration or you get angry and claim that you have won the argument and walk away yourself, which it would appear you are doing now.

If I am truly wrong how about you man up and actually explain how I am, starting first with your assertion that atheists must all believe no gods exist. That will be hard however when the consensus among Atheists themselves is that being an atheist simply requires a lack of belief but don`t let that stop you. I`m sure your stubborn enough to cherry pick dictionary definitions and Wikipedia to rationalize your position like any self respecting internet pseudo-intellectual would.
0
Reply
Male 147
@Schr0dinger - I can only assume that your cognitive dissonance in this case is just far too much to allow you to comprehend a simple argument. I have explained to you in excruciating detail the nature of a false dichotomy and how this is the case in your blatant misrepresentation of what most atheists believe.

Furthermore you have completely failed to demonstrate how my arguments are flawed and have instead resorted to claiming I hold a specific position when I do not.

Here is our argument as it stands:

you - 1) A and B both are unprovable
2) atheists believe B
.`. atheists have faith

me: 1) A and B require faith but C does not.
2) C does not because it is not a claim.
3) atheists believe C
.`. atheists do not have faith.

to which you reply:
1) you`re stupid and illogical
2) repeat same argument and ignore counter argument
.`. atheists and you have faith
0
Reply
Male 359
This thread is getting old so I doubt Ill look for it again. In the end you have your faith and it makes you happy. You feel secure in your absolute just like a muslim or christian etc. Perhaps its just the way of some people to need to have all the answers and not face that they just dont know some very big things.

Enjoy your faith.
0
Reply
Male 359
Animecha you cling to your faith like the most devout believer. In your desperation you change the given equation to defend the tabernacle. Obviously its not a matter of dumbing it down because you understand it well enough to globalize and skew the example so as to shoe-horn it into something you can accept.

I dont know if Bob exists. But this guy says he knows him and talks to him all the time. As a matter of fact, there are literally millions of people all over the world for several thousands of years now, that claim to not only know Bob, but know him well. I myself have never met Bob and there seems to be no photo of Bob with any of theses people that know him, but that doesnt mean Bob doesnt exist.
0
Reply
Male 359
And if you can show me millions of people that claim to have seen a unicorn, Ill give it proper consideration...but I wont necessarily believe it until I see some proof.

You on the other hand are All knowing. You see all things in all ways and hold intimate knowledge of the universe and multidimensional existence. Perhaps you are God. No wait that cant be it because you have all the answers about all things natural, supernatural and multidimensional and you say he doesnt exist.

So no, you are not God. You are delusional.
0
Reply
Male 195
Again with the blah blah blah.
0
Reply
Male 27
*Republicans have spent the better part of 60 years telling people that if they are elected to office, they will "bring this country back to God," which is a load of crap because it never was.

Unfortunately the general public has gotten so lazy and content listening to taking heads spouting bullet-points of what they`re supposed to think that they believe that this country *was* founded on explicitly Christian principles and that somewhere in the past ~240 years we`ve abandoned our true faith, and they truly believe that "bringing the country back to God" is something that needs to happen.

This is a problem for everyone anywhere else on the political spectrum because you can`t argue facts with these people. The only way to get them to respond to anything is with a direct attack on their faith.
0
Reply
Male 27
@xKiesix: It *should* be that simple, but for at least the past 30 years, definitely since Ronald Reagan ran for President, the Republican party has been spouting the line, "If you`re a Christian, you`re a Republican" and other variations of that correlation. It may go back even further to the `50s when during the Red Scare, a lot of political rhetoric was thrown about how the Communists were "Godless and un-American".

So, what is now the right-wing of the political spectrum has been insisting to the general public that it and it alone wants to make public policy choices based on the morals of the Christian faith.

This is a very bad thing because it goes in direct contradiction of the first amendment, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".

Republicans have spent the better part of 60 years telling people that if they are elected to office, they will "b
0
Reply
Female 728
diverge.*
0
Reply
Female 728
@Volsunga: The sense that I was referring to similarities between modern science and Greek Atomic theory was that both consider matter to be made up of indivisible particles. The alternative in ancient though was primarily that things are made up of certain elements, or even numbers. Those theories are way off-base in comparison to Atomic theory. I never said they got it perfectly right, I just said that they came to a conclusion of merit without the benefit of evidence, causing people to overlook their conclusion.

We don`t "know" at all that there are others to perceive things in the same manner we do. Look, I believe that reality is objective; I`m simply pointing out that that belief is built on a basis of assumptions that cannot be proven. Assumptions are the reason why philosophers almost never agree. The majority of philosophers have well-developed reasoning skills, but there is a point that comes before reasoning, which is the point at which philosophies diverg
0
Reply
Male 147
@Schr0dinger - "You decide that you dont trust what that person has to say and want actual evidence as to the existence (or lack thereof) of this third person you have never met, BEFORE a decision is made. "

Now you`re just piling on ad hominem fallacy like it`s frosting on a cake. How can you claim to be the master of all logic when you can`t type two sentences without making a fallacy?

As a matter of fact I have friends both religious and non religious and I never make assumptions on the validity of their claims but exercise critical thinking to evaluate those claims with them when they want to debate me.

However the existence of god cannot be proven, you yourself said it. And I don`t need to disprove the existence of god to reject the claim he exists any more than I need to prove unicorns and fairies don`t exist to reject the claim those exist.

To say otherwise is to make a false dichotomy or black/white fallacy, hopefully you know bette
0
Reply
Male 147
@Schr0dinger - Thank you for dumbing down your logical fallacy for me, now we can use your example to better explain how it`s a false dichotomy.

"Its that someone either believes you do or do not exist with no evidence one way or the other."

So if someone were to tell you that Bob exists and there was no evidence to support the claim, you would choose believe that there was no Bob at all? I hope I don`t need to tell you how stupid that is.

"You take their word for it or you do not. Either way you make a blind judgment call on it and act on faith that you are correct."

Or you take the only logical option and simply refuse to believe them. This does not require a belief that the person does not exist. It`s like saying "sure he could exist, but I`ll believe it when I see it".
0
Reply
Male 182
Damn some of you people make Scientology look sane.
(And I`m talking to both sides of the fence)
0
Reply
Male 1,548
@Schr0dinger
If you agree with the statement "I believe in a god/gods", then you are a theist. If you do not agree with it, for whatever reason (including lack of knowledge) then you are an atheist. the prefix "a-" denotes a lack, not an opposition.
Your example uses faulty logic. The argument that the person exists needn`t be met with much skepticism because due to our experience, we have seen enough people to assume that there would be another one (the evidence being that there are other people). However a deity is something that we haven`t seen, so we would need some evidence to logically accept one, especially a specific one. Basically, the overstated but true statement of "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".
0
Reply
Male 1,548
@green_batman
First off, Greek "Atomic theory" was so far from the modern theory that it`s not even relevant to bring it up. All it says is that matter must have indivisible parts, which they called atoms. The only reason we call atoms "atoms" is because scientists have a latin/greek fetish and like to allude to ancient philosophies.
Solipsism is a dead end. It doesn`t matter if it is valid or not because it is useless. We know that we do perceive things and others around us perceive the same things. If we coordinate our efforts, we can eliminate most instances where our senses are deceived. Whether the world we perceive is objectively real or not is irrelevant because we are forced to act like it is anyways.
0
Reply
Male 636
belief and faith are not the same thing.

You may tell me that you will do X, based on my history with you I may believe that you will not. But I still might decide to have faith that you will.
0
Reply
Male 359
Animecha I will try to dumb this down for you.

Its not that someone is or is not your friend or that they do not know you. Its that someone either believes you do or do not exist with no evidence one way or the other.

If someone says that they know a person and that person is real, You take their word for it or you do not. Either way you make a blind judgment call on it and act on faith that you are correct.

>OR<

You decide that you dont trust what that person has to say and want actual evidence as to the existence (or lack thereof) of this third person you have never met, BEFORE a decision is made.

If you can not see the truth of this then it is because you choose to remain blind. Frankly you would make a great religious zealot. You both share the same lack of logic.
0
Reply
Male 147
@Schr0dinger - A lack of belief isn`t a belief, to say someone must believe there is no god simply because they reject your assertion that there is one is a false dichotomy. That`s like saying that if someone is not your friend they must therefore be your enemy, this is a fallacy because it ignores the other obvious possibility that they might just not know you.

You are obviously ignorant of the concept of logical fallacies or else you would recognize this important facet of employing logic.
0
Reply
Female 728
Further, while solipsism is arguably "useless", it`s usefulness/uselessness does not make an argument one way or another for its validity. There are theoretical conditions under which it might be possible that there exists only one consciousness, and that every other apparent being is an illusion. While it seems improbable that there is only one consciousness, improbable does not mean impossible. It is most practical to dismiss other epistemologies, but that does not mean that it is necessarily correct to do so.
0
Reply
Female 728
@Volsunga: Even based on our empirical observations, we know that our sense data is flawed. We know that we do not experience reality directly, but rather interpret it indirectly. There are also things that we can`t experience unaided. While there was a school of thought in Ancient Greece that matter is made up of atoms, that school was essentially forgotten until modern science discovered how close they were to truth. It was forgotten because we cannot see atoms unaided. It is quite possible that there are still things that we do not know about, simply because our senses do not give a perfect representation of reality.
0
Reply
Female 500
He kind-of explains my thoughts. Actually, mine are his exactly on religion. But one more thing was immediately brought to my attention: his is a perfectly crafted AP essay.
0
Reply
Male 1,548
@green_batman
Actually, you can hold an argument against those epistemologies without assuming any of them. The rules of logic are universal and operate equally within all three of those doctrines.
Hermeneutics is internally contradictory because the texts on which it is based are in and of themselves contradictory. Besides, it depends on the "argument from authority" fallacy. It`s also a dead end philosophy and I don`t think anyone who is using a computer would accept it as their way of obtaining knowledge.
Rational epistemology necessarily implies solipsism at its foundation. Solipsism is useless and is rejected by nearly everybody, so we can cross that out. In order to avoid solipsism, rationalism needs to make the concession that the senses can be trusted when confirmed by peers.
That makes it into empiricism, which can be consistently observed to be valid.
0
Reply
Female 448
I believe in one God.
If you don`t, awesome.

It should be THAT SIMPLE.
0
Reply
Male 17
I`m an Atheist due to one simple reason, there is no evidence to suggest the existence of a God. That doesn`t make me arrogant or narrow minded. It simply means that I see no reason to entertain an idea that has no evidence. If enough evidence to explain away my concerns are brought to light, then I have no issues accepting that idea. If I can accept Quantum mechanics based on its evidence then I sure as hell would accept the existance of a God if there was any evidence.

But no hard evidence has been brought to my attention, ever. All I seem to get are arguments with deep flaws and random scripture references.

Until that day I will remain an Atheist.
0
Reply
Female 728
I consider myself agnostic, but I`m not a passive, neutral kind of agnostic. I do not believe in God, and I often argue against the existence of God, but I ultimately can`t know for certain because I can`t know that the evidence of my senses is correct. There could be a God that I simply can`t sense. I trust my senses in a practical sense, but, philosophically, I can`t prove that my senses are accurate. While I think it is important for people to search for knowledge, I think it is also important that we know that we won`t necessarily find it.
0
Reply
Female 728
"Because self-identified agnosticism is nothing but the inability to acknowledge the entire field of epistemology. Atheist/theist is binary. You can either believe in a god or not believe in a god. Claiming lack of knowledge would make you not believe in a god, making you an atheist.
gnostic/agnostic asks a completely different question and is not a third option from atheism/theism. There is no middle ground, claiming that there is only shows your ignorance (agnosticism) of logic."

You can trust in empirical epistemology, but there is no good argument against those who choose to trust in other epistemologies, such as rational or hermeneutical epistemology, because your base philosophical assumptions differ. When your epistemology differs, you can`t hold an argument about the possibility of knowledge because you already have certain assumptions that will cause you to simply argue right past each other.
0
Reply
Male 3,894
There are big-mouthed non-nice individuals in every belief or non-belief system. That`s just how it goes-- people get so convinced of their own rightness that they feel the need to disparage the lack of intelligence in people who oppose them.

I`m agnostic, with strong leanings towards atheism. I don`t know whether there is a God out there, and I`ll accept proof for either side. It`s just not something that I know. I think, however, that I could be more supportive of religion if it was willing to question itself. That`s what its problem is in comparison to, say, science. Science (evolution, etc.) is based upon the concept that you need to question everything, prove it, and then expand upon it. If your findings contradict what you know, you reexamine what you know and attempt to fine-tune it.

In religion, you are discouraged from questioning what religious knowledge is given to you. You do not revise, and you rarely expand. Therein lies a large flaw.
0
Reply
Female 56
My ex boyfriend is one of those "smug, arrogant atheists". I`m not a die hard Christian by any means, but at least I have an open mind. We couldn`t even have a normal discussion on the topic without him just saying "nope, there is no God, this is it. Too bad for you and your family." He would roll his eyes when my mother would pray over her food, make disparaging remarks behind her back about the things she would say, it got to the point where I couldn`t even be around him without getting angry.
0
Reply
Male 359
Animecha,
If you believe in ANYTHING without proof you do so on faith. Its called logic but I think that may be a bit much for the obviously ignorant.
0
Reply
Male 147
"atheist operate purely on faith that there is not." Straw man distortion

"Yep. Really." mindless contradiction without reasoning, lol
0
Reply
Male 359
"No, not really."

Yep. Really.
0
Reply
Male 7,123
<i> atheist opperate purely on faith that there is not. </i>

No, not really. I operate on the principle that the god hypothesis is unevidenced, unnecessary and unconvincing. So I put it to one side and get on with life.

Organised religion, on the other hand, needs a damn good talking to every now and then.
0
Reply
Male 7,123
Musuko42,

It`s kind of a rule. You can`t mention Dawkins without using the words `shrill` or `strident`. Preferably both.
0
Reply
Male 359
It would be great if there were some hard proof one way or the other.

But there is not.

Believers opperate purely on faith that there is a God, and atheist opperate purely on faith that there is not. The two really are one and the same.

I for one do not know. I do know that some incredibly smart people throughout history have taken both sides.

So all we can do is go with what makes us happy; pick a team, and see what the score is when we die.
0
Reply
Male 56
@LazyMe484 If you`re so sure this article is wrong, why do you care? Why do you not ignore it or comment on it?
0
Reply
Female 798
Apparently sleeping pushes my arguments too far back but regardless...
I`m a deist, I`ve thought long and hard about my beliefs and would say anyone claiming I`m wrong from any field would annoy me and so would many people considering a lot of people think about their faiths before committing wholeheartedly. Discourse is important but berating is not useful. It usually accomplishes the opposite effect. We`ve done the religion thing by force multiple times, just look at the Inquisition and the affect militant Islam has had on Sudan and other areas. Debate is good, belittling is bad and we`ve seen recently that some people take things too far like that nut that decided to shoot up politicians in Arizona. I`m not saying people need to sit back and do nothing but someone saying you`ll burn in hell or your an idiot for your beliefs accomplishes nothing. And clearly we would never be on the same page as far as religion goes, it has been tried before with awful results.
0
Reply
Male 1,360
I must agree with Davymid, but the problem is that some religion are imposing themselves.
I live in Spain and thank god the catholic church has lost a great deal of its influence on the population but it still tries to take part in the civilian life.So I understand if some want to push it back.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@davymid.

"Also, for the record, I personally find Dawkins in particular a little to shrill and strident in his denouncement of religion."

I also personally find him to be one of the most vocal opponents of religion, and sometimes it does seem a little too aggressive, but "shrill" would hardly be the right word for one of the most softly-spoken and eloquent people you`ll ever see.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@peloos12

"Maybe if we argue about it on the internet we can accomplish something."

We certainly WOULD accomplish something; we`d be a little less bored for a short while.

Which would be a resounding success, considering this site`s general purpose.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@metalm0rgan

"You just missed the point by a country mile."

The point made, I suppose, was that you needn`t be a dick and point out when someone is being an idiot.

My point was that they are still going to be an idiot whether you point it out or not.

"The sky is not blue by the way."

It was a simplistic analogy, one which most people understand, even though it`s not always true. The sky is blue, the Pope is Catholic, Bears poo in woods, and water is wet.
0
Reply
Male 110
@Musuko42

`If I stopped pointing out that the sky is blue, the sky would still be blue.`

You just missed the point by a country mile. The sky is not blue by the way.

You go outside at midnight tonight, and tell me what colour the sky is. Cretin.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@rainbowfarts.

"And seriously, some of the atheists I`ve talked to along with some on here are proof that some of them need to get off their high horse and stop calling people idiots for their beliefs."

If I stopped pointing out that the sky is blue, the sky would still be blue.
0
Reply
Female 412
davymid: For once I agree with everything you`ve said in three posts. :)
0
Reply
Male 42
@Heureux Hitler was Catholic and believed in an Aryan race under God. The other two just treated their leaders like God(s) on Earth, so it`s basically the same thing as religion.
0
Reply
Male 3,076
TMDR
0
Reply
Male 3,819
Just had the craziest idea. It. Could. Change. The. World.

Okay, here goes. Picture this:

Maybe if we argue about it on the internet we can accomplish something.

No? Huh...
0
Reply
Male 421
I`m a Christian and I believe in Thor. I also believe in the power of metal.
0
Reply
Male 2,096
The universe is god playing hide and go seek with herself
0
Reply
Male 12,138
(sorry for triple post)

Also, for the record, I personally find Dawkins in particular a little to shrill and strident in his denouncement of religion. And that coming from an atheist, even anti-theist, and professional scientist. I don`t think it`s that helpful in the long run. But that`s just personal opinion.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Also, let`s not forget here that, almost without exception, Christians are atheists too. They (presumably) don`t believe in Vishnu, or Shiva, or Avalokitesvara, or Allah, or Odin, or Thor, or Appollo, or Zeus, or any multitude of other gods. They believe in their own, usually because of accident of where and when in the world they happen to have been born.

To paraphrase Stephen Roberts, an atheist might well say to a Christian: "I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours".

Would you declare Christianity simply a prejudice and nothing more? I know I wouldn`t.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
[quote]atheism is a prejudice - a negative conclusion about all members of a group solely because of their membership in that group. [/quote]
Oh, not this crap again.

Atheism is NOT a prejudice, it`s simply a lack of belief in any god or gods. Seriously, that`s all it is. I`m atheist, and I`m not prejudiced. I just don`t believe that any gods exist. Atheism doesn`t mean you think of religious people as inferior, it just means that you don`t believe in the same things they do.

I, for one, have many friends who are deeply religious. I don`t think of them as "inferior" to me in any way, they just believe in different things than I do through their own life experiences. I don`t push atheism on them, they don`t push religion on me. We just drink beers, make dick jokes, and get on with it.

To state that atheism is a just a prejudice retarded as stating that conservatism or liberalism is a prejudice. They`re just different world views.
0
Reply
Male 10,440
[quote] Nearly all atheists wouldn`t claim no god(s) exist but simply reject the presupposition that they do. [/quote]

Logically you are right. I cannot make the assumption that no god(s) (and by god(s) I include anything that has ever been defined so) can`t ever exist in any fashion.

But practically you are not. I can freely say "no god(s) exist", as there isn`t any argument that can counter it. Sure, I can`t completely prove it, but I can still make the statement.

But "god(s)" is such a vague thing. If I was to replace it with Yaweh or Allah, then I could say, with certainty, that they don`t exist. Only a Deist is safe from this approach.
0
Reply
Male 10,440
... you`re not going to be as certain.
0
Reply
Male 10,440
Oh what fresh bullcrap is this?

"Militant Atheism", just why do you call it that? What exactly makes it militant? I have yet to see any threats of any kind put forth. You might say its the aggressive fashion that an atheist asserts that your beliefs are wrong. If you are so certain that the atheist is wrong, why do you care? Why do you not ignore her/him? Or is it because, as even you are a rational person, you cannot help to see the atheist`s logic? And this causes discomfort as it seems that they are trying to take away something more precious than your life.

Let me ask you this, are they actually? Has anyone ever directly harmed anyone else through a discussion or debate?

There is no justification for this article just like there is no such thing as a militant atheist. If you`ve worked out that the sky is blue then you`re going to claim that it is with little short of absolute certainty. If you believe something unknowable, you`re not going to b
0
Reply
Male 147
@rainbowfarts "even atheists are taking a certain leap of faith in conclusively stating that there is no God and nothing happens after you die."

Nearly all atheists wouldn`t claim no god(s) exist but simply reject the presupposition that they do.

That aside I felt it was an oversimplification. Activism on ALL fronts is militant, because no one evoked change by smiling and saying "please" but by being in your face. Whether is was womens rights, black rights or gay rights some amount of aggression was needed to fight back against those that would stamp out their voice with threats.

Not saying Atheism is comparable to those issues, but being loud and unafraid usually happens because you`re angry.
0
Reply
Male 1,548
@rainbowfarts
In a way, yes it is better. It at least makes you aware that there`s an argument going on. Their hyperbole is necessary to get through the wall of apathy. If you all joined the conversation, their ignorant rantings would be drowned out by rational argument.
That it cannot be proven is exactly the argument of atheism. Very few atheists claim to know there is no god. The "equal leap of faith" argument is bullsh*t because the lack of belief in something is not necessarily belief in something else.
Belittling opponents is constructive because it makes people consider their own beliefs. Any criticism is called "belittling". Imagine how little we could get done if nobody criticized each other.
0
Reply
Female 798
@Volsunga, so people yelling at each other and driving each other father apart is better? True people talking things over with each other helps spread knowledge but I`m specifically talking about when Evangelical Christians tell everyone they`re going to burn in hell or atheists yell at spiritual people that they`re complete idiots and if they all died the world would be better for it. That is not constructive, that is destructive. Religion of lack thereof is not something that can be proven like the shape of the Earth or orbital patterns as much as atheists claim they know already. No one knows, even atheists are taking a certain leap of faith in conclusively stating that there is no God and nothing happens after you die. So yes, people should talk to each other, I`ve talked to at least a handful of people from each religion (or no religion) in a thoughtful way that is an effort to become more knowledgeable but belittling others has never accomplished anything.
0
Reply
Male 4,004
He didn`t even mention how arrogant Richard Dawkins is. He gives all good, respectful Atheists a good name. I say keep your religion to yourself, and keep your non-religion to yourself.

If you have religious motives behind your protests, you`re pushing your religion on people. Anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage protests, it`s good to stand up for what you believe in, but don`t do it for the church, do it because it will benefit the future of mankind. And if gay people getting marriage has a negative effect on the future, then tell us why, don`t quote the Bible as it will only make you seem like an Atheist pushing his lack of faith on people.
0
Reply
Male 1,548
@rainbowfarts
I think that EVERYBODY should be outspoken about their beliefs. If it wasn`t just the small, loud and annoying few, then more facts would come to light due to people learning the basic laws of logic through argument. People standing on the sidelines saying "can`t we all just get along" are wasting their breathe because, no, we can`t all get along until an idea is unanimous like a round earth or heliocentric model. It`s not because people are mean spirited towards each other, it`s because they have compassion for each other and want to spread knowledge and understanding. When two worldviews contradict one another, the only rational thing to do is to weigh their respective worth by presenting the most intelligent defenses of each. All for the purpose of furthering human understanding. Apathy is selfish and disgusting in light of this.
0
Reply
Female 1,264
rainbowfarts: very well said.

Personally, I think that if the radical atheists and ignorant religious people understood one fraction of the true importance of myth they would stop using the word as an insult or as a hard truth. I believe in myths. I want to believe that Hecate actually beat the crap out of a titan with her torches. But if she did or not is not important: what matters is what her story brings to my life. The same can be said of all myths in all religions. Myth is both an important psychological event as well as a social experience. We need myths.

Believe what you wish, or not, but that is nothing but a personal experience. And no one can measure anyone else`s personal experience.
0
Reply
Female 798
@Volsunga, regardless if she`s a legit atheist or not I feel is beside the point. What`s wrong with saying that atheists as well as any religious person should not get all high and mighty? And seriously, some of the atheists I`ve talked to along with some on here are proof that some of them need to get off their high horse and stop calling people idiots for their beliefs. Just ignore them and relish in the fact that you`ve made the right choice in your eyes.
0
Reply
Female 513
rainbowfarts - AMEN!
0
Reply
Male 1,548
A small amount of research shows that S.E. Cupp is more likely than not a theist that just pretends to be an atheist so she can take advantage of the argument from authority fallacy when talking with secular liberals. From reading that article and reviews of her book: "Losing Our Religion: The Liberal Media`s Attack on Christianity", she doesn`t really understand any arguments against theism and probably has no good reason to be an atheist.
0
Reply
Male 171
What if God turned out to be a grilled cheese sandwich who has to be put together and left alone for a day before he could talk? We`ve all been eating God before he could speak to us! But it`s his fault for being so damned delicious.
0
Reply
Female 798
Finally! An atheist not being rude on the internet. I`m a deist but I don`t care what people believe since I take a little from everywhere. I just get so tired of some atheists (similar to hardcore Christians) not only forcing their beliefs down your throat but also calling you an idiot for believing in "an imaginary man in the sky", "myths", and any other derogatory terms they use to put down spiritual beliefs. Be an atheist, don`t care, just be cordial. And that goes to everybody!
0
Reply
Male 490
@Crazyguy24 She isnt saying all atheists are like that, only the ones that act smug and arrogant about their views.
0
Reply
Male 552
How the drat is this news? I`m an atheist and I`m not a smug prick.
0
Reply
Male 1,021
Since the last 10 years or so, Atheists have replaced door to door religions as the most pushy and annoying about their religious views.

I say, live and let live
0
Reply
Male 508
How can she be an atheist when she`s suppose to be cleaning my toilet? Put down the damn keyboard and make me a sandwich!
0
Reply
Male 2,516
btw, we`re atheists, we`re not sure there is a god or not, we just don`t care (plus there`s the fact that everything points to there not being a god)
0
Reply
Male 2,516
i prefer to just shut up and laugh at everybody
0
Reply
Male 605
F*ck off. As much as I don`t like to talk about it, I am an atheist, and I don`t act arrogant to people who believe in God. I don`t care. It`s not my job to convince them.
0
Reply
Male 10,845
I agree with this woman. I`ve heard athiest on this post make some rather condescending horrible notions about religious people. It`s why I prefer to be ambivalent on the issue.
0
Reply
Male 2,422
I don`t allow my disbelief to get in the way of my happiness. All of my friends are some kind of Christains and if I always acted like a smug non-nice individual I would have lost a lot. I don`t really care what you believe, what I care about is what kind of person you ARE. I think that`s a much more useful yardstick for creating associations and relationships.
0
Reply
Male 25,416
well you cant argue with your won beliefs :P
0
Reply
Male 2,402
@KPress

The reason more are not agnostic is that when when obtains a doctrine to live by it is very difficult to change. This applies to all theists, religionists, atheists etc...
It`s all a matter of perspective on how life should be lived. That`s the way atheism no matter how much they argue are religious in their world, but can`t see the truth of rthe reason ming.

Even here a few I-A-B people cannot see how the author is presenting a different observation between the two sides yet is berated by the militant atheists already. Just look at her article comments as well. It`s pathetic really.
0
Reply
Male 328
When you`re atheist you`re kind of forced to be a smug jackass because everyone with a religion is an even bigger dick to you, and they come at you in force (as in a lot of people, not violence).
0
Reply
Male 1,548
@KPres
Because self-identified agnosticism is nothing but the inability to acknowledge the entire field of epistemology. Atheist/theist is binary. You can either believe in a god or not believe in a god. Claiming lack of knowledge would make you not believe in a god, making you an atheist.
gnostic/agnostic asks a completely different question and is not a third option from atheism/theism. There is no middle ground, claiming that there is only shows your ignorance (agnosticism) of logic.
0
Reply
Male 985
Lol yea im the smug one.
Being told my whole life that because I have a different opinion, Im going to burn, die, in pain forver.. etc.
I once asked the question "If God knows what were going to do, how do we have a choice?"
And I get pulled aside and told not to ask questions.
Also God hates pillows, its in the Bible.
Sorry for being smug...
B
0
Reply
Male 309
I don`t understand why more people aren`t Agnostic.

For religious people, agnosticism fits. After all, if you could KNOW that God exists, then why would you need faith?

For athiests, the problem lies in the "unknown unknowns". Athiests often deride the idea of the "God of the Gaps", but if you think about it, the God of the Gaps is a stronger argument than it appears at first, since the "gaps" are likely to be infinitely large. Who can comment on what`s in them. So Agnosticism is really the most logical position as well.

The real question is whether you`re going to choose to act and think as if there is a God. But that`s such a personal preference. Isn`t "live and let live" the best way, especially since the "other" in the case can`t possibly be hurting you?
0
Reply
Male 931
Helgarin, wait up!
0
Reply
Female 1,963
Strangely impressed with the calibre of the comments here tonight, particularly the last few. It`s like we`d never even heard of flame wars.
0
Reply
Male 167
The problem I have with this article is the author seems to feel that her father only searched for deeper meaning in life because he had found religion. It seems to me that his desire for something more significant in life and his thirst for knowledge were just intrinsic characteristics of his personality, not directly related to any sort of newly acquired spirituality. I have never noticed any sort of trend related to religion about a person`s "enlightenment" or desire to better themselves, it just appears to be related to a person`s character.

0
Reply
Female 298
As much I believe in being the "bigger" person, and I practice this myself, I have to stand up for the atheists that say things like "man in the sky"... Religious people rule everyone`s lives with the laws based on religion to nearly everything else, especially in the US. These atheists are just fed up and have been hurt by these rules and are finally sticking up for what they believe. I`d never go and say such things to anyone`s face, because it is pretty rude, but usually religious people will do the same to non-religious. Fight fire with fire.
0
Reply
Male 35
I don`t blame atheist for speaking out. If I was an atheist I would really be pissed off at Christians and other religions. There are thousands of examples of people acting in the name of their faith and doing horrible things, and even today it continues in an extreme way.

So if I didn`t believe in God, I would be so angry that I have to live in fear of terrorism due to religion. Or enraged that the Catholic church killed millions during med evil times or how "christian" fanatics lash out in hatred towards gays and abortionists.
If I was an atheist I would try to end all religion. But I`m not. I believe there is only one true religion and it condones none of the actions I`ve listed. But there are extremists out there in every walk of live, who ruin it for the rest of us I guess........it`s just the human condition.
0
Reply
Female 1,077
How did she write this article? Does she have a computer in the kitchen?
0
Reply
Male 510
this is my understanding of religion. the same way that people require food, water, sex, there are some people that need some kind of spirituality in their lives. Maybe not `need` like require, but without some amount of spirituality in their lives they would feel a notable abscence. Religion is one way to fulfill this spiritual `need`, though there are other ways as well.

I`m agnostic, but not because i disagree wit hreligion. I simply feel i do not require spirituality in my life, that i dont have the spiritual `need` my relatives feel. I have family who are orthodox (black hat) jews in new york. I do not look down on them for believing in a `man in the sky` as athiests will so rudely put. i simply recognize that they have a spiritual `need`, and if they so choose to fill it with religion, i have no problem with that.
0
Reply
Male 1,929
There`s so many aspects, points and depths with atheism and religion that people can often be having long, long discussions/arguements while talking about two different points. Barely anyone declares what they`re actually driving towards; so attempts to take religion out of public decisions soon get taken as attacks on people`s personal lifestyles, and people`s liking of religious culture soon gets misread as retarded ignorance.
I swear to god, if you locked people like Bill O`Reilly and Richard Dawkins in a room and forced them to have a slow and logical discussion they`d be agreeing on 90% of stuff they would have "argued" about.

This article touches on more points than you can count one hand. Responses to each of those points will also raise more points than you can count on one hand. So we get nowhere with anything, because everyone is talking about everything without declaring whatever the something is that they`re actually trying to talk about.
0
Reply
Male 762
@Volsunga

Well put.

And for doing these things we get labeled as militant for having an opposing view to people who have been afforded a free pass in society and who all the while go prosthelytizing door to door and damning everyone to who disagrees to hell.
0
Reply
Female 1,963
Volsunga, that`s because us atheists don`t have the burden of believing that people who we don`t convert go to hell. I am perfectly happy to let other`s have whatever religion they want. If it brings them happiness and if they are not using it as an excuse to infringe upon anyone`s rights, good for them.

I also think that religion should absolutely be taught in schools: just not only one particular religion.
0
Reply
Male 15,510
Extreme atheism is as bad as extreme religious people, down with them two for once
0
Reply
Male 44
@Volsunga

Educate people - yes. Calling it "the truth" - no. That`s how relegions gain their power.
0
Reply
Male 1,054
atheism is a prejudice - a negative conclusion about all members of a group solely because of their membership in that group.

It applies a standard or test to refute religion that it cannot pass itself.

It dimsisses the personal testimony and experiences of mot of humanity based on personal lack of evidence and experience.

""Well, this product may cause people to commit mass genocide, "

Like those perpetrated by atheist/anti-religious countries like the Soviet Union, East Germany and communist China?
0
Reply
Male 1,548
If you think you know the truth about something and you believe others would benefit as well from learning it, Shouldn`t it be a moral imperative to educate others on this truth? That goes for theists, atheists, republicans, democrats, trekkies, and jedi. The object of debate is not to convince the opposition, it`s to convince spectators who are open minded enough to consider the facts.
decent atheist writers like Hitchens and Harris do not proclaim arrogant certainty (note how I left Maher out of that list). Atheist organizations do, however, and it just ends up being lame bullpoo that doesn`t stir up any rational thought from anyone.
Most of us atheists really only argue on the internet and at dinner parties. We don`t try to stir up controversy, but try to lay out the facts when discussion of controversy takes place.
0
Reply
Male 2,290
If religion was a product like a blender, just imagine how absurd it would be to market it. "Well, this product may cause people to commit mass genocide, or it may improve the quality of their smoothie."

Bad analogy really, but just because religion does good in some areas doesn`t mean that it isn`t a flawed system.
0
Reply
Female 3,001
i guess the thing to remember is, nobody cares what you believe.
0
Reply
Female 2,120
I hope at least someone will believe we are not all like that. I am happy with myself, and I don`t go around nosing into other people`s religions when it is clearly not my business.
0
Reply
Male 271
yeah, i think that atheists can really suck just as hard as christians when it comes to beating people up about thier beliefs...

but this article really wasnt very good.

totally agree with yanging
0
Reply
Male 44
This is the exact reason I reluctantly want to call myself an atheist, even though I have no faith in religions whatsoever.

The ongoing harassment of beliefs and spirituality is, like the article says, more of a conversation ender than a starter. Now, if dialogue isn`t the best way to solve things instead of spitting "this" and "that" in eachother`s faces, please give me a reason.

An atheist without respect and humility lacks very fundamental ethics and morality. If we want to live side by side with eachother as humans, religious barriers need to be put down through dialogue and reason, not through harassment and paternalism.
0
Reply
Female 412
I really agree with this. I know a few people who get me really pissed off every time because they have to nitpick on every little thing some religious extremists do and not see how religion can enhance some people`s lives. I`m not religious myself but I believe anyone can be religious if they want, as long as they do not interfere with other people`s lives. And I don`t interfere with theirs.
0
Reply
Male 762
@Oldfrt

And theists have been relying on the "Magic man dun it" argument way too long.
0
Reply
Male 749
Excellent article. Atheists lately have been relying on the "I hate broccoli, so you`re an idiot if you do" argument way too long.
0
Reply
Male 172
This article is ridiculous.

It attempts to paint modern Atheistic beliefs in such a fashion as to somehow add credence to the religious argument.

It is nothing more than ad hominem attacks sheltered in a frame of veiled scrutiny.

While I do agree that some of the approaches by today`s atheists are rather rash, what the author of this article seems to be implying is disjointed form any logical conclusions one might otherwise draw.
0
Reply
Female 7,838
Mmm- ok, I am indeed an atheist. However, I feel that many elements of many religions have merit, and there are many people who are religious for whom I have the greatest regard. I am torn- I personally feel that we should not permit children to be indoctrinated, but I also see that religious belief can be of great benefit to some people. I try not to be strident, I try not to be arrogant, perhaps I am- I hope not.
0
Reply
Male 769
only thing worse than an over-the-top religious nut, is an over-the-top atheist nut.
0
Reply
Male 102
Thats how religion was born - out of empathy. To try to make someone feel better.
I don`t think they would say - `Deal with it`
I think they would just avoid the guy.

Yes, there are some atheists that want to just push atheism into somebodys face just for reasons of deleting other-minded people. But there are also A LOT of religious people like that.

But in the end, whats better - believing in something fake for false happiness or just accepting that you don`t need him. And life is beautiful as it is.
0
Reply
Male 506
*Walks in*

Religion and Atheism?

*Walk straight back out*
0
Reply
Male 762
S.E. Cupp is the Fox news token atheist. Someone wouldn`t care more about others feelings getting hurt than her own rights. She is a fraud.
0
Reply
Male 77
Very good article, you cannot dispel religion by disqualifying the masses.
0
Reply
Male 67
Link: Atheist Writes About The Arrogance Of Atheists [Rate Link] - ``They batter believers in religion with smug certainty,`` so reads the article. They sorta do, don`t they.
0
Reply