The Oatmeal: War In The Name Of Atheism [Pic+]

Submitted by: Buiadh 4 years ago Funny


Personally, I blame the moustaches.
Credits: The Oatmeal
There are 88 comments:
Male 36,490
@tsty: Ah, you have done well Grasshopper! Valid points and intelligent arguements!
Now, snatch these pebbles from...
HEY! Gimmie back my pebbles!
(lolz!)

You`ve made outstanding arguements here, even if I`m not 100% behind them (only like 94%) I still have no refutation and am honored you`ve shared your wisdom with us!

(ps: if you don`t understand the "KungFu" bit I`m happy to explain...)
0
Reply
Male 9
And IAB cashes in again
0
Reply
Male 496
I`m not saying you have to validate religion or say that is feasible. But to say that science supports atheism is arrogant and short-sighted. Honestly, I don`t think there is a God. I think the idea of an entity sitting around creating life to watch it kill itself is ridiculous. I like to think that there is positive and negative spiritual energy that regulates the universe.
But it`s beyond our scope of understanding. I`m not going to say that I believe anything for sure because of that very fact. We are unable to fully understand reality in its fullest so it is foolish to say that what we see is all there is. Demanding physical evidence of a non-physical existence is flawed from the get go. There is no possible way to fulfill that request. This is why I say science does not support atheism.

So...I`m honestly open to my mind being changed. Let me understand.
0
Reply
Male 496
OK. So maybe I`m looking at this all wrong so I`m going to explain my logic and someone just tell me where I`m wrong.

Imagine two (very boring) two dimensional entities. One is making the claim that there is a third dimension. The other says, "The burden of proof is on you since you have made the claim of this magical third dimension. The fact that you cannot provide proof means that science supports adimensionism."

Ok, so these beings exist on a plane which does not allow them to perceive the third dimension, all their means of measurement are defined by their perceptions so they have no way of proving the third dimension exists. They could observe effects of it however this could all be explained in two dimensional science. So, the adimensionist is also making a claim that there is no third dimension. It is a positive claim of a negative existence.
0
Reply
Male 526
I know those terms actually have real definitions that are probably pretty different from what I suggested but if we could at least settle on some before yelling at each other we might actually get some semblance of conversation here.
0
Reply
Male 526
Why does every religious flamewar on I-A-B devolve into an agnostic/atheist debate? I thought we had already established that (a)gnostic referred to knowledge and (a)theism to belief? Let`s just discard the agnostic term entirely and make four groups:

Strong Atheism- No gods exist and I can prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt

Weak Atheism- Nothing I`ve seen so far suggests the existence of god(s) but it`s impossible to entirely rule out the possibility.

Weak Theism- It seems very likely to me that deities exist, but it`s impossible to completely prove their presence.

Strong Theism- God(s) exist and I can prove it.

I, like most atheists, identify somewhere around the border of weak and strong atheism. I really really really don`t think anything`s there, but there is a slim chance that we find otherwise.

If people out there really want to be twats and say that they are true neutral, we can make that the definition of agnosticism.
0
Reply
Male 36,490
[quote]They dont use their athiesm, they use science and facts to discredit unsubstantiated beliefs[/quote]
Noooo, they use "science and facts" to support their atheism, and DISCREDIT other people`s religion!
0
Reply
Male 598
The point of the comic is true precisely because atheism is not the same as a religious belief. While religious people use unfounded beliefs to control people and resources, athiests only try to tell people not to use religion to control people and resources.
They dont use their athiesm, they use science and facts to discredit unsubstantiated beliefs.
0
Reply
Male 36,490
[quote]You can redefine words as much as you like. You can say that "cow" means the same as "eagle" if you like.[/quote]
Wait, wait. @Angilion: I AM the one quoting the dictionary, which YOU say is `wrong`. YOU are the one saying atheism and agnosticism are "the same" not me!
Projection much?
You are "redefining words" (and @LillianDulci too).
YOU are saying two different things are `the same`.

A person without gods? Like an agnostic? Only with "theist" in there so you can see the difference?
un-theist?
in-theist?
(in- the opposite of, like visible vs invisible)
What is the point of this?
0
Reply
Male 438
"Also Hitler was not a Christian."

It really doesn`t matter if Hitler was Christian, he used Christianity to further his goals and justify his genocide. The reason this point is an issue is many people (christians) in this country make the claim he was an atheist and his actions were based on atheism.
0
Reply
Male 541
Oh look, it`s one of THESE comics where the religious person is depicted as angry and irrational, waving his arms about and making a dumb-ass point (that most Christians don`t actually make) and the atheist is calm, casually holding a cup of coffee while easily defeating all of the religious persons`s lame arguments. This is a straw man. This is a dumb comic.

Also Hitler was not a Christian. He had plans to destroy the religion after the war when he had established his power even more. So there`s an argument that I`ve seen some atheists make which is complete bs, maybe I`ll go make a comic about it.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
I`ll try a different angle.

This is the definition of agnosticism, as stated by the person who created the word:

[quote]That it is wrong for a man to say he is certain of the objective truth of a proposition unless he can provide evidence which logically justifies that certainty. This is what agnosticism asserts and in my opinion, is all that is essential to agnosticism.

Thomas Huxley[/quote]

So....5Cats at alia:

What word do you think describes someone who has no religious beliefs?

You can`t use `agnostic`, because that word already exists and already has a different definition.

So what word do you think fits and fits better than a word that literally means "a person without gods"?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]"Atheism is a lack of religious belief."
Not seeing that in the dictionary.[/quote]

Then you need a better dictionary. I suggest the OED, as that`s the standard for English.

Or any atheism site. Or any atheist.

Maybe the problem isn`t that the correct definition isn`t in your dictionary. You say that you`re not seeing it in your dictionary. That doesn`t mean it isn`t there.

You can redefine words as much as you like. You can say that "cow" means the same as "eagle" if you like. It won`t turn cows into eagles and it won`t make people who know the difference think that a cow is an eagle.
0
Reply
Male 438
panda_chaos

If people want to have an online discussion and it is not a subject you enjoy, it doesn`t harm you, don`t click on it, ignore it and take your own advice, STFU.

Commenting like you are `above it all` just makes you look pompous...
0
Reply
Female 235
All of you religious people and all of you atheists need to knock it off. As long as nobody is causing any harm, it`s fine. Go to church or go to the library but please. STFU.
0
Reply
Male 438
Gnostic/agnostic refers to knowlege

Theist/atheist refers to belief

they are not mutually exclusive.
0
Reply
Male 36,490
ATHEIST

AGNOSTIC

"Atheism is a lack of religious belief."
Not seeing that in the dictionary.

Case closed.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
I`ll use myself to illustrate.

I`m an agnostic atheist.

People who don`t know what the words mean and/or don`t understand what lack of belief is will see that as a contradiction in terms. It isn`t.

Agnosticism is a general principle (NOT just about religion) that you shouldn`t assert something as objectively true unless you can objectively prove it true or at least demonstrate overwhelming objective evidence supporting it.

Atheism is a lack of religious belief.

Belief is treating something as true without regard to evidence. Maybe there is some evidence, maybe there isn`t any. It doesn`t matter - evidence is irrelevant to belief.

Atheism and agnosticism are completely different things. They`re not two different positions on the same thing. So they are not mutually exclusive.

I am an agnostic atheist.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]I hit post on accident, oh well. The truth is that now that I think about it, I don`t really care if you consider atheism a belief or not. I do, however, hate it when people act like it is science or fact. It`s not. It`s just not.[/quote]

It is the result of applying the scientific method, so it is a scientific approach. Science, done properly, does not include belief in things as being absolutely, objectively true without question and without evidence. So science does not include theism. In that sense, science is atheist.

The problem with that apparently reasonable argument is that it`s a result of applying the scientific method to something it doesn`t work on - magic. Science is solely about natural phenomina. It can be used to test claims of natural effects of magic, but not to test claims of magic.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Ah @Angilion! I am mentally incompitent because I do not agree with YOU! I expected better...[/quote]

Then why did you make that up? If you expect better from yourself, then live up to it or at least don`t publically advertise what you perceive as your failure.

You`re not trying to claim I said it, are you? You wouldn`t be that dishonest, would you? I wouldn`t expect you to do that.

[quote]SO a `theist` is a description of a belief system, thus "atheism" is ALSO a description of a belief system. It accurately describes what that person "believes" about God![/quote]

Either you don`t understand the concept of lack of religious belief or you`re arguing for the sake of arguing and don`t even believe what you`re writing.

Either way, I`m wasting my time arguing with you.

Lack of belief is not belief and it won`t become so no matter how many times theists claim it is.
0
Reply
Female 2,674
"That atheism is no more factual than religion. "

Except that religions make claims about things without being able to prove those claims. And atheism doesn`t make any sort of claims, other than that religions don`t have proof of the existence of a god. Religion isn`t backed by science, but atheism doesn`t need to be backed by science because it`s not making any claim. It`s not a belief any more than saying unicorns don`t exist is a belief (which it`s not).

"All I said was that if someone honestly were to try to tell me that unicorns exist in a non-physical capacity, I have nothing to support that they don`t."
But you don`t need to prove that they don`t exist, the person making the claim needs to prove that they do exist. Otherwise there`s no reason for you to validate their opinion by saying "it may or may not be true" when there`s no proof that it is true.
0
Reply
Male 496
I`m sorry, I`m gonna be out for a while. It`s been fun though. Happy April Fools.
0
Reply
Male 496
I hate bigots and people who deny perfectly sound facts as much as you, Lillian. My thing is that people claim atheism is not a belief. Which it is. If someone is trying to actually prove to you that God exists then sure they would have to have proof. Still doesn`t make atheism any less a belief. That`s really my only point. That atheism is no more factual than religion. You can call it belief or you can call it opinion but it`s still the same. I personally am agnostic because I don`t have any proof to support the existence and I realize that if it were true then we would not be able to prove it by its very nature. That`s my belief though. If you think otherwise, then congrats.

And I didn`t say anything about the amount of people believing in unicorns (or half the things you apparently thought I was saying). All I said was that if someone honestly were to try to tell me that unicorns exist in a non-physical capacity, I have nothing to support that they don`t.
0
Reply
Male 43
dont click, the joke pretty much ends here
0
Reply
Female 2,674
"But when you try to tell a person who believes in God that they are wrong because they don`t have any evidence well that is a logical fallacy because you are asserting your belief that things but be proven with science on them."

Provide proof if you want you "belief" to be considered valid. Until then, we have no reason to believe your claim and we don`t have to give it any sort of validity. I`m not saying religion is a science either. But religious people make many claims (there`s a god, evolution isn`t true, certain perfectly normal things are actually bad for you, etc) without anything to back them up and then expect everyone else to validate their claims by saying "oh it may or may not be true" when, without proof, there being a god is just as likely as there being a unicorn.
0
Reply
Female 2,674
I`m done arguing semantics with 5Cats.

"What you are saying still doesn`t prove that atheism is a science."
I never said atheism is a science. When did I say that? o_o

"I don`t know anybody that honestly believes that there are incorporeal unicorns therefore the argument is invalid."
So if multiple people believe in something fictitious, then all of a sudden it`s valid?

"If there were somebody then we would really have to approach that as, "well it`s a possibility until proven wrong." If you deny that then you simply diluting yourself or truly don`t understand. "
Nope. Someone asserting something`s true WITHOUT PROOF to back up their claim does NOT deserve validity from others. It`s their job to prove it. Until then, everyone else has no reason to validate their "belief" by pretending that it "might be true or might not be true" as if both possibilities are equally likely.
0
Reply
Male 496
*must be*, not but be
0
Reply
Male 496
BTW 5Cats, my flame insurance dropped me years ago. Apparently I`m too much of a liability.
0
Reply
Male 496
I think you all might be missing the point. What you are saying still doesn`t prove that atheism is a science. I don`t know anybody that honestly believes that there are incorporeal unicorns therefore the argument is invalid. If there were somebody then we would really have to approach that as, "well it`s a possibility until proven wrong." If you deny that then you simply diluting yourself or truly don`t understand.

Maybe this is a good alternative: some people believe in science (so to speak) therefore they don`t believe in God. That`s cool. I`m not saying there`s anything wrong with that. But when you try to tell a person who believes in God that they are wrong because they don`t have any evidence well that is a logical fallacy because you are asserting your belief that things but be proven with science on them. Religion is not science, no one is saying that. And, if you missed it the first time, if someone is saying that then they are just plain stupid.
0
Reply
Male 36,490
But @LillianDulci: Atheists go one step beyond "there`s no reason to believe in a god because there`s no proof" in that they tell theists (Christians, Jews, Muslims & etc) "You are wrong" or stupid, or worse.
THAT is more than just saying "I don`t know if God exists" it`s saying "No, God does not exist".

[quote]like not believing in unicorns is a lack of belief in unicorns.[/quote]
Nooo, that`s a logical error. A "lack of belief" would require NO opinion whatsoever. Saying "I don`t believe" IS INDEED a type of belief! It is having an opinion (belief, same thing) about the existance/ non-existance, right?

Yes! Unicorns do exist!
Unicorns might exist, I can`t say for sure or not.
No, unicorns do not exist.

Three completely different "beliefs". They may share "common ground" but they`re exclusive of each other.
0
Reply
Female 2,674
tstyblucryns, that`s not true. It`s impossible to prove than unicorns don`t exist even though they don`t. All we can do is prove that claims made by people about unicorns existing aren`t true. Same with disproving religious claims. We can do that all we want, most religious people will ignore the results anyway, or modify their beliefs to where they still believe in a god just not /certain aspects/ of their religion. But we can`t disprove the existence of any god.

So if I tell you there`s a gigantic invisible dinosaur in my backyard right now, you have to believe me because I`m asserting it`s true. Now the burden of proof is just as much on you and it is on me? I don`t think so. Even if you come to my house and walk around my backyard without running into a dinosaur, I can say he moved to the front yard. You have no reason to "believe" me until I prove it`s true. You don`t have to prove anything.
0
Reply
Female 2,674
5Cats, an agnostic is someone who isn`t willing to say whether there is or isn`t a god. An atheist will go ahead and say there`s no reason to believe in a god because there`s no proof, just like there`s no reason to believe in mermaids because there`s no proof. If a god popped into existence and showed itself to atheists, they`d "convert" but that doesn`t make them agnostics in the first place. There`s no reason to qualify it with "maayyybeee it`s true" like agnostics do. But it`s still a lack of belief, like not believing in unicorns is a lack of belief in unicorns. You seem to not even mention anything about atheism being a belief system (which it isn`t) anymore which is why I started responding to you in the first place. o_O
0
Reply
Male 36,490
Thx @tsty, enjoy your marathon!

Well, I`m an a-PirateNinja-theist! I don`t believe this so called "PirateNinja" peson ever existed! Oh it`s up to YOU to "prove" she does, right? All I have to do is say: "she don`t exist, that`s a scientific fact!" and then you have to prove she does?
...not quite actually.

(PirateNinja: I post, therefor I am!)
(5Cats: Curses! Foiled again!)
0
Reply
Female 121
Wrong, tsty. Burden of proof always lies with the person who claims that "thing X" exists.
0
Reply
Male 496
Sorry for the delayed response but I`m in the middle of a self induced Breaking Bad marathon so I have little spare time.

@LillianDulci The unicorn argument is a fallacy. The burden of proof is as much on someone claiming there is no God as the person saying there is. In your scenario I would say no, I wouldn`t believe you. But the key word is "believe".

The point is that if we were to truly look at it through the scope of science, nothing is true until proven. I`m not saying that religion is a science. Anyone that does is stupid. But once you are aware of the possibility of a God/Gods you either choose to believe it is true or you choose to believe that it is not. Besides, it`s incorporeal. Everything we measure reality with is based off of what we can perceive. If there were a God or a heaven it would stand to reason we couldn`t measure or observe it.

So, once again...atheism is not science, but opinion or belief.
0
Reply
Male 36,490
Not really @LillianDulci:
ATHEIST
AGNOSTIC
So you see, there`s a big difference. You seem to have the two sort of mixed, eh?

"Exactly, it`s a lack of belief in a god."
That`s agnosticism, actually. Atheists HAVE a common belief: there is NO God and there never has been.

Deists (that`s me!) believe in God, but not a particular one. Unlike agnostics, we believe God does (or did) for sure exist, and created the universe (or the Big Bang). Apart from that it`s anyone guess!



0
Reply
Female 2,674
"In fact: Atheists have FIRM belief: that God does not exist, nor has He ever!

That`s not "a lack" that is a conviction as strong as any Christian has!"

Not really. No matter how much you disprove claims made by theists, most of them will remain theists. However, if a god popped out of nowhere and presented itself to atheists, most atheists would believe it`s real and "convert". Just like we`d believe unicorns are real if one magically showed up in front of us. We just don`t see a reason to give any sort of weight to there being a god. Being agnostic implies that the person believes there could be or there could not be a god, as if there`s equal weight on both sides. Atheists go further and say there`s no reason to give any sort of weight to there being a god (like with unicorns and such) because there`s no proof.
0
Reply
Female 2,674
5Cats, atheism is a lack of belief. The ONLY reason "atheism" exists is because theism exists. It is not a belief system like you were claiming. Theists claim a god exists, atheists don`t believe this claim because there`s no proof. There`s no reason for atheists to have to call themselves agnostic (most sane people aren`t "agnostic" in their "belief" that unicorns and dragons and mermaids don`t exist; most sane people just realize they`re fictitious).

"But atheists don`t "lack belief" they just do NOT believe in God"

Exactly, it`s a lack of belief in a god. I didn`t exactly feel the need to clarify but you kinda just showed how atheism isn`t a belief system. Atheists can believe, do, or act in any way that`s completely different from other atheists. There`s no set guidelines that we follow, the only thing we`re 100% the same on (besides being humans) is the lack of belief in a god. So it`s not a belief system.
0
Reply
Male 36,490
In fact: Atheists have FIRM belief: that God does not exist, nor has He ever!

That`s not "a lack" that is a conviction as strong as any Christian has!
0
Reply
Male 36,490
[quote]It`s a lack of belief.[/quote]
But atheists don`t "lack belief" they just do NOT believe in God. They sure believe in other stuff, like Wicca and Gaia and UFOs and global warming and... stuff!

I did answer your question:
a-unicornism (atheist): I do not believe unicorns exist now nor have they ever existed.
agnostiunicornism (agnostic): I have no proof either way that unicorns exist or not.
See?

But by forming an opinion, or not, on religion is all the same. Belief? Non-belief? Unsure? It`s all about religion!

Don`t confuse `religion` (a big building) with `religion` (a philosophy, an understanding of God(s)).
0
Reply
Female 2,674
5Cats, you didn`t answer my question. Is your belief system aunicornism (or agnostiunicornic if you`d rather)? A belief system is something you base your life around, a guideline for how to live. Atheism, like aunicornism, doesn`t provide such a belief system. It`s a lack of belief.

tstyblucryns, unicorn comparison holds. If someone asks you to prove that unicorns don`t exist, how do you do it? It`s not really possible. It`s up to the person making the claim that it exists to prove it exists, not the other way around. I could tell you that aliens abducted me last night and took me billions of lightyears away onto their planet and we partied hard for 12 days (their planet days, not ours) before they returned me home, but it happened so quickly that no one even noticed I was gone. You wouldn`t believe me, would you? It`d be up for me to prove it, not up to you to disprove it.
0
Reply
Male 36,490
@tstyblucryns: Excellent points! Hope you have `flame insurance` (lolz! kinda...) I can already hear them squealing "you can`t disprove a negative" lolz! Whiners.

"Atheism" is the name of your opinion on God. ANY opinion on God or Gods is "religious in nature" by definition.

So saying "I have an opinion on God but I have no opinion on religion" is an oxymoron!

I hope that settles things, since @swoop is strangely silent...

And by "settles things" I mean folks understand what I`m saying, even if they still think it`s wrong.
0
Reply
Male 496
I hit post on accident, oh well. The truth is that now that I think about it, I don`t really care if you consider atheism a belief or not. I do, however, hate it when people act like it is science or fact. It`s not. It`s just not.
0
Reply
Male 496
No denying some horrible things have been done in the name of religion and to call atheism a religion is inaccurate, but to pretend that atheism is the same as science is just plain arrogant. Science is the based in facts, and there aren`t any that support the existence of God...or disprove it. I think people confuse the fact that you can explain any natural phenomenon using science as proof there is no God.
To me, saying atheism is backed by science is the same as someone who says a rainbow is proof that God exists. It`s a fallacy. Show me proof that God does not exist and I will shut up. Actual proof that God doesn`t exist. Obviously nobody can. Although I`m sure somebody will either try to discredit this view with some unicorn comparison or try to explain what science without ever really addressing the fact that nothing can ever/will ever disprove religion.

0
Reply
Male 36,490
@LillianDulci: I`m kinda agnostiunicornic really...

A belief system is a belief system! Call it what you like, it`s the same darn thing!

Yours is a cult! Yours is a religion! Yours is a philosophy! Yours is 7th Day Advent Unicornisim!

Same.... thing!
0
Reply
Female 2,674
5Cats, do you believe in unicorns? If not, would you say aunicornism is your belief system?
0
Reply
Male 14,775
I`m glad we had this cartoon. That`ll shut up the tards who`s only `proof` that Christianity makes you a better person was to claim that Hitler and Stalin didn`t believe in their imaginary friend.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Buiadh: Are you trying to say that in your beloved socialism that your top earners don`t have 10x the people `propping them up` ? The confiscatory taxes that prop up your system lead to inevitable economic collapse. Greece is an prime example.

Financial self-interest is pervasive, no matter what type of political system exists.

“A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have.” - Thomas Jefferson
0
Reply
Male 36,490
Face facts: Jews and Christians (for example) are both mono-theists. While Hinus are poly-theists. You cannot mix the two without something giving way.
Ditto for atheists. No atheistic Hinus that I know of. Certianly one can `let go` of a former belief, change one`s mind, BUT that is replacing one "way of thinking" with another, get it?

Don`t make me bring Zen into this...

Edit: Show me where I`m wrong @swoop, without insults (if you`re capable of typing a sentence without insulting someone that is...)
0
Reply
Male 1,754
5cats displaying his critical thinking skills, or lack thereof, again.
0
Reply
Male 36,490
[quote]You are mentally incapable of understanding anything other than a religious framework.[/quote]
Ah @Angilion! I am mentally incompitent because I do not agree with YOU! I expected better...

"theism" a way to believe in God, in my mentally deranged mind. Also, the Dictionary is deranged too it seems.
It is further modified by: mono- poly- and a-. a- in this case means the opposite of.
SO a `theist` is a description of a belief system, thus "atheism" is ALSO a description of a belief system. It accurately describes what that person "believes" about God!

"If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice" (that`s agnosticism, I know, I know!)

YOU are confusing `religion` with Church, or institutionalised worship. I`m not contending that every single atheist belongs to "The Church Of Atheism" BUT that they share a similar "religious philosophy".
0
Reply
Male 546
Most discussions regarding one`s beliefs or lack thereof usually start with the words, "I believe", or "I think", (or something similar phrase). Hmmm... either way, "I believe...."

and you are right, I have had Religious Folks knock on my front door. But, online and at various forum or blog sites I do get Atheists knocking on my proverbial door. So, maybe they just aren`t as energetic as the Religious Folks and prefer to do their knocking while sitting?

I believe (there goes those words again) that there is plenty of room for all forms of belief or non-belief. It`s all about your faith in a higher power (no not the government) or your belief that science can`t explain it, it doesn`t exist.

Nachoooooo......
0
Reply
Male 1,444
Obviously the person who created this cartoon hasn`t studied world history very much.
0
Reply
Male 1,045
@Angilion
Give up, you`re never gonna win.
"If we could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people"

By this guy
0
Reply
Male 325
Seriously i had to CLICKY CLICKY to see one more panel... GAY!
0
Reply
Male 12,365
I`ve just noticed that you go on to flat out call athiesm a religion.

I think I see the problem.

You are mentally incapable of understanding anything other than a religious framework. So you have to think everything is a religion, even the complete opposite of a religion.

The shortcoming is yours.

I don`t claim to understand a religious mind. Not in anyone past young childhood, anyway. Young children can believe all sorts of things with no reason to do so, either because they`ve been told them by someone they look up to and don`t question or because they have fertile imaginations and limited reasoning due to shortage of experience. But I can at least acknowledge the existence of religion. Why can`t you even acknowledge the existence of atheism?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Religion is a "belief system", so is atheism.[/quote]

Bollocks.

Lack of belief is not belief.

While it`s true that repeating that lie often enough will gain you power through your religion by causing more people to believe it, it won`t make it true. So the question is how dishonest you`re willing to be to gain power through your religion.

Do you think that not playing any sport is playing a sport?

Do you think that a ream of blank paper is a book?

Do you think that silence is sound?

Are you deliberately ignorant?
0
Reply
Male 1,586
I would definitely go to war for fractions. Don`t ever let me hear someone besmirch the integrity of the mighty fraction.
0
Reply
Male 25,416
kinda funny
0
Reply
Male 36,490
@bophus: Religion is a "belief system", so is atheism. If your religion is montheistic, polytheistic or Deistic (the correct one btw!) OR atheistic, it`s all the same thing.
0
Reply
Male 977
Good for a chuckle.
0
Reply
Male 483
Be whatever you want to be. Just be good to people, and don`t tolerate the bad people no matter what they do it in the name of.
0
Reply
Male 482
@outwest.

you want an answer to your questions? Ill answer it with another question and this will sum it up nicely....

When is the last time someone came to your door in the morning asking you whether you have accepted atheism into your life?

@Popcap.

Atheism has more to with science than religion ever will. religion is not science on any plane.


why do people fail to understand that being an atheist is not a religion it is quite literally non religion. i dont believe in atheism, because it isnt a thing. it is the lack of.

holy crap.

0
Reply
Male 914
"Who is more tolerant, Religious Folks or Atheists?"

Definitely atheists.

"Who thinks they are more intelligent, Religious Folks or Atheists?"

Dumb people incorrectly think they`re intelligent because they`re dumb, and intelligent people correctly think they`re intelligent because they`re intelligent.

Therefore the whole question seems irrelevant.

"Who constantly complains about the other side more, Religious Folks or Atheists?"

Both complain, but I`m going to have to give the win to religious folks on this one. Atheists generally just mind their own business, while religious get persnickety anytime anyone questions anything about what they believe.

"Who seems to need to explain to others their beliefs or lack thereof, Religious Folks or Atheists?"

DEFINITELY the religious people. I`ve never heard of atheists going door to door trying to convert people.
0
Reply
Male 542
Oatmeal, do funny poo again
0
Reply
Male 6,737
Crakr - I guess you don`t realise the difference between Socialism and Communism? As most Americans don`t.

Marxist communism hasn`t, and probably will never exist in our lifetime.

Oh and in your beloved capitalism, the people at the top have to have 10x as many people below them propping them up.
0
Reply
Female 1,803
BTW- Poor people would have help buying insurance so the only people I`m referring to are the people who can afford it and choose not to because they are irresponsible or are the "tell me to wear a seatbelt and I purposely won`t" type.
0
Reply
Female 1,803
"No government can mandate by force or coercion that all their citizens buy a certain product. "

But that relies on the assumption that if you choose to not buy something you are willing to live life without it. We all know that once people`s lives are in danger they`ll run to benefit from something they chose not to buy. If I had my way, those people would prove an ability to pay for the services before they receive them or die but that`s not the social contract most people want to live under.
0
Reply
Female 2,674
"Believing in atheism is the same as believing in math? Math is science. Atheism is not."

I wouldn`t say they`re the same, but they`re similar. Every child is born an atheist, and atheists are just seeing what`s clear to see (i.e. reality, what`s around them, there`s no god that`s evident without being indoctrinated into a belief system). It`s similar to math in the sense that it`s not really a belief, it just is. There`s no "in the name of atheism" like there`s no "in the name of math". There could be "in the name of anti-religion" but that`s not the same as being in the name of atheism.
0
Reply
Male 36,490
@OutWest I think it`s kinda equal, actually.
There`s smart & dumb on both sides.
There`s loud and quiet folks on both sides too.
They each complain about the other, just in different ways.

"Hey! You got Religion in my Government!"
"Well you got Government in my Religion!"

0
Reply
Male 546
Who is more tolerant, Religious Folks or Atheists?

Who thinks they are more intelligent, Religious Folks or Atheists?

Who constantly complains about the other side more, Religious Folks or Atheists?

Who seems to need to explain to others their beliefs or lack thereof, Religious Folks or Atheists?
0
Reply
Male 17,512
As I`ve proposed before Hitler, Stalin and Mao came from Social Darwinism and Eugenics. They all believed in a socialist/communist utopia whereby mankind would elevate themselves to perfection.

But it doesn`t work that way and never will. Whereas capitalism has a multi-class structure, Socialism/Communism has a three tier structure, Workers, Non-Workers, The Elites.

At least in capitalism there upward mobility for those that work hard, people are judged by their merits, Ideas are not state property and people can patent them, The individual has the same legal equality of a big corporation or even a state or federal government.

This is best summarized by the SCOTUS soon to repeal Obamacare. No government can mandate by force or coercion that all their citizens buy a certain product. Freedom FTW!
0
Reply
Male 36,490
@Buiadh & @Altaru: If you look at religion as just another form of "governance", and note that under Islam religion = government (as it was back in the middle ages under Cathoilic reign), then no, Stalin & Hitler & Mao were both very much representing their "religions".

When religion runs a government it`s no longer "worship" is it?
0
Reply
Male 185
preachy athiests are preachy
0
Reply
Male 646
Hitler was not a Christian, ffs.
0
Reply
Male 6,737
5Cats, the difference is thoughout history people have been killed in the name of religion. Wars aren`t fought under atheism.

Those irreligious (atheist =/= irreligious) crazy types are exactly that, crazy.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
5Cats, see my previous post.

Also, North Korea isn`t atheist. They worship their glorious leader, their brainwashed version of the Messiah. He`s their Jesus.
0
Reply
Male 65
I feel like the biggest issue I have with this comic is that they form a double standard when explaining why they committed such atrocities. For Hitler and Stalin (regardless of whether or not Hitler actually held to a religion or not) they are content to say it was because they were twisted little non-nice individuals.

The implication seems to be that religious people can be twisted little non-nice individuals too. However, the comic turns that on its head and says that religion is the part that is screwed up, not the people.

*As a Christian, I`m not going to defend any other religion`s ideals on war, the Crusades. I`m sure Old Testament war will come up. I may or may not leave my comments to this. Call me a coward if you like.
0
Reply
Male 35
I would love if the atheists I knew stated their arguments like this guy. Most of them just bang on tables screaming, "GOD IS NOT REAL! YOU ARE STUPID AND I AM SMART!". :-/
0
Reply
Male 3,482
Stalin`s breed of communism persecuted religious people.because they were a threat to the state, acknowledging higher powers than he and.his and thus presenting a possible opposition to his authority.

It wasn`t a religious thing, it was a political technique.
0
Reply
Male 36,490
VV What @hwkiller said. Hitler was an occult believer, or `mystic`.

He leaves out Chairman Mao, Pol Pot, Kim Il Sung (or whatever the eldest King Jong`s name was) and a host of others.

So: anyone who ISN`T religios BUT kills lots of people ISN`T and "atheist" but is simply crazy. Ah good! `splains everything.
0
Reply
Male 729
Believing in atheism is the same as believing in math? Math is science. Atheism is not.
0
Reply
Male 319
Give atheism time. It`s really only in the last 100 years or so that atheism was part of the intellectual scene. If you ask me, the problem isn`t religion, it`s any dehumanizing ideology. Communism was atheistic, but individuals only existed for the sake of the State. Individuals that got in the way of the State mission had to be gotten rid of. Religion can and has done this just as well as Communism, but it doesn`t ~have~ to. A constructive argument would be aware of the shades of belief present in both atheism and theism. This argument doesn`t account for that, and it therefore ignorant and contributes nothing.
0
Reply
Male 1,440
Violence in the name of Religion out weigh violence in the name of atheism.
0
Reply
Male 319
Communism was atheistic, and religious people were persecuted under Stalin for refusing to bow to the state ideology. Strange how this guy omits that side of it. Well, that would mean concluding that Atheists aren`t better people than religious people, and damned if he`ll admit that.
0
Reply
Male 37,888
0
Reply
Male 490
Commenters note: Hitler was not Christian. He was plotting to destroy religion because he thought it was hazardous to his end game (there are transcripts and notes about him talking about this with his advisors). He exploited the religion of the people to maintain his political standing.
0
Reply
Male 6,737
Link: The Oatmeal: War In The Name Of Atheism [Pic+] [Rate Link] - Personally, I blame the moustaches.
0
Reply