Backhanded piece about atheism in New York Times
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
31-12-2016, 10:59 AM
RE: Backhanded piece about atheism in New York Times
No, I get you. I'm not even quite sure I felt like I needed to ask. I think what you're saying is really cool. Over the past few years my love for humanity has greatly diminished. I know right from wrong but I've become so cynical and frustrated my negative feelings start to override my sense of decency. For example, I was really devastated by the election but a part of me thinks, "Good. Now we can expedite the process of destroying this shithole."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-12-2016, 11:24 AM
RE: Backhanded piece about atheism in New York Times
Quote:Campolo has fallen out of touch with many of his old evangelical comrades.
I love how he puts that part in bold. That's right. FALLEN... first from his bike, and now from God's grace.
"Man, talk about writing a cohesive and intricately woven article. Am I good at this or what, you guys?"

Quote:Best-selling authors like Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens drew huge crowds at these “cons.”
"cons" Oh wow, s0 3dgy. Rolleyes

Quote:As with O’Doul’s, converts are few, and rarely do they end up having a very good time.
I'm having an awesome time, thank you very much. I don't have to write articles for a shitty newspaper, which helps. Drinking Beverage Bam, shots fired.

Quote:he’d preach secular humanism, a kinder cousin of atheism
[Image: grlly.gif]

If we came from dust, then why is there still dust?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like cactus's post
31-12-2016, 12:07 PM
RE: Backhanded piece about atheism in New York Times
(31-12-2016 10:59 AM)ImFred Wrote:  No, I get you. I'm not even quite sure I felt like I needed to ask. I think what you're saying is really cool. Over the past few years my love for humanity has greatly diminished. I know right from wrong but I've become so cynical and frustrated my negative feelings start to override my sense of decency. For example, I was really devastated by the election but a part of me thinks, "Good. Now we can expedite the process of destroying this shithole."

Cynicism is the dark side of skepticism.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
31-12-2016, 02:10 PM
RE: Backhanded piece about atheism in New York Times
Come on, Girly. Everybody knows that the operator of a tardis cannot revisit a 4D nexus he's been involved in... also everybody knows "can't be done" just means "until the Doctor figures out how." Laugh out load

living word
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like houseofcantor's post
31-12-2016, 02:14 PM
RE: Backhanded piece about atheism in New York Times
(31-12-2016 10:59 AM)ImFred Wrote:  No, I get you. I'm not even quite sure I felt like I needed to ask. I think what you're saying is really cool. Over the past few years my love for humanity has greatly diminished. I know right from wrong but I've become so cynical and frustrated my negative feelings start to override my sense of decency. For example, I was really devastated by the election but a part of me thinks, "Good. Now we can expedite the process of destroying this shithole."

I live in this shithole, thank you very much.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-12-2016, 02:32 PM
RE: Backhanded piece about atheism in New York Times
I don't understand what is so wrong with the word "atheism" and why the writer seems to think it's this awful terrible thing. Humanism is great but atheism and atheists like Dawkins are just...they're so...mean and nasty. Yeah we're a very diverse group ya know? We're not all the same just because we're atheists. I mean jeez even Buddhists are technically atheists, are they all terrible people?

First of all, I do agree that most atheists are not really all that interested in going to a group or church type setting to get preached to, even most Christians I know never go to church, it's just a hassle to them and it doesn't matter, they chose Jesus as their savior, done and done. Will he write an article about that too?

I don't really mind it so much since I know it won't change any minds, if you are atheist before reading the article you'll still be atheist after reading it and if you didn't like them before, well now you still don't like them, thanks writer! You really made a difference today, bravo!

[Image: sagansig_zps6vhbql6m.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-12-2016, 03:57 PM
RE: Backhanded piece about atheism in New York Times
(31-12-2016 02:10 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Come on, Girly. Everybody knows that the operator of a tardis cannot revisit a 4D nexus he's been involved in... also everybody knows "can't be done" just means "until the Doctor figures out how." Laugh out load

So does that mean that zombie Clara and that other girl who didn't die flying around in their own diner in the desert tardis could go back and grab River Song since they separated from the Doctor before he dorked his sister or daughter or mother or whatever she was? Consider

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-12-2016, 05:09 PM
RE: Backhanded piece about atheism in New York Times
(31-12-2016 07:58 AM)ImFred Wrote:  
Quote:Atheists and agnostics have long tried to rebottle religion: to get the community and the good works without the supernatural stuff. It has worked about as well as nonalcoholic beer. As with O’Doul’s, converts are few, and rarely do they end up having a very good time.

Where I live churches insist on having a complete monopoly on non-government charity. Food Not Bombs people are ARRESTED for feeding the homeless unless there's a church connection. What used to be secular charities have been absorbed by churches using the state as a mechanism to ensure their monopoly. After the community was devastated by a hurricane representatives from churches harassed private individuals doing things like passing out water. I experienced this first hand. Food banks get taken over and names like Manna are added to Meals on Wheels and so on. At the hospital, my mom who's in her 80's and from Countryside, Jesusland had to tell some religious fuck she wasn't religious to get rid of his stupid Bible-bullshit-self.

It's telling that he compares theism to an addictive intoxicant that impairs the ability to think clearly in the short term, and destroys the ability to do that in the long run.

I think the analogy bears more fruit than he realizes (pardon the mixed metaphor.)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post
31-12-2016, 05:30 PM
RE: Backhanded piece about atheism in New York Times
(31-12-2016 05:09 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  
(31-12-2016 07:58 AM)ImFred Wrote:  Where I live churches insist on having a complete monopoly on non-government charity. Food Not Bombs people are ARRESTED for feeding the homeless unless there's a church connection. What used to be secular charities have been absorbed by churches using the state as a mechanism to ensure their monopoly. After the community was devastated by a hurricane representatives from churches harassed private individuals doing things like passing out water. I experienced this first hand. Food banks get taken over and names like Manna are added to Meals on Wheels and so on. At the hospital, my mom who's in her 80's and from Countryside, Jesusland had to tell some religious fuck she wasn't religious to get rid of his stupid Bible-bullshit-self.

It's telling that he compares theism to an addictive intoxicant that impairs the ability to think clearly in the short term, and destroys the ability to do that in the long run.

I think the analogy bears more fruit than he realizes (pardon the mixed metaphor.)

OUTSTANDING POINT!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-12-2016, 06:41 PM
RE: Backhanded piece about atheism in New York Times
Quote:Atheists and agnostics have long tried to rebottle religion: to get the community and the good works without the supernatural stuff. It has worked about as well as nonalcoholic beer. As with O’Doul’s, converts are few, and rarely do they end up having a very good time.

Yabut, NA beer works just fine. Yes Well, not O'Douls - that's piss. Dodgy

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: