Atheist adverts declaring "there's probably no God"

[wilbur]

Why do Atheists have to be such self-righteous pricks?

I was walking downtown yesterday, and there's a dude on the street corner ranting to a crowd gathered around him yelling about fire and brimstone and everlasting punishment unless you believe what he does. A little turn-about on the part of atheism in recent times is long long overdue. The self-righteousness of religion is institutionalized to the extent no one even notices just how self-righteous it is anymore. Even the somewhat pompous attitude that emanates from Dawkins cannot compare.

Seriously; if you don't believe in God, that's cool I respect that. But why do you feel the need to crap all over those who do? I believe in God, but I keep it to myself and I'd never shove my beliefs upon anyone else. So what the Hell harm am I causing? I'm so f*cking sick of these pompous, arrogant douchebags like Richard Dawkins and his ilk trying to seem superior because they're atheist.

I can drive around town and probably run into at least a dozen or more religious advertisements on billboards, and everywhere else. Hell, they even beam the crazyness over the airwaves into my home on my TV, on the radio. A group of atheists get one little meager advert on a bus and they are shitting all over everybody?

You don't have the answers to life any more then religious people do, so get over yourself.

This is usually the point I am trying to make. I know there are questions that we really don't have the answers too. Religion generally goes ahead and claims to KNOW the answers anyways... pointing that those who claim to have the answers, but really don't, isnt claiming that one necessarily has all the answers.

[marinejcksn]

The pompous atheists I mentioned certainly claim to have all the answers, as long as "God" isn't among them. I've read Dawkins work, he's one of the most arrogant men I've ever heard. The same reason I don't like the "end is near" christians is the same reason I hate Dawkins and people like him; they both peddle their b.s. but from different angles and neither side contributes much to the conversation. It's all well and good that you want God removed from your settings, I got nothing against that. It's when atheists use the seperation of church and state to present one side more often then the other that I have an issue with.

A guy talking about Hellfire and brimstone, you know how often I see that when I work in Hawaii? I drive past this whole congregation who holds bible-thumping signs preaching the gospel all day long...what do I do? Roll up the windows and crank some Tool. Always does the trick. :)

[wilbur]

The pompous atheists I mentioned certainly claim to have all the answers, as long as "God" isn't among them. I've read Dawkins work, he's one of the most arrogant men I've ever heard. The same reason I don't like the "end is near" christians is the same reason I hate Dawkins and people like him; they both peddle their b.s. but from different angles and neither side contributes much to the conversation. It's all well and good that you want God removed from your settings, I got nothing against that. It's when atheists use the seperation of church and state to present one side more often then the other that I have an issue with.

A guy talking about Hellfire and brimstone, you know how often I see that when I work in Hawaii? I drive past this whole congregation who holds bible-thumping signs preaching the gospel all day long...what do I do? Roll up the windows and crank some Tool. Always does the trick. :)

Great thinking... I would roll down the windows and crank it up though ;)

[megimoo]

Great thinking... I would roll down the windows and crank it up though ;)

Willie you sure work yourself into an awful sweat at just being GOD Less !

[FlaGator]

<snip>

This is usually the point I am trying to make. I know there are questions that we really don't have the answers too. Religion generally goes ahead and claims to KNOW the answers anyways... pointing that those who claim to have the answers, but really don't, isnt claiming that one necessarily has all the answers.

This is one of the points I am most interested in concerning some atheists. Why should you care one way or the other if a believer feels he has all the answers and what is the difference between them and you when you claim that you have the only correct answer concerning the existence of God? I would say that your position is no different than that of a believer and that if you examine yourself you might see this is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

For the record, believers they don't have all the answers. We don't know why God is doing things the way He is and we don't know His ultimate reasons. We believe that God has told us that he created everything and that we should live a certain way, but He has not revealed his ultimate reasons for this. He could just flush creation if He willed it but for whatever reason there is a purpose for all this.

You believe that there is no God so in your view what a believer accepts as fact is moot in your eyes. However, maybe religion does know everything it claims to know and you are the one in error. You can not admit to that no more that a believer can admit that his beliefs are incorrect.

So now we have come to the core of my thoughts on this. You don't like the fact that believers feel they know what they claim to know so you desire to upset their theological apple cart. I feel that your statement above is proof of this. You feel obligated to weigh in not so much to correct what you feel in irrational thinking but to put a believer on the spot and force him or her to defend their position. I believe that you know you can no more change a true believer's mind that one of us can change yours. With the in mind, what is the point of confrontation? Could it be that since you don't have all the answers then you don't want believers to feel they can know what you don't? Isn't it kind of childish to attempt to bust someone’s bubble for no other reason that it would please you to do so?

[wilbur]

This is one of the points I am most interested in concerning some atheists. Why should you care one way or the other if a believer feels he has all the answers and what is the difference between them and you when you claim that you have the only correct answer concerning the existence of God? I would say that your position is no different than that of a believer and that if you examine yourself you might see this is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Well, I don't necessarily care what anyone believes... I may certainly have my personal opinions about those beliefs.. but people having them is no skin off my back, really... until I am expected to treat those beliefs as an unassailable foundation from which one should make real world decisions... or I am expected to 'respect' those beliefs by holding my tongue while I see them leading people towards wrong decisions (when they have consequences for us all).... and such assumptions are often implicit in many conversations.

For the record, believers they don't have all the answers. We don't know why God is doing things the way He is and we don't know His ultimate reasons. We believe that God has told us that he created everything and that we should live a certain way, but He has not revealed his ultimate reasons for this. He could just flush creation if He willed it but for whatever reason there is a purpose for all this.

You believe that there is no God so in your view what a believer accepts as fact is moot in your eyes. However, maybe religion does know everything it claims to know and you are the one in error. You can not admit to that no more that a believer can admit that his beliefs are incorrect.

So now we have come to the core of my thoughts on this. You don't like the fact that believers feel they know what they claim to know so you desire to upset their theological apple cart. I feel that your statement above is proof of this. You feel obligated to weigh in not so much to correct what you feel in irrational thinking but to put a believer on the spot and force him or her to defend their position. I believe that you know you can no more change a true believer's mind that one of us can change yours. With the in mind, what is the point of confrontation? Could it be that since you don't have all the answers then you don't want believers to feel they can know what you don't? Isn't it kind of childish to attempt to bust someone’s bubble for no other reason that it would please you to do so?

Well I confess I let my attitude sometimes get the better of me and I let out a snarky post or three when the absurdity level rises beyond the threshold I can bear... but other than that I mainly post for reasons such as:

1. This stuff is fun to think about
2. Writing out posts helps one practice arguments or see counter-arguments that you never thought of.
3. Stuff is actually learned... while I think most of us are deeply convinced of our positions, we still do learn things from one another, generally.
4. The real world doesn't afford me many opportunities to have these conversations... at least not as deeply... especially on religious topics where actual civil conversation isnt likely possible without holding back on what I (or probably the other person) think.
5. It actually helps me articulate and organize my thoughts.

CU is a good fit for these types of discussions, strangely enough.

[FlaGator]

Well, I don't necessarily care what anyone believes... I may certainly have my personal opinions about those beliefs.. but people having them is no skin off my back, really... until I am expected to treat those beliefs as an unassailable foundation from which one should make real world decisions... or I am expected to 'respect' those beliefs by holding my tongue while I see them leading people towards wrong decisions (when they have consequences for us all).... and such assumptions are often implicit in many conversations.



Well I confess I let my attitude sometimes get the better of me and I let out a snarky post or three when the absurdity level rises beyond the threshold I can bear... but other than that I mainly post for reasons such as:

1. This stuff is fun to think about
2. Writing out posts helps one practice arguments or see counter-arguments that you never thought of.
3. Stuff is actually learned... while I think most of us are deeply convinced of our positions, we still do learn things from one another, generally.
4. The real world doesn't afford me many opportunities to have these conversations... at least not as deeply... especially on religious topics where actual civil conversation isnt likely possible without holding back on what I (or probably the other person) think.
5. It actually helps me articulate and organize my thoughts.

CU is a good fit for these types of discussions, strangely enough.

I do enjoy these discussions. Also the psychology round both sides is interesting to observe. There is a lot of behaviors that the two sides seem to share but neither likes to acknowledge that they have in common. Being zealous of the cause, is not the least of them :)

[asdf2231]

I was walking downtown yesterday, and there's a dude on the street corner ranting to a crowd gathered around him yelling about fire and brimstone and everlasting punishment unless you believe what he does. A little turn-about on the part of atheism in recent times is long long overdue. The self-righteousness of religion is institutionalized to the extent no one even notices just how self-righteous it is anymore. Even the somewhat pompous attitude that emanates from Dawkins cannot compare.