We don't know right from wrong because we don't fear retribution from an almighty.
I'm an atheist, so I get to rape and murder as much as I want. It just happens that that amount is zero.
I'm also kind to others, purely because doing so makes me feel good. If it also builds up "karma credits" with others, that's just a nice fringe benefit.
I had a coworker a few years ago who was seriously confused how I maintained morality without an imaginary friend threatening to fuck me up for all eternity. Like, he genuinely struggled to compute how it was possible for me to go around not raping and killing people as an atheist, to the extent that the guy was clearly wary around me going forward from that point. Very strange dude. Also weirdly enthusiastic about competitive pistol shooting.
God doesn't want him to shoot people, yet.
That actually makes me boil, cause i remember the live interview with a religious dude around 2008. In which he said and i quote "i don't fear the law of man, i only fear god", the bastard said it after killing someone in the name of jehova (i don't even remember if it was only one victim or more, my monkey brain was just baffled at his response to the question).
They don't play with the same social rules at all, and then they rage because "us" r the crazy ones.
I think that's the sum of it all
Ah, this one always makes me smile. I store it right next to the assumption we haven't read their holy book, and the assumption we didn't learn anything good from doing so that we can share as common ground.
If those are the only assumptions I have to get past, we can friends shortly!
No morality. Eat children. Sleep with your partner when you're stuck in traffic. The source of all evil. Can't be trusted. Are always miserable.
Basically everything religious folks really are under the mask they wear.
As a religious person, I will absolutely sleep with your partner while you're stuck in traffic.
I love a nap. I'm always sleepy, and if you're stuck in traffic and I'm bored, imma be sleepin.
This is something we can all get behind. Just like OPs partner. Because we’re all stuck in traffic and they’re sleeping at the front.
I sure do love me a sleep train
It's not under the mask. Some of them, they just cannot apprehend the fact that a human being can live respectfully without the permanent menace of being sent to hell or get some holy wrath or something
I hadn't thought that could be a stuck in traffic activity but I might just go out at rush hour and see what's up.
Hey wifey, I'm stuck
If we just hear “the gospel” enough, we’ll come around. In reality, I hear street preachers, and see “Jesus loves you” stickers on street corners, and it turns me off even more.
Honestly, as an honestly pretty unspiritual Christian, Street preachers make me unnecessarily angry. Because it feels like they're just bible bashing and aren't actually doing anything to further Christianity's goals, despite the fact they think they are. Individuals can't win people over by shoving their beliefs down people's throats.
I feel like the only people who listen to these guys are people who agree with them. Most people ignore them in my city.
I quite like them. And I don't mind Jehovah's witnesses. I can ignore or politely send them away without much hassle. But I think it's nice that they believe they can save people and actively try to do so. If I believed, I hope I would be a good enough person to try to save everyone else, too.
Of course, this doesn't apply to people who are trying to force people or demand poor treatment of people with different beliefs. It really depends where it comes from.
That anyone outside of the US or the middle east even gives a fuck whether you're an atheist or not
That's weird guys come on
That because we are free from god or gods that we have no moral compass. I consider myself a good person and I have good moral standards. I don't need fear from punishment after death to do so.
Also that we have no spirituality.. Spirituality and religion kinda go hand in hand but aren't mutually exclusive. That being said, I have no desire for either religion or spirituality. Maybe when I'm closer to the later chapters
From my experience many religious people have questionable moral standards.
That because we are free from god or gods that we have no moral compass.
The scariest thing is someone claiming that only religion imparts morals and ethics.
Because if the only thing stopping a person from raping and killing and causing pain and anguish is the religion they have… dude, THEY ARE the monster everyone needs to be afraid of.
My own morals and ethics aren’t forcibly imposed on me by an outside force like a religion, ready to snap apart and break off with the smallest of stresses.
No, it is built up inside of me via empathy and understanding and personal experiences, and is therefore a core part of my being and far more immune to corruption or breakage.
The "no spirituality" really resonates with me. I didn't believe in spirituality for a long time, in the same way I don't believe in the supernatural (Gods etc).
It was only recently that I realized that you can be spiritual and still have a more logical view of how the world works. The mind is a very powerful thing, and things like ritual and meditation can absolutely manifest things simply through its effect on our thoughts and behaviors.
For instance, lately I've been learning Tarot. Just a few years ago I would've thought Tarot is a complete waste of time, but it's actually an incredible way to explore problems from different perspectives and get a better sense for how you feel about things in a more abstract way.
Perhaps not exactly what you're asking but one thing many religious people don't seem to get is that they're "atheists" aswell when it comes to all the other gods out there. The difference to atheism is that we just don't believe in their god either.
I don't know how many gods there are but for the sake of an argument, lets say 500. A Christian believes in 1 out of 500 gods and an atheist believes in 0 out of 500. We're not that different from each other after all.
Atheism means you believe in no god whatsoever, not that you don't believe in a particular set of gods.
That's what they're saying. An atheist believes in 0 of the total options for gods and religions that you get if you add them all up. A believer believes in 1 or a few of them. So really, the religious are also non-believers when it comes to most gods and religions.
Not sure about that. It takes a pretty big leap to go from believing in 0 gods to 1. I think the line dividing atheists from theists is a pretty huge rift because they hold opposing views on very fundamental matters like the concept of God itself, how the world came to be, our purpose in life, what happens after we die... I don't think it's something you can quite reduce down to a matter of numbers.
Yeah, I agree. I was just trying to clarify the intent of the comment.
But also I think that's the point of that line of debate. It is an attempt to show a religious stance from an atheist perspective in which belief is a while load of possible strange things accepted as true. It's not really much use other than when you're faced with someone who things your lack of theism is the opposite of their particular brand of religion and frames the discussion around which bits you have issue with, as if they might prove to you that you're wrong. Or to show that their belief that their religion is correct and all the others, including atheism, are the wrong ones, isn't really the other side of what an atheist thinks.
More a thought experiment than meant to characterise the entirety of atheism.
Do they? I know plenty of people who follow the Christian faith but still believe in science.
Sure, but only as far as science doesn't contradict their religious beliefs. For example, there are many Creationist Christians who reject Evolution, Natural Selection and the Big Bang.
We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further. - Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion
Richard "eugenics is good, actually" Dawkins
Keep it classy, liberal-fascist beehaw.
That was part of the reason I became an atheist, to remove the hypocrisy and believe in all gods equally. I still believe in all gods equally, but am no longer an atheist.
Where I am in Australia, if as a group (say of coworkers) talking about a new person, we might be like 'maybe don't say "Jesus fucking Christ" in front of Lisa, I'm pretty sure she's extremely Christian' or 'let's do lunch instead of drinks to celebrate the milestone, I'm pretty sure Vish is Muslim so we don't want him to feel left out'.
Majority of my peers are atheist. Religion only comes up in our lives when we're trying to be inclusive or respectful of the religious minority.
It's funny how some places can't do the same in reverse.
Edit to say, the thing is, to the majority of us, belief in a god is silly hocus pocus, drummed up by humans when we just didn't understand how things worked and the scientific method didn't exist. But as a respectful person living in a society, I live by the rules that you don't make fun of those silly ideas, and also that religion is intrinsically linked to people's cultures too. So I have a live and let live attitude to it.
Pity many Christians can't be that Christian.
Most successful religions are highly evangelical. This is how they become religious. They also have the view that their way of worship is the only and correct way to worship. Otherwise, people would not have to follow that religion. These two ideas, crucial to the spread of a religion, are not compatible with tolerance.
In fact, if you genuinely believed that worshipping a God in a specific way was necessary or you would face eternal punishment. Would you not want to save everyone else from this. The do not see it as intolerance. They genuinely think they are helping you. Others just see it as their tribe and have a use Vs them attitude.
For Atheists it is easier to accept and welcome others. There's no punishment for it. So tolerance comes easy. It's also necessary for religions to demonise Atheists, to control their flock. So the historical cultural perception of Atheists is not one of kindness and tolerance. That's why it's seems novel that reality doesn't match that.
I was doing some work on the servers at a Christian college and I must have said 'God damn it' or something like that cause they pulled me aside and said we can't be taking the lords name in vain lol
This is where I'm at. It's "you do you" so long as it doesn't harm yourself or others.
That I can't do religious stuff! I don't have to believe in the religious components to participate in an event that holds meaning to you. To me it's not sacred -- all just normal words being said and ordinary matter being handled according to some rules. I do that every day at work at the direction of a different kind of "higher power" (clients) without anger or discomfort, it's really not a big deal!
I'm not angry at god for not existing, nor am I angry at all the people who believe otherwise. If the invitation to your religious event is in good faith, I'm honored to attend, and will just keep to myself or make small talk. Plus I've studied enough faiths I can probably fake it, if keeping the situation under control requires it ;)
I've discovered that in practice, many people of different faiths are not sure what to think about this position. Most are OK with it, some not (I just give them their space). With the interesting exception of Buddhists! They've always been super excited to bring me along to the pagoda somehow. No one ever tried to convert me, and the monks often speak a surprising number of languages and are interesting and well traveled. It's become a set of surprisingly wholesome memories (I immigrated to a primarily Buddhist country)!
That we do abortions for fun.
I mean, I do do abortions for fun. But not because I'm an atheist.
That it’s a religion. Except for a few groups, which I find kind of strange, being an atheist is the lack of religion and belief in a god. It’s not a religion or anything like a religion and so often I see atheism discussed by the religious in religious terms l, as a monolith, and other ways that just totally miss the mark.
If religions and beliefs are like the different broadcast channels you see on TV, you get Atheism when you turn the TV off.
It's easier to group it up as a religion for information purposes, the amount of atheists are relevant if someone's researching which religions people believe in.
Not parent poster, but I don't think that's what they were getting at.
Atheists are often generalized in the same way one might make generalizations about Catholics; the problem is that, while Catholics share a common set of beliefs and values (generally) based on doctrine and scripture, atheists don't necessarily have anything in common about their beliefs or values, aside from an absence of theistic belief.
I don't hate religion or religious people. I just don't believe. I do find religions really interesting, though, historically and culturally.
I'm not an asshole to every single religious person that exists. It's only when someone brings up pushing religious ideologies that I get pissed.
I know that's a big one.
Or that we're "godless heathens" because not believing in a god somehow means not having morals.
Or that we're "godless heathens" because not believing in a god somehow means not having morals
The scariest thing is someone claiming that only religion imparts morals and ethics.
Because if the only thing stopping a person from raping and killing and causing pain and anguish is the religion they have… dude, THEY ARE the monster everyone needs to be afraid of.
My own morals and ethics aren’t forcibly imposed on me by an outside force, ready to snap apart and break off with the smallest of stresses.
No, it is built up inside of me via empathy and understanding and personal experiences, and is therefore a core part of my being and far more immune to corruption or breakage.
And then how many pushy religious people actually follow the good moral lessons from their beliefs, anyway? Like American fundies are so judgmental. Even my quiet, meek Catholic grandmother is so judgmental.
Looking for an argument on every corner. Especially on the stupidest and most inhumane situations. That’s reserved for Christians.
That we don't have sympathy or empathy for religious people.
Speak for yourself /s
Like almost any marginalized group, atheists get caricatured by their most vocal members.
I probably would have become atheist a decade sooner if I hadn't associated it with the logocentric, Western chauvinist, and plain old bigots who first represented atheism to me.
There are plenty of us who aren't obsessed with religious debates; we don't hate religious people; and our cultural, political, and philosophical ideas are not frozen in 18^th^ Century Europe.
There is this strange idea that atheists are just rebellious against God because they don't want to be responsible for being moral, kinda like disobeying your parents and sneaking out to party.
Also, lots of theists assume atheists used to be religious, they don't really consider that people are raised without religion sometimes.
Yeah, the first one is really frustrating.
No, I don't need the threat of everlasting punishment to be moral. I'm a secular humanist, and the idea that the only reason you're not evil is because of threats of going to hell is way scarier than just being kind because it's the right thing to do.
It’s not religion that’s the problem. It’s bad people. Religion becomes a vehicle for bad people to do bad things to vulnerable people.
Otherwise go ahead and do your meditations, rain dance, or give to your earth god for all I care.
I think religion is the problem and not just bad people in the same way I think fascism is a problem not just bad people. A collection of people who are discouraged from challenging authority and encouraged to operate on "faith" that the leaders aren't corrupt is inherently flawed.
That we're smug knowitalls that just goes around looking for logical debates.
I think we're stereotyped often as the militant and belligerent atheists quite a lot. We have been painted as unsympathetic assholes who like to talk down to religious people to make us feel better about ourselves, not to mention a weird overlap with some parts of the far-right, usually by way of transphobia, homophobia, racism, social darwinism and the enforcement of poorly understood or straight up incorrect "science"
Eugenecists inhabit this space, as well as people who might call themselves "race realists", as well as people who think their middle-school-level understanding of genetics and sex encapsulates the entirety of gender and sexuality. It's those atheists who claim to love science, hate ignorance, but remain ignorant of science. They give us a bad name, and their loudness makes it seem like they represent us
I've wondered if most of those atheists were brought up very religious. They seem to take a very religious attitude towards their atheism. It would kind of explain why they're so obnoxious, too. Kind of like lashing out at their upbringing.
I suspect a whole lot of atheists were brought up religious. The heavy religiosity is the push they need to even think on the subject. I think a lot of people who are what I'd call passively religious (non-practicing, don't really care, but might say say they believe in god if asked) don't have to engage with the material critically, so it's not as much a part of their world. For sure there are atheists out there who have a dogmatic approach to atheism because of their former belief systems
But even beyond that, I think it runs deeper. Christianity, if you're in the west, is foundational to our culture, even in secular nations. It still informs traditions and morals and perspectives that can trace themselves to a Christian origin, and that underlying religiosity in our cultures does inform the way in which we view the world. I concluded this when a friend pointed out to me the language we use in evolution
We describe evolved adaptations as serving a purpose. We'll say things like "we evolved opposable digits to better grasp things", and yeah, we all know that's not strictly true, but language informs our perspective and reflects it. We didn't evolve thumbs to hold things; We just got thumbs, and were able to hold things with them. These are not the same, and the former still has that kernel of creationism in it, some subconscious belief in a greater purpose
That said, I generally agree that an atheist might be made more militant if he had a particularly religious upbringing. Really, though, I suspect it's also a lot to do with insecurities. I grew up in a passively religious household, and was sent to a catholic extracurricular just so that I could choose for myself what to believe, and in that brief time, I actually became easily the most religious person in my house. Religion spoke to my insecurities and fears. I was bullied a lot at the time, and the thought that my righteousness would be rewarded and my bullies wickedness would be punished was wonderful. In turning atheist after that, it didn't undo the bullying. Instead, the self-righteous idea of "I'm smarter than you dumb Christians" was the new salve for insecurties
I'm way more tolerant now. Maybe the issue is just age. Maybe most of those awful ones are just obnoxious teens and young adults who would be obnoxious either way, and they'll grow out of it. If they don't, they get to become Ricky Gervais without the money or fame. Kinda rambled more than I meant to, but yeah, just throwing out some perspectives
I've ran across a few in real life as well. The main thing they have in common seems to be religious recoil. They used to be religious, but realised that it was false. Unfortunately, losing the nostic part is harder than losing the theistic part. They tend to over shoot, and become quite radical.
On the plus side, they tend to settle down. It takes time (sometimes years) to find their new equilibrium. I wasn't particularly religious growing up, but even I had a bit of that recoil effect for a while. I'll still go toe to toe with a religion enthusiast, if required, but try not to instigate the "discussion". I just step in when their public views need balancing out.
Honestly I am mostly bothered by the "reddit atheist" stereotype. Most of the atheist even on Reddit, that I have met, even in Reddit, were as annoying or pleasant as everyone else. But it feels like if you oppose religious nonsense as it gets pushed in your face online, "everyone" thinks you are some radical who hates all e.g. christians, while in reality you might intentionally buy some handmade crafts for the local church to support some charity and support your elderly local community by rewarding their social efforts.
I don’t care what others do with themselves in the privacy of their house, or what goes on between their ears.
I take a very big exception, however, when people try to tell me how to act and live based on their own scriptures.
A person’s religion only affects them. It defines what they can or cannot do.
It doesn’t affect me in the least, nor should it ever do so to any degree.
Absolutely. Just because I think religion is stupid and don't want it shoved down my throat everywhere I go, doesn't mean I dislike the people spending their time on it.
People who don't keep religion to themselves and start bothering me or others with it (Jehovah's witnesses and whatnot), they bother me and I do dislike those few
I live in a country that is on the surface quite ateist and nobody is openly religious, not even Muslim immigrants.
So i really got nothing.
Where is thi magical land?
That we have to have faith to be an atheist. Complete nonsense, of course.
Faith and belief are the root of all evil.
It is obvious if you look at the core definitions:
belief is the uncritical acceptance of a premise when no evidence for or against it exists or is immediately available.
faith is the uncritical acceptance of a premise despite the existence of evidence that invalidates it.
Both of these are used to make people ignore reality in favour of fantasies and lies. Because if something was a verifiable fact grounded in reality, it would require neither faith nor belief.
A lot of people like to say that atheists traffics with demons to solve their daily problems, routinely play with Satan's gigantic cock, and do a fuck ton of drugs and I'm here to put the rumors to rest. I have never once even seen Satan's gigantic cock, nonetheless held it in my hands.
That when we see a fish on the back of their car, we know we're going to be following a really considerate driver.
That you are enlightened, not by a phony God’s blessing but by your own intelligence
I been told that if god was 100% proven is real, I would have to bend the knee and love and worship him.
Fuck that, if he is real I am going to make it my life mission to kill god. He ain't looking like much of a good guy to me.
🤘
I shave my neck
That it's in other places like it is in the USA. I think being an atheist or christian here in central europe is very different to what americans experience in their lives. And it's yet another story in other countries.
Answering that question is pointless: I couldn't give a single solitary flying fuck what a mentally deranged person thinks of any demographic unless it becomes a threat to somebody other than themselves.
An untrue stereotype is that you're all like this poster above lol
Honestly, I think a good stereotype that religious people have about athiests is that the average athiest would consider the religious ones to be the "normal people." Blatantly not true, we view them as willful ignorants, less functional human beings.
They seem to have this sense that irreligious/non-spiritual people are "missing something". That " missing something" sense could range from them having some kind of weird pity for us to thinking of us as no different from talking animals.
It's like they think we're missing something that should be a apart of humanity. They don't think that we've actually overcome that part of humanity.
I said irreligious because I'm from a Buddhist country.
Not believing in anything, which is very true as people just replaced "believing in something bigger" with "numbing depression with consumerism".
But there can be atheist christians (like, they should be if they read the damn bible) and you can be spiritual and social without believing in some random interpretation of other people thousands of years ago, word by word.
We're not really smarter than religious people on the whole. Human intelligence is deeply flawed, being right about anything is a matter of luck and/or hard work
I'd be curious to see some studies on that. Being smart is like muscle strength, it requires exercising to build and maintain. Most religions actively discourage doing this. They also have a tendency to shed members who do, despite the warnings. These 2 effects combined could easily push down the general IQ of religious groups, unless additional effects exist to correct for it.
What is your definition of smart?
It seems to me that people like to tie to how fast someone can do something, not whether they can do it at all.
The ability to generalise, or otherwise apply previous knowledge and experience to an otherwise novel problem. The ability to do so at speed is also a large factor, though slow but correct can also be acceptable, depending on the subtask.
Intelligence obviously breaks down into a myriad of sub forms. The obvious, and easily tested are things like spatial reasoning, or word games. Maths and logic puzzle solving also fall into the same group. These are used to form most IQ tests. Beyond that however are forms that are harder to measure, social intelligence is one such. Along with things like lie detection or reliable deception.
In most research, IQ is used. It has massive flaws, but is still useful. It tends to be an accurate proxy for full intelligence, at least at a statistical level. It's also useful for relative level comparison. E.g. a maths IQ of 100 would be average. In an average person, that would be normal. However, if their overall IQ was 160, then it's actually a significant deficit. It would point towards something like dyscalculia. Conversely, in someone with a significant deficit, it can point to an area of particular skill. Shaping their teaching method to lean on that area would likely help overall learning.
Basically, intelligence is a huge can of worms, once you dig into it. IQ akin to using GDP to measure countries. It has its uses, but you have to be careful with it, since it can hide a lot of flaws.
Another point to consider is that intelligence/being smart is a learned and practiced skill. The best potential bodybuilder in the world won't reach their potential drinking beer in front of the TV. A potential smart person can't actualise that potential without effort and practice.
You're a stereotypical Reddit atheist 😅
Atheist and Athlete look too similar
We don't really eat babies.
Yeah, Satan is very strict on his new policies.
That atheist are generally right wing
Wut
The Red Scare tried very, very hard to link atheism with socialism, and not only did people believe it, it wasn't particularly wrong.
"The church" meaning an established instition of faith with ties to a state has been a source of legitmacy for monarchies and aristocracies
they also tend to enforce other hierarchies like patriarchy and of course clerigical
Perhaps that anyone of any religion is not also atheist.
Anyone in any theology believes in only their deity, but doesn't believe in the hundreds of other recorded, historical deities.
Even the theists are atheists.
A-the-ism. "A", lack of/without. "The(o)", god. At it's core atheism means that you don't believe in god, any god. So no, believers can't be atheists because they believe in at least one god.
That atheists don't believe in an afterlife.
That is true of most atheists though...
If by life you mean being part of the biological ecosystem then yes.
I was thinking of Buddhists who worship no god but believe in reincarnation. I also have friends who claim to be atheists yet believe there is an afterlife in a higher dimension.
My personal belief is that the last state of the biological computer we call a brain becomes our eternity. Religion is designed to make that last thought a hopeful one.
I mean, we decompose into nutrients and technically with our decomposition, our nutrients enter the soil and we become part of the cycle.
In like a spiritual way? Then you are not an atheist, just a hipster christian
So because they believe in life after death, they believe in Christ?
What after life do some atheists believe in? How do they get there?
I don't know, who is "us"? Are you asking for opinions from atheists about stereotypes about Christians that aren't true?
(Ex-atheist here) That our beliefs are rigid, and won't change.
What made you religious?
Not OP, but for me it was realising I was dronegender. I could either be an atheist whose identity was valid but not "real" as I conceived it, or I could embrace a religion that said my identity was achievable. That said mind melding with a swarm was possible and I could be who I am in a physical sense and not just a personal one.
Also I met a god. She's nice.
Sorry, I didn't really understand that. Can you please eli5?
I need magic in order to feel like myself. I couldn't keep being an atheist once I started using magic.
How do you define magic?
I won't use that word. From atheism, I went to igtheism.
Oh, I would still consider that a form of atheism, colloquially if not formally.
I know nothing colloquial in the concept of igtheism. Formally, by its very existence, igtheism proves that atheism can only be conditional - hence it is not even a proper concept.
I know that, formally, you can't lack a belief in a god that isn't properly defined, and I agree with you that many religions' gods aren't properly defined. But I think the colloquially definition of atheist or agnostic could still cover igtheism.
As for theists, the gods are equally undefined for atheists/agnostics. For an igtheist, beliefs of atheists/ignostics (or lack of belief) cannot be taken any more seriously than those of theists, until definitions are provided.
Take an example. There are people who say that god is nothing but merely energy. Can someone call herself an atheist if this is definition of god?
Sans definition of god, theism/atheism do not make sense.
We don't know right from wrong because we don't fear retribution from an almighty.
I'm an atheist, so I get to rape and murder as much as I want. It just happens that that amount is zero.
I'm also kind to others, purely because doing so makes me feel good. If it also builds up "karma credits" with others, that's just a nice fringe benefit.
I had a coworker a few years ago who was seriously confused how I maintained morality without an imaginary friend threatening to fuck me up for all eternity. Like, he genuinely struggled to compute how it was possible for me to go around not raping and killing people as an atheist, to the extent that the guy was clearly wary around me going forward from that point. Very strange dude. Also weirdly enthusiastic about competitive pistol shooting.
God doesn't want him to shoot people, yet.
That actually makes me boil, cause i remember the live interview with a religious dude around 2008. In which he said and i quote "i don't fear the law of man, i only fear god", the bastard said it after killing someone in the name of jehova (i don't even remember if it was only one victim or more, my monkey brain was just baffled at his response to the question).
They don't play with the same social rules at all, and then they rage because "us" r the crazy ones.
I think that's the sum of it all
Ah, this one always makes me smile. I store it right next to the assumption we haven't read their holy book, and the assumption we didn't learn anything good from doing so that we can share as common ground.
If those are the only assumptions I have to get past, we can friends shortly!
No morality. Eat children. Sleep with your partner when you're stuck in traffic. The source of all evil. Can't be trusted. Are always miserable.
Basically everything religious folks really are under the mask they wear.
As a religious person, I will absolutely sleep with your partner while you're stuck in traffic.
I love a nap. I'm always sleepy, and if you're stuck in traffic and I'm bored, imma be sleepin.
This is something we can all get behind. Just like OPs partner. Because we’re all stuck in traffic and they’re sleeping at the front.
I sure do love me a sleep train
It's not under the mask. Some of them, they just cannot apprehend the fact that a human being can live respectfully without the permanent menace of being sent to hell or get some holy wrath or something
I hadn't thought that could be a stuck in traffic activity but I might just go out at rush hour and see what's up.
Hey wifey, I'm stuck
If we just hear “the gospel” enough, we’ll come around. In reality, I hear street preachers, and see “Jesus loves you” stickers on street corners, and it turns me off even more.
Honestly, as an honestly pretty unspiritual Christian, Street preachers make me unnecessarily angry. Because it feels like they're just bible bashing and aren't actually doing anything to further Christianity's goals, despite the fact they think they are. Individuals can't win people over by shoving their beliefs down people's throats.
I feel like the only people who listen to these guys are people who agree with them. Most people ignore them in my city.
I quite like them. And I don't mind Jehovah's witnesses. I can ignore or politely send them away without much hassle. But I think it's nice that they believe they can save people and actively try to do so. If I believed, I hope I would be a good enough person to try to save everyone else, too.
Of course, this doesn't apply to people who are trying to force people or demand poor treatment of people with different beliefs. It really depends where it comes from.
That anyone outside of the US or the middle east even gives a fuck whether you're an atheist or not
That's weird guys come on
That because we are free from god or gods that we have no moral compass. I consider myself a good person and I have good moral standards. I don't need fear from punishment after death to do so.
Also that we have no spirituality.. Spirituality and religion kinda go hand in hand but aren't mutually exclusive. That being said, I have no desire for either religion or spirituality. Maybe when I'm closer to the later chapters
From my experience many religious people have questionable moral standards.
The scariest thing is someone claiming that only religion imparts morals and ethics.
Because if the only thing stopping a person from raping and killing and causing pain and anguish is the religion they have… dude, THEY ARE the monster everyone needs to be afraid of.
My own morals and ethics aren’t forcibly imposed on me by an outside force like a religion, ready to snap apart and break off with the smallest of stresses.
No, it is built up inside of me via empathy and understanding and personal experiences, and is therefore a core part of my being and far more immune to corruption or breakage.
The "no spirituality" really resonates with me. I didn't believe in spirituality for a long time, in the same way I don't believe in the supernatural (Gods etc).
It was only recently that I realized that you can be spiritual and still have a more logical view of how the world works. The mind is a very powerful thing, and things like ritual and meditation can absolutely manifest things simply through its effect on our thoughts and behaviors.
For instance, lately I've been learning Tarot. Just a few years ago I would've thought Tarot is a complete waste of time, but it's actually an incredible way to explore problems from different perspectives and get a better sense for how you feel about things in a more abstract way.
Perhaps not exactly what you're asking but one thing many religious people don't seem to get is that they're "atheists" aswell when it comes to all the other gods out there. The difference to atheism is that we just don't believe in their god either.
I don't know how many gods there are but for the sake of an argument, lets say 500. A Christian believes in 1 out of 500 gods and an atheist believes in 0 out of 500. We're not that different from each other after all.
Atheism means you believe in no god whatsoever, not that you don't believe in a particular set of gods.
That's what they're saying. An atheist believes in 0 of the total options for gods and religions that you get if you add them all up. A believer believes in 1 or a few of them. So really, the religious are also non-believers when it comes to most gods and religions.
Not sure about that. It takes a pretty big leap to go from believing in 0 gods to 1. I think the line dividing atheists from theists is a pretty huge rift because they hold opposing views on very fundamental matters like the concept of God itself, how the world came to be, our purpose in life, what happens after we die... I don't think it's something you can quite reduce down to a matter of numbers.
Yeah, I agree. I was just trying to clarify the intent of the comment.
But also I think that's the point of that line of debate. It is an attempt to show a religious stance from an atheist perspective in which belief is a while load of possible strange things accepted as true. It's not really much use other than when you're faced with someone who things your lack of theism is the opposite of their particular brand of religion and frames the discussion around which bits you have issue with, as if they might prove to you that you're wrong. Or to show that their belief that their religion is correct and all the others, including atheism, are the wrong ones, isn't really the other side of what an atheist thinks.
More a thought experiment than meant to characterise the entirety of atheism.
Do they? I know plenty of people who follow the Christian faith but still believe in science.
Sure, but only as far as science doesn't contradict their religious beliefs. For example, there are many Creationist Christians who reject Evolution, Natural Selection and the Big Bang.
Keep it classy, liberal-fascist beehaw.
That was part of the reason I became an atheist, to remove the hypocrisy and believe in all gods equally. I still believe in all gods equally, but am no longer an atheist.
Where I am in Australia, if as a group (say of coworkers) talking about a new person, we might be like 'maybe don't say "Jesus fucking Christ" in front of Lisa, I'm pretty sure she's extremely Christian' or 'let's do lunch instead of drinks to celebrate the milestone, I'm pretty sure Vish is Muslim so we don't want him to feel left out'.
Majority of my peers are atheist. Religion only comes up in our lives when we're trying to be inclusive or respectful of the religious minority.
It's funny how some places can't do the same in reverse.
Edit to say, the thing is, to the majority of us, belief in a god is silly hocus pocus, drummed up by humans when we just didn't understand how things worked and the scientific method didn't exist. But as a respectful person living in a society, I live by the rules that you don't make fun of those silly ideas, and also that religion is intrinsically linked to people's cultures too. So I have a live and let live attitude to it.
Pity many Christians can't be that Christian.
Most successful religions are highly evangelical. This is how they become religious. They also have the view that their way of worship is the only and correct way to worship. Otherwise, people would not have to follow that religion. These two ideas, crucial to the spread of a religion, are not compatible with tolerance.
In fact, if you genuinely believed that worshipping a God in a specific way was necessary or you would face eternal punishment. Would you not want to save everyone else from this. The do not see it as intolerance. They genuinely think they are helping you. Others just see it as their tribe and have a use Vs them attitude.
For Atheists it is easier to accept and welcome others. There's no punishment for it. So tolerance comes easy. It's also necessary for religions to demonise Atheists, to control their flock. So the historical cultural perception of Atheists is not one of kindness and tolerance. That's why it's seems novel that reality doesn't match that.
I was doing some work on the servers at a Christian college and I must have said 'God damn it' or something like that cause they pulled me aside and said we can't be taking the lords name in vain lol
This is where I'm at. It's "you do you" so long as it doesn't harm yourself or others.
That we despise people who have religious faith. I don't despise people with religious faith - I despise what religion does to people who have faith.
I rarely eat babies
That’s the best way. Well done is a sacrilege
Ham Sarris has no problem with it
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Ham Sarris has no problem with it
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
That I can't do religious stuff! I don't have to believe in the religious components to participate in an event that holds meaning to you. To me it's not sacred -- all just normal words being said and ordinary matter being handled according to some rules. I do that every day at work at the direction of a different kind of "higher power" (clients) without anger or discomfort, it's really not a big deal!
I'm not angry at god for not existing, nor am I angry at all the people who believe otherwise. If the invitation to your religious event is in good faith, I'm honored to attend, and will just keep to myself or make small talk. Plus I've studied enough faiths I can probably fake it, if keeping the situation under control requires it ;)
I've discovered that in practice, many people of different faiths are not sure what to think about this position. Most are OK with it, some not (I just give them their space). With the interesting exception of Buddhists! They've always been super excited to bring me along to the pagoda somehow. No one ever tried to convert me, and the monks often speak a surprising number of languages and are interesting and well traveled. It's become a set of surprisingly wholesome memories (I immigrated to a primarily Buddhist country)!
That we do abortions for fun.
I mean, I do do abortions for fun. But not because I'm an atheist.
I miss the awards only for this kind of things.
Thanks for the laugh good sir.
Were you paraphrasing MiB3 there?
https://youtu.be/GNOZhAc26I8
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/GNOZhAc26I8
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
That it’s a religion. Except for a few groups, which I find kind of strange, being an atheist is the lack of religion and belief in a god. It’s not a religion or anything like a religion and so often I see atheism discussed by the religious in religious terms l, as a monolith, and other ways that just totally miss the mark.
If religions and beliefs are like the different broadcast channels you see on TV, you get Atheism when you turn the TV off.
It's easier to group it up as a religion for information purposes, the amount of atheists are relevant if someone's researching which religions people believe in.
Not parent poster, but I don't think that's what they were getting at.
Atheists are often generalized in the same way one might make generalizations about Catholics; the problem is that, while Catholics share a common set of beliefs and values (generally) based on doctrine and scripture, atheists don't necessarily have anything in common about their beliefs or values, aside from an absence of theistic belief.
I don't hate religion or religious people. I just don't believe. I do find religions really interesting, though, historically and culturally.
I'm not an asshole to every single religious person that exists. It's only when someone brings up pushing religious ideologies that I get pissed.
I know that's a big one.
Or that we're "godless heathens" because not believing in a god somehow means not having morals.
The scariest thing is someone claiming that only religion imparts morals and ethics.
Because if the only thing stopping a person from raping and killing and causing pain and anguish is the religion they have… dude, THEY ARE the monster everyone needs to be afraid of.
My own morals and ethics aren’t forcibly imposed on me by an outside force, ready to snap apart and break off with the smallest of stresses.
No, it is built up inside of me via empathy and understanding and personal experiences, and is therefore a core part of my being and far more immune to corruption or breakage.
And then how many pushy religious people actually follow the good moral lessons from their beliefs, anyway? Like American fundies are so judgmental. Even my quiet, meek Catholic grandmother is so judgmental.
Looking for an argument on every corner. Especially on the stupidest and most inhumane situations. That’s reserved for Christians.
That we don't have sympathy or empathy for religious people.
Speak for yourself /s
Like almost any marginalized group, atheists get caricatured by their most vocal members.
I probably would have become atheist a decade sooner if I hadn't associated it with the logocentric, Western chauvinist, and plain old bigots who first represented atheism to me.
There are plenty of us who aren't obsessed with religious debates; we don't hate religious people; and our cultural, political, and philosophical ideas are not frozen in 18^th^ Century Europe.
There is this strange idea that atheists are just rebellious against God because they don't want to be responsible for being moral, kinda like disobeying your parents and sneaking out to party.
Also, lots of theists assume atheists used to be religious, they don't really consider that people are raised without religion sometimes.
Yeah, the first one is really frustrating.
No, I don't need the threat of everlasting punishment to be moral. I'm a secular humanist, and the idea that the only reason you're not evil is because of threats of going to hell is way scarier than just being kind because it's the right thing to do.
It’s not religion that’s the problem. It’s bad people. Religion becomes a vehicle for bad people to do bad things to vulnerable people.
Otherwise go ahead and do your meditations, rain dance, or give to your earth god for all I care.
I think religion is the problem and not just bad people in the same way I think fascism is a problem not just bad people. A collection of people who are discouraged from challenging authority and encouraged to operate on "faith" that the leaders aren't corrupt is inherently flawed.
That we're smug knowitalls that just goes around looking for logical debates.
I think we're stereotyped often as the militant and belligerent atheists quite a lot. We have been painted as unsympathetic assholes who like to talk down to religious people to make us feel better about ourselves, not to mention a weird overlap with some parts of the far-right, usually by way of transphobia, homophobia, racism, social darwinism and the enforcement of poorly understood or straight up incorrect "science"
Eugenecists inhabit this space, as well as people who might call themselves "race realists", as well as people who think their middle-school-level understanding of genetics and sex encapsulates the entirety of gender and sexuality. It's those atheists who claim to love science, hate ignorance, but remain ignorant of science. They give us a bad name, and their loudness makes it seem like they represent us
I've wondered if most of those atheists were brought up very religious. They seem to take a very religious attitude towards their atheism. It would kind of explain why they're so obnoxious, too. Kind of like lashing out at their upbringing.
I suspect a whole lot of atheists were brought up religious. The heavy religiosity is the push they need to even think on the subject. I think a lot of people who are what I'd call passively religious (non-practicing, don't really care, but might say say they believe in god if asked) don't have to engage with the material critically, so it's not as much a part of their world. For sure there are atheists out there who have a dogmatic approach to atheism because of their former belief systems
But even beyond that, I think it runs deeper. Christianity, if you're in the west, is foundational to our culture, even in secular nations. It still informs traditions and morals and perspectives that can trace themselves to a Christian origin, and that underlying religiosity in our cultures does inform the way in which we view the world. I concluded this when a friend pointed out to me the language we use in evolution
We describe evolved adaptations as serving a purpose. We'll say things like "we evolved opposable digits to better grasp things", and yeah, we all know that's not strictly true, but language informs our perspective and reflects it. We didn't evolve thumbs to hold things; We just got thumbs, and were able to hold things with them. These are not the same, and the former still has that kernel of creationism in it, some subconscious belief in a greater purpose
That said, I generally agree that an atheist might be made more militant if he had a particularly religious upbringing. Really, though, I suspect it's also a lot to do with insecurities. I grew up in a passively religious household, and was sent to a catholic extracurricular just so that I could choose for myself what to believe, and in that brief time, I actually became easily the most religious person in my house. Religion spoke to my insecurities and fears. I was bullied a lot at the time, and the thought that my righteousness would be rewarded and my bullies wickedness would be punished was wonderful. In turning atheist after that, it didn't undo the bullying. Instead, the self-righteous idea of "I'm smarter than you dumb Christians" was the new salve for insecurties
I'm way more tolerant now. Maybe the issue is just age. Maybe most of those awful ones are just obnoxious teens and young adults who would be obnoxious either way, and they'll grow out of it. If they don't, they get to become Ricky Gervais without the money or fame. Kinda rambled more than I meant to, but yeah, just throwing out some perspectives
I've ran across a few in real life as well. The main thing they have in common seems to be religious recoil. They used to be religious, but realised that it was false. Unfortunately, losing the nostic part is harder than losing the theistic part. They tend to over shoot, and become quite radical.
On the plus side, they tend to settle down. It takes time (sometimes years) to find their new equilibrium. I wasn't particularly religious growing up, but even I had a bit of that recoil effect for a while. I'll still go toe to toe with a religion enthusiast, if required, but try not to instigate the "discussion". I just step in when their public views need balancing out.
Honestly I am mostly bothered by the "reddit atheist" stereotype. Most of the atheist even on Reddit, that I have met, even in Reddit, were as annoying or pleasant as everyone else. But it feels like if you oppose religious nonsense as it gets pushed in your face online, "everyone" thinks you are some radical who hates all e.g. christians, while in reality you might intentionally buy some handmade crafts for the local church to support some charity and support your elderly local community by rewarding their social efforts.
I don’t care what others do with themselves in the privacy of their house, or what goes on between their ears.
I take a very big exception, however, when people try to tell me how to act and live based on their own scriptures.
A person’s religion only affects them. It defines what they can or cannot do.
It doesn’t affect me in the least, nor should it ever do so to any degree.
Absolutely. Just because I think religion is stupid and don't want it shoved down my throat everywhere I go, doesn't mean I dislike the people spending their time on it.
People who don't keep religion to themselves and start bothering me or others with it (Jehovah's witnesses and whatnot), they bother me and I do dislike those few
I live in a country that is on the surface quite ateist and nobody is openly religious, not even Muslim immigrants.
So i really got nothing.
Where is thi magical land?
That we have to have faith to be an atheist. Complete nonsense, of course.
Faith and belief are the root of all evil.
It is obvious if you look at the core definitions:
Both of these are used to make people ignore reality in favour of fantasies and lies. Because if something was a verifiable fact grounded in reality, it would require neither faith nor belief.
A lot of people like to say that atheists traffics with demons to solve their daily problems, routinely play with Satan's gigantic cock, and do a fuck ton of drugs and I'm here to put the rumors to rest. I have never once even seen Satan's gigantic cock, nonetheless held it in my hands.
That when we see a fish on the back of their car, we know we're going to be following a really considerate driver.
That you are enlightened, not by a phony God’s blessing but by your own intelligence
I been told that if god was 100% proven is real, I would have to bend the knee and love and worship him.
Fuck that, if he is real I am going to make it my life mission to kill god. He ain't looking like much of a good guy to me.
🤘
I shave my neck
That it's in other places like it is in the USA. I think being an atheist or christian here in central europe is very different to what americans experience in their lives. And it's yet another story in other countries.
Answering that question is pointless: I couldn't give a single solitary flying fuck what a mentally deranged person thinks of any demographic unless it becomes a threat to somebody other than themselves.
An untrue stereotype is that you're all like this poster above lol
Honestly, I think a good stereotype that religious people have about athiests is that the average athiest would consider the religious ones to be the "normal people." Blatantly not true, we view them as willful ignorants, less functional human beings.
They seem to have this sense that irreligious/non-spiritual people are "missing something". That " missing something" sense could range from them having some kind of weird pity for us to thinking of us as no different from talking animals. It's like they think we're missing something that should be a apart of humanity. They don't think that we've actually overcome that part of humanity. I said irreligious because I'm from a Buddhist country.
Not believing in anything, which is very true as people just replaced "believing in something bigger" with "numbing depression with consumerism".
But there can be atheist christians (like, they should be if they read the damn bible) and you can be spiritual and social without believing in some random interpretation of other people thousands of years ago, word by word.
We're not really smarter than religious people on the whole. Human intelligence is deeply flawed, being right about anything is a matter of luck and/or hard work
I'd be curious to see some studies on that. Being smart is like muscle strength, it requires exercising to build and maintain. Most religions actively discourage doing this. They also have a tendency to shed members who do, despite the warnings. These 2 effects combined could easily push down the general IQ of religious groups, unless additional effects exist to correct for it.
What is your definition of smart?
It seems to me that people like to tie to how fast someone can do something, not whether they can do it at all.
The ability to generalise, or otherwise apply previous knowledge and experience to an otherwise novel problem. The ability to do so at speed is also a large factor, though slow but correct can also be acceptable, depending on the subtask.
Intelligence obviously breaks down into a myriad of sub forms. The obvious, and easily tested are things like spatial reasoning, or word games. Maths and logic puzzle solving also fall into the same group. These are used to form most IQ tests. Beyond that however are forms that are harder to measure, social intelligence is one such. Along with things like lie detection or reliable deception.
In most research, IQ is used. It has massive flaws, but is still useful. It tends to be an accurate proxy for full intelligence, at least at a statistical level. It's also useful for relative level comparison. E.g. a maths IQ of 100 would be average. In an average person, that would be normal. However, if their overall IQ was 160, then it's actually a significant deficit. It would point towards something like dyscalculia. Conversely, in someone with a significant deficit, it can point to an area of particular skill. Shaping their teaching method to lean on that area would likely help overall learning.
Basically, intelligence is a huge can of worms, once you dig into it. IQ akin to using GDP to measure countries. It has its uses, but you have to be careful with it, since it can hide a lot of flaws.
Another point to consider is that intelligence/being smart is a learned and practiced skill. The best potential bodybuilder in the world won't reach their potential drinking beer in front of the TV. A potential smart person can't actualise that potential without effort and practice.
You're a stereotypical Reddit atheist 😅
Atheist and Athlete look too similar
We don't really eat babies.
Yeah, Satan is very strict on his new policies.
That atheist are generally right wing
Wut
The Red Scare tried very, very hard to link atheism with socialism, and not only did people believe it, it wasn't particularly wrong.
"The church" meaning an established instition of faith with ties to a state has been a source of legitmacy for monarchies and aristocracies
they also tend to enforce other hierarchies like patriarchy and of course clerigical
Perhaps that anyone of any religion is not also atheist.
Anyone in any theology believes in only their deity, but doesn't believe in the hundreds of other recorded, historical deities.
Even the theists are atheists.
A-the-ism. "A", lack of/without. "The(o)", god. At it's core atheism means that you don't believe in god, any god. So no, believers can't be atheists because they believe in at least one god.
That atheists don't believe in an afterlife.
That is true of most atheists though...
If by life you mean being part of the biological ecosystem then yes.
I was thinking of Buddhists who worship no god but believe in reincarnation. I also have friends who claim to be atheists yet believe there is an afterlife in a higher dimension.
My personal belief is that the last state of the biological computer we call a brain becomes our eternity. Religion is designed to make that last thought a hopeful one.
I mean, we decompose into nutrients and technically with our decomposition, our nutrients enter the soil and we become part of the cycle.
In like a spiritual way? Then you are not an atheist, just a hipster christian
So because they believe in life after death, they believe in Christ?
What after life do some atheists believe in? How do they get there?
I don't know, who is "us"? Are you asking for opinions from atheists about stereotypes about Christians that aren't true?
(Ex-atheist here) That our beliefs are rigid, and won't change.
What made you religious?
Not OP, but for me it was realising I was dronegender. I could either be an atheist whose identity was valid but not "real" as I conceived it, or I could embrace a religion that said my identity was achievable. That said mind melding with a swarm was possible and I could be who I am in a physical sense and not just a personal one.
Also I met a god. She's nice.
Sorry, I didn't really understand that. Can you please eli5?
I need magic in order to feel like myself. I couldn't keep being an atheist once I started using magic.
How do you define magic?
I won't use that word. From atheism, I went to igtheism.
Oh, I would still consider that a form of atheism, colloquially if not formally.
I know nothing colloquial in the concept of igtheism. Formally, by its very existence, igtheism proves that atheism can only be conditional - hence it is not even a proper concept.
I know that, formally, you can't lack a belief in a god that isn't properly defined, and I agree with you that many religions' gods aren't properly defined. But I think the colloquially definition of atheist or agnostic could still cover igtheism.
As for theists, the gods are equally undefined for atheists/agnostics. For an igtheist, beliefs of atheists/ignostics (or lack of belief) cannot be taken any more seriously than those of theists, until definitions are provided.
Take an example. There are people who say that god is nothing but merely energy. Can someone call herself an atheist if this is definition of god?
Sans definition of god, theism/atheism do not make sense.