Skip to main content

The other thread concerning all the "atheist bashing" that goes on got me to thinking: I don't think atheists are based enough, actually. I want my beliefs challenged. I want you all to give me some valid reason to question my beliefs. Not a single should has done so in my entire tenure here but I don't know that I'll ever get tired of seeing you try.

My acceptance of the ration world can handle all the bashing anyone can dish out.

That said, let's bash some atheists.

Here is an example of one who was really stupid. This idiot is suing a Christian organization to get them to remove a bumper sticker commemorating April 1st as National Atheist Day.

The article is here:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/i...GE.view&pageId=71008

The reason this guy is stupid is because he is attempting to silence people who offend him thereby trampling the constitution. While I vehementaly disagree with the bumper sticker, I would fight for their right to say stupid stuff.

So, this is an example of a stupid atheist.

Any others?

Extra points are awarded to fellow atheists who point out stupid atheists.
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Hi Fishy,
I have to post this. Its too perfect to me. No offense to you or any others. It just shows a lot of the same arguments all of you use. Big Grin


Stupid Atheist Tricks

There are intelligent, educated atheists who can give you a plausible, well-reasoned argument for their position without being offensive. But if you've ever debated atheists on-line, or for that matter in real life, you run into a lot more would-be clever atheists who don't understand the difference between reasoned debate and Christian-baiting. For those folks, I have here collected a list of typical tactics to use.

#1 -- Insist that "religion is illogical," especially if you've had no training in formal logic and couldn't tell a syllogism from a shibboleth.

#2 -- Insist that you "just believe in one less god than you do." Ignore the fact that a Christian monotheist and a Hindu or Neo-Pagan polytheist agree that the supernatural exists, which puts them closer to each other than either is to you. And never agree that a Christian (or whatever) might concede that there is an element of truth in other religions.

#3 -- In any discussion of religion, you must make at least one reference to Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, or invisible unicorns.

#4 -- Be sure to mention the Crusades, even if you know nothing of medieval history and couldn't give a concise summary of the events to save your life.

#5 -- Be sure to mention the Inquisition and/or the Witch Trials, because if anyone claiming to be a Christian ever did anything evil, it obviously invalidates that religion.

#6 -- If your opponent brings up the fact that more people have been killed by officially atheist regimes than in all the religious wars and persecutions in history put together (e.g. 80 million by Stalin, 60 million by Mao, 1-3 million by the Khmer Rouge), insist that they weren't "real" atheists, or that "communism is a religion."

#7 -- If your opponent says that if bad atheists don't invalidate atheism, bad Christians don't invalidate Christianity, refuse to concede the point. Bring up the Inquisition or the Crusades again.

#8 -- Claim that "science" somehow proves atheism. Ignore any claim that science can't do any such thing, since it operates on the basis of methodological materialism.

#9 -- Claim that evolution falsifies Genesis. If Christians or Jews claim to have no problem with evolution, accuse them of denying what the Bible actually says.

#10 -- Claim to know more about the Bible than "Christians" do. Ignore the immense implausibility, since Christians are likely to read the Bible every day and study it at home, at church, and on church retreats.

#11 -- This is most important -- insist, as heatedly as any extreme fundamentalist, that the Bible must be read in the most naively literal sense in all passages, and therefore the tiniest mistake or scribal error invalidates the whole thing and any religion based on it.

#12 -- Imply that your opponent is mentally ill. If he/she doesn't seem to get it, be explicit. After all, religion is a form of mental illness. Ignore the fact that theists are no more likely to score high on psychiatric intake tests than anyone else.

#13 -- Two words: Richard Dawkins.
The stupidest athiest I know is ME!

In fact, this weekend I had an epiphany and decided I have no choice but to turn from my athiest/agnostic ways and admit that there really IS a god... and she hates me!

Had a real twist of "fate" that I just cannot even chalk up to fate anymore, because it is just too bizarre to even believe this is happening to me. All I can figure is that God just created us to have some fun. She gets some sick enjoyment out of just messing with us. I think we're some kind of pieces on a board game or something.

I can chalk up our existence, the Earth's existence, and everything else to logic and years of evolution. But some of life's experiences I cannot consider coincidental anymore. So I'm going to start praying and begging God to stay the heck out of my life because it goes along much smoother that way.
quote:
Did I scare everyone off? No sense of humor?


Oh, I have a great sense of humor. Those simply weren't funny to me. Not offensive, mind you, just humorless.

You did, however, give me the opportunity to try to learn something. Evey one of these arguments are a logic fallacy. The problem is, I don't know what they are called. They would be defined as a fallacy where a known scientific fact is contorted and mangled to make it appear to support a view it was not originally designed for.

I know there is a name for this fallacy but can't find the thing right now. Learning mode on!
quote:
So I'm going to start praying and begging God to stay the heck out of my life because it goes along much smoother that way.


Hah. Yeah, that's kind of stupid. Wink

You may have made the mistake of believing that you actually have free will in this life. You don't. It's a long, complicated philosophy but take a look here for a start. Quite interesting. Whatever the case, I'd be intereted int eh details of your epiphany.

A little remediation might do you good, too. Take a look at Julia Sweeney's very entertaining performance (and book) entitled "Letting Go of God." It truly is a beautiful, sad, funny and honest look at the journey many of us had to experience - but from a woman's perspective.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtIyx687ytk

You have been missed, by the way. Welcome back.
quote:
Originally posted by GoFish:
quote:
Did I scare everyone off? No sense of humor?


Oh, I have a great sense of humor. Those simply weren't funny to me. Not offensive, mind you, just humorless.

You did, however, give me the opportunity to try to learn something. Evey one of these arguments are a logic fallacy. The problem is, I don't know what they are called. They would be defined as a fallacy where a known scientific fact is contorted and mangled to make it appear to support a view it was not originally designed for.

I know there is a name for this fallacy but can't find the thing right now. Learning mode on!


The sense of humor comment was meant for the non-atheists, I knew you would not find them funny.
Do you deny that you and DF have used several of them on the forums to defend being an atheist and to insult being a Christian?
David Hackett Fisher, the historian out of Brandeis University, author of the ever popular and therefore controversial Albion's Seed wrote a much shorter book once called [I]Historians' Fallacies[I]. It is a hoot! Every single fallacy of logic is exposed by Fisher, with common names as well as Latinate fancy Scholastic ones.
I read it as an undergrad for Tom Osborne at UNA and keep a copy handy at all times!
And to be fair to both sides:

George Bush on atheism and patriotism

"Did George Bush really say that atheists should not be considered citizens?"

The following exchange took place at the Chicago airport between Robert I. Sherman of American Atheist Press">American Atheist Press and George Bush, on August 27 1987. Sherman is a fully accredited reporter, and was present by invitation as a member of the press corps. The Republican presidential nominee was there to announce federal disaster relief for Illinois. The discussion turned to the presidential primary:

RS: "What will you do to win the votes of Americans who are atheists?"

GB: "I guess I'm pretty weak in the atheist community. Faith in God is important to me."

RS: "Surely you recognize the equal citizenship and patriotism of Americans who are atheists?"

GB: "No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God."

RS: "Do you support as a sound constitutional principle the separation of state and church?"

GB: "Yes, I support the separation of church and state. I'm just not very high on atheists."

UPI reported on May 8, 1989, that various atheist organizations were still angry over the remarks.

The exchange appeared in the Boulder Daily Camera on Monday February 27, 1989. It can also be found in Free Inquiry magazine, Fall 1988 issue, Volume 8, Number 4, page 16.

On October 29, 1988, Mr. Sherman had a confrontation with Ed Murnane, cochairman of the Bush-Quayle 1988 Illinois campaign. This concerned a lawsuit Mr. Sherman had filed to stop the Community Consolidated School District 21 (Chicago, Illinois) from forcing his first-grade atheist son to pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States as "one nation under God" (Bush's phrase). The following conversation took place:

RS: "American Atheists filed the Pledge of Allegiance lawsuit yesterday. Does the Bush campaign have an official response to this filing?"

EM: "It's bull****."

RS: "What is bull****?"

EM: "Everything that American Atheists does, Rob, is bull****."

RS: "Thank you for telling me what the official position of the Bush campaign is on this issue."

EM: "You're welcome."

After Bush's election, American Atheists wrote to Bush asking him to retract his statement. On February 21st 1989, C. Boyden Gray, Counsel to the President, replied on White House stationery that Bush substantively stood by his original statement, and wrote:

As you are aware, the President is a religious man who neither supports atheism nor believes that atheism should be unnecessarily encouraged or supported by the government.

For further information, contact American Atheist Veterans at the American Atheist Press's Cameron Road address.
quote:
Originally posted by GoFish:
quote:
So I'm going to start praying and begging God to stay the heck out of my life because it goes along much smoother that way.


Hah. Yeah, that's kind of stupid. Wink

You may have made the mistake of believing that you actually have free will in this life. You don't. It's a long, complicated philosophy but take a look here for a start. Quite interesting. Whatever the case, I'd be intereted int eh details of your epiphany.

A little remediation might do you good, too. Take a look at Julia Sweeney's very entertaining performance (and book) entitled "Letting Go of God." It truly is a beautiful, sad, funny and honest look at the journey many of us had to experience - but from a woman's perspective.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtIyx687ytk

You have been missed, by the way. Welcome back.


There's no way that when she and her brother had cancer that she didnt pray to be healed . Wink

And keep in mind ,she comes from Saturday Night Live . She is alive today by the grace of God . Razzer
quote:
Originally posted by Monette:
quote:
On February 21st 1989, C. Boyden Gray, Counsel to the President, replied on White House stationery that Bush substantively stood by his original statement, and wrote:


Didn't realize Bush was in the White House in 1989 ????


In 1988, Bush won the Republican nomination for President and defeated Michael Dukakis in the general election, therefore, he would have been in office in 1989.
quote:
Do you deny that you and DF have used several of them on the forums to defend being an atheist and to insult being a Christian?


No, I absolutely claim to use many of those same arguments and rightly so.

A short summary:

1: I would not say that religion is illogical. Only a Stupid Atheist would state that. I believe religion is as innate as hunger for some people. I will point out the illogical aspects of it every time they are brought up, though. Example: The Trinity. That makes no sense no matter how much you try.

2: Yes, you are an atheist with respect to all other gods and, yes, I simply go one further than you. That is an appropriate, logical statement.

3: Yes, there is just as much evidence for Santa, Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy as there is God. Only the Flying Spaghetti Monster is real and I don't need to prive that to you. It is simply evident.

4: Yes, the Crusades were a horrible time of biblical fundamentalism. Almost as bad as the fundamentalism exhibited by Muslims today. We are just a few Bill Gray's away from a new Crusade.

5: That one is just stupid.

6: The claim that atheists have killed more people than religion is stupid. Stalin did not kill people IN THE NAME OF ATHEISM. Claiming that his evil was due to atheistic principals is simply not accurate. Muslims and Abortion clinic bombers (and Crusaders) KILL IN THE NAME OF GOD. There is a huge difference.

8: Science never has and never will "prove" atheism (nor will it "disprove god"). That is simply a dumb statement. If I ever see an atheist state that, he will be entered into this thread as a stupid atheist.

9: Evolution falsifies Genesis? Umm, no. Genesis can be interpreted as a metaphor - albeit a poor one IMO. Evolution, however, DOES falsify every argument put forth by Creationism and Intelligent Design. Yes, every argument.

10: I absolutely do know more about the bible than many (most?) Christians. In fact, a good thorough reading of the bible (without skipping the nasty parts) is a wonderful way for believers to explore why atheism makes much more sense as a moral way to live your life.

11: Tell Bill Gray that one.

12: Do you possibly deny that there are religious fruitcakes? Yes, I will call Braylan crazy every times he acts that way.

13: Read his book THEN come back and state that. Comeon, I dare ya.
I would assume that when our founding fathers based this country on freedom of religion and a separation of church and state, they included those who were believers and those who weren't.

By agreeing with Bush's inane statement Mo, I infer that you are saying citizenship should not be a birthright in this country but something that is earned by conforming to majority?

Remember that when Jesus first came on the scene, his ideas were considered so radical he was put to death for them. He did not conform to the majority in his time.

Open your mind.
Stop repeating lies Moronette!

Don't you have a snake handling to get ready for already or clean your brushes or study Spanish gender-adjective agreement before making another fool of yourself?

Senator Obama never did not salute the flag. He did not cover his heart with his hand because he was not facing it! He was sworn into a copy of the Holy Bible, not the Koran or anything else, and that is fact, real live history, not chain email BS.

Do you know what happens on a military base and you are in civilian clothes and the attention to colors whistle or bugle sounds and you cannot see the flag? You merely stand at attention! There is nothing to salute. The national anthem merely gets attention when it is not alongside the flag. The uncovering and placing hand on heart is to salute the flag in civilian clothes, not for anything else.

In the Navy, for example, many cannot salute if they are indoors, as covers are removed at the instant of entering a covered space, even on a ship. One only salutes an officer on weather decks if it is the first meeting of the day, except for senior officers like the captain, XO, an admiral, etc. Only the captain gets "Attention on deck" when he goes into a workspace.

On a submarine, for instance, one would never have the same rules that apply to a topside watch on a skimmer. For starters, there is no room to salute in passageways! Then the flag is inside when submerged for some odd reason, and "shifting colors" is a sign that you are in port and tied up. The flag goes from the sail to the deck.

Shifting colors is good, it means the surface transit is over, the maneuvering watch is over, and the happiest words to be heard save "Set Condition II watches in the Engineering Spaces" and "USS XYZ is 12 miles from land inbound, set containment, request permission to transmit." Well, "Liberty until 8 a.m. for Watch Sections I and II in the engineering spaces" is pretty good, too.
quote:
Do you know what happens on a military base and you are in civilian clothes and the attention to colors whistle or bugle sounds and you cannot see the flag? You merely stand at attention! There is nothing to salute. The national anthem merely gets attention when it is not alongside the flag. The uncovering and placing hand on heart is to salute the flag in civilian clothes, not for anything else.



Excuse me, NutHughes, I forgot about O'bama's military training Roll Eyes...that must have been where he learned that...or could be he just turned his back on the flag....were you there?? Eeker Nutbag, the eyewitness!
No, but I would wager it is a safe bet, myself. I was one of Tom's boys -- oh what blissful days, learning of von Ranke and Vico and Marx and Satre in historiography class! I still recall "Shove them taters, Mr. Hentz," with only the glee that one who had Tom for historiography can!
Of course, there was Dan Heimmermann along for his stories of la vie boheme in Paris and Larry Nelson was there too, and Lynne Rieff.
Bunky, Claudia and Roberto for Spanish, Christie for linguistics and Patty Chandler for English. And Jerri Bullard for sociology and anthropology, can't forget her! Dr. Hudiburg for psych, after suffering through Ratman's class . . . and my friend Jeff Miller of his late ill fated mayoral race to make us all coffee!
No offense, NH, but my pet peeve is "pseudo-intellectuals." A person who is really intelligent and has class, never boasts of his own knowledge. People should be able to deduce that on their own by what he says...not by his constant bragging, 'eloquent' speech, etc.

Keep your mouth shut and people may suspect you are a fool; open it, and they have no doubt.
Another stupid atheist:

http://www.secular.org/news/DNC_Daughtry080730.html

This orgization has petitioned the Democratic National Convention to include them in their interfaith opening ceremonies.

I understand their reasoning but this makes it appear that atheism is necessairily a Democratic political posi8tion. It also gives fodder to fools like Bill Gray who emphatically state that atheism is a religion when it clearly is not. That's just stupid.
quote:
Originally posted by GoFish:
Another stupid atheist:

http://www.secular.org/news/DNC_Daughtry080730.html

This orgization has petitioned the Democratic National Convention to include them in their interfaith opening ceremonies.

I understand their reasoning but this makes it appear that atheism is necessairily a Democratic political posi8tion. It also gives fodder to fools like Bill Gray who emphatically state that atheism is a religion when it clearly is not. That's just stupid.


How can it be a religion when an atheist doesn't subscribe to any religious belief?

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×