Why are atheists hated so much?

don't worry, Christians are hated so much too.funsohng

No they arn't :| They make up the predominate religion within the West.. To be president of the United States, or really any kind of elected official in legislative branch you pretty much have to be a devout Christian to have a chance..

Wow, you speak english very well.

magnax1

Thank you very much. It took me ages before I could say a sentence without school kids having a giggle. I read a lot of english books and sort of integrated myself by watching american television, you know, to pick up popular slang. (Not the argumentatively useless sort!) Just so I could talk well and blend. I'm doing pretty well, I hope. Still my speech is awkward, at least behind a keyboard my words can cleverly be devised. Not so much while talking. It's nice to know my study has paid off.

[QUOTE="THE_DRUGGIE"]

[QUOTE="McJugga"] :lol: I want to frame this post and hang it on my wall. :3McJugga

Sig quoting is the next best thing. :wink:

[QUOTE="magnax1"]

Wow, you speak english very well.

dhyce

Thank you very much. It took me ages before I could say a sentence without school kids having a giggle. I read a lot of english books and sort of integrated myself by watching american television, you know, to pick up popular slang. (Not the argumentatively useless sort!) Just so I could talk well and blend. I'm doing pretty well, I hope. Still my speech is awkward, at least behind a keyboard my words can cleverly be devised. Not so much while talking. It's nice to know my study has paid off.

I also find your English to be rather impressive.

[QUOTE="Espada12"]I just gave a situation, why would his father say that other than to stir something up? It's like me making racial remarks in public and not expecting others to say something about it.

Danm_999

Firstly, the poster said it, not his father. Comprehension.

Secondly, are you suggesting that the intent of their conversation was honestly to use the Robin Hood movie they had just seen, and the following conversation they had made about its historical accuracy, was a backhanded way of criticising Christianity in an attempt to gain a reaction from any potential eavesdropping Christians that would feel strongly enough to comment? Occam's Razor.

Thirdly, it is not like you making racial remarks in public for two reasons (yes, I apologise for putting lists within lists):

1) It was a private conversation between son and father (hence the use of the word 'eavesdropping').

2) Criticising the authenticity of the Bible, or even comparing it to the authenticity of the Robin Hood myth, is nowhere near as despicable as racial remarks.

It seems to me you view atheists (if they indeed were atheists) having private conversations about their views is them not doing their part to "live and let live" which honestly I find staggering.

It's not as near to you but it is to religious people. Point is he clearly made the comment to start a scene, and secondly if you want to know what I'm talking about when I say they attempt do denounce religion at every turn look at the poster's sig above. If I make a racist remake in a private conversation people will obviously tell me about it no matter how you look at it. Why would you even make such a comment in public other than trying to start a scene or show your atheism to the world? A guy made a good reference, if you walk into a bar with a hockey game and said the hockey sucks loud enough for others to hear even if they are eavesdropping you will obviously get a reaction, why even do that other than to get attention?

Personally I don't care for either side, because both are annoying. In your face atheist are far far worse in my experience though.

[QUOTE="SgtKevali"]

[QUOTE="magnax1"]

No it would make more sense for everyone to bend to the general consensus so that we are all speaking the same language.

magnax1

It's quite obvious there is no general consensus; that's why you have these arguments.

Looking for universality in language is almost laughable, though. Like I said, the huge lack of universality in meaning is a great failure of language.

Either way the semantics argument is still pointless, because I already posted dictionary definitions that prove my definition, and so did the other pesron. And yes, there are consensus definitions.

With simple things, yes, but in relation to this issue, there really isn't one.

[QUOTE="magnax1"]

Wow, you speak english very well.

dhyce

Thank you very much. It took me ages before I could say a sentence without school kids having a giggle. I read a lot of english books and sort of integrated myself by watching american television, you know, to pick up popular slang. (Not the argumentatively useful sort!) Just so I could talk well and blend. I'm doing pretty well, I hope. Still my speech is awkward, at least behind a keyboard my words can cleverly be devised. Not so much while talking. It's nice to know my study has paid off.

Yeah, its always much more dificult to speak a language then write it. I took a lot of German in Highschool, and I can write it fairly well, but I'm sure I'd struggle if I had to go to Germany and actually speak it.

Anyway, here are the definitions I posted earlier, just so we can stop the dictionary argument

someone who denies the existence of god

a person who claims that they cannot have true knowledge about the existence of God (but does not deny that God might exist

It won't let me past the links, but I got it off of the google dictionary thing.

Whether you want to say it makes you insane or not, there is no logical way to dispute the fact that EVERYTHING requires some sort of faith.

magnax1

You and I think differently then. There is not much useful opposition I can provide. I say that our senses, and the lives driven by senses clearly different from our own proves this world's life is all individualistic. You say the differences are essentially a ruse, I take it? Different aspects of this one mind we cannot understand and therefore attribute as separate from us? You're welcome to pose that and I can do little more than I have to say otherwise. I simply and concretely disagree without any doubt.

[QUOTE="magnax1"]

Because they're hypocritical and illogical. Thats why I hate atheism

Chickan_117

[QUOTE="Chickan_117"]

[QUOTE="magnax1"]

Because they're hypocritical and illogical. Thats why I hate atheism

Jaguar_Shade

Those are the two things the internet is full of: Idiots and sarcasm. :lol:

It's not as near to you but it is to religious people.Espada12

You're very point was that atheists cannot "live and let live", but now you seem to be admitting that Christians cannot let this go.

You also seem to think Christians are afforded a special allowance; their views must be protected. But do you think atheists are not bothered when theists tell them they are immoral, or that they'll go to hell?

Do you think it doesn't bother them when rhetoric like "atheists aren't real Americans" is thrown around by the media and attributed to Bush? Or Gallop Polls indicate that over 50% of Americans think they'd be unfit to become President if they were otherwise completely qualified?

Point is he clearly made the comment to start a scene, Espada12

Once again, he was having (in his own words) a private conversation.

Unless he was attempting to cause a scene with his father, that is utterly unnacceptable to state people cannot express their views in private without fear of reprisal.

and secondly if you want to know what I'm talking about when I say they attempt do denounce religion at every turn look at the poster's sig above. If I make a racist remake in a private conversation people will obviously tell me about it no matter how you look at it.Espada12

Once again, racist views and atheistic views are not equal. You should not have to keep your religious views to yourself because someone who takes offence might be listening in.

Why would you even make such a comment in public other than trying to start a scene or show your atheism to the world? A guy made a good reference, if you walk into a bar with a hockey game and said the hockey sucks loud enough for others to hear even if they are eavesdropping you will obviously get a reaction, why even do that other than to get attention?Espada12

That's not what he did though. Once again, he was in his own words, having a private conversation, in which an outsider eavesdropped. You need to look up the definition of that word if you think loudly saying something in a bar counts as eavesdropping.

Let me again say I'm astounded to find an example of someone having a private conversation with their father, being spied upon, and then verbally assaulted, is evidence of intolerance in that person.

Otherwise, I'm not really willing to discuss this any further, we obviously interpret this incident in fundamentally different ways.

[QUOTE="magnax1"]

Whether you want to say it makes you insane or not, there is no logical way to dispute the fact that EVERYTHING requires some sort of faith.

dhyce

You and I think differently then. There is not much useful opposition I can provide. I say that our senses, and the lives driven by senses clearly different from our own proves this world's life is all individualistic. You say the differences are essentially a ruse, I take it? Different aspects of this one mind we cannot understand and therefore attribute as separate from us? You're welcome to pose that and I can do little more than I have to say otherwise. I simply and concretely disagree without any doubt.

I agree with the fact that it proves it, but that has little to do with faith. You have to have faith in the proof. You have to have faith in your senses. I really don't understand how some one can disagree with that. It completely confuses the crap out of me.

Yeah, its always much more dificult to speak a language then write it. I took a lot of German in Highschool, and I can write it fairly well, but I'm sure I'd struggle if I had to go to Germany and actually speak it.

Anyway, here are the definitions I posted earlier, just so we can stop the dictionary argument

someone who denies the existence of god

a person who claims that they cannot have true knowledge about the existence of God (but does not deny that God might exist

It won't let me past the links, but I got it off of the google dictionary thing.

magnax1

Ahah! See, you're obviously not paying attention. I said I knew your definitions and knew of many more that supported my understanding. In fact, far more than your own. The definitions vary, and when you research agnosticism in its various forms, you'll find it most beautifully fits as a kind of belief, uncertain in nature, but a belief all the same. Generally, based on the countless definitions and cultural contexts I've seen, an atheist is a non-believer: one without belief. While the agnostic consensus that god cannot be known is an assertion, it is a positive claim implying the possibility of a god. Atheism implies no possibility until the evidence demands it. But again, we might want to stop, as we seem to be in a loop.

I need sleep soon!

[QUOTE="magnax1"]

Yeah, its always much more dificult to speak a language then write it. I took a lot of German in Highschool, and I can write it fairly well, but I'm sure I'd struggle if I had to go to Germany and actually speak it.

Anyway, here are the definitions I posted earlier, just so we can stop the dictionary argument

someone who denies the existence of god

a person who claims that they cannot have true knowledge about the existence of God (but does not deny that God might exist

It won't let me past the links, but I got it off of the google dictionary thing.

dhyce

Ahah! See, you're obviously not paying attention. I said I knew your definitions and knew of many more that supported my understanding. In fact, far more than your own. The definitions vary, and when you research agnosticism in its various forms, you'll find it most beautifully fits as a kind of belief, uncertain in nature, but a belief all the same. Generally, based on the countless definitions and cultural contexts I've seen, an atheist is a non-believer: one without belief. While the agnostic consensus that god cannot be known if an assertion, it is a positive claim implying the possibility of a god. Atheism implies no possibility until the evidence demands it. But again, we might want to stop, as we seem to be in a loop.

I need sleep soon!

Agreed, it just goes in a loop, which I why I have been saying this is stupid and people should just go by societal definitions.

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

You're very point was that atheists cannot "live and let live", but now you seem to be admitting that Christians cannot let this go.

You also seem to think Christians are afforded a special allowance; their views must be protected. But do you think atheists are not bothered when theists tell them they are immoral, or that they'll go to hell?

Do you think it doesn't bother them when rhetoric like "atheists aren't real Americans" is thrown around by the media and attributed to Bush? Or Gallop Polls indicate that over 50% of Americans think they'd be unfit to become President if they were otherwise completely qualified?

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

Once again, he was having (in his own words) a private conversation.

Unless he was attempting to cause a scene with his father, that is utterly unnacceptable to state people cannot express their views in private without fear of reprisal.

[QUOTE="Espada12"]and secondly if you want to know what I'm talking about when I say they attempt do denounce religion at every turn look at the poster's sig above. If I make a racist remake in a private conversation people will obviously tell me about it no matter how you look at it.Danm_999

Once again, racist views and atheistic views are not equal. You should not have to keep your religious views to yourself because someone who takes offence might be listening in.

Why would you even make such a comment in public other than trying to start a scene or show your atheism to the world? A guy made a good reference, if you walk into a bar with a hockey game and said the hockey sucks loud enough for others to hear even if they are eavesdropping you will obviously get a reaction, why even do that other than to get attention?Espada12

That's not what he did though. Once again, he was in his own words, having a private conversation, in which an outsider eavesdropped. You need to look up the definition of that word if you think loudly saying something in a bar counts as eavesdropping.

Let me again say I'm astounded to find an example of someone having a private conversation with their father, being spied upon, and then verbally assaulted, is evidence of intolerance in that person.

Otherwise, I'm not really willing to discuss this any further, we obviously interpret this incident in fundamentally different ways.

Lmao so someone was spying on him talking about robin hood just waiting for him to make an atheist comment? You really believe that? He obviously said it loud enough for others to hear, whatever I don't care to discuss this either.

I agree with the fact that it proves it, but that has little to do with faith. You have to have faith in the proof. You have to have faith in your senses. I really don't understand how some one can disagree with that. It completely confuses the crap out of me.

magnax1

Again, context. I don't think I mean faith in the same manner you do. I know my senses to describe the world in the best way it can, as such a limited body. I can only know what is gathered by me, and the information discovered by others that helps me to better receive input and understand things beyond my time on this planet. (Such as Abiogenesis and The Big Bang) I learn and understand my senses as they are. There is no faith involved, this is how I interpret reality. It is not my faith in what the world is, I know it to be my specific version of the sensory world available. I thankfully have each sense and without limitation. It's not faith at all, it's quite explicitly obvious that I'm just another lifeform in a world of many lifeforms that conveniently adhere to testable patterns that can naturally occur over billions of years. That my existence is obviously no different and not special. There is no faith, this just so probably is. To think otherwise would require me to invoke my inner paranoid schizophrenic. Again, we can only go cyclical from here. So there is no point.

Lmao so someone was spying on him talking about robin hood just waiting for him to make an atheist comment? You really believe that?Espada12

Agreed, it just goes in a loop, which I why I have been saying this is stupid and people should just go by societal definitions.

magnax1

Not to be redundant, and I am, but as somebody interested in a language's true intent: I seek accuracy. Societal definitions are drivel. I only want to best define the words I know in english without basing them on modern and soon-to-be-outdated slang. At least, one can hope. :P

[QUOTE="magnax1"]

Agreed, it just goes in a loop, which I why I have been saying this is stupid and people should just go by societal definitions.

dhyce

Not to be redundant, and I am, but as somebody interested in a language's true intent: I seek accuracy. Societal definitions are drivel. I only want to best define the words I know in english without basing them on modern and soon-to-be-outdated slang. At least, one can hope. :P

Dictionary definitions become outdated just like the slang, and there is no real accuracy since there are multiple dictionary definitions. I think we should probably stop arguing though.

Dictionary definitions become outdated just like the slang, and there is no real accuracy since there are multiple dictionary definitions. I think we should probably stop arguing though.

magnax1

I agree (somewhat) and am happy when an agreement of sorts can be reached. Isn't that so rare? It was divine chatting, though. It is happy times when I can go to bed and not be expected to go searching back through thread tomorrow, like it matters.

[QUOTE="Espada12"]Lmao so someone was spying on him talking about robin hood just waiting for him to make an atheist comment? You really believe that?Danm_999

Thanks for the definition, are you trying to insult my intelligence? Do you really believe he was sitting there just listening to a conversation about robin hood? Really??? Really???

Meh, sure, some people "hate" atheists. But I'd rather put it that 'atheism' and 'atheists' are presented by many Christians as if those terms are synonymous with bad things.

Because they aren't a majority and until that becomes true, people are going to fear the people involved with it because they don't fully understand it. People also don't like it when their ideals are called into question, which isn't what you intended but I would imagine many people at the camp thought about after you said that.

Stand your ground and defend your ideals to the best of your ability. F#!% everyone else.

Where I'm from religion is generally scoffed at or ignored.

Because they're hypocritical and illogical. Thats why I hate atheism

magnax1

why are theists hated? :?

[QUOTE="magnax1"]

Because they're hypocritical and illogical. Thats why I hate atheism

Bashers79

The thread will just turn into a flame battle.

[QUOTE="Bashers79"][QUOTE="magnax1"]

Because they're hypocritical and illogical. Thats why I hate atheism

balls_out

The thread will just turn into a flame battle.

Too late.

I don't know about the U.S., but over here, any negative opinion of atheists is partially due to the fact that our government-sanctioned education lists theism as being a positive moral trait.

[QUOTE="dhyce"]

[QUOTE="magnax1"]

Wow, you speak english very well.

coolbeans90

Thank you very much. It took me ages before I could say a sentence without school kids having a giggle. I read a lot of english books and sort of integrated myself by watching american television, you know, to pick up popular slang. (Not the argumentatively useless sort!) Just so I could talk well and blend. I'm doing pretty well, I hope. Still my speech is awkward, at least behind a keyboard my words can cleverly be devised. Not so much while talking. It's nice to know my study has paid off.

I also find your English to be rather impressive.

[QUOTE="Danm_999"]

[QUOTE="Espada12"]Lmao so someone was spying on him talking about robin hood just waiting for him to make an atheist comment? You really believe that?Espada12

Thanks for the definition, are you trying to insult my intelligence? Do you really believe he was sitting there just listening to a conversation about robin hood? Really??? Really???

What you are suggesting is that the poster intended to construct a conversation based around his experience of the film and its historical accuracy to lead to a scathing insult of Christianity which would allow him to cause a scene with any easily antagonized Christians within the area, rather than simply making a (to his father) light joke to show how unrealistic he considers the film to be.

You are hardly in any position to cricitize the implausibility of other people's interpretations of the situation. I would also like to note that attempting to use that as a evidence that "Atheists are generally incapable of living and letting live" is a fantastic way of making yourself look hopelessly biased, especially when you're not denouncing the guy who stuck his nose into the conversation and attempted to lecture the TC.

Here's an even better question. Why are there so many atheists on these forums?

[QUOTE="JML897"]:? Is it some sort of religious summer camp? mr_poodles123

You mean, Young Men's Christian Association? Boy, oh boy. :lol:

because we like to cut off a piece of the baby jesus to offend our friends

no, seriously, I really do not know. I think it is because a small percentage (like less than 15%) of people in the US for example are religionless, and an even smaller percentage are actually atheist.

They aren't. Mainly religious people are the ones who get the most flack. Especially Christians.

Because they are different from Christians in that they refuse to blindly accept highly illogical parables that aren't rooted in fact, but merely faith.

Christians force their opinions to others calling it "fact".rockerbikie

fixed

[QUOTE="rockerbikie"] Christians force their opinions to others calling it "fact".mrbojangles25

fixed

[QUOTE="rockerbikie"] Christians force their opinions to others calling it "fact".mrbojangles25

fixed

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

[QUOTE="rockerbikie"] Christians force their opinions to others calling it "fact".rockerbikie

fixed

when did I say you were a Christian?

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

[QUOTE="rockerbikie"] Christians force their opinions to others calling it "fact".GHlegend77

fixed

I completely agree with you but, as they used to say, "he started it" so if someone is gonna generalize me, I am gonna sling it right back at them.

Anyway, I do not believe most Christians are as bad as that. Most Christians are generally good, kind ,and accepting people. Most religious people, in fact.

They just forget that the Bible and religion is not meant to be taken literally; its full of good lessons if you take it for what is is, but that is about it. Do you really believe the sea parted, that a staff turned into a snake, and that a bush talked?

[QUOTE="rockerbikie"][QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

fixed

when did I say you were a muslim?

[QUOTE="GHlegend77"][QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

fixed

I completely agree with you but, as they used to say, "he started it" so if someone is gonna generalize me, I am gonna sling it right back at them.

Anyway, I do not believe most Christians are as bad as that. Most Christians are generally good, kind ,and accepting people. Most religious people, in fact.

They just forget that the Bible and religion is not meant to be taken literally; its full of good lessons if you take it for what is is, but that is about it. Do you really believe the sea parted, that a staff turned into a snake, and that a bush talked?

Most I've met are whiney, pricks, and bash relentlessly against religion. Maybe that's why. Then again, the same could be said towards religious people.

In the end, both sides suck. Case closed.

What do you know, another religion thread...