Euphoric atheists

  • 🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Wyróżnienie
AnOminous powiedział(a):
The worst thing Internet atheists did, specifically aalewis, was ruining the word euphoric.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
It's a very niche word that you can only really use to describe being high. I never used it myself except in an ironic matter. Like if I was saying someone had ejaculated but wanted to do it in a classy way.
 
Watcher powiedział(a):
It's a very niche word that you can only really use to describe being high. I never used it myself except in an ironic matter. Like if I was saying someone had ejaculated but wanted to do it in a classy way.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
Well, I copied this from Google:

eu·pho·ri·a
yo͞oˈfôrēə/
noun
  1. a feeling or state of intense excitement and happiness.
    "the euphoria of success will fuel your desire to continue training"
    synonyms: elation, happiness, joy, delight, glee;

In other words, these atheists are REALLY happy that they do not believe in a deity.
 
1EuLv59.jpg

Please ignore the fedora and focus on his higher intellect and pokemon paraphernalia.
 
Adamska powiedział(a):
I guess I can choose not to tolerate this guy's fashion sense and rampant obsession with children's toys and regard him as a mongoloid only worth mocking.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...

Indeed, how dare people be interested in a (Supposedly) make believe fictional character. Says the fedora wearer with the pokemon poster in the background. Are you fucking kidding me.
 
So this semester I'm taking a class on the sociology of religion; as part of an academic approach, we're looking at religion objectively, and that includes reading a lot about famous atheists and their thoughts on religion (thankfully, my teacher herself is an enthusiastic, easygoing blonde instead of some smug asshole who's more interested in pushing an agenda than actually instructing the class). We read an excerpt from a book called "God is Not One" by Stephen Prothero, which examines most of the world's major religions.

The last chapter is called "A Brief Coda on Atheism" and basically talks about how those who Prothero has termed "New Atheists" have basically turned atheism- which should be a lack of religion- into something that in some ways resembles what the fundamentalists they hate would follow (hilariously, he directly names Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris as prime examples). But he also talks about friendly atheists (or new New Atheists), who merely want to coexist with their religious neighbors peacefully and aren't interested in trying to rid the entire world of religion, they only want acceptance for their own beliefs. As Prothero points out in the end, which one would you rather listen to?

 
RedneckQuadFeed powiedział(a):
Wyświetl załącznik 55000

One can only have so much edge before cutting oneself.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
And this man wouldn't get the fact that this is thought through the lens of people whose god they see as omnipotent (sure sun came after but when you are a being that can make things out of nothing, I'm pretty sure the radiance of said being could feed plants) who would no doubt make some things defy logic (survive inside a whale for 3 days, make a woman out of a man's rib which could also mean altering chromosomes and such). As for the animal thing, some could skirt around that by saying the animals were pretty much like Noah in that they were progenitors of animals that either died off at some point or managed to survive to this day.

Excuse any autism I shown but in all honesty, as much as how the guy can say that he is right one way or another, it's not like what he says would really have any edge since 1) any of these have been touted before (to the point of beating a dead horse for some) and 2) some people would have a sort of rebuttal of some kinda to what this guy says (to the contrary, not every creationist think the earth is young. There are creationist who think the earth is old. And not every Christian denies evolution).
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
Gazelle_Bro powiedział(a):
That's the kind of person who believes every Christian must believe every story in the Bible.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...

He's also probably the type of person who gets a rage tumor when he hears about Christians (or any kind of religious people) in scientific fields, because how else can he maintain his intellectual superiority?

Also, the whole "Christians believe that the Earth is only 6000 years old and evolution is a lie!" is such a strawman argument. Yes, there are people who believe it, but it's far from a universal belief. The only truly universal belief that all Christians share is that there was a cool guy named Jesus who was the Son of God; everything else is subject to different interpretations and opinions. That's why you can have a Christian evolutionary biologist and a Christian fundamentalist who believes that dinosaur fossils are fakes that were planted by Satanists.
 
Wyróżnienie
Musisz się zalogować lub zarejestrować, aby odpowiedzieć.
Wstecz
Top Na dole