Why do Atheists Hate Religion?

[Snail2]

That is yet another ignorant assumption masquerading as fact. You are the one who stated that it would be funny to see an atheist try to deny the existence of the 'Everlasting Blue Sky', when the fact is the religion you cite employs, like most religions, tangible things as symbolic representation of supernatural or paranormal elements of their belief system.

I simply pointed out that there wasn't actually anything funny about your statement, because your statement was disingenuously implying you had managed to cleverly assert a religious representation that an atheist could not deny the existence of.

OK. Just forget what I said about humour and such stuff. You clearly don't understand that part, as I see. Well, we all have our talents, I guess.

Clank, clunk, grind, clang . . .sure, you just keep on trying to make it fit, I'm sure it'll go in if you hit it hard enough, often enough.

You know I'm the one here who don't need to hit hard anything. I'm perfectly happy with my beliefs, I'm also happy with your "beliefs", so you are the one who's working hard on denying and disapproving other ppl's views about spirituality in the name of the logic, the reason and the holy science .

Atheists don't deny your subjective reality, where do you get that idea? In fact atheism is pretty much about acknowledging the relevance of subjective realities in understanding just how unreliable every single claim towards 'spirituality' actually is.

I think you keep on taking too much rope, you appear to be getting awfully tangled up in it.

Well, you are just trying to do that, mate. My beliefs are integral parts of my own subjective reality, so if you are trying to take the Easter Bunny and Santa from me, that means you are in fact ignoring my "spiritual needs" and forcing your boring all maths and physics subjective reality on me. Why your approach would be any better than what the inquisitors did in the name of an other subjective reality? OK, I know. It's far better, as you most likely not going to burn me at the stake, but the ignorance is the same.

[1715593820]

1715593820

[1715593820]

1715593820

[1715593820]

1715593820

[1715593820]

1715593820

[1715593820]

1715593820

[1715593820]

1715593820

[BADecker]

Atheists don't hate religion. They simply want to impose their religion on everyone else, same as most other religions.

They are more forceful than many other religions at doing this. But they need to take lessons from Islam if they want to be exceedingly forceful at it.

[Snail2]

Atheists don't hate religion. They simply want to impose their religion on everyone else, same as most other religions.

They are more forceful than many other religions at doing this. But they need to take lessons from Islam if they want to be exceedingly forceful at it.

I was often thinking about which one is the better: killing people in the name of love and kindness like the church did, or killing people in the name of enlightenment and fraternity as some of the the most iconic atheist movements did .

[BADecker]

Atheists don't hate religion. They simply want to impose their religion on everyone else, same as most other religions.

They are more forceful than many other religions at doing this. But they need to take lessons from Islam if they want to be exceedingly forceful at it.

I was often thinking about which one is the better: killing people in the name of love and kindness like the church did, or killing people in the name of enlightenment and fraternity as some of the the most iconic atheist movements did .

Probably more than any other present-day religion, atheism kills people. Many of the atheists that do so are acting their atheism out more strongly that any formal atheist, even though they do not understand what the word "atheism" means at all. Many of the atheism ignorant atheists murder when they abort their kids.

[deisik]

In fact, they no longer care, once "vaccinated". Really, why should they? Most people don't think every now and then about smallpox since it had been eradicated from Earth...

Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof

FFS, are you lot dense or what? The reason the 'man in the street' doesn't care about smallpox is because it actually has been, on the whole, eradicated. It isn't something that needs much thought in this day and age.

I was criticising the false assumption that atheists shouldn't care about theism because it doesn't concern them when the truth is theism is still infecting the masses all around us through the generational brain-washing of their offspring. The toxic dysfunction is all around us, that is why we still care about theism continuing to wreak the harm it does to our species.

I don't see you making valid assumptions or drawing solid conclusions. If something doesn't concern you personally (and wouldn't in the future), you don't care about it. Otherwise you should care about everything which is impossible...

Who is dense actually?

The initial assertion in your reply provides the answer to its latter question.

Do atheists currently live a world without the theism? No. We do not. Our lives are still blighted by the toxic poison that causes people to define their sense of self and their subsequent choices and decisions by way of a persistent delusional narrative they are living in, where they play the role of somebody 'special' to an all-powerful super-being. That's pretty fucked up.

I don't know what kind of world you personally live in, but I don't feel that my life is "blighted by the toxic poison" and all that nonsense you talk about. Where I live there are a lot of religions of all sorts mixed up with a good portion of non-religion in-between, and it is considered a good tone not to emphasize one's religious preferences (or lack thereof)...

In short, speak for yourself and don't use the pronoun we where you obviously should use I instead

[cryptodevil]

HAhahahahaa, seriously, you theists are so insistently desperate to believe that your assertions must mean something other than being desperate insistence, it is funny to watch because it is so inevitable whenever you are threatened by the loss of the deference and 'respect' for your delusions that you believe you are entitled to.

Ok, let's take your posts apart one by one:
I won't bother quoting your username for each fallacy because you are all cut from the same cloth as to make no difference as to what nomenclature you prefer to be known by.

1.

The easiest religion to troll is Atheism.

Atheism is like a religion in the sense that 'Not collecting stamps' is a hobby.

2.

fine, superior to the other person who holds the opposing point of view.
it's ego on both sides of the equation.
I'm right, they're wrong.  I'm the smart guy.

Except that isn't at all what the objectively reasoned challenges to theist assertions actually is. Sure, if we were to employ the same theist versus theist tactics of subjectively spinning our own interpretations as being correct over your subjectively spun interpretations then, yes, you might have a point. But when a theist position is dismantled by way of critical analysis and objective reasoning, namely, the employment of valid argument which exposes the theist position to be the arbitrary baseless fallacy it is then, no, we are right because our argument is right while yours fails, not because we are simply declaring that we right and you are wrong.

3.

OK. Just forget what I said about humour and such stuff. You clearly don't understand that part, as I see. Well, we all have our talents, I guess.

Dude, seriously, let it go. You gaffed up your original smart-arsery and when it was exposed for being the twaddle it was you resort to trying to belittle me by claiming I didn't understand it. I did, I do and I continue to demonstrate that your statement was a fail and absent anything clever or, for that matter, funny. Accept it.

4.

I'm perfectly happy with my beliefs, I'm also happy with your "beliefs", so you are the one who's working hard on denying and disapproving other ppl's views about spirituality in the name of the logic, the reason and the holy science.

Yeah, still another swing-and-a-miss. Atheists don't 'deny' or 'disapprove', although we do frequently disprove theist positions and deny them their expected deference and respect for the infantile beliefs they hold so dear. But we do it by dismantling theism, not by asserting atheism.

5.

My beliefs are integral parts of my own subjective reality, so if you are trying to take the Easter Bunny and Santa from me, that means you are in fact ignoring my "spiritual needs" and forcing your boring all maths and physics subjective reality on me.

*fights urge to simply dismiss as the WAAAA! WAAAAA! WAAAAAAA! it actually is*

You are entitled to your own beliefs, you are not entitled to your own facts. Atheists don't force anything on anyone, we simply reject the theist position because it is fallacious bullshit and provably so. That does not at all mean we prove that god does not exist, no, it means we can prove theist beliefs are all based on dishonest argument and, therefore, to be dismissed.

[BADecker]

HAhahahahaa, seriously, you theists are so insistently desperate to believe that your assertions must mean something other than being desperate insistence, it is funny to watch because it is so inevitable whenever you are threatened by the loss of the deference and 'respect' for your delusions that you believe you are entitled to.

Ok, let's take your posts apart one by one:
I won't bother quoting your username for each fallacy because you are all cut from the same cloth as to make no difference as to what nomenclature you prefer to be known by.

1.

The easiest religion to troll is Atheism.

Atheism is like a religion in the sense that 'Not collecting stamps' is a hobby.

2.

fine, superior to the other person who holds the opposing point of view.
it's ego on both sides of the equation.
I'm right, they're wrong.  I'm the smart guy.

Except that isn't at all what the objectively reasoned challenges to theist assertions actually is. Sure, if we were to employ the same theist versus theist tactics of subjectively spinning our own interpretations as being correct over your subjectively spun interpretations then, yes, you might have a point. But when a theist position is dismantled by way of critical analysis and objective reasoning, namely, the employment of valid argument which exposes the theist position to be the arbitrary baseless fallacy it is then, no, we are right because our argument is right while yours fails, not because we are simply declaring that we right and you are wrong.

3.

OK. Just forget what I said about humour and such stuff. You clearly don't understand that part, as I see. Well, we all have our talents, I guess.

Dude, seriously, let it go. You gaffed up your original smart-arsery and when it was exposed for being the twaddle it was you resort to trying to belittle me by claiming I didn't understand it. I did, I do and I continue to demonstrate that your statement was a fail and absent anything clever or, for that matter, funny. Accept it.

4.

I'm perfectly happy with my beliefs, I'm also happy with your "beliefs", so you are the one who's working hard on denying and disapproving other ppl's views about spirituality in the name of the logic, the reason and the holy science.

Yeah, still another swing-and-a-miss. Atheists don't 'deny' or 'disapprove', although we do frequently disprove theist positions and deny them their expected deference and respect for the infantile beliefs they hold so dear. But we do it by dismantling theism, not by asserting atheism.

5.

My beliefs are integral parts of my own subjective reality, so if you are trying to take the Easter Bunny and Santa from me, that means you are in fact ignoring my "spiritual needs" and forcing your boring all maths and physics subjective reality on me.

*fights urge to simply dismiss as the WAAAA! WAAAAA! WAAAAAAA! it actually is*

You are entitled to your own beliefs, you are not entitled to your own facts. Atheists don't force anything on anyone, we simply reject the theist position because it is fallacious bullshit and provably so. That does not at all mean we prove that god does not exist, no, it means we can prove theist beliefs are all based on dishonest argument and, therefore, to be dismissed.

Atheism is one of the few religions that seeks to make its members believe that they are not religious, and, more importantly, that it is possible that religion doesn't exist.

Atheism is simply another religion that is attempting to drown itself in religion ignorance.



EDIT: "Religion ignorance" means a religious intent to remain numb to the fact that they are religious.

[deisik]

<garbage skipped>

Atheism is one of the few religions that seeks to make its members believe that they are not religious, and, more importantly, that it is possible that religion doesn't exist.

Atheism is simply another religion that is attempting to drown itself in religion ignorance.

EDIT: "Religion ignorance" means a religious intent to remain numb to the fact that they are religious.

I wouldn't call this ignorance religious. Here we see a clear case of zealotry (and therefore ignorance of such), but it is not necessarily religious in its roots...

I would rather call this the impetuousness of youth (notwithstanding the actual age)

[RodeoX]

I find it interesting how religious people want to believe that religion is essential and so atheists must also have religion. I don't know about others, but to be clear, I have zero religion whatsoever. Religion requires a God and I do not believe in any of them. The correct term is philosophy. If your philosophy includes a God then it is a religious philosophy. If it does not it is just called philosophy. All are welcome to use words as they wish, IMO. But you are incorrectly using that word in English.

So philosophy is your view of how the world works, ethics is how you believe moral people should act, and religion is the belief in a higher power.  It makes no difference to me that there is no God. My philosophy places a lot of importance on ethics. Not because a God might smite me or a devil might get me, but because I think it is right.  Believe what you like. As an atheist I am not looking for converts or a donation on Sunday.

[cryptodevil]

Here we see a clear case of zealotry (and therefore ignorance of such), but it is not necessarily religious in its roots...

LOL. Yes, sure, passionately seeking to refute bullshit theism by way of intellectually dismantling the theist position is clearly the mark of a 'zealot'.

Careful now, you are one step away from the 'tone complaint' fallacy.

[legendster]

Here we see a clear case of zealotry (and therefore ignorance of such), but it is not necessarily religious in its roots...

LOL. Yes, sure, passionately seeking to refute bullshit theism by way of intellectually dismantling the theist position is clearly the mark of a 'zealot'.

Careful now, you are one step away from the 'tone complaint' fallacy.

Need a dictionary now.

[deisik]

Here we see a clear case of zealotry (and therefore ignorance of such), but it is not necessarily religious in its roots...

LOL. Yes, sure, passionately seeking to refute bullshit theism by way of intellectually dismantling the theist position is clearly the mark of a 'zealot'.

Careful now, you are one step away from the 'tone complaint' fallacy.

Now I'm more interested why it is such a pain in your ass ("passionately seeking to refute bullshit theism"). How old are you really? I could just say that bullshit in someone else's head is money in your pocket. If you cannot monetize (on) it, then all your bigotry is futile and not worth a fuck...

[cryptodevil]

I find it interesting how religious people want to believe that religion is essential and so atheists must also have religion.

That is an interesting notion. Do you think that the reason theists try to fallaciously claim atheism to be equal to a religion because they actually can't understand the concept of moral sentience without religion?

Actually, come to think of it, back when I was a fence-sitting agnostic, I actually believed it was impossible to be a genuine atheist, with the associated 'the end is the end of me' acceptance, without losing one's mind. I now know that, actually, once you become an intellectualised atheist, by way of reaching that position through much thought and consideration coupled with objective reasoning and critical thinking, it becomes absolutely natural a concept.

I didn't exist before I did and that wasn't a problem, so why would not existing after I do be any different?

[BADecker]

<garbage skipped>

Atheism is one of the few religions that seeks to make its members believe that they are not religious, and, more importantly, that it is possible that religion doesn't exist.

Atheism is simply another religion that is attempting to drown itself in religion ignorance.

EDIT: "Religion ignorance" means a religious intent to remain numb to the fact that they are religious.

I wouldn't call this ignorance religious. Here we see a clear case of zealotry (and therefore ignorance of such), but it is not necessarily religious in its roots...

I would rather call this the impetuousness of youth (notwithstanding the actual age)

Obviously, you are free to call it whatever you desire. And it may fall under other other categories than religion. But the truth remains, according to the dictionary definitions of "religion," atheism is religion.

[BADecker]

Here we see a clear case of zealotry (and therefore ignorance of such), but it is not necessarily religious in its roots...

LOL. Yes, sure, passionately seeking to refute bullshit theism by way of intellectually dismantling the theist position is clearly the mark of a 'zealot'.

Careful now, you are one step away from the 'tone complaint' fallacy.

You may be laughing on the outside, but your posts show that you are finally coming to realize that all people have religion on the inside.

[BADecker]

I find it interesting how religious people want to believe that religion is essential and so atheists must also have religion.

That is an interesting notion. Do you think that the reason theists try to fallaciously claim atheism to be equal to a religion because they actually can't understand the concept of moral sentience without religion?

Actually, come to think of it, back when I was a fence-sitting agnostic, I actually believed it was impossible to be a genuine atheist, with the associated 'the end is the end of me' acceptance, without losing one's mind. I now know that, actually, once you become an intellectualised atheist, by way of reaching that position through much thought and consideration coupled with objective reasoning and critical thinking, it becomes absolutely natural a concept.

I didn't exist before I did and that wasn't a problem, so why would not existing after I do be any different?

Perhaps atheists have their own personal religion, but atheism in general is religion. Its god is the human mind.

[legendster]

Here we see a clear case of zealotry (and therefore ignorance of such), but it is not necessarily religious in its roots...

LOL. Yes, sure, passionately seeking to refute bullshit theism by way of intellectually dismantling the theist position is clearly the mark of a 'zealot'.

Careful now, you are one step away from the 'tone complaint' fallacy.

Now I'm more interested why it is such a pain in your ass ("passionately seeking to refute bullshit theism"). How old are you really? I could just say that bullshit in someone else's head is money in your pocket. If you cannot monetize (on) it, then all your bigotry is futile and not worth a fuck...

A true hypocrite would first care for his ego & keep it safe, monetizing inevitably comes next but isnt always a necessity.

[deisik]

I find it interesting how religious people want to believe that religion is essential and so atheists must also have religion.

That is an interesting notion. Do you think that the reason theists try to fallaciously claim atheism to be equal to a religion because they actually can't understand the concept of moral sentience without religion?

Actually, come to think of it, back when I was a fence-sitting agnostic, I actually believed it was impossible to be a genuine atheist, with the associated 'the end is the end of me' acceptance, without losing one's mind. I now know that, actually, once you become an intellectualised atheist, by way of reaching that position through much thought and consideration coupled with objective reasoning and critical thinking, it becomes absolutely natural a concept.

I didn't exist before I did and that wasn't a problem, so why would not existing after I do be any different?

Perhaps atheists have their own personal religion, but atheism in general is religion. Its god is the human mind.

I guess you are expanding the meaning of the word too far. Believing in something (which is what you are evidently trying to say) doesn't necessarily constitute a religion...

[deisik]

Here we see a clear case of zealotry (and therefore ignorance of such), but it is not necessarily religious in its roots...

LOL. Yes, sure, passionately seeking to refute bullshit theism by way of intellectually dismantling the theist position is clearly the mark of a 'zealot'.

Careful now, you are one step away from the 'tone complaint' fallacy.

Now I'm more interested why it is such a pain in your ass ("passionately seeking to refute bullshit theism"). How old are you really? I could just say that bullshit in someone else's head is money in your pocket. If you cannot monetize (on) it, then all your bigotry is futile and not worth a fuck...

A true hypocrite would first care for his ego & keep it safe, monetizing inevitably comes next but isnt always a necessity.

Well, it may not indeed be a top necessity, but how can it otherwise be proved truly authentic? The proof of the pudding is in the eating...

[BADecker]

I find it interesting how religious people want to believe that religion is essential and so atheists must also have religion.

That is an interesting notion. Do you think that the reason theists try to fallaciously claim atheism to be equal to a religion because they actually can't understand the concept of moral sentience without religion?

Actually, come to think of it, back when I was a fence-sitting agnostic, I actually believed it was impossible to be a genuine atheist, with the associated 'the end is the end of me' acceptance, without losing one's mind. I now know that, actually, once you become an intellectualised atheist, by way of reaching that position through much thought and consideration coupled with objective reasoning and critical thinking, it becomes absolutely natural a concept.

I didn't exist before I did and that wasn't a problem, so why would not existing after I do be any different?

Perhaps atheists have their own personal religion, but atheism in general is religion. Its god is the human mind.

I guess you are expanding the meaning of the word too far. Believing in something (which is what you are evidently trying to say) doesn't necessarily constitute a religion...

From the dictionary definition listed in https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg11350691#msg11350691:

6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience:
to make a religion of fighting prejudice.

Seems to me that an atheist who responds to anti-atheism posts zealously is not only a zealot, but he is a religious zealot, as well.