I hate God.
- The concept
- God is an outdated hypothesis presented to explain reality at a time when the scientific method didn’t exist.
- Testable variations of this hypothesis have never succeeded at proving the existence of God. Untestable variations are useless.
- Different communities of people have weaponized the concept of God to somehow prove their moral frameworks as objective reality to impose them on others.
- The ruling class has weaponized God to accumulate more power.
- The character
- If God indeed exists, God is an asshole. If they are indeed the creator of this reality, pain and suffering exist because of them. Assuming they are all powerful, they can eliminate pain and suffering while still achieving their terminal goal behind the creation of this reality. Unless the terminal goal is causing pain and suffering itself. Both explanations point to God being an asshole.
- Another branch of this argument can be that “God cannot eliminate pain and suffering to achieve the terminal goal, which is NOT to cause pain and suffering”. This means that there are certain rules that apply to God too. Meaning, that God is not all powerful. God is just someone MORE powerful than us. We are at the mercy of God. To achieve the terminal goal, God is willing to put us through pain and suffering. God is evil. As God is bound by certain rules, and is not all powerful, a possibility exists of couping God. God must be couped.
No atheist hates god. How can you hate something you don’t think exists?
I guess you can hate god as a concept. God can be proven to exists in human minds (no esoteric stuff, just psychology and sociology). You can hate this scientific fact and what it means for humankind.
The best example of an asshole atheist they could find was one making a shitty anti-theist meme, meanwhile the examples of asshole Christians and Muslims are violent
CCP and USSR stamped out religious practice, but go off.
As an Atheist myself, don’t delude yourself into thinking religion is unique in its capacity for horrors. Humans have that capacity, any group we make would also have that capacity.
The existence of religions itself is harmful to me. Religions make public manipulation very easy. This leads to power accumulation, which is very dangerous for me (unless I’m the one doing the manipulation). Hence, it is in my interest to stamp out all religions.
However, the methods used by the CCP and the USSR failed to stamp out religion. Repression makes religion stronger. In my opinion, societal indoctrination of the laws of logic would stand a better chance at eradicating religion. In other words, good education that revolves around the workings of logic, logical fallacies, etc. would stand a bigger chance at this
I was commenting on the examples the meme chose to use. It implies they couldn’t find examples of violent atheists
They should have used the destruction of temples in Kyiv
It’s been a while since I’ve seen drag! :)
Drag got banned from blahaj and decided to take a step back from Lemmy
hopefully drag is doing better now. Good to see drag back.
(PS. is saying “good seeing ya” be ok with how neopronouns work? or would “drag” instead of “ya” be better?)
There are a lot of edgy athiests using all their time attacking trans people these days, because an unfortunate number of them are mainly athiests as a way to hate Muslims. And the ones taking the time to attack trans people have almost all joined the alt right, which has been responsible for a lot of attacks on innocent people.
They may not be killing in the name of atheism, but they have been in the same of “reason” and “defence of women”.
I haven’t seen that. Why would they need to be atheist to hate Muslims? You can do that from anywhere.
You can really change that to “should” instead of “can”.
They literally defend a pedo prophet. I don’t know how exactly they justify that, but I don’t really care. I will actively hate them for this one detail and feel pretty fucking justified.
When you actively go out of your way to be terrible, you intentionally choose to be considered low class until you wake up and choose a decent path.
Just be decent. That’s not a high bar to clear. Muslims and Christians fail this test. Probably a lot of others, but staying on topic of the post context here.
Mao, Kim jong un, Stalin…
They weren’t killing in the name of atheism though
You can sugar coat it however you like and No-True-Scotsman till the cows come home, but North Korea, iirc, even today, kills, imprisons and tortures more people for their beliefs than any other country.
Believing that atheists are somehow immune from shittiness is absurd. No broad category of people is immune from shittiness.
“The Soviet Union (1922–1991) had a long history of state atheism, whereby those who were seeking social success generally had to profess atheism and stay away from places of worship; this trend became especially militant during the middle of the Stalinist era, which lasted from 1929 to 1953.”
“The Communist Party engaged in diverse activities such as destroying places of worship, executing religious leaders, flooding schools and media with anti-religious propaganda, and propagated “scientific atheism”.[55][56] It sought to make religion disappear by various means.[57][58] Thus, the USSR became the first state to have as one objective of its official ideology the elimination of the existing religion, and the prevention of the future implanting of religious belief, with the goal of establishing state atheism (gosateizm).”
I’ve went through that personally so I’m very well aware but still I don’t think its very much of the same thing. It’s less due to atheism per se and more to do with the fact that people groups were just dangerous to the regime and this extended way beyond religion.
And when the Cathars, or the Templars were eradicated, or when Protestants and Catholics went to war, do you really think it’s because of sincerely held beliefs regarding their God, or because one group threatened the hegemony and material wealth of the other? In the case of the Protestants, the single most critical doctrine they went after was the Catholic belief that doctrinal authority came in part from the Bible, and in part from the Church; whereas Protestants argued for Sola Scriptura - the belief that doctrinal authority came from the Bible alone. And even the 95 theses clearly had the goal of ending a system of exploitation and financial parasitism by the Catholic church. Welcome to real politics.
None of this does anything to change that cases of church authority are still functionally the same as those of state atheism and anti-theism. In the case of Christian churches, you have the view that only Christianity is the truth and everything else is both the result of the devil, and leads to evil, and therefore all other beliefs are invalid and ultimately must be eradicated.
In the case of these varying state atheist groups you have governments expressing that atheism is the only valid belief system, and again, all others must cease. And anti-theists are explicit about their view of all other religious beliefs being invalid and needing to be eradicated.
If persecutions and executions against religious people by governments that are saying everyone has to be atheist isn’t killing in the name of atheism, then what the fuck is?
well you can find them on social media hating on women instead. a lot of early atheist youtubers went on to become gamergaters.
or look at a popular one like Dawkins who is busy being a transphobe nowadays. imagine being an atheist and wasting the remainder of your precious and only life trying to make the precious and only life of the most marginalized people in society even worse.
or sam harris who literally defended torture.
-
actually dangerous white supremacist
-
guy in a ninja costume with a knife
-
weird meme
-
completely made up stereotype
1/4: do better next time!
Misandrists exist, but most are harmless. Social media just does a good job of amplifying them like all outrage.
No it doesn’t. You just don’t want to admit that you benefit from misogyny.
You realize that both misogyny and misandry can exist at the same time in different people?
I don’t know why you feel like you know me well enough to make that claim.
The claim that there is such a thing as misandry places them on equal footing and minimises the scale of cultural misogyny.
No it doesn’t. The world isn’t that binary. That’s a twitter mindset.
Read some Judith Butler or Angela Davis
-
I’m not sure I’d use Bill Nye as the example of the asshole atheist, unless that’s the joke. Maybe Christopher Hitchens.
The downvotes for this are wild lmao
