The Positively Atheist Thread

[Stu Monty]

For x=browness. Confused rationalist confuses correlation and causation.

 

Yep. You got me. I'm a massive racist and you're the brightest cat in town. 

 

Sort of falls down when people that identify with x are white though. Or when x isn't Islam. Which was the point of using x. You keep on telling people that say "I'm doing this in the name of X!" that you know better than them though. Maybe explain the whole causation / correlation problem to them.

[Rico1304]

Yep. You got me. I'm a massive racist and you're the brightest cat in town. 

 

Sort of falls down when people that identify with x are white though. Or when x isn't Islam. Which was the point of using x. You keep on telling people that say "I'm doing this in the name of X!" that you know better than them though. Maybe explain the whole causation / correlation problem to them.

Stu Monty = TLW EDL

Stu Monty = TLW NF

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

Sorry I thought you were saying religious people are intellectually confused. Presumably you think they are too?

I think the ones who claim certain things are, yes. I acknowledge that religion is a very, very broad church and judging billions of people - billions, man - as one entity is pretty fucking ridiculous.

 

On what basis are you refuting the available data on what religious people have said to polls they believe? Now unless you're stating we literally cannot use polling data to form our opinions then I'm at a bit of a loss as to how on earth you can say it's conformation bias. Show me the contradictory figures. Give me some figures that aren't frankly ridiculous.

I'm saying it's confirmatory bias because you, and those who have also presented the same data on here, choose to believe their validity rather than questioning the polling. You know just as well as I do that you can heavily influence an answer just by the way you ask and phrase a question. Even more than that, if you present something in a certain fashion, you're going to get skewed answers. Going even further, if you do something in a cursory way and then take the answers at face value, then you can be quite mislead. If this was, for example, a poll on socialism or nuclear disarmament or welfare, you might well lead to question the results if they didn't tally up with your on world view. I think we should question them either way.

 

 

As for conflating the religious with the heinous, I really don't see how you can ignore the fact that if one section of the population that identifies strongly as x has a hugely disproportionate support for something compared to the general population then whatever X might be is probably going to be a major factor.

Okay, this is a good example of my issue here and with you in particular. Just a few pages back, you said that people aren't good because the bible tells them so, they'd have been good anyway. Now, you've said on here many times, and intimated as much again, that if they're doing something - stoning people, or whatever - it's because of religion. In my view,you can't have it both ways.

 

I think you, and the group of people who share very similar views on here, like to treat anybody who is religious as if they're the same person. It's really quite offensive to me. Now, this is where I'm told that I have no right to not be offended. I agree. I personally think that pre-judging of people based off of a vast minority of heinous ACTS is akin to saying 'niggers are stupid and lazy'. I'm offended by that, too. Not because I'm religious or black, but because it's just not a very nice way to behave.

 

Now, for some reason, there's this 'but what about those doing the stoning' argument. Yeah, I'm sure nobody will be surprised to find out that I'm not a big proponent of that either. The thing is, people are just people. Do you think the average Joe in Saudi Arabia isn't just a person trying to get on with his life and feed his family just like the majority of people are in this country? Of course they are. I oppose this segregation that the antitheists are trying to make. I abhor that violence too. I'd never question somebody for speaking out about violence. I do dislike the dehumanisation by the antitheists towards religious folk though. It's dangerous to allow that sort of thing to go unquestioned. Once you start treating a group of people like that, you're on dangerous group. 'The muslims' this or 'the religious' that is an act of dehumanisation that we've seen in the past.

 

I'm not saying you need to be nice towards those stoning people or that you should believe in a God or any of that stuff. Just that you should be careful of how you come across, because on this issue - and I respect your views on a great number of other subjects - you come across as crass, prejudiced and a bit thoughtless. That's not the sort of person I've spoken with on here over the last 6 or 7 years or so.

[Rotpeter]

Well stop pretending you're making a rational case. You're just using the same thought processes that my friends who were in the ICF. "Well there's more crime where those darkies live!"

 

c/darkies/religion/g and you sound like the same,

[Rotpeter]

Yep. You got me. I'm a massive racist and you're the brightest cat in town. 

 

Sort of falls down when people that identify with x are white though. Or when x isn't Islam. Which was the point of using x. You keep on telling people that say "I'm doing this in the name of X!" that you know better than them though. Maybe explain the whole causation / correlation problem to them.

Why don't yiou solve YOUR correlation causation problem, tell me how you did it,and i'll try it on them!

[Rico1304]

NV - if you've a problem with the Pew studies, or the questions asked, show me the errors. All the questions are available, if there was any issue with it it should be easy to point out.

 

Your point about the 'average joe' in Saudi is dead right, they do just want to get on. But that average Joe is told that mysoginy and homophobia is normal. I listened to a podcast the other day and the speaker (can't remember who) was saying that it's impossible for all the hundreds of thousands of ISIS supporters to be mentally ill. In those supporters there MUST be people who don't want to do what they are doing but feel it's their duty to fulfill the word of God.

[Stu Monty]

I think the ones who claim certain things are, yes. I acknowledge that religion is a very, very broad church and judging billions of people - billions, man - as one entity is pretty fucking ridiculous.

 

 

I'm saying it's confirmatory bias because you, and those who have also presented the same data on here, choose to believe their validity rather than questioning the polling. You know just as well as I do that you can heavily influence an answer just by the way you ask and phrase a question. Even more than that, if you present something in a certain fashion, you're going to get skewed answers. Going even further, if you do something in a cursory way and then take the answers at face value, then you can be quite mislead. If this was, for example, a poll on socialism or nuclear disarmament or welfare, you might well lead to question the results if they didn't tally up with your on world view. I think we should question them either way.

 

 

Okay, this is a good example of my issue here and with you in particular. Just a few pages back, you said that people aren't good because the bible tells them so, they'd have been good anyway. Now, you've said on here many times, and intimated as much again, that if they're doing something - stoning people, or whatever - it's because of religion. In my view,you can't have it both ways.

 

I think you, and the group of people who share very similar views on here, like to treat anybody who is religious as if they're the same person. It's really quite offensive to me. Now, this is where I'm told that I have no right to not be offended. I agree. I personally think that pre-judging of people based off of a vast minority of heinous ACTS is akin to saying 'niggers are stupid and lazy'. I'm offended by that, too. Not because I'm religious or black, but because it's just not a very nice way to behave.

 

Now, for some reason, there's this 'but what about those doing the stoning' argument. Yeah, I'm sure nobody will be surprised to find out that I'm not a big proponent of that either. The thing is, people are just people. Do you think the average Joe in Saudi Arabia isn't just a person trying to get on with his life and feed his family just like the majority of people are in this country? Of course they are. I oppose this segregation that the antitheists are trying to make. I abhor that violence too. I'd never question somebody for speaking out about violence. I do dislike the dehumanisation by the antitheists towards religious folk though. It's dangerous to allow that sort of thing to go unquestioned. Once you start treating a group of people like that, you're on dangerous group. 'The muslims' this or 'the religious' that is an act of dehumanisation that we've seen in the past.

 

I'm not saying you need to be nice towards those stoning people or that you should believe in a God or any of that stuff. Just that you should be careful of how you come across, because on this issue - and I respect your views on a great number of other subjects - you come across as crass, prejudiced and a bit thoughtless. That's not the sort of person I've spoken with on here over the last 6 or 7 years or so.

 

Sorry mate but you are definitely already on a train of thought about how I approach this and you're filtering my posts through that instead of reading what I'm actually saying. 

 

I am not saying that if they are stoning people that "it is the religion"  because as you say, the good or the bad does not come from the religion. What I am saying though is that it's a very strong tool for manipulating people and manipulating culture and as such you have to see it as a major factor when one specific group of people have a big problem with something like, for instance, stoning adulterers. It is almost impossible for me to re-iterate any more than I do (in the face of you, and others repeatedly ignoring it) that I do not think "all muslims are x" or "all religious people are x". It's a totally different issue to say that, for instance, this group, or this religion, have a problem with any particular issue by pointing out that a lot of people that identify with them hold a particular view. You wouldn't pull me up on that if I was using the word Tory but will if I use the world Christian or Muslim. 

 

Nobody is saying Joe isn't just trying to get by, they are pointing out that he supports some bad shit. Then stating that maybe one of the reasons that he supports that bad shit is maybe not because he is inherently evil but that the thing that he holds very dear to him and identifies strongly with is something that is warping his views and guiding him down that path. John over here is just trying to get by too, that doesn't mean that he can't have been manipulated into being a racist cunt by nationalism or his strong identification with the Conservative party. It also doesn't mean all Tories are, by definition racist - just that they seem to have a problem with it being quite prevalent. 

 

I always question the information that I'm forming my opinions on and I'm well aware that polls can be manipulated. I even went through the trouble of trying to look into the Pew foundation (presuming that being a US vehicle they will have some slant on things that is not helpful and trying to stir the pot). I didn't find anything that massively undermined it, but even if I did, how much level of error are you working with? You've got huge percentages where if you knock 15% off the responses then it's still bleak as fuck. If I had seen figures that told me the numbers were totally different I'd fucking well read them, because although I think religion is a corrosive force I'm actually on the side of the more progressive movers in these countries that are fighting against the majority.

 

What informs your opinion that there are not large percentages of people in these countries that think in the way that polling data suggests?

 

It's not even your faith in religious people that surprises me it's your faith in people in general. Lots of people are cunts; I'm just suggesting that quite a few of the people identifying in one way are going about being a cunt in quite a specific way. And that if you were in charge of that club, and wanted it to be purged of cunts, you would want to look at why that is. In the same way if you were in a different country, where your cunts are taking a different route, that route might also need sorting out to try and minimise the cuntiness.

 

I do not dehumanise religious people. I attack the ideas and the delivery system of those ideas. I recognise that a lot of people do dehumanise them and that it is a very hostile atmosphere for them because of that but, on here, where we are supposed to be allowed to discuss complicated subjects I am not having my views bundled in with that shite. Elsewhere I'm fucking constantly pulling people up for "Muslim this" and "refugee that" (obviously totally interchangeable to these people) but I'd expect that to be taken as a fucking given by most of the people these posts are being read by/aimed at.

[Jose Jones]

The Bible says that mankind was made in God's image, so we can reliably state that God looks like a man, according to the Bible.

 

That he is a white bearded man is a function of him not being reported to shave, and of him being very old.

 

That Heaven is said to be in the sky is a function of things like Jesus ascending to Heaven.

 

God is a white bearded man in the clouds, according to the Bible. It's all in there.

 

Well "ascending" could obviously mean in the spiritual sense, but also the sky was part the vast unknowable back in ye olden days, so I think it's fair to point that heaven and God could be knocking about in the sky somewhere.  Also Zeus was up in the clouds throwing thunderbolts, so it's quite likely that the Christian images of God were directly descended from that as well.

Zeus also went down to earth and impregnated virgins too of course.  Although he mainly did it to the fit ones for a lark, and wasn't really that fussed about saving the souls of mankind.

[VladimirIlyich]

NV - if you've a problem with the Pew studies, or the questions asked, show me the errors. All the questions are available, if there was any issue with it it should be easy to point out.

 

Your point about the 'average joe' in Saudi is dead right, they do just want to get on. But that average Joe is told that mysoginy and homophobia is normal. I listened to a podcast the other day and the speaker (can't remember who) was saying that it's impossible for all the hundreds of thousands of ISIS supporters to be mentally ill. In those supporters there MUST be people who don't want to do what they are doing but feel it's their duty to fulfill the word of God.

How do you,or I,know what the average Joe in Saudi Arabia thinks? He/she could think their government is a bunch of wankers like most of the people in this country do about our government and try to ignore the propaganda spewed out by our agencies. With ours its a more political agenda,for them it may be more religious,I have no idea.

 

As for ISIS 'hundreds of thousands of supporters' there is a difference between a supporter and a 'soldier' or 'terrorist' and maybe an Arab who just despises the West for maybe slaughtering their family or bombing their homes and making them refugees or whatever. Their 'support' may be based on the simple fact that ISIS are not the West and nothing more than that. The best of the worst,in their eyes,if you like.

The ISIS 'soldiers' are pretty much everything the average Muslim is not.

[Rico1304]

How do you,or I,know what the average Joe in Saudi Arabia thinks? He/she could think their government is a bunch of wankers like most of the people in this country do about our government and try to ignore the propaganda spewed out by our agencies. With ours its a more political agenda,for them it may be more religious,I have no idea.

 

As for ISIS 'hundreds of thousands of supporters' there is a difference between a supporter and a 'soldier' or 'terrorist' and maybe an Arab who just despises the West for maybe slaughtering their family or bombing their homes and making them refugees or whatever. Their 'support' may be based on the simple fact that ISIS are not the West and nothing more than that. The best of the worst,in their eyes,if you like.

The ISIS 'soldiers' are pretty much everything the average Muslim is not.

The data tells us thats how.

 

Can you tell me about this average Muslim please?

[Rico1304]

Although they do have some good ideas, probably due to America or climate change.

 

http://www.cosmopolitan.com/food-cocktails/news/a53000/women-banned-from-saudi-arabia-starbucks/

[skend04]

When did misogony and homophobia stop being an issue in the largely atheistic UK?

[Rico1304]

When did misogony and homophobia stop being an issue in the largely atheistic UK?

What's the direction of travel in the UK? For fucks sake.

 

If you have/had a daughter would you rather her be brought up under our or their rules?

[Jose Jones]

The UK is still very much CofE. The head of state is the head of the church. Luckily the prods actually read the Jesus bits of the bible (that's the whole reason they came about) unlike the Catholic Church, so that when enough godless bastards started complaining about misogyny and homophobia the church was moved to do a bit about it. Because Jesus was a cool loving dude.

[Stu Monty]

When did misogony and homophobia stop being an issue in the largely atheistic UK?

Nobody said they have.

 

You can take part in a mature conversation or go and play in the ball pit. Your choice.

[zigackly]

Just because homophobia and misogyny are no longer mandated by religion for a lot of people in the UK, that doesn't mean the cultural prejudices are simply going to disappear.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Oddly, the Koran gives women a lot more rights (property ownership, divorce, etc.) than the Bible.

 

Culture would appear to consist largely of which bits of Scripture one chooses to ignore and which bits one exaggerates.

[Rico1304]

Oddly, the Koran gives women a lot more rights (property ownership, divorce, etc.) than the Bible.

 

Culture would appear to consist largely of which bits of Scripture one chooses to ignore and which bits one exaggerates.

By Jove...

[Bjornebye]

God was that fella who took a vow of silence in Life of Brian im certain of it

[razor]

The work I do for local charities inspires my zest for life in a way that a vague hope things will be better after I'm dead never could.

 

Yes, this "after I'm dead" bit is a tad misleading.  I would wager most Christians aren't thinking about the afterlife when they become Christians.  They are entering into a relationship with a living God there and then for what they see as a better life NOW.  This is my experience, anyway.

[Stu Monty]

Yes, this "after I'm dead" bit is a tad misleading.  I would wager most Christians aren't thinking about the afterlife when they become Christians.  They are entering into a relationship with a living God there and then for what they see as a better life NOW.  This is my experience, anyway.

 

I'd wager that for many they aren't thinking that much about a better life as they are having religion drummed into them as children.

[Rico1304]

Yes, this "after I'm dead" bit is a tad misleading. I would wager most Christians aren't thinking about the afterlife when they become Christians. They are entering into a relationship with a living God there and then for what they see as a better life NOW. This is my experience, anyway.

68% of US believe in heaven

58% of US believe in hell and Satan

[AngryOfTuebrook]

68% of US believe in heaven

58% of US believe in hell and Satan

If pushed, I'd guess most Christians believe in Heaven. The point is that you can't assume that they're fixated on it, guiding their every movement. It's more complicated than that.

[VladimirIlyich]

68% of US believe in heaven

58% of US believe in hell and Satan

Those Americans are crazy fuckers anyway.

[Bobby Hundreds]

I remember a bit of Bill Burrs standup where he says he first heard of Scientology he laughed his tits off and thought mad bastards but still holding on to the sheer ludicrousness of his own religion, he said the reason he found Scientology so absurd is because he heard it for the first time when he was an adult, life, experience and just logic highlighted the absurdity of it but Christianity was shoved down his throat from a young age when he believed in santa and the easter bunny. Shit can stick if rubbed in enough. I have no idea how people can hold onto a book of religion thats been transcribed changed and politicised so many times over hundreds upon hundreds of years by the powerful and the unscrupulous for their own ends and still see these books as the word of god. Maybe faith in what we can achieve as a species would best serve us now rather than faith that theres something better after this.. honest guv.