Nothing worse then a Devout Atheist trying to push beliefs (IRONY)

[jeff f]

Obviously race is not a choice, where holding a belief, which is essentially forming a conclusion, is a choice. Religious people make the conclusion that there is a deity. Atheists remain unconvinced. Knowing someone is Atheist tells you precisely what they DO NOT believe, but it tells you nothing about what they may believe. Knowing someone is black tells you nothing about what they believe or how they think. Knowing someone is religious tells you that they accept the claim of a deity, which tells you a lot about how they think.

Religion never hesitates to play the hurt card, or to vilify those who don't conform. Faith is in fact ignorance. When do we look to faith for comfort? When we don't understand God, when we are given reasons to doubt God, anytime we question things that are unknowable about God; faith is the answer we are given. Faith stops people from asking questions without providing any answers. Faith teaches us to be satisfied with not knowing; ignorance. Skeptics do not accept ignorance as a reason to hold a belief. When someone sights faith as a reason to believe something, there are in fact saying "I can not explain why I believe this claim, but I believe it anyway." An atheist simply has a higher standard for belief.

If you take someone who simply refuses to accept a claim you are making, and label them a bigot, it shows your inability to truly grasp the situation. The better solution is to simply form a more convincing argument for your claim, and stop being a cry baby when people don't believe it.

So then we should be allowed to discriminate against, oh I don't know, MUSLUMS or PEOPLE WHO ARE TOO STUPID TO BELIEVEn

Nevermind I don't think you are smart enough to understand the irony.

 

[Heisenberg]

So then we should be allowed to discriminate against, oh I don't know, MUSLUMS or PEOPLE WHO ARE TOO STUPID TO BELIEVEn

Nevermind I don't think you are smart enough to understand the irony.

That is a strawman argument. Who is arguing the position that religious people should be discriminated against? Again you play the hurt card, when no one is trying to hurt you. If prejudice is what you have a problem with, then pick on prejudice. Atheists judge the claim of "there is a deity" without caring who the person is making the claim.

 

[guy incognito]

i think black people are dumb. you probably dont even understand that this is how you sound.

religion is protected by discrimination laws as is race, sex, handicap, creed, age. i think i hit them all.

anyway, you "thinking" your smarter than all religious people shows your ignorance and puts you at the head of the class of dumbasses.

It doesn't sound like that to me. Making a conscious decision to believe in god is fundamentally different than being born with a certain skin color.

There is also that same fundamental difference between religion/creed and race/sex/handicap/age.

Also why do you think every opinion is equally valid? Just because someone has a belief or opinion doesn't mean it was based on rational thinking or that it should automatically be respected. I have many beliefs, but I can always back them up with a logical thought process so you know WHY I came to that conclusion. Simply accepting a belief with no evidence IS inferior to having valid reasons for holding a belief.

 

[guy incognito]

That is a strawman argument. Who is arguing the position that religious people should be discriminated against? Again you play the hurt card, when no one is trying to hurt you. If prejudice is what you have a problem with, then pick on prejudice. Atheists judge the claim of "there is a deity" without caring who the person is making the claim.

I want to point out it is not prejudice either. PREjudice means pre-judging. This is just regular judging.

 

[Heisenberg]

I want to point out it is not prejudice either. PREjudice means pre-judging. This is just regular judging.

Isn't that what I pointed out in that quote? Judging something on an attribute that tells you nothing about it (race, handicap, sex) is prejudice. Your judging without first considering any actual evidence. Atheists evaluate evidence and remain unconvinced, which is regular judging. He is of course falsely equivocating evaluation of religious claims with prejudging people, which allows him to play the hurt card.

 

[guy incognito]

Isn't that what I pointed out in that quote? Judging something on an attribute that tells you nothing about it (race, handicap, sex) is prejudice. Your judging without first considering any actual evidence. Atheists evaluate evidence and remain unconvinced, which is regular judging. He is of course falsely equivocating evaluation of religious claims with prejudging people, which allows him to play the hurt card.

Touche heisenberg. Touche.

 

[TheGreenThumber]

Since when is a judgment about someones intellectual capabilities the same as discrimination?

 

[NoDrama]

Since when is a judgment about someones intellectual capabilities the same as discrimination?

When that person is a Minority. Some people are more equal than others.

 

[Dominathan]

Arguing with Heisenberg is like boxing a glacier.

 

[sync0s]

So then we should be allowed to discriminate against, oh I don't know, MUSLUMS or PEOPLE WHO ARE TOO STUPID TO BELIEVEn

Nevermind I don't think you are smart enough to understand the irony.

Perhaps it isn't that he isn't smart enough to understand you. Maybe, it's your not smart enough to understand him. The mere fact that you say it is wrong to judge someone on intellect and compare it to judging someone on race is completely dumbfounding. How do you judge people then?

 

[jeff f]

Perhaps it isn't that he isn't smart enough to understand you. Maybe, it's your not smart enough to understand him. The mere fact that you say it is wrong to judge someone on intellect and compare it to judging someone on race is completely dumbfounding. How do you judge people then?

they are both covered by law....look it up dummy. you cant discriminate against either....BY THE LAW, you know, that pesky little thing that keeps us locked up.

 

[sync0s]

they are both covered by law....look it up dummy. you cant discriminate against either....BY THE LAW, you know, that pesky little thing that keeps us locked up.

I didn't say discriminate. That's prejudging. I said judging.

dis·crim·i·nateverb /disˈkriməˌnāt/ 
discriminated, past participle; discriminated, past tense; discriminates, 3rd person singular present; discriminating, present participle
Make an unjust or prejudicial distinction in the treatment of different categories of people or things, esp. on the grounds of race, sex, or age

Interesting on how you can be mentally retarded and get easier punishment in criminal court. That's judgement on intelligence if I didn't know any better.

 

[Heisenberg]

they are both covered by law....look it up dummy. you cant discriminate against either....BY THE LAW, you know, that pesky little thing that keeps us locked up.

Since when is it against the law to discriminate against intellect? Does my employer now have to hire me even if I do not possess a diploma? Can I sue Mensa if they decide I am not smart enough to be in their club? Should I be let on the math team if I can not add 2+2?

It's against the law to discriminate based on religion because religion is a belief, and it is wrong to punish people for a belief. In America, we are free believe what we want and to express those beliefs. We do not try to control what someone thinks in their own head.

It is well understood that someone can make the conclusion that god exists and still be intellectually competent. A lot of religious people have thought deeply on the subject, but still neglect to apply rigorous doubt, do not understand the pitfalls of invalid reasoning, or else excuse religion from the standards they set for other beliefs. I doubt many religious people would take a drug based on a claim that has not been put through a process of doubt and passed consistent standards of merit. So while I would not make the statement that religious people are stupid, I would say that they are either unaware, under vigilant, or inconsistent.

So explain how an atheist, who says I am unconvinced of god, is discriminating against you?

 

[jeff f]

I didn't say discriminate. That's prejudging. I said judging.




Interesting on how you can be mentally retarded and get easier punishment in criminal court. That's judgement on intelligence if I didn't know any better.

well next time you judge a guy because he is religious, when you are in court, explain to the judge that you werent "discriminating" mister smarty pants.

 

[jeff f]

Since when is it against the law to discriminate against intellect? Does my employer now have to hire me even if I do not possess a diploma? Can I sue Mensa if they decide I am not smart enough to be in their club? Should I be let on the math team if I can not add 2+2?

It's against the law to discriminate based on religion because religion is a belief, and it is wrong to punish people for a belief. In America, we are free believe what we want and to express those beliefs. We do not try to control what someone thinks in their own head.

It is well understood that someone can make the conclusion that god exists and still be intellectually competent. A lot of religious people have thought deeply on the subject, but still neglect to apply rigorous doubt, do not understand the pitfalls of invalid reasoning, or else excuse religion from the standards they set for other beliefs. I doubt many religious people would take a drug based on a claim that has not been put through a process of doubt and passed consistent standards of merit. So while I would not make the statement that religious people are stupid, I would say that they are either unaware, under vigilant, or inconsistent.

So explain how an atheist, who says I am unconvinced of god, is discriminating against you?

blah blah blah...i am gonna apply for an appartment in your building. tell me i aint getting it because of my religion.....then we will let god, oops, i mean the judge figure it out.

 

[Heisenberg]

blah blah blah...i am gonna apply for an appartment in your building. tell me i aint getting it because of my religion.....then we will let god, oops, i mean the judge figure it out.

Again you fail to make any sort of coherent point other than you don't want to consider what I am saying, as indicated by "blah blah blah". Putting your fingers in your ears is a poor way to find truth. Maybe it's the fact that you didn't consider what I said that makes what you said a senseless non-pertinent response. You do not even possess the ability to clearly express yourself or explain your position, which leaves any opinion you have without merit.

 

[sync0s]

well next time you judge a guy because he is religious, when you are in court, explain to the judge that you werent "discriminating" mister smarty pants.

Somebodies angry

I never said anything about how I think religious people are of lesser intelligence.

Let's face it. Your anger towards atheists stems from your ignorance to it. You fail to understand it, and you get angry when your belief is contested.

 

[jeff f]

Again you fail to make any sort of coherent point other than you don't want to consider what I am saying, as indicated by "blah blah blah". Putting your fingers in your ears is a poor way to find truth. Maybe it's the fact that you didn't consider what I said that makes what you said a senseless non-pertinent response. You do not even possess the ability to clearly express yourself or explain your position, which leaves any opinion you have without merit.

are the rest of you guys diggin this clown? a mystery wrapped in an enigma.....errrr

 

[sync0s]

are the rest of you guys diggin this clown? a mystery wrapped in an enigma.....errrr

Another statement from the angry christian whom chooses to ignore others posts and instead chooses the high road. You know, the road where you call the other person a clown in order to defame them.

 

[Dan Kone]

well next time you judge a guy because he is religious, when you are in court, explain to the judge that you werent "discriminating" mister smarty pants.

prejudice and discriminating are not interchangeable words. You can discriminate without being prejudice.