are you an atheist?

silby I'm not gonna pretend to understand what has set you off here...I imagine this is a hangover from recent shitshow on multiple other threads? It seems like a weird issue to make your *last straw* but maybe it's just a response to Tombot's chastening.

I appreciate you and your schtick and felt kind of bad about your last ban. It is a little bit weird though from someone who regularly and indiscriminately tosses bombs and steamrolls threads with generalizations (I think most of us take that in stride) to totally wilt at this one.

implore you for a last time to not say “Abrahamic” in instances when you mean “Christian”.

I don't mean Christian though. I mean Abrahamic. These religions share the same creation myth and a lot more. (I did get ahead of my thoughts as NV points out with "begat"^—drunkenly conflating the biblical line of "begetting" w/ god "creating" man," but the point stands—there's a persistent theme of male parentage across the big three monotheistic religions. Not sure how that is even remotely controversial.

Anyway this isn't about personal views. I know a lot of Christians who reject the notion of an anthropomorphized god—it doesn't mean that "old bearded guy in sky" doesn't prevail in the popular conception.

I may be wrong but this seems at bottom more of a political objection on your part—an understandable disdain for Christianity that encourages you to imagine it as more apart from its neighboring faiths than it really is.

All of these religions are dumb btw

(^this last with apologies from a preacher's kid—and former editor of a journal abt religions)

Full disclosure: I admit it was lazy and cheap to appear to conflate Abrahamic visions of the godhead into Beard Dude. If that was what set silby off, I take responsibility and will flay myself appropriately in private.

I was (and am) aware of the prohibitions in Judaism and Islam about depictions of the deity; in a moment of rapid typing I engaged in an act of casual shorthand.

So, with that out of the way: I strongly disagree that the assembled ilxor heathens are only addressing Christianity. For me? Adonai, Aphrodite, and Apollo are all on equally shaky ground and have not hesitated to say so. Personally I've been exactly as dismissive of Norse gods as I am of Jehovah. I'm an equal-opportunity god-mocker.

I am still fuzzy on the gravamen of silby's charge of antisemitism. Is it somehow antisemitic to be an atheist or agnostic if your rejection is limited to rejections of Christian doctrine? (By which I mean, the doctrine that is currently obscenely prevalent in US culture?)

Okay. I am happy to state that I am just as contemptuous of the ancient Babylonian gods as I am of the god worshipped by Mike Huckabee and Jerry Falwell.

Does that help?

here just choosing to ignore the antisemitism charge because wtaf

I don't get what silby did itt that was so bad. And I think it's weird that no one commented on this post, which strikes me as egregiously worrying mod behavior (at least I assume Tombot is a mod based on his access to fp totals?):

I am giving you advice. you have nearly 40 fps. you are generally disliked. consider your approach.

― sound of scampo talk to me (El Tomboto), Sunday, August 2, 2020 12:24 AM (eleven hours ago)

I think mods warning posters when they're accruing fps can be a kind gesture, but surely it should be done privately, not as a public threat intended to get a poster to alter their posting in a way the mod approves of and certainly not accompanied by stating "you are generally disliked" like it's a fact.

The only religious explanation I would be OK with is "god is an evil irrational sadist".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism

fwiw I don't think the antisemitism charge was directed at atheists at all. It was directed at the "whatever" dismissal of the differences between the Abrahamic religions, and prioritising of Christian conceptions as emblematic of all Abrahamic religions. While I don't think the intent was at all antisemitic or Islamophobic on your parts, such dismissal of difference as insignificant is *definitely* part of the Christocentric thinking that leads to structural antisemitism and Islamophobia.

"whatever" dismissal of the differences between the Abrahamic religions, and prioritising of Christian conceptions as emblematic of all Abrahamic religions

nobody itt doing this though

I admit it was lazy and cheap to appear to conflate Abrahamic visions of the godhead into Beard Dude. If that was what set silby off, I take responsibility and will flay myself appropriately in private.

I was (and am) aware of the prohibitions in Judaism and Islam about depictions of the deity; in a moment of rapid typing I engaged in an act of casual shorthand.

Like, this is INCREDIBLY dismissive of someone's religion, you realise that? And yes, I know you're dismissing all religions because this is a thread about atheism, but you are 100% being culturally insensitive in a way that diminishes Judaism and Islam more than Xianity. "Oh, I'm just ignoring facets of your religion for my own convenience, what could be wrong with that?"

"Oh, I'm just ignoring facets of your religion for my own convenience, what could be wrong with that?"

This is the entire history of religion iirc.

Why do religious people give a shit that a non believer dismisses their religion

Fair point, pom.

Granny, because it can have real-world consequences? And often has? And in fact still does?

In answer to the original question, I'm pragmatically atheist and philosophically agnostic, funnily enough for a lot of the same reasons YMP and Hadrian give, except that I'm not "contemptuous" of other people's gods, I just don't believe in them.

silby otm

I know you're dismissing all religions because this is a thread about atheism, but you are 100% being culturally insensitive in a way that diminishes Judaism and Islam more than Xianity.

I don't know abt YMP but I'm not dismissing or diminishing any religions. And I'm not an atheist. I was addressing a pretty obvious commonality among the three major monotheistic religions which have a sacred text in common.

Religious ppl perpetually getting offended at every perceived slight tends to be the thing that has the real world consequences tho

The bearded dude conception of God is not an "obvious commonality." Even in the Christian Bible there's not a physical description of God that describes Him as having a beard iirc.

no shit

a paternalistic god is the obvious commonality.

Oh, sorry Hadrian, I think I was confusing some of your posts with agreeing with YMP's in a way that meant you were agreeing with the dismissal (re-opening the full thread makes my computer chug too much). I think you can argue for the similarity without being "like, whatever, shorthand" offensive, but it's still worth listening to someone who is obviously pretty offended by the conflations being made.

We're all just culturally appropriating Zoroastrianism.

^truth

this thread makes me embarrassed to be an atheist

xxp s'okay

"but you are 100% being culturally insensitive in a way that diminishes Judaism and Islam more than Xianity."

So does one need to be a religious scholar and constantly take the time to include every single religion in the discussion to not be culturally insensitive? Christianity is by far the dominant religion in my culture. I haven't diminished other religions, that's already been done for me.

It's often useful even necessary to conflate disparate and contradictory traditions for the purposes of talking about more than one small thing at once but it's definitely worth being mindful of what you're doing and that its p weird to conflate all the strands of any religion when you think about it

if you're going to take the time to actively slag off on a religion, or anything else really, it's good to at least know what you're talking about

Yes but the bar of "knowing what you're talking about" is set by religious people. I have zero interest in the intricacies of their silly beliefs. I don't need to know every little detail of juggaloism to form an opinion of it and mock it.

I mean you had me at "I'm positive their is/are supernatural being(s) that created the universe". It usually gets sillier and more bizarre from there, but I find the starting point worthy of being dismissed

*there

And mind you your point is the exact same one made by gun nuts

Find myself tapping the sign


I tried to flag one of silby’s posts but got an error message saying “where’s the lie tho”

― Garu you just posted flange (wins), Monday, 9 March 2020 08:39 (four months ago) bookmarkflaglink

Theres all sorts of fine distinctions within categories like "atheist" and "gentile" that will inevitably escape the ppl that use them but they're still useful, as ever the key q is what are the differences that make a difference

xp: Bearded guy on a throne goes back to Zoroastrian depictions of Ahura Mazda.
https://www.crystalinks.com/ZHoldingSunDisc.jpg

If anything, the Islamic prohibitions on depicting the divine are far more conducive to belief in modern life. Bearded guy is just fodder for Pythonesque mockery.

I don't need to know every little detail of juggaloism to form an opinion of it and mock it.

― A True White Kid that can Jump (Granny Dainger), Sunday, August 2, 2020 4:48 PM (twenty-two minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

This would be a grave mistake, as juggalos are generally extremely dope and right about things.

Zeus was also a supreme male god who was often depicted as bearded and enthroned.

I'm not unfolding 2200 posts but I'm just going to say silby probably otm.

Everything was fine until we stopped worshipping the Löwenmensch figurine and the Venus of Willendorf.

In truth, if you were to unfold those 2200 posts and read them, mixed in among the zings and mutual incomprehension you'd find some very interesting and competent discussion of a subject that is rarely approached in that spirit.

I still worship Willendorf girl. Well no, but I do have the replica keychain.

This would be a grave mistake, as juggalos are generally extremely dope and right about things.

― There's more Italy than necessary. (in orbit)

one might even say they are... 2 dope

https://i.ibb.co/Lp8r1Nw/FB-IMG-1607113210785.jpg

Thoughts? A friend I respect posted this but while I'm usually down with criticizing toxic masculinity, this feels more like "my atheism is more pure than your atheism", which doesn't make me feel comfortable.

I also don't know how much of atheism is one fluid conscious choice. I didn't leave the faith in one pronounced moment, I drifted over time and realized that I wasn't going to church, and despite me calling myself agnostic, that I actually felt confident that there was nothing out there. It wasn't a solid moment in time and my sentiment against religion became less passive the more toxic Christianity became in this country.

I'm probably overthinking it, though.

any attempt to generalise by race is doomed

These seem like extremely lazy generalizations to me.

There is a subcategory of 'euphoric', Dawkins-toting, Mountain Dew-drinking atheist neckbeards who definitely fit the bill, but these kinds of generalizations aren't exactly helpful, are they.

"don't have spoons"?

Is it a reference to this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoon_theory

Thanks.

wonder when Tumblr discourse will die. possibly never

I don’t know where that tumblr post is supposed to lead. Okay, it’s different?

I didn’t lose any faith, didn’t break from any kind of religion so ‘my atheism’ is different from anyone who did, regardless of ethnicity/gender/etc., right? So what am I supposed to do with that? (I mostly just don’t ever think about god, gods or atheism.)

If a group of non-believers got to that point because they were being more overtly oppressed by the hypocrisies and belief discrepancies in the bible, in the end all atheists are non-believers. There really isn't any value in dunking on r/atheist caricatures when what we all have in common is a rejection of the idea of deities/spirits. Those discrepancies in the teachings of any specific religion are covered within that common rejection despite anyone's personal experiences with them.

i'd say there really isn't any value in recognizing that all non-believers can tick a categorical when social reality is structured by shades of domination, but then i'd be doing a pale imitation of, say, noodle vague who is always so rich on these kinds of topics and much better than i am at countering silly hogwash while also being charitable.