Atheists are cowards.

Author: Tradesecret
supadudz
Whiteflame
Barney

Posts

Total: 203
#31
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,613
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
Tradesecret may be on to something. The words 'Allahu Akbar' translate to mean “God is the greatest”.
You have to be brave to fly a plane into the World Trade Center.
So maybe it's religious people are stupid and brave and atheists are smart and cowards?
#32
amandragon01
amandragon01's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 101
1
2
2
amandragon01's avatar
amandragon01
1
2
2
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
When have I ever done anything that could be construed as harassment? This is a forum for the purpose of discussing religion isn't it? What is your reasoning for excluding those who do not believe the claims put forward?
#33
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,613
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
1 Samuel 15:3 -
Go and attack the Amalekites and completely destroy everything they have. Don't leave a thing; kill all the men, women, children, and babies; the cattle, sheep, ...

I can see where you would have to be brave to do that. So Atheists are cowards because they will not fly a plane into a tall building for God.


#34
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,205
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
God either.   
(   A   )   EXISTS. 
OR  
(  B  )   DOES NOT EXIST. 

Thats A or B
One of them HAS TO BE CORRECT.

Thats .
B 
Or A

A .   Real 
Or
B.    Not real.

One 
Orrrrrr
Two
 

 What did ya pick? 

You prob went with ( C ) hey? 

#35
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
F*** them
beside that your entire argument is strange, here's why: I don't debates very often anymore, not something that is particularly healthy for my mind, just isn't. But uh, I kinda' have to sometimes, why? Cuz' of shit like: "Do not be friends with bad people, they will only make you bad" the problem here, a lot of times atheist are those bad people. So uuh, that's my social relationships down, second of all - it literally causes my emotional distress to perform what a lot of theists consider helpful, that's fine, its when a lot of em socially cast me out or treat me as lesser when I don't (or just force me to go into those scenarios).

So.... I kinda do have a dog in the race? And I'm kinda thinking you should take a step back to think about this in more depth, about people not populations. Cuz' people matter, and when there are theists who screw 'em over systematically it kinda' is everyone's race then. 
#36
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@Tradesecret
This comes across as disingenuous ngl - people have explained to you over and over that atheism is just a label for if you believe in god(s) or not, my two theories, this is for attention or you refuse to stop conflating a bunch of positions for one. Like, personally not a fan of orogami's positions here because I don't think that the atheist position has anything to do with any world view besides the god thing. Just like theist doesn't have anything to do with any other world view by itself

Sociologically speaking, the church is a social institution, it molds you into a particular sort of person with a particular sort of beliefs and values - this tends to create a sort of "us v them" mentality in regards to atheists, and that gets kinda hard to do whenever a lot of atheists are just normal people, so other positions are correlated overtime to make sure that people don't see them as normal people. See: the satanic panic, the new leftist=atheist label, etc, etc... So socially its very easy to point out that "its cowardly to say you don't have any worldviews" but that doesn't actually describe the very technical logic side of it.

So... I don't necessarily think your doing it for attention, could just be a misattribution of social conflation.
#37
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@Theweakeredge
You're free to do whatever you want to in your real life I don't give a s***.  It has nothing to do with me nothing to do with my spiritual practice. But when you people come here and you talk about how we're evil, mentally ill and stupid don't expect me to be nice to you I don't give a f*** what you think I should do when people say s*** like that.
#38
GnosticChristianBishop
GnosticChristianBishop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 361
1
2
3
GnosticChristianBishop's avatar
GnosticChristianBishop
1
2
3
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Fuck all theists who are homophobic and misogynous and have to hate their own gay or female children.

That is what you promote you pathetic piece of moral coward.

That and scapegoating. Another Christian forte.

Regards
DL
#39
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@GnosticChristianBishop
And you're entitled to that opinion you can hate us and we can hate you so there you go at least you're honest about it the first time you haven't lied since you've been here.
#40
GnosticChristianBishop
GnosticChristianBishop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 361
1
2
3
GnosticChristianBishop's avatar
GnosticChristianBishop
1
2
3
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Thanks for the lie.

That is all you immoral failed apologists are good at.

Take your garbage morals and prick of a God and shove them back up from where you got them.

Regards
DL
#41
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@GnosticChristianBishop
Again our posts are black and white if you want to go change your post so you don't look like a liar that's up to you. But you go back and forth on all kinds of s*** here this is the first honest post you've ever posted. Everything else you've posted has been an outright lie. You lie about what gnostic means l, you lie about being an atheist you lie about being a theist you never tell the truth. You're probably a second or third account of a member that post already under another account here cuz your posts are too much like other people's to be unique.
#42
SkepticalOne
SkepticalOne's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 1,720
3
3
7
SkepticalOne's avatar
SkepticalOne
3
3
7
-->
@Tradesecret
If atheists had an alternative and you could legitimately criticize it, would that make your beliefs true? 
Topic's author
#43
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@SkepticalOne
No.  Of course not. Yet it would give an opportunity of open discussion.  An opportunity to explore ideas. 


Topic's author
#44
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Reece101
What do non-smokers believe? Nothing. This is essentially what you’re arguing. Most atheists just live their lives just as religious people do. 
Thanks Reece, but you are incorrect. That is not what I am asking. There is no reason for a non-smoker to come to a religious forum as a non-smoker. Atheists do come intentionally as atheists. They ask questions - fair enough - they criticize - again fair enough - but when a theist starts to question the atheist - the smoke screen comes up. We don't actually believe anything.  Not that you can pin on me as an atheist. 

Hence your comparison is flawed. 

Thanks for the word about Brother.  


#45
SkepticalOne
SkepticalOne's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 1,720
3
3
7
SkepticalOne's avatar
SkepticalOne
3
3
7
-->
@Tradesecret
If other people's views have no bearing on the truth of your beliefs, why must they be part of an open discussion?
Topic's author
#46
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@SkepticalOne
You asked initially:

If atheists had an alternative and you could legitimately criticize it, would that make your beliefs true? 
I responded by saying:

No.  Of course not. Yet it would give an opportunity of open discussion.  An opportunity to explore ideas. 
How then do you get to:

If other people's views have no bearing on the truth of your beliefs, why must they be part of an open discussion?
It was my view that you were asking whether the basis of my views truth or not was based upon whether I was could criticize someone else's view or not.  And my response to that was no.  I was not indicating that other people's view have no bearing on the truth of my views.   Actually, the intent of my response was that I like to explore other people's views and their ideas.  I don't find atheists so much into exploring ideas as they are in destroying ideas.  And ridiculing people along the way.  If they had something better to offer it might assist. 
Topic's author
#47
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Double_R
It wouldn’t be so frustrating if you had enough evidence to meet the burden of proof you give yourself when you make a claim, such as “a god exists”.
Do you mean for you or theists? I find it frustrating that atheists - choose not to give a reason. They don't think that's necessary.  And for the record,  theists give excellent reasons for why they believe in God all the time.  It is just that non-theists choose to believe that they are weak reasons.  That doesn't mean that the standard is not met - it only means that the atheist doesn't understand what the correct standard is.  It happens in jury trials all of the time.  Lawyers tend to call it bias. It's one of the reasons we like to select juries. 

You’re confusing atheists with atheism. Atheism has no worldview because that’s not what it is.
Interesting. Are you suggesting that atheists do have a worldview? But that there is not an atheistic worldview per se?   In other words, individual atheists can have a worldview - but not altogether? Fascinating if that is the case.    I also suspect that it's really a copout. Most secular atheists I know - hold almost identical worldviews.   Yes, there are differences. But so what? That is the case with every religion and worldview. 


It’s the rejection of theistic claims. Any attempt to add a worldview into that is wrong because there is nothing about any worldview you add that is necessarily a part of atheism. This is like the question “what do all women want?”. The very act of answering this question with a desire you believe to be common amongst all women is itself demonstrative of the fact that you don’t understand the scope of the question.
You don't identify religion with worldview though, that is part of the problem. Atheism is apparently some kind of response to theism, yet all theists see their religion as a worldview.  Hence, to deny that - seems to imply an alternative worldview.  Divorcing God from a worldview well seems silly.

I don't agree we can compare it to what woman want.  That's a false dichotomy. 


If there is one thing most atheists accept as a foundation of their worldview it’s skepticism. So if you’d like to have a conversation with atheists about what they believe while sticking to this subject, spend some time discussing epistemology. Things what kind of evidence is needed to support various claims, where is the line between accepting a proposition vs not accepting vs denying it as false, and where the default position lies.
Skepticism is not owned by atheists.  when i read Dawkins books - I am totally skeptical from beginning to end.  It happens to be one of the foundational basis for my own worldview. Epistemology is also one of my favourite things to do.  I find most atheists have no idea what it is.  I am also very much into understanding why people think something is true v not true. where people go to make the basis of their knowledge so. I don't typically find that  high priority of atheists. 

Most atheists I know - were born that way in a family as such. they never think very much. Of course there are many who do - but the predominant ones I meet in my line of work - have never even heard of the word epistemology. And they reject any kind of source of knowledge except what they know experiementally. Or they might listen to the ABC - because everyone knows the ABC is always right. 

Topic's author
#48
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@FLRW
Some have gone so far as to argue religion may actually be a form of mental illness. In 2006, biologist Richard Dawkins published his book The God Delusion, in which he characterizes belief in God as delusional. Dawkins cites the definition of a delusion as “a persistent false belief held in the face of strong contradictory evidence, especially as a symptom of a psychiatric disorder.”
Seriously.  Your first retort is "mental illness".  no wonder people ignore your posts. 

#49
amandragon01
amandragon01's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 101
1
2
2
amandragon01's avatar
amandragon01
1
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
Why is open discussion of ideas precluded? There is an idea put forward. That of creation or a god. Why does one need an alternative idea to question if the creation or god idea is valid? Surely you're not suggesting we should believe an idea unless we can put forward an alternative?
#50
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,973
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
Thanks Reece, but you are incorrect. That is not what I am asking. There is no reason for a non-smoker to come to a religious forum as a non-smoker. Atheists do come intentionally as atheists.
Ignoring the inherent bias, i was making an analogy. Non-smokers are non-smokers just as atheists are non-theists.
non-smokers may make a case against smoking just as atheists may make a case against theism. 

They ask questions - fair enough - they criticize - again fair enough - but when a theist starts to question the atheist - the smoke screen comes up. We don't actually believe anything.  Not that you can pin on me as an atheist. 

Hence your comparison is flawed. 
Can we agree atheism and even theism to a lesser degree doesn’t represent a persons whole identity? You’re creating a strawman. 

Do you want to ask me any questions?
#51
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@Reece101
Can we agree atheism and even theism to a lesser degree doesn’t represent a persons whole identity?
Yet the atheist come here and tell the theists all the time that that part of their life is their business and they should get to tell them that they shouldn't practice it, they shouldn't get to believe it and they're stupid and they're evil and they're mentally retarded and they're abusing their kids.
#52
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,973
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Within 2022 can you provide any links from this site of atheists telling theists any of this? 

And please try to distinguish between ‘that idea is retarded’ versus ‘you are retarded because you’re a theist.’

#53
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@Reece101
Do whatever f****** research you want to I'm not your bitch.
#54
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Tradesecret
I find it frustrating that atheists - choose not to give a reason
If an atheist makes a claim then that atheist has a burden to prove their claim. But since atheism isn’t a claim, there is no reason atheists would carry such a burden to give a reason for anything other than why your claim do not have any merit, which they do, all the time.

I also suspect that it's really a copout. Most secular atheists I know - hold almost identical worldviews.   Yes, there are differences. But so what? That is the case with every religion and worldview.
The commonality amongst all theists is that they believe in a god. Anything beyond that might fit into theism, but is not itself theism. So it would be just as egregious for atheists to attack theism for things that not all theists accept as it is the other way around.

The differences matter, because group labels are defined by their commonality. It would be silly for me to attack the pro life position because of their opposition to contraception, while disregarding the fact that opposing contraception has nothing to do with the pro life position and many pro lifers are even ok with it. 

This is what you are doing with regards to atheism. If you have a problem with the worldview most atheists seem to hold then why not start a thread on addressing your disagreements there? Why not ask atheists to tell you what they believe and why do you can just knock down their claims?

I don't agree we can compare it to what woman want.  That's a false dichotomy.
The point is that there is nothing all women want because the only thing that makes one a woman is however you are defining a woman (vagina, chromosomes, whatever). So to attack women for wanting thing X is wrong because you are attacking those women who do not want X as well. That is perfectly analogous to atheism because there is nothing all atheists believe. There is one thing all theists believe though, because that is how the word is defined.

Atheism is apparently some kind of response to theism, yet all theists see their religion as a worldview.
That’s part of the problem. Theism isn’t a worldview, your religion is. So an atheist would be just as wrong to conclude that they defeated theism by defeating the claims of your religion as any theist is attacking atheism because of some perceived defeat of an atheist’s worldview.
#55
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
God either.   
(   A   )   EXISTS.  
OR  
(  B  )   DOES NOT EXIST. 

Thats A or B
One of them HAS TO BE CORRECT.

Thats .
B 
Or A

A .   Real 
Or
B.    Not real.

One 
Orrrrrr
Two
 

 What did ya pick? 

You prob went with ( C ) hey? 
If the defendant is either guilty of committing the crime or innocent of having committed the crime, why is there a “not guilty” verdict?
#56
SkepticalOne
SkepticalOne's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 1,720
3
3
7
SkepticalOne's avatar
SkepticalOne
3
3
7
-->
@Tradesecret
I don't find atheists so much into exploring ideas as they are in destroying ideas.  And ridiculing people along the way.  If they had something better to offer it might assist. 

From what I can see, it doesn't look like you're interested in exploring the views and ideas of atheists. It looks like you find their criticism true in some way and want to retaliate (by destroying their views) while you are quite literally ridiculing (atheists are cowards).

If you sincerely want to know someone's views - you would just ask rather than pretend you are a victim.





#57
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Reece101
What do non-smokers believe? Nothing. This is essentially what you’re arguing. Most atheists just live their lives just as religious people do. 
exactly
#58
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@SkepticalOne
I don't find atheists so much into exploring ideas as they are in destroying ideas.
i really don't know any other way of "exploring" an idea if you can't break it apart
#59
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,613
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
Stephen Hawking:  It's my view that the simplest explanation is that there is no God. No one created the universe and no one directs our fate. This leads me to a profound realisation: there is probably no heaven and afterlife either.

Albert Einstein:  "The word 'God' is for me nothing but the expression and product of human weaknesses; the Bible a collection of honorable but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish,"

Tradesecret:  'Allahu Akbar' 
#60
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Tradesecret
It's been my experience that Theists love to show up to religious threads.  They get to have their say. They get to destroy their opponents.  They get to prove how cool they are in the world of philosophy.

But this is why I say they are cowards.  Because they are afraid to reveal what they believe.  For instance, what do Theists believe? 

Nothing. One common doctrine. God does exist. An argument based on an unfalsifiable claim. That is it.  Nothing else. We are not allowed to know what else they believe - because there is no common factor. 

Hence why Theists are COWARDS.   They criticize - but without fear of being criticized. That is not criticism. That is safe ground.  Bogus. really. 

Are there more doctrines for the Theist than there is God? No.   nary  a one. LOL! laughable. And weak.  Cowardly really. there is no other words that can account for this state of being. A worldview - that is not really a worldview - a position - that is not really a position - a statement that allows no criticism. Imagine if we tried to apply to that any religion?  It would be laughed out of the stadium.  that is why Theism is cowardly. One rule for them. 

My view is that only people with worldviews should be allowed to contribute in a religious forum.   An Theist ought be rejected unless they can provide a worldview to be considered.  Unless this occurs - then there is no basis of comparing and contrasting. There is no basis for conversation.

Unless an Theist is able to come up with a worldview - then the Theist's opinions ought not be welcome. 

We should not be permitted to criticize others unless we have something alternative to offer. Theists have nothing to offer - of their own admission - so why ought we subject to ANY of their criticisms.  By admitting they have no other doctrines, they admit they use religious doctrines to live their lives.