Made of 100% Awesome

[kyburg]

I think atheists are, generally speaking, a bunch of obnoxious, know-it-all, elitist, emotionally stunted assholes.

But he makes his point SO well - it's irresistible.

For me? Atheists confound me. To me, to completely disregard all the mysteries beyond what you can sense with your eyes and ears is pretty - hm - sad? I've envied yzzy her insight (and to be honest, unclejimbo has a good portion of it as well), but I do twig on occasion to something 'not here,' mostly in graveyards and if it hadn't happened to me, I'd not likely believe it at all.

But there you go. No, I didn't go looking for it either.

Christian, largely because that's how I was raised - and stay that way not by exclusion of other beliefs, but including them along with my own because they hold value in and of themselves as well. Hardly limited to the fundamentals.

He's pretty pointed, to be honest - but I just sat there and laughed so hard this morning, I couldn't resist.

Comments

[stormdragon.livejournal.com]

I'm agnostic, but that's only because I can't hate something that doesn't exist.

[bitpig.livejournal.com]

Good point. So many atheists ask for scientific proof of God's existence, but few have studied philosophy enough to know that "proof" is an illusion. There is no such thing as proof. There is no way to prove that what our eyes and ears report to us has any correlation to a Reality external to and independent of our own mind. There is no way to demonstrate that anything outside ourselves exists at all. Materialism is a belief system, and has at its foundation a series of unproven (and unprovable) assumptions just as any belief system does.

[reannon.livejournal.com]

I'd be fine with atheists if they'd stop trying to convert me. :)

[muimi07.livejournal.com]

For the record, he also refers to Jesus Christ as "JC".

... I'm just thanking God he refrained from doing so in front of the priest. :X

[nsingman.livejournal.com]

Eh. Mildly amusing, but I'm unimpressed with potshots at easy targets and straw men. I'm an atheist not because I believe that there are no gods, but because I don't actively believe in anything for which I have no evidence. People tell all sorts of stories, and some of them are rich, meaningful and beautiful. But they're still just stories.

I've never had a problem getting along with deeply religious people (including my eldest son, who is a Torah-observant Jew). I've never had a problem getting along with mystical people (like my ghost-believing wife). And I have little more tolerance for proselytizing atheists than I do for proselytizing theists. Honestly, I don't care what you believe. Just be polite and respectful, and do no harm, and we'll get along swimmingly. :-)

[lord-keeper.livejournal.com]

HEAR HEAR! BRAVO! And well said....thank you.

[lord-keeper.livejournal.com]

um.....what does hate have to do with it?

[lord-keeper.livejournal.com]

alas it is late or I am sure I would have many things to say. But, if your interested in debate, I am an athiest. And yes I did find his post very narrow minded and filled with at the very least distrust if not hatered for people based on thier religious views.....hmmmm and I thought we got rid of all the Nazi's and racism and prejudgeing of people sometime between the 30 and the year 2000.

Ah well....I guess I was wrong. Which is so sad....so so sad.

[mdlbear]

I found the post simply annoying, not amusing. I really didn't see the point.

Maybe it's just me. I'm pretty far toward the atheistic side of agnostic, and my sense of humor is skewed toward word-play and paradox.

As for my religion, well, I'm willing to accept the fact that there are plenty of things beyond the reach of my senses. What I'm not willing to accept is that some ancient book of legends has very much useful to say about such things, or that it should have more authority than scientific inquiry in those areas, like biology, where their teachings overlap.

excluded middle

[stoneself.livejournal.com]

just because one does not believe in god, a god, or gods, doesn't mean one can't be interested in mysteries or mysticism.

a view that sees atheism as disregarding all mysteries is a very narrow view.

[kyburg.livejournal.com]

I just dig your husband, hon. He's absolutely precious and I doubt you hear that often.

I'm really REALLY sorry he and late husband never met. They'd have enjoyed each other.

[kyburg.livejournal.com]

Ya just gotta know him - to be perfectly frank, he hates everyone. I think. At some time. He's completely equal opportunity and we all have it coming - the good part is, unless you ALSO deserve it, it's very short-lived.

[kyburg.livejournal.com]

..

God, I love this thread.

[kyburg.livejournal.com]

I think it's more amusing how simply easy it was to put a number of people into boxes as easily as they put people of other beliefs into ones of their own devising.

I've known people I could have put into so many of these categories - and that's also the thing about parody/humor. It can play both sides of the issue - and frankly, I'm glad someone stood up and said that you don't avoid being pigeon-holed just because you claim to be atheist. If you're a twit - you're a twit, regardless.

[kyburg.livejournal.com]

*nods* When it comes to How Things Work, I think what we have as reference materials is only intended to be a starting point.

The rest, we gotta figure out for ourselves.

[poetpaladin.livejournal.com]

I think most Atheists are agnostics, but the atheist term is more widely known.

I myself am agnostic.

[poetpaladin.livejournal.com]

Agreed.

[catsonmars.livejournal.com]

If we look at the etymology of atheism, it's simply non-theism or non-belief. While militant atheists can be annoying, they're no more annoying than anyone else with a narrow, dogmatic axe to grind. (Case in point: spoon-fed liberals whose points you might totally agree with, but whose methods and mannerisms don't make them much better than the right.)

Atheism is the absence of belief. Of course, it's easier to claim agnosticism because there's less of a "movement" or politicization to it. Of course none of us can claim we know the answer to the great question. But those of us who label ourselves nonbelievers do so with a fair degree of confidence that a series of culturally exclusive and oft-untranslatable mythologies hardly have the answers any more than the dramatic works of the ancient Greeks or Romans.

Philosophically speaking, I might have a touch of Zen Buddhism somewhere in there, and the sort of openness that labels me an agnostic by default. But should there be any larger creator out there (which happens to be an idea I wholly reject - I'm more of a masses-of-energy kind of naturalist) scientific discovery and technology are the gifts afforded our species to achieve a triggered evolution and higher state. This artificial evolution has already been underway for thousands of years within our societies and cultures. There is no necessity for religion when humanism affords us our own solutions and cures. And in my world, and in the way I function, there's no necessity for that side of things.

So I found the post to be every bit as narrow-minded, rude, self-righteous, and arrogant as the author claims atheists to be. Easy, mean-spirited potshots at an already-maligned sector of society, and nothing too clever about it either. I should ask him to write for Fuckin' Otaku.

[kyburg.livejournal.com]

Talk to Jim about the "masses of energy" concept - we're closer in belief than you would think at first blush. Need? No. Explanation and normalization of common experiences into something understandable? Probably.

Used to keep people scared, stupid and at each other's throats? Sadly, yes.

You should ask him - read his stuff more often. He's a kick - and he's been on my FL for years now.

Reality is Subjective Until You Get Hit By A Truck

[browren.livejournal.com]

There is no way to demonstrate that anything outside ourselves exists at all. Materialism is a belief system, and has at its foundation a series of unproven (and unprovable) assumptions just as any belief system does.

I've studied philosophy long enough to know that the old "parable of the cave"-style arguments are largely worthless. If there is no objective reality, then everything that philosophers spend so much time debating - morality and the origins of existance, in particular - is completely meangingless, as it's nothing more than one individual's pontifications about this imaginary reality they've constructed. Who cares what Plato thinks about the relative merits of the puppets in his head? If reality is only subjective, then the only opinion that matters is mine, I can demand that the sky is green and the sea is red, and boom, suddenly I'm God because I have a good imagination.

Then I get hit by a bus, and objective reality continues on its merry way, not giving a shit what I thought. :P

Anyway, I don't think asking for proof - scientific, or otherwise - is outside the bounds of Christianity. Thomas got to stick his fingers in the holes; why is it unfair for someone else to want the same level of certainty?

[stormdragon.livejournal.com]

Simple:

If I don't believe that a diety exists, how can I hate it/him/her/whatever?

[foogod.livejournal.com]

Personally, I'm just overwhelmed with the sheer hypocrisy of that post. He's complaining about atheists by spewing out a screed of his own obnoxious, know-it-all, self-righteous propaganda. Of course they're all stupid and self-centered because he should know, because he is right and they are wrong.

Twit.

For the record, I'm not an atheist, I am solidly agnostic, but that asshole is a whole lot more offensive to me than most atheists I've ever encountered.