How discouraging it is to see a compete idiot like this telling us in an official capacity that we need not worry about Environmental issues because the invisible Magic Man-in-the-sky will destroy the world when he sees fit. Imagine the damage this moron could cause!
Since 1963, AMERICAN ATHEISTS has been the premier organization laboring for the civil liberties of Atheists, and the total, absolute separation of government and religion.
Copyright 2012. All materials contained on this site, whether written, audible or visual are the exclusive property of American Atheists.
no ridicule meant for you neo…..only a prod and poke to ask….why do you think atheist are more arrogant than theist….
Here’s a thought for Rep. Shimkus. The Christians says the Moslim god does not exist. And the Moslims says the Christian god does not exist. Well, for once, they are both right. While Shimkus says his god will over rule reality, he hasn’t even thought about the fact that everytime the Christian god fights the Moslim god, the Moslim god kicks the Christian god’s ass! There was a brief time, once when the Christian god temporarily was winning in only one of the crusades. So then Shit-For-Brains Bush got us into this fiasco we are in now in Iraq.
Charlie asked:
“no ridicule meant for you neo…..only a prod and poke to ask….why do you think atheist are more arrogant than theist….”
Response: I don’t, theists believe in mountains of unbelievable bullshit, and call it the perfect word of god. My theory, as atheist free thinkers rise out of the fog of bullshit, the momentum carries them just one step too far. That is to believe we can assume that just because religion is mythological bullshit, it proves there is no intelligent design. I’m not ready to bust anyone’s balls on the subject, because there is also no proof of intelligent design, just intuition, theory, or conjecture. So I stop where proof ends, and call myself agnostic.
NeoWolfe
DVan said,
“I wonder if he also believes we should stone children to death that disobey their parents? (Deuteronomy 21:23) It is the literal, infallible word of God, right?”
Response: That’s a really good point, DVan, as you can always be trusted to make, but, by itself it’s kinda weak. But, maybe we have already belabored the mass murder of every man, woman, and child on the planet in the flood. Maybe the story is getting old of Joshua sweeping across the land of Canaan killing every man, woman, and child, and livestock. But, what’s interesting is, that after Jesus tried to rework Yahweh’s image, turn him into to a loving father, a god of forgiveness, still, waiting in the books is “armegedon” when all those who have not washed their robes white in the blood of the lamb will be destroyed. The loving, forgiving father mass murders his own children yet again. Makes you want to bow and pray doesn’t it?
Oh, Homocidal psychopath that art in heaven, exposed be thy crimes. Thy sentence come, thy will be done on you as you have done on thy children.
I pass the baton DVan, finish it for me.
NeoWolfe
don’t worry – go shopping
what? me worry? be happy
neowolfe
what if I explained my atheism this way
there is no god image…..meaning not one m fer is gonna tell me about the likes and dislikes of thier god….because they are not in communique with thier god and the communique does not come from three dumb collection of stories…koran, old and new bible….so no god…
now that does not me that I am not open to the possibility of a superior being….but today I have yet to meat one, nor do I think anyone else has met one and to make clear again…no one is going to tell me that thier god created evolution….and it is their god…not my dumb idea….
I might call myself an agnostic one day…but certainly only after I see stupid religion kicked back behind the walls of thier property tax free clubs and out of my public view constantly trying to verify thier credibility….
Charlie said:
“what if I explained my atheism this way.”
What you explained, Charlie, is your agnostism. Atheists have made an assumption that we haven’t, but, that doesn’t make that assumption wrong. Agnostics are just waiting for more evidence. From my point of view, they are still brothers, as long as they realize the elimination of religion is only the beginning of the answers to the human condition. Atheist, agnostic, meaningless. The world can only be saved by freethinkers.
NeoWolfe
do agnostics have a MaybeNoGod blog
Charlie asked:
“do agnostics have a MaybeNoGod blog”
Tons of them. But, they spend time debating if religion really has merit. If bible accounts can be scientifically verified. I know you are making fun of me, but, atheists are my closest kin. And contributing here allows me to interface with people like you that think you are looking down on me from under my boots. Next time bring an argument, not a snide remark.
NeoWolfe
your the snide one neo…..I open up to you and then you insult me….I will be the one that decides what best describes my views….and that would be atheist….
furthermore….ID is poor attempt by theist to hijack science….you agnostics only help theists perpetuate thier ridiculous claims….
I would say you two are the same as me- both agnostic and atheist, and Neo pretty much explained how they can coincide.
You both reject any current form of theism, making you atheist.
You both acknowledge that you don’t have every answer, and that we really cannot disprove theistic religions, making you agnostic.
[...] When they ask “What Harm Does Religion Cause?” Show them this … [...]
Quote from NotSoFast: “Environmentalism. . . irrational belief?. . . PRAYING?? geoih, what are you thinking of?”
I’m not sure what you consider “environmentalism”, but I know from what I’ve seen it tends to create some sort of collective entity (e.g., the planet, the bioshpere, the human race, Gaia, whatever), endow it with anthropomorphized traits and rights, and elevate those rights above everybody elses individual rights. Then typically there is a demand that everybody accept this view, through coersion if necessary.
The problem I have is the collective entity is a fiction in the minds of the people creating it. Sure, the planet exists, but it isn’t some separate entity with rights. The forest is not another tree. The forest is simply a collection of individual organisms in a biological system. The system is not another organism.
The “collective” is just another fiction in the minds of people. Elevating it to some superior position and expecting everybody to support it is very religious and in my opinion very irrational.
geoih
If we give it those rights then it will have those rights. It is as simple as that. And I wish we would! If our environment had the rights (loosely speaking) of just ONE individual human then we could not get away with most of the damage we do to it which, ironically, effects and will effect billions of humans adversely.
geoih,
Your arm doesn’t have any rights either. So would you sit quietly while somebody cut it off?
The Earth’s biosphere is a collective entity. Every living thing is, in many ways, in a symbiotic relationship with every other.
The scientist who coined the “Gaia” term was a lot more rational than some of his detractors. I remember one who took umbrage at the simple (I think self-evident) statement that living things perform certain “functions” that benefit the whole ecosystem. He said that “function” implies “purpose”! That’s where this idea comes from, that the Gaia concept is some mystical anthropomorphism: It’s a rumor started by people who, for some reason, didn’t like the concept of interrelatedness.
charlie said,
“your the snide one neo…..I open up to you and then you insult me….I will be the one that decides what best describes my views….and that would be atheist….”
That’s the thing about written statements or questions, charlie, you can’t hear the tone of voice, nor can you read facial expressions. Like I’ve said before, I am a red headed step child here, and while I came looking for friends, people who think like me, I’ve caught a lot of abuse. Please forgive me for misinterpreting the intent of your question, but, the accusation that I insulted is you is unfounded. Reread my post. I know I was being defensive, but I have nothing against any freethinker. We’re not perfect, just the last hope of humanity.
NeoWolfe
Whutthole said:
“If our environment had the rights (loosely speaking) of just ONE individual human then we could not get away with most of the damage we do to it.”
What if that individual human was a jew, you hypocrit?
NeoWolfe
Neowolfe
Huh? Please explain what that means.
Quote from What: “If we give it those rights then it will have those rights. It is as simple as that. And I wish we would!”
Wishing, praying, whatever. It doesn’t make it reality. It’s only in your mind and forcing the same belief on everybody else makes you look just like any other church.
Quote from NotSoFast: “The Earth’s biosphere is a collective entity.”
In the words of all good atheists: Proof it. You’re worshiping an idea in your head (just like all religions).
geoih,
I think there is some truth in what NotSoSmart said. There is a balance in nature, but, the proof you seek will not be forthcoming, because, he like the rest of the Al Gores of the world assume that balance is stable, which is an obvious scientific absurdity. It is estimated that ninety five percent of all the species that ever existed on this planet are now extinct. While its true that if you kill off coyotes the rabbit population booms, because an existing balance is disturbed, it’s also true that if you killed all the rabbits, the coyotes would disappear as well.
They talk about global warming. Duhhhh! If the Earth wasn’t getting warmer, we’d still be in the Ice Age, when half of Europe was under a huge glacier. I read a geneticist’s theory that at the end of the Ice Age, there were about twenty reproducing human females on the planet. We were that close to becoming part of the fossil record that no one would have ever dug up. Had we gone the way of the dodo bird, the planet would be a different place, because, it cannot be denied that we pump poison into the air and water, and our population is unchecked, so the problem becomes increasingly worse, headlong to an eventuality of dying in a metaphorical pool of our own piss.
But, the Chinese are the only government on the planet taking a common sense approach to controlling our numbers. In Christian dominated societies, the concept of population control is considered immoral, as the churches try to outbreed each other.
Bottom line, if humans disappear, nature will still have a balance, it will just be different than it is now.
I love this quote: “The only thing that never changes is the constant wind of change”.
NeoWolfe
Quote from NeoWolfe: “But, the Chinese are the only government on the planet taking a common sense approach to controlling our numbers.”
You’re limiting your view. Look at the populations of Japan and Russia. Their populations are shrinking. They don’t have any governement mandated population controls. The US and European populations would be shrinking as well, if it wasn’t for immigration.
You don’t have to have a fascist regime to control population. As the standards of living rise, it happens spontaneously because it takes far more resources to raise a child to be a doctor or an engineer, or even a carpenter or plumber. Consequently, you end up having fewer children.
its all good neowolfe…….just please understand that I am an atheist because not one mother fer is gonna tell me about the likes and dislikes of their supernatural friends, specifically monotheism…..
suck it buybull and corny
geoih
No, but work will.
What is only in my mind?
Who is talking about force?