That kind of arrogant behavior is why the rest of us look bad. We aren't all a bunch of lunatics looking for a fight.

That kind of arrogant behavior is why the rest of us look bad. We aren't all a bunch of lunatics looking for a fight. | I'M AN ATHEIST. WHEN A CHRISTIAN SAYS "GOD BLESS YOU" TO ME, I SAY "THANKS, YOU TOO" INSTEAD OF BITING THEIR HEAD OFF. IT'S COMMON DECENCY ( | image tagged in memes,captain picard facepalm | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
5,713 views, 126 upvotes, Made by fryfox 26 months ago memescaptain picard facepalm
Captain Picard Facepalm memeRe-caption this meme
Add Meme
Post Comment
reply
15 ups, 3 replies
First World Problems Meme | SHE SAID SOMETHING NICE TO ME WHAT AN ASSHOLE | image tagged in memes,first world problems | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
I've noticed that some people, especially in the South, say "have a blessed day" instead of "have a nice day". Although it does annoy me a little bit, I don't say anything, because I know that they don't mean it in a rude way. They intend it as a compliment, even if I don't happen to agree with the underlying theological message of it.

What really bugs me is when I hear some Christians refer to non-believers as "lost" or "walking in darkness" and "in desperate need of the light of Jesus Christ". This comes across as very condescending and arrogant, and sadly, they seem to be oblivious to just how off-putting it is.
reply
9 ups, 2 replies
Captain Picard Facepalm Meme | I understand exactly what you're saying! Being Jewish seems to attract the religious stupid! | image tagged in memes,captain picard facepalm | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
Yea, I've had people who want to "Save" me, to people who want to argue the bible with me, my favorite, that i killed Jesus because I'm Jewish! I tell them that I'm only 42 years old amd i wasn't there when it happend! Athiests on the whole don't bother me, but having no god(s) SOME (not all, a few of them) tend to see themselves as (A) or (The) God. No humility whatsoever, i find that troubling.
reply
8 ups, 1 reply
Leonardo Dicaprio Cheers Meme | THAT'S RIGHT! I FORGOT YOU WERE JEWISH | image tagged in memes,leonardo dicaprio cheers | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
:) I wouldn't say that arrogant atheists see themselves as God, because that would mean they aren't atheists, but I get what you're driving at :)
reply
8 ups, 4 replies
Captain Picard Facepalm Meme | I wish people would keep they're religious beliefs in their hearts and not their tongues! | image tagged in memes,captain picard facepalm | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
I see you're point but I would argue that they are not necessarily aware they are doing that in the same way a person being an asshole is usually the last person to know he/she is being an asshole. :). My beliefs are very personal to me and that's exactly where i keep them.
reply
7 ups, 1 reply
Captain Picard Facepalm Meme | I DEFINITELY AGREE SOME ATHEISTS ARE JERKS, AND THEY GIVE A BAD NAME TO THOSE OF US WHO AREN'T | image tagged in memes,captain picard facepalm | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
. | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
Lol. :)
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
OPEN YOUR EYES, LOOK UP TO THE SKIES, AND SEE . . . | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
1 up
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
I, being a very strong Christian, don't mean to offend atheists and what not by calling the "lost", etc. I just try to spread Jesus' teachings through some of my hobbies and sometimes get carried away with my words. I know I'm not the only one because one of my hobbies is rapping so I'm around a lot of Christian African-Americans with rough pasts who sometimes can get aggressive with their words
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
*jesus's
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
How old are you?
reply
0 ups
Right. Because there are multiple of jesus
reply
0 ups
Thank you for pointing that out to him. You're so right. Jesus's ...
reply
[deleted]
5 ups, 1 reply
They are taught to spread the word of the Gospel not to be reticent. The problem is some are over zealous in their methods. At least you're not getting your head cut off for not believing.
reply
5 ups, 3 replies
Yes, missionary work is definitely part of it. Like the every Mormon (just as an example, i might be incorrect on some facts) goes for two years on a missionary trip. At the same time, in the past, that has caused alot of destruction of native people culture which is now lost forever. I don't hold anyone but he people who did this responsible. I can't blame someone today for the deeds of a person(s) from the past. Nor do i care for being told I'm supposedly going to hell because someone's little terribly translated over the centuries book says. If all one does is recite from a book that person isn't thinking for him/herself, that's how bad shit happens. My head is still on, but ive been jumped, shot at, (i shot back!) rammed with vehicles, spit at, threatened, and followed. I admit I antagonize the poor dumb bastards, but you got to have fun sometimes! :)
reply
8 ups
I am definitely just kidding. :)
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
Good thing we Mormons don't send full-time missionaries to attack people. :P (If they are, they are doing it wrong). Also, I agree with the original meme here. There's no need to be oversensitive. Unfortunately, on both religious and non-religious ends, there are oversensitive people.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
Morman in my experience have been totally cool, and probably the most welcoming group of people (they have everyone under the rainbow as members, which is great!) I've run into. We've both (as groups) experienced prejudice and enough of other crap! They chased the Mormons, what, from New York to Missouri to Utah! I've been the cathedral, took a tour.
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
I only know what i saw then. I've been all over the South Pacific and a lot of the Maori people are Mormans. I guess in this country? I don't know, honestly? But i saw a bunch of different kinds of mormons abroad.
1 up
That's true. I heard somewhere that in the past, Mormons focused a lot of their missionary efforts on the Pacific Islanders.
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
I like the Polygamy idea as long as they work, I don't and we have multiple houses so I can tell those that get on my nerves to go to the other house. Oh, and they are all into having sex together. Oh the dreams, the dreams.
1 up
Lol. I'll tell you what, if you can handle more than one wife/women, God Bless you! Personally, i can barley handle myself, but that's definitely not to say it can't be done, obviously its being done right now. I guess its a combination of a few things, 1: Patients (i have very little). 2: Yes, there is a damn good reason they(depending on the arrangement) live in different houses. 3: Eyes in the back of your head! If you dont think one of those women won't nget jealous at one point or another, that could be life threatening, while you're sleeping! Lol. Men are brutal to other men at the worst times, women,mjust plain evil to one another at the worst times. B**ches (forgive me ladies) be crazy! Lol. :)
reply
[deleted]
3 ups
Sounds like you are in for a short life if you cross the wrong person. I agree with religious people being brainwashed and losing all self examination. I spent many years as a religious person but now I'm what someone would call spiritual. For me something exists but not what the religious zealots try to shove down everybody's throat. I found life to be much more peaceful once I removed religion from my life. People stop becoming humans when they are governed by a religious "users manual" The world today is a prime example of what happens when people stop thinking for themselves and it's only going to get worse.
reply
2 ups
:)
reply
[deleted]
4 ups
I feel the same when some blacks blame whites for slavery. Not only was I not here my family didn't come to the U.S. until 1910. They are nothing but weak minded people looking for something to satisfy their own missing part of themselves.
reply
[deleted]
6 ups, 1 reply
I'm sorry if a Christian uses the words "lost" or "walking in darkness" in a condescending way. Christians are supposed to reach out to others by sharing the gospel in a loving respectful way. We are only to be witnesses, not judges or lawyers. Christians should only be comparing themselves to Christ, not other people. It keeps us humble so as to not elevate ourselves over others, Christian or not. At least it should keep us humble, I understand not all Christians do. I've had folks at church not talk to me because I don't attend as often as they think I should.
reply
3 ups
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
I don't let any of it bother me. I was raised Catholic, so my guess is that I would get sent to Purgatory where I could earn the chance to get into heaven.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
Isn't Catholicism great? I was raised in a strict Roman Catholic household. If you are a believer in Jesus this is more of a relief than Purgatory.

John 14:2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you

I'm no longer a believer but Catholicism is nothing but compliance based on fear.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
I'm not a believer anymore, but I still find comfort in some of the rituals.
reply
[deleted]
4 ups
As do I. I still use my confirmed name sometimes. I took St. Francis of Assisi for his love of animals. I still like the before dinner prayer and if I get something simple to go my way like make it through a red light I will look up and say "Thanks". Some things are difficult to let go after 50 some years.
reply
11 ups
reply
7 ups, 3 replies
Too bad we can't just share our beliefs with eachother and move on.
reply
5 ups, 2 replies
Sometimes love is gentle and sometimes it doesn't come with warm fuzzies. Everyone will say what they will say and do as they will do. But I would suggest that when someone is trying to share something with you, no matter the message, they are trying to connect and show they care.
Unless they are intentionally being cold and obnoxious ... then I think it is pretty face value lol
We should all listen more, speak less and be patient to hear what the other person is saying.
reply
[deleted]
5 ups, 1 reply
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
As a wise man once said- Be Slow to speak, quick to listen ;D
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
Hmmm, Charles Barkley must be a genius.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Who? XD
reply
[deleted]
3 ups
reply
1 up
:)
reply
0 ups
I'd love to move on but I keep getting chased by a renegade sith and some ninja from 2016...
reply
6 ups
reply
4 ups
reply
3 ups
Ikr? Most of them get offended! I was just being Polite.
reply
3 ups
YOU F**KING IDI- naw I'm just playing ;) hehe love it!!!
reply
5 ups, 5 replies
reply
8 ups, 1 reply
Science cannot prove or disprove the existence of anything supernatural, including God. Science only deals with natural phenomena.
reply
[deleted]
3 ups, 2 replies
That's WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYY too logical for the religious to understand. This new "prove God doesn't exist" is so beyond ridiculous I laugh every time I see it. It's definitely the last grasp. I can't even imagine what will be said next to top that ignorant statement.
reply
1 up
XD
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Creationists believe one God created the everything in 6 days, while evolutionists believe everything was created by an explosion and then over billions of years has evolved into more intelligent beings.

Science tells us that this is impossible, since nothing improves over time, but breaks down. It has been proven that organic material slowly breaks down over time and not the opposite. Evolution theory teaches us the complete opposite. So scientifically speaking, evolution is wrong.

Have you ever seen one species of animal mate with another species of animal and created a completely different kind of animal? It is impossible. You cannot create a new species of animal by mating a cat and a dog. And a dog will not become, over time, a new species of animal.

"But it happens over millions of years, which is why you can't see it..." Oh, how convenient for the evolutionists.

Darwin himself told the scientific community that if the structure of the cell is not complex, evolution is wrong. Have you seen the complexity of a single cell? And you still believe evolution is fact?

The Bible tells us that every man is willfully ignorant and will knowingly choose evil. No man has an excuse to follow Satan and his lies.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
Mating of species is not evolution and I have never seen it mentioned in any science journal as such. Evolution is the adaptation to survive by change. Fish with limbs and lungs, snakes with leg spurs, humans with tails, the evidence is there for evolution but there is quite a bit that is still yet to be discovered and you refute this evidence with a book of words with no evidence of any kind. If God made all creatures than there is no reason to cross DNA and have physical resemblances to other species. Why would a human have 96% DNA of an ape? Try reading on the evolution of birds. Why are there no fossils from earlier periods than the Jurassic Period if all animals were created at the same time per scripture? There is plenty of evidence that supports birds evolved from land dinosaurs. There is more proof of Evolution than anything involving Creationism and just because there is no answer to some questions does not support Creationism. That's just a blind reach from the desperate.

You just have a mental block from the religious tunnel. Please don't quote more scripture as a rebuttal it just shows you are still stuck in the religious tunnel that blocks logical thought. I do believe there is something else that comes into play just not the biblical nonsense. I believe man has taken something spiritual/Metaphysical and turned into something to benefit himself as do most humans. You can quote scripture all you want and it means nothing to me. I'm way beyond the simple minded book of sheep. There is something else much deeper that humans have yet to discover. Anyone who takes scripture as complete truth has really done themselves an intellectual disservice. You have literally shut down your brain for any other education.

To say I am "evil" and follow Satan is ridiculous and more proof that you have become intellectually brainwashed. I regularly help the poor, I volunteer for Habitat for Humanity, I currently care for my 88 year old mother with MS and Diabetes, have upstanding morals, I'm courteous and cordial but I do get frustrated when I see ignorance being spouted with no attempt by the individual to learn. A quick Google search will educate you on the many Christian scientists who believe in some type of evolution.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
As they say, fight fire with fire.

You were saying that they haven't found bird fossils from earlier than the Jurassic period. In god's book, the Jurassic period could be one day. We don't know how long a day was compared to now. The sun could have gotten bigger therefore increasing it's gravitational pull, therefore shortening the time of day. That could explain why some animals, who needed that extra time of day/night to hunt and find food, went extinct. But how does how fast the world rotates around the sun effect how fast the earth spins? When the earth rotates around the sun, it creates kind of a rolling effect. The faster the earth rotates, the faster it spins, the farther away the earth is, the slower it rotates. Therefore making the days slower.

But I do kind of agree with your evolution approach. Or at least I understand it. God could have made man (a species of apes and primates) who could have evolved from there state to become the dominant species and creating the society we see now.
reply
[deleted]
0 ups, 1 reply
"We don't know how long God's day was compared to now". I can't even begin to tell you how many times I've heard that statement from the religious. It's complete bunk as is the book of "Genesis". The one thing the religious really don't take in account is man wrote scripture so it is inherently incomplete, erred, half truth and some what completely false. Anyone who takes scripture verbatim really has no concept of reality. I don't mean to be rude but I'm tired of discussing this with everyone who replies to my posts. All I can say to the religious is you will never understand scripture until it is examined from a non-religious aspect which is impossible if their life is controlled by it. Peace be with you.
reply
1 up
reply
[deleted]
5 ups, 1 reply
The burden of proof is on the believer. Nothing exists until proven to be so your argument is invalid. Christians have gotten so desperate that now they use illogical sense when trying to convince there is a God by asking to proof God "doesn't" exist. A complete lack of understanding comment sense and physics. Typical when a person has literally lost all basis to their debate.
reply
[deleted]
5 ups, 2 replies
I like how you single out an entire religion, instead of just stating "religions" now we know why you are truley here. Stick up foe muslims bash Christians yeehaa! Id have to disagree about the burden of proof thing. It seems like alot of people are ready to jump on evolution bandwagon when that could never be proven.
reply
[deleted]
4 ups, 1 reply
Preface:
I'm not an atheist, I bash both Islam and Christians and also believe in evolution.

Anyway:
The only anti-evolution arguments I've ever seen have come from (American) Christians, who also preach that there's either "literally no evidence supporting it" or "tons of evidence against it" and then they site "answersingenesis" (a.k.a. the people that think your God rode around on a dinosaur. No, really). It's fair to say "Christians" when talking about the "anti-evolutionaries" (if you will)

So without being rude, because I truly believe you aren't THIS educationally backwards, I call "troll"
reply
[deleted]
3 ups, 1 reply
I'm not saying it's all wrong but I am saying as far as an explanation that can stand up to scrutiny, as science is defined, evolution cant. There are alot of things they claim as fact that can be contested without the bible. Ok, girlfriend?
reply
[deleted]
4 ups, 4 replies
There is not at this point any way you can say "evolution is 100% fact" because that's not how science works. We both agree on this, no?
Obviously no one was there to confirm the exact moment at which life was conceived, and the only "accounts" are of religious accord. Ask a Christian and he or she will tell you "our God made Adam and Eve" and anything else is a contradiction to their beliefs, and to the more conservative bunch, anything that contradicts what they're taught in their churches is abominable.

But evolution most certainly stands up to scrutiny. If it didn't, we wouldn't be having this discussion. As far as life's origin goes, the most popular theory to date is "abiogenesis" which states, and under experimentation in controlled conditions is supported with physical evidence, that certain chemicals in certain conditions with electricity can create amino acids, the very building blocks of life. From this stemmed the evolution of single-cell bacteria. Now we have actual life. Every time a cell is divided, the chromosomes are copied. The parent cell make any repairs to faulted chromosomes as best as it can, usually perfectly, and away the daughter cells go. These occasional faults in the replications of chromosomes lead to physical changes like hair colour, eye colour, skin colour and over time, yes, evolution.

(You can read more about mitosis and DNA structure here. Shouldn't be a hard read, if you have the time for it. Harvard's is actually the shortest:

http://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/genetics/vgec/schoolscolleges/topics/cellcycle-mitosis-meiosis

http://cyberbridge.mcb.harvard.edu/dna_1.html

Not necessary to read, but you can. Most of it is stuff you should already know from grade school)

Controlled conditions don't work in favour of "happenstance" and evolution is a long process that can't be observed (where fossil records, carbon dating, etc. come into play), which is what makes this theory far from airtight, but it currently has much more evidence to back it up than what any one religious book says. To simply say "well that's not 100% verified, therefore it's dismissible" is asinine. It's called the "theory of evolution" for a reason.

In an objective reality with subjective reasoning, it's my belief that abiogenesis is the most likely answer to how life came into being on our planet, and evolution gave rise to the vast array of life forms, even though it is at odds with my religious beliefs.
reply
[deleted]
5 ups, 2 replies
Well I'm glad you have an opinion. Explain the evolution of the woodpecker.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
My answer: f*** if I know. I just know what I was taught in school. I imagine they evolved the same way any other creature did, just adapting to "whatever works" which happened to be "slam your face into a tree repeatedly and eat bugs" (sure, it's okay when they do it, but it earns me 2 weeks in the Looney bin)

If I've given you the impression that I'm knowledgeable in any way then I've missed you. I just Google anything that pops into my head. Back before internet was really a thing to my people I just hit a library. So all I have under my belt is a basic education and random questions I wanted answered. More than likely YOU know more about this question than me. I'd like to know your thoughts.

After all, my answer is "I don't know"
reply
[deleted]
4 ups, 4 replies
Oh. Well I think it's a cross between both. I just don't think its as crazy as people think that there was a designer. I mean for evolution to happen, you have to have perfect arrangements. The odds of for example a 50 50 male to female ratio is odd. Ummm if these animals evolved then shouldn't we find alot more different types of fossils? Showing the stages of all each animal? I'm not completely counting it out but there are far to many queastions unanswered. Hmm like were did the elements come from ? You ever notice that text books show present day animals then back track? The skin color idea that ppl closer to the equator are darker and migrated, but indigenous people same color love in the arctic circle? There's alot of things that need to be answered before I argue 100 fact against a creationist. There both pretty far fetched. I'm just saying I need more facts. From both sides.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
The fossil record, genetics, morphological similarities, etc. it's not just blind guessing.
[deleted]
0 ups
Just like Octavia to abandon a debate he was in trouble of losing, then pop up elsewhere.
reply
0 ups
I didn't "abandon a debate" because I was "in trouble of losing" it. I've been busy with other things and other conversations, so if I forget to reply to a message it doesn't mean I'm throwing in the towel.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
It's disappointing to see you give well-thought-out responses one moment, then turn around and attack me the next. (This is a follow-up to my "abandon a debate" comment)
[deleted]
0 ups
reply
0 ups
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
Birds are easy. There were none prior to the Jurassic Period so more evidence of evolution. Birds are the easiest example to disprove Creationism as describe in scripture. If any type of Creationism existed it was not all at once.
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 2 replies
That's sorta were in at. But with evolution. Why arnt there more examples of this across the animal kingdom? What are the odds that all thses animals appeared and flourished at the same time? Not counting it out, but both sides should relise that both ideas are pretty gnarly. Like when someone brings up the woodpecker. I've seen evolutionist argue the toungue
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
It's pretty much proven fact that all animals were not on earth at the same time. like birds, many didn't come around for millions of years after the earth was created which also took millions of years. There are parts of scripture that are complete bunk like Genesis. It has been scientifically proven to not have happened the way scripture described and the thought of God's "days" being longer than ours is just another religious reach at nothing. My college studies have shown that something supernatural is evident in every culture and the similarities are many. I do believe in something Metaphysical because it's ingrained in the human mind from the beginning of man but serves absolutely no purpose for survival. Big question, why has every human had the idea of an entity or spirituality even without prior exposure from others? Why did ancient man see lightening and thunder as "Gods" instead of just a flash of light and sound? What would even induce the thought of some invisible "man" created it?

On a completely different thought, look into the Egyptian Book of the Dead (yes it exists and not just in movies). There are many similarities between it and the Torah to the point that the Torah has possibly plagiarized some of the stories. I also learned about this in my studies. It really is a thinker because the BOTD predates the Torah by a thousand years or so and Hebrews spent many years as personal servants and scribes for Egyptian nobility and could easily have had access to the BOTD.
[deleted]
1 up
This is where I'm at with evolution and creationism.
Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
Einstein is probably the best known and most highly revered scientist of the twentieth century, and is associated with major revolutions in our thinking about time, gravity, and the conversion of matter to energy (E=mc2). Although never coming to belief in a personal God, he recognized the impossibility of a non-created universe. The Encyclopedia Britannica says of him: "Firmly denying atheism, Einstein expressed a belief in "Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of what exists." This actually motivated his interest in science, as he once remarked to a young physicist: "I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details." Einstein's famous epithet on the "uncertainty principle" was "God does not play dice" - and to him this was a real statement about a God in whom he believed. A famous saying of his was "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
Well I disagree with the "Science without religion is lame" idea. There does not have to be a specific religion involved only the possibility of a "non-human" creator(s). It could merely be an energy field of sort that creates the building blocks for life. Keep in mind Einstein was influenced at an early age by Judean principles. Even though he discredits them the mentioning of his belief in "Spinoza's God" shows his early exposure has an influence.
[deleted]
1 up
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
I applaud your reasoning and research. For a religious person you have an open mind.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
My religion is a little different.

Heathen heart, pagan pride.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups
That explains a lot.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups
Wow, this didn't seem this long when I looked it over before posting...

TL;DR

Evolution holds up to scrutiny even though it's not 100% verified.
reply
[deleted]
3 ups, 2 replies
Why do evolutionists summarily dismiss the evidence of design without any serious consideration? Professor D.M.S. Watson, zoologist and Chair of Evolution at University College London, has given us some insight as to why this is so. He said, “Evolution [is] a theory universally accepted not because it can be proved by logically coherent evidence to be true, but because the only alternative, special creation, is clearly incredible.” This, of course, is an admission that the foundation of evolution is not science, but a rejection of the supernatural. Evolution then is simply the best alternative anyone has been able to come up with. This also means that evolution is the only field in science where one decides on the answer first, and then looks for evidence to support that predetermined answer.

Other than rejection of the supernatural, how else can one explain the steadfast adherence of evolutionists to this theory even though they do not know the origin of the three main bases of evolution: the origin of matter, the origin of energy and the origin of life.
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
Geesh, easy to get lost with all the posts and not being able to reply on the last post so you have to reply to a post that has nothing to do with the current post. That's a lot of posting of posts on unrelated posts. In answer to your "upvote" meme that was deleted, I just forget to do it, nothing personal. I don't care if someone upvotes mine so it's not a conscious thought. I went back and upvoted all of them.
reply
[deleted]
1 up
Yeah I deleted it. Sorry buddy we got a meme fest going on. :)
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
In response to your last sentence I believe there were always those elements and possibly others. Logically speaking it is impossible for there to be "nothing". Maybe they didn't "come" from anything and just "are". Humans have this distinct thought that there was nothing and something was made because of scripture. If there was "nothing" then "nothing" is what would still be.
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 2 replies
I mean sure, but there's another debate. To answer it like that increases the value of the designer. In my eyes. It had to have something, other wise it would still be nothing. I just wanna know. Like, is there any examples that we are of evolution happening today? I see animals going extinct. I just thirst for knowledge.
reply
[deleted]
1 up
reply
[deleted]
0 ups, 1 reply
Extinction is part of evolution. They couldn't survive with changing conditions whether it's man made or not. A quick way to see evolution in action is to acclimate a salt water fish to fresh water. It takes a long time for most species and usually results in death but some can handle the relatively quick change. Going from fresh to salt is more difficult because salt water has less dissolved oxygen. That's just an example of a quick change but over millions of years the fish would probably go through physical changes that made it more adaptable to it's new environment.
[deleted]
1 up
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
Please stop being stupid. Christians are at the forefront of every discussion about where God came from and Creationism not other religions. Also, show me where I "stick up" for Muslims? I have regularly discredited their religion here. As for Evolution, it's fact and occurs as we speak. There is no specific link between apes to man other than 96% DNA match and that's 96% more fact than anything on a Creationists list. Of course you disagree with the burden of proof. You're a Christian/religious why would anything have to be proven by the self-righteous? You tunnel dwellers are hilarious.
reply
[deleted]
4 ups, 1 reply
oh wow how mature you are. If evolution is a fact then how come there are volumes of information that contradict it? things that evolutionists choose to bury their heads in the sand about? Speaking of which since you are such an expert, have you PERSONALLY seen these books of proof and looked at these fossil records?
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 2 replies
Do you even know the definition of "Evolution" and yes, I have taken college level courses in Biology, Anthropology and Chemistry. Not only that, I can debunk any religious garbage you try to throw out there. I grew up strict Roman Catholic, switched to Secular Christianity, married a woman who practices Judaism then got a minor in Theology/World Religions. After actually getting educated I've come to the conclusion that the Torah, New Testament and Quran are mostly fallacy from chauvinistic periods. Good luck with your rhetoric. You can't say ANYTHING I haven't heard a dozen times. Get an education and get your head out of YOUR sand hole. That's exactly what religion is. A hole where nothing else is visible. As for the "maturity" comment. I called you "stupid" for a reason but I should have used "ignorant" instead. Stupid people don't want to learn, ignorant people can.
reply
[deleted]
4 ups, 1 reply
of course i know the definition of evolution. lol what a comment to make! obviously you are trying to take the high ground with all your comments about being a big college boy. guess what i went to a university! not some rinky-dink "college." And wow you ve crossed through every religion damn near too. how convenient!
I think that is where you are going wrong. You should know better then to assume anything, since you are so smart, but yet you choose to assume that im just some religious nut that doesn't believe in science. of course i believe in science, im using a $1700 mac to prove science exists.
what i think is you have such a strong hate for God or spirituality that it blinds you to many scientific answers. you refute anything that can be helped explained by a supernatural notion. just because it cant be observable, testable, and repeatable, yet.
you also "choose" to ignore that science has often had its fingers in another pie: Metaphysics, the philosophical inquiry into the basis of reality.
basically what science in its most purest form, has looked at supernatural explanations and has given alternatives. so really science wouldn't even exists if it weren't for belief in the supernatural.
so in short i believe in God and science laws! im not so arrogant that i think that man is so vastly advanced that they can explain the explainable. plus on the bright side i can sit and debate a hateful, bully like yourself and walk away knowing im a good person. i think i saw you at a protest, yeah, you were the guy that when put up to scrutiny, chose to become violent and verbally abusive. :{
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 2 replies
Yeah, you thought wrong. The "mac" reference was hilarious. Yeah, your stupid. Sorry I gave you the benefit of the doubt. As for "assuming" you're spewing quite a bit. I'll have to inform my professors at Arizona State University and UCLA (Theological studies) about their rinky dink colleges. I have no "hate" for something that doesn't exist. I have just learned the difference between fact and fallacy and the fact remains the biblical God does not exist. Metaphysics is nothing but hypothesis. Pure assumption not based on fact but opinion since there is no physical explanation. A protest is one place you will never find me. I'd rather be around people that use their intelligence. As for "verbally abusive", don't be a pansy. If you think I'm a bully then you really have thin skin. If you believe in "science laws" then you shouldn't be here causing a childish fuss and disputing evolution. A quick Google search can tell you much and for you to deny it's existence is really educational retardation on your part. No scientist in any field will deny its existence.
reply
[deleted]
3 ups, 1 reply
Not denying, kid. just saying there are alot of holes you claim to ignore. That's all. And obviously you hate me for my thoughts because I exsist and you seem to not like me very much. So before you start thowing around "facts" maybe you should look into the fact that evolution has some holes.
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
LOL, I'm probably older than you. I was alive when Kennedy was shot. I never said evolution was the beginning of man so in that example, yes it has many holes. You assumed that like most Christians do since I don't believe in Creationism. Like I said, you can't say anything that I haven't heard a dozen times. I also don't hate you nor anyone else. I just think you are ignorant (by definition means "lack of knowledge") in religious studies other than the typical KJ Bible. Best way to understand religion is to step outside and study objectively. Difficult for most religious people because they refuse to understand anything that might contradict what was shoved down their throats by parents, pastors and priests. I was religiously tormented for years but now I'm free and it never felt better. There is much more than what you now know just waiting for you. I hope you find it.
[deleted]
3 ups
Well we re both hot for different reasons then, so I'm just going to throw this out here. I within the last 8 years have found religion and i find it very comforting and it's helped me prosper further then I could have ever imagined. I got to a place of complacency, then I decided I'd check this Jesus guy out, see what all the fuss was. I found my spirtuality and i know now there is a god. I can't prove him to anybody who isn't looking. I can only tell you he does exist and i have my reasons for believing so. I know many people who were force fed the bible and refused it. I don't blame you for that, but I want looking and I'm glad I did! I'm just saying there is more to this world, universe, dimension then man can explain. I also believe that we as humans are constantly looking for answers to why. I just think it's ignorant to not put the two ideas together to try and find meaning. This is what I mean when ppl don't think outside the box, in both your shoes and mine. Mans arrogance.
reply
[deleted]
3 ups, 4 replies
Again with verbal lashings, wow. If you can't explain it does not exist. That's what we re dealing with here. Lol. If evolution is so iron clad them what's with all the holes in it? Why can't it stand up to scrutiny? I know many ideas sound good, but if it was true fact then ALL of it would be 100 percent explainable. Which it is not. But you won't ask me which parts because you know I'll tear you apart. Really if it weren't for people like me youd never gain, any facts. So forgive me for thinking outside the box like any good scientist would do.
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
What holes are you referring to and to which process? The creation of Man? I already said that I don't support that theory. Feel free to "tear me apart" I would be interested in what you have to say if it's actually educational. Just don't use a lame example like the "mac". That was infantile. Explain away.
[deleted]
3 ups
First i just want to ask you what you thought I was saying when I talked about the mac. I just want to see if you are even understanding what is going on right now. Cuz you keep being it up like you thought I thought i was saying something revolutionary.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
Can't reply to your comment below. The thread is at the end. , "im using a $1700 mac to prove science exists". Now that was either complete idiocy or you were being facetious. Let's hope the latter.
[deleted]
3 ups
Ah yes. I was using that as an example, because I think you under the assumption that I reject science. Just because I have a relationship with God doesnt mean I reject science. You seem blind to that?
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
I was lucky enough to go the opposite direction as you. You were lost and found guidance in what gave you comfort. Many do with religion but I'm beyond that. If you are complacent with where you are then great. I wasn't, there are still too many questions and scripture is just writing from men who were "inspired" or "informed" by God, yada, yada. That's not enough for me. Man is inherently fallible and if you read the Torah, New Testament Scripture and the Quran objectively then the man made stuff jumps out like a spring. The writings are basically mans way of trying to rule the world in one way or the other. Whether through peaceful union, self-proclamation or violence it's all the same. I you want to see holes then the Torah is full of them and the most glaring is Hebrews being the "chosen". If you ask a Jewish person very few have any clue what that means. Also, keep in mind the Torah was written by Hebrews, about Hebrews, for Hebrews and everything in the writings is very chauvinistic. A characteristic of the culture that still exists in the Middle East.
[deleted]
3 ups
Didn't need comfort. Just have it all and i wanted more. It says in the scripture that ppl will refuse faith, show them that is there and move on. So as the meme illustrates God bless you my son :) keep that mind set about the Muslims though, that shots f**ked up.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 2 replies
I never insinuated you reject all science. In reply to your last comment "God bless you my son". Peace be with you. Sorry for the attitude but sometimes I get fed up with people. There are so few that don't walk around in a tunnel of some kind or another.
[deleted]
3 ups
Well appreciate that. I'm sorry you for a bad taste of religion. I'm just searching for answers like you. I like the way the bible makes me feel. Mostly new testament because it's Jesus. When I'm on a quest for answers I try to remember that the smartest people in our world get proven wrong alot. Flat earth, earth rotation, etc. I also relize that the bible has been mis translated by the Greeks. So I'm my quest for answers I try to look at everybodies point. Like if you allow yourself to look at the bible like a first science book and take what you will from it, it's pretty gnarly. There are alot of sciencey things that hold up. It's like with strong theory and black holes where belief in supernatural things seem more legit then it's ever been. It's an exciting time for scientists and creationists alike. I enjoyed having this conversation, I took something good out of it, I hope you did to. I'll upvote your comments my friend. Now be vigilante and watch out for islam. Lol ;)
[deleted]
3 ups
Also I appreciate you for not jumping on my misspellings, friggen auto correct these days. I think this maybe the first time a debate was ended peacefully on imgflip.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
"After actually getting educated I've come to the conclusion that the Torah, New Testament and Quran are mostly fallacy from chauvinistic periods."

Well the Quran is obviously. Muhammed created his whole religion on the pre-existing foundation of Judeo-Christian beliefs, and mixed in his own personal sick beliefs. He basically created a religion to justify his own sick behavior and claimed to be a prophet of the "god" allah to get people to follow him. He was an obvious con-artist and flim-flam man.

I would say that the teachings of Jesus are worth defending however, and don't represent any chauvinistic ideals. Lots of religious nuts have perverted his teachings. Islam apologists try to say that Muslim extremists are simply misinterpreting the Quran also, when in fact they are actually following it correctly. This whole "radical Muslim" is ridiculous because it's really just normal Islam.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
Jesus's time was surely chauvinistic. It was the culture. Although there are couple women of note like Mary Magdalene, Martha and Mary (different) who gave Jesus shelter they were still servant and the Apostles were all men. I'm not knocking the teachings. Christians tend to be very defensive when someone even hints that something may be wrong. To me Jesus was a prophet with a great manual on how to live life. I have no qualms to the message but I'm not interested in hearing about the Messiah. It's still a way to rule the world as I previously said.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
I'm an athiest actually. I wasn't saying the time in which he lived wasn't chauvinistic, but I don't see that his teachings supported those ideals is what I meant.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups
No, he actually made a point of learning from women such as Mary of Bethany (I guess people liked the name "Mary") who was like a disciple. Jesus made no separation other than who was chosen for Apostles.
reply
2 ups
That's why there are still religious people who aren't ignorant idiots around!
reply
2 ups
indeed
reply
1 up
In this case, God may as well be unicorns or dragons or tooth fairies. Burdon of proof lays with the believer, not the non-believer.
reply
3 ups
CORRECT!!!! <3
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
If you're an asshole and just want to tell me how wrong I am to have hope or put it in the wrong ideals then would you kindly f**k off.
reply
[deleted]
1 up
Hail!
reply
2 ups
After reading some of the comments on this thread, I have come to this conclusion
reply
[deleted]
2 ups
Well, it's maturity. People who are emotionally immature have trouble understanding when some action is appropriate or not.
reply
2 ups
huh ??? i don't get an attitude when someone says god bless me (unless its someone i know and i get a joking attitude)
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
5 ups, 4 replies
The problem with your "experiment" is that it has no control; nothing with known results to use for comparison. There are people who have done things similar to what you proposed and have seen results, and some people have done the same thing and gotten no results. How do you determine what "results" are in a case like this?
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Sure, they can do both. But when they get better, some of them will attribute their recovery to God, or God plus the doctors, instead of just the doctors. But when they don't get better, they blame the doctors but not God. Put simply, God gets all of the praise when things go right but none of the blame when things go wrong.
reply
1 up
Not exactly. God never gets blamed because we feel he always has a plan for us written out. When things don't go well we don't blame anyone, we just wait till the good outcome God meant to happen.
reply
[deleted]
1 up
You would have to get in touch with your spirituality. Just pray for strength, a willingness, unselfish things. The results would be tough, you are right. I guess the best you could hope for is a spiritual awakening. The ability to notice the signs instead of brushing them off as coincidence.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
You're assuming Christians believe that God will give them anything they pray for. That's simply not what prayer is for. If that were the case, we would be God, and God would be our slave.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
1 up, 1 reply
You took that verse waaay out of context. It's in my opinion one of the most common mistakes non-Christians and Christians alike make when quoting from the bible.

When this passage is taken out of context,
" 'whatever you ask' is then defined as 'the desires of your heart.' This gives rise to the idea of a 'word of faith' in which Christians who truly believe can simply command things in Jesus' name with the confidence that whatever they command will happen just as they desire.

However, *this is a classic example of failing to understand a biblical text in its own context*. That failure to hear the text on its own terms leads not only to projecting our own human agenda onto Scripture and calling it the truth of God, it violates the message of other parts of Scripture that deal with God's power to endure hardship, suffering, and even death."

I suggest you go to http://www.crivoice.org/commanding.html
to understand this verse better.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
I understand that people sometimes take verses like that out of context, and that's what leads to the "name it and claim it" type of stuff. But even if you take that verse to mean that God will give you anything you ask for IF it is for his greater glory (as I often hear people say), that still doesn't make sense, because people pray for things all the time that would give God glory, such as a loved one being healed, yet they don't get it.
reply
0 ups
"So, this verse is not justification for modern Christians to command physical things. I think that risks the same kind of self-centered fruitlessness that typified the failed religious system of perverted first century Judaism in thinking that God's power is to serve our wants and needs." (Last paragraph in the link above).

Like Dennis Bratcher said, God's power isn't to serve our wants and needs. He is the one who determines what is for "His glory". Whether that be healing or anything else. We may see things that seem to be "for His glory", but ultimately it may be labeled so for selfish reasons. We may never know the reason for His decisions, because we simply can't "zoom out" persay. We must remember that we see things from one point of view. Ours. On the other hand, God is omniscient (all-knowing).

Speaking of miracles by prayer, I just learned about a few in the sermon I heard at my church today. Many people think "If so many healing miracles happened in the Bible, then why don't we see any in the modern world?" But the thing is, there are, but due to a secular culture, they aren't as publicized. I can find the online sources for you if you would like.
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
I'm not looking to argue, I'm just saying more people should look into it. When something horrible is happening to you or some one you love, like when you get terminal cancer you 'll try to pray to God, while in your deathbed Everyone always does.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 2 replies
:)
reply
3 ups
God was there :3
reply
0 ups
Of course I was there :)
reply
1 up
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 2 replies
After many years of Children Christian Doctrine (CCD) classes and many Sunday masses, at the age of 15 our daughter didn't want to go through with her Confirmation. For just about all of the reasons that you guys have mentioned. My wife and I decided that we can't force her into it and there are adult ceremonies if she changed her mind later in life. All of our relatives agree that there is an amount of respect for a youngster that isn't going to commit to something that they don't believe in.
reply
2 ups
I'm sorry to hear that. It must be difficult. But it always is with kids. They are their own people. And as you suggested, faith is not something you can give or force. We all have to walk our own walk.
Jesus said in John 10:27, My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. And Proverbs 22:6 Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.
Kids require patience, as Christ is patient with us. I will say a prayer that she will come to desire God's Word.<3
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
As someone who was forced into religion through their young years I applaud your decision. She may return to religion or go a different route of religious understanding through objective religious studies like I. I am spiritual and have finally found peace with where I am in life. I hope she also does.
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
I have no problem with her decision. Understandably there are many questions and many hypocritical points being raised when you're in your early teens and an instructor who has questionable credentials is telling you that we are all Gods children, but those who are not Christians will have a tough life and possibly not be accepted into heaven. Oh,by the way, father Robert is going on his yearly sabbatical to Las Vegas soon anything extra that you can put in the donation basket would be appreciated. The reason we sent the kids to CCD classes and introduced them to the church is for extra guidance besides my my wife and I, grandparents, teachers and councilors because let's face it, there's a lot of bad influences out there. As far as her her decision goes, I stand behind it because she's always making the smart choices.
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
Loved the Vegas explanation. Made me laugh. I grew up strict Italian Roman Catholic and as someone who switched to Secular Christianity later in life then married into Judaism and finally degreed in Theological studies I decided religion is not for me. Personally I found the guilt trip associated with Catholicism damaging and it took me a few years to realize it was all false. I am now spiritual and happier than ever that I'm not stuck in the tunnel that is religion. I hope she finds her way and you find peace with her decision whether it's in or out of religion.
reply
[deleted]
0 ups
Thank you for that. I feel the same way. Exposing our kids to religion was just that. An exposure to it. She's happy with her decision and I'm happy for her. She respects everyone's beliefs and our son is the same way. As you said there are too many guilt trips about Christianity and As I mentioned we saw too many hypocrites.
reply
1 up
type amen if you agree
reply
0 ups
reply
8 ups, 2 replies
Why Arphemius - so bitter. I'll have to agree with fryfox here. Not a believer, but not an asswipe. While I laugh at all the conservatives who get all bent out of shape when someone says 'happy holidays' instead of 'merry christmas' I certainly don't care when someone does use 'merry christmas'. Hell, I've said 'merry christmas' to people who I know aren't believers and haven't got my head bit off. I guess that has to do with open-mindedness. And atheists of the most passionate kind are as annoying as their christian counterparts. The problem isn't the words it's the passion and mindlessness. Foxfry simply saying the obvious is hardly something to bite his head off about. I distrust those who seek to apply purity tests. Foxfry thinks for himself - I respect that more than righteous anger (even of the non-religious type).

And hell - I'm for christian dick (in my case christian pussy). Any I can get. Don't care as long as it is spreading.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
reply
0 ups
Well, not ALL of them. I do have SOME taste. ;)
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Why KenJ - no actually, that was a fairly reasonable comment. I wasn't disagreeing with Fryfox here. I was more questioning his motivations. I have been an atheist my entire life and I've been on the internet for a considerable amount of time. And of all the thousands of atheists I've seen and witnessed, not a single one, not a one of them has ever complained about someone saying "God Bless You". And him taking that strawman and ending with saying that most - or many - atheists simply lack common decency; I just couldn't let that slide.
I've seen this so often, with some atheists and those obnoxious, ignorant people who call themselves agnostics, who side with religious people because they disliked the tone or the choice of words of the atheist they were opposing - and sometimes simply because they were the majority and those people just wanted to be liked by the majority.

In either case, I have a particular disdain for those people and I'm not gonna just take their shit.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Okay. You seem reasonable. Actually I have no problem with whatever anyone says, short of something a recipient has no control over (i.e., race). We're basically coming from similar directions. While not a believer I'm not an atheist, but that has more to do with not being a joiner. I wouldn't want to be a member of an -ism or an -ist. Don't really want to be part of something bigger than I am. Basically why I disdain passion.

Man, all these people make me seem mild and I can be pretty damn wordy.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
I certainly agree with only ever judging a person for what he himself controls.

And the "-ist" thing - I guess I readily assume any label that applies to me, simply because I recognize that it does. And I feel that anyone who purports to judge any of the different demographics I belong to might just as well have directed his criticisms at me. And so I respond. That's pretty much the extent of 90% of my involvement in any of the different groups I belong to.

And yes, it can get a bit heated when groups clash, I guess. ^^

p.s. "Basically why I disdain passion."

Passion? Just in general? What are you - some kind of jedi?

'There is no passion, there is peace'
reply
1 up, 1 reply
No jedi, just generally peaceful. I don't get angry on the threads. I'm never going to convert someone who is passionate in their belief. I've had it out with plenty of conservatives here - their anger not mine - so I'm used to them misinterpreting my liberal beliefs (it's not socialism you boobs) and in the end them calling me a pussy, or else me poking them for the fun of it and getting called a pussy. I don't get angry since at that point I've usually continued the correspondence for the sake of others who might look in. Few people here know how to debate, instead of casting aspersions. You seem to know how to debate. And poke.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Not a jedi? Of course you're not - KenobiJ.

But seriously, I've had the same experience. Debate in general is almost never about convincing the opponent, as people are in general too stubborn or too set in their ways to change after only a single discussion even if you've succeeded in making them think a little; It's more for the sake of other people listening, that they might hear both of your opinions.

I have to admit though that I do get angry sometimes. Arguing helps me vent. It's funny, sometimes, when a reply is particularly long, you can basically see how I calm down as I'm writing; Being incredibly pissed of in the beginning, spewing insults, and completely calmed down at the end, maybe even finishing with an ironic comemnt or a joke.^^
reply
1 up, 1 reply
I'm more of a Star Trek geek, if a geek at all.

My fall back emotion is discouragement. All these people who never examine their selves and their beliefs. Then I think to myself, 'and yet what I argue is theoretically knowable and provable'. Or in the case of politics 'the world will be more like I want it to be in 100 years' even though I won't be around to see it. Anyway, this is just a meme site - an addictive meme site but just a meme site - so it's not like all these obnoxious twats will ever have a major effect on the world.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
I'm pretty much an all around geek. I like Star Trek, Star Wars and LOTR - the nerd trifecta, pretty much.^^

And I know that feeling. I can't remember his name, might've been Carlin or maybe Jeffries, but a comedian once said: "Imagine the average person. Just your average guy. Pretty much a f**king idiot, isn't he? And now think about it: Half the population is dumber than that."

But I don't know about this site - the greatest, most widespread memes of all - religions - have ruled the world for thousands of years. Who knows what these are gonna do?
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Sounds like Carlin.

I dunno. The history of the world is of change and progression, usually for the better with side trips towards stupidity. Conservative and hidebound societies get challenged by radical movements and it tends to work out to liberal concepts. Thesis + antithesis = synthesis (I'm a good Hegelian). Suppressive monarchical structures were overtaken by aristocratic models, themselves changed by parlimentary governments. All is far from perfect but it will never be. Even the most annoying right-wing religionists have been relatively sidelined. It's why we have terror groups killing in the name of Allah and bitter evangelicals trying to force everyone into their beliefs through repressive laws, and it makes the news; in the 'old days' they were part of the power structure and it was given they'd get their way. Now individuals are more autonomous and it's why the counter-reaction is so strong. The bitter angry types on imgflip have lost the order and conformity that kept them at the top of the food chain and striking out here is one of the few venues they have left. Call me an optimist, but I doubt few future reactionary revolutions will start because MamaTriedRob keeps using the Robert Downey template to try and scour his opponents.
0 ups
I don't think people who were ever at the top of the food chain would come to a memesite.^^

Agree with the rest of your post though.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
I'm thinking there are at least 3 people in the world who have objected to God bless you. Of course, there have also been 3 people in the world who got into a fistfight over ones preferred chocolate bar opinion, so what the hell do I know.
reply
1 up
Fine, I'll give you that.^^
reply
1 up, 1 reply
This kind of hate and ridicule is exactly the OP's point!
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
Like I said above. What he said in the original post has truth to it. All I see in your posts is a power tripping chest pounder. "Now, if you want to side with stupidity for the sake of civility, be my guest. but don't expect me to conform to your weakness" That statement is exactly what I speak of. You now have two people who disagree with you but you refer to it as "weakness". Sorry kid, I've known Atheists who jump at the chance to put down a Christian for merely saying "God bless you" when the Atheist sneezed.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
I don't believe you. They were probably just trolling you if you ever heard those words. Atheists, even antitheists, still use "oh my god" as an exclamation, for example. It's just an expression, no one seriously cares.
reply
[deleted]
0 ups, 1 reply
Oh, ok. Of course you know everything including the people I've met. Silly me. How does your chest feel now?
reply
0 ups
I'm just saying that maybe you've misread the situation.

And my chest doesn't feel that great to be honest. Kind of a stinging feeling. And my left arm hurts. Is that normal?
reply
[deleted]
0 ups, 1 reply
I agree with you that you hardly ever see anyone actually act like that. I've certainly never seen it ACTUALLY happen. Mostly trolls do it to create argue-fuel. However, I DO see a lot of atheists in comment sections that act in the condescending manner you do, or "unholier-than-thou" for puns' sake, when someone stereotypes an atheist. I think it's times like this when people need to take a step back and say "is this comment really discrediting what he/she said about atheism?"

The answer is "no, it's kinda supporting it"
You're puffing out your chest and rolling up your sleeves to say "I'm a better atheist than you are!"
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Hilarious. "You're puffing out your chest and rolling up your sleeves to say 'I'm a better atheist than you are!'"
Tell me again how you're not doing the exact same thing right now.

And I actually wasn't. You can't be a "better atheist"; Atheism is simply the disbelief in a deity. The only way to be a better atheist is to not believe even more, which is ridiculous.

No I said he was simply being an asshole. He decided to bring up a useless stereotype about atheists and say that they lack common decency. I decided to not let that slide. He took a swipe, I punched back. It's as simple as that. No need to make a war for ideological purity out of this.

So take your own holier-than-thou attitude and shove it up your ass.
reply
[deleted]
0 ups, 1 reply
1: I'm not being holier-than-thou, I'm saying in laymen's term that you're an ass. You started with calling the meme maker spineless, threw out vulgar insults because they made a meme about stereotypes that appealed to the religious at the expense of all, like, 7 atheists on this site. Seriously, they're all a bunch of Christians, so at the very worst he made a tactical move for points.

2: you seem to miss the "better atheist" point completely. Did you also think that I believed you literally rolled up your sleeves and puffed out your chest too?

The point was that you're denying atheist stereotypes by being a different atheist stereotype. You're currently the "YouTube comment section atheist anti-theist" stereotype.

But roar back at me, like the little kitten you are. Your super edgy comments have thus far shown that you're the coolest of cool.

NOW I'm acting holier-than-thou. Recognise.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
"I'm not being holier-than-thou"

Come on mate. I think we both know I got you on that one.

" at the expense of all, like, 7 atheists on this site."

And I'm one of them. And now you're trying to tell me off for not taking his shit?

"you seem to miss the "better atheist" point completely."

No, but you did miss my point. If you think that being quote "the "YouTube comment section atheist anti-theist" stereotype." is being a "bad atheist" and advocate against being one, then you're right now taking a position of "try to be a better atheist.
Well, atheists aren't a homogenous group, they don't have a binding ideology. So I explained how trying to be a "better atheist" (as you're clearly trying to be) doesn't make sense.

"But roar back at me, like the little kitten you are. Your super edgy comments have thus far shown that you're the coolest of cool."

I don't think you know how this works. You see, I show how you're being a selfimportant, holier-than-thou jackass with zero levels of introspection, and you call me a kitten (one of the cutest things on the planet) and the coolest of cool. (And I swear to the nonexistent deity in the clouds, if you say one word about how "coolest of cool" was meant sarcastically and I'm unable to recognize sarcasm...)

"NOW I'm acting holier-than-thou. Recognise."

No, now you're being condescending. Learn the difference.
reply
[deleted]
0 ups, 1 reply
""I'm not being holier-than-thou"

Come on mate. I think we both know I got you on that one."

What I said is that you're acting like a twit, calling it " weak" for someone to appeal to the religious majority for their own benefit, insulting them. Yeah, that's just acting like an ass just to show everyone how right you are and how very wrong they are and that you are somehow the ideal specimen of Internet atheism. Which is its own religion at this point. I'm suggested that you take a look at your own comment and see if it was conforming to stereotypes, because it IS. Just different stereotypes.

"" at the expense of all, like, 7 atheists on this site."

And I'm one of them. And now you're trying to tell me off for not taking his shit?"

Yes. What you do every single day in person still applies online. You just sit there and smile like a jackass.

"No, but you did miss my point. If you think that being quote "the "YouTube comment section atheist anti-theist" stereotype." is being a "bad atheist" and advocate against being one, then you're right now taking a position of "try to be a better atheist."

I'm not an atheist, so that point is moot.

"Well, atheists aren't a homogenous group, they don't have a binding ideology. So I explained how trying to be a "better atheist" (as you're clearly trying to be) doesn't make sense."

You're still missing the point, which is that there's "being an atheist" and "being an s**t person" and I said that you're one over the other.

"You see, I show how you're being a selfimportant, holier-than-thou jackass with zero levels of introspection"

I'm saying you are not meeting society's expectations for "a person who isn't an ass". I'm just telling you to conform.

"And I swear to the nonexistent deity in the clouds, if you say one word about how "coolest of cool" was meant sarcastically and I'm unable to recognize sarcasm..."

It was sarcasm, which you obviously recognised.

""NOW I'm acting holier-than-thou. Recognise."

No, now you're being condescending. Learn the difference."

Semantics.
reply
1 up, 2 replies
"What I said is that you're acting like a twit..."

I was responding to something he said about my group, about me. If you say "many atheists lack common decency", you can expect an atheist to come and tell you off for it. And he could have chosen any demographic I belonged to, "many whites/men/heterosexuals lack common decency" I would still would have come and insulted him for being a douchebag.
You are the one currently making a bigger deal out of it than what it is! What are you even arguing here? Never insult anyone? F**k that. Never respond negatively to someone attacking your demographic? F**k that, too.
Are those honestly your positions here? And if they're not, what are you even saying?

"Yes. What you do every single day in person still applies online. You just sit there and smile like a jackass."

You assume I take anyone's shit irl. You assume wrong.

"I'm not an atheist, so that point is moot."

First of all, it's not. If you read it again you'll see that it doesn't depend on you being an atheist.
Second, you're an agnostic aren't you? I'd recognize the stench of "I'm oh so enlightened" anywhere.

"You're still missing the point, which is that there's "being an atheist" and "being an s**t person" and I said that you're one over the other."

And there we have it, thank you. That's what I was saying the entire time. You shouldn't argue about bad atheists, just argue about bad individuals. I've got no problem with that.

"It was sarcasm, which you obviously recognised."

It would literally have been the next thing you said: "Ohhh, it was so obviously sarcastic! Aren't you stupid."

"Semantics."

Not really. Condescending and being holier-than-thou are entirely different things. Being condescending is ok in my book, as long as arrogance is earned. But being holier-than-thou is just disgusting.
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
You know what? You win. I am 100% wrong, morally unjust, completely illiterate and also agnostic now.

Now aren't we all so much happier? I know I am.
1 up
Yes you are 100% wrong. Wouldn't say morally unjust though, at least not as a consequence of this conversation. You can't be completely illiterate because you wrote 'completely illiterate' down. And I'm sorry if I inadvertently converted you to agnosticism.
You should become an atheist, it's just all around better.
reply
[deleted]
1 up
For the record, as sarcastic as my comment was, I am indeed saying that you pointed out logical flaws in my statement, and saying "you're right, I'm wrong"

Just sayin' that this isn't like raging because I can't think of a response or I ran out of replies. And also I'm not actually agnostic. That was just a joke.

But yeah, sometimes you have to know when you're wrong. And I am. So that's that.
reply
[deleted]
0 ups
Geez, take an Ativan. I have known "Atheists" just like he described and they are usually the religious turned Atheist who have a chip on their shoulder for anyone who still believes. They are basically just butthurt little children who didn't have life go their way even though they asked God like they were told. Some of them eventually turn to Satanism when Atheism doesn't cure the butthurt. It's a pattern I've seen a few times. There are a few on this website.
Flip Settings
Captain Picard Facepalm memeRe-caption this meme

Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator

Show embed codes
IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
I'M AN ATHEIST. WHEN A CHRISTIAN SAYS "GOD BLESS YOU" TO ME, I SAY "THANKS, YOU TOO" INSTEAD OF BITING THEIR HEAD OFF. IT'S COMMON DECENCY (SOMETHING THAT MANY ATHEISTS DON'T HAVE).
hotkeys: D = random, W = like, S = dislike, A = back
Feedback