Majima Everywhere System
Member
Why atheists gotta put people down?
This bearded man was just signing it up, as he is wont to do.
This bearded man was just signing it up, as he is wont to do.
Is it normal for people not to wear shoes?
This disturbs me greatly.
A wild Jathewist appears!
The Jathewist uses HITLAR.
It's SUPER EFFECTIVE!
JATHEWIST has escaped!
I apologize if I have offended any Jathewists.
Jews can be atheist.
Jew = mother who's a Jew.
oh this was in berkeley
it all makes sense now
This is infantile. The kinds of angry thoughts and feelings this dude is experiencing are what I might expect from someone who only recently lost their religion and is adjusting to a new worldview in an immature and highly emotional way. But this garbage coming from an adult? Ridiculous. You don't have to compromise your beliefs or pull punches in a debate for the sake of not offending anyone, but you need to maintain your composure and act like a reasonable person if you want to be taken seriously.
I say this not from a smug perspective of "OHOHO EXTREME ATHEISTS ARE JUST AS BAD!" but as an atheist who is fed up with what people like this guy do to our public image. The angry rebellious teenager stereotype will be around forever if certain atheists don't grow up and stop demonstrating it so perfectly for our detractors.
That's like, completely wrong.
There are always going to be immature atheists just as there are always going to be immature christians or jews or muslims, there are nutjobs everywhere. So you might want to get used to it.
Thing is, atheists have less of an excuse because atheism doesn't have any dogma, at least not if taken at face value. The problem comes from chuckleheads like the guy in the video getting "dogma-lite" from hellholes like r/atheism that reinforce being mean-spirited, condescending, and intellectually lazy as if those things went hand in hand with atheism. Seriously, it just makes my blood boil.
Atheism doesn't have a dogma, but "Brights" do.
I don't know that Atheism has to be defended. The burden of proof is on the other guys.
One shouldn't have to defend atheism
That's like, completely wrong.
i can't even make it to the 1-minute mark, my embarrassment level is way too high
As the default, I don't think atheism needs defending.
I admire this crusader for trying though.
Yeah it ends with the police coming around and the guy screaming whatever as he goes back to jogging barefoot....
I can clearly say it was sufficiently humiliating to me and my fellow atheists..../shakes head
Shit like this is why I only believe in machines
so does the guy just scream at the christian for 9 minutes? i genuinely cant bring myself to look at the rest
Atheism is only the default based on which definition of it you subscribe to.
The definition I use based on my social experiences with the phenomenon is a belief that there is/are no god(s) rather than a lack of belief in god(s).
The subtle distinction, for my point of view, plays a major role in shaping attitudes and active discussions about the topic, to the extent that atheism doesn't really qualify as a null claim but rather an alternate positive claim.
oh this was in berkeley
it all makes sense now
psuedo-edit: get this man a web redemption
Pretty much, he gets out of breath like a bajillion times, lowers his voice, raises his voice, walks back and forth, does a lot of finger pointing, cracks his voice, keeps repeating Hitler was a catholic and how faith based religions ruin everything, slavery...ect...
Its funny because the crowd was also against him, many people kept on trying to rationalize with the dude and many onlookers were taping his meltdown...
Its sad because he actually posed some good points, only if he remained calm and coherent but he just ended up looking like an out of breath fool.
What's wrong with Berkeley?
Apart from missing my edit, it's not.That's like, completely wrong.
http://www.jewfaq.org/whoisjew.htmWho is a Jew?
A Jew is any person whose mother was a Jew or any person who has gone through the formal process of conversion to Judaism.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/whojew1.htmlWho is a Jew according to Halacha (Jewish Law)?
According to Jewish law, a child born to a Jewish mother or an adult who has converted to Judaism is considered a Jew; one does not have to reaffirm their Jewishness or practice any of the laws of the Torah to be Jewish. According to Reform Judaism, a person is a Jew if they were born to either a Jewish mother or a Jewish father. Also, Reform Judaism stresses the importance of being raised Jewish; if a child is born to Jewish parents and was not raised Jewish then the child is not considered Jewish. According to the Orthodox movement, the father’s religion and whether the person practices is immaterial. No affirmation or upbringing is needed, as long as the mother was Jewish.
He sounds like someone trying to condense every Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens youtube video into one statement lol
i'm just gonna assume he was shouting because of a lack of oxygen after his jog.....
Yet most Atheists I know and interact with use the latter definition. Instead of using your preconceived notions of what you think Atheism is, find out what the person actually thinks. As such, my position of agnostic atheism is neither a positive claim or a position that is subject to the burden of proof.
What's wrong with Berkeley?
This guy is r/atheism
The number of conversations a person has had about their 'lack of belief' in something is evidence that it's more of an active belief in the non-existence of something. How often do you thing about your lack of belief in flying dogs?
The number of conversations a person has had about their 'lack of belief' in something is evidence that it's more of an active belief in the non-existence of something. How often do you thing about your lack of belief in flying dogs?
I meant one shouldn't have to defend their belief. I think Religious people are hypocrites for attacking atheistsWell, it depends on what you mean by that. If you take a world without God as the null hypothesis, disagreeing with someone who makes testable claims about God is defending atheism in a sense, which I don't think that's an unreasonable thing to do.
Half the student body lives in trees.
They live on a deadly fault line that could shift at any moment.
It's never a good day to be a Cal bear.
The number of conversations a person has had about their 'lack of belief' in something is evidence that it's more of an active belief in the non-existence of something. How often do you thing about your lack of belief in flying dogs?
I wonder if he'd go on an outburst like that if it was a bunch of a muslims holding signs.
I meant one shouldn't have to defend their belief. I think Religious people are hypocrites for attacking atheists