Those Wacky Athiests

Tam has a post up on the butthurt Atheists that are upset that they might see something Cross-like at a 9-11 memorial, and the so-called Christians who are hurling some ironically unflattering insults at them.

I’m not going to go to far into the so-called Christians being violent assholes. When it comes to heart-felt belief the weaker-minded of any group will often do some really stupid things. Who hasn’t seen somebody wish death or harm on a troll on a message board of ANY topic. I’ve seen people wishing harm on other people who didn’t like the same Anime series they do. Seriously, two Americans arguing with violent threats over a JAPANESE cartoon show. And that’s not even getting into the furies. I’ve seen harm wished by pro-gun people on Anti-gun people (and despite motive and opportunity all known anti-gun trolls are still alive. They know this, and that’s why they troll) I’ve been wished harm by anti-gun people.

There are turds in every pot. Islam and Marxism get short shrift from me only because there are entire nations that are Muslim Theocracies that sponsor the “Kill all the Jews/Infidels” perversion of Islam. That’s just a pressure cooker of danger. Marxism always ends in state-sponsored mass murder…so its a shitty ideology because that’s the fucking truth.

Still as a former Atheist I gotta wonder what the big deal is. Sure I get upset if somebody gets up in my grill or actively judges me (I’m most impressed with the people who pray for me simply because I don’t subscribe to their theology) for not believing what they believe, or when I see them supporting bashing of other ideologies or lifestyles, or if they’re “praying away the gay” or forcing your kids in public school to Memorize the Ten Commandments in social studies, or study the Book of Genesis as an alternative to Darwinian Evolution.

Still thinking you can go through life not believing in a higher power and be insulated from religious icons, relics, or seeing religious ceremonies or practices isn’t very realistic.

Look Atheists if you see somebody wearing a yarmulke, a Cross, or a Hijab, that’s how they roll. They believe those things have meaning, you don’t. Don’t get offended. It would be no different than me getting offended when my coworkers talk about the big ball game around the water cooler. Didn’t watch it didn’t care. They DO care, and so long as they aren’t making me watch it, what is it to me?

Saying you don’t want to see religious icons at a memorial for a Mass-Murder that killed lots of people of a wide range of faiths is pretty rude. Death is one of those big things that tie into religion, and to push religion away from a HUGE death event is VERY rude. Also look around and note those you know who DO have faith.

I may not ascribe to any particular faith, but man I see a LOT of good done. Grow up and get over yourself. Not believing in these things SHOULD mean they don’t have any power over you!

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

0 Responses to Those Wacky Athiests

  1. Sturm says:

    Words and symbols only have whatever power you give them. If there’s one thing we learn by listening to the anti’s, no matter how loud you are or how many times you repeat yourself, your words can never change the truth a single bit. It’s just as true for religion and non-belief. Whatever the truth is about the existence of God or which God it actually is, (I have my own beliefs, but there isn’t any way for anyone to prove the matter conclusively for any side) I guarantee you that no amount of screaming, suing, death-wishing, panty twisting, or door to door preaching by any side will alter the objective fact.

  2. alcade says:

    I like the atheists who state “I believe in science!” Looks like a contradiction, to me.

    Seems to be that if one believed in science, they would accept that anything is possible unless disproven. But then, atheism itself is really a religion, since most proclaim that there is no Creator and go about their assertations with no more proof than anyone else.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      One correction MILITANT Atheists are a religion. The Atheist who you have to ASK if he partakes in a religion because you honestly don’t know isn’t a religion, its just what they believe.

  3. Jay G. says:

    You see, me and the Lord, we have an understanding…

  4. Afeist says:

    But… I do object to baseball stadiums when they use tax dollars and eminent domain to support others’ sports preferences.

    So, saying “no” to others’ religious preferences when they do use tax dollars is just being consistent.

    Not believing in these things SHOULD mean they don’t have any power over you!

    And that’s simply the goal we’re trying to reach. Have you noticed we don’t make any fuss over Buddhism? That’s because we’ve already achieved this end with them.

  5. Suz says:

    The thing I admire most about atheists is that their morality is purely rational. Without the concepts of divine forgiveness, or earning a reward, atheists have nothing to fall back on, nothing to mitigate the real consequences of their actions. That takes guts. They tend to do right simply because it’s right. That said, some of them forget that the constitution guarantees freedom of religion, not freedom from it. To promote one set of beliefs and exclude others in a tax-supported venture, would be unconstitutional. But atheism is a matter of faith, just like religion is. Therefore, couldn’t it be said that the exclusion of all religion is supportive of the “belief” that there is no god?

    Those of us who think it’s no big deal, are we rationalizing? Or are we honestly trying to keep this no-religion-associated-with-ANYTHING-governmental business, from turning into oppression?

    You are provoking a lot of thought today, Weer’d.

    • Afeist says:

      But atheism is a matter of faith, just like religion is.

      I’m sure you’re aware that atheists don’t agree with this statement at all, so the question is one of definition. For example, if we define “faith” to include the elements of 1. mere wishful thinking and 2. dismissal of empirical evidence, as Hebrews 11:1 tells us, then no, atheism is more like the absence of faith.

      Of course, people of faith almost universally know nothing at all about epistemology, so they render themselves incapable of judging whether anything at all constitutes “faith” or “not faith.” It’s all faith to them! You can imagine a person with no color perception trying to understand how the rest of us see a rainbow. They may see variances in shades of gray, but they can never understand what the word “hue” means.

      Thus statements like, “atheism is a matter of faith” tells us more about the writer and his lack of epistemology than about atheists.

  6. Robert says:

    Atheism is a faith like not collecting stamps is a hobby.

    Buddhism is a philosophy, not a religion. Or so I am led to believe.

    While baseball fans can be, well, fanatic, there isn’t a belief system being forced on innocent bystanders while the game is being played, so a sports analogy is so-so.

    Everybody (yeah, me too) gets a bit carried away sometimes. We all just need to chill and leave everyone else the f*** alone.

    Myself, I don’t believe in anything without some actual, y’know, evidence. My ex-wife believes in fairies an’ stuff. Drives me nuts.

    Weerd: With all due respect and no snarkiness: how did you come to be a former atheist? If it isn’t too personal for the intertubes. Seriously, I’d like to know- it might be helpful to me.

    BTW, I like that you capitalize atheist.

  7. Silverevilchao says:

    From what I understand, it’s not the fact that religion is involved at all here, it’s more the fact that they’re taking a very diverse group of victims and putting them under one religious banner – including the atheists who died. Imagine, if you will, a memorial for soldiers that consisted of a Hindu symbol or a pagan one, despite some of them being Christian. There would be SO much crying over it; for example, the heart attacks some Christians had at the very idea of putting an Islamic-related building near Ground Zero (“victory mosque”, some called it). But non-Christians, including atheists, are apparently supposed to take having a cross representing them without any problems. It just seems like an illogical double-standard. While I’m not really emotionally invested in the whole memorial thing, I can see where they’re coming from, especially if taxpayer dollars are funding it, which kinda toes the line on the whole “establishment of religion” clause.

  8. Tam says:

    When someone tells me that “atheism is a faith”, I am usually polite and don’t ask in turn if disbelieving in unicorns is also a faith.

    I mean, nobody walks around all day saying “There’s no such thing as unicorns. I believe there are no unicorns. I have faith that there’s no such thing as unicorns!”

    • Patrick says:

      Tam hit it on the nose as usual. Atheist simply means “lacking a god belief” just as a theist has a god-belief. There is no faith involved.

      *Some* atheists say “there is no god”. That doesn’t define all atheists though. I don’t believe in god, but I no longer say “there isn’t one”. I am still waiting to discover it/him, but I’m not holding my breath.

      There are *some* theists who say “I believe something is out there” with no idea as to what. Others have a specific idea of what is their god.

      • Patrick, I’ll go further. I’ll say I’m confident there’s no God, and that this is still not a matter of faith.

        I’m confident there’s no God in exactly the same way I’m confident there isn’t a lime-green flying elephant behind me that moves away really fast when I turn around. That isn’t to say I have faith that such a thing can’t exist; it simply means that because I see no compelling evidence that it does, it goes in the same pile as centaurs, Care Bears, and effective gun control laws: I’ll believe they exist when somebody shows me solid evidence for them. Being confident that an unsupported assertion is untrue doesn’t mean being certain that the assertion could never be supported.

        • Patrick says:

          Oh I’m confident there isn’t one either… and the difference with this topic and all the others is that nobody has tried to convince me to believe in those other things you listed. Nor have them built laws around their belief in those things..

          Honestly, I’ve gone long past carrying what Christers do as long as they leave me out of it. I can’t tell you the last time I had any other religion knocking on my door to save my soul… I appreciate those religions for that.

          • Weerd Beard says:

            But you do have to admit, they’re polite, and their literature is HILARIOUS!

            I have a whole stack of The Watchtowers somewhere. LOVE THEM, they’re great for a laugh!

          • Patrick says:

            That should have been “caring”.. LOL

            Yea, my MoL is a Witness and I have a brother who is a Baptist preacher. I get enough of religion without stepping out the door. Today my brother invited me to his new Christian whatever page on Facebook..

  9. Speaking as a current atheist, I think it’s important to fight First Amendment violations even where they do very little harm. Just like we fight the relatively trivial multiple-long-gun-reporting push by the ATF on principle, even though it really does very little to damage out freedom in the big picture, we have to fight the tiny cases of shitting on the Establishment Clause as hard as we fight the big ones.

    That said, the WTC cross ain’t that. I think the loudest of my fellow atheists badly misunderstand the Establishment Clause. It forbids the establishment of a state religion; it doesn’t demand that the state pretend its citizens aren’t religious. If a government-run memorial sets out to commemorate the people’s reaction to a great tragedy, that memorial will end up commemorating religious–and specifically Christian–expression, and there’s nothing wrong with that. The 1A restraint is simply that government itself can’t be seen as endorsing any religion (or endorsing religiosity over irreligion). That doesn’t mean any religious symbol on public property is automatically unconstitutional.

  10. Suz says:

    I define faith as belief without proof. “Divinity does not exist,” is as unproven as, “Divinity exists.” Unless you want to split philosophical hairs and get into the difference between positive and negative atheism, the belief that “god” does not exist is indeed a matter of faith. I am truly fascinated by those atheists who claim to have no opinion on the subject, which is really the only way to have no faith one way or the other. (Is that “negative atheism?” I forget the specifics…)

    Personally, I believe in divinity, but I could be wrong. Could you?

    • Patrick says:

      As Elmo said.. there are a number of things people *don’t* believe in and don’t attach labels to them for doing so… If you want to believe that it is faith that unicorns don’t exist.. you are entitled to your opinion. Could I be wrong in thinking they don’t? Sure.. but I’ll keep not believing in unicorns.

      And honestly.. as long as they are burning my money for everything else under the sun.. I could really care less if they threw religion into the pot.. and did something for the memorial. There are bigger fish to fry.

  11. Suz says:

    Yes, I’ve heard that one before. I think it was purple flying saucers in my nose, or some such thing. Here’s the issue. There is plenty of “evidence” of something “not physical” in this physical world. However, real scientists aren’t allowed to acknowledge such bullshit until fringe scientists can come up with empirical evidence that it might actually be “not physical.” (They were the same way about microbes and vaccines. Some voodoo whack-job had to cram the evidence down their throats.) So “rational” people tend to treat it as if it doesn’t exist, and don’t even bother to look into it, except the parts that can easily be debunked. And that’s just sad, because it raises some fascinating questions. Physically impossible phenomena may very well be explained by science one day, and maybe it won’t, but it happens all the time. Is it more reasonable to believe that it’s caused by some aspect of physics of which we have no inkling, than to believe it’s something non-physical, or “spiritual,” that connects us all? Is one really more likely than the other? I ask this seriously, because the last time I asked this question (to a very intelligent atheist) the guy dodged and feinted like a fencing master. I don’t think anyone has THE answer, but I would appreciate AN answer.

    That said, wouldn’t it be cool if we were to discover that all such phenomena was a product of the human brain? That the brain could “perceive” things without the use of, or as a response to, the physical senses?

    As I said previously, I believe that divinity exists, but unlike many “faithful,” I understand that I could be wrong. After all, if I know indisputably that God exists, what’s the point of faith?

  12. Suz says:

    By the way, Elmo Iscariot, color blindness is by far the best analogy I’ve EVER seen on the subject. Thanks for that. Yet I have to ask, and I’m not quite sure I’m doing it right: does the color blind person have an opinion or any curiosity about the nature of this thing he cannot comprehend? Surely someone has tried to explain to him that one shade can have many hues. Does he wonder about what he’s missing?

  13. Suz says:

    Ugh! See, I AM and idiot! Not Elmo, Afeist!

  14. Cormac says:

    I think it was S.E. Cupp who I heard say “I am an athiest who longs to be a person of faith.”

    I’ve always liked that…she may go to her grave without ever believing in anything, but at least she’ll have kept an open mind and have understood that people who DO believe seem to benefit from it…placebo effect or not.

    She’s also (along with many others) a hot chick with a gun.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      Damn good way to live one’s life I suspect if it translates to all avenues.

      I’m an Anti-Gun convert to the Firearms rights side, but I always welcome people to make an argument to “win me back” if it were. I’ve given up hope on them when such a request is often answered with crude insults.

      Still one must never lose that open mind.

  15. DukkButt says:


    Really like your blog. I’ll admit that this is more than just a little bit of a “suck up”, but It’s also true, I think, that if the majority of the people in this country would adopt your “chill out, live and let live” attitude, we could be a great nation again. Unfortunately, there are too many who benefit from getting us to divide up and fight each other. The divisions are an easy way to distract us from the real problems.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *