What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
How Smart Guys Keep Their Faces Looking Young view!
howlifeworks.com - Why men have finally started to use certain anti-aging skin care products...
897 Comments
- inactive, on 10/26/2007, -67/+350We're not too angry. Its just the discrimination and subjugation we have all suffered for years finally being given an outlet at last! Enough of us have finally have the courage to stand up and declare that we have had enough! We aren't going to take this ***** sitting/laying down any more!
If you push your outmoded, superstitious belief and acceptance of the completely unacceptable onto me, then I'm going to push back twice as hard!!
As a gay person, I probably have more anger towards religion than a lot of people, the hurt and harm religion has caused gay people is simply beyond reckoning, and it continues today with the apparent approval of governments and their petty short sighted views which have been steered by the church!
So, damn right I'm pissed off and angry! Give me a reason why I shouldn't be! - ranthony, on 10/26/2007, -20/+155Stalin and Mao disbanded all religions under their dictatorships, because the only allowed religion was worship of the state. They simply replaced one irrational set of beliefs with another. As such they were not atheists, since they did indeed have a theism.
Atheism is non-belief, skepticism; not another form of religion. No matter how many times the contrary is asserted. - jefferygomer, on 10/26/2007, -26/+110Angry? Not really.
But a lot of them are starting to become more like the reason I don't like a lot of Christians. Intolerance and self-supremacy. Many atheists, even on digg, say they don't have a problem with what other people believe, which is fine, but within the same sentence they call anyone that doesn't share their atheistic belief either dumb, stupid or ignorant. It's silly. - inactive, on 10/26/2007, -21/+99"Anger leads to hate, and Hate leads to suffering." - Yoda.
- commernie, on 10/20/2007, -34/+104I share your anger! You speak for at least another fellow atheist!
- Corrosionx, on 10/26/2007, -3/+72There are two kinds of people 1) Those that want to be left alone 2) Those that will not leave them alone.
- radicaldementia, on 10/22/2007, -5/+69I disagree, we (or some of us) are too angry. Atheism is supposed to be an ideology of reason and logic over emotion and superstition. Getting "angry", or worse, celebrating and promoting your anger, undermines the very notion of what it means to be an atheist. Like many of you, I am frequently frustrated by religion and the various effects it has on my life, but getting angry does nothing to solve the problem. Yes, we should be active, assertive, and not afraid to back down, but we should not be hypocrites and lash out in anger. That will just make more people even angrier.
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." - Ghandi - gropo, on 11/06/2007, -11/+73Good GRAVY! I just realized that all but one of those dictators has an "O" in their name! Undeniable proof that having an "O" in your name makes you a vicious genocidal madman!
- asancho, on 10/22/2007, -15/+59Are Atheists too angry? I think with the current state of politics in the last 7 years, everyone, catholic, christian, jewish buddhist, muslim, whatever, has the right to be angry, and damn well should be. But when i constantly read these pro-atheist anti-christian articles getting dugg up to the front pagem, i have to ask myself "Are these atheist turning into what they hate the most?".
I am a Catholic, yet i totally respect everyones right to religion (or lack thereof), and it is not my right to try to infringe on your freedom to believe in whatever you want, shouldnt all Atheists (And religions for that matter!) try to do the same? - AbsurdParadox, on 10/19/2007, -65/+104I say, absolutely its too angry, and I don't care about your reasons -- they're irrelevant. People of all kinds have legitimate claim to be angry. Anger does nothing to further a viewpoint, of any kind, atheist or not, however.
When it comes to any personal belief, there are two kinds of people. Evangelists and Preachers (abandon your irrational judgements of these terms for a moment). Evangelists are the kind of people who know HOW to put their viewpoint out there for others to consider, without being forceful and angry. Preachers are the kind of people who rile up those already-on-your-side. The problem lies, in ALL beliefs, when Preachers try to Evangelize. They will have the opposite effect.
In other words, if you think those who don't believe the same as you do as "idiots", please STFU. You're damaging your "team's" reputation, and those not on your side cannot hear your words anyway. - AriaStar, on 10/26/2007, -20/+59Angry atheists. No *****. Religion rules so much of our lives, religion we don't believe in. Of course we're angry that we're forced to abide by biblical non-sense and be bombarded with Christian messages all the damned time. We've been capped for so long, and now the top's been blown and all the suppressed feelings are coming out.
- RuffRidr, on 10/19/2007, -5/+43Yes get angrier. Because as everyone knows, anger is the quickest way to solve all of the world's problems.
- gforce85, on 10/21/2007, -4/+42To the angry people, and to the non-angry people: I love you all.
- WhiteRaven, on 10/23/2007, -14/+47Atheism IS NOT AN IDEOLOGY. We just don't believe in gods.
- notque, on 10/22/2007, -7/+38I am an atheist. I have no problem with others believing in religion. I have no problems with others wanting to communicate their desire for you to join them.
It's a personal matter that isn't all that important to me. Who am I to tell parents that their child who died isn't going to heaven?
Religion has done an awful lot of evil in this world, but the answer isn't to stop religion. It's to make a better world where religion isn't required because you don't believe life is a hopeless series of injustices. - bumb1ebee, on 10/23/2007, -10/+40Atheists should defend their beliefs if they are being challenged but I think some atheists go too far when they generalize and accuse people who believe in God to be stupid. Determine the stupidity of a person on a case by case basis. Don't stoop so low as to generalize a large population of people on this planet just to make you feel better about yourself. It's this elitist sense of superiority that many atheists have that I don't agree with and I'm an atheist myself.
- SiNN4R, on 10/23/2007, -15/+43I'm an atheist and have generally viewed the more vocal forms of atheists as obnoxious and preachy. Its a lack of religion don't try to make atheism into a new religion. Just shut up about it. I've been on the bus and had to listen to arguments back and forth between religious people and atheists and frankly I think both sides of the argument are obnoxious.
- JackBurden, on 10/22/2007, -21/+49Atheists are too angry just like 'dem uppity nigras were too angry back during the civil rights movement's early days.
In other words, leave us the ***** alone and give us all of the rights given to the theists. Problem solved. - WhiteRaven, on 10/19/2007, -10/+37You are incorrect. The *only* trait of atheism is the lack of believe in any deity. A lack of belief is a very different thing from claiming that it is a fact that there is no such thing as god.
In other words, a lack of belief is not a belief in (or an assertion of) a lack. - zeitgueist, on 10/19/2007, -2/+28Not surprisingly, you're factually wrong. Hitler in Mein Kampf: "Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord"(p. 65, Manheim translation).
Nor can you support your belief that atheism causes genocides. You're absolutely correct that atheistic regimes have been responsible as many deaths as religious ones, however the vast majority of those were political deaths, not religious ones. I've never heard(though I could be wrong) of anyone specifically going to war to "bring atheism to the religious", but it's not uncommon to see religious people do so. Considering that neither point of view actively advocates murder, a more intelligent person might realize that people are evil, and do bad things, regardless of what they do say to justify it. - onisamsha, on 10/23/2007, -6/+32You confuse their purpose in killing those people.
They killed them because of the communist/fascist ideal that religion was "the opium of the masses." They killed religious peoples because they viewed them as a threat to their power, not simply just for the fact that they worshipped a god. To try and lay that at the feet of the modern "new atheism" movement that slowly propagating in western countries (mostly the US and Britian) which seeks, for the most part, to simply ensure the continuation of the seperation of church and state, is intellectually dishonest.
They were mad men drunk on their own desire for megalomaniacal power, not on atheism. But if you can lump me as an atheist in with them, then i guess i can say you are are responsible for the crusades, the pogroms, the murder/forced conversion of hundreds of thousands of native tribal peoples, the inquisition, the Reformation Wars, the Papal Wars, etc, etc.
Every idea has blood on its hands if you are short sighted fool. - jefferygomer, on 10/18/2007, -1/+26Yah - I see where it is going, but I don't think that's a good argument. Skepticism is good and healthy, and ideas and beliefs are good to be skeptical towards.
There are some serious whack jobs that are also very smart people. Throughout history there were people that were laughed at, killed, and scoffed at only to be proven true over time. Insulting someone rarely does any more good than bad.
It's fine to think an idea is stupid, but to apply that to a person, well, that's a bad idea. Call me a hippie if you want, but, while not always practical, I think things can be achieved better though peaceful discussions. - inactive, on 10/18/2007, -2/+26No one expects the Swedish inquisition!
- Phyltre, on 10/18/2007, -4/+27It wasn't anger, it was resolution. I'm surprised nobody sees the difference.
- DrMonkeyLove, on 10/23/2007, -8/+31Right!!! Atheism is the default position! It's ridiculous that there's even the word "atheism". How many other words in the English language exist to describe the absence of a belief in something? Aunicornism? Ateapotism? Aflyingspaghettimonsterism? NO! It's absurd! Not believing in something there's no proof of isn't an ideology, it's the default condition. Not believing in fairies and unicorns is not an ideology. It's the default condition. There is nothing ideological about atheism.
- RogerStrong, on 10/20/2007, -10/+32>> Atheism denies the existence of any supreme being, and that is what they see as fact.
Wrong. Athiests would perfectly OK with the existence of any supreme being. Its blind faith that they're against. They want a reasonable amount of evidence.
Whether its following the Pope's order's because of blind faith in God, or following Stalin's orders because of blind faith in communism ,the principle is the same. Both faiths are perpetuated by the same prime commandment: Thou Shalt Not Question. - WhiteRaven, on 10/19/2007, -0/+21That figure is roughly accurate. Mao intentionally introduced "reforms" that left a staggering number of people unable to feed themselves. This was done intentionally because Mao believed the existing population to be unmanageable in the long run. He used the power he was able to maintain over the short term to drastically reduce China's population and make it more manageable over the long term.
Of course, communism is a matter of faith and if functionally identical to religion. - Corrosionx, on 10/24/2007, -5/+25In this country some people are still ostracized by their families or communities or lose their jobs because they admit they are atheists. For a religious parent, having an atheist child is a failure. Nobody is throwing stones at the atheists or throwing them in camps, but there is still some intolerance.
- gambyt13, on 10/18/2007, -9/+29I recommend that everyone read Dawkins' book, "The God Delusion." Whether you're religious or not, if you're not afraid of reason and the lessons of history, you'll find yourself nodding your head at most of his work. ISBN 0-618-68000-4
- AriaStar, on 10/19/2007, -12/+32Reading through this list makes me think about how, whenever something good happens, someone almost always says to me how good god is. God had nothing to do with my cat coming home after two weeks missing (he's 20 years old and was sick), wasn't behind me getting better after a very ill childhood (what kind of merciful God would make a child extremely sick and should be praised for undoing it?), and so on.
If one prayer in a thousand in "answered," it's taken as proof that god is great and should be praised and pushed off onto everyone, and the other 999 times are just passed off as "part of god's will."
I don't pray, and I think I get what I want as often, if not more so, than Christians. - Birdoftruth, on 10/20/2007, -7/+27There is no Fact that God exists. There is no Fact God does not exist. By default science has no opinion. thus making it agnostic or weak atheist (as some like to pull agnostics to their side).
So let me ask you this White Raven, Does it make a difference if one's viewpoint is actually based on LOGIC? Like the philosophers of the millennium, One can arrive to a god via discourse and logic Just like man arrived to math and infinity and many of the other intangible objects in the world. One does not need repeatable, testable, and most importantly observable evidence to arrive at a conclusion. - Crosshare, on 10/20/2007, -16/+36I was going to be an ass and just read this submission and answer YES in the comments. I figured it was just a post by another robot minded Dawkins supporter that couldn't construct an original thought. BUT this was a very well written out blog post, great writing and fact checking. Bravo madam, Bravo. Atheists could learn a little bit from this one other than spitting out regurgitation. I only say this because I want to see Atheists seen as viable in this country.
- KnightWhoSaysNi, on 10/23/2007, -2/+20No. A TON of theists treat Atheism as an ideology.
- bamapachyderm, on 10/18/2007, -5/+23Sorry about the length, but you asked...
Selected Pre-20th Century
Democide and Totals [1]
Cases Years [2] Democide [3]
China 221 B.C.-19 C. A.D. 33,519,000 [4]
Mongols 14 C-15 C 29,927,000
Slavery of Africans 1451-1870 17,267,000
Amer-Indians 16 C-19 C 13,778,000
Thirty Years War 1618-1648 5,750,000
In India 13 C-1 9 C 4,511,000 [5]
In Iran 5 C-19 C 2,000,000 [4,5]
Ottoman Empire 12 C-19 C 2,000,000 [5]
In Japan 1570-19 C 1,500,000 [5]
In Russia 10 C-19 C 1,007,000 [5]
Christian Crusades 1095-1272 1,000,000
By Aztecs Centuries 1,000,000 [6]
Spanish Inquisition 16 C-18 C 350,000
French Revolution 1793-1794 263,000
Albigensian Crusade 1208-1249 200,000
Witch Hunts 15 C-17 C 100,000
Total For All Cases pre-20 C 133,147,000
Hypothetical Total 30 C B.C.-19 C A.D. 625,716,000 [7]
International war-related dead 30 C B.C.-19 C A.D. 40,457,000 [8]
Plague dead (Black Death) 541 A.D.-1912 102,070,000 [9]
1. From STATISTICS OF DEMOCIDE.
2. Unless otherwise noted, years and centuries are A.D.
3. Unless otherwise noted, these are a best guess estimate in a low to high range.
4. Excludes democide in China by Mongols.
5. An absolute low.
6. A very speculative absolute low.
7. From STATISTICS OF DEMOCIDE.. Calculated from the 20th century democide rate and the population for each century since 30 B.C.
8. From table STATISTICS OF DEMOCIDE. Total undoubtedly inflated by democide.
9. A minimum: includes plague dead in circa 541-542 A.D.; 1346-1771 in Europe; 1771 in Moscow; 1894 in Hong Kong; and 1898-1912 in India. From Duplaix (1988, p. 677-678).
What percentage of these killings were due to religious democide? It is less than 3% of the totals. The surprising thing is that these killings occurred during a period of time when virtually all the peoples of the world were involved in some sort of religion. Here is the data for the 20th century:
TABLE 1.2
20th Century Democide [1]
REGIMES YEARS DEMOCIDE [2]
U.S.S.R. 1917-87 61,911,000
China (PRC) 1949-87 35,236,000
Germany 1933-45 20,946,000
China (KMT) 1928-49 10,075,000
Japan 1936-45 5,964,000
China (Mao Soviets) [3] 1923-49 3,466,000
Cambodia 1975-79 2,035,000
Turkey (Armenian Genocide) 1909-18 1,883,000
Vietnam 1945-87 1,670,000
Poland 1945-48 1,585,000
Pakistan 1958-87 1,503,000
Yugoslavia (Tito) 1944-87 1,072,000
North Korea 1948-87 1,663,000
Mexico 1900-20 1,417,000
Russia 1900-17 1,066,000
China (Warlords) 1917-49 910,000
Turkey (Ataturk) 1919-23 878,000
United Kingdom 1900-87 816,000
Portugal (Dictatorship) 1926-82 741,000
Indonesia 1965-87 729,000
LESSER MURDERERS 1900-87 2,792,000
WORLD TOTAL 1900-87 169,202,000
1. From STATISTICS OF DEMOCIDE.
2. Includes genocide, politicide, and mass murder; excludes war-dead. These are probable mid-estimates in low to high ranges. Figures may not sum due to round off.
3. Guerrilla period.
What percentage of this democide was due to religious conflict? It turns out that religious democide doesn't even make the top 20 (although I am sure there is some in the "lesser murderers" category. Still, the total religious killings is less than 2%. In fact, the top two killers were specifically atheistic states (which had never existed before in human history). Should atheism be blamed for more than 50% of the atrocities committed during the 20th century? The answer of course is No! If one examines the nature of the regimes that committed these atrocities (even the religious ones), the key factor is absolute power (see Figure 1, right). According to Professor R.J. Rummel, in the 1816-2005 period there were 205 wars between non-democracies, 166 wars between non-democracies and democracies, and 0 wars between democracies. Lord Acton's warning that "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" seems to be more than just a trite saying. - SheilaNoya, on 10/26/2007, -4/+20You didn't know about the secret atheist meetings? They're just like the secret gay meetings where they conjure up the mysterious "gay agenda" that the religious right keeps harping about. Oh - and watch out for those "secular progressives" that Bill O'Reilly keeps warning us all about. They have secret meetings and secret agendas too.
;) - tbydal, on 10/26/2007, -1/+17Almost all atheists will agree that they *technically* are agnostics. The atheist viewpoint is usually that the existence of a God or Gods is as probable as the existence of the tooth-fairy. No conclusive evidence for or against in both cases, but any *sceptic* would agree that something with no evidence for or against should not be believed in at all.
- tbydal, on 10/26/2007, -4/+20The amount killed by atheists and the amount killed by religious are largely irrelevant.
What matters is how many were killed *in the name* of atheism, which is pretty close to zero. As opposed to most religions.
Counting the amount of people killed by atheists is like counting the amount of people killed by people with mustaches. My point being, people with mustaches are clearly evil. - notthemama, on 10/20/2007, -10/+25"Anger does nothing to further a viewpoint, of any kind, atheist or not, however."
Actually, it does. If that black woman hadn't gotten angry over being told to sit in the back of the bus, we'd probably still be making black people ride in the back. - onisamsha, on 10/19/2007, -1/+16What if you're an atheistic capitalist?
- WhiteRaven, on 10/18/2007, -4/+19Communism is a matter of faith. The government (purporting to represent the people) is treated as the supreme being.
- amdahlj, on 10/18/2007, -3/+18Are you kidding? Refusing to vote for someone based on religious beliefs is discrimination. It's not better than refusing to vote for people of a certain race. As an atheist, I'd vote for someone of any religion as long as they were capable and supported reasonable policy. The fact that half the country won't vote for a QUALIFIED atheist shows that they think atheists are morally lacking, which is a highly discriminatory viewpoint.
- WolverineBlue, on 10/19/2007, -2/+16I'm an atheist myself, but I've noticed that there are a handful of us that just can't seem to be in the same room as a theist for five minutes without mentioning how idiotic he thinks religion is. It's perfectly fine to be angry at the theists who do cause us trouble, but that's different than being angry at ALL theists; it's the few of us that don't get this distinction who create the "angry" stereotype for all atheists.
- inactive, on 10/18/2007, -12/+26Last time i checked Atheist dont build buildings to go to each week and try to make you join in, going from door to door, handing out papers and telling you how to run your life everyday.
- catalysis, on 10/20/2007, -4/+18How many people have been converted to a different ideology by ridicule their current one? My guess is not many. Acting angry and lashing out only pushes the religious people farther away and makes them cling to their beliefs out of self defense.
It cultivates an "us vs. them" competitive mentality where each side is rooting for their home team to the point where the ideology that started it all becomes meaningless. Kind of like American politics. - Mageling, on 10/18/2007, -0/+131) There's a common moral code totally separate from religion. Why? because I am atheist and I know I have better morals than a lot of Christians I know..
2) Consoling mechanism... Um, my grandfather died. The best thing you could do to honor their death is to relive their effect on you and let it change you for the better. What else do you really expect? That you'll physically see or 'feel' them when you died? I think not. - nreynolds, on 10/18/2007, -6/+19Tell me one way religion *rules* your world. It doesn't affect my life pretty much at all, certainly not my decisions. And in case you're wondering, "since the Christians did it" isn't a reason atheists should be ***** too.
- adenansu, on 10/18/2007, -3/+16Newly? There has been a vocal atheist community for a long long long long long (etc etc) time now.
- dvsbastard, on 10/18/2007, -2/+14Bah, I don't care what your theological ideas are... The moment you begin seperating and segregating based on these ideas, divisions begin to form and you *will* become a problem.
An "atheist movement" is no different than any religious divide, political divide, territorial divide, ancestory divide, racial divide OR any other divide which has in the past resulted in problems for humanity.
Live your life as you choose, and respect the choice of others. Simple. - Ferre1, on 10/18/2007, -4/+16I was bullied by religious kids at school for not taking part of religion classes, when I came home, I was around 8 years old, I asked my dad why I didn't have a religion like the other kids, and he answered that I was too young to force any kind of religiuon onto me, he told me that religion is a serious matter and that I should decide about that later on, when I was an adult. he also told me to be aware of religions that tell me that "something bad" will happen to me if I don't join them. He also adviced me to look into various religions before, and if, I ever wanted to join one and to make a rational decision. I'm still thankful for him to not force me into a religion as a child. My father is an atheist, I am 48 years old and I'm an atheist too, despite years of looking into various religions, and I'm very aware that many religions tell you that "something bad" can happen to me if I don't join them in their fears for imaginary friends and what those imaginary friends can do to them if they don't enslave their personality.
To believe in a monotheistic god, and accept such god as a "master", is volunteerly enslaving yourself in my opinion, it kills free thought. - Birdoftruth, on 10/26/2007, -10/+22See you are getting dugg down because a great quote is not supporting people's agenda here. Had this been posted in a Armenian genocide story you would get dugg up. Not here. Funny how man cherry picks ehh?
-
Show 51 - 100 of 900 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is