What is Digg?Sponsored by Rockstar Games
Grand Theft Auto: Episodes from Liberty City view!
rockstargames.com - Out Now on Disc for Xbox 360. Includes The Lost and Damned plus the all-new The Ballad of Gay Tony.
924 Comments
- 1980Tim, on 11/02/2008, -5/+493Its amazing how people will turn on you when they learn you are an atheist.I worked with a girl for several years and we always had pretty good political debates in the break room. She was a Rep. and myself a Dem, yet we were still friends. We had differing views on abortion, yet we were still friends. She knew I believed in evolution, yet we were still friends. I never brought up her religion and I never mentioned my lack of one. One day she invited me to church and I said no thanks. Apparently someone filled her in on my atheism as the next day she asked me about it. I said yes I was indeed and Atheist, and she basically said she couldn't associate me anymore and called me several names in the process.
I'm not saying I feel oppressed as an atheist, its pretty easy to fly under the radar. But there is a double standard here. Speak badly about atheism and its good for your political career, speak badly about theism and its hate speech. - alapoet, on 11/02/2008, -10/+349A desperate Republican is an ugly thing.
Dole has chosen to reinforce this with her ugly last gasps of political life.
Today's polls show her falling even farther behind her opponent for the Senate, Kay Hagan. - yosserhughes, on 11/02/2008, -36/+311Everyone is an Atheist, every last one of us.
Here is a list of the 20 main religions:
1. Christianity: 2.1 billion
2. Islam: 1.3 billion
3. Hinduism: 900 million
4. Chinese traditional religion: 394 million
5. Buddhism: 376 million
6. African Traditional & Diasporic: 100 million
7. Sikhism: 23 million
8. Juche: 19 million
9. Spiritism: 15 million
10. Judaism: 14 million
11. Baha'i: 7 million
12. Jainism: 4.2 million
13. Shinto: 4 million
14. Cao Dai: 4 million
15. Zoroastrianism: 2.6 million
16. Tenrikyo: 2 million
17. Neo-Paganism: 1 million
18. Unitarian-Universalism: 800 thousand
19. Rastafarianism: 600 thousand
20. Scientology: 500 thousand
Every one of these individual followers is an atheist to the other 19. So if someone gets in your face about being an atheist just tell them that so are they, but that you just don't believe in one more god than they do. - GregFD3S, on 11/02/2008, -4/+253Atheism is a non prophet organization.
- vivisimonvi, on 11/02/2008, -53/+210I much prefer being agnostic
- faded242, on 11/02/2008, -4/+151It is sad that an atheist can't even consider running for a public office (even though that isn't what's happening in this case). It's amazing how those that preach tolerance and acceptance are the same people that are the least accepting and tolerant of those that have beliefs that differ from their own.
- inactive, on 11/03/2008, -0/+125It really does suck to lose a friend over being an atheist. That has happened to me twice, but a bit less direct. They simply phased me out of their lives.
Arguably worse, a girl who I had liked, and who liked me, pretty much broke off all forms of contact after finding out that I did not believe in god. I do understand being religious and what not, I have nothing against that. But when it stops you from being friends, or something more, with people, I think that something is wrong. I still miss her a bit. :( - alphgeek, on 11/02/2008, -35/+159archer104 said:
"You can't prove that there is no God therefore you shouldn't say that there is no God."
Your logic sucks:
You can't prove that there is no Santa Claus therefore you shouldn't say that there is no Santa Claus.
You can't prove that there is no Tooth Fairy therefore you shouldn't say that there is no Tooth Fairy.
You can't prove that there is no Allah therefore you shouldn't say that there is no Allah.
You can't prove that there is no Invisible Pink Unicorn therefore you shouldn't say that there is no Invisible Pink Unicorn.
You can't prove that there is no Kali therefore you shouldn't say that there is no Kali.
You can't prove that there is no Flying Spaghetti Monster therefore you shouldn't say that there is no Flying Spaghetti Monster.
So...according to you, nobody can claim that the Tooth Fairy doesn't exist? Because that might be unscientific?
Get a grip. - Hetman, on 11/02/2008, -8/+118All minorities start out as being seen as unamerican
Native Americans = Unamerican
Blacks = Unamerican
The irish = Unamerican
Cathoics = Unamerican
Asians = Unamerican
Mexicans = Unamerican
Mormons = Unamerican
Jehovah witnesses = Unamerican
Muslims = Unamerican.
Eventual they are all seen as Americans because that is what they are. - doiveo, on 11/02/2008, -47/+141what a dick. we should make dole a swear word for guys like this.
- inactive, on 12/08/2008, -13/+106Dugg for the headline.
- MaximusIGN, on 11/03/2008, -4/+93Christianity is the belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.
Yup makes perfect sense.
Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived ~ Mark Twain - atdigg, on 11/02/2008, -6/+88Because most of the voters are religious idiots. On the other hand atheists don't have a choice, they usually have to choose between two religious (or so they usually claim) candidates.
- alenox, on 11/03/2008, -1/+7821. Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster: over 9,000!
- elwior, on 11/02/2008, -3/+79 Where is there any real debate regarding this issue? The Constitution could NOT be any clearer. The First Amendment guarantees Americans Freedom of Religion, part of which is Freedom FROM Religion.
I believe in God, but not Religion, which has, for the most part come to stand for anti-spirituality and un-Godly intolerance.
The narrow-mindedness of our political process goes beyond rejecting Atheists. It also rejects Agnostics, and people like me who believe that God transcends Religion, as well the majority of the world's people whose beliefs in God are not the accepted Western belief in the "Judeo-Christian" concept of Religion.
We should follow our our Costitution, rather than the Tyranny of the Majority. - Seldon2639, on 11/02/2008, -5/+69Yeah, except you deny the existence of Zeus, Poseidon, Apollo, Thor, Odin, Loki, Ra, Isis, and Osiris, right? Not to mention Shiva, Ganesh, and Kali, or even Amaterasu, Omoikane, and Susano-O. You reject the existence of certain deities, but deny the existence of others, with no rhyme nor reason to the denial. So, you deny the existence of supreme beings, not all of them, but even the denial of *one* supreme being would be enough to fit the definition you provided.
Manchu, you're aware that definitions actually mean things, right?
"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." - 1980Tim, on 11/02/2008, -4/+67A note on "condecension and arrogance" Theists are just as bad if not worse in those departments. They are just blind when it comes to seeing it in themselves.
- rz8472, on 11/03/2008, -0/+63I was also disappointed with Kay Hagan. Her response was "I'm a Christian, not an atheist", which is perfectly fine... but she made no attempt to point out that atheists are perfectly good people as well. As with the Obama Muslim smear, there is a good answer, and then there's a much better answer.
- inactive, on 11/02/2008, -15/+71Agnosticism is the most scientific and logical of viewpoints anyways. The belief that we can neither positively confirm the existence or non existence of god.
It is wrong to claim with 100% certainty that there IS a god as well as 100% certainty that there is NOT.
Same can be said about the Vishnu, Thor, and even the FSM.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. - alphgeek, on 11/02/2008, -10/+65@archer104
The same test applies for God. I can bring the creator of God forward to debunk the myth. Of course, in both cases the creators are long dead so...
And I agree it is incredibly unlikely that Santa Claus is real (sorry kids). Likewise, it is similarly incredibly unlikely that God exists. That too is clear.
@manchu2
Resorting to ad hominem attacks I see. A classic sign of a lack of reasoned argument. And before you accuse me of the same, I didn't personally attack archer104, I attacked his flawed logic.
Now I will attack yours. His logic, and by extension yours, is incorrect. You are both essentially implying that the case FOR God and the case AGAINST God is a 50/50 proposition:
"It is just as much jumping the gun to say that there is a God as to say that there is no God."
When in fact based on any rational, repeatable evidence there is merely an infinitesimally small chance that God exists, whereas there are an almost infinitely large range of possible scenarios that do not require the Christian God, or substitute a different God such as Zeus, Apollo, Shiva, Krishna etc. Obviously Christians don't believe in Zeus, Apollo, etc. Christians are atheist with regard to these gods.
@kurttrail
An agnostic isn't a person who says "I don't know". An agnostic says "it cannot ever be known"
There are agnostic atheists and agnostic theists, just as their are gnostic atheists and gnostic theists.
It isn't just some wishy-washy fence sitting view. It means more than that. - GregFD3S, on 11/02/2008, -15/+68Just the fact that there are so many religions in the world should prove the fact that they are all made up.
- IphtashuFitz, on 11/03/2008, -2/+52Unfortunately most people think this country was founded up on a base of Christianity, which couldn't be further from the truth... Many believe "In God We Trust" has always been on US currency and "Under God" has existed in the Pledge of Allegiance since it was written. Both are 100% false. "In God We Trust" wasn't added to currency until around the Civil War, and "Under God" was added to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954.
The 400+ founding fathers, those who signed the Declaration of Independence, signed the US Constitution, and were members of the first US Congress, represented no fewer than 12 different religions. Granted most were based on one form of Christianity or another, but they realized that founding the USA on one specific religion would be a very bad idea. It would lead to discrimination against those who weren't members of the "official" religion. Unfortunately that wisdom was lost decades later and when those in power started introducting terms like "In God We Trust" and "Under God" into things like US currency, the Pledge, etc. - Technohamster, on 11/03/2008, -2/+52Today on digg: Atheists discover what it's like to be a gay dude.
- Seldon2639, on 11/02/2008, -4/+53Manchu,
Read that definition again, if you would. Do you deny that you disbelieve the existence of Odin? If you do, you disbelieve in the existence of a supreme being. If your definition were to include the word "all", you'd have a point. But, since it doesn't say that to be an atheist one must reject the existence of *all* supreme beings, the rejection of any supreme beings is enough to constitute being labeled an atheist based on your definition. Bear in mind I'm simply working within the bounds of *your* definition of atheism.
Your explanation for your rejection of other religions is that your religion claims it's right? Wow, that'd really stymie me, except *every* religion claim's it's right. I'll bet you dimes to dollars that I can find you at least one such example in every religion's major work. Your rhyme and reason are bunk, since it's purely circular logic.
Your apologia link, while interesting, makes the same fundamental equivocation you do. As discussed above, your claim to not be an atheist falls flat on its face in light of your own definition of atheism. Further, Ryft's explanation for rejection of pantheistic religions is simplistic and entirely false. He says that "I dismiss the god of pantheism as illegitimate is because, by the pantheist’s own admission, his god is none other than the world in which we live". That seems logical, except the core disagreement between theists and atheists is whether there is a personality behind the rules which govern existence. What Ryft describes as "none other than the world", would instead be Demeter, controlling the seasons personally (her grief at the loss of her daughter being the reason for winter). Further, you cannot use scripture as proof for the validity of your religion, insofar as it begs the question. I ask you why you believe in God, and you say because God said he exists, except if God doesn't exist, he didn't say he exists. Now, give me a reason you object to polytheism that's both logical, and ignores scripture, and we can continue. - audomatix, on 11/03/2008, -5/+54Weak politicians use religion as a crutch.
- inactive, on 11/03/2008, -0/+46This is America - it won't be remotely acceptable to be an atheist anytime soon. You can be any religion you want in this country, but for some reason having no religion at all is an unspeakable evil.
- alphgeek, on 11/02/2008, -1/+47Dole is repulsive. Meanwhile, her political opportunist of an opponent has come out to vehemently distance herself from the atheists.
Gotta love a fight to the bottom. - skippyoh, on 11/03/2008, -1/+44I read a paper in front of the entire senior class about my belief that there is no God. I wasn't rude or offensive in the paper, and I wasn't trying to persuade anyone to become atheist. It was just about what I personally believed to be true. After reading it about half of the people refused to clap. A lot of people came up to me and said they loved it but many more were outraged and have since refused to talk to me. Some even went to the principle and complained. They said I was being offensive. A lot of kids read about their belief in God for the assignment and no one thought differently of them. No one called them "offensive". It just made me realize the ridiculous double standard many people have when it comes to religion.
- BlaqReaper, on 11/02/2008, -9/+50I'm sic of religious people who get up in your face and condemn you if you don't believe in the same God/Gods as they do.
That said, I'm also sick of the atheists who call religious people idiots for having faith and believing in something. People should just let each other believe what they want to, live and let live.
Also, I'm an agnostic, but I respect both sides. I did notice an earlier comment comparing believing in religion to believing the Earth is flat or Blacks are a subhamn race. - GregFD3S, on 11/02/2008, -3/+43Wait, you KNOW that he is real? Wow, I didn't know that. That proves his existence beyond question. Thank you.
/sarcasm - kurttrail, on 11/02/2008, -17/+57Alpha,
What started existence?
If you are honest you'll answer, "I don't know."
That is the basic tenant of Agnosticism. I don't know, so as a reasonable person I ain't gonna make ***** up. - MrSilverblood, on 11/03/2008, -0/+39You hit it Tim!
Coworkers of mine were having some sort of religious discussion in the halls, when one called the other an atheist. Basically insinuating that being one was a very bad thing. I'm walking back to my office at that moment, hear the comment, stop and turn around to respond and say, "Um....I'm an atheist." Needless to say, that coworkers face looked somewhat horrified after I spoke up. Kind of an oh-***** moment. lol - cmsjustin, on 11/03/2008, -3/+42My butt doesn't hurt
- Bomaz, on 11/02/2008, -2/+40Then prove it. If you can do that then all the problems are solved. Until then there is no knowing there is only belief
- archer104, on 11/02/2008, -2/+40You BELIEVE God is real, which is great. But it's called "faith" for a reason.
- Mononuclear, on 11/03/2008, -1/+38Dole is already a swear word for most people in latin america.
- shalb, on 11/02/2008, -2/+35@manchu2: Coming to a logical conclusion is not in itself a leap of faith. Assumptions are to some degree, but most logical conclusions come from known facts. The facts may be wrong, in which you would need a true fact to refute the incorrect fact which can change a person's logical conclusion. Like a long time ago, I thought Mariah Carey was white because in the first photo I've ever seen of her, she looked white. From that picture I drew the conclusion that she was white. Then everyone told me she was black and later on when I saw another photo of her, I changed my logical conclusion. With leaps of faith, it's a do or die. There's no proving right or wrong, no way to change or adjust. A hypothesis is a leap of faith since you're just taking a guess. A logical conclusion, whether right or wrong, is not.
- binky79, on 11/02/2008, -9/+41You must have really enjoyed the article and picture to make such an epic comment.
- toptopics, on 11/02/2008, -16/+47organized religion = hate
- Seldon2639, on 11/02/2008, -5/+35It's pretty simple logic, actually. I don't mean to rehash all existing debates on atheism, but whenever this kind of thread comes up, I'm compelled to offer the following challenge to any person who does believe: provide me with one rational, logical, and empirical reason for your faith (i.e show that god must exist, not simply that he can exist), and I'll back down. I'll exclude the following things: you can't use the ontological proof (proof from the fact that we can conceive of a perfect being, and a perfect being which exists is more perfect that one that doesn't), nor the cosmological proof (the need to find a causal starting point. I disqualify this because it always boils down to a religious person saying that there must be some *being* that started it all, and atheist saying that if God can exist outside the bounds of causation, why can’t the universe itself), nor the argument from design (that the world is too complex not to have a creator, since that’s based on an assumption that one cannot make: that there must be a creator to breed complexity). I’m also excluding the petulant “atheists can’t prove God doesn’t exist” argument on the basis that the burden of proof is on the affirmative (you). Which means, dear theist, that you’ll need to either provide sufficient evidence that there is no other possible explanation, or that god is the most rational explanation given the existing rules governing logic (most significantly Ockham’s Razor)
If you can make a single argument for why God must exist, I give you my word that I’ll never speak on this topic again. - bennychapman, on 11/03/2008, -8/+38Thank God I'm an Atheist. :-)
Here in Australia, we had an Atheist prime minister a few years back, he also held the Australian record for sculling a yard glass of beer. Makes me glad I live here rather than the US, that's for sure.
Religion has no part to play in politics. Religion was only developed to help people deal with the unknowns which have since been explained by science. - Disgod, on 11/03/2008, -4/+34No, religious people don't usually get dugg down for their belief in a god. They get dugg down when they want to impose their beliefs on someone else, deny scientific fact which they don't even understand, or are just offense (Like the religious nuts who say being gay is wrong or something along those lines).
You are getting dugg down because you made a completely incorrect assumption about atheists on Digg. - pappyblueribs, on 11/03/2008, -1/+30The emphasis should be on knocking the argument rather than knocking the person.
So, "The earth isn't flat, and here's why..." rather than "You are an idiot for believing the earth is flat."
Knocking the argument is American and has enjoyed a long tradition here. Of course, knocking the person is also pretty well known here, but probably shouldn't be. - Apokalyps2547, on 11/02/2008, -3/+31Allright, I'm burying the comments in this thread that say "No, ____ are more arrogant and condescending than ____", because this kind of dialogue is not only juvenile, but counter-productive to creating the kind of dialogue necessary to reduce the discrimination and lack of understanding toward atheists.
- alphgeek, on 11/02/2008, -4/+32@archer104
Your example is interesting but think of it another way for a second.
George: I believe that there is a leprechaun in the next room.
Fred: What evidence do you have for this?
George: No evidence but someone told me and I have not a conviction but a belief.
Fred: There is no leprechaun in the next room.
George: What evidence do you have for this?
Fred: None, but you are an idiot for believing it without any proof.
George: I think that you are the idiot for being convinced without any proof.
Does the case hold up equally well for a leprechaun as a tree? Trees obviously exist so it is at least remotely possible that there is a tree in the next room, even if unlikely. Is it possible that there is a leprechaun in the next room?
In this case, who is the bigger idiot, Fred or George? Or is equally as stupid to disbelieve in leprechauns as it is to believe in them? Of course not. Now substitute in any other fantasy creature - Zeus, flying spaghetti monster, tooth fairy...you can see where I am going?
There's an old saying, "Always try to keep an open mind, but not so open that your brain falls out". - paulierocks, on 11/03/2008, -1/+29I've been an atheist all my life and haven't ever really had problems with people I know. When I was a teenager I had to deal with dumb crap a few times, but now no-one argues with me about it at all any more. I think it's pretty stupid to try to demonize us. An atheist has to make a conscious decision to place his or herself in this category. I can say without hesitation that I've put a lot more thought into my position than most people who *say* they believe in God have put into theirs. So, to Dole, both hands, 'tard:
..!.. ..!.. - MrSilverblood, on 11/03/2008, -0/+27I'll agree with that.
But the same can be said of many religious groups. I'm an atheist, and I can't tell you how many times I've had people try and push their beliefs on me, while I've personally never pushed mine on anyone.
Live and let live is a wonderful thing. - gaoshan, on 11/03/2008, -0/+27As sad as it may have been at the time it is better to break it off early rather than later. I broke up with a women because she was a devout Christian because the arguments would never have ended and she would have held out hope against hope that I would "convert" someday. As I am no more likely to start believing in God than I am in Zeus, this was not happening. Better to end it and find someone with whom you can be compatible. If the shoe doesn't fit, get a new shoe.
- alphgeek, on 11/02/2008, -4/+31I agree with pretty much everything you say but there is one key point that I must mention that unfortunately damages your argument:
Atheists do not tell others who they can marry and who they can not.
Atheists do not tell others that it is a sin to take their own life, no matter how much that person is suffering.
Atheists do not create wars due to their "belief" in atheism.
Atheists do not, as a consequence of their atheist beliefs, belittle others for their choice of sexual partner.
Atheists do not use the fear of eternal torture to control people's thoughts.
Atheists do not lobby to demand the teaching of laughable fantasies as fact in schools.
Atheists do not deny the nature of reality, as demonstrated by evidence, in favour of an apocryphal story. -
Show 51 - 100 of 941 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is