The Friendly Atheist has asked atheists to reply to a few questions that are often asked by theists of atheists. He also asked for simple and short answers. So here goes:
* Why do you not believe in God?
There is absolutely no evidence that any God exists or has ever existed.
* Where do your morals come from?
"Morality" is about 90% genetic (it is hardwired in us) and 10% nurture (cultural values that are taught to us).
* What is the meaning of life?
The meaning of life is purely subjective and differs from one person to the next. We make life meaningful as per our priorities, and they change over time as well.
* Is atheism a religion?
Atheism simply means not believing in God. There are no rules, philosophies, or places not to worship attached with being an atheist.
* If you don’t pray, what do you do during troubling times?
Reflect mostly.
* Should atheists be trying to convince others to stop believing in God?
When separation of church and state is involved or religious bigotry becomes an issue, I think it is my duty to let people know that there is no evidence of God.
Note: This currently gives my life meaning.
I can't disprove God, but my message is stop acting like an idiot because there is no evidence God exists.
* Weren’t some of the worst atrocities in the 20th century committed by atheists?
First off, Hitler was a theist or at least a deist. No atrocities were committed on the basis that God doesn't exist. Pol Pot and Stalin had political beliefs strongly influenced by the cultures they lived in, not by atheism. With over 650 million atheists in the world today, there is bound to be a couple of bad apples.
Other than Stalin and Pol Pot, almost every other major atrocities that have been committed in recorded history, had believers behind them.
* How could billions of people be wrong when it comes to belief in God?
I think we are hardwired to accept the supernatural as an explanation for things that we can't understand or don't want to understand. It kept our ancestors from going crazy since they were without many scientific explanations.
* Why does the universe exist?
There is no purpose in nature. But there is a scientific explanation as to why it exists, we just don't have all the answers yet. We will in the near future.
* How did life originate?
Again, we don't know for sure, but it was most likely a chemical reaction in a very hostile environment that produced the first one celled life form.
* Is all religion harmful?
Not always. Only when a religious person hurts or hinders someone (and that someone could also be religious too) because of their own beliefs. By hurt, I mean physically or emotionally. Like shunning gays. Hindering someone would be trying to force someone else from learning real science, or imposing non science in science classes.
* What’s so bad about religious moderates?
There is usually a form of bigotry that has its root in religion that comes out of even religious moderates.
* Is there anything redeeming about religion?
It might keep the odd nutball from murdering people, because religious people often say that without belief in God, nothing would hold them back from doing ugly things.
Also, many humanitarian reliefs are associated with religious organizations.
* What if you’re wrong about God (and He does exist)?
I'd love to ask him or her why he or she didn't put any evidence of his or her existence here.
* Shouldn’t all religious beliefs be respected?
No. Those who deny reality (evolution and an ancient earth) should be mocked because it is those types of beliefs that are the root of all religious bigotry.
* Are atheists smarter than theists?
In general, I would say yes. 65% of Americans who dropped out of high school believe in Young Earth Creationism versus 25% of Americans who graduated from college. The nations with the lowest IQs tend to have the highest percentage of believers as well.
* How do you deal with the historical Jesus if you don’t believe in his divinity?
Up to around 4 years ago, I just thought he was just another dude. Now, I doubt he ever existed. I think Paul put a name to the Gnostic God that was starting to become worshiped around his time.
* Would the world be better off without any religion?
Yes. I think an enlightened world would arise from it. Less bigotry and less conflicts.
* What happens when we die?
We become worm food.
H/T God Is For Suckers
Also, for a laugh, read Oh, The Hilarious Comments People Make...
July 23, 2007
I Made It To The City Of Dis
The Dante's Inferno Test has banished you to the Sixth Level of Hell - The City of Dis!
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Take the Dante's Inferno Hell Test
H/T The Atheist Hussy who seems to be a saint compared to me.
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
| Level | Score |
|---|---|
| Purgatory (Repenting Believers) | Very Low |
| Level 1 - Limbo (Virtuous Non-Believers) | Very Low |
| Level 2 (Lustful) | Extreme |
| Level 3 (Gluttonous) | High |
| Level 4 (Prodigal and Avaricious) | High |
| Level 5 (Wrathful and Gloomy) | Very High |
| Level 6 - The City of Dis (Heretics) | Extreme |
| Level 7 (Violent) | High |
| Level 8- the Malebolge (Fraudulent, Malicious, Panderers) | Very High |
| Level 9 - Cocytus (Treacherous) | High |
Take the Dante's Inferno Hell Test
H/T The Atheist Hussy who seems to be a saint compared to me.
July 21, 2007
DUELING CHRISTIANS
Many Protestants/Baptists believe that Catholics are not real Christians. Of course, many Catholics, including the Pope, think that non Catholics are not Christians either.
I figure I might as well make a video on the subject:) Enjoy:
This video was Stardust inspired:
Pope says other Christians not true churches and most recently, Dueling Christians Continued...
I figure I might as well make a video on the subject:) Enjoy:
This video was Stardust inspired:
Pope says other Christians not true churches and most recently, Dueling Christians Continued...
July 18, 2007
What Theists Can't Answer
Michael Gerson recently wrote an article in the Washington Post, What Atheists Can't Answer.
The question he states that atheist can't answer is:
He goes on with some assmonkey rhetoric:
The reality is that not only is the atheist answer to the question simple, it is also based on reality.
We have evolved a mindset that allows us to be inclined to be able to survive and procreate and to do our best for our offspring to survive as well, just like every other animal on this planet. By survival, I am talking about food, shelter, getting along with mates, and avoiding predators which includes doing stuff that will make someone else want to kill us with certainty.
Yes, we are conflicted, the selfishness that comes with our individual survival (which could lead to "bad" behavior) versus doing things that appear good or altruistic in order not to piss others off, and even doing good things on the expectation that "if I open the door for you, you will open the door for me."
Culture does add rules as well. Laws that remind us to be good or pay the consequences (jail not hell). Culture norms that keep us in good standing in the culture as well, influence us. Most norms and laws are just common sense that benefits our evolutionary survival written down on paper.
Good and bad instincts are constantly being weighed in our brains, mostly subconsciously. Good instincts win out usually, because we would be extinct by now if they didn't.
Now for the question that theists can't answer. I am defining theists in this case as anyone who thinks we need a belief in God to be able to choose between right from wrong:
How do chimpanzees decide between good and bad instincts?
Before you say they don't. Read this:
Chimps may display genuine altruism
CHIMPS are not known for their manners, but it turns out they are more civilised than we give them credit for. They seem happy to help both unrelated chimps and unfamiliar humans, even if it means exerting themselves for no reward.
True altruism - completely unselfish acts for somebody else's benefit - was until recently considered uniquely human. When animals help, the theory went, they either help relatives, thereby increasing chances of passing shared genes to the next generation, or they count on having favours returned in the future.
Now Felix Warneken and colleagues at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, have found that 12 of 18 semi-wild chimpanzees went out of their way to help an unfamiliar human who was struggling to reach a stick. They even did this when they first had to climb into a 2.5-metre-high ropeway and for no reward. Equivalent experiments ...
or this
Chimps get angry but not spiteful, study finds
LONDON (Reuters) - An angry chimpanzee will take revenge but -- unlike a human -- it will not do so out of spite, according to a study published on Monday that offers insights into how people perceive what is fair.
The study showed chimpanzees would seek retribution when wronged but did not punish others out of spite, for instance if another chimpanzee was better off, said Keith Jensen, an evolutionary biologist at the Max Planck Institute in Germany, who led the study.
Scientists had debated whether a sense of fairness and social comparison applied only to humans and the study was an attempt to answer some of the questions, Jensen said in a telephone interview.
"Like humans, chimpanzees retaliate against personally harmful actions, but unlike humans, they are indifferent to simply personally disadvantageous outcomes and are therefore not spiteful," he and colleagues wrote in a study published on Monday in the Proceedings of the Natural Academy of Sciences.
The study suggests that anger is an important motivational force but what causes it differs greatly between chimpanzees and humans, Jensen said.
"Humans and apes both get upset at theft but humans are more likely to get upset at unfairness," he said.
For more reaction to Gerson's article check out Rank Atheism and also An Atheist Responds by Christopher Hitchens.
Big H/T to Internet Infidels News Wire, a great place for what is hot in the world of belief and atheism.
The question he states that atheist can't answer is:
How do we choose between good and bad instincts? Theism, for several millennia, has given one answer: We should cultivate the better angels of our nature because the God we love and respect requires it.
He goes on with some assmonkey rhetoric:
Atheism provides no answer to this dilemma. It cannot reply: "Obey your evolutionary instincts" because those instincts are conflicted. "Respect your brain chemistry" or "follow your mental wiring" don't seem very compelling either. It would be perfectly rational for someone to respond: "To hell with my wiring and your socialization, I'm going to do whatever I please." C.S. Lewis put the argument this way: "When all that says 'it is good' has been debunked, what says 'I want' remains."
The reality is that not only is the atheist answer to the question simple, it is also based on reality.
We have evolved a mindset that allows us to be inclined to be able to survive and procreate and to do our best for our offspring to survive as well, just like every other animal on this planet. By survival, I am talking about food, shelter, getting along with mates, and avoiding predators which includes doing stuff that will make someone else want to kill us with certainty.
Yes, we are conflicted, the selfishness that comes with our individual survival (which could lead to "bad" behavior) versus doing things that appear good or altruistic in order not to piss others off, and even doing good things on the expectation that "if I open the door for you, you will open the door for me."
Culture does add rules as well. Laws that remind us to be good or pay the consequences (jail not hell). Culture norms that keep us in good standing in the culture as well, influence us. Most norms and laws are just common sense that benefits our evolutionary survival written down on paper.
Good and bad instincts are constantly being weighed in our brains, mostly subconsciously. Good instincts win out usually, because we would be extinct by now if they didn't.
Now for the question that theists can't answer. I am defining theists in this case as anyone who thinks we need a belief in God to be able to choose between right from wrong:
How do chimpanzees decide between good and bad instincts?
Before you say they don't. Read this:
Chimps may display genuine altruism
CHIMPS are not known for their manners, but it turns out they are more civilised than we give them credit for. They seem happy to help both unrelated chimps and unfamiliar humans, even if it means exerting themselves for no reward.
True altruism - completely unselfish acts for somebody else's benefit - was until recently considered uniquely human. When animals help, the theory went, they either help relatives, thereby increasing chances of passing shared genes to the next generation, or they count on having favours returned in the future.
Now Felix Warneken and colleagues at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, have found that 12 of 18 semi-wild chimpanzees went out of their way to help an unfamiliar human who was struggling to reach a stick. They even did this when they first had to climb into a 2.5-metre-high ropeway and for no reward. Equivalent experiments ...
or this
Chimps get angry but not spiteful, study finds
LONDON (Reuters) - An angry chimpanzee will take revenge but -- unlike a human -- it will not do so out of spite, according to a study published on Monday that offers insights into how people perceive what is fair.
The study showed chimpanzees would seek retribution when wronged but did not punish others out of spite, for instance if another chimpanzee was better off, said Keith Jensen, an evolutionary biologist at the Max Planck Institute in Germany, who led the study.
Scientists had debated whether a sense of fairness and social comparison applied only to humans and the study was an attempt to answer some of the questions, Jensen said in a telephone interview.
"Like humans, chimpanzees retaliate against personally harmful actions, but unlike humans, they are indifferent to simply personally disadvantageous outcomes and are therefore not spiteful," he and colleagues wrote in a study published on Monday in the Proceedings of the Natural Academy of Sciences.
The study suggests that anger is an important motivational force but what causes it differs greatly between chimpanzees and humans, Jensen said.
"Humans and apes both get upset at theft but humans are more likely to get upset at unfairness," he said.
For more reaction to Gerson's article check out Rank Atheism and also An Atheist Responds by Christopher Hitchens.
Big H/T to Internet Infidels News Wire, a great place for what is hot in the world of belief and atheism.
July 13, 2007
ABOUT THE MENTALLY ILL ASSMONKEY, JOSEPH COHEN/YOUSEF AL-KHATTAB
I knew this lying hypocritical imbecile looked familiar when I saw his video "Daniel Pearl I Am Happy Your Dead:)" He is the same POS who Richard Dawkins interviewed in his Root of All Evil documentary. Yes, Takferi is Yousef Al-Khattab aka Joseph Cohen. A Jew, who grew up secular in Brooklyn, and turned Orthodox at 18. He went to an Israeli settlement, where one day, his already mushed up brain fell for a pitch made by a Muslim on the internet. Since that time he has been an Al Qaeda loving Muslim. His wife, also an ethnic Jew and former Orthodox Jew, stuck with him and he has also polluted the minds of his children.
Here is the Dawkins interview (it is a good one as it includes the Teapot Atheist analogy after Dawkins spits out a piece of Cohen):
Joseph isn't very bright. His Youtube videos are full of double talk and back tracking as well. It isn't very difficult to see right through the retard.
Here is his story of conversion. I'm sure it isn't the exact truth, because of his history of changing his stories:
The Dawkins piece was a little different this time out. The first time I saw it, Cohen stated that he converted because he went to pick up his kids and saw female teachers showing too much leg. He is really a depraved individual.
UPDATE: Youtube pulled his account today. Personally, I want it still there for the world to see.
The Jawa Report has a great post on him (including a link to my blog). There is a good possibility the POS is in New York once more, and not Morocco. If the loon winds up going to Utah, I wonder if he'll become a Mormon next:)
Here is the Dawkins interview (it is a good one as it includes the Teapot Atheist analogy after Dawkins spits out a piece of Cohen):
Joseph isn't very bright. His Youtube videos are full of double talk and back tracking as well. It isn't very difficult to see right through the retard.
Here is his story of conversion. I'm sure it isn't the exact truth, because of his history of changing his stories:
The Dawkins piece was a little different this time out. The first time I saw it, Cohen stated that he converted because he went to pick up his kids and saw female teachers showing too much leg. He is really a depraved individual.
UPDATE: Youtube pulled his account today. Personally, I want it still there for the world to see.
The Jawa Report has a great post on him (including a link to my blog). There is a good possibility the POS is in New York once more, and not Morocco. If the loon winds up going to Utah, I wonder if he'll become a Mormon next:)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)