Video with 15 notes
Atheist Mingle - “At Atheist Mingle we understand how difficult it can be to find someone who shares the same bitterness you do about religion, ignorant people, and the world in general…”
Question with 2 notes
rabidwerewolfie asked: Do you enjoy tea or coffee? Silly question I know, but I just get the feeling that having a conversation with you over hot tea or coffee would prove to be endlessly fascinating.
I enjoy a good cup of coffee once in a while. I’ve honestly tried to get better about drinking more water and cutting down on caffeine but it is definitely a work in progress. I enjoy a nice green tea once in a while as well but definitely drink far less tea. :)
Question with 17 notes
Anonymous asked: I am an atheist and currently a third year at a med school in Durham, NC. I traveled to Tembe, SA this summer to assist assist in health clinics with a Christian organization. I noticed an earlier post on just praying to help those dying (which I agree is horrendous). But I guess it now irks me when other atheists seem to think Christian groups only do missions to throw bibles, when this was truly just saving lives. Are you against any Christian missions entirely, or just bible ones?
The short answer would be yes I oppose any and all “Christian” missions for one very simple reason, it can be done much easier, usually cheaper, and with a lot more integrity through secular means. I am not discounting that you likely did wonderful work but the problem is that Christianity has to be tied to it at all. If it was simply a mission of helping, giving, and taking care of people there would be absolutely no need what so ever to tie Christianity to it. I have heard too many stories in the past of people being forced to say they are Christian or recite bible verses in order to just receive help to believe that they were all lies. It is absolutely vile that these “Christian” groups go out to provide help but will only help those that fall in line with their belief system.
In many ways the entire reason that these charities wrap themselves in a Christian agenda is because their proselytizing is still top priority. Charity is simply a means to an end. They are looking to built a Christian kingdom, they want it to dominate the world. Who easier to convert than the uneducated and impoverished? They use providing help and aid as a simple in to establish camps in these areas and “spread the word”. Many times after these missionaries leave the areas are worse off than they were before the “aid” came in to help to begin with. They’re often stripped of their culture, their traditional religions, and their heritage. A quote from Desmond Tute sums it up perfectly :”When the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said ‘Let us pray.’ We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the Bible and they had the land.”
Question with 9 notes
Anonymous asked: What do you think of sudden attack on same sex marriage and homosexuals all around the world? I know Christianity etc has always been against it. But it's within this year I see a lot of attacks on homosexuals by governments. Russia, India etc. Are we as human race regressing? Is it like a thing to attack homosexuals when they can't solve real problems like hunger, economy etc? What do you think?
If you look at this history of things honestly the last few years (15-20) are almost nothing compared to what things were like closer to 75-100 years ago in most areas. The reason people are attacking the rights of homosexuals is because they can no longer attack homosexuals directly themselves. There used to be a time in the United States where it was against the law to be homosexual. They made someone’s sexuality illegal.I have a good friend who used to tell me how when she was growing up her father had to be escorted by two armed police men any time he came to the state of Indiana to visit her because he was an open homosexual and it was against the law in that state. I guess the thinking was that if he attempted to kiss a man they would be right there to arrest him or something. It was ridiculous but that was the way of the times.
I think overall we are progressing, in most areas when it comes to how homosexuals are viewed. There are certain areas of the world that seem to be working harder than ever to attack homosexuality and “stamp it out” (as if that were possible) but those areas of the world are being condemned by most. It is going to be extremely interesting to see how things play out as we get closer to the winter Olympics being held in Russia in February. Hopefully out of whatever controversy erupts something positive will emerge. I am still getting fully caught up on the situation in India and am honestly not well enough informed to even know what that whole ridiculousness stems from.
The strangest thing is if you look at ancient history in most areas of the world homosexuality wasn’t “embraced” but it was seen as no big deal. In ancient China and Japan people would take part in homosexuality and no one thought it stranger or “sinful”. Ancient Romans were also known to indulge in many homosexuals sex acts but as the power of the church and religion grew they looked to suppress it. Homosexuality prevents procreation and therefor homosexuals can’t produce an army of young soldiers of god. It may sound simplistic but that is basically what it comes down to at the root. Christianity is mainly worried about continuing and spreading their message and anything that works against that is going to be labeled as a “sin”.
Question with 7 notes
Anonymous asked: Regarding the quote, people with cancer don't choose to have cancer. But people choose to have religions so I feel like it's entirely different. It's not their fault that cancer patients have cancer but religious people don't have an excuse. Because it definitely is a choice.
It all depends on the situation. I think the amount of people that make a conscious choice in relation to their beliefs or religion is minimal. The most common way religion is passed on is through indoctrination, forcing it upon a child before they have the comprehension skills to really process what they are being given. Honest belief isn’t really a matter of simple choice for most people as it is. I couldn’t suddenly just make the choice to believe in god, at least not in any genuine way. The same really has to be said for giving up religion, giving it up is by far a much easier path in my view but it is still something that has to be built to. Most people don’t snap from being a believer one moment to a flat out Atheist the next, the transition often takes people years.
I have said many times in the past that when we boil it down religious people are the victims of religion. Religious people are the first victims of their own religion. This often spread and infects in to other areas of their life, voting in line with their religion, evangelizing to friends and neighbors (or worse, strangers), distancing themselves from non-believers or even other denominations and religions, insulting themselves in an echo chamber of reassurance on their beliefs. Even if it doesn’t cause them to do vile acts it still causes them to sell out their intellectual integrity and believe things that no person could possibly genuinely believe if it wasn’t for religion. It is harder to maintain sympathy for these victims though because they do have the power to break the chains, they hold the key to free themselves from this imposition, yet most are too afraid. I often feel a wide range of emotions when I sit and seriously reflect upon the nature of a religious mind but perhaps the one that hits me the most is simple pity.
Question with 1 note
xhaua asked: I've heard the "energy can never be destroyed, only displaced" argument before, but there are different types of energy. Don't you think that the energy that composes living matter, chemical energy, does after a time simply loses its potency, like when a battery finally "dies" as we like to say, and becomes inert? Wouldn't you agree that likewise, consciousness ends with the cessation of brain activity?
Why would you possibly think that energy would or even could “lose its potency”? There would be no good reason to think that it would and inert energy is not the same as non-existent. Even when energy isn’t actively doing anything it still exists and is still part of the whole that makes up our universe. Batteries aren’t energy themselves, they hold energy, the energy they once held is used on other things and expended but that energy still exists, the battery is merely a vessel. I have absolutely no reason to think that consciousness would continue on after death, I believe that consciousness is dependent upon our brain and physical bodies and without those what we know as “consciousness” would not be able to exist.
Question with 5 notes
fenris526 asked: I'm not saying that we don't have reason to be upset with religion---we do. But we should not forget to promote the benefits of education in addition to exposing the ills of faith. We should be pro-science, not just anti-religion. Cheers!
If you simply take a look at my blog you will see hundreds of posts dedicated to eduction, science, and furthering reason and logic. This is exactly what I have done.
Quote with 18 notes
In the course of the great Taiping rebellion, which was only crushed in 1864, the exotic “Christians” routed the Manchu trash wherever they met it, took Nanking and all the cities along the Yangtze River, and created panic in Peking. Burning Buddhist and Taoist temples, and substituting Christ for Confucius as they went along, they could almost certainly have overrun the whole country had they made up their minds to do so. Six hundred cities and towns were destroyed in the course of their crusade, and an empire that had a population of 400 million in 1850 was down to 267 million by 1862, it is said.
Question with 11 notes
the-mutant-queen asked: (☆u☆) Ar3 you also of th3 opinion that a soul is a ridiculous conc3pt ?
What most people traditionally consider to be the “soul” is an absurd concept that couldn’t possibly exist in reality. With that said though I am not as down on the possibilities of what might happen after death as many people would think. I am actually quite comfortable in stating that some form of reincarnation takes place. Obviously one of the most basic scientific concepts can be summed up as energy is never created or destroyed simply converted. We obviously have some form of energy that animates our thoughts and our bodies. That energy will never disappear, even when we’re dead, it will simply transfer in to something else.
To be clear I don’t think this energy retains any memory, it doesn’t identify itself as you and it certainly doesn’t hold your experiences and memories. It is an essential and important part of you but it is essentially entirely apathetic to “who” and “what” you are. We don’t have bodies, we are bodies. What makes us is strictly material and even if any matter of our “energy” or whatever you would like to call it survives past the physical death of our bodies there is absolutely no good reason to think that whatever that is, is us, or could be recognized as us. It simply returns to the cycle of the universe to continue on the pattern that has been repeating since the beginning of time.
Page 1 of 357