Infinite Possibilities-- Limited Probabilities

But have you noticed that atheists only seem to target people who ought to be able to defend their viewpoints? All the atheist propaganda (for lack of a better word) that I’ve seen has been targeted at adults or teenagers who are old enough to think for themselves. When atheists “force their atheism” on people, it’s usually an individual viewpoint pitted against another individual viewpoint. If this was the only way that religion was forced on me, I would welcome it quite honestly, because I love debate. But that isn’t how religion works.

Obviously Christians indoctrinate their children (yes, I’m focusing on Christianity because that’s what’s around me right now). I have yet to see an atheist parent indoctrinate their child into atheism and I don’t know how that would be accomplished anyway. It seems like if you just don’t force a religion on a child and generally encourage curiosity and skepticism, the child will probably end up an atheist. And even if they don’t stay an atheist, I have yet to hear about someone being outcast from their non-religious family for converting to a religion, whereas I hear a lot about atheists having serious problems with their religious families.

Also, remember that outrage when that one sociologist said that atheism was a form of autism? Well, looking into that story further, he had this whole plot to introduce autistic people to God. You also see Christianity targeting depressed people a lot as well. Do you see atheists trying to deconvert people who are delusional out of legitimate insanity? No. 

And as a final point (though there are plenty more that I could talk about but I’m going to skip over them for now), there are plenty of instances of Christians trying to force their religious laws and practices on other people through the law. Do you see atheists trying to ban religion through the law? No. You may see atheists trying to get religion out of the government, but you don’t see atheists trying to turn the government against religion. 

hearmerorey:

People really need to learn the difference between atheism, agnosticism, and being nonreligious. I’m so sick of people calling me a ‘stupid atheist’ or a ‘clueless agnostic’. Atheism mean you have no belief in any god. Agnosticism means you’re doubtful on the fact whether or not a god exists. Nonreligious means you do not affiliate with any religion nor to you take part in any belief.

I am not religious. I don’t give a crap about anyone’s religion. The only reason I’m so against Christianity/Catholicism though it solely because several of its followers have tried shoving their religion down my throat and making me believe.

Seriously, if people are going to make fun of my aspect of religion and my choice to avoid it, at least make fun of what I actually am. Making fun of me for what I’m not just make you sound like an ass!

Agnosticism doesn’t just mean you’re doubtful about whether or not there’s a god, it goes farther and says that it can’t be known whether or not there is a god. 

Of course, plenty of people call themselves agnostic without actually knowing what agnosticism is. 

Also, it should be clarified that agnosticism, atheism, and being non-religious are not mutually exclusive. You can be all at once or whatever. 

Shit

TheAmazingAtheist is on Tumblr now?

quidditchplayersturnmeon:

…contrary to popular belief, America was not actually founded by people hoping to escape religious persecution. It was actually founded by protestants that wanted to create a country where they could persecute as much as they wanted to, it wasn’t about religious freedom at all, it was just that the original pilgrims saw the inability to persecute as them being persecuted themselves.

So kinda like the anti-gay, anti-atheist, anti-muslim, anti-semitic or pro-life christians today, it’s both sad and fascinating how little some things change.

The pilgrims yes, but that’s just Massachusetts and over a hundred years before the founding. When people talk about the founding, they’re usually referring to the founding fathers, the revolutionary war, and, most importantly, the bill of rights, all of this happening significantly after the pilgrims. The first amendment has stated that “congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion.” That’s freedom of religion right there. That’s stated directly in a founding document. So yeah, a over hundred years before the founding it was like that, but after the founding it wasn’t supposed to be.

isdesiderium:

think-question-everything:

isdesiderium:

you know what just leave the religious people alone, let them do their faith thing. don’t tell them their beliefs are wrong because guess what nobody’s belief system is wrong if they like it ok now don’t be a fucknut

Do I get to tell them off when they come at me with a Bible and still keep talking about Jesus after I politely tell them I’m not interested and no matter how many times I say ‘no thanks’ they continue to follow me and try to hand me pamphlets and even try to block me from getting to the car? Because that happens, and I won’t respect that.

it’s still very rude and ignorant to tell them their beliefs are wrong. by doing so, you’re going down to the level of militant christians that tell everyone who isn’t christian they are wrong and will rot in hell. a christian pestering you with pamphlets is nothing like that.

So, first off, some belief systems have to be wrong because there are a lot of mutually exclusive belief systems, so they can’t all be right because that would be a contradiction, therefore some have to be wrong. 

I actually think it’s more wrong not to tell people when they’re wrong. If I was going around saying that the sun revolved around the earth, I would prefer for someone to tell me I was wrong than for them to let me go around being wrong for the sake of respecting my beliefs. Of course, just flat out telling people they’re wrong is annoying, you should explain why. 

Furthermore, debate is a great way to generate information and to learn about other people’s perspectives. In an ideal situation, both sides should learn from it and both sides should be open to change if they’re proven wrong.

You think you’re upset about people being ignorant. Ignorance is a lack of knowledge. By telling people that they can’t say certain things, you’re cutting off a source of information and knowledge thereby promoting ignorance. Honestly, how do you expect people to learn if they can’t be told when they’re wrong?

That odd moment when a friend of mine, who I know is an atheist, posts a status on facebook about how it’s his four year anniversary with his girlfriend and someone comments “we pray for God’s Richest Blessing on you!!!!!!”

What even is “God’s Richest Blessing?” The answer that makes the most sense is happiness. But if that were the case, why wouldn’t they say it directly? They could be trying to subtly push them towards marriage, but my friend is only twenty, so that would be odd too (although he’s planning on proposing to her in the next year anyway (this is a secret that I’m only posting here because my irl friends who follow this blog don’t know either of them)). It really sounds like a euphemism telling them to have babies but, as I said, both of them are young and they aren’t married yet.

Christianisms baffle me.

throbinhood:

my most prized possession is a holographic image of jesus that i have

where he blinks when you move him

and if you angle it right he’ll wink

oohhhh jesus you saucy devil you