Pre-Friday Fun Link

Jesse Walker | August 6, 2009

A funny story about a heathen's adventures at God camp.

Comments

Mad Max|8.6.09 @ 10:44PM|#

'A funny story'

Yes, I'm sure Chris Rock is trembling in his boots for fear of the competition.

And I would like to thank Timmy Reed for reminding us how insufferable atheists can be. I should know, since I used to be one myself. (used to be an atheist, I mean - I'm still insufferable, but in comparison to how insufferable I was as an atheist, my current persona is downright Mister Rogers - esque).

Lester Hunt|8.7.09 @ 12:01AM|#

I'm an atheist but I am extremely sufferable.

|8.7.09 @ 12:11AM|#

I'm an atheist and I'm kind of insufferable.

squarooticus|8.7.09 @ 1:10AM|#

I guess I'm "sufferable" in the sense that religion almost never comes up as a topic: I don't preemptively scoff at religious nuts, but I tend to avoid situations in which my atheism would be an issue.

Tositos|8.7.09 @ 1:21AM|#

I wish fun things ever happened to me in life ever.

Mike Laursen|8.7.09 @ 1:22AM|#

I should know, since I used to be one myself.

What turned you? Were you like a I'm-an-atheist-because-religion-is-irrational atheist, or an I'm-an-atheist-because-I'm-mad-at-God atheist? If the former, I'm going to guess it was a dame, because that's the only thing that makes a rational man turn all irrational. If the latter, you weren't really ever an atheist.

Mike Laursen|8.7.09 @ 1:23AM|#

By the way, I was going for moderate insufferability there.

|8.7.09 @ 1:58AM|#

That's not right Mike. *All* guys are atheists, but some pretend not to be for girls, and when that works for them, it's not irrational.

EoT|8.7.09 @ 2:44AM|#

I really didn't think that guy was so bad. He admitted his actions were youthful misbehavior, and none of his jokes were vicious or even that mean.

Honestly, people are way too sensitive about religion.

Which makes them so deliciously easy to troll....

纯水设备|8.7.09 @ 3:09AM|#

I'll say!

|8.7.09 @ 6:33AM|#

I'm an Agnostic, which means there's a slight chance that I'm not insufferable, but in all likelihood I am.

Zoe at that camp|8.7.09 @ 6:40AM|#

Suffer the little atheists to come to me.

Elliott|8.7.09 @ 7:28AM|#

If theists are irrational, are not atheists? Unless one's atheism is coupled with agnosticism - that is, agnostic atheism - but I'd assume most atheists AND theists are also agnostic. (Few people are arrogant enough to claim they 'know.')

At any rate, libertarians are usually rational. But I guess a person can be rational in one respect and irrational in another... to a point.

Art-P.O.G.|8.7.09 @ 7:31AM|#

But I guess a person can be rational in one respect and irrational in another... to a point.

Not really a guess, more of an axiom. Some people are more rational than others, but I've seen little evidence of a completely rational person. I don't even know if being completely rational would be a good thing.

|8.7.09 @ 7:37AM|#

Wow, you go boi! I like it!

RT
www.anon-web-tools.net.tc

|8.7.09 @ 7:41AM|#

That's not right Mike. *All* guys are atheists, but some pretend not to be for girls

I've often thought that religion is a priviledge of comfort for the weaker sex.

ktc2|8.7.09 @ 7:42AM|#

Elliott,

So, is it arrogant to claim "to know" there is no Zeus or Odin as well?

ktc2|8.7.09 @ 7:45AM|#

Domoarrigato,

And yet oddly, few things in this world are more anti-woman than the major monotheistic religions.

Kind of reminds me of this quote:

"It's interesting to speculate how it developed that in two of the most anti-feminist institutions, the church and the law court, the men are wearing the dresses." - Flo Kennedy -

|8.7.09 @ 7:45AM|#

Mad Max | August 6, 2009, 10:44pm | #

... I mean - I'm still insufferable

Repeated for posterity

|8.7.09 @ 7:47AM|#

And yet oddly, few things in this world are more anti-woman than the major monotheistic religions.

odd that a force that deeply captures the imagination of women is used by non-believeing a-hole men to subjugate them? not really.

Elliott|8.7.09 @ 8:07AM|#

So, is it arrogant to claim "to know" there is no Zeus or Odin as well?

No, that's rational. But I don't understand the comparison of God to the Flying Spaghetti Monster (and things of that nature). The concept of God (and really anything beyond cognition) is too expansive and abstract for that comparison to work.

And sure, that's why I don't want religions having holds on government, but I'm not fond of government in any incarnation.

Elliott|8.7.09 @ 8:20AM|#

Shucks, I forgot to put a winking smiley after "No, that's rational." If you would pretend it's there, I'd appreciate that.

Elliott|8.7.09 @ 8:26AM|#

I forgot the winking smiley again. I've noticed the absence of the winking smiley often causes others to misunderstand my messages - which is to say, I'm a bad writer.

<strike>strike through</strike|8.7.09 @ 8:41AM|#

We're all born atheists. Then the brainwashing begins.

ktc2|8.7.09 @ 8:42AM|#

If the evidence for the existance of the xtian god, the Norse god and the Greek god are all roughly equivalent (i.e. there is no scientific evidence for any of them), than why is it rational to completely reject the existance later two but not the first?

ktc2|8.7.09 @ 8:43AM|#

"Later" and "first" as in order of occurrence in my sentence, not in history obviously.

Spoonman|8.7.09 @ 9:00AM|#

Oh, fuck this thread.

Doctor Duck|8.7.09 @ 9:04AM|#

The only 'rational' atheism is apatheism

If you just ignore all that shit, how can you be insufferable?

|8.7.09 @ 9:16AM|#

ktc2,

The one problem with that is that we lack knowledge and, probably, the capacity to assess whether there's any sort of deity. That line of reasoning is more effective if you're attacking one religion (because the lack of proof supporting each works against all of them) but not against theism in general.

Elliott|8.7.09 @ 10:10AM|#

If the evidence for the existance of the xtian god, the Norse god and the Greek god are all roughly equivalent (i.e. there is no scientific evidence for any of them), than why is it rational to completely reject the existance later two but not the first?

That doesn't make them equal, even roughly. It just groups them together.

That's beside the point. Theism does not equal any of them. If theism equals Christianity as well as, say, Islam, then Christianity would equal Islam.

My point is, the antiquated stories of God killing firstborns and talking to humans is absurd, sure, but why reject ideas entirely? I said it's rational not to believe in the existence of Zeus or Odin, and you extended that statement to mean that I think it's rational to believe in the Christian god.

|8.7.09 @ 10:31AM|#

We're all born atheists agnostic. Then the brainwashing begins.

|8.7.09 @ 10:32AM|#

Militant agnosticism.

|8.7.09 @ 11:44AM|#

It's anecdotal, but it seems most of the theists I know claim to know that God exists with more certainty than I'm willing to claim that I know Obama exists. Many of them even claim to know that, deep-down, I believe that God exists too, but I'm just denying it for some reason. But most atheists I know are "soft" atheists who lack belief in God but don't deny God in absolute terms. Even Dawkins believes that there "almost certainly is no God."

In most dictionaries, atheism can be defined as a lack of a belief in God, but not necessarily an active disbelief, so, in some sense of the word, all agnostics, who neither believe, nor disbelieve, are atheists because they lack a positive belief in a god. But theism is defined more-or-less strictly as a belief in a God. So I don't really see how a theist can also be an agnostic except through inconsistency. Maybe part of a person believes, but another part doubts?

And how is another god more expansive and abstract than the Spaghetti Monster?

Mike Laursen|8.7.09 @ 12:12PM|#

If theists are irrational, are not atheists?

As far as I'm concerned, people who don't believe in any of the traditional god-based religions and call themselves agnostics are just being wishy-washy. That includes those who have vague new age beliefs that there may be like some kind of universal energy thing, that's like, you know, the traditional concept of god. If a Baptist or a Catholic secretly snickers at your vaguely-defined, non-committal religious beliefs, you're are, for all practical purposes, an atheist.

Mike Laursen|8.7.09 @ 12:13PM|#

The only 'rational' atheism is apatheism

Never heard that word before. Thanks for introducing it to me.

Mike Laursen|8.7.09 @ 12:21PM|#

And how is another god more expansive and abstract than the Spaghetti Monster?

To be honest, I find your Flying Spaghetti Monster beliefs to be absurd.

twv|8.7.09 @ 1:55PM|#

One Friday every month I shed a tear for all the dead gods. They used to romp and cavort and plot and scheme and go about their celestial roles, keeping the universe together, allowing humanity to find some relief from finitude.

But then came monotheism. It started out as a "public option," but, well, you know.