Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Aqizzar]

That they do.  Also, holy shit, that article.  I thought it was a different one when I linked it, but it's actually some weird push-study by Baylor University, by some guy with a huge chip on his shoulder about atheists.  I'd put his analysis and commentary into question, but the actual poll results are pretty solid, I've seen the study before.

[Jackrabbit]

Yeah, anyone who basically says "Athiests are just very angry people that need to be ignored" is kind of a douche.

[ETV]

Yeah, anyone who basically says "Athiests are just very angry people that need to be ignored" is kind of a douche.

I usually ignore such people.

[Nikov]

“There was only one decline in church attendance and that was in the late 1960s,” Mr. Stark said, “when the Vatican said it was not a sin to miss Mass. They said Catholics could act like Protestants, and so they did.”

1. Become Catholic.
2. Sleep in on Sunday.
3. Quote the Pope to my wife when she gets all cross (ho-ho).
4. Profit!

[Leafsnail]

Europe does have more atheists than the U.S., the survey said, but no country has more than 7 percent except France, which is at 14 percent of the populace.

I'm pretty sure this just straightup isn't true.  Certainly, I can't find any figures as low as that for the UK.  I'd be interested to see their sampling method.

Also, almost every conclusion he draws isn't particularly supported by his evidence.  Eh.

[DJ]

IIRC Estonia is something like 70% atheist.

[Africa]

Fun fact: Judaism isn't the oldest Abrahamic religion. It's tied with Samaritanism. Nobody can really say which is older.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

IIRC Estonia is something like 70% atheist.

IIRC Sweden is 45% atheist, but also 95% identify as nonreligious.

[G-Flex]

Well, the problem I have with Wiccans is that they're some kind of batshit hippy new-age perversion of actual pagan beliefs, but that's just me.

Do you really have to be such an intolerant ass about this? Seriously, I don't think referring to people's religion as a "batshit hippy new-age perversion" is very conducive to discussion.


You're calling a religion a perversion for drawing inspiration from another, older, set of beliefs while not necessarily following them to the letter. What exactly is wrong with that? Religions change over time just like language does. You'd have to call pretty much every modern religion a "perversion" of something-or-other.

[Nikov]

There's quite a bit of fun-poking at ignrant cristuns on this forum, but if you put the shoe on another foot, hoooo boy.

[G-Flex]

I'd be saying the same thing if he had said that about Christians.

[Leafsnail]

Yeah.  If some poll showed that 95% of Swiss people are nonreligious and the person used that as basis to say...
"The irreligious people don’t care about the religious people, but the religious are prickly. I think they’re just angry (subtext: they know God doesn't exist but are just saying he does to be difficult).”
It'd still be a stupid conclusion.  Basically, there's nothing in that poll at all to suggest that atheists are angry, prickly, secretly believe in God or are ignorant or whatever.

[Dwarf]

Well, the problem I have with Wiccans is that they're some kind of batshit hippy new-age perversion of actual pagan beliefs, but that's just me.

Do you really have to be such an intolerant ass about this? Seriously, I don't think referring to people's religion as a "batshit hippy new-age perversion" is very conducive to discussion.


You're calling a religion a perversion for drawing inspiration from another, older, set of beliefs while not necessarily following them to the letter. What exactly is wrong with that? Religions change over time just like language does. You'd have to call pretty much every modern religion a "perversion" of something-or-other.

Okay, I'll agree the word "perversion" was over the top and definitely exaggerated.

I just have trouble in seeing anything else in Wicca than some religion made up completely from different, rather random parts of mythology recent and old put together into some kind of, as the name implies, neopagan conglomerate. If I shall be a bit vulgar, it just seems to me somebody pulled the whole thing out of their ass, because their belief doesn't originate in the early days of humanity, nor has it evolved from another belief.
I don't hate Wiccans or anything, but to me, it's just meh. It's built on highly questionable claims.

[Jackrabbit]

There's quite a bit of fun-poking at ignrant cristuns on this forum, but if you put the shoe on another foot, hoooo boy.

It is just fun-poking though, and there's been fun-poking at wiccans in this very thread. But I think near everyone agrees that just calling it bat-shit crazy is being an asshole, and nobody wants to deal with it.

So it's all cool, we're basically on your side, depending on how far your definition of fun-poking stretches. But I for one am most certainly not on Dwarfs. Be less of a douchebag and be more conducive to discussion. Vitriol breeds vitriol (I wouldn't have called you a douchebag otherwise, though I stand by that, cause that was hella douchey) and helps nobody. Is it so hard to express your opinion in a positive manner? Here, I'll rewrite this whole post so I do too.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

There's quite a bit of fun-poking at ignrant cristuns on this forum, but if you put the shoe on another foot, hoooo boy.

It is just fun-poking though, and there's been fun-poking at wiccans in this very thread. But I think near everyone agrees that just calling it bat-shit crazy is unnecessarily rude, and nobody wants to have to deal with it.

So it's all cool, we're basically on your side, depending on how far your definition of fun-poking stretches. But I for one am most certainly not on Dwarfs. Don't be so caustic in voicing your opinion or all you'll do is alienate people. I wouldn't have minded if you said you have trouble with Wiccan because, say,

I have trouble in seeing anything else in Wicca than some religion made up completely from different, rather random parts of mythology recent and old put together into some kind of, as the name implies, neopagan conglomerate.

That's not a bad way of putting it, it's less rude and more people are willing to discuss it with you instead of simply calling you out. Better for all sides.

But my original post stands because you made me angry by being an ass.

[Nikov]

Excessive use of the word 'you' is making me confused.

Ultimately I'm trying to say "simmer down everyone". I think Dwarf certainly put it very bluntly and I find that disrespectful but I've seen similar bluntness elsewhere. I want to avoid assigning blame and have everyone get along. I guess I can lock it if that isn't possible.