Thanks to political shift, probably.

The left turns against anti-theism because as anti-theists they would need to be anti-Islam and "das rayciss".

<:pot_of_kek:544849795433496586>

And the right turns against anti-theism because their political allies are religious and don't want to offend them.

There is more to it than just that.

There's a lot to it, obviously.

But I think anti-theism is still needed, especially because of Islam.

But even atheists hate anti-theism. All the fedora memes were atheistic inside joking, then turned to self-hatred and now already Christian weapon against atheists.

The left turns against anti-theists because they'd be against Islam, yes so far so true. But not because that's racist (the left uses "racist" not honestly but to defame the target). The honest reason as to why the left defends Islam is because Islam is anti-capitalist, and so is the left. Muslims are a guaranteed ally on that regard culturally speaking, or a guaranteed voter politically speaking.

So the left turns against anti-theists because the left is anti-capitalist, and they can't attack another anti-capitalist ideology. So instead they attack anti-theists.

The enemy of my ally is my enemy

Basically

Well, shouldn't conservatives become more tolerant toward anti-theism as a response?

Anti-theism doesn't provide meaning nor is it capable of anything else but deconstructing the grand meta-narratives that unify us. While there is a place for defying the extreme dogmatism amongst certain theist groups, there is such a thing as being militant and harassing people you'll never convince of anything.

Being anti-islam is fine, though. Anyone with a proper christian moral fiber would realize it has problems.

Depends on what you mean by "conserative"

Depends on the anti-theist and depends on the political group around the anti-theist, whom he or she wants to associate with.

I think anti-theism is just unhealthy

I'm an agnostic/atheist, not anti-theist

It saves time, effort, energy, I don't feel angry all the time

It's bad to feel angry all the time, I know because I've been through that

Well yeah, actual practice will actually get you shot. To be anti-theist is the same to being anti-social. You will actively stop people from performing those acts.

I used to be anti-theist

Why be anti-anti-theism if you are not anti-anti-SJW as well?

Never confuse the 'a' prefix for the 'anti' prefix

I'm not anti-anti-theism, I'm just not anti-theist myself

I'm anti-theist in a tangent sense of being misanthropic.

I've actually been distancing myself from anti-SJW's as well

I don't follow most of the channels anymore that keep speaking about it

It's unhealthy if it goes on for too long

We haven't made progress, it's time to change tactics

Thing is, there has been made a lot of progress.

Yeah ok sure

I guess maybe it's just diminished too much, is what I mean

The return of investment is low now

A lack of progress made so far would be far more harmful if we didn't point out the power they had.

I just believe it's time to start unifying on common ground again

Well. Using the anti-sjw angle to get at having a different moral foundation from the norm that created the sjws is a good way to go.

That's why atheists and Christians have been meeting in the middle, they don't want to be angry at people all the time

Considering human behavior and history, that would require a war

So instead they work on shaking hands

@ETBrooD And what is that common ground to unify around?

The preservation of the west against the radical destruction from communism and similar ideologies like Islam

Space exploration used to be a great unifier, and should still be. But nowadays we seem perfectly happy to burn up with our rock.

The excessively faith-demonstrating christians might be obnoxious, but at least they conform to a moral foundation that you share with them in no small part.

@ETBrooD How do you defend yourself against Islam in USA with it's 1st Amendment?

As opposed to communists and moslems.

The information war

Information war is OK to me.

Just spread the truth about Islam is good.

But that is anti-theistic.

No it's anti-Islam

I'm not spreading anything against Christianity

It is anti-theistic in a sense, but specifically only against Islam.

I would, they don't seem to give a fuck about Jesus that much nowadays

Christianity is a smaller evil, but it does no more harm than good.

I agree somewhat yeah

Well they aren't as much of a military influence anymore

While general anti-theism is just a bunch of passive-aggressive fedora-tippers being assmad about people having something bigger that gives them meaning.

Stem cell research, civil liberties, and them being around you cannot mock Islam either without being hypocritical.

Agreed @Zakhan

This is more relevant to Europe with hatespeech laws and even blasphemy laws (protected by conservatives as well, despite anti-Islamic speech being primary target).

Conservatives are shielding anti-Islamic information war.

My anti-theistic stance is simply: Hey you dumb fucks. There will be hundreds of more lifetimes past yours, and at some point, the planet upon which we stand is gonna be fucked, so stop bitching about your hopeful afterlife, and get to work on fixing the issue of the fact that we're all gonna die.

Because they want to keep the blasphemy laws in the law book to protect Christian sensibilities.

This actually concerned me personally, because I realized I had little meaning in life besides friends and close family (although that is pretty decent). So I decided to find my own meaning in life where I don't see objective meaning, hence I'm an absurdist

I do think Christianity is shielding Islam from critique.

In a sort of existentialist sense?

Yeah

Depends on where you are, whiic.

Laws written to protect Christinity are used to protect Islam from being exposed.

Even writing about what's written in Qu'ran and Hadith's to expose it, is a crime in Finland.

Some countries have shit like that and some countries don't.

Also, the state church has toyed with the idea of functioning as sanctuary for deportees. Imagine why I'm fucking anti-theist, incl. anti-Christian.

These are institutions doing bad shit and inspiring bad shit.

Imagine having a state religion for starters.

Well, Britons have that too.

I've seen footage of police raides on churches that hide illegal immigrants, which of course right now mostly includes Muslim immigrants.

Even in modern day, religious institutions like churches still hold too much sway out of favor of older laws.

They get to ignore new laws in some circumstances

@ETBrooD Did they raid actual churches or mosques?

And still "deus vult" is solution, when Christians **are the problem to begin with**?

Churches

They are not the source problem. Humanity is always going to be the source problem.

Our nature is an issue of source, but there's no fixing that

I can sympathize with the misanthropic take on the issue.

We've repeated our history for over 10,000 years in terms of society

I can't find the footage, should've saved it, but it was years ago. Church raids are happening though, so the churches are acting against the government, proving that some of them think the immigration laws are against their faith.
I found one article that shows these raids are happening even in some European countries.
https://www.savemysweden.com/police-raid-the-church-of-sweden-for-illegal-muslim-immigrants/

Some Christians believe that no man should be stopped from travelling across a border, I don't know the exact justification for that though since I don't care to read the bible, but I could ask my father who is quite a knowledgable Christian.

I think it's the sanctity of life argument, but that seems like a stretch

Must be something else

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/markdroberts/series/illegal-immigration-seeking-a-christian-perspective/

Well I guess the only real conclusion is that Christianity itself is neither for nor against illegal immigrants, it depends on the individual's interpretation of the Bible. Maybe one side is in fact correct and the other is not, but currently there is no consensus. So we can't really say Christians are either allies or enemies in the fight against Islam.

Except that the side that is an "ally" in fight agaisnt Islam is also in fight against atheism, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.

So it's either slay the unbeliever, or not.

And if not, they are pro-Islam because they worship the **same God**.

So, as an atheist, Christianity is a problem either way: either they ally with Islam and provide them a shield from critique (whether by blasphemy law or by soft tyranny of social acceptance)... or they want me dead.

Either way, Christinity is my enemy.

(I don't say it's equal enemy to Islam. Islam is priority.)

Christianity is not pro-Islam just because they share their God worship

The sacred text, i.e. Bible and Quran, are fundamentally different

I didn't say Christianity is pro-Islam. I said, in cases when they are anti-Islam, they tend to be anti-atheism.

And when I'm their enemy... I'm sorry: they are also my enemy,.

**I'm not a cuck like you.**

I'm not sure who's the greater enemy for Christians, Islam or atheists

How so?

It wouldn't surprise me if Islam was a greater threat to them, because most atheists are agnostics, not anti-theists

Islam on the other hand is straight up anti-Christianity

I don't even know why you even need to ask that. Atheists aren't suicide-bombing people, throwing them off buildings, whipping them, or hanging them--solely because they're gay.

Even agnostic atheists can be anti-theists.

I know, but most atheists or agnostic atheists are not anti-theists

Gnosticism is ridiculous to begin with. You cannot know of supernatural, by definition.

Hence gnostic atheists and gnostic Christians claim to know what they cannot perceive.

The point is, atheists by and large aren't out to destroy Christianity, they typically have a live and let live mentality

Islam is out to destroy Christianity without any shred of a doubt

Islam accepts jizya.

What Islam says and what Islam does is fundamentally not the same

https://youtu.be/5LO6yUgutzQ

Where as Islam decapitates atheists without exception. Jizya tax option is only offered to People of the Book (Christians and even Jews).

"Plague-Chan is flat... Just like the heartbeat of her lovers"

Atheist are dead meat under Islam.

https://youtu.be/C_ijc7A5oAc

Are you ready, brothers?

Plague-chan ❤

Atheists can pretend to be Christians, Christians cannot pretend to be atheists, so atheists have a lot less to be afraid of

I was part of the original Ebola-chan cult.

I've sacrifapped so much to get rid of Africa.

We did make Ebola into sexually transmitted disease, so while we failed to make her reach New Delhi, it wasn't a total failure.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX0v83qSSSo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4N7GdeB9O4c

"Liberal" "Sanity"

I don't need to click it. I know enough of the username.

It is everything except what it claims to be.

I don't like to quote Molyneux but

Not an argument

Oh. It's collab with David Shitrat.

Spineless saurus.

People who defended that Soph kid are just complete weirdos, idiots, or useful idiots

Are you taking Spino seriously, after all quote-mining and misrepresenting he has done?

I've seen Soph's content

She's a child, she's poorly informed, and she should not be taken seriously

Well, Spino claims he knows what got Soph banned. How does Spino know that?

Even the banned person doesn't get a reason.

How does Spino know?

We talking about Spinosaurus?

Well, "Liberal" "Sanity" collabed with him **in that video you linked.**

I didn't link it

I'm watching it rn

Oh, sorry. It wasn't you but Classy Liberal.

Imo 14 year olds shouldn't be allowed to talk about politics on a public platform

We lost our sanity if we did let them

They should be talking *about* politics in private, in schools, etc.

That's not the argument of "Liberal" "Sanity" or Shitrat.

I know

I'm more radical than he is

Their argument is "Lauren Chen Is A Nazi Apologist Hack".

I think she's a Nazi AND she's a stupid child who deserved to be banned just for talking politics on Youtube

if they talk about politics in public it could help them have a better understanding

Remember when Shitrat fucked over Kraut and his Gay OP, by accidentally putting the *undoctored* version of the same screenshot of Ralph's discord they edited into one of his videos?

Children talking about politics in public is wrong

Let them ask questions, not express their own opinion

i mean

soph doesnt even come close to nazi

Or was that JF's discord? I forget, they've targeted so many people.

and if you're able to express your opinions you can find out how you are wrong

They're children, they need to be protected from themselves

Soph is a chan-tard to me.

I don't take young kiddos seriously.

Doubly so if they spout chan speak.

Well then you're one of the sane people

I **don't** call kiddos who know nothing of the word "nazis".

But thousands, if not perhaps hundreds of thousands, apparently thought Soph was talking sense, and they worshipped her

That video calls her nazi.

I loved her video on (((Boomers)))
Hilarious.

See, this is what happens though

A 14 y/o gets called a Nazi

I don't want to live in such a society

that's on the people calling her a nazi

No, it's on us not stopping her from opening her mouth on Youtube over politics

most adults have a child's understanding of politics

If we adults don't stop her, we're at fault

if we stop her how can she learn

it's ultimately up to her parents

She can learn in private, in school

politics aren't really taught in school

>believing school actually teaches anyone the truth about politics

and parents usually try to force politics on kids

she's finding out what she believes organically

"Organically"

If you take Spino seriously when he (and "Liberal" "Sanity") calls Soph "nazi", and her being kicked off Youtube justified, then take it as a fact that any deplatforming suffered by Sargon is **also justified** (by the same people): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96nluWQHQN0

and people are telling her she's wrong and hopefully, how she's wrong

You'd defend organic food even if it poisons you?

wat

You're saying it's an organic learning process, and therefore it's good

organic as in no one's forcing their ideas upon her

Yeah

And that's your defense?

organic food=/= organic process

Just because she wasn't forced into it, it's good?

i mean this is baby shit my dude

legitimate criticisms
she is a child
she is female
ergo, it's not responsible for her father to allow her to publicly discuss politics, even if she sincerely believes them, or organically arrived at this position

it's better

It's still shit, so no

in defense
it's absolutely hilarious

it's more likely she will reach a better conclusion politically if she can figure things out for herself rather than be brainwashed by moral busybodies

If I caught my kids talking politics in a Youtube video I'd ban them for a whole year

From Youtube

ok but you're sure as shit not gonna ban my kids

I should though

no you shouldn't

Hell yeah I should

the state should not be involved in kids being raised beyond preventing blatant abuse

Youtube is not raising kids

"it's a private company they can do what they want"

Wrong

bitchute's fine with her

Yeah then fuck bitchute, too

ok so you want the government involved then

Yes absolutely

>

My nephew suddenly started talking with people online that the Middle East is only ever a warring hotbed now because of US influence ever since my sister remarried. I had to call him out on it. Kids are far too stupid and easily-influenced for politics.

*depends on the child intensifies*

depends on the parents

Youtube is literally raising kids. See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDDmBN2qD7o

Whatever, you know what I mean <:DrinkBleach:590859953225334794>

where do we draw the line in how government can decide what kids can do in this way

Simple

So, they should have shut down all the Parkland kids from talking about politics, too, then.

Kids can't vote -> kids don't talk politics in public

that's pretty fuckin authoritarian

Kids can very much talk politics all they want. They just can't vote, because they're clearly too stupid to make a self-determined opinion

Youtube doesn't count as in public lol

Yeah it is authoritarian

@ETBrooD So... Parkland?

Welcome to the world of kids, where we protect them

Insane, right?

"we need to protect them from themselves"

Yes, we do

how is it even harm

Kids are stupid, dumb, idiotic, fucking stupid

ok

They need our protection

I agree that it's entirely on the parents to make sure the kids don't get brainwashed, and don't in turn brainwash the kids themselves.

let them be

kids learn by being stupid

We can let kids be stupid

At home, in the backyard, in schools

mistakes give you experience

@whiic
>Finger Family
NO NO NO NO NO FUCK NO

Schools are in public

>"only in prescribed circumstances and locations"