Message from @MaxKolbe
Discord ID: 488788538616315916
But theres a lib prop movement to exploit it and turn it into one.
atheism doesn't even deal with conclusions, logic and knowledge, it's simply the lack of faith
"Atheism is lack of faith BY DEFINITION" -- nobody accepts this assertion except t hose indoctrinated by the cult, sorry. Atheism is 100% faith-based, always has been always will be. The bizarre cult of New Atheism/Internet Atheism has worked har to get the rest f us to accept that "lack of belief" definition, along with their fake definition that "faith=belief without evidence.": Both are cultish lies and good reason for religious people like myself to simply avoid them.
Fortunately they're not all like that at all.
like, most christians are atheists in regards to buddhism, and do not believe in Buddha
you sound completely brainwashed
Lack of faith in any higher power
Projection.
And you are being confrontational.
Take a chill pill.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/atheism
No as in, that's literally what atheism means
turn off that pesky boulder
Enh. We don't always agree on things. [shrug] It's still true: ideological atheists like Sargon, who hate on and abuse religious people, are going to be poison for UKIP and its voters unelss Sargon changes his tune that's all.
> The bizarre cult of New Atheism/Internet Atheism
I told you above, those are just lefty propaganda, most are SJWs trying to position their flavor of "atheism" as a religion
But atheism's actual definition is a lack of belief in a higher power
what's next, you're gonna say the V-sign means two genders because someone on the internet said so?
no gods, no higher powers
>ideological atheists
fucking LEL
Its just another label adopted and turned into a movement.
THe Merriam-Webster doesn't support what you're saying, sorry, and neither do most dictionaries. Some will accept the "lack of belief" claim, but it's just a claim, and it falls apart quickly once you analyze it, which is why most serious sources, like the STanford Encyclopedia of Phiosophy, explicitly reject it (as I do).
There is a atheist movement whether or not you like it.
Its just the guise it takes the form of for now
And I bet once the hype is down it will find another host.
In any case, those of us who do not accept these claims that atheism is just "lack of belief" or "lack of faith" -- and we have no reason to accept thesee ideological assesrtions--have every right to be mistrustful of people who talk like that. That's all. If he wants UKIP support, it's gonna be an issue for him. Just a fact.
Thats what feminists did by coopting LGBT by creating LGBTQ+
ANd they did the same with atheism by making it a movement and calling it Atheism+
see, this is why the religious people lose me. They go against atheism like it's another religion and alienate everyone that could agree with them
@GingaBomber My read onit, having watched it since it started, is that y ou're right it was always a SocJus movement, at least once the Horsemen and the Internet movement moved in.
The problem is, that identifying it as a movement does not connotate a negative definition
>us
you
That you are against us, call us stupid, etc. is just reason for us to dislike you. That's ntohing personal, but just you talking that way about us is alienating and doesn't exactly make friends.
It was probably just an off color remark
No no, I get along splendidly with Buddhists, Jews, Hindus, Deists, agnostics, and atheists who aren't rude jackholes. My buddy @harmsie the gay atheist anarchist helps out a lot on our server and is one of our best volunteers. He knows how not to be a jerk. 😉
No need to get so defensive over that
you just proved my point, you can't even read the dictionary definition of Atheist. It's like feminazis in denial
Over what?
so if someone who lacks belief in any god isn't an atheist, what the fuck is such a person?
Well, we all have beef with relligion one way or another at some point.