Message from @Mal
Discord ID: 463757938767560708
Obviously he's going to have a bias to Israel.
Ben also thinks like a trad theist, he's stated in the past that he thinks atheistic or agnostic people are more likely to be immoral simply because of their lack of faith<:thronk:441701565607444482>
I mean, it's not entirely unfounded. It's easier to lie to yourself than it is to lie to someone else, more or less.
When you feel like you can't steal because a god is always watching rather than if you steal and don't get caught, then you're without punishment.
Whereas if you have those types of belief systems, if you steal, caught or not, you're always caught.
So I can see the logic in that statement.
yeah ben is a cuck.<:pepe_sad:378719408345841664>
Remember, generalized statements like that based upon logic usually aren't attacks at you in particular.
it's nice how he thinks that atheists and agnostics are more likely to be immoral, despite studies that show evidence to the contrary. I wonder if he justifies this by going the Peterson route by claiming those people aren't really atheists <:pepe_smug:378719408341909506>
Agnostic folks generally aren't considered atheist. There is a reason these are two different terms.
And to be fair, and not to sound rude: there are far more pressing things to worry about and people to bitch about than someone that agrees with you on the majority of things wrong in society today, but has a bit of a religious tint to his activism.
Who said anything about them being the same, though?
Well considering what you said, about a study regarding athiests AND agnostics, and then about Peterson saying something about people not being atheist, that's the only thing I could think of to bring up that would follow the logic I see outright.
I do not recall off the top of my hat if people who said they believed in some kind of spirit or life force of the universe, were lumped in with atheists, in the studies that showed differences in moral behavior between them and religious people
Agnostics basically are indecisive, atheists are confident.
that's not the distinction I generally see
I think it'd be easier to seperate into groups those who believe in objective morality/ethics, and those who don't.
it's usually agnostic atheism vs gnostic atheism
and the people who say they believe in some kind of life force or spirit, are really just some kind of new age spiritualist
I also don't consider the majority of self-proclaimed Christians to be Christian. 70% of America identifies as Christian, and I can guarantee there aren't nearly enough Churches for that many actual Christians.
so you decide who is christian and who isn't? I generally tend to take people's word for it, if they say they're christian
is a christian someone who goes to church every week?
If you're going to be part of any religion, you don't pick and choose what to follow.
but that's what most people do
Isn't that the definition of a denomination?
Denominations come from different interpretations.
only fundamentalists who follow the word of the bible to the letter are "true" christians then?
Well if you're also not practicing your religion, it's hard to consider you part of it.
What about cultural christians?
"Cultural Christians"?
just put restrictions and regulations on all religions.
the people who believe western values are formed from a christian ideological basis
well they are.
Arguably they are.
not really, but that tends to be a longer discussion than I care for
"In God we Trust." "God-given right."
@Mal really then why aren't they.<:pepe_smug:378719408341909506>
Look at your damn money.
if you cared, you'd look it up yourself, instead of having me trying to explain it to you in a way that can only end up coming across as incredibly condescending <:pepe_smug:378719408341909506>
Obviously our western values are derived from chsritianity, or else the Muslims wouldn't be so fucked
is that a centrist typing?<:think_woke:378717098681171988>