Bull$#!+ in the world.

[Industrial Miner]

You can post in this thread what you would classify as bullshit in the world.

I'll start.

Before creating this thread, I was watching on TV a documentation about the supporters in Ukrain at the UEFA European Championship, and fuck, those are fucking racist! I saw them doing the Hitler greet, they had Keltic symbols, swastikas and the police didn't do much when there was a fight. Why did UEFA choose for such a country for this ? No offence for anyone who is from Ukrain here, but man, those supporters are really terrible, freaking godless.

[hoho]

Religion in all it's forms.

It's basically a mental illness and I still can't understand why people suffering from the delusion are treated differently from other similar problems. Even worse, they are often thought being superior to non-believers. Seeing how many people are simply incapable of rational thinking and how they are often working in places with high responsibility makes me rather worried.

[The_DarthMoogle]

I was over in Ukraine a few days ago. Saw an asian guy get beaten up by his own fellow fans. Fucking mental place.

Also this

[Blank_space]

Religion in all it's forms.

It's basically a mental illness and I still can't understand why people suffering from the delusion are treated differently from other similar problems. Even worse, they are often thought being superior to non-believers. Seeing how many people are simply incapable of rational thinking and how they are often working in places with high responsibility makes me rather worried.

errk tell me about it. I know a couple of peeps who are real nice about the whole thing but other seem to have a weird chip on their shoulder about atheist like myself. still what can you do, i am just glad i don't live in the bible belt! reading /r/atheism sometime is crazy...

[HarunDanyal]

Religion in all it's forms.

It's basically a mental illness and I still can't understand why people suffering from the delusion are treated differently from other similar problems. Even worse, they are often thought being superior to non-believers. Seeing how many people are simply incapable of rational thinking and how they are often working in places with high responsibility makes me rather worried.

Similarly, someone reading over your comment could easily see the condescending tone, implying that you yourself are 'high and mighty', and superior to people who different beliefs than your own.

[Pulse95]

Religion is like a penis. It's fine to have one and it's fine to be proud of it, but please don't whip it out in public and start waving it around... and PLEASE don't try to shove it down my child's throat.

[HarunDanyal]

Religion is like a penis. It's fine to have one and it's fine to be proud of it, but please don't whip it out in public and start waving it around... and PLEASE don't try to shove it down my child's throat.

Does that only apply to people with a religion, or also to other ways of life?

[Brunswick]

Does that only apply to people with a religion, or also to other ways of life?

It should apply to absolutely everything, in my personal opinion.

[Jay?]

I dunno, i think it's particularly relevant to religion, mostly due to "i have no proof, but you should believe me anyway, and if you don't then you must be an evil creature from hell who's only purpose is to confuse and damn poor innocent religious people like myself"

Most other things, when brought up in public result in real discussions. (politics only results in real discussions at about a 50/50 basis), but religion only ever ends up being an argument between evidence and the strict refusal to acknowledge that evidence is important when assessing a worldview.

Classifying atheism as a religion is kinda like classifying sitting as an exercise routine.

[Ragnar Homsar]

reading /r/atheism sometime is crazy...

Stop. You're telling me you actually believe shit on r/atheism? That place is the definition of "shit that never happened", moreso than f7u12.

I just hate reddit in general, mostly for the amount of pedophiles and pedo apologists on there, but r/atheism stands out for different reasons.

[hoho]

Similarly, someone reading over your comment could easily see the condescending tone, implying that you yourself are 'high and mighty', and superior to people who different beliefs than your own.

So using critical thinking and scientific method instead of praising ignorance and belief without any evidence and is now "high and mighty"? If so then, yes, I guess am. If you really want to put a label to me then i'd prefer it to be anti-theist, though.

Religions in pretty much all their forms are incredibly immoral and have very bad effect on humanity in long-term. We'd be FAR better off without them.

[freakachu]

Religions in pretty much all their forms are incredibly immoral and have very bad effect on humanity in long-term. We'd be FAR better off without them.

I find it rather amusing to accuse religion of immorality from a standpoint of total atheism. immoral according to what? morals are a thing based in religion, without it there are no morals outside of whatever a given person feels is ok to do at any given time, which changes constantly.

without something to base morals on that is constant and absolute, you can have no real morals, only social acceptability. even that is a stretch.

also, you view the innumerable charities, hosptials, soup kitchens, food pantries, and other supportive organizations founded and operated by people primarily motivated by religion as not worth it? why? please do not bring up the crusades or some other trite thing.

I'd also like to note there that I'm using "religion" in the sense of belief in a higher power. there's a bit of a difference between organized religion and religious belief.

[Jay?]

Actually, religious morals are based on already preexisting morals determined by society. Remember, the majority of the religious absolutes in the bible actually tell you to do things that are TERRIBLE. For instance, if a married woman's husband dies, and she refuses to marry his brother, the town is supposed to get together and STONE HER TO DEATH.

Just the fact christians cherry pick so much of the bible is evidence of a functional (and more effective) morality outside of religious belief. In fact, i'd go so far as to say that "morality" due to a fear of punishment or desire of reward isn't even really a morality, just self preservation. The people displaying morality are the ones who seek the improvement of the world around them with no regard to belief, reward, or punishment.

[Munaus]

What i hate most in this world? Rapists (not jakj, she is ok)

Read the newspaper about a delivery guy doing his morning round, then he saw a girl in the street taking a smoke. He raped her, wut?

What goes in these men's minds when they see women?

Are there some kind of hormone that i havent got when i entered my adulthood?

I sure as hell watch girls, talk to them, flirt them, buy 'em a drink and hope the night will end with a one-night-stand.

Keyword is: Patience

But what that delivery f@ck did was cheat and skip straight to undeserved pleasure (for himself, that is)

It worries me if this would ever happen to people i know, love and care about.

IF it happens, i would drag that miserable guy to my basement and make him scream. And i would use all my skill, ingenuity and patience to make that scream last as long as humanly possible.

didnt want to creep anyone here, i just hate rapists.

[Ragnar Homsar]

What goes in these men's minds when they see women?

Are there some kind of hormone that i havent got when i entered my adulthood?

I'm no expert on psychology but I'm fairly sure most of these men have pretty severe psychological issues.

[freakachu]

Actually, religious morals are based on already preexisting morals determined by society. Remember, the majority of the religious absolutes in the bible actually tell you to do things that are TERRIBLE. For instance, if a married woman's husband dies, and she refuses to marry his brother, the town is supposed to get together and STONE HER TO DEATH.

Just the fact christians cherry pick so much of the bible is evidence of a functional (and more effective) morality outside of religious belief. In fact, i'd go so far as to say that "morality" due to a fear of punishment or desire of reward isn't even really a morality, just self preservation. The people displaying morality are the ones who seek the improvement of the world around them with no regard to belief, reward, or punishment.

this is not actually true. that is in leviticus, yes, but that is also part of the old testament. the laws set forth there were essentially made null with the new testament. that is why wives aren't being stoned and all that rot. this is not cherry picking, this is what the bible teaches.

the morals of religions, we'll go with christianity because it's the only one atheists really get up in arms about and I happen to be one, are based on god. you can't have real morals without a way to determine right from wrong, in an absolute sense. you can't get that from social norms. morals based on social norms are simply chaos, not morals.

you say the moral and therefor righteous ones are those who want to improve the world for no reason at all, but the problem is that it is you that says this. are you the ultimate arbiter of all things moral? if you say no, society is, you descend into relativism and "morality" will most likely change tomorrow. if this is the case then anything goes, literally anything from the foulest murder and oppression to the most helpful and kind acts. rome fed christians to lions as entertainment and burnt them in gardens as lamps. it was socially accepted, did that make it moral? if not, why not?

in essence, who are you to be able to determine what is and isn't moral?

as a side note, do not mistake the laws of the covenant being rewritten in the new testament for negation of the entire first half of the bible. that is not what that means.

[KakerMix]

"The Bible" is inherently broken in what it teaches anyway, since it's been translated. Start shifting words to others in sliding to a new language and hey, suddenly the original intent is muddled in the new words, different things start taking on new meanings. Bringing the Bible into some sort of moralistic debate isn't helping anything because you can't trust what man has written, especially when the whole work was written over a long-ass time and translated over and over and over again through the ages.

Morals simply don't exist. It's cool to have sex with anyone and everything back in the day in Rome, today though if you are a man and you sleep with another man OH BOY that's so naughty! Mormons around ye olde 1850s were polygamist as all hell (it was their duty!), but suddenly it doesn't fit with the modern era and they excised it really quickly, and look away and stare at their feet when you bring it up. Even today, murder is accepted depending on context (although I don't remember their being a disclaimer next to 'Thou shalt not kill') because things need to be done, and things need to be justified as to not damage society be it agnostic, religious or secular. Put yourself in a position of power and you get to decide what is moral and what is immoral, from the president, the pope, your dad or the police chief.

Given time and influence you can convince a society anything is immoral, literally anything.

[freakachu]

the argument that the bible has been mistranslated or changed over centuries of transcription is quite common. it's also not as accurate as many people think. even the oldest manuscripts end up being functionally identical to versions penned hundreds of years later. when you consider that for the jews, and later various christian monks, the transcribing of scripture was considered a sacred act, and any mistake an affront to god himself, it makes some sense that you ended up with some unparallelled accuracy. combine that with the fact that even the bible itself mentions that the scriptures are essentially divinely protected, so as to preserve god's message contained within. of course, if you don't believe in god that last part doesn't mean anything to you, but the rest certainly should.

some stuff about morals

this is exactly what I'm getting at. from the atheist perspective, this is the only logical and sensible conclusion.

as for the "thou shalt not kill", that commandment is famously misquoted. it is "thou shalt not murder", which is all together different. that is why god can commands the hebrews to go to war quite often in the old testament without being blatantly hypocritical.

it's pretty clear I'm outnumbered here, and I'm really not interested in instigating "the religion debate thread" for these forums, so I'm going to leave it at that. I was just a little tired of having my beliefs bashed and lampooned. I feel a bit better now. the regularly scheduled mocking of all religions can now resume.

[Xylord]

I guess I could just repeat it, but I really couldn't describe my line of thought batter than with this video. It is basically about how it is perfectly possible to have a moral society oriented toward the reduction of suffer in general for its citizen, while still being atheist.

It's a bit long, but definitely worth it. I'd also go watch the rest of the series. And why not the other videos of the channel.

[freakachu]

totally unrelated to the religious aspect of that video, the ideas contained in there do not lead to anything close to utopia or a reasonable society. the end result of basing everything on a rational and scientific approach to minimizing overall suffering is extreme tyranny. how else are you going to make sure suffering is minimized? euthanasia becomes a great idea, the old will only suffer in sickness and frailty anyway and they can't really do anything but be a burden to their children. according to that video, that's morally acceptable killing.

heavy regulation is required to ensure the "proper" education is given to every individual in order to make sure they can make the informed moral choices they need to make, not doing so eventually will cause far too much suffering. the persecution of anyone who does not think in a similar fashion is also easily considered correct. if you're not on the same page, you could convince others of your way of thinking and this would be extremely harmful to society. you and your lot might say or do the wrong thing at the wrong times and cause undue suffering to those around you.

the major downfall of this idea is that it relies on people to be purely reasonable and educated in absolutely everything while all agreeing on absolutely everything. good luck on ever making THAT happen.

[Xylord]

totally unrelated to the religious aspect of that video, the ideas contained in there do not lead to anything close to utopia or a reasonable society. the end result of basing everything on a rational and scientific approach to minimizing overall suffering is extreme tyranny. how else are you going to make sure suffering is minimized? euthanasia becomes a great idea, the old will only suffer in sickness and frailty anyway and they can't really do anything but be a burden to their children. according to that video, that's morally acceptable killing.

heavy regulation is required to ensure the "proper" education is given to every individual in order to make sure they can make the informed moral choices they need to make, not doing so eventually will cause far too much suffering. the persecution of anyone who does not think in a similar fashion is also easily considered correct. if you're not on the same page, you could convince others of your way of thinking and this would be extremely harmful to society. you and your lot might say or do the wrong thing at the wrong times and cause undue suffering to those around you.

the major downfall of this idea is that it relies on people to be purely reasonable and educated in absolutely everything while all agreeing on absolutely everything. good luck on ever making THAT happen.

Basically, this idea to its ultimate would create a dystopia... I can't say you're wrong, it is indeed what the final result would be. This is why balance is important in everything. If right of speech and democracy could be conserved in the process, I think it would help negate the vile effects you're talking about, such as tyranny, dehumanization, etc. However, where you're perfectly right is that this model would need a society where all, or at least a majority of the population is reasonable, which is a pretty surrealistic goal, I will admit. But, hey, we can always hope. If we compare the society of the Middle-Age, and the one now, I am sure the ratio of reasonable and educated people has been considerably improved.

[freakachu]

If we compare the society of the Middle-Age, and the one now, I am sure the ratio of reasonable and educated people has been considerably improved.

hahaha, I sincerely doubt it.

[Xylord]

hahaha, I sincerely doubt it.

Well, if we take the Middle-Age France (Might be better in Middle-Orient, but I don't know the numbers, so I won't bother). At least 96% of the population is peasants. They can't read, they can barely talk. They put their infants in bags in the house, and those sometimes survive if their parents remember to feed them. All they do all day is work in their fields and mostly starve, so they don't have any intellectual quality, but for the one kid on thousand who manage to become religious. Religious who're part of the remaining 4%, along with the nobles and the bourgeois. The nobles can rarely read, since they mostly sit on their asses and have their "mini-nobles" grab most of the possessions of the peasants. The occasional merchant, bourgeois, can count and read, but they're a ridiculously scarce. So, what's left is the religious. Ironically, back in those days, the only intellectuals, authors etc. were from the priesthood.

Now, if we take today's... U.S.A. Well, most of the people can read, and count. That's already an improvement. Also, only 40% of the population believes in creationism, compared to a flat 100% in Middle-Age (The rest got their head taken care of). Now, there certainly is a majority of unreasonable people in this country. But things improved, and I am optimistic enough to hope they will continue to do so.

But it isn't like we can really argue about those, they are boring hard facts, and I even forgot why I wrote them out. Back on topic, I really hate pennies. I don't see why there still are pennies. I mean, were pennies ever useful to anyone? Ever?

[freakachu]

Back on topic, I really hate pennies. I don't see why there still are pennies. I mean, were pennies ever useful to anyone? Ever?

there was a time, before I was born, when things like "penny candy" existed. literally candy at $0.01 a piece. such things no longer exist because inflation. yay economics!

[Xylord]

there was a time, before I was born, when things like "penny candy" existed. literally candy at $0.01 a piece. such things no longer exist because inflation. yay economics!

My dad often talks to me about the XL Pizzas for 25 cents... Now, I pay the octuple for a box of chocolate milk. I think that's what can be called Bull$#!+.