Infected Euphoric atheists

[Hyperion]

I really don't see this kind of fervor from atheists who were brought up in secular families.

I grew up in a born again home and my parents were still pretty cool with it. They were pretty sure that my atheism was just an edgy phase since I was 13.

Anyway I'm 30 now. Still an atheist.

It's also sad that Atheism = trying to be edgy

 

[Dudeofteenage]

Honestly this thread is all over the place. All of the following types of behaviour are being called out here, including:

1: Atheists who believe they're smarter than religious people
2: Atheists who can't stop talking about how they're atheists
3: Atheists refusing to participate in religious rituals
4: Atheists believing their beliefs are more correct than other people's beliefs
5: Atheists being atheists and not agnostics or antitheists

 

[kuniqs]

How can you make fun of people believing on fate alone when there isn't yet a proven theory of how the universe came to be? There isn't even a proof that there are no alien beings in the world who are so advanced they are, for practical purposes, gods.

 

[SteelPlatedHeart]

How can you make fun of people believing on fate alone when there isn't yet a proven theory of how the universe came to be? There isn't even a proof that there are no alien beings in the world who are so advanced they are, for practical purposes, gods.

Because some people are douchebag who are desperate for something to boost their egos so they can act smug towards everyone else.

 

[TheImportantFart]

I was considering making a thread for this guy but I don't think he's big enough to warrant it and now this thread exists there's no need. I don't know if anyone's come across him before but he's a yet another YouTube atheist who seems to believe that uploading videos of other atheists makes him some kind of towering intellect.

https://www.youtube.com/user/conraddeath123/featured

However, the real hilarity comes with the titles he gives his videos. I don't think I've ever seen a more ridiculous collection of titles. This guy actually seems to get off on watching atheists lay the smackdown on religious people. Here's a quick sampling of the greatest hits:

And, the one he's probably received the most hate over:

He actually changed the title of the last one from "destroy filthy religious scum" to "demolish stupid religious scum" after being called out on it but what's the difference really?

To be fair, a lot of the people in the videos he uploads are nutters but he's said in the comments section of his videos that he hates all religious people calling them "dirty bastards". Say what you will about CultofDusty but at least he made this video:

When getting into arguments with people in the comments section, this guy's strategy is to call his opponent either "scum" or "idiot" and leave it at that. Real persuasive stuff. And to cap everything off this guy doesn't even properly watch the videos he uploads before giving them his ridiculous titles. Take this one for example:

There was an earlier part of the video which he either cut off or didn't bother to look for where the guy said he was actually an atheist and therefore not the "cultist scumbag" the title suggests. He also seems to be a bit of an anglophile, assuming he's not British himself.

As an atheist I have to say people like this are doing far more harm than good for the cause they so fervently champion.

 

[BF 388]

Hello all, just stopping by to say hello.

 

[CatParty]

Honestly this thread is all over the place. All of the following types of behaviour are being called out here, including:

1: Atheists who believe they're smarter than religious people
2: Atheists who can't stop talking about how they're atheists
3: Atheists refusing to participate in religious rituals
4: Atheists believing their beliefs are more correct than other people's beliefs
5: Atheists being atheists and not agnostics or antitheists

basically all atheists are lolcows.

 

[Positron]

Success? What did he succeed at? Wasting the Library staff's time and giving them more work? Because that's all I saw.

Succeeded in making a fail of himself: his moniker "The Religious Anatagonist" implies he is religious, when he should have called himself "The Religion Anatagonist" instead.

This fucker should've spent more time in a library - actually reading books instead of fucking around and making himself a nuisance.

 

[BriarHeart]

For all the peeps in this thread defining "agnostic" as "don't know, don't care," I think a better term for that is apatheism (which is also more fun to say).

As for the more "euphoric" atheists, they're hella lulzy to be sure, but I also see where they're coming from in a way that I think most people don't. Atheists who were raised in more kum-by-yah, love-thy-neighbor religious communities often don't realize the extent to which religion can be used to control and punish people, just like in a cult. And a lot of times, if not the majority, this type of vitriol is the by-product of escaping from (and coping with) a lifetime of abuse. Physical, emotional, religious, you name it. For their entire lives, the concept of god and religion was used as a club to beat them into submission until they were too hurt and afraid to step out of line anymore.

Breaking free of that cultic mindset is incredibly difficult and painful, and can also result in people losing their family, friends, children, sometimes their job, pretty much their entire lives. That kind of pain and loss triggers a wellspring of anger as they grieve for their losses, and a lot of that anger is directed at the concepts used to hurt them, as well as at the types of people who wield it as such. Take a look at some of the stories from Homeschoolers Anonymous, and you'll get a better idea of what I mean.

TL;DR - A lot of "angry atheists" are hurting and grieving after escaping abusive families and situations. Give them a few years and they'll probably get over it. If they're doing it professionally, however, chances are they're just dicks.

 

[ASoulMan]

These guys are pretty funny and ironic, as they can act just as dogmatic as any religious fundie out there. But I can understand the hatred though if it came from a really bad experience. A friend of mine once had a professor who hated religion because she had an abusive Catholic father (and my friend talked about this in church mind you). If they're hating religion just to be edgy rather than because of more legit reasons such as a scientific view on life, then it's just stupid.

Not that this really matters to me. Despite having gone to church at times, I'm at most religiously ambiguous.

 

[supdup]

To the person rating us "off topic."
We're just giving examples of Militiant Athiests who DID kill people.
they could be historical lolcows.

One problem though, none of those people killed in the name of atheism, they killed for socio/political reasons. This argument is like if a murderer was a plumber, you claim that he murdered for plumbing.

 

[Tomboy]

Yeah, the neckbeard MLP types are facepalm-worthy, but like others have said, I can understand where "angry atheists" come from. I guess sometimes even I get a bit venomous towards religion. I'm atheist and was raised catholic for a while. But since my parents weren't super religious and stopped going to church when I was around 11 (when they found out about the pedophile priests), I didn't experience religious abuse like a lot of other people have. I have a sort of anger towards religion being a gay person more than being atheist, and I do not respect religion itself, but I try hard to respect the right of people to have a religion. It's difficult, especially when they tell you you're "inappropriate, need to be fixed, don't deserve rights, going to burn for all eternity, ect." It's a pretty nasty thing to say to someone and it's a lot harder to listen to when those people are family.

I listen to the Thinking Atheist podcast while at work sometimes and it's very informative. A lot of people call in to tell their stories of growing up in religious abuse which can either be physical, emotional, or manipulative. Some parents completely disowned their children over it much like they disown gay/trans children. I also listened to the Atheist Experience but it's harder to listen to while working...they let more theists call in and a lot of them troll or call to be annoying.

 

[Abethedemon]

 

[creamyfanta]

I REALLY don't want to get into this but the word Agnostic has been bastardized from it's original meaning quite a lot.

The term "agnostic" is not a position, it's a world view. The term states "I think knowing if the supernatural exists is unknown".

The problem is that it's not specific to a God. You can be a Christian and be agnostic toward Big Foot. Or be an Athiest and be agnostic toward dieties. It's why there's an expression called an "Agnostic Atheist" who does not believe in God but thinks knowing if he exists is unknown. By this line of logic almost every Atheist is an Agnostic. There are also agnostic theists who believe in a God but also think knowing if he actually exists is not knowable.

The point I'm trying to make is you either believe there is one or you do not. Saying "I don't know" isn't called being agnostic it's called being on the fence. "going through my athiest phase" is not a valid statement because the only way to not be an atheist is to become a theist. This is similar to saying "I went through my heterosexual phase. But now I'm more of a sexually curious person" when the latter statement doesn't reject the former.

tl;dr both terms are not mutually exclusive.

Thank you!!!

These terms are akin to how now a fedora is a Trilby and a Trilby is nothing.

 

[Arctic]

This is why we should have a fedora rating. Not a top hat. A real fedora.

The Armoured Skeptic, which some people actually already mentioned, actually has a video outlining his life story and how he became disillusioned with both religion and "euphoric atheism." It's rather insightful and helps you understand where he comes from as a "skeptic."

Love his take on FreeThoughtBlogs XD. For those of you who don't know, it's basically a combination of Atheism and Tumblr-style social justice.

 

[Henry Bemis]

How are you gonna start a thread about euphoric atheists without posting the source?

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/in-this-moment-i-am-euphoric

One might say he can feel the cosmos.

 

[ChuckSlaughter]

nor is refusing to say grace some form of rebellion. That's just childish.

For some children it's probably a legitimate form of rebellion against their nutball parents but after you move out of their house it's different.

How are you gonna start a thread about euphoric atheists without posting the source?

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/in-this-moment-i-am-euphoric

Did this man actually make that graphic himself? He dressed this way as a joke right? Fuck it's too ridiculous to be real

 

[Marvin]

I REALLY don't want to get into this but the word Agnostic has been bastardized from it's original meaning quite a lot.

The term "agnostic" is not a position, it's a world view. The term states "I think knowing if the supernatural exists is unknown".

The problem is that it's not specific to a God. You can be a Christian and be agnostic toward Big Foot. Or be an Athiest and be agnostic toward dieties. It's why there's an expression called an "Agnostic Atheist" who does not believe in God but thinks knowing if he exists is unknown. By this line of logic almost every Atheist is an Agnostic. There are also agnostic theists who believe in a God but also think knowing if he actually exists is not knowable.

The point I'm trying to make is you either believe there is one or you do not. Saying "I don't know" isn't called being agnostic it's called being on the fence. "going through my athiest phase" is not a valid statement because the only way to not be an atheist is to become a theist. This is similar to saying "I went through my heterosexual phase. But now I'm more of a sexually curious person" when the latter statement doesn't reject the former.

tl;dr both terms are not mutually exclusive.

In American English, as the word is used in religious contexts, an agnostic is a person who doesn't believe in gods, but they don't claim to have confirmed that said gods don't exist either. They don't know either way. This is the correct usage.

Edit: I should correct myself. This usage I'm talking about is a correct usage, not the only usage. The one Cuddlebug talks about is correct too. It's just not the only correct usage.

 

[Pikimon]

Did this man actually make that graphic himself? He dressed this way as a joke right? Fuck it's too ridiculous to be real

C'mon man, it's probably the best Sonic shirt he has in his closet!

 

[Watcher]

In American English, as the word is used in religious contexts, an agnostic is a person who doesn't believe in gods, but they don't claim to have confirmed that said gods don't exist either. They don't know either way. This is the correct usage.

The term "agnostic" in it's usage today goes back to Thomas Huxley who stated

Agnosticism, in fact, is not a creed, but a method, the essence of which lies in the rigorous application of a single principle ... Positively the principle may be expressed: In matters of the intellect, follow your reason as far as it will take you, without regard to any other consideration. And negatively: In matters of the intellect do not pretend that conclusions are certain which are not demonstrated or demonstrable.

Agnosticism is similar to something like Skepticism. You can be both a skeptic and a theist, just like you can be both an agnostic and an atheist. I don't know where you're getting the "Correct usage" thing from. Especially since Thomas Huxley applied the term equally to all forms of metaphysics and not just a God.

Like I said you can be an agnostic theist. Who is someone who believes in God but does not believe they can be proven to exist. Similarly you can be a gnostic Atheist who believes you can definitively know whether a God exists. These terms are not mutually exclusive. One applies to belief whereas the other applies to knowledge.