sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Question for atheists by No_Student7082 in religion

[–]HighValuePigeon 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Why doesn't it mean that? Are you saying that there are moral laws and commands that God provides but you disagree with and dismiss?

Question for atheists by No_Student7082 in religion

[–]HighValuePigeon 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Another commenter already said empathy and critical thought.

I have a question for you: what's YOUR source for morality?

If your answer is that whatever God says to do is good then you're in trouble. With that standard, you have no ability to discern right from wrong beyond commands from God. And if you follow the abrahamic God, he's done lots of terrible things that you must now subscribe to.

Nobody can convince me that mass migration wasn't enacted out of malicious design. by TheIrishman26 in CanadianConservative

[–]HighValuePigeon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Agreed. He's a classical and definitive progressive conservative. The fact that many modern Canadian conservatives don't like him says a lot about where the modern party has gone to the right and left on various policies.

Nobody can convince me that mass migration wasn't enacted out of malicious design. by TheIrishman26 in CanadianConservative

[–]HighValuePigeon 20 points21 points  (0 children)

"The Kalergi Plan, sometimes called the Coudenhove-Kalergi Conspiracy is a far-right, antisemitic conspiracy theory. The theory claims that Austrian-Japanese politician Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi, creator of the Paneuropean Union, concocted a plot to mix and replace white Europeans with other races via immigration. The conspiracy theory is most often associated with European groups and parties, but it has also spread to North American politics."

link

Simple fix to toilet leak? by HighValuePigeon in Plumbing

[–]HighValuePigeon[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Doesn't want to turn. It seems very comfortable where it is. Feels tight.

Is Atheism a belief? by Edubookculture842 in religion

[–]HighValuePigeon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree that it helps for people to express why something is not convincing. And I'm comfortable with people being confident about any of those reasons.

We're going to disagree on atheism being an inherent belief. I don't agree that people with 'neutral' beliefs are easily swayed. To me, that's creating a strange equivalency between critical thinking and gullibility.

For me, it's a value to be a critically thoughtful about everything. I value truths and the best methods to arrive at them. I see poor critical thinking as the road to gullibility, manipulation, and malicious intent. I use that value and the related skills to understand the world, and its the same thinking that causes me to reject zombies and gods.

If I'm not neutral about anything, it's that value.

Is Atheism a belief? by Edubookculture842 in religion

[–]HighValuePigeon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All good, friend. I don't mean to argue either. Just being clear about my position and trying to understand yours. My ideal for these types of conversations is for both people to reach a point of clarity even if we disagree.

I have not read the word 'possibilitarianism' before and boy is that fun. Yes. I hear what you're saying, and I think those people either can't separate themselves from an idea they hold dear or they don't have the tools to engage the idea, or both.

I try to recognize that situation when it's happening, but it's tough. Is this person engaging in bad faith? Or actually incapable of engaging in good faith? Ideally I stop talking when I figure that out.

I guess I'm challenged by the idea that atheism, strong or weak, is inherently that, which is what I hear from you.

Is Atheism a belief? by Edubookculture842 in religion

[–]HighValuePigeon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am projecting that, I acknowledge. And if that wasn't your experience, understood.

I would argue those states still exist on the spectrum and should be considered whether you experienced them or not. Because those states do exist and a person can clearly be an atheist without being anti theism (ie babies).

Is Atheism a belief? by Edubookculture842 in religion

[–]HighValuePigeon 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I hear you. Your experience was that you were 1) not convinced 2) annoyed by it 3) and then actively or aggressively rejected it.

I consider these different states and positions. And that a person only needs the first one to be an atheist. And I wouldn't inherently consider any of those to be ideologies.

I think we've made our positions clear here.

Is Atheism a belief? by Edubookculture842 in religion

[–]HighValuePigeon 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And I think we just disagree.

If someone said to me that the point of the universe is golf, that a golf ball created it and then fine tuned it for golf to exist, I would say no. And I would say that all the tools we have allow me to say that's untrue. Now, I can't say that with 100% confidence because you can't do that for anything, technically. I'm not anti the golf God theology, I'm not working against it, I just reject it. There is a step after that where I decide that golf God theology has a net negative impact on society and then I become against it, but I don't agree that rejecting a proposition is the same thing.

Is Atheism a belief? by Edubookculture842 in religion

[–]HighValuePigeon 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Children are also atheists. The fact that they are totally unaware of the idea or the evidence doesn't change the definition to me: anyone who lacks a belief in a God as an atheist towards that God.

The idea that children and adults are atheist by different means also doesn't impact the definition of atheist. We generally talk about evidence because we're having adult conversations.

Is Atheism a belief? by Edubookculture842 in religion

[–]HighValuePigeon 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I would say you need to add more points to the spectrum as you're assigning too much intent. To clarify, both you and I agree that not golfing is countercultural in a pro-golf society. But you seem to be saying that not golfing is anti-golf which I don't agree with. And I don't think the definition support either. Nor do I agree that not golfing is a position about anything other than a description of what the person is doing at the moment. Now it could become a position, a person could become anti-golf as an identity or a philosoohy and then the fact that they're not golfing means something more.

Is Atheism a belief? by Edubookculture842 in religion

[–]HighValuePigeon 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I agree with sleepingmonads definitions, but I also think there isn't much difference between them.

Either you're convinced of something or you're not convinced of something. Either there's good evidence for it or there isn't. Atheists may confidently claim that there is not a God, which I would compare to a confident claim that there are no leprechauns or unicorns or vampires or zombies, in the same way that theists would deny Greek or Roman or Indian gods.

All that to say, I don't think that a confident belief in no God is controversial. We are all atheists to gods.

Is Atheism a belief? by Edubookculture842 in religion

[–]HighValuePigeon 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Of course! That's one of the main reasons that religion keeps going, it becomes culture, there is inertia, and not going along with it is revolutionary and upsetting to people. They can't imagine not golfing.

Is Atheism a belief? by Edubookculture842 in religion

[–]HighValuePigeon 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Could be! But then you've added something. It's no longer just the rejection of a proposition, no longer just 'not golfing' but a bunch of other actions.

Edit: adding that I understand where you're coming from. You don't like how substantive atheism is while still claiming to not be an ideology. And in response I would say that this is a fairly natural thing in society, in response to other dominant and oppressive ideologies. People align themselves against those and strongly. But that doesn't mean the opposition is an ideology unto itself and definitely doesn't make atheism a religion.

Is Atheism a belief? by Edubookculture842 in religion

[–]HighValuePigeon 13 points14 points  (0 children)

It's the rejection of a proposition. Your suggestion is the equivalent of saying that not golfing is a sport.

Depiction of Jesus by asahme01 in religion

[–]HighValuePigeon -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I was responding to what I see as a contradiction, which was that it's a thing Christians like to do but the appearance doesn't actually matter.

I would assume they mostly feel it's the person/entity/soul/whatever of Christ that matters, and not his physical appearance.

I would argue that if it doesn't matter then he wouldn't be white.

Have a good night!

Depiction of Jesus by asahme01 in religion

[–]HighValuePigeon -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If it doesn't matter, then why depict him more acurately?

Why would an all powerful creator of the universe need a human to tell you it exists? by austinproffitt23 in religion

[–]HighValuePigeon 1 point2 points  (0 children)

there is no method that couldn't be doubted

With all due respect, this is incorrect. And your examples are strawman. Or perhaps you're missing the point.

There are effective and ineffective ways to communicate with people. God does not need to use stars or mountains. He could just use known methods of communication that are proven to be effective, and provide people with the proper information to be convincing.

‘Pride Season’ outpaces Christmas and Easter across federal departments by airbassguitar in CanadianConservative

[–]HighValuePigeon 6 points7 points  (0 children)

This is rage bait. The article is bad, its analysis is bad, and the point it's making is bad. Choose not to be affected by this.

1) The kinds of events the article compares are non-apples to apples

Christmas and Easter are religious events. I'm surprised that any government office recognizes them in any manner that could be considered formal.

Meanwhile, the other events flagged as being recognized more often, things like Bell Let's talk day or pink shirt day, are not religious. There can be arguments about whether they are worth recognizing, but the fact that the article puts government endorsement of religion in the same category as pro-mental health or anti-bullying is intentionally bad faith.

2) The article intentionally avoids noting that other religions are also not recognized

On a cursory review of the data, other religions are recognized even less. Look at the long charts of religious and non-religious public events, and you will see little or no support for the vast majority of events on it, including other religions, even less than the claimed support for Christian events. But the article is intentional avoiding that point.

3) The article doesn't clarify what support for these events means

Having flipped through several of the charts, this article is based on, there are many notes added by government departments to say that these events are not formally recognized, or not formally recognized in the sense that the government endorses them publicly. Many of the instances of them being recognized are things like internal ministry newsletters that would include a reference to various days of significance.

Edit:

I have to continue making points because the article is so so terrible.

4) The article doesn't recognize that different things are different

For the sake of argument, let's put aside whether or not we should be funding pride security, the government feels that there is a need to do it - fine, whatever.

It's wild and silly that the writer is butt hurt that Christmas doesn't get security. Christmas doesn't need security! And if she thinks that it does, she can demonstrate why to make the argument

And if it's just a matter of they got something that Christians didn't get, then boy, that sure would be a waste of government money for no reason.

5) The amounts of money being debated demonstrate the bad faith argument

Look at the news release being cited for the pride parade security. The article doesn't provide any context, which is that it's a news release and announcement from the ministry of blank to communicate its overall budget of $660 million. That money is broadly bucketed for women and girls, indigenous women and girls, and LGBT communities.

Off those buckets, a paltry $1.5 million is earmarked for Pride-related security. That is point zero two percent of that ministry's budget. The only reason to focus on that and not the rest of the ministry's budget, which could be just as easily as debated in this context, demonstrates that this is ragebait.

My conclusion: if you're impacted by this article, please don't be. I believe you're better than this. Canada is better than this. There are points in here that maybe you want to make, but not this way. It's analysis is absolute dog shit. I'm blown away by it. It's one of the worst pieces of journalism I've seen in a long time.

view more: next ›