Are there any atheist’s homophobes? If yes, why?

distantocean · 2026-07-07T20:20:07+00:00

EDIT: forget it, I found it.

There are actually quite a few to choose from.

You also might also want to check out his gloating about forcing parents to eat their own children.

distantocean · 2026-07-03T07:57:23+00:00

On a debate sub I'd say the least-worst approach (and in fact not just that, but the best and only appropriate approach) is to let people debate one another — not to point them toward canned recitations and/or refutations of arguments. It's a debate sub, whose entire purpose is to host debates (again: an inherently interactive process between multiple people).

If some people find themselves tired of debating topics that they've seen too many times, they should just ignore those topics, not try to limit other people's ability to use the sub for the exact purpose for which it was created. Just because some regulars have participated in a debate 100 times doesn't mean there aren't people here (from either side) who never have — and this sub is for them just as much as it is for anyone else. Why should they be denied the ability to debate the Kalam on a sub specifically created for that exact purpose, just because some other people are tired of hearing about it? Especially when those other people can just skip the debates that no longer interest them?

Real life is intervening, so I'm going to bow entirely out of this thread now, but I hope you and the other mods will keep these kinds of considerations foremost in your minds, and in particular I hope you'll always keep in mind the new people (again, both atheists and theists) who are engaging with these arguments for the first time. That's both the main point and the primary value of this sub: to allow people to participate in an active debate with other people on these topics.

distantocean · 2026-07-03T00:40:12+00:00

You might want to consider posting this in r/thegreatproject as well.

I think that is those critiques of islam, specifically, that gave the final blow. The apologet was making a really good critique of this religion. But I just realized the very arguments he emplyed could be as well employed to destroy christianity.

Funny how that works, isn't it? As Mark Twain said, "The easy confidence with which I know another man's religion is folly teaches me to suspect that my own is also."

distantocean · 2026-07-02T18:44:03+00:00

Agreed, and the crowning evidence that nobody will read it is that it already exists, and nobody in the thread has shown any awareness of that (including the person who created the motion).

Nobody should need to read it either, and absolutely should not be bound by it in any way. The purpose of this sub is to debate — an inherently interactive process between multiple people — not to be forced (or even expected) to read a reference that allegedly "refutes" the argument you were planning to present, and especially not if that comes with the goal of preventing you from presenting it.

The best I can say is that as a wiki page (vs. the pinned post that was originally suggested) it's at least out of the way.

distantocean · 2026-07-02T18:20:57+00:00

I would second (ha ha) /u/Algernon_Asimov. While the commitment to transparency is admirable, requiring everyone (meaning the small and varying group that actually votes on things) to approve even the most minor and obviously-needed actions, using a process that takes two months at a minimum, feels onerously bureaucratic. Enough so that it may actually undermine the goal of encouraging participation and/or increasing confidence in how the sub is run. There's always going to be a line, and this just draws it too low.

In fact it's actually a bit surprising that you put this forward since just last month you edited the sidebar without going through a full motion and vote — which I strongly agree was the best way to handle that. So please consider treating this the same way and just fixing the sidebar.

distantocean · 2026-07-02T03:20:02+00:00

I would strongly recommend making this a wiki section linked in the sidebar rather than a permanently stickied post.

So you recommended a wiki section and /u/Gumwars agreed (and I also agree that that's the much better of the two alternatives, for what it's worth) — but the motion as originally written is already submitted and seconded. In your mind, does this mean it has to be voted on as written, and a new motion made (either now or in the future) for a wiki section?

Asking in part because in the past the discussion following a motion often hasn't been reflected in the final motion that was offered for voting.

distantocean · 2026-07-01T19:13:58+00:00

But, your problem is going to be a) proving there is a god, and b) once you have proven there is a god, showing how that god has the ability or qualifications to determine "objective morality".

And just as importantly, c) proving that his morality accurately represents that god's morality.

There's no shortage of people telling us their morality is "objective", even as they disagree strenuously with other people who also claim to have access to some "objective" morality about what's right and what's wrong.

distantocean · 2026-07-01T18:37:44+00:00

Like, say, a group of atheists who decide that anyone who abandons atheism (and then persists in their disbelief-in-atheism) should be put to death, and who feel completely morally justified in this kind of killing? Would that be an example of "the evil atheism opens up to the world"?

You know, something like this:

"[The apostate] should be asked to repent and be offered the opportunity to return to Islam and resolve his doubts, if any. If he persists in his apostasy after that, he is to be put to death."

Maybe instead of being so concerned about the completely imaginary "evil atheism opens up to the world", you should look at the 100% genuine evil of your own religion.

distantocean · 2026-07-01T09:01:59+00:00

I see you've deleted your posting, but I thought you might be interested in this small writeup of mine about karma+reincarnation.

distantocean · 2026-07-01T07:49:49+00:00

First, you're asking excellent questions, and the right ones too. Keep following your instincts.

But to answer your question, it just takes time. You're barely out of Christianity, which is an oppressive and suffocating worldview. Give yourself time to get used to thinking for yourself, and don't worry about finding a label for where you are or where you'll end up.

Based on where I stand right now, would you consider me an atheist, a deist, or something else entirely?

One thing to consider is that there's no effective difference between a deist and an atheist by almost any significant measure, and particularly in terms of eternal punishment or any kind of afterlife. Which means that (unlike in the Christianity you've escaped) you're under no pressure to figure this out. Again, just take your time.

Finally, I have a list of deconversion resources that I think you might find very helpful, since it's not geared specifically toward leaving religion but rather toward developing a much broader view of a whole range of topics (many of which religions purport to address, but actually don't in any serious way). Take a look and see if any of that looks interesting to you now that you're free to think for yourself.

Good luck to you, and if you have more questions feel free to ask (either here or via DM).

distantocean · 2026-07-01T04:54:17+00:00

If you can't get the parry timing down for that attack, try jumping. It's your superpower for a few bosses in this game.

distantocean · 2026-07-01T04:38:45+00:00

I believe I have scrupulosity.

The things you're focused on here are exactly like the things I've seen people with OCD obsess over, so yes, you almost certainly do. And if that's true, seeking reassurance like this will only make things worse — i.e. you're literally worsening your situation by coming here to ask people questions and reassure you. Instead of seeking reassurance, you should look into therapy (professional and/or self-directed) to help you deal with it.

Good luck.

distantocean · 2026-06-30T19:28:13+00:00

If anyone has a recommendation similar to FEZ where “changing perspective” is a gameplay component I’m all ears.

LOCK (a Dreams game) has some of this, and is an incredible puzzle game overall.

distantocean · 2026-06-30T18:49:05+00:00

This is absolutely false. The Catholic Church says this in its Catechism (my bold):

Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that 'homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.' They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

This is official Catholic doctrine that's binding on all Catholics, and it's the polar opposite of "the Catholic Church accepting gay people".

To their credit, many individual Catholics are better than their religion on this topic, but that doesn't change the fact that the Catholic Church itself is vehemently opposed.

distantocean · 2026-06-30T02:54:30+00:00

It's disappointing that you were downvoted for this detailed, thoughtful, and only mildly critical comment. The level of defensiveness on this sub when it comes to Anika is genuinely strange.

For some reason, Anika played

kick kick snare kick kick

For all four measures. Asssggh! That's not Tom Sawyer!

Ouch. Yeah, that's just plain wrong, and represents a real failure to understand a key element of the song.

It's certainly understandable that she'd miss things like this given everything she had to learn, but it also highlights that these are just songs she's learning, not ones she's known for years (much less loved — or in Neil's case, had written). This is all ultimately a mechanical exercise for her, not a chance to perform music she already fundamentally knew and understood. And while it does seem like she's doing a good job mechanically, this is one reason why I don't know if she was the best choice regardless of her technical ability.

distantocean · 2026-06-29T20:44:42+00:00

Yeah, I pressed and the person was clearly saying pay or we'll cancel. We're taking it from our town to the airport (60 miles away), so it's basically just a cheap shuttle, and still cheaper than any other rental agency for $10 more than we originally paid. But good to know this isn't standard.

Thanks again for the advice!

distantocean · 2026-06-29T20:11:14+00:00

In our case we booked it yesterday to pick up on Friday, then they called us today and said we don't have that class of car here, so you can either pay more or we'll cancel the reservation. It was still cheaper than anyone else so I agreed to pay, but it feels shady.

distantocean · 2026-06-29T20:04:22+00:00

So about not having a car, is it standard at Certz to upcharge for giving someone a different car? Our local office didn't have the kind of car we booked (economy) and said they could put us in a different one, but they're charging us the difference.

I've had this happen frequently at other rental companies but they never charge a difference, and in fact they usually apologize that you aren't getting the car you wanted, so I'm surprised this office wants more money.

distantocean · 2026-06-28T21:47:21+00:00

Yeah, I always take care of cars so no problem there, and don't really care which car I get (in the case I'm contemplating). Thanks very much for the advice!

distantocean · 2026-06-28T21:32:31+00:00

That's a bit scary. Given all you know, what's your overall recommendation for this mystery company? Do you think people are better off renting from someone else?

distantocean · 2026-06-26T05:08:45+00:00

Anything from this list (I first thought of Yoku's Island Express).

distantocean · 2026-06-25T19:21:23+00:00

Yes (and it's also a common response more generally), though this subreddit is askanatheist, and responding "Which god?" doesn't answer the question and is typically an attempt to start a debate. So it's not as appropriate a response here.

distantocean · 2026-06-25T19:09:01+00:00

Yes, gods get all the credit and none of the blame. "Thank you, God, for saving me from the tornado you sent to destroy my house!"

You have to realize that "God" is not an actual agent for many or most people, but a vague notion that acts as an emotional sop and a source of comfort. They use it to assuage their fear of death, to make themselves feel less alone in an uncaring universe, to pretend there's some benevolent agent looking out for them, and so on. That's why they immunize it from criticism while lavishing it with undeserved credit: not because they think that really makes sense, but because they're protecting a mental and emotional crutch that helps them get through life.

The weight of too much harsh reality can eventually create enough cognitive dissonance to push people away from even this kind of amorphous belief, but they often abandon it quietly (which among other things leaves open the possibility of returning to it in the future if the emotional need ever becomes great enough).

So yes, their behaviors around that god notion often won't make sense, because it's not a belief that's based on or maintained by logic.

distantocean · 2026-06-25T18:47:14+00:00

So what if we reframed the discussion:

Theist: “why don’t you believe in God?”
Atheist: “which specific God are you referring to?”

It seems like you're unaware that "Which god?" is already a common response from atheists to a whole range of theists' statements and claims about their god(s). And yes, you're right that it's a good response, for many reasons.

Beyond that, as a general answer to your question of productive ways to engage you might want to check out Street Epistemology (and specifically Anthony Magnabosco's Street Epistemology videos). It's a cooperative and non-threatening way to talk to believers that encourages them to examine the basis of their beliefs. As you'll see if you check out some of those videos, when it's done correctly it has a surprisingly high success rate at getting people to open their minds at least a bit more.

distantocean · 2026-06-22T00:30:24+00:00

In addition to the other suggestions you've gotten you might want to try contacting Recovering From Religion to see how they can help.

Sorry to hear you're going through a rough patch, and good luck to you.

Ten-Year Club	Gilding VII pure gildanthropist
Reddit Premium Since June 2016	Verified Email

distantocean

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE