Why is it that atheists are antagonized?

[Duckmeister]

?????

The whole point of atheism is not having a religion.

I was talking about how people like you have to shove "lol ur religunz r st00pid" down everyone's throats (and sarcastically, how we should pity you because you have to deal with all the people who don't like being told what to believe), not that you have/don't have a religion.

Besides the fact that being anti-God is a religion in itself.  But that's another discussion.

Atheists don't have a religion, nor do they have beliefs.

So, you don't have beliefs?  Do you believe that you don't have beliefs?  This makes me curious.

[Ad Bot]

[Vulgus]

No, we KNOW we don't have beliefs.
And when have we ever said "LOL RELIGEN DUM"

[Mateo]

So, you don't have beliefs?  Do you believe that you don't have beliefs?  This makes me curious.

Don't even bother starting this. It always ends up broken and obnoxious and besides, no one likes semantics.

[Duckmeister]

No, we KNOW we don't have beliefs.
And when have we ever said "LOL RELIGEN DUM"

So, atheists shift the burden of proof, claim that God doesn't exist because of a supposed lack of evidence (and not because of evidence against), and then claim that they KNOW God not to exist?  Pffffft.

Use logic next time.

[Inv3rted]

Vulgus is handicapped.

Atheists don't pretend to know anything.

There's a difference between believing God does not exist and not believing that God exists.

One is asserting something; the other is not.

Atheists do not believe that God exists. If you find an atheist that says "I believe with certainty that there are no gods" I give you permission to punch them in their face.

And the burden of proof is always on whoever asserts something. Just because you say God is self evident does not mean the burden of proof is not on you.

If I say I don't believe in gravity, you cannot say it's self evident and shift the burden of proof to me. There is nothing I am asserting and therefore nothing possible to prove.

Use logic next time.

[Duckmeister]

Atheists do not believe that God exists. If you find an atheist that says "I believe with certainty that there are no gods" I give you permission to punch them in their face.

Aaaaaaaand, you lost right there.

I have never seen anyone make a more contradictory statement.

Asserting something is true, or asserting something isn't true, it's still asserting something.  If you said you don't believe in gravity, no one would be shifting the burden of proof if they told you to prove why gravity doesn't exist, because you just asserted that gravity doesn't exist.

You can't get out of "asserting" simply by making a negative "assertion".  The only difference is that it's negative.

[Moybus]

Inv3rted, you seem to be more agnostic than you are atheists. Atheists believe there is no god, from every encounter I've had with them.

[zz_tophat]

Aaaaaaaand, you lost right there.

I have never seen anyone make a more contradictory statement.

Asserting something is true, or asserting something isn't true, it's still asserting something.  If you said you don't believe in gravity, no one would be shifting the burden of proof if they told you to prove why gravity doesn't exist, because you just asserted that gravity doesn't exist.

You can't get out of "asserting" simply by making a negative "assertion".  The only difference is that it's negative.

You missed the point of the above post entirely.


Re-read it and try again.

[Inv3rted]

Aaaaaaaand, you lost right there.

I have never seen anyone make a more contradictory statement.

Asserting something is true, or asserting something isn't true, it's still asserting something.  If you said you don't believe in gravity, no one would be shifting the burden of proof if they told you to prove why gravity doesn't exist, because you just asserted that gravity doesn't exist.

You can't get out of "asserting" simply by making a negative "assertion".  The only difference is that it's negative.

????

My whole point is that the logic you just used is flawed on every level.

Creationist logic is lol.

[Pi]

Four things start wars. Love, Religion, Money, and Politics.

[Inv3rted]

Religion and money are extremely intertwined with politics.

[MagicAhrim]

Four things start wars. Love, Religion, Money, and Politics.

Wrong People start wars those just lead to wars.

[Pi]

Religion and money are extremely intertwined with politics.

Well, even little children start wars about that.

[zz_tophat]

Wrong Klingons start wars those just lead to wars.

Fixed it.


People start wars for wealth and or ideals.

[rkynick]

Aaaaaaaand, you lost right there.

I have never seen anyone make a more contradictory statement.

Asserting something is true, or asserting something isn't true, it's still asserting something.  If you said you don't believe in gravity, no one would be shifting the burden of proof if they told you to prove why gravity doesn't exist, because you just asserted that gravity doesn't exist.

You can't get out of "asserting" simply by making a negative "assertion".  The only difference is that it's negative.

You're really, awfully stupid.

Point:
"I do not believe it is red"
"I believe that it is not red"

Former: Lack of belief.
Latter: Belief that it is not.

The latter would directly contradict "I believe it is red", while the former would not.