Atheists and White Supremacists

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I am so confused.

Is there a term for someone who has a belief in a higher probability of no god existing than a god existing in this experiential reality that in some way does not convey the antithesis of a god while still professing their belief?

Pro-universe, perhaps? Existentialphilic? But that doesn't address the strong Theic bent most people have.
It's like proving a negative. If presented with a godlike framework, doesn't one have to either say No God, or reject the framework which functionally does the same thing?

Why do you even need a term for that, in this era? How about empiricist? Don't-give-a-fuck-ist? Prefer-not-to-have-wankery-conversations-about-improbabilities-ist?

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

And Vex moves the conversation inexorably into personal-insults territory, where he feels safe.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Interesting, since this originated in the arena of comparative self-worth.

[Don Coyote]

seriously get fucked.  I had no fucking vine in this weird ass beef you have with atheists the  because fucking white boy pent shat all over religious folk. I defined myself as an atheist because I didn't give a fuck about the existence of a fucking diety,  but evidently this is a fucking "check your fucking privledge white boy" moment.  Thank you fucking condescending wannabe mother figure.  I fucking had this sneaking suspicion that was the root of your fucking issue. could you care to enlighten this poor ignorant white boy about how his fucking white privledge had some how blinded gin to the wondrous fucking position of privledge he had gained by rejecting the validity that he needs to pay homage to a fucking diety that regardless of its existence doesn't fucking matter to him?

I was fucking super religious, until I left basic.  Then I had a very very fucking brief religion is stupid phase that lasted die maybe a year.  Now I just don't fucking care.

Funny fucking thing two fucking days ago I publicly coving my support to a friend of mine regarding her faith and my vehement disdain for Atheists, and constantly point all the fucking awesome shit we have because certain religious faiths placed knowledge of the natural world on a pat with seeking the knowledge of the divine because they saw no difference between the two.
but because I don't fucking brag about how often I defend religion in my day to day life from Jack ass Atheists and don't fucking chew out the fucking jackass behavior of pent I am evidently the sane class as white supremacists. 
shit maybe I should have been talking shit to twid for gigs spiritual exploration,  or rofer die fits fucking sermons, or you for whatever Tybee duck thing your Jahr recently dinner towards some shrine.

that is why I am pissed.  not because I have suddenly had my white cishet male privledge shoved in my face. 
I've gotten shit from my family for not being Catholic so fuck off.

I've been dealing with a whole other level of shit beyond my bitching about school so again fuck off with your weird fucking agenda

[tyrannosaurus vex]

And Vex moves the conversation inexorably into personal-insults territory, where he feels safe.

Was that before or after this

So kind of what I am getting from both of you boys

and this

I know it hurts to think about ways in which you have previously refused to think, or to consider your own uniforms.

?

You can't make personal attacks and then bitch when someone else calls you out for being an asshole.

[tyrannosaurus vex]

Nevermind that the entire PURPOSE of this thread was to launch a personal attack against atheists in the first place.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

Even if shitneck Atheist Douchebags are the majority, it's not right to lump all atheists in with them. Atheism has a definition that has nothing to do with being a shitneck, and if some of them suck it's because they'd be bad people no matter what uniform they put on in the morning.

I'm not lumping in all atheists, as in people with an atheistic worldview, with Atheists.

Then maybe you might want a better label for the subset of atheists you don't like. Personally, I think the ones being jerks are serving an important -- if annoying -- purpose, by forcing people to recognize the fact that not everyone is part of the dominant religion. You don't get very far in those types of fights by being nice and quiet.

I find them able to make me more willing to dismiss them. Just saying. I don't have a problem with atheists, much in the same way that I don't have a problem with anyone believing in any other religious position that isn't what I happen to be believing today. But you know, you can have a bunch of Christian friends, and if one of them starts talking about how you're going to hell.... replace Christian with atheist and going to hell with friggin' deluded, hey yeah. No one wants to talk to that guy except other guys who think exactly like him. I'd probably be willing to listen to Richard Dawkins if he talked about biology instead of atheism, since you know, he's a biologist and not a theologian, and I'm not overly interested in what someone doesn't believe in.

...basically at the heart of it, they're the same thing. Insecure people looking for a group to belong to that makes them feel superior to another group through no doing of their own.

And now you get to feel superior to them! Yay, stupidity is fun.

If you think I started this thread to feel superior, I will make a mental note of what you think of me and move on.

I don't actually think that of you, or didn't until this thread... now I'm starting to wonder, but haven't made up my mind yet.  I do, however, fail to see how you lumping all Atheists together as assholes and insecure is somehow different from how you view them.

Nigel has identified as atheist, even within this thread, even if she shuns the word specifically.

well you have certainly shown me the errors of my sinful ways.


nope

get fucked Nigel.
you chose to make a point in deliberately trollish wau and while I acknowledge the validity of your point you have lost my respect.  not that anyone actually gives a shit about my opinion or input or contributions here.

I give a shit. Much in the same way that I give a shit about LMNO, or Hoops or Vex or Faust or Cain or Pent, or...

I mean yeah, I brushed off what Pent said about faithfools at first because I figured he was referencing a particular subset of religious folk. He kinda dug himself into a hole a bit, and I found some of what else he said disappointing, even a bit offensive. But I figure if he actually thinks me a fucking moron for believing in a something or other, he can flat out tell me so. And until he does, I won't hold it against him too much. I see what Nigel did here. Frankly, even as a religious guy, I was initially WTF too, but that's why I held off until I read the rest of the thread.

Nigel- to further flesh out your OP, it's kinda like Satanism. Modern Satanism is basically atheism on Goth night and intentionally edgy. And by choosing a name like Satanism, it's defining oneself as what one is not/against. Can you be a Satanic Hindu or does the word Satanic itself carry some specific cultural/anti-denominational baggage? Can you be Satanic against Judaism or does it make more sense to worship a Golden Calf or Moloch at that point? How would a Satanic Muslim say an anti-Shahadah? There is of course somewhat of a difference. While atheism/Atheism is a rejection of religion as a whole, Satanism is a form that does it through mocking a specific one. You know, if you ignore FSM or IPU or whatever rehash du jour on Carl Sagan's Dragon in the Garage happens to be.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

I am so confused.

Is there a term for someone who has a belief in a higher probability of no god existing than a god existing in this experiential reality that in some way does not convey the antithesis of a god while still professing their belief?

Pro-universe, perhaps? Existentialphilic? But that doesn't address the strong Theic bent most people have.
It's like proving a negative. If presented with a godlike framework, doesn't one have to either say No God, or reject the framework which functionally does the same thing?

Antipatheist? Non-theist? Meh?

[tyrannosaurus vex]

I am so confused.

Is there a term for someone who has a belief in a higher probability of no god existing than a god existing in this experiential reality that in some way does not convey the antithesis of a god while still professing their belief?

Pro-universe, perhaps? Existentialphilic? But that doesn't address the strong Theic bent most people have.
It's like proving a negative. If presented with a godlike framework, doesn't one have to either say No God, or reject the framework which functionally does the same thing?

Antipatheist? Non-theist? Meh?

You know what? The word is Atheist. It's fucking Atheist. And the notion that an atheist should be sorry for saying out loud that they think the idea of a God is ridiculous is disgusting and inexcusable. "Atheist" is not a bad word. It's a perfectly well-defined and well-understood word. There's no reason to go making up new vocabularies every time someone decides to twist a word into some epithet.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

I am so confused.

Is there a term for someone who has a belief in a higher probability of no god existing than a god existing in this experiential reality that in some way does not convey the antithesis of a god while still professing their belief?

Pro-universe, perhaps? Existentialphilic? But that doesn't address the strong Theic bent most people have.
It's like proving a negative. If presented with a godlike framework, doesn't one have to either say No God, or reject the framework which functionally does the same thing?

Antipatheist? Non-theist? Meh?

You know what? The word is Atheist. It's fucking Atheist. And the notion that an atheist should be sorry for saying out loud that they think the idea of a God is ridiculous is disgusting and inexcusable. "Atheist" is not a bad word. It's a perfectly well-defined and well-understood word. There's no reason to go making up new vocabularies every time someone decides to twist a word into some epithet.

I think Nigel's point is there's really no need for the word anyway.

Do we not sneer at the word libertarian?

[Nephew Twiddleton]

I will also point out that a few months back, several atheists from here jumped on an atheist friend who put his foot in his mouth and came off sounding like he said that Muslims were backwards barbarians on FB. Coyote, ECH and Kai immediately come to mind.

[tyrannosaurus vex]

I am so confused.

Is there a term for someone who has a belief in a higher probability of no god existing than a god existing in this experiential reality that in some way does not convey the antithesis of a god while still professing their belief?

Pro-universe, perhaps? Existentialphilic? But that doesn't address the strong Theic bent most people have.
It's like proving a negative. If presented with a godlike framework, doesn't one have to either say No God, or reject the framework which functionally does the same thing?

Antipatheist? Non-theist? Meh?

You know what? The word is Atheist. It's fucking Atheist. And the notion that an atheist should be sorry for saying out loud that they think the idea of a God is ridiculous is disgusting and inexcusable. "Atheist" is not a bad word. It's a perfectly well-defined and well-understood word. There's no reason to go making up new vocabularies every time someone decides to twist a word into some epithet.

I think Nigel's point is there's really no need for the word anyway.

Do we not sneer at the word libertarian?

Yeah, we sneer at libertarians. But that's no reason to think we're any smarter than they are. Anyone and any group who's convinced they have the One True Way is dangerous and ought to be avoided. I laugh at libertarians, but then I get past the label and see if they have anything worthwhile to say because, you know, labels are just labels and they don't always describe what's behind them very well. Labels can be retained without being worshiped. You don't have to insist that your preconceptions about a label must hold true even when someone who carries that label doesn't live up to those preconceptions. You can give up your preconceptions. That's what rational people do when confronted with evidence that contradicts their beliefs.

Is the word necessary? Well, as long as the general consensus in society is that by default you are assumed to believe in God, but you don't believe in god, I would argue that yes there should be a word for that.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

I am so confused.

Is there a term for someone who has a belief in a higher probability of no god existing than a god existing in this experiential reality that in some way does not convey the antithesis of a god while still professing their belief?

Pro-universe, perhaps? Existentialphilic? But that doesn't address the strong Theic bent most people have.
It's like proving a negative. If presented with a godlike framework, doesn't one have to either say No God, or reject the framework which functionally does the same thing?

Antipatheist? Non-theist? Meh?

You know what? The word is Atheist. It's fucking Atheist. And the notion that an atheist should be sorry for saying out loud that they think the idea of a God is ridiculous is disgusting and inexcusable. "Atheist" is not a bad word. It's a perfectly well-defined and well-understood word. There's no reason to go making up new vocabularies every time someone decides to twist a word into some epithet.

I think Nigel's point is there's really no need for the word anyway.

Do we not sneer at the word libertarian?

To elaborate on this point- libertarian no longer means libertarian. It means you're too cautious to admit you oppose Obama because he's Obama. Therefore, libertarian has less to do with economic matters and the oft forgot social liberalism and more to do with being anti-Obama.

[tyrannosaurus vex]

I am so confused.

Is there a term for someone who has a belief in a higher probability of no god existing than a god existing in this experiential reality that in some way does not convey the antithesis of a god while still professing their belief?

Pro-universe, perhaps? Existentialphilic? But that doesn't address the strong Theic bent most people have.
It's like proving a negative. If presented with a godlike framework, doesn't one have to either say No God, or reject the framework which functionally does the same thing?

Antipatheist? Non-theist? Meh?

You know what? The word is Atheist. It's fucking Atheist. And the notion that an atheist should be sorry for saying out loud that they think the idea of a God is ridiculous is disgusting and inexcusable. "Atheist" is not a bad word. It's a perfectly well-defined and well-understood word. There's no reason to go making up new vocabularies every time someone decides to twist a word into some epithet.

I think Nigel's point is there's really no need for the word anyway.

Do we not sneer at the word libertarian?

To elaborate on this point- libertarian no longer means libertarian. It means you're too cautious to admit you oppose Obama because he's Obama. Therefore, libertarian has less to do with economic matters and the oft forgot social liberalism and more to do with being anti-Obama.

Maybe it's a problem with the assumption that what a word means to you is what it means to everyone else. I don't associate atheists with assholes. I don't associate Libertarians with being automatically and shallowly anti-Obama (that's what the Tea Party is for). I don't write people off because they subscribe to a label. I try to move past what they call themselves and get to know who they are. That includes religious people, by the way.

ETA: At the same time, a person's self-identity is important to them and I'm not going to listen to someone describe what they think and what they believe, and then say "oh, well then see, you're wrong. You're not an X. You're a Y," because people have the right to call themselves whatever they want without my dumb ass intruding on it and correcting them.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

I am so confused.

Is there a term for someone who has a belief in a higher probability of no god existing than a god existing in this experiential reality that in some way does not convey the antithesis of a god while still professing their belief?

Pro-universe, perhaps? Existentialphilic? But that doesn't address the strong Theic bent most people have.
It's like proving a negative. If presented with a godlike framework, doesn't one have to either say No God, or reject the framework which functionally does the same thing?

Antipatheist? Non-theist? Meh?

You know what? The word is Atheist. It's fucking Atheist. And the notion that an atheist should be sorry for saying out loud that they think the idea of a God is ridiculous is disgusting and inexcusable. "Atheist" is not a bad word. It's a perfectly well-defined and well-understood word. There's no reason to go making up new vocabularies every time someone decides to twist a word into some epithet.

I think Nigel's point is there's really no need for the word anyway.

Do we not sneer at the word libertarian?

Yeah, we sneer at libertarians. But that's no reason to think we're any smarter than they are. Anyone and any group who's convinced they have the One True Way is dangerous and ought to be avoided. I laugh at libertarians, but then I get past the label and see if they have anything worthwhile to say because, you know, labels are just labels and they don't always describe what's behind them very well. Labels can be retained without being worshiped. You don't have to insist that your preconceptions about a label must hold true even when someone who carries that label doesn't live up to those preconceptions. You can give up your preconceptions. That's what rational people do when confronted with evidence that contradicts their beliefs.

Is the word necessary? Well, as long as the general consensus in society is that by default you are assumed to believe in God, but you don't believe in god, I would argue that yes there should be a word for that.

I happen to agree with this 100%.

I think part of Nigel's point though is that [at least subset of vocal] atheists do in fact think they are smarter than theists. Or at least saner. Hell, I was initially embarrassed to admit to being a theist of any stripe here because I figured that I would be mocked for it. Why would I feel that way if not for a perception that theists have about how atheists think of them?