• BlackRing
    link
    fedilink
    181 year ago

    I haven’t eaten enough crayons to be able to fully understand that…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      61 year ago

      The implication is that belief in non-belief is more important than Christian babies…I believe.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    171 year ago

    So you’re telling me some magic spray will save babies? Why does everything have to start with a fairytale in your world?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      111 year ago

      At the point where magic existing is a requirement for the scenario anyway, i might as well be believing in god, i guess.

  • Diplomjodler
    link
    fedilink
    361 year ago

    It’s impossible to lose something I don’t have. Belief in atheism makes no sense whatsoever as a concept.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      41 year ago

      So you don’t believe you’re an atheist? If I accused you of unknowingly believing in a god, you wouldn’t deny it?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          Yes. I believe in all gods and myths, and I hadn’t consciously thought that I believe in Krampus before, but now thanks to you, I realise I do.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        You’re confusing belief, knowledge, and conviction, it’s a common issue with common, imprecise, language.

        A sceptic would proportion their conviction of a position according to the available evidence. As there is no evidence to support any specific god, and some evidence against several gods, it is rational to be tentatively convinced there is no god. That position is atheist.

        There are of course also other ways at arriving to an atheist position, not all of them reasonable.

        You are however also engaging in either dishonest argumentation or esoteric sophistry horribly misreading the current discussion. It is reasonable, and polite, to assume a person knows their own mind better than any external person, and if prompted, has right of interpretation to their own beliefs, knowledge and convictions.

        It’s unreasonable, and unproductive, for me to assert you’re secretly a Russian propagandist, and even more so when you say you aren’t. I cannot know this better than you, and either I trust you to engage this conversation honestly, accurately describing your propagandist status, or I don’t, and we have nothing more to gain from a discussion.

        To adress your argument: the person is convinced they take an atheist position. You accusing them of unknowingly being a theist is thus absurd and/or dishonest.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          21 year ago

          It is reasonable, and polite, to assume a person knows their own mind better than any external person, and if prompted, has right of interpretation to their own beliefs, knowledge and convictions.

          No, I disagree. I agree with you that we have the right to interpret our own intentions freely, because intentions cannot reliably be externally sensed. But let me give an example as to our beliefs and biases.

          Suppose I’m a scientist conducting trials on a new drug. I gather a group of volunteer test subjects, and begin trials to compare the drug to a placebo. However, after they take the drug (and placebo), some of the test subjects come to me and say “You don’t have to test me, doc. I’m immune to placebos. I can feel this working, so I know I’m in the experimental group and I know the drug works great.”

          If I were to apply your idea that you can’t mistrust someone else’s biases and beliefs about themself, then I would have to take their word and my science would be garbage.

          To adress your argument: the person is convinced they take an atheist position

          Yes, my question proved that very neatly, didn’t it? They didn’t think they had any belief in being an atheist, and that the final line of the original meme was therefore nonsense. But I used a very elegant question to prove that they do have belief in being an atheist.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            31 year ago

            You seem fundamentally confused about this topic, unwilling to listen, and unequipped to further your understanding of neither crux, domain nor dialogue. We will not get further in this discussion.

            Best of luck in your endeavours.

      • RiddleMeWhy
        link
        fedilink
        131 year ago

        Atheist is a label for people who do not believe in God. You don’t believe in a system of atheism, you apply the label because you don’t believe in God. If a person suddenly doesn’t apply the term atheist to themselves it doesn’t automatically make them a Christian.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          You’re changing the subject. While the OP is about christianity, this little subthread is about whether someone can lose their belief in atheism. Nobody in this subthread mentioned christianity until you did, and nobody in this subthread is a christian. I would appreciate some good faith engagement instead of changing the subject to those other guys over there we both hate. You hate em, I hate em, let’s get over it and actually have a fruitful discussion.

          You’re saying you don’t believe in a system of atheism. I’m taking this to mean you don’t have any beliefs asserting your atheism. So if I accused you of not being an atheist, you wouldn’t deny it, right? Cause you don’t believe anything about you being an atheist. There are no beliefs you possess for me to challenge if I call you a theist, correct? You’d go along with it or hold a neutral view?

          • swim
            link
            fedilink
            71 year ago

            Atheism, by definition, is an absence of belief in deities. If you “accused” an atheist of “not being an atheist,” they would think you were confused about what atheism is. They would likely not be personally offended by your ignorance.

            I don’t know why anyone would “go along with it” were you to incorrectly assert they held beliefs which they did not, but if they did, it would likely be in pity for or exasperation with the person impotently trying to “gotcha” their “beliefs.”

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 year ago

              So, you’re playing a trick here. You’re saying you don’t have any beliefs, but you’re also saying you think I’m wrong. That’s not an absence of belief. That’s a negative belief. Belief in the absence of something, not absence of beliefs. You’re mixing the two up.

              Here, I’ll explain with a hypothetical. Imagine you’re on a space ship with someone who doesn’t believe in vacuums. They think there’s air everywhere. They say the air in the ship is stuffy, and they want to open the window to get some fresh air in. You tell them that you’re all going to die if you do that, because there’s no air. It’s not that you have no beliefs, it’s that you specifically believe there is no air. It’s a belief in absence, not an absence of belief. Your belief in there being no air informs all sorts of other beliefs, like the belief that opening the window will kill you.

              Do you have a belief in the absence of theism regarding yourself, or do you have an absence of belief regarding your religious status? You can only pick one, they’re mutually exclusive. You cannot have both.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                31 year ago

                They believe the absence of theism; the deity or religion is not relevant. It’s really that simple.

              • swim
                link
                fedilink
                7
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Unfortunately for your ego, you have nothing relevant or novel to “explain” to me; you did not arrive at this discussion with an adequate understanding of “belief” or “atheism.”

                And to your further misfortune, you haven’t developed the necessary reverence for growth which typically fosters the humility to recognize one’s own ignorance and error.

                But the most salient bad luck you’ve wrought here has been the pain and loss of those who have chosen to read and engage with your blithering comments made in bad faith.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  11 year ago

                  My ego? I don’t have much of an ego, I’m just a regular drone. If you think I’m important though thanks

          • RiddleMeWhy
            link
            fedilink
            71 year ago

            While you accuse me of not following the logic of your argument, you didn’t follow mine. I never said I was an atheist, you just assumed it. Actually, I’m agnostic. The reality is I don’t give a shit if you think I’m an atheist or not. Calling an atheist a theist is inaccurate, so is calling me one, but it doesn’t personally offend me, it’s just an inaccurate statement because it assigns a belief that I don’t hold.

            Maybe respond in good faith if you want good faith back

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      111 year ago

      Because he’s also ok with mass shooting, child rape, war, disease, famine, and the Ice Capades.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    141 year ago

    I imagine OOP was asked “Would you kill your own child if you thought it was divine mandate” mere minutes before posting this

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    191 year ago

    I’m not sure babies CAN be christian. Isn’t a central tenant of the whole thing that you CHOOSE god by having faith? A case could be made for a 13 or 14 year old, but a baby can’t really consent to something on that scale. I remember being told once that babies too young to decide automatically go to heaven, so… Why are they against abortion?

    It’s almost like there’s no logic at all.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      21 year ago

      They get baptized at birth to save them from limbo. I think the free will bit doesn’t count until you’re able to have one.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      31 year ago

      Then why baptize babies? I’m pretty sure this is a difference in doctrine between denominations.

    • livus
      link
      fedilink
      151 year ago

      It sort of feels like whoever wrote this thinks christianity and atheism are like ethnic groups and they are at war with each other.

      • Ech
        link
        fedilink
        English
        41 year ago

        Also that atheists need to be believed in? This person is nuts.

  • Melllvar
    link
    fedilink
    English
    47
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’d spray it, save the babies, and then continue being atheist.

    I wasn’t magically transformed into an atheist so I’m not terribly concerned about being magically transformed back.

  • Rhynoplaz
    link
    fedilink
    161 year ago

    I mean, I say some stupid nonsense when I’m high as fuck, but I don’t put it online… Usually. Don’t check my comment history.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    301 year ago

    Is atheism a belief though? I’m not sure. Is it a belief when a person might be an atheist based on a lack of verifiable evidence to the former?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      41 year ago

      I guess? I mean, it’s no more or less a belief than nihilism or agnosticism.

      What would that mean for the question? Could I select agnosticism? Would I be appointed a random religion? OOOOH, would I take the Christianity from all the babies, leaving them as atheists?!? I’d totally do that. Take one for the team.

  • anon
    link
    fedilink
    121 year ago

    Lose what faith ? Also would you do it if the roles are reversed as you actually have faith to lose ?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    91 year ago

    So if i spray a weird can of chemicals i end up with brain damage because i inhale it, and then start believing in a man in the sky… 🤔

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    151 year ago

    I would safe the babies. My belief in atheism is so strong that I believe I would find back to it. Always. Via logic and reason!

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    31 year ago

    Fuck them kids. Dumb little idiots should’ve learned running before obedience to sky cake. Pretty sure it’s a skill issue. Ethiopian babies woulda figured out running 100%

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    141 year ago

    Atheism is a lack of belief…

    0 fucks given - 0 fucks given = 0 fucks to give
    

    Saving some babies is a net positive.