- Registrado
- 2 de Abr, 2023
How is this different from the rightoids of melanin?Black leftists have one single goal in mind, which is acquiring more gibs. It's a fairly straight forward ideology.
Sigue el video de abajo para ver cómo instalar nuestro sitio como una aplicación web en tu pantalla de inicio.
Nota: Esta función puede no estar disponible en algunos navegadores.
How is this different from the rightoids of melanin?Black leftists have one single goal in mind, which is acquiring more gibs. It's a fairly straight forward ideology.
I do think that people will always have some sort of superstition they believe in, yes. I can't imagine voodoo becoming popular though. I could see a mix of Neopaganism, Buddhism, and a vague sort of Spiritualism with vaguely Christian elements gradually overtaking Christianity among the American populace.Do you (and everyone else in the thread) think that it'll always be a cycle of different faiths replacing each other or there'll be a point when a majority of population picks up atheism?
For example, about 70% of Americans consider themselves religious, what do you consider more likely to happen at some point - 70% of Americans will switch to Voodooism or something like that or 70% of Americans will be atheists?
Also, if you think the future is mostly/predominantly atheist (I mean both individual countries and the world as a whole), how will it be achieved? A good chunk of populace will decide they don't feel like being religious (like how atheism has grown in the West) or it will be forced from the top at a gun point (a-la USSR, Socialist Block, China, Anarchist Catalonia)?

What do you mean by this?I think the biggest apparent obstacle to not going atheist is mind-brain dependence, possibly making the "soul" hard to believe in.
Workings of the mind clearly depends on brain function. Which challenges the spiritual belief that consciousness, thinking, and feeling really come from a magical entity.What do you mean by this?
Dawkins is okay, but we all miss him.I found it mildly interesting how she pretty much offers zero arguments in favor of Christianity besides wishy-washy emotional bullshit (edit: you'd think she'd know better from her years as an atheist). Dawkins, in almost nostalgic fashion, was able to get in a lot of good dunks. The colossal faggot of a moderator asks him some retarded questions and gets dunked on as well.
>Let's become a Christian to resurrect my political career after a sex scandal.let's become Christian to own the Left
One major weakness with Ayaan Hirsi IMO is the fact that she's an ex-Muslim Somali woman with a traumatic past who found a better life in a Christian-majority nation. I'm usually very warm towards the ex-Muslim crowd, a lot of them are based and will bring the heat against Islam that most people won't/can't, but many of them also fall into this trap I'll call the Refugee's Remorse which basically starts with "I was taken in by a Christian-majority nation, who am I to shit on Christianity?" and can lead to "who am I to even reject Christianity?". It doesn't help that Christians are constantly bombarding them with bless-you's and Jesus-loves-you's which probably hits them on a deep, emotional level after all the trauma they endured from a Muslim upbringing. When Dawkins said "Yes, Islam is very nasty religion, but Christianity isn't all that nice either. For instance, it's obsessed with the idea of sin", Ayaan responded with "I think it's obsessed with love", which I found very telling. The famous George Carlin quote ending with "... but he loves you!" comes to mind.This new fad of "let's become Christian to own the Left" is nonsense. I would like to hear what God fearing Christians actually think about Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Jordan Peterson.
Ayaan is a cultural Christian, nothing more. I doubt she believes in any of the supernatural claims. She just returns to the comfort of "Christian culture" whenever questioned on the specific dogmas. It's bordering on dishonesty and just makes her appear extremely ungenuine. She's drifting slowly towards Jordan "it would take me four days to explain the resurrection" Peterson; who comically flails around with his word salad responses. His discussion with Sam Harris was like watching somebody try to nail gelatin to the ceiling.
How about we just call out bullshit when we see it. If being offended wasn't rewarded, and instead laughed at by more people, we might be in a better position. Just take the old Hitchens line when somebody says they're offended: "I'm still waiting to hear what your point is." We need one bullshit man in every room to set the world straight.
Ver archivo adjunto 6078063
Can't say that I have, although it sounds pretty silly and random. Same level as "have you seen a tree?" or "how do your lungs even breathe???" followed by "that's proof of God!".Any of youse ever heard an argument from suffering proof? Like, we all suffer which gives meaning to temporary reprieves from toil and suffering, which means God exists?
Fuckin' magnets—how do they work?Same level as "have you seen a tree?" or "how do your lungs even breathe???" followed by "that's proof of God!".
And so do other people.I love Circlejerks
In terms of rhetoric, it's a somewhat more complex version of calling someone stupid and ugly. That can be funny, when it's done well. However, it's not actually a good argument.The association of atheism with "neckbeards" and fedoras isn't a very good argument against atheism.
In terms of rhetoric, it's a somewhat more complex version of calling someone stupid and ugly. That can be funny, when it's done well. However, it's not actually a good argument.
You're still thinking about the fight(s) you had in the "Is BP ruining site culture" thread, aren't you? I mean, I mostly agree with your sentiment but way to make it obvious, dude
Not really. I've thought of those threads as being masturbatory for a while now. That thread was just where I decided to express my beliefs.You're still thinking about the fight(s) you had in the "Is BP ruining site culture" thread, aren't you? I mean, I mostly agree with your sentiment but way to make it obvious, dude![]()