• PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Sure.
      But routinely trying to take the basketball away from the basketball players shares a lot of similarities with a sport

      • Jimmyeatsausage@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Esp when you’re walking by the court minding your own business, and they keep throwing it at you, insisting you play for your good, put statues of Jordan in courthouses, make you swear on your favorite team in school and courts and try to pass laws to make the rest of life just like basketball.

        • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Right.

          To say that some basketball players are belligerent about their sport doesn’t mean that nobody is belligerent about not playing the sport.

          So there are people on the court trying to force you to wear their jerseys and the ball at you.
          And there are people who try to take the jerseys off players, puncture the ball, and protest outside courts.

          I absolutely agree there are more belligerent religious people than there are belligerent atheists, what I’m saying is that belligerent people on both sides share a lot in common.

          • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            and protest outside courts.

            Pretty sure those protests are inspired by basketball fans who try to shove their fandom down our throats. Please go away. You’re winning no supporters.

            • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Oh, so you’re explicitly saying you were seeking an echo chamber.

              Is that a whiff of belligerence I smell? Why yes, it is.

              • Cypher@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                oh no he shredded my metaphor I better label him belligerent, shit all over the board and strut around like I won.

                You absolute pigeon.

                • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  You mean the tired sports metaphor that I’ve been absolutely shitting on all over this section and nobody has yet produced a single reasonable response to, because it is clearly a silly metaphor that nobody was ever meant to take as seriously as y’all are taking it?

                  I’m trying to have a reasonable discussion with y’all but all you can say is

                  bUt SpOrTs 😭😭😭

                  Like… I agree with his assessment.
                  But you are too fucking blinded by your holy conviction to even consider that they can both be true at the same time

                  I swear y’all are Republicans.

  • m_f@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    They don’t understand the difference between belief and faith. I believe many things, but have no faith in them. I will take contrary evidence into account.

    • Areldyb@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      As long as they’re going to insist on giving religions special rights, then yeah, sure man, atheism’s a religion. I’m very devout.

  • absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Simple answer to this:

    If your imaginary friend can provide proof of its existence, I will accept that it exists. Until such time; I will go with the null hypothesis; your god doesn’t exist.

    But don’t feel special, because I believe that no gods exist.

    • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I think the distinction is between people who don’t believe, and the people who beligerantly don’t believe. If you make your non-belief a big part of your identity, it’s not religion but it shares a lot in common

      • psud@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I feel the belligerent non believers are the ones who feel they have been hurt by religion and feel strongly that others should be saved from the same harm

          • psud@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            What they lack is a belief in something. It’s like someone who so hates tennis that not only do they not play they tell others not to play either

            You’re not going to call that person a tennis player

            • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              I get that. I understand the analogy, and as an analogy, it’ll only get you so far. It’s hard to have a good faith (lol) discussion with you if you don’t actually read what I wrote; when you just repeat the same analogy that I already responded to, but with a different sport, you’re not helping me understand or telling me anything new.

              I agree I wouldn’t call them a tennis player, but I might call them an obnoxious spectator who streaks onto the court, smashes the rackets, punches the ref, and hurls insults at players. If you insist on continuing the silly stawman analogy, anyways.

              Edit: ok it wasn’t you who used the analogy before, it was someone else. But it’s such a common and silly analogy, you have to know it’s not really a good argument.

      • Fushuan [he/him]@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        If you make your non belief belligerent, it becomes faith. If you organise people in your non belief structure, create a congregation to talk about your non belief, and make it your mission to spread the word of non belief, it becomes a cult. With enough people following that specific non belief doctrine, it becomes a religion.

        Iirc, the satanic temple is a cult/religion about atheism, with a given doctrine and a specific belief system. Atheism itself can’t be a religion just how the concept of theism isn’t either.

          • Fushuan [he/him]@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            I said several things, can you point which one of them is false? I’m not sure of the satanic temple thing, I might be remembering incorrectly.

  • yokonzo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Downvote all you want, I’m an atheist, but some of you absolutely treat atheism like a religion

    • phoenixz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yes, but with a reason.

      No-one has committed atrocities like genocides in the name of atheism, no-one justifies crimes with atheism, no-one tries to ruin lives with atheism.

      Religion, any religion, cannot claim the same

      • yokonzo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I don’t really care for your reasoning, it’s still zealotry and it’s just as annoying as some evangelist

        • Zagorath@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          The difference is that evangelicals hold positions that are necessarily harmful. They’re homophobic and transphobic, they don’t believe in women’s bodily autonomy, and they promote anti-science teaching in schools.

          The problem with evangelicals isn’t that they evangelise. It’s what they evangelise.

          • yokonzo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Again, really don’t care about the reasoning behind it, my stance is, without any ambiguity, this “I find devout athiests to be as or even more annoying than devout Christians/catholics”

        • phoenixz@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          How many atheists have tried shoeinv their dicks down your child’s throat in the name of jesus?

          How many atheists have murdered or started wars in the name of <insert your favorite god or messiah here>

          Howmany atheists have tried controlling your sex life?

          How many atheists have required you believe in the almighty unicorn?

          How many atheists have come to your door to bring you the good news?

          How many atheists have raped and stolen only to then ask forgiveness the next Sunday?

          How many atheists would quite happily assault, rape, or murder people whose only crime is loving someone of the wrong gender?

          I could go on a while, but yeah, you’re right, atheists are worse than Christians or Muslims or whatever, we’re the worst.