News

I fully support a woman's right to choose without conditions because I believe it's wrong to require that someone keep someone else alive with their own body. It removes that person's agency and reduces them to less than a person. We can't require that people donate organs after they die, so we obviously can't require that they host another person against their will.

A person should have more rights and protections than a corpse. Obviously.

Don't assume the poster's position on that issue... I believe in God and I believe in the right to abortion too, everything is not black or white.

I mean ... what did they think the result of those low effort posts would be, exactly? I've been on the Internet long enough to see far, FAR worse than that. All it does is clutter up a thread.

OTOH, threads like these are great for my blocklist. Makes it easy to screen out histrionic bigots that can't differentiate between an Episcopalian or United Methodist with a gay priest who's worst crime against humanity involves providing housing for folks in their community and some batshit nuts Evangelical White Nationalist.

You must be a pretty terrible Christian, because the Bible is overwhelmingly anti-science and God's stance on homosexuality couldn't be any clearer. I don't think you're allowed to pick and choose what parts of the Bible to follow 🤔

no that pretty much sums up every openly religious person I know

You're right. Believing in the literal existence of any god or supernatural entity obviously doesn't imply that the believer is a moron in a general intellectual sense. There are plenty of highly skilled and academically-inclined religious people, including scientists. However, such beliefs do reflect an inability or stubborn unwillingness to align with a scientific worldview, which in turn suggests some form of psychological weakness. I mean, honestly, what would you think of someone who believes in the literal existence of fairies, ghosts, and invisible dragons and organized their world view around those beliefs? You may not actively dislike or discriminate against such people, but you would wonder at their psychological constitution and susceptibility to delusion. And surely you would be worried if they became a majority and started voting for politicians whose goal is to align your society with their invisible magic dragon worship. It's just so...utterly ridiculous. That's why atheists use the shorthand moniker "moron" when referring to religious people. We don't mean that religious people are literally intellectually incapable, just that they hold an inexplicably stupid and inconsistent worldview. The negativity component doesn't apply to the fairy-believers and dragon-worshippers because they are an unthreatening fringe. Christians and Muslims, however, are large, dangerous, and politically influential groups who have shown a tendency towards forcing their views on others. And a majority of Christians, especially the most vocal ones, do vote for Trump. I don't hate all individual Christians or Muslims, who can be perfectly nice people, but I really do hate public and especially political religious expression.

I never once ever called a person a moron for believing in skydaddy. I know it simply isn't true because I have worked with plenty of wicked smart skydaddy followers. Also I was one and didn't get any smarter when I left religion.

The rest of the stuff yeah sure you are all basically the same. Don't really care that some of you pretend to be otherwise on the internet. I have seen how you vote and that is all the data I need. Sorry your Pope is having legal issues now.

I'll stop saying that when theists stop thinking atheists eat babies or are in league with some sort of archfiend that only exists in their own religion.