Two Proofs That Atheists Are Lying
Proof #1: Atheists do not suggest replacing law enforcement with animal control.
According to atheism people are animals who are in no way exceptional in comparison to other animals. Therefore atheists should logically suggest that animal control officers be used to capture and destroy nuisance people in the same way they are used to control nuisance animals. People are not merely like animals, we are animals. Animal control is far more effective and less expensive than law enforcement. About thirty people per year in the US are killed by dogs; about 20,000 are murdered by other humans. Furthermore the cost of police, courts and prisons is astronomical; dog catchers and animals shelters, not so much. The elaborate and expensive criminal justice system is based on the superstitious, pre-Darwinian notion that people are different; we have souls and were created in the image of God.
However no atheist suggests this because no atheist sincerely believes that we are merely animals, not better or worse than a dog or a rat.
Proof #2: Atheists do not advocate global warming.
According to atheism, microbes developed into people through the process of evolution. Mass extinctions have accelerated evolution in the past. Global warming is now causing a mass extinction. Global warming should therefore be a positive thing in the long run which should be encouraged.
However no atheist suggests this because no atheist sincerely believes in evolution.
80 comments
1. If we were to advocate this, the cost of animal control would skyrocket (even using your own numbers, which I'm sure were lifted straight out of your ass) thus resulting in a zero gain enterprise. What I do advocate -- for reasons unrelated to my atheism -- is reform of our law enforcement system.
2. Global warming as a general concept does happen. The issue is that we as a species are accelerating it. That's not an advocacy question but rather a serious question about whether we have effectively doomed our own species (along with countless others) or if we can stem that tide even a little bit.
Well, i'd like to say that most urban law enforcement is operated like animal control when it comes to crimes such as drug use. And if the religious right had there way with zero tolerance, law enforcement would be far more cruel than animal control and euthanasia programs. Second, evolution is adaptation too environment, so while global warming over the course of millions of years would create species suited to it, it would wipe out most current species...that includes us.
"According to atheism people are animals who are in no way exceptional in comparison to other animals."
Then...
"However no atheist suggests this because no atheist sincerely believes that we are merely animals, not better or worse than a dog or a rat."
Self-contradiction is the best pwnage!
@Filin De Blanc
"Stoned any adulterers to death lately? No? Then I guess you don't sincerely believe in Judaism."
No so fast, Filin De Blanc, Jewish Philsopher really does advocate stoning people. He is as "honest" as you can get about being a true believer.
"Darwinism is a rotten myth" - John Maynard Smith
"Nature's factuality, is not, and cannot be, our morality" - Stephen Jay Gould
Apparently, Jewish philosophy doesn't include the "naturalistic fallacy ". Who knew?
Humans are animals, and are no more or less evolved than any other animal, or plant for that matter. But no atheist I know believes that all animals are interchangable therefore. We are all equally evolved, but for different things.
Evolution is a fact, as is natural selection, but that does not mean that we are obliged to accept the consequences of either. Faced with the scourge of malaria, we use netting and insecticides, drain swamps and release predators or pathogens to control the mosquito population. We don't sit back and hope to be luckily more resistant to Plasmodium parasites.
Not because we don't believe evolution happens, but because it is a scientific fact, not an ethical philosophy.
"Proof #1: Atheists do not suggest replacing law enforcement with animal control. "
I often advocate animal control for protecting society from fundies.
"Global warming is now causing a mass extinction. Global warming should therefore be a positive thing in the long run which should be encouraged. "
This is sort of right. A global warming/population bottleneck event could make fundies extinct. The population that comes out on the other side would be decended from people who understood and used scientific knowledge to survive.
Of course it could also result in violent ignorant fundies killing everyone else, thus ending out brief experiment with rational thought.
Notice, jewish philosopher, that in the second case your religion will probably become extinct.
"Proof 1" I agree, we are mere animals, we are really no better than any other animal.
This is like saying "I believe in gravity, therefore I think people should jump off skyscrapers".
Also, animal control officers don't "destroy" animals unless it's absolutely necessary.
WHY WOULD ANYONE WANT THAT?!
Sorry, but WHAT?
Why would ANY atheist want that? Maybe a mass extinction isn't on anyone's agenda because they have an attachment to life?
What a stupid bunch of "reasoning".
We may as well claim that all religious people want to die and meet their god as soon as possible. Since they aren't offing themselves every minute by the thousands, we can assume that's wrong.
And on second thought: lying about what?
of course humans are exceptional. That's not always good. You're proof.
According to atheism people are animals who are in no way exceptional in comparison to other animals.
What does a disbelief in God have to do with thinking that humans are the same as other animals?
Global warming should therefore be a positive thing in the long run which should be encouraged.
That's like suggesting cows should encourage the destruction of grass in order to "accelerate evolution".
If atheists would really believe in gravity they wouldn’t put railings on high places
And if atheists would really believe in germ theory they wouldn’t take antibiotics
Makes about the same amount of sense.
Congratulations, you are the umpteenth fundie to confuse atheism with belief in science.
1. No one claims to believe that humans are exactly the same as other animals.
2. Believing that evolution happens =/= believing in a moral duty to encourage it to happen more rapidly. Evolution is not a good thing or a bad thing in and of itself.
Judging by his extended argument with people responding to his "proofs", I have to conclude that this Jewish philosopher is not a very decent philosopher. One person gives him a counterargument for one of his points and encourages him to look it up. JP responds with, "I am not a reference library."
Even if I were to take his arguments with a grain of salt and actually analyse them, that response pretty much invalidates him as a philosopher.
What this is I don't even...
People ARE animals, and I'll go ahead and tell you that if by some strange chain of events I had the chance to save you or a random "lesser" animal, I'd choose the latter in a heartbeat.
My cats are smarter than you, ffs.
Proof #1: Atheists do not suggest replacing law enforcement with animal control.
I do! I can't wait to send Billy The Exterminator on your sorry ass!
Proof #2: Atheists do not advocate global warming.
As a golfer, I'd love to play golf in the antarctic, using your head as a golf ball, the only ball you got!
Oh, FFS! Reductio ad absurdum only makes you look feeble minded, ya know.
And what does any prison system have to do with a "soul" except to extinguish it in the most brutal fashion possible?
#1 Jails and wars are animal control. They are more expensive because thinking animals present more grey area problems than a diseased rat or mad dog.
#2 Mass extinction would do little to protect myself or my family. Evolution has no direction so why should I favor mass extinctions or rates?
Take your #1 & #2 and go flush yourself.
You're entire argument is based on the presupposition that evolution, which you call Darwinism, is a religion or ideology. It is not, it is a science. Evolution is a descriptive science, it tells us how the world is, not how the world should be.
Your argument is also based on the false idea that evolution and atheism are interchangeable. They are not. The fact that many atheists accept the theory of evolution by natural selection is irrelevant, because plenty of theists do as well.
people are animals who are in no way exceptional in comparison to other animals.
In the biological sense this is true. And that's all atheists, and almost all religious people for that matter, say.
You choose to ignore that on purpose.
But, using your style of logic:
One Simple Proof That Fundamentalist Jews Are Lying
Proof: Fundamentalist Jews do not eat dogs
Jewish dietary laws forbid eating pork. But Jewish dietary laws do not forbid eating dog meat. Since he didn't forbid it, God must approve of humans eating dogs, but you don't find any Kosher dog butchers. There should be thousands of them. There aren't because fundamentalist Jews don't sincerely believe in God's laws.
Well, let's take a look at our taxonomy (formatting's a bit messy due to copying and pasting from Wikipedia):
Kingdom: Animalia (See that? We're animals. Fail.)
"Everybody must get stoned"______Bob Dylan
Global warming should therefore be a positive thing in the long run which should be encouraged.
I thought the happy ending of the world was your lot's wet dream.
What in the holy hell is this person trying to convey? I see a lot of words but not much sense. So, I take it, it must be non sequitor day. To engage in this special day, I submit the following:
Purple because aliens like propeller hats.
1. I believe some guy with a funny mustache tried that with you Jews a few decades back. How did that go? Why are you asinine to suggest such a thing?
2. Survival of the fittest. Humans are by far not the fittest in adapting to change, being unable to survive extended periods without clean food or water.
Given that people like you are part of the human race, the mass extinctions caused by global warming will almost certainly wipe out humanity. The key to survival is to prevent global warming not deny it.
Point one requires complete ignorance, and it's pretty easy to tell he's never met or spoken to an athiest.
Point two likewise requires complete ignorance, not just of the views of others but of the existence of this thing called 'self-presevation' and also 'species-preservation' (The phrase 'too dumb to live' springs to mind). On the whole people would prefer to survive, and they'd prefer the species to survive, which is an evolutionary trait.
Also, I really resent being told that I don't sincerely beleive in a fact of our existence.
jewish philosopher brand Philostrawmen !!
New and improved ! Now with 50% more non-sequitur !
Get 'em while they're hot folks !!
"We are animals" and "We are mere animals" are two very different statements. Citizen Kane and Freddy Got Fingered (to which I will not give the courtesy of italicization) are both films, yet we do not suggest that because they both come from the same technology (the same scientific theory underlies their projection), they have the same worth. We are animals, but that doesn't mean we aren't a grand and wonderful species. We are. And we are worth protecting.
No scientific theory ever advocates a particular moral philosophy except to imbeciles who misunderstand them. Evolution does not suggest that humans are somehow worthless any more than gravity suggests birds are sinners against Mother Earth.
@Raised by Horses:
I wish. I know plenty of people (many quoted on here) who desperately need their philosophy licenses revoked. This guy comes instantly to my mind.
Here's the thing about his second "point": I find it interesting that, to this person, active facilitation of evolution is the only way to believe in it. If we're not doing everything we can to further evolution as a process, then we must be lying about it, and that's not even taking into account his specious reasoning.
Well, no. Evolution happens, but we're all in the middle of it. It serves no purpose on a personal level to aid a mass extinction; the evolutionary process will trundle along quite well without our "aid," as it has forever.
... And that's IF we take his reasoning at face value.
#1 Just because you don't think something is better than something else, doesn't mean you must treat them both the same.
It's obvious that we would treat our own species better than another species, it's just our evolutionary need to look after ourselves first. We can understand and empathise with humans much more readily than with dogs, hence why we make the effort.
#2 Oh look, another fundie doesn't understand evolution. But your belief isn't based on ignorance, no sireee. Why should we try and accelerate evolution any more than we should aid gravity by tying weights to things or killing birds? It's not some sort of god that needs to be appeased. If encouraging Global Warming damages our chances of survival, why would we do it?
"According to atheism people are animals who are in no way exceptional in comparison to other animals."
Fail... since that isn't atheism at all, nothing you say based on it is true.
@Mr Spak
"The population that comes out on the other side would be decended from people who understood and used scientific knowledge to survive. "
Priority is limiting nukes to individual events.
1. Er, yes, we ARE animals, but what planet do you come from that all animals behave the same? Rats do not conduct themselves like dogs, dogs do not conduct themselves like humans, and humans don't conduct themselves like either (usually). We all have different physical and mental needs and our own unique social structures. You can't "just act like animals" because all animals are different. Is this seriously a difficult concept to grasp?
2. This is even worse. Evolution isn't a good OR a bad thing. It's just something that happens in response to a changing environment and the changing of competing species. Yeah, if the climate changes, species will surely adapt. They'll also continue to adapt to their current environment if the climate DOESN'T change. It's not something we WANT to happen, it's just something that DOES happen.
Jewish Fundies, Because we can't let the Christians hog all the stoopid!
(Although I guess jewish fundie craziness really is nothing new to ME. They've been nuts for decades in the modern worlds. (And in Israel just as thuggish as the christian fundies in the US.)
Religion uses primitive instincts like fear of punishment to keep the more aggressive individuals at bay, who sometimes even admit that they would go on a killing spree, if it wasn't for jesus.
Biologically we are animals, yes. In law enforcement we look at intent and reasoning behind the action. The other animals, besides humans (and perhaps chimpanzees and gorillas), have no real intent or reasoning behind their actions. That is why we have one set of laws for humans and one set for the other animals.
We humans have contributed to the Global warming. We want to reduce our contribution, so that we can keep the Global warming off for as long as possible. There is a difference between "natural" and "positive", stupid. It's natural for lions and wolves to kill humans, but we want to reduce the risk of humans being killed by wolves and lions anyway.
We don't "believe" in evolution, any more than we "believe" in birds flying and clouds giving off rain.
That's the sloppiest strawman I've ever seen.
"Therefore atheists should logically suggest that animal control officers be used to capture and destroy nuisance people in the same way they are used to control nuisance animals."
Yet I'm quite sure you're very comfortable with the concept of 'prison'.
So tell me, syphilitic morons of std.com, why should I believe in the magic evolution fairy? Why not the FSM?
ROTFLMAO!!!
I love this site. What a hoot!
I guess it's a problem if I dish out ridicule instead of just being the object of it.
So, syphilites of std.com, how many racial inferiors or enemies of the people have you murdered today? Slacking off perhaps, thanks to theistic police officers?
atheists do not like global warming because we live here , and a lot of heat, drought, dying grass, shrubberies and food crops are not welcome.
We have police because our society has rules for the conduct of that societies members. My hamster is an animal, so am I. He cannot get a drivers license, he has no credit card or bank account. The police denied him a carry permit for his Glock. He is not human so different rules apply.
You never played animal, vegetable or mineral as a kid did you ?
According to atheism, there are no gods. That is all that atheism says.
1. People are indeed members of the animal kingdom. That does not change the fact that we are more intelligent than most other animals and therefore ought to be held responsible for our actions, and to be given a chance to talk in our defense.
2. Who would advocate global warming? We ought to do whatever we can to minimize our impact on the climate. The ToE is a description of what happens, not a rulebook of what should happen, stupid.
Treating humans like dogs is the same bad logic as treating hemlock like parsley. The fact that one thing is different from other things in that group doesn't make it not in that group, it just makes it not something else.
Global warming isn't bad for the Earth per se, but it's bad for life, and we are life.
What are atheists lying about? The only things we have in common are that we either believe that there are no gods, or we don't believe that there are gods, and that we are focused on reality.
1. According to atheism, there are no gods. That's it, there is no other ideas, dogmas, rules or liturgies. Sure, humans are part of the animal kingdom. But, humans are more intelligent and self-aware than most other animals, which makes us more responsible for our actions. Humans are aware of death which makes us appreciate life. To nature, we are no more important than a dog, a rat, a frog or a bee. I'd say most atheists want us to treat other animals more like humans, instead of treating humans more like other animals.
2. How the heck do you advocate global warming? Do you advocate photosynthesis and gravity too? Global warming is a process that is happening, and human interaction is speeding up this process, thousandfold. Thinking human beings realize this and want to diminish our impact on this process. Evolution is also a process that is happening, not a set of rules to follow. Evolution happens best when it's left to its own devices; we should NOT interact.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
