Why are atheists such a douchebags ? Seriously

Call it secular humanism then, not atheism

>They unironicaly believe that people are superior just by one simple belief, not by skills or IQ
Nobody said that
It's Christcucks who think to be superior just becuase they belive in their skydaddy

Not an atheist, pointing out your entire post is one huge strawman. You are unreasonable and are making theists look retarded.

Why is his willy so small?

Why does he have a nipple for a cock

The true redpill is agnostiscm

I'm an atheist and I don't believe any of that

Attached: 1529577586429.png (961x1912, 182K)

you're wrong, atheism peaked in the 1970's as a result of secularism in the west. birthrates have dramatically declined since then, and atheism is now down to 1-2% of the world population (and declining).

religion has survived for thousands of years because they place so much emphasis on the family unit and children. they are going nowhere, they outnumber you, they outbreed you, and they are always going to be the majority.

Because they're godless, amoral heathens. This question doesn't even deserve to be typed out.

Objective morality can only exist if God is real. They believe he's not, so to them, anything can be subjectively moral.

Most Atheists are plebs, most Christians are plebs, most people on this planet are plebs. This doesn't stop them from being loud and vocal and the loudest and most vocal plebs are usually the people trying to engage others in conversation. When you engage in a conversation with a pleb you have only yourself to blame for subjecting yourself to their stupidity.

If i had such small dingdong i would hate god too

>emphasis on the family unit and children
First and foremost monotheistic religions are about that they are right and everybody else is wrong and can burn in all eternity for their beliefs.

How is that a red pill ? dumb shit ? the red pill is truth he either exist or he does not , not knowing is bluepill

Attached: 4636296936.png (343x413, 73K)

It isn't, he's 2m tall so it looks small.

nah, it's tiny

He confirmed for idiots like you on camera, with a ruler, that it's 5.75 inches, not huge but certainly not tiny.

with is a shame because it's what kept is from destroying ourselves :^ )

It literally looks like a little button.

Post your cock with face and timestamp if it's so big then

Why are we talking about Theamazingatheist's penis?

They are just random edgy millennial fucks in the middle of existential crisis which makes them agressive.

On the contrary

same reason christfags are
theyre all people.

A truly cucked S-oy Boy who will now spend the rest of his life supporting his wife's children and probably think it makes him superior in some way

there is no necessary connection between atheism and any particular moral position - it is quite possible to be atheist and anti abortion, anti women's rights. pro slavery, anything at all.

religions on the other hand tend to be anti science, anti logic, anti women for the most part and anti each other - they are inherently divisive and short sighted and likely to lead to conflict. they are totalitarian.

also they tend to attract low iq people. Sorry but it is true that on average the average atheist is smarter than the average religious person.

this is probably because anyone who thinks very much about religion will logically conclude it is bunk.

of course there a some dumb atheists, and some smart religious people but going on the averages...

and yet theists are unable to say what is objectively moral...

they have the same moral dilemmas as others. they fail to answer difficult questions. they fall back on "it says in the book some man wrote down a few hundred years ago..."

not a good way to run your life.

morality is not objective. there is no separate measurable or detectable moral quality to a thing or act.

ahah! but the real question: can anyone tell if that dude is circumsized?

> not a belief
> it's a synonym for belief

If atheism is a religion, then bald is a hair style.

>First and foremost monotheistic religions are about that they are right and everybody else is wrong and can burn in all eternity for their beliefs.
>implying that's not a good thing

You can open your mind to trash for all I care but there will come a time when it's been filled with trash to such an extent that it will be hard to disinfect it. Your western nations have rot and festered only because in your arrogance you thought yourselves better than God. Have fun with your trucks of peace and peaceful loving migrants who will overtake you soon :)

He either gots a small peepee or it's because he's so fucking fat and he's a grower. It's one of those two

>I was only 19 years old.
>I loved Žižek so much, I had all the books and films.
>I pray to Žižek every night, thanking him for the knowledge he's given me. “Žižek is love” I say, “Žižek is life."
>My dad is Jordan Peterson. He hears me and calls me a cultural marxist. I knew he was just jealous of my devotion to Žižek.
>I called him a pseudo-intellectual.
>He hits me and sends me to sleep.
>I'm crying now and my face hurts.
>I lay in bed and it's really cold. i smell something...
>It's Žižek! I was so happy.
>He whispers in my ear an obscene joke.
>As I laugh he grabs me with his slavic hands and puts me on his lap. I'm ready.
>I am all ears for Žižek.
>He penetrates my mind and expands my view on the current predicament.
>It hurts so much, but I do it for Žižek. I can feel my neoliberal illusions shatter and my eyes starting to water as i am picturing future authoritarian regimes in the west.
>I want to revitalise the left.
>He sniffs a mighty sniff as he fills my young mind with his wisdom.
>My dad walks in.
>Žižek looks him straight in the eye and says,
>"Capitalism is entering an authoritarian phase."
>Žižek crushes him in a debate and leaves through my window.
>Žižek is love. Žižek is life.

Attached: 1846345_1.jpg (1200x630, 40K)

Why would you photograph your dick if it's that embarrassingly small?

You believe in something that has no proof.

You believe in something that has no proof as well.

I have no idea how the universe came to be. YOU claim it was the result of a higher being. You have NO proof said being exists. In science, when you make a claim, you have to back it up. If you can't back it up, I can't accept it as truth. IF there's no proof of god, I don't believe in god. Show me irrefutable evidence, and I'll change my mind.

are you a mind reader?

how do you know that about him?

>Your western nations have rot
You've fallen for one of those weak Kremlin memes. Our Western civilization keeps getting better for the people who live in it, meanwhile Russia keeps on being the worlds shittiest shithole.

>in your arrogance you thought yourselves better than God.
That's not arrogance. Arrogance is imagining you have a secret personal relationship with the creator/destroyer of universes. Like if he did exist he would give two fucks about you.

>Have fun with your trucks of peace
This is religion. This is why religion is shit. Religion is the degeneracy ass-raping children and defending the rapists. Religion is beheading innocent people in the Middle East. Religion is preventing us from stopping the spread of AIDs.

*********american atheists*********
ftfy

fuck atheists

Attached: 1526715299362.jpg (1280x720, 93K)

Big bang theory is tauted as fact yet has many holes and uses unprovable assumptions to make it work

Literally not an argument

I miss 2016 so much. Bernouts come one here and one guy putting bananas up his ass derails every thread.

Attached: IMG_0260.jpg (1020x571, 179K)

And that means God exists because...

Is that shit...

Africa is booming
You don't say

>I have no idea how the universe came to be.
Yes and you have zero evidence that it wasn't created by the Christian god.
So any claim to the contrary is just as baseless.

>You have NO proof said being exists.
You have no proof that I even exist in reality, NOTHING is provable outside of mathematics, everything else is "good assumptions".

>If you can't back it up, I can't accept it as truth.
There is ZERO evidence that your body exists, if "truth" is for you more then "what people commonly accept", then you now LITERALLY nothing.

>Show me irrefutable evidence
No claim exists, outside of mathematics that can have "irrefutable evidence".

>Big bang theory is tauted as fact
No it isn't. The people incapable of understanding science probably believe it is, but no one with at least an 8th grade education would fall for it.

>There is ZERO evidence that your body exists
if you don't count all the evidence that it does.

being a Cartesian skeptic is self referentially incoherent

>if you don't count all the evidence that it does.
Do you have any more, then "I believe that it does, because my senses tell me it does"?

you do not need more. There is no rational explanation for having senses at all if they are not sensing something.

our senses are part of us - to have them requires having a body. materialism is the only rational explanation.

>you do not need more
Okay, so it is enough that you sincerely believe in something and have your brain tell you it is real, for it to be considered real?

no it is not belief. When in pain I do not merely believe i am in pain, i experience pain.

sincerity has nothing to do with it

Is that TJKirk? Holy shit he has a small dick!

Attached: 1528514950121.jpg (250x249, 6K)

Essentially this dude is getting absolutely BTFO in his retarded Christcuk thread and through his seething teeth decided to make another thread.

Attached: 15-2.jpg (405x786, 62K)

>no it is not belief. When in pain I do not merely believe i am in pain, i experience pain.
But that is just your brain telling you that, "pain" are just electrical signals in your brain, you "feel" pain, because you have a brain interpreting it as such.
Everything you see, feel and experience in any way is filtered through your brain, just look up what the brain does with our vision.

>sincerity has nothing to do with it
Why not?

Additionally I had two qualifiers, "believing it in sincerely" and the brain telling you it is real.
The "believing it in sincerely" means that something like a VR video game wouldn't be considered reality, since you obviously have your brain telling you it is real, so "experience of something" can not be enough to justify its reality.

so you agree that i have a brain? ok you are a materialist.

sincerity is a mental state of honestly beleiving something, if i am in pain i am in pain, not sincerely beleiveing it - I am experineceing it. the same goes for all other experience.

look you can collapse into Cartesian skepticism if you like - but it is utterly impractical and does not explain sensation. materialism does that. and from that the material world exists.

The faggot emerges.

They are created by the pharmajew who is always seeking new victims for SSRI pushers.

>he actually has this saved
Disgusting.

>mods will let this thread stay up 300+ replies

>so you agree that i have a brain? ok you are a materialist.
You still don't get what I am doing here?

>sincerity is a mental state of honestly beleiving something, if i am in pain i am in pain, not sincerely beleiveing it
>the same goes for all other experience.
If you see an image, maybe under a 3D vision helmet, does that mean that what you see is real?
You can experience something, which isn't reality and if you consider all experiences to be a reflection of reality, then you get on quite shaky grounds.

>look you can collapse into Cartesian skepticism
But that wasn't the point, I wanted to demonstrate to the American user, that our Reality is standing on ground, that becomes quite shaky if he would apply his demands for believing in God to it.
If you go around demanding "Proof of God", then you have already failed to understand that we don't really have proof for anything outside of mathematics and that what we consider truth is mostly "things we believe in" and "things that work".

You're only a skeptic when it comes to science. When it comes to fairytales you unabashedly and hypocritical stop being a skeptic.
Stop abusing skepticism to make people believe in purely made up shit. Descartes would probably chew you out for being this stupid.

>You can experience something, which isn't reality and if you consider all experiences to be a reflection of reality, then you get on quite shaky grounds.

all experiences are a reflection of some reality - the thing experienced. what else can they be? even hallucinations are real - they are experiences generated by fever or drugs.

that is not to say the pink elephants are physical, they are the product of fever dreams in a physical brain.

your claim that it is an experience requires something to be experienced.

now how can we tell what is dream and what is waking? sometimes it is hard - but we can usually do it - continuity, repetition, physical laws apparently being followed.

to assume there is nothing, no body no eyes, no nerves, no brain, just a non physical consciousness experiencing non physical experiences is nonsense. there is no explanatory value in it. no limits to what it might experience, no logic to examine its existence.

>You're only a skeptic when it comes to science.
Only moderately so, I just am trying to demonstrate the limits of science, I don't really doubt the claims that science makes in general, these claims happen to be coming with some limitations that you should recognize.

>Stop abusing skepticism to make people believe in purely made up shit. Descartes would probably chew you out for being this stupid.
You mean the guy who tried to quasi mathematically prove the existence of God?
Surely the guy he would chew out for being stupid would be you.

The first thing Descartes would tell you is he failed. And YOU should stop pretending skepticism is the doorway to ignoring skepticism for whatever you FEEL is right.

Did you even read my post?

Yes. You presented a hypothetical that doesn't exist.

>The first thing Descartes would tell you is he failed.
The same thing I told you in my first post here and in numerous other of my posts.

>And YOU should stop pretending skepticism is the doorway to ignoring skepticism for whatever you FEEL is right.
But being a skeptic means that you are even skeptical of skepticism, but again I already told you that I am not particularly skeptical of science, just aware of its limitations.

Where?