Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

There are 24178 comments on the Psychology Today story from Apr 25, 2012, titled Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038. In it, Psychology Today reports that:

My blog posts on religion have attracted a lot of controversy. Religious people are annoyed by my claim that belief in God will go the way of horse transportation, and for much the same reason, specifically an improved standard of living.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Psychology Today.

LCN Llin

United States

#17914 Jul 31, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Your fear of Evolution has numbed your mind.
Jane Austen is being added as a result of a campaign to have more women on UK banknotes.
I'd have preferred a female scientist because education is important to me.
<quoted text>
Enjoy the Ten Pound Note, nothing more nothing less.
Like the colour of your money and the different sizes.
BBC provides us with best news available in the states.
Republican evangelicals and libertarians trying to ruin the country with the objective of bringing down President Obama.
Evolutions established fact!

“Fortes Fortuna Juvat, ”

Since: Dec 09

Wichita. Ks.

#17915 Jul 31, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Is THAT a definition of Atheism!! No doubt no one is able to understand it!!
That is why I said Atheists are the most unreasonable people on this planet!!
sorry but that would be the religious that are unreasonable. MUQ you are dense.
spudgun

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#17916 Jul 31, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Pardon?<quoted text>
Lol.
spudgun

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#17917 Jul 31, 2013
Very Cynical Person wrote:
<quoted text>sorry but that would be the religious that are unreasonable. MUQ you are dense.
Ironically "Muck" is slang in the UK for dirt or filth :)
LCN Llin

United States

#17918 Jul 31, 2013
spudgun wrote:
<quoted text>
Ironically "Muck" is slang in the UK for dirt or filth :)
We wish to thank you for paying your fees to the BBC as BBC programming is tops.

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#17919 Jul 31, 2013
spudgun wrote:
<quoted text>
I would say agnostic, having no knowledge of God or gods. I think Atheism requires an active process of not believing. Just my view.
Sorry, but that just sounds silly. I don't 'actively not believe' in gods, unicorns, faeries, goblins, demons, leprechauns, dragons... etc. because there has never been any evidence of them existing in the first place. If one needs to 'actively not believe' something, that person must be choosing not to accept actual evidence... like creationists denying evidence of evolution. Just my 2 cents

Since: Mar 11

Henderson, KY

#17920 Jul 31, 2013
I agree. Actively not doing something is kind of silly. You actively do something not actively not do something. By that logic we are all actively not doing a billion or more different things!

If you actively believe in a god you are a theist. If you don't you are an atheist. People get so bent out of shape on the term atheist because of the negative stigma theists have placed on it I find. Then they have to do backflips to avoid calling themselves an atheist.

Saturday was telling on this, I was hanging with some friends and this Christian dude asked what faith we were. I smiled and said atheist while my buddy Eric said agnostic. The Christian bible beater says.. So an atheist and a cowardly atheist. I can at least respect the one who clearly states what he is.

Lmfao!

Funny, but true no matter what cute term for non believer you chose the bible beaters all lump you into the atheist camp at the end of the day anyways in their heart of hearts so why waste time? I have no need to attempt to coddle them and at the end of the day it's fruitless anyways because as that bible beater said... God doesn't accept I don't know as a valid excuse.

:))

I'm an unapologetic atheist based on sound reason and observable facts and they can take it or leave it. Once a theist is able to provide me with observable data for their God I will eagerly look into it. Until then they can enjoy their imaginary friend.
TerryL wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry, but that just sounds silly. I don't 'actively not believe' in gods, unicorns, faeries, goblins, demons, leprechauns, dragons... etc. because there has never been any evidence of them existing in the first place. If one needs to 'actively not believe' something, that person must be choosing not to accept actual evidence... like creationists denying evidence of evolution. Just my 2 cents
LCN Llin

United States

#17921 Jul 31, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
I agree. Actively not doing something is kind of silly. You actively do something not actively not do something. By that logic we are all actively not doing a billion or more different things!
If you actively believe in a god you are a theist. If you don't you are an atheist. People get so bent out of shape on the term atheist because of the negative stigma theists have placed on it I find. Then they have to do backflips to avoid calling themselves an atheist.
Saturday was telling on this, I was hanging with some friends and this Christian dude asked what faith we were. I smiled and said atheist while my buddy Eric said agnostic. The Christian bible beater says.. So an atheist and a cowardly atheist. I can at least respect the one who clearly states what he is.
Lmfao!
Funny, but true no matter what cute term for non believer you chose the bible beaters all lump you into the atheist camp at the end of the day anyways in their heart of hearts so why waste time? I have no need to attempt to coddle them and at the end of the day it's fruitless anyways because as that bible beater said... God doesn't accept I don't know as a valid excuse.
:))
I'm an unapologetic atheist based on sound reason and observable facts and they can take it or leave it. Once a theist is able to provide me with observable data for their God I will eagerly look into it. Until then they can enjoy their imaginary friend.
<quoted text>
Skeptic seems a Christian troll after all, or is this another of your identities?
Peace

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#17922 Jul 31, 2013
LCN Llin wrote:
<quoted text>
Skeptic seems a Christian troll after all, or is this another of your identities?
Peace
Hey creationist troll, let us know when you're finished with your childish games, so you can get on with proving the god you're here to lie to us about.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#17923 Jul 31, 2013
LCN Llin wrote:
<quoted text>
Skeptic seems a Christian troll after all, or is this another of your identities?
Peace
I can't wait till you get bored of this find a better way to occupy your time.
LCN Llin

United States

#17925 Jul 31, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't wait till you get bored of this find a better way to occupy your time.
Thanks for your positive comments. Have a Nice Day.
spider

Cambridge, UK

#17926 Jul 31, 2013
spudgun wrote:
<quoted text>
I would say agnostic, having no knowledge of God or gods. I think Atheism requires an active process of not believing. Just my view.
Agnostics sit on the fence and hedge their bets both ways,,,,fine if it suits them,,,,but would you trust one. Personally I would take a carefull look at anything they do or say,,,, better safe than sorry. I WAS REFFERING TO INDOCTRINATION ie BRAIN WASHING from an early age.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#17927 Jul 31, 2013
emperorjohn wrote:
<quoted text>
And our conservatives insist that if we adopt the said policies, that we would be doing worse.
I swear that half this country is dumb.
Indeed it is: anyone who votes for ReThuglican, and is **not** in the top 1%...

... is dumb.

For the top 1% is the **only** thing ReThuglicans care about.

And equally depraved? Many DemoWimps too...
LCN Llin

United States

#17928 Jul 31, 2013
The Queen was expected to urge the people of the United Kingdom to "pray" in the event of a nuclear war, government documents from 1983 reveal.

The script for a hypothetical broadcast has the monarch describing the threat to the "brave country" as "greater" than any other in history.

It also mentions the Queen's son Prince Andrew, then in the Royal Navy.

Devised by Whitehall officials at one of the most fraught periods of the Cold War, it was never recorded.

The document, released by the government under the 30-year rule, was drawn up as part of a war-gaming exercise in the spring of 1983, working through potential scenarios.
'Terrors'

Although it was only a simulation, the text of the Queen's address - written as if broadcast at midday on Friday 4 March 1983 - seeks to prepare the country for the ordeal of World War III.

The script reads: "Now this madness of war is once more spreading through the world and our brave country must again prepare itself to survive against great odds.
Prince Andrew The speech includes a reference to Prince Andrew, then serving in the Royal Navy

"I have never forgotten the sorrow and the pride I felt as my sister and I huddled around the nursery wireless set listening to my father's [George VI's] inspiring words on that fateful day in 1939 [at the start of the World War II].

"Not for a single moment did I imagine that this solemn and awful duty would one day fall to me.

"But whatever terrors lie in wait for us all, the qualities that have helped to keep our freedom intact twice already during this sad century will once more be our strength."

Striking a personal note, the script continues: "My husband and I share with families up and down the land the fear we feel for sons and daughters, husbands and brothers who have left our side to serve their country.

"My beloved son Andrew is at this moment in action with his unit and we pray continually for his safety and for the safety of all servicemen and women at home and overseas.

"It is this close bond of family life that must be our greatest defence against the unknown.

"If families remain united and resolute, giving shelter to those living alone and unprotected, our country's will to survive cannot be broken."

In the war-gaming exercise, Orange bloc forces - representing the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies - launch a chemical weapon attack on the UK.

Blue forces - representing Nato - retaliate with a "limited-yield" nuclear strike, forcing Orange to sue for peace.

The exercise came in the year that US President Ronald Reagan both enraged and alarmed Moscow with his denunciation of the Soviet Union as the "evil empire", his plans for a "Star Wars" ballistic missile shield in space, and the deployment of US nuclear cruise missiles to Europe - including to RAF Greenham Common.

Tensions increased when the Soviets shot down a South Korean airliner that strayed into their airspace, killing all 269 on board.

A Nato military exercise, codenamed Able Archer, then nearly triggered an actual conflict with the Soviet leadership apparently convinced it was cover for a genuine attack.

The Soviet Union and the US later negotiated a reduction in the number of nuclear weapons, as the Cold War came to an end.

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

#17929 Jul 31, 2013
LCN Llin wrote:
Notable atheist intellectual Richard Dawkins recently retweeted a post for his 756,000+ followers featuring a recently released anti-evolution film.
Last week, Dawkins retweeted a post that included a video by Ray Comfort titled "Richard Dawkins' Dirty Little Secret" and a link to a Facebook group for the film "Evolution vs. God."
"'Dawkins will have a cow.' http://bit.ly/12CSGb4 Fascinated to know what that means. Has the Banana Man finally over-reached himself?" tweeted Dawkins after posting the link.
The pejorative name Dawkins gave Comfort derives from a video Comfort made years ago wherein he claimed that by their design bananas are the "atheists' worst nightmare."
It is not the first time Comfort and Dawkins have been at odds with each other. In the past, Comfort has challenged Dawkins to a debate, with Dawkins agreeing under the condition that Comfort donate money to the skeptic's foundation.
Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/richard-daw...
Is the same Ray Comfort who gives a hand job to a banana and says it's what God intended?

Granted you can find verses in the Bible about homosexuality, bestiality, incest and eating forbidden fruit to suit your arguments.

But I'd say Ray subverted the spirit of the law when he jerked off a banana to provide proof of intelligent design when he was actually demonstrating his deep, personal, God given, closeted desires.

Since: Mar 11

Henderson, KY

#17930 Jul 31, 2013
Well Ray is a hero at his church so that's why he looks up to Ray in adoration.
greymouser wrote:
<quoted text>Is the same Ray Comfort who gives a hand job to a banana and says it's what God intended?

Granted you can find verses in the Bible about homosexuality, bestiality, incest and eating forbidden fruit to suit your arguments.

But I'd say Ray subverted the spirit of the law when he jerked off a banana to provide proof of intelligent design when he was actually demonstrating his deep, personal, God given, closeted desires.

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

#17931 Jul 31, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
You remember I was asking again and again for so called Atheists to give me a definition of Atheism "IS" and what I always got was a Negative Definition that what it is NOT.
Obviously it is bunch of "loose guys" gathering together and each having his or her own mind, like a fish market.
I do not know what type of civilization these people can create.
The discussion on quality of True prophet of God was started by Mr. Spider....who seem to have become very busy at late.
Even if you are an atheist, there will be harm if you get "some message of truth from time to time".
Take a pinch of salt and simply ignore my posts, if you do not like it.
No one forces you to read every thing that is posted on this thread, does it?
I'm starting to wonder now. While I disagree with you, I liked the peaceful discussion in the exchange of ideas.

I acknowledge that there may be some good ideas that are in the Quran. Just like I acknowledge there are good ideas in Hebrew, Christian, Hindu and Buddhist texts.

But this particular post of yours only demonstrates your frustration that the "word of god" doesn't instantly sway the unbelievers.

I guess you can blame that on Satan.

But then you have to acknowledge Satan can seriously challenge God.

Perhaps God has grown old and Her offspring has grown enough to kick Her ass to the old folks home?

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#17932 Aug 1, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Is THAT a definition of Atheism!! No doubt no one is able to understand it!!
That is why I said Atheists are the most unreasonable people on this planet!!
YOU WERE AN ATHEIST TOO.

Before you were indoctrinated, you were atheist. It simply means not theist. We make no god claims, and neither did you before you were indoctrinated.

Do you understand the difference? Now you have a gods blessing to thigh babies, we will never have that, nor would we accept such a truly shit god.
MUQ

Lucknow, India

#17933 Aug 1, 2013
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>YOU WERE AN ATHEIST TOO.
Before you were indoctrinated, you were atheist. It simply means not theist. We make no god claims, and neither did you before you were indoctrinated.
Do you understand the difference? Now you have a gods blessing to thigh babies, we will never have that, nor would we accept such a truly shit god.
Our prophet said "Every new born is born as on True Nature, it is their parents who make them Jews, Christians or Magians (and Hindus and Buddhists etc).

So every new born is born as pure and unbiased and it correct mindset.

No one is Born Atheist!!

You have to REJECT all religions to become an Atheist.
spudgun

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#17934 Aug 1, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Our prophet said "Every new born is born as on True Nature, it is their parents who make them Jews, Christians or Magians (and Hindus and Buddhists etc).
Notice how your quote includes Hindus and Buddhists in brackets. i.e. something he didnt say.

Muhammed obviously was ignorant about beliefs outside of the Middle East. He had no knowledge of the Chinese, South or North American, Europe or Australasia.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 2 hr The FACTory 32,288
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... 2 hr The FACTory 889
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 7 hr 15th Dalai Lama 77,078
Atheists are subhuman filth that need to be exe... 10 hr Roec 1
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 12 hr superwilly 258,482
Religion sux ? Tue Eagle 12 - 4
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... (Jan '17) Tue Dogen 4,321
More from around the web