I, an Atheist, have been banned from c/AtheistMemes

Thank you for sacrificing yourself for our memes.

Where's the "lie", my guy??

I can no longer post in the community, and they found I once commented on a grandpa-tier 'me stand against the IS-LAMS' meme as a possible reason why.

Trust me, if i could shitpost in my people's meme community, I would!

Hey some guy, if you wanna talk about books you've read this year, you gotta list the titles to attract people who have read said books.

Or... at least to enlighten us poor stupid fuckin idiots who can't surmise what you read from your vague ass descriptions....

See above

Well maybe many of those communities are actually filled with 14 year olds

Thanks, Sam Harris.

I read "The Moral Landscape". 90% of it is pretty good, but he'll randomly drop "and that's why we need to be worried about Islamic takeover of western Europe" into something completely unrelated. He spends a lot more time complaining about Islamic fundamentalist than he does the Christian fundamentalist who actually have political power in the US (and to a lesser degree, western Europe). Then you get to a chapter that's all about religious influence on society, but it's all about relatively relaxed Christians who have Ph.Ds in some field and show up at scientific conferences.

You might expect a word somewhere about the fundamentalist Christians who control roughly half of Congress, but no. It's all Muslims and Christians who make it a more personal thing.

Religious or not, you shouldn’t be telling people what to believe or how to believe. That goes for hardline Christian nationalists just as much as it goes for hardline Atheists attacking anyone of faith. If it’s not hurting anyone, let people believe what they believe.

I would agree, but I've actually become sympathetic to the opposite viewpoint recently. It is hurting people. Look at the policy decisions in the US that are driven by religious fundamentalism. Heck, just think about the core premise that faith is stronger than reason. That's an inherently problematic and extremely exploitable viewpoint. I don't think something like religion can be counted as harmless by ignoring all the examples of harm that it causes. If a belief is only not dangerous when it agrees with other beliefs, and is dangerous when it disagrees, then that is a fundamentally dangerous belief all the time, which only becomes apparent sometimes. I think religion has a purpose, to give community to those who need it, but fundamentally it is not good.

I agree with this sentiment, but Christianity is partly defined by "spreading the word of god". So "telling people what to believe" is par for the course (think missionaries).

Curious though, why do you not refer to yourself as atheist? Non-religious is actually not very specific. Non-religious can mean Agnostic Theist, Agnostic Atheist, or Atheist.

The constant angry circlejerk abounds. Deadass I got way more atheist mileage out of the DankChristianMemes sub than any atheist sub on the old place.

Some fuckers are too euphoric to have fun it seems.

Without knowing the situation, in the world as it exists today, there’s a lot of racist people that use Muslim or anti-Muslim rhetoric to refer to or denigrate any person of roughly Middle Eastern descent. Think of how many stories there were of Sikhs that were assaulted physically or verbally after September 11.

A moderator or admin who is aware of this could easily still allow criticism of Islam, the religion, while taking actions against those who are just being racist assholes with a veneer of anti religion. I have seen this many times before.

You'll be accepted in kind, I assume ;)

No it's not "just" a carryover - it's a valid link actually, if you put it into the link portion of a URL, even without the http part.

Also, your first exclamation link does not work. Probably bc it lacks the ending part so like !atheistmemes@lemmy.world.

This is all explained much better than my words here: Guide | How should I link to a community?

!ligma

Become so much of an Atheist, that your disbelief in God sucks the faith right out of theists.

Bad example, turns out Voldemort actually had a curse on his name and it was a good idea to not say it

Well I was specific to say that you have to look at things dialectically in order to see the connection. When you describe other people's beliefs, you say they believe in something that doesn't exist. So in order for something to exist, it has to be a "thing" or an object. This is its own type of logic called "Empiricism" or more radically, "Positivism". Empiricism is a really good basis for reasoning, especially scientific reasoning. The creation of Empiricist reasoning is the intellectual basis for the (notably Atheistic) Enlightenment, which is the ideological superstructure for our current Modernist milieu.

But empiricism is actually bad at other kinds of epistemology (theory of knowledge.) For example, it necessarily divides the objective and the subjective into two separate "things", as well as the mind and body. This leads to some wonky conclusions about metaphysics and the self, particularly where human experience meets nature. Empiricism is great at categorizing, but often fails to reassemble the collection of objects back into a monistic whole. As such Empiricism's theory of social is extremely atomized and individualistic.

Like the way you describe religion, as " trust me bro this thing exists," is a perfect example. There is that part to it, the belief in a god, but there is also creation and appreciation of monuments and temples, ritual, community, social events, group study, all of these human experiences that collectively make up the very real and undeniable power of religion. But my understanding of your explanation just has a bunch of alienated individuals with the same wrong ideas, with no explanation or historical context as to how things became this way. This is also how people come to the very wrong assumption that the value of money doesn't exist. Because it doesn't have an objective form, it doesn't exist. This is just completely untrue. It is socially real, which is as real as any object. In fact religious belief and power is just another form of social currency.

Augustine, Aquinas, Anselm and countless other philosopher theologians imbued Christianity with a consistent, self supporting logic. That was their job, and they have been extremely successful. We can discuss the limitations and shortcomings of that logic, but denying that it is logical is just willful ignorance.

Dialectics has its own shortcomings, so I'm not arguing that one is better than the other. But each form of epistemic reasoning, of which religious belief undeniably contains a vast epistemology, has certain advantages and shortcomings. In my opinion our task isn't to find one way of reasoning and then brow beat others into accepting that reasoning, this is a form of fundamentalism -- a way of determining knowledge, meaning and truth that supercedes all others in every way; which is exactly what religious fundamentalists want people to believe (so those people can be exploited, as fundamentalism always serves some higher power whether it be religious or economic.) Instead I think we should learn as much as we can, acknowledge the strengths and shortcomings of each way of conducting analysis, as well as our own strengths and weaknesses in doing so, and use them as tools to help us understand the world that exists. Leave nothing out, embrace contradiction, and learn how to become the most fulfilled, practical and honest selves.

But then again, everyone is on a different path ;)