If the majority of the United States is atheist and believes in evolution, then why do they say "Humans are not animals"?

[Deleted member 33091]

If you're an atheist and you believe that the world blew up from nothing and viola there's life, then you should NEVER say this phrase, "Humans are not animals."

Yes, we are animals. We evolved from animals. Animals do not ask for consent before sex. Animals do not show equality between genders. Animals do not show any regard for the safety of any other animals. Animals eat their own young. Animals choose the alpha male(Chad) at all times. Animals have no morals. Animals do not believe in "good" or "bad". We are animals and all of our behaviors are dictated by this fact, if you believe in atheism then this is the only possible conclusion that you could come from.

I saw a comment on IT saying, "We are not animals." Such a retarded and hypocritical point of view.

Obviously if you believed in God and that humans were created differently, then you could say "Humans are not animals". But if you're an atheist then you cannot say, "Humans are not animals."

 

[RollD20]

I never heard anyone that believes in evolution says that, but who knows

 

[Deleted member 33091]

I never heard anyone that believes in evolution says that, but who knows

Then why do those atheists say that homophobia is "bad" and that racism is "bad". If you believe that there is no God and no ultimate moral responsibility then you should be totally fine with homophobia and racism since those are natural constructs through biological means.

 

[Darkenzo]

We're animals just a little more for your money. Anyway not all religions believe in God see Jainism, Taoism etc. I suppose atheism can be seen as it's own religion like that , though for me it's a bit left wing, a bit socialist.

 

[Reprobus]

If you're an atheist and you believe that the world blew up from nothing and viola there's life, then you should NEVER say this phrase, "Humans are not animals."

Yes, we are animals. We evolved from animals. Animals do not ask for consent before sex. Animals do not show equality between genders. Animals do not show any regard for the safety of any other animals. Animals eat their own young. Animals choose the alpha male(Chad) at all times. Animals have no morals. Animals do not believe in "good" or "bad". We are animals and all of our behaviors are dictated by this fact, if you believe in atheism then this is the only possible conclusion that you could come from.

I saw a comment on IT saying, "We are not animals." Such a retarded and hypocritical point of view.

Obviously if you believed in God and that humans were created differently, then you could say "Humans are not animals". But if you're an atheist then you cannot say, "Humans are not animals."

I’ve seen many atheists who claim to live by science, yet they can not understand the black pill or accept women are a lesser form of men. Those “atheists” are just as justified as the Christians they clown.

 

[Darkenzo]

I’ve seen many atheists who claim to live by science, yet they can not understand the black pill or accept women are a lesser form of men. Those “atheists” are just as justified as the Christians they clown.

Because they tend to be ultra left wing Communist feminist cucks.

 

[radishman]

I'd hardly call the majority atheist. Outside of muslim countries the US is the most religious country in the world.

 

[Deleted member 28903]

"Animals" colloquially means "non-human animals". Everyone knows humans are technically animals.

 

[squirrelsonfire2]

Well obviously they do since we are animals

 

[Deleted member 33091]

@blackpill

I’ve seen many atheists who claim to live by science, yet they can not understand the black pill or accept women are a lesser form of men. Those “atheists” are just as justified as the Christians they clown.

Because they tend to be ultra left wing Communist feminist cucks.

But why would an "atheist" ever become a left wing feminist? Left wing feminism does not correlate with science. Trannies and etc. None of those lgbtqsadflkajlsadfjupoirewerijungafdsf++ stuff makes any sense if you use scientific reasoning.

Those nuts definitely claim to be atheists but yet still claim that there's a moral right and wrong.

I'd hardly call the majority atheist. Outside of muslim countries the US is the most religious country in the world.

It's only because our culture originated from a Christian perspective and a lot of our literature and major thinkers in our early civilization were Christians. So a lot of our cultural reasoning stems from that. However we are very secular as a country and deny any personal responsibility to God at all.

 

[Darkenzo]

I'd hardly call the majority atheist. Outside of muslim countries the US is the most religious country in the world.

It's kind of 50/50 but the 50% who are religious are actually deadly fucking serious. Proper literal Adam and Eve and Noah's Ark stuff. Hardily anyone here in Europe besides Jehovah's Witnesses believe anything like that. Kind of life Deism with a very light dusting of supernatural bollocks. Kind of like Anglicanism it's more a tradition.

 

[Deleted member 33091]

"Animals" colloquially means "non-human animals". Everyone knows humans are technically animals.

It isn't a technicality at all if you're an atheist. We are only intelligent animals who's sole purpose is to fuck every hole that we come across at any means possible.

 

[Darkenzo]

@blackpill


But why would an "atheist" ever become a left wing feminist? Left wing feminism does not correlate with science. Trannies and etc. None of those lgbtqsadflkajlsadfjupoirewerijungafdsf++ stuff makes any sense if you use scientific reasoning.

It's just part of the overall package for some reason. Christianity tends to be right wing, conservative and/or libertarian and atheism is much more ultra leftie liberal socialism verging on Communism in some cases. I suppose the idea is create some kind of Utopia or heaven on Earth where everyone is equal and we've moved beyond the old prejudices.

 

[Deleted member 33091]

It's just part of the overall package for some reason. Christianity tends to be right wing, conservative and/or libertarian and atheism is much more ultra leftie liberal socialism verging on Communism in some cases. I suppose the idea is create some kind of Utopia or heaven on Earth where everyone is equal and we've moved beyond the old prejudices.

Christians being right wing makes sense because most of the right wing ideologies aligns with the Bible.

However none of the left wing ideologies align with evolution. In evolution there is no equality. There's simply eliminating the weak from the gene pool and promoting the strongest/best genes. Hitler and Nazis were actually geniuses who followed the logic that is presented behind evolution. None of this "tolerance" and feminism and lgbt utopia makes any sense in a scientific perspective at all. Nazism however does.

 

[Deleted member 28903]

It isn't a technicality at all if you're an atheist. We are only intelligent animals who's sole purpose is to fuck every hole that we come across at any means possible.

Do you not understand the concept of words having colloquial meanings? There is a sense of the word "animal" which specifically doesn't include humans. It doesn't matter if you're an atheist or not.

 

[Darkenzo]

However none of the left wing ideologies align with evolution. In evolution there is no equality. There's simply eliminating the weak from the gene pool and promoting the strongest/best genes. Hitler and Nazis were actually geniuses who followed the logic that is presented behind evolution. None of this "tolerance" and feminism and lgbt utopia makes any sense in a scientific perspective at all. Nazism however does.

Hitler and the Nazi's were ultra left wing socialists as well, it was called National Socialism for a reason. Christians tend to accept that humans are flawed and we accept our place in the natural order as created by God. Atheists and socialists, people like Hitler and Stalin will see man as the absolute order if there is no God created order and they will ten impose their own idealized utopian agenda. Every time this is attempted it goes to absolute shit you can see what happened to Nazi Germany and the USSR. The Christian view of the world accepting man and the world as flawed sinful creations of God seems to work out better on the whole. It's kind of good that not everyone is an atheist as we would see much more Black Lives Matter and feminist bullshit and greater government authority and inference with peoples lives and businesses. It's best we maintain the core of Christian civilization without necessarily taking on a literal belief in any interventionist deities or supernatural beliefs regarding the creation of life. There's perhaps a little more to evolution than just Darwinian survival of the fittest, a more holistic view may be preferable. It's a mix of competition and struggle but also interdependence and symbiosis. You can see the planet as a whole as some kind of living and evolving organism.

 

[Deleted member 33091]

Do you not understand the concept of words having colloquial meanings? There is a sense of the word "animal" which specifically doesn't include humans. It doesn't matter if you're an atheist or not.

Of course I understand that concept. Still doesn't make the phrase, "Humans aren't animals" any less absurd.

"Water isn't wet." would make no sense regardless of whether it has a colloquial meaning or not.

Hitler and the Nazi's were ultra left wing socialists as well, it was called National Socialism for a reason. Christians tend to accept that humans are flawed and we accept our place in the natural order as created by God. Atheists and socialists, people like Hitler and Stalin will see man as the absolute order if there is no God created order and they will ten impose their own idealized utopian agenda. Every time this is attempted it goes to absolute shit you can see what happened to Nazi Germany and the USSR. The Christian view of the world accepting man and the world as flawed sinful creations of God seems to work out better on the whole. It's kind of good that not everyone is an atheist as we would see much more Black Lives Matter and feminist bullshit and greater government authority and inference with peoples lives and businesses. It's best we maintain the core of Christian civilization without necessarily taking on a literal belief in any interventionist deities or supernatural beliefs regarding the creation of life. There's perhaps a little more to evolution than just Darwinian survival of the fittest, a more holistic view may be preferable. It's a mix of competition and struggle but also interdependence and symbiosis. You can see the planet as a whole as some kind of living and evolving organism.

I agree but like I said, if you truly believe that there is no God and only believe in the physical realm then the only definition of "good" or "bad" is defined by either society or the individual himself. And the definition of goodness would change from generation to generation. If you rewind the clock by 100 years, everyone agreed that homosexuality is bad. Now everyone agrees that it is good. Forward the clock another 100 years and maybe homophobia will be popular again. This is what happens when you leave the definition of morals to society alone. It is doomed to change and change continuously.

If you believe that there is an unchanging, eternal God and he says, "Homos r bad" then that is an unchanging, eternal moral boundary. It won't change regardless of society's opinion.

 

[Irredeemable]

If you believe that there is an unchanging, eternal God and he says, "Homos r bad" then that is an unchanging, eternal moral boundary. It won't change regardless of society's opinion.

If God is obviously real, and God's message is abundantly clear, why are there different religions and denominations? Why is your denomination correct and all others are wrong? Who is right when two people believe different things but claim it is the "true word of god"?

 

[Darkenzo]

I agree but like I said, if you truly believe that there is no God and only believe in the physical realm then the only definition of "good" or "bad" is defined by either society or the individual himself. And the definition of goodness would change from generation to generation. If you rewind the clock by 100 years, everyone agreed that homosexuality is bad. Now everyone agrees that it is good. Forward the clock another 100 years and maybe homophobia will be popular again. This is what happens when you leave the definition of morals to society alone. It is doomed to change and change continuously.

If you believe that there is an unchanging, eternal God and he says, "Homos r bad" then that is an unchanging, eternal moral boundary. It won't change regardless of society's opinion.

I'd say there is some kind of evolutionary basis for morality as we would not exist as a species if everyone behaved a certain way. There is a natural order to things. Atheists don't tend to get that while Christians do get it though they attribute it to the God of the Bible. As far as homosexuality is concerned you can only say it's not much use for providing future generations, so as long as male on female sex takes place at a sufficient level. The ancient Jews may been concerned about maintaining their population, we have other fertility options these days so it's not such a big deal. Religion does have a better view of the traditional family and how children are better raised by two parents, it's kind of the way it's always been done naturally.

With say the Nazi's they were going to have the ideal racial individual fuck each other in communes and then the the children would all be raised in some kind of a mass childrwens home who will be trained to fight in future wars instilled with Nazi ideology.

 

[Deleted member 33091]

If God is obviously real, and God's message is abundantly clear, why are there different religions and denominations? Why is your denomination correct and all others are wrong?

This is not an argument for religion. This is simply pointing out atheists for being absurd for believing in morality and "moral duty" and other absurd ideas. If you're an atheist then you should clearly know that morality is nothing but your own imagination and hormonal urges.

I'd say there is some kind of evolutionary basis for morality as we would not exist as a species if everyone behaved a certain way. There is a natural order to things. Atheists don't tend to get that while Christians do get it though they attribute it to the God of the Bible. As far as homosexuality is concerned you can only say it's not much use for providing future generations, so as long as male on female sex takes place at a sufficient level. The ancient Jews may been concerned about maintaining their population, we have other fertility options these days so it's not such a big deal. Religion does have a better view of the traditional family and how children are better raised by two parents, it's kind of the way it's always been done naturally.

There is a natural order to things but yet we deny those natural orders. Homosexuality spreads disease, transsexuality encourages suicide and infertility, monogamy is bad, only chads should reproduce, women should stay at home and raise children, etc. These are simply things that you can perceive with your own two eyes yet we deny them and excuse them away as "homophobia" and other imaginary terms.

 

[Deleted member 28903]

Of course I understand that concept. Still doesn't make the phrase, "Humans aren't animals" any less absurd.

You don't understand it

"Water isn't wet." would make no sense regardless of whether it has a colloquial meaning or not.

"Water isn't wet" makes no sense because the word "water" is never used to refer to anything that isn't wet. "Animals" is used to refer to a group which excludes humans, so "humans aren't animals" makes sense.

 

[Deleted member 33091]

You don't understand it

"Water isn't wet" makes no sense because the word "water" is never used to refer to anything that isn't wet. "Animals" is used to refer to a group which excludes humans, so "humans aren't animals" makes sense.

Perhaps if you're a member from IT, it makes sense to you.

 

[Deleted member 28903]

Perhaps if you're a member from IT, it makes sense to you.

Perhaps if you speak English, and aren't too autistic to understand the non-literal, it makes sense to you.

 

[Deleted member 33091]

Perhaps if you speak English, and aren't too autistic to understand the non-literal, it makes sense to you.

You are simply nit-picking and trying to win an argument. It won't work with me, I've seen your autistic arguments with other people on this forum.

No trucels seem to like you.

 

[Deleted member 28903]

You are simply nit-picking and trying to win an argument. It won't work with me, I've seen your autistic arguments with other people on this forum.

How am I nit-picking? You're the one trying to say an expression doesn't make sense because it doesn't work with the technical definition of a word, even though it does work with its colloquial definition.

 

[Deleted member 33091]

How am I nit-picking? You're the one trying to say an expression doesn't make sense because it doesn't work with the technical definition of a word, even though it does work with its colloquial definition.

The phrase clearly does not make sense if you think it in a literal definition which was the context that I am talking about.

You are simply trying to make me appear autistic and foolish and trying to discredit me. It's not going to work.

 

[Darkenzo]

There is a natural order to things but yet we deny those natural orders. Homosexuality spreads disease, transsexuality encourages suicide and infertility, monogamy is bad, only chads should reproduce, women should stay at home and raise children, etc. These are simply things that you can perceive with your own two eyes yet we deny them and excuse them away as "homophobia" and other imaginary terms.

Men and women traditionally had different roles in society and women were naturally more involved in child rearing and looking after the home. With atheism/socialism/feminism there is full equality of the sexes so women are 100% the same as men. Of course that isn't quite right but atheism is a rejection of all former religious traditions and values, the whole thing flushed away and replaced with something else. That's what we saw with Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union as well as say North Korea. So that's where we heading as Christianity fades away. As for homosexuality spreading disease it's generally because they're less monogamous and not they're more likely to 'do it raw'. Christians have a great deal more restraint when it comes to sex, it's a bit of a sinful carry on. People who don't believe in sin won't tend to have that inhibition.

 

[Deleted member 33091]

Men and women traditionally had different roles in society and women were naturally more involved in child rearing and looking after the home. With atheism/socialism/feminism there is full equality of the sexes so women are 100% the same as men. Of course that isn't quite right but atheism is a rejection of all former religious traditions and values, the whole thing flushed away and replaced with something else. That's what we saw with Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union as well as say North Korea. So that's where we heading as Christianity fades away. As for homosexuality spreading disease it's generally because they're less monogamous and not they're more likely to 'do it raw'. Christians have a great deal more restraint when it comes to sex, it's a bit of a sinful carry on. People who don't believe in sin won't tend to have that inhibition.

I agree that current atheism is about rejecting all religion and literally going in the opposite direction. It's more of a crusade against Christianity than a real sincere belief in what they believe to be true. In fact, that is exactly what I think it is. I don't think those people even believe in evolution or "survival of the fittest" but rather they believe in anything that is AGAINST religion. If it's against religion then it's automatically "good" and praiseworthy.

 

[Irredeemable]

This is not an argument for religion. This is simply pointing out atheists for being absurd for believing in morality and "moral duty" and other absurd ideas. If you're an atheist then you should clearly know that morality is nothing but your own imagination and hormonal urges.

Okay, fair. About the OP, atheists who think humans are somehow separate and "above" animals are likely to be staunch secular humanists.

only chads should reproduce

Why should only Chads reproduce? Because he is attractive? Why is it not Stacy who should reproduce? Why is the attractiveness requirement only applied to males?

 

[Darkenzo]

I agree that current atheism is about rejecting all religion and literally going in the opposite direction. It's more of a crusade against Christianity than a real sincere belief in what they believe to be true. In fact, that is exactly what I think it is. I don't think those people even believe in evolution or "survival of the fittest" but rather they believe in anything that is AGAINST religion. If it's against religion then it's automatically "good" and praiseworthy.

What we need ideally is an alternative to Christianity that isn't atheism.

At least that is an actual religion not just a rejection of all religion. It sounds like you're a good candidate for it.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=535Zy_rf4NU

 

[Deleted member 33091]

Okay, fair. About the OP, atheists who think humans are somehow separate and "above" animals are likely to be staunch secular humanists.

Why should only Chads reproduce? Because he is attractive? Why is it not Stacy who should reproduce? Why is the attractiveness requirement only applied to males?

I googled "secular humanists" and it was an interesting read.

And yes I should've said, "Chads and Stacies" but I mostly said Chads out of bitterness since I am not Chad. But realistically only Stacies and Chads should reproduce and future generations would have less suffering. Also race mixing should be done with extreme caution.

What we need ideally is an alternative to Christianity that isn't atheism.

View attachment 423062

At least that is an actual religion not just a rejection of all religion. It sounds like you're a good candidate for it.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=535Zy_rf4NU

Personally I think Christianity did a really good job. First 200 years of America was pretty great.

 

[FlamingCel]

Ecceslesites 3
18I said in my heart with regard to the children of man that God is testing them that they may see that they themselves are but beasts. 19For what happens to the children of man and what happens to the beasts is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, and man has no advantage over the beasts, for all is vanity.20All go to one place. All are from the dust, and to dust all return.

2peter 2
12These false teachers are like unthinking animals, creatures of instinct, born to be caught and destroyed. They scoff at things they do not understand, and like animals, they will be destroyed

 

[Deleted member 33091]

Ecceslesites 3
18I said in my heart with regard to the children of man that God is testing them that they may see that they themselves are but beasts. 19For what happens to the children of man and what happens to the beasts is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, and man has no advantage over the beasts, for all is vanity.20All go to one place. All are from the dust, and to dust all return.

2peter 2
12These false teachers are like unthinking animals, creatures of instinct, born to be caught and destroyed. They scoff at things they do not understand, and like animals, they will be destroyed

Based Christiancel.

 

[Darkenzo]

Personally I think Christianity did a really good job. First 200 years of America was pretty great.

America wasn't founded as a Christian country if you look into it. It was founded as a secular non-religious state. Total separation of Church and State. All other countries including here in the UK have a State religion.

'Others of our Founding Fathers who were deists were John Adams, James Madison, Benjamin Franklin, Ethan Allen and Thomas Paine'

 

[Deleted member 28903]

The phrase clearly does not make sense if you think it in a literal definition which was the context that I am talking about.

You are simply trying to make me appear autistic and foolish and trying to discredit me. It's not going to work.

The people you're referring to obviously aren't using the literal definition though. It would make sense to complain if you saw the phrase "humans aren't animals" in a biology text book, where context indicates the biological definition of "animal" is being used, but if the context is a reddit comment then it makes no sense. What is your criticism, even? "What you just said doesn't make sense if I use a different definition of a word than the one you were using"? Uh... Okay?

 

[Deleted member 33091]

The people you're referring to obviously aren't using the literal definition though. It would make sense to complain if you saw the phrase "humans aren't animals" in a biology text book, where context indicates the biological definition of "animal" is being used, but if the context is a reddit comment then it makes no sense. What is your criticism, even? "What you just said doesn't make sense if I use a different definition of a word than the one you were using"? Uh... Okay?

They are though. You are simply desperately trying to win an argument right now and failing. I'll let you have the last response since I know you're the kind of person who always needs to have the last word.

 

[Deleted member 27161]

I never heard anyone that believes in evolution says that, but who knows

Then why do those atheists say that homophobia is "bad" and that racism is "bad". If you believe that there is no God and no ultimate moral responsibility then you should be totally fine with homophobia and racism since those are natural constructs through biological means.

Which atheists are you referring to? Certainly not the ones like me here.

 

[Deleted member 33091]

Which atheists are you referring to? Certainly not the ones like me here.

The entire community of reddit.

 

[Deleted member 28903]

They are though. You are simply desperately trying to win an argument right now and failing. I'll let you have the last response since I know you're the kind of person who always needs to have the last word.

How do you know that they are? If you see someone use a word in a casual setting, such as in a reddit comment, and their use of the word makes sense if they are using the common definition but doesn't make sense if they're using a technical definition, why would you randomly assume they must be using the technical definition? Unless, of course, you are simply playing with words.

Of course, you don't actually believe this. You just don't want to admit you were wrong about something for some reason.

 

[Deleted member 27161]

The entire community of reddit.

Understandable. Reddit is filled with soy cucks that love to cry about things like that but claiming to be atheists. I feel most there just call themselves atheist to seem cool and try to be "different"

 

[Deleted member 33091]

Understandable. Reddit is filled with soy cucks that love to cry about things like that but claiming to be atheists. I feel most there just call themselves atheist to seem cool and try to be "different"

Yeah possible. I came to this conclusion in this thread from my conversation with @Darkenzo. It seems like they're more like rebelling against religion than actually being an atheist. Kind of pathetic, really.

 

[Darkenzo]

Yeah possible. I came to this conclusion in this thread from my conversation with @Darkenzo. It seems like they're more like rebelling against religion than actually being an atheist. Kind of pathetic, really.

They're against all religion atheism is 'lack of religion' as they're very keen to insist.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGfTxjjux3I

 

[Deleted member 33091]

They're against all religion atheism is 'lack of religion' as they're very keen to insist.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGfTxjjux3I

debooonked

 

[Darkenzo]

Atheism an anti-religion religion.

 

[Deleted member 33091]

Atheism an anti-religion religion.

Indeed. If you were truly atheist then you could clearly see that religion is a very useful tool and gives people a purpose in life that is greater than themselves and greatly benefits society. But these edgy atheists are like "hurr durr all religion bad!"

 

[grondilu]

If you believe that there is no God and no ultimate moral responsibility

Just because morality doesn't come from a bearded guy in the sky doesn't mean the concept has no pertinence whatsoever.

Morality is basically a branch of philosophy. It is nothing but a collective, inter-generational intellectual effort to establish rules and norms regarding human interactions, with the goal of keeping them peaceful and compatible with a free and productive society.

You don't need God to have that.

 

[Deleted member 33091]

Just because morality doesn't come from a bearded guy in the sky doesn't mean the concept has no pertinence whatsoever.

Morality is basically a branch of philosophy. It is nothing but a collective, inter-generational intellectual effort to establish rules and norms regarding human interactions, with the goal of keeping them peaceful and compatible with a free and productive society.

You don't need God to have that.

True but ultimately that morality is doomed to continuously change as society changes. Right now look at where this has gotten us. lgbt, feminism, hypergamy, jews, blm, virgin but not incel, etc.

 

[Robtical]

Animals should be above cucks and whores, even insects.

 

[Deleted member 33091]

Animals should be above cucks and whores, even insects.

You know when niggers were slaves, that's basically how it was. You could beat up and kill your nigger and nobody could do anything about it. He was legally your property. This is how it should be with women.

 

[grondilu]

True but ultimately that morality is doomed to continuously change as society changes. Right now look at where this has gotten us. lgbt, feminism, hypergamy, jews, blm, virgin but not incel, etc.

If your point is that atheistic morality is not set in stone, then I agree.

Is it worse or better than religious morality? I don't know, but I do know that throughout history many atrocities were committed in the name of God.

Also, say what you want about atheism, but if you're here complaining about it it's because many people are more convinced by it than they are by religions. Beyond its purported utilitarian value, the concept of God also needs to convince people about its very existence, and I think that's where it fundamentally fails.