Why do some atheists feel urges to tell religious people God doesn’t exist?

[Anonymous]

[buzzword]

You can't have atheism without theism. The prefix a- means away from. Therefore you must believe in God and walk away from him to be an atheist. The entire cult of atheism revolves around the rejection of God. Specifically the rejection of Christianity. They want to be without God in the external darkness... Therefore they know God exists, they believe in him, and they strive to be ungodly by mocking God and committing sacrilege every chance they get. It's a satanic cult. The Greek noun atheotēs means ungodly; to actively disobey and disrespect God. The cult of reason formed during the French revolution to actively oppose the church. French athéisme means without a god, denying the gods. The French lopped off the heads of clergymen with the guillotine until the streets ran red and then they did it some more. It was the first place were atheism became the state religion. It's also the grooming location for countless communist dictators. As Satan wants to destroy god and become the most high, thus so to do atheists. They follow Satan and his legion and are fanatical about it.

[Lliam]

I never heard an atheist do that unless it was in response to a Christian talking about God.
It's Christians, not atheists, who feel the need to proselytize and act sanctimonious.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

Why are atheists always so easily refuted?
“Mock them. Ridicule them. In public. Don’t fall for the convention that we’re all too polite to talk about religion" Richard dawkins.

Sam harris:
" The End of Faith: “We have been too tolerant of intolerance. We need to challenge the belief systems that endorse these ridiculous notions and drive public discourse.”"

"We need to stand up and say that religion is not above criticism. We need to be vocal about our atheism and confront the harmful aspects of religious belief."- Greta Christina

“We need to confront the beliefs that are causing real harm in the world. We need to speak out against religious doctrines that suppress human rights.”- Ayaan Hirsi Ali

"The time to be silent is gone. We need to make sure that this is the end of a chapter of religious rule. We need to make sure that we do not accept any special privilege for religion."- Christopher Hitchens.

Seems like a lot of proselytizing to everyone with a functioning brain. (not atheists).

I find it awesome to see atheists always being wrong in everything they say. Have i seen a comment from an atheist that was accurate? Im not sure i have.
Even if it was something as simple as 2+2=4.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

I'm going to address "Dr pepper12's" comedically dumb word salad.

>>We are REALLY bothered by what we consider a WASTE of the precious few days we are granted on this spinning ball of dirt.<<

Theists are glad it "really bothers" you. It's awesome. Granted? By whom? By what? You are a cosmic accident. You should know what it feels like to be an accident. Ask your mom. And earth is more than dirt. Genius. Furthermore, you begin with question begging from the jump. Your comment is replete with it.

Atheists cannot prove meaning at all. None of you have done it. So until you can prove meaning more than just some "subjective" claim, then anyone else's opposite subjective claim is just as valid as yours. LOL.

To assert that days are "precious" is to assert life has meaning at all. Can he prove that? Nope. Even that first sentence is comically stupid.

Next sentence:

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

To be blunt, we think you are living in service to a anachronistic delusion, a fable from when we didn't know anything and superstition reigned instead of science.

Again. With the question begging. And this clown asserts he has logic on his side when all he does is rape it. He also rapes science.

This dummy presupposes that modern science is entirely separate from past knowledge, dismissing the foundations on which it was built. Science itself is deeply rooted in historical progress and discoveries made over centuries, often relying on earlier knowledge, including areas once considered superstition, philosophy, or proto-science. By labeling earlier beliefs as "anachronistic delusion" and suggesting that they held no value, the comment overlooks the fact that many scientific advancements are the result of centuries of trial, error, and refinement.

For example, early alchemy, though viewed today as pseudoscientific, laid the groundwork for modern chemistry. Likewise, early astronomical models, even when incorrect by today's standards, contributed to our understanding of the cosmos. Dismissing earlier stages of human understanding as "fables" negates the role they played in paving the way for modern discoveries. The phrase "shoulders of giants," often attributed to Isaac Newton, reflects the idea that scientific progress is cumulative, built on the efforts of predecessors. Therefore, this retard fails to recognize this essential historical continuity in the development of knowledge.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

>>Using reason, science and logic you cannot come to any other conclusions so you rebel and ground your belief "faith" is amorphous and unprovable. <<

This is provably false.
A notable study that examined the beliefs of atheist scientists and found that their atheism was not necessarily rooted in their science is "Religion among Academic Scientists: Distinctions, Disciplines, and Demographics" by sociologist Elaine Howard Ecklund.

In her research, Ecklund surveyed and interviewed scientists at elite research universities in the United States. One of her key findings was that many atheist scientists did not attribute their atheism to their scientific work. Instead, their non-belief often stemmed from factors unrelated to science, such as personal upbringing, life experiences, or philosophical perspectives.

The study revealed that these scientists' lack of belief in a deity was often formed before they entered their scientific careers or was shaped by broader worldviews rather than their engagement in scientific methods or research. Many expressed that they saw no inherent conflict between science and religion, and some even saw their personal atheism as unrelated to their professional work as scientists.

Ooops!
Maybe this loser should actually read a book.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

>> Even your God is simply an accident of birth and if you never told a child about religion until they're 18 and then tried to prosthelyze upon that kid with all the stories, ritual and dogma, that child would uproariously laugh in your face and ask if you need medical attention! <<

First off already a stupid statement from the first 3 words of this. LOL.
"Even your god"
This is the oversimplification fallacy. The fallacy of oversimplification occurs when we attempt to make something appear simpler by ignoring certain relevant complexities.
The word "god" can mean all sorts of things. For example:
Spinoza’s God is synonymous with nature or the universe itself—a kind of pantheism. For Spinoza, God is not a being who exists apart from the universe but is the underlying substance of everything. This conception is universal and not tied to any specific culture, religion, or accident of birth.
I guess you believe the universe doesn't exist then. LOL.
And of course this is a god that Einstein believed in. And of course you'd disagree with him. Because you hate science. Just like you hate logic. As I've showed.

Also this brain damaged dolt fails to account for the fact that various cultures, independently of each other, have arrived at similar philosophical and mystical ideas about divinity, existence, and the universe. Stoics, certain branches of Hinduism, and Taoism, often describe an impersonal or universal force behind existence, which is conceptually closer to Spinoza’s God than to culturally specific deities.

Further "god" can also refer to Kim Jong-un’s rise to power which is directly related to his birth into the Kim family, the ruling dynasty of North Korea, rather than being an accident or random event.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

Even if people with a working brain granted the idea that "they wouldn't believe in god after 18 if they never heard about it."
Seems like atheism also has this issue.
"The Psychology of Religion and Spirituality": This field has explored how upbringing influences belief systems. Research indicates that parental beliefs play a significant role in shaping the religious or non-religious identities of children. Children raised in families that openly identify as atheists often develop similar beliefs, just as children from religious families are likely to adopt their parents' faith.

Research by Elizabeth Olds: She found that children raised in secular environments are likely to maintain those beliefs into adulthood, similar to how children raised in religious households are likely to adhere to their family's faith.

The only reason you're an atheist is because your parents brainwashed you.
Yet another fail.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

>> if you never told a child about religion until they're 18 and then tried to prosthelyze upon that kid with all the stories, ritual and dogma, that child would uproariously laugh in your face and ask if you need medical attention!<<

Oh dear. Wrong again.
In the Barna Group's research, it has been found that a small percentage of individuals who identify as atheists or agnostics later embrace a religious faith. While specific studies show that around 10-15% of people who identify as non-religious report converting to a religious belief at some point, the exact figures can vary based on the specific survey and population sampled.

Pew Research Center (2019): In their survey, about 26% of Americans who were raised in non-religious households reported becoming religious at some point in their lives.

National Study of Youth and Religion (NSYR): This study found that many youth who identified as non-religious during adolescence often returned to religion in young adulthood. About 25% of those who reported being non-religious at age 18 indicated a shift toward religious identification by their mid-20s.

LOL@U.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

Also in a survey of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, conducted by the Pew Research Center in 2009, they found that 51% of scientists believe in God, compared to 41% who do not.
So, the majority of scientists did express belief in God according to the Pew survey. Moreover, the Pew survey revealed that when you compare the percentages of those that believe in God to the percentages from one hundred years ago you find virtually no change.

Back in 1914 there was a survey conducted by the psychologist James Leuba of 1000 U. S. scientist about their views on God, and he found that the scientific community at that time was evenly divided: 42% said that they believe in a personal God, and 42% said that they did not.

Virtually the same numbers as today. So, all of the supposed advances in science over the last one hundred years, including general relativity theory, quantum theory, advances in molecular biology and evolutionary theory, have not altered significantly the percentages of scientists who say they believe in God.

this includes some of the top scientists in the world. I think, for example, of people like George Ellis of the University of Cape Town. He has been described by astrophysicists as the person in the world who knows more about cosmology than any other person alive today, and he is a theist.

Christopher Isham is a quantum cosmologist in England who has been described as Briton’s leading quantum cosmologist, and he is a Christian. Francisco Ayala is one of the most eminent evolutionary biologists in the world, and he is a Christian believer.
Allan Sandage, one of the world’s greatest astronomers.

Francis Collins, the head of the Human Genome project and eminent scientist is a Christian. So. the fact is, that Christians are well represented in the scientific community and includes some of the top scientist in the world.

In conclusion. Atheists like DrPepper12 are easily refuted and you can dismiss this retard.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

My guess is if this dumb dumb responds is he will attack me with asserting that i believe in somekind of god. And he will do so WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE.

Thats what atheists do. All they do is 2 things. They can only make comments that are easily proven false, and they believe in things without any evidence.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

I want you to notice that i have repeatedly refuted atheists on this page, and have done so without the need of making anykind of theistic argument, and without invoking a god.

But thats what atheists feel the need to do. Assert that the only reason anyone would disagree with an athiest it must mean the person believes in somekind of god.
Except thats easily proven false too.
Atheists bicker among themselves CONTANTLY.
And we know this because there are groups of atheists that have contradictory definitions of what the word "atheism" even means. Are we supposed to believe all atheists are actually god believers since groups of them disagree? LOL.
Its absurd.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

This clown has already shown to do this in a comment thread where i have already stated that there's no evidence i believe in a god.

" For penance I command you to say 10 hail Satan's & 15 Our Flying Spaghetti Monster, may his sauce endure forever."
This sort of comment is typically used against god believers to offend them.

So, typically this is indicative of this clown already being this over the top stupid.

[mandyfire98]

Same reason why religious people feel the need to "witness" to other people.

[DrPepper12]

We are REALLY bothered by what we consider a WASTE of the precious few days we are granted on this spinning ball of dirt. To be blunt, we think you are living in service to a anachronistic delusion, a fable from when we didn't know anything and superstition reigned instead of science. Using reason, science and logic you cannot come to any other conclusions so you rebel and ground your belief "faith" is amorphous and unprovable. Even your God is simply an accident of birth and if you never told a child about religion until they're 18 and then tried to prosthelyze upon that kid with all the stories, ritual and dogma, that child would uproariously laugh in your face and ask if you need medical attention! Then when you tell that kid about all the hate, strife and blood spilled in God's name, that child would weep for you out of pity, shame and empathy for you and all those harmed by religion.
It just doesn't add up!

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

The irony of everything you just said is a bunch of unprovable assertions that you believe without any evidence at all.
Awesome.

[DrPepper12]

I have logic, reason, science, Bayseian probability on my side. You have faith. LOL

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

LOL. No you don't.
Cope.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

If you had ANY of that on your side, you'd be able to demonstrate ANY of the things you said in your original post. You won't do that. Because you can't.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

Your comment is a bunch of hilarious question begging b. s.
HAHAHAHA.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

No wonder things don't "add up" with the amount of comic stupidity in your comment you probably can't even do basic math!
LOL.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

Holy flying spaghetti monsters. Even that picture is dumb. Not as dumb as you of course.
You can't get from "deserves to" from something that "can be".

I guess if a woman CAN be raped, she deserves to be raped.
Thats your retarded logic.
Fool.

[DrPepper12]

Again. Some gummies and a long session with your toys will clear your rage & depression right up!

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

Cope. I don't use your kinds of toys. Those 20 foot fake dongs your wifes boyfriend uses on your backside aren't for me. You repeating your insults? Sad.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

You're too stupid to be funny.

[DrPepper12]

So how's my suggestion going? Groovy? Maybe play some pink Floyd while your having some me time?

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

Lame. Try again.

[Summeroflove]

It’s really funny that these same people accuse Christian’s of forcing their religion when this is exactly what they do. They don’t want to hear someone preach on the street but they shout from the rooftops how God doesn’t exist. Even people minding their own business for instance praying together at a restaurant they feel the need to interject.

At the end of the day not all atheists act this way it’s like how not all Christian’s are the same. They love making a straw man of all Christian’s and being bigots towards Christian’s.

If someone bothers me unproved I’m not very nice about it. Leave me alone and I’ll leave you alone.

[razelove]

That would be because although there is a lack of a deity in atheism, it is a religion with a dogma. Your belief directly clashes with just about everything except for Buddhism.

Kind of like how the Kurds find themselves shafted because of Zoroastrianism.

Granted I've never heard of an atheist starting a holy war, I do remember how the amazing atheist got such an amazing and dedicated following. Even the church of satan basically changed it's beliefs to being atheism with the rituals of catholic mass.

Anyway, religions clash, especially when your belief is the "right" belief.

[Tim2nice]

That’s a dumb take. Atheism is just what it says. Lack of belief in deity. I don’t know of any atheist temples

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

@Tim2nice First off, there's literally zero evidence that atheism is a lack of belief in a deity. No atheist has ever been able to prove that the one and only true meaning of atheism. Every atheist asserts dogmatically as if their word is gospel.

Secondly. Thats a dumb take. Because there are plenty of atheist churches.

[Tim2nice]

@Thatgirlyouhate33, well, aren’t you an energetic religious zealot? Atheism is a Greek word meaning no god. An atheist is a person who believes gods don’t exist. That some atheists might make friends with other atheists it is normal. Most theists like to have theists friends only. I’ve never known an atheist church and if there was one I have zero desire to go to. My atheism is a personal belief based on lack of divine evidence. Nothing else.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

@Tim2nice Well aren't you asserting i believe in god, without any evidence?
I believe in things with actual evidence. You should try it.

>>Atheism is a Greek word meaning no god.<<
Nice etymology fallacy. And words change meaning over time, and words are descriptive no prescriptive. Try again.

>>An atheist is a person who believes gods don’t exist. << Nice baseless assertion.

>>That some atheists might make friends with other atheists it is normal.<<
You should try arguing against claims instead of your imaginary friends in your head.

>>Most theists like to have theists friends only.<<
Who gives a crap? Seriously. Who? Your imaginary friends in your head you are arguing against?
Or leprechauns you obviously believe in. I mean since where making up baseless claims.

>>’ve never known an atheist church and if there was one I have zero desire to go to. <<
Yawn. seattleatheist. church
Google it. Dumb dumb. And no, thats not the only one. there's a ton.
I guess since YOU personally haven't seen evidence of a thing, therefore it doesn't exist.

>> My atheism is a personal belief based on lack of divine evidence.<<
Well my belief that you have brain damage is a personal belief based upon lack of any evidence that you can make any cogent argument. Unlike your claim, youve already proven you dont know what you're talking about.

[razelove]

y'all are proving my point with your well reasoned arguments. You don't believe in a god, and that is your belief. I never expressed any belief of my own, yet your assumption is that I am a "religious zealot" because I point out that atheism is indeed a religion.

You have beliefs as a religion, even if the belief is the lack of a god, humanism, whatever you want to call it. Your beliefs clash with those who do believe in a god and lead to frustration that most people who believe and do not examine their beliefs experience when they encounter contrary beliefs.

It's kind of like how when you don't make a choice about something you are still making a choice. Not believing in a god or gods is still having a belief, and atheism is a religion.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

Yeah and some atheists will scream at other primates that their version of atheism is the one and only true version as if their pathetic accidental lives mean something. When really at any moment their random brain firings could force them to throw bananas and poo at each other.
Bunch of mindless monkey automatons.

Atheist APE prophet Matt dillahunty literally said and i quote "My mind does not exist." Look it up.

Meanwhile you have atheists crying over and over saying "atheism is not a religion" after the supreme court ruled it was.
Then they are being constantly mocked and atheists have to cope with the idea of atheists going to churches on Sunday and singing in pews.
Mad TV literally mocked that idea long before it happened, suggesting already how STUPID it would be to even think of such a thing. Yet they did it.
Why?
Because they're clowns.

[razelove]

@Thatgirlyouhate33 I don't think they're clowns, I think it's just that their belief is the same as any other belief. It's the "right" belief. For Muslims everyone who doesn't believe in the Quran and Mohammed is ignorant and doesn't see the light. The same is true for Christians, Jews, etc. They know they're right, because it's what they believe. You could include individual beliefs like paganism too. The individual determines their open mindedness.

It's better, but not easier, to accept and respect that other people have their own views and values that you might not always agree with. I do like the "my mind does not exist" idea, that's rich.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

They are clowns if the standard was set by the society that doing X thing is ridiculous and they go ahead and do it. A clown is defined as "a comic entertainer." To me and to many people they are doing the very thing the show caused people to laugh at.

>>I think it's just that their belief is the same as any other belief. It's the "right" belief.<<
Wrong. Some beliefs are wrong. To say otherwise is to say the belief that all beliefs are right is to say the opposite belief that some beliefs are wrong, is a contradiction.
Because by saying that all beliefs are the same is positing the opposite proposition is inherently incorrect.
Its self refuting.

Whether or not muslims, christians, jews etc "Know" they are right is a question of philosophical epistemology and ontological status.

It also depends on what it is "to know" Knowledge by some peoples definition is "justified true belief" The problem with that is, it would mean knowledge is just a subset of belief. And thats dumb. But if it is, then to say "They know they're right because its what they beleive" would be redundant.

Its also false. One does not validate their knowledge based upon their beliefs.
Thats not how epistemology works.

Imagine how silly that would be if true. It would also result in contradictions.
For example I believe the statement "They know they're right because its what they believe" Is false.
Why? because its what i believe.

[razelove]

@Thatgirlyouhate33 I think I get what you're saying, but it's a tall order for most people to try to think that deeply into theology unless they're preaching it, or have come out of the other side of a crises of faith. Some personal reason to search for that deeper meaning. A lot of people will learn an ideology and continue on with it simply because it is what is right because if feels right and it needs no further questioning than that.

They may do taboo things, because it feels naughty to break away from the tradition, or completely break. I don't think they really dwell too deeply in it by and large though. You're giving too much credit... Like why does a Catholic stay Catholic, or an edgy teenager follow the crowd towards atheism. I don't think there's much deep thought there, it's mostly following the crowd to what's "right"

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

Understanding my arguments doesn't require people to understand them. All that is required is basic knowledge of logic and basic understanding of foundational philosophy like epistemological justification.

>>A lot of people will learn an ideology and continue on with it simply because it is what is right because if feels right and it needs no further questioning than that.<<
Except thats a violation of scripture in some religions, like Christianity.

Christianity for example states that one ought not follow blindly. It specifically states to question.
So its a contradiction to those within that religion to behave in that manor.

So to even make the claim "This religion is a cult" when that spefic religious doctrine tells you ideas that are antithetical to cult claims is false.

You can't follow a book religiously that tells to you question everything and then also not question everything because "It feels right."

A Cathoic stays catholic for a variety of different reasons. Its not always "beacuse it feels right and im not gong to question it."
That simply is not the case for all catholics, and i doubt its for even most of them. You would have to tell me that the vast majority of catholics are violating scripture that says to question everything.
Ok sure, lets suppose thats true then. Can you really call them a catholic when they are violating the very book they are suppose to follow?
Nope.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

Obviously when i said this: "Understanding my arguments doesn't require people to understand them"
The "them" is in reference to theologies.

[razelove]

@Thatgirlyouhate33 I'm not saying religion is a cult, I'm saying it you were to grab 20 random people from 20 random churches, less than 100 of them have read the bible. They are following what their pastor has said and don't know about the broader church (if it exists) outside their region.

That argument does break down entirely when it comes to Judaism though, as understanding the Hebrew language and reading from the Torah are necessary to be a Jew.

I did not say that I was talking about all cases, just the overwhelming majority of cases. There is nothing wrong with being ignorant. There are only so many hours in everyone's day, and we prioritize them differently.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

Stating people follow a religion because they dont question it, is in fact implying thats its a cult.
How? Because thats commensurate with what cults do.

The vast majority of people in religious have at least read a portion of the bible. How do we know this? Because pastors generally quote the bible and they do read Along's.
Thats how that works.
Reading the entire bible is not required to follow specific ideas in Christianity.

I dont see how that argument breaks down on grounds the religion requires you to understand a single word as it was written.
Thats like saying "well you dont need to understand English even though this English class that you are taking requires it of you."

I already addressd the majority of cases. The majority of cases do not believe in their religion on grounds that it "feels right" and dont question it.

And like i said, even if that was true (and its not) they wouldn't be a catholic based upon their own standards.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

i will address this claim even further. Is the claim "Most people are catholics simply because it is what is right because if feels right and it needs no further questioning than that." True?

No.
Studies, such as those conducted by the Pew Research Center and CARA (Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate), have consistently shown that the majority of Catholics are raised in the faith from childhood. In a 2015 Pew study on U. S. religious life, 60% of Catholics cited being born into a Catholic family as the primary reason for their faith. Cultural and family influence are powerful drivers of religious identity, particularly in Catholicism, where rituals, traditions, and community ties are integral.

These studies show that while personal beliefs and spiritual experiences are also significant factors, the influence of family plays a predominant role in shaping Catholic identity. Other reasons include a sense of belonging to the religious community and the continuation of family traditions.
Where does it say there that they did it because "it feels right, and they like the idea that they aren't supposed to question it."
Its not there.

Pew Research Center (2016): A study of U. S. adults showed that about 9% of people who became religious cited "intellectual reasoning" or "searching for truth" as a factor. Most people identified factors like upbringing (39%), personal spiritual experiences, or a search for meaning.

Among Evangelicals, a small percentage of converts (around 10-15%) state that they were drawn to Christianity due to logical arguments like those in apologetics, including reasoning about the existence of God, the historicity of Jesus, or other intellectual explorations.

[razelove]

@Thatgirlyouhate33 Now you're just being obtuse. It feels right to generally continue doing things you were raised doing because those are your morals, values, and rituals. I thought you were coming loaded for bear or something. I pointed that out for every religion I mentioned, you do it because it feels right for you.

Like Muslims I've known had warm, loving households where parents were working hard to raise their children. Of course it would feel right for them to have that belief, and feel proud of it. Same for Mormons or anyone else.

I would think atheism would be the exception there, they're the people discontent with their previous religion, or children of such. I guess a step further it is truly a grudge religion, or it would be agnostic.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

Imagine if i said "The only reason many people who believe in evolution are only doing so because they follow it blindly. They haven't actually read the whole origin of the species."
They are only doing so because what their science teacher said.
They dont actually go out and study it.

Would that mean evolution is false on grounds most people dont read the origin of the species?
No.
And even if most people believe in thing x for a dumb reason, does that mean thing x is tarnished in some way?
No.
Does it even mean that those reasons for believing are false in some way?
No. That would be an argument from personal incredulity.

What follows though is its unlikely that a doctrine that involves faith and following jesus is not preached by a preacher. Why? Because its foundational. The likelyhood of preachers not talking about those passages referencing to question everything and not to have blind faith are therefore very slim.

[razelove]

Yeah, you're just trolling.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

there's no evidence that im doing it "Just to be obtuse." Thats baseless.

Just because something "Feels right" because of x reason does not mean you are therefore doing it BECAUSE it feels right.
Correlation is not always causation.
Try again.

>>. I pointed that out for every religion I mentioned, you do it because it feels right for you.<<
No. Wrong.
I even addressed those in polls that demonstrated they believe because of intellectual reasons which by the way have nothing to do with "feelings."

No go ahead and say "Well i just mean for those 60%"
And then im going to say, reference to what i already said about that.
Correlation is not always causation.
I might FEEL right about getting my paycheck and it "feels good" to go and get it, but if im only doing it because i have to do it because i have to pay bills? Am i paying bills SOLELY because "it feels right" or am i doing i primarily because I HAVE TO?

Try again.

>> Of course it would feel right for them to have that belief, <<
Yawn.
Neuroscience is replete with studies that show you dont know what you're talking about.
there are two distinct systems involved in making decisions: one that is emotion-driven and automatic (System 1) and another that is deliberate and logical (System 2).

What they show is that while emotions influence decision-making, the process involves a combination of emotional and rational components. The somatic markers from emotions guide the decision-making process, but the FINAL decisions are often rationalized through logical reasoning.

Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1974). Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124-1131
Damasio, A. R. (1996). The Somatic Marker Hypothesis and the Possible Functions of the Prefrontal Cortex. In The Neuroscience of Human Decision Making. Academic Press.

So this idea that they are making decisions SOLEY because it "feels right" Isn't even true based on actual science.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

>>I would think atheism would be the exception there<<
No. Wrong.
Given your argument that people "do things because it feels right for them" You dont get to do that.
Are atheists being atheist because it "feels WRONG?"
HAHA.
Also there's this: Pew Research Center (2015): This study found that children raised by religious parents are more likely to be religious themselves, and similarly, children raised in non-religious households are more likely to identify as non-religious.
LOL.
So clearly atheists are just being brainwashed to not question atheism in atheist households!
They are just doing it because of family reasons. Because it "feels right."

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

And you know why this argument also fails? Because that reasoning would also apply to religious people who convert to other theistic religions based upon being disconent with their previous religion.
So its not solely applicable to atheism
So no.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

Yeah saying im just trolling is not an argument.
ANd there's no evidence of that.
You asserting that is simply baseless.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

Well YOU are just trolling. See how easy that was?

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

All claims, including claims that someone is trolling require evidence or they can be summarily dismissed. That which has no evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
How can someone PROVE they are trolling? Easy. Demonstrate the following. Which you won't do.

Off-Topic Arguments: Frequent irrelevant points suggest a lack of genuine engagement.
Extreme Positions: Taking absurd or outrageous stances may indicate trolling.
Logical Fallacies: Heavy reliance on fallacies instead of sound reasoning points to insincerity. (which you have done)
Dismissive Behavior: Consistently mocking or insulting opponents shows a focus on provoking rather than debating.
Repetition: Repeating points despite being addressed suggests a desire to annoy rather than discuss. (which you have done)
Lack of Engagement: Ignoring opposing views indicates a disinterest in meaningful conversation. (which you have done)
Disregard for Facts: Focusing on emotional or sensational claims over evidence implies disruption over discussion. (which you have done)

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

The irony is, merely saying someone is trolling could be viewed as trolling. Why? Lack of Engagement: Ignoring opposing views indicates a disinterest in meaningful conversation.

If anyone is trolling here, its you.
Im not saying you are though.

[DrPepper12]

@thatgirlyouhate33. For penance I command you to say 10 hail Satan's & 15 Our Flying Spaghetti Monster, may his sauce endure forever.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

@DrPepper12 Ill do that as soon as you stop letting your wifes boyfriend peg you.

[DrPepper12]

If it's my wife's boyfriend and he has a cock I'm pretty sure that's the real deal and not pegging.
I guess opining on sex isn't your strong suit...

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

@DrPepper12 Wrong. He pegs you obviously because you prefer the fake 12 foot ones.
Idiot.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

@DrPepper12 Obviously opining on comebacks isn't your strong suit.

[Tim2nice]

@Thatgirlyouhate33, where do you find a 12 foot and what do you do with it?

[Berethor]

If people are getting fraud don't you want to help them? if they buy a car that don't exist?

https://www.youtube.com/embed/qahB7mYhLxs

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

Why are atheists so stupid?
A person who is legitimately delusional cannot "fraud" people. You moron.

Common Law Fraud: Traditionally, common law fraud requires that the false statement be made with intent to deceive. Knowledge of the falsity is a key element because it demonstrates intent to mislead or defraud.

Civil Fraud: In civil cases, plaintiffs need to prove that the defendant knowingly made false representations with intent to deceive, leading to the plaintiff’s reliance and resulting harm.

Criminal Fraud: In criminal fraud cases, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knowingly committed the fraud. This often involves demonstrating that the defendant acted with intent to deceive and knew their actions were fraudulent.

Fail.

[Agape93]

Same reason the religious insist the opposite to them

[LiamJHayden]

I find it amusing, as it is impossible to know that there is no God. That would require comprehensive knowledge of everything everywhere at all times, or in other word, God.

[Tim2nice]

Lack of evidence is just that. Until evidence is proven then we have to assume there’s none

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

@Tim2nice No. Thats false. You dont know what you are talking about. Not surprised. No atheist i have ever seen has. And until evidence is proven i have to assume there isn't any evidence of any atheist that knows what they are talking about.

[LiamJHayden]

@Tim2nice and the atheists lack evidence of nonexistence, impossible to prove, which was my point. It is fine to say "I don't believe" and quite another to say "Not there."

[jahaims]

Because it is clear that grown adults are in a cult worshipping a sky daddy so they can cope with reality. It's no different than a furry that lives in a fantasy world they made up to cope with life. I'd mock either.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

Yawn. Why are atheists this dumb. Even some atheists that have less brain damage have repeatedly stated that god does not live in the sky.
If you are going to mock religion, you could do it without straw manning and proving yourselves to be retarded.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

>>It's no different than a furry that lives in a fantasy world they made up to cope with life. <<
Even if we grant they are both fantasy worlds made up to cope with life, they are vastly different.

I wish atheists wouldn't constantly prove how dumb they are.

[Breanna_nonbinary]

I don’t tell people god doesn’t exist unless they bring it up first.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

Great. And i dont tell atheists that they are provably retarded unless they tell me they are atheists.

[Breanna_nonbinary]

Wow. I didn’t know we had bots on here that were trolls here.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

I know. Because bots like you only know things that they are programmed to.

[DrPepper12]

That girl you need some gummies and a toy

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

@DrPepper12 You need to stop letting your wifes boyfriend peg you.

[DrPepper12]

Well it's not THAT often... LOL I thought I was a bot? Or retarded?

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

@DrPepper12 Lol you admitted it.

[DrPepper12]

Yes I admit it. I'm a retarded bot... You're funny! I like you!!

[CuriousHubby]

They have the need to be accepted as right often for dumb beliefs.

Like the universe or star signs. Both indicate a god pulling strings

[Tim2nice]

Which god?

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

@Tim2nice Which atheism? What a terrible argument. Since other versions of atheism contradict therefore all of atheism is false.
Boy, why are atheists this dumb?

[CuriousHubby]

Haha both sound dumb and I meant in general we are either puppets on strings or needing to believe there is a reason for things.
Trying to find reason when there is none

My favorite line to someone saying Thier horoscope is the stars made me do it! Their ideas make that true! The full moon made me act out!

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

>>Haha both sound dumb <<
No. Only the atheist here is saying something is false based upon other peoples disagreements.
Thats retarded as F.

[strateguy632]

For baiting people. That is the real trolling. Like kyles dad in series south park!

[ChicoFromThe305]

I don't know but it's kinda interesting how they even look for God themed things to behave that way.

[Dargil]

They are afraid religious people are right and want to discourage them.

[Tim2nice]

Why would that be? This is so dumb.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

@Tim2nice No. You're the dumb one. Clearly. As I've repeatedly shown.

[Dargil]

@Tim2nice Actually, the responder is so dumb. Seems self-evident to me.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

Wait, are you seriously agreeing with Tim2nice who said that what you said was dumb?
LMFAO.
And the concept of self evidence is dumb.
Why? Because you can just assert that for anything first off. Secondly, nothing is actually self evident because all claims don't exist in a vacuum.

[Tim2nice]

If religious people were right nobody would disagree with them. But there’s nothing right about religion

[Dargil]

@Thatgirlyouhate33 no.

[Dargil]

@Tim2nice Please keep thinking that (and don't forget to vote November 6). You will make more room choices in heaven for Believers.

[Thatgirlyouhate33]

@Tim2nice
"If religious people were right nobody would disagree with them." HAHAHHA
Thats so retarded.
Darwin was diagreed with by a ton of his peers originally when he promoted the idea of evolution.
If you agree with evolution then darwan was right, yet people disagreed. Thats really weird.

IF atheists were right, nobody with disagree with them. But there's nothing right about atheism.
Wait. But atheists can't even agree to what atheism means, so there's that.

HAHAHA>

[Dargil]

@timmyainttonice ***suppresses yawn unsuccessfully***

[Anonymous]

Because their demons are angry at people for loving god

[jjj101010]

Same reason religious people tell u that god does exist. It’s called having a belief

[Anonymous]

Fear and arrogance.

[thearchjoker]

I don't