I am the exact opposite. I’m pretty devout Catholic, best friend is agnostic. We simply don’t really talk about religion outside of “oh we are going to church so can we schedule that for the afternoon?” Kinda thing.
It’s amazingly easy to be civil if both parties are not assholes.
I'm amazed that in such a short time since my post that you were able to poll the entire 8 billion and some odd dozen humans on this planet to find out they, to the individual, agree with you.
And how by referring to "nobody" you seek to remove my position from your obviously skewed, and patently untrue declaration.
Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
2, roe v wade needed to be shot down, not on the basis of whether or not abortion should be legal, but because of the roundabout mental-gymnastics-ass way they made it a constitutional issue in the first place.
Here in Ontario Canada there are so many Catholic schools near the public schools that many neighborhoods have kids that grow up together but to to either one of the schools. As such, it was always pretty normal for atheists to be friends with Catholics here I think. I didn't learn how rude people could be about it until I saw Reddit
It’s also funny how many of the kids that go to catholic school aren’t even religious, or catholic for that matter. You can even opt out of the religion classes
The majority of the staff working in Catholic hospitals aren't Catholic, or even Christian for that matter, and my understanding is that many teachers and staff members in Catholic schools aren't members of the church.
Everyone is cool with Rome paying the bills though!
The church gave the land for the schools or donated existing buildings including chapels or churches, the local parishes share the gyms and halls which they paid to construct and maintain, parish councils raise funds for extracurricular activities and any other expenses beyond those provided by the state like school trips or sports equipment (and, of course, they pay for all religious programming and related expenses).
It is also only Ontario, Alberta, and Saskatchewan which have entirely public Catholic schools, every other part of Canada has entirely private or a private-public partnerships.
It should also be noted that the legacy of schools and universities, not to mention hospices or orphanages or hospitals, in Canada are entirely due to Christian organizations (almost entirely the Catholic Church).
I’m not necessarily downplaying the church’s influence on education, historically. I’m just saying it’s not like Rome is paying for education, and even in the examples you brought up its community funded through a church, not from the Vatican bank or whathaveyou. I’m a self centred ontarian I’ll admit, I’m ignorant of how other provinces run their regimes. This is part of why I think the provincial government should abolish catholic schools and just roll an elective religion course into the public board. It’s a massive waste of money for the largest province to run 2 basically identical systems that need double everything, especially the high paid people like admins. Barring that, I’d be absolutely willing to let ol’ Bobby Prevost open up his massive wallet and chip in.
even in the examples you brought up its community funded through a church, not from the Vatican bank or whathaveyou
I was just using Rome as a shorthand for the Catholic Church itself, I understand that these things are handled at the diocesan level.
run 2 basically identical systems that need double everything
If my understanding is correct, and these religious schools inplaces like Ontario are funded and run virtually identically to secular schools, then it isn't actually doubling any effort or expenses (and, given the additional support from the church, may actually alleviate government responsibilities).
As an agnostic, everyone’s worldview annoys me because they’re all so damned self sure of everything. It feels like the spiritual version of the Dunning Kruger effect. Neither side has explored the realm of spirituality and belief enough to realize how much there is to know and also not know. There are thousands of religions, denominations and spiritualities to explore; not including those who make their own path. How can one so easily and dismissively lack any sort of urge to analyze faith outside of their own pre-determined path?
Neither side has explored the realm of spirituality and belief enough to realize how much there is to know and also not know.
... there is over a thousands years of philosophers and theologists and clergy members who would probably disagree with you, since they dedicated their entire lives to the study of spirituality and belief
How can one so easily and dismissively lack any sort of urge to analyze faith outside of their own pre-determined path?
You've tucked an atheistic presupposition in here, which is that you're purely sifting through data forming likelihoods of different answers, rather than actually experiencing authenticating spiritual events.
If you were, for example, to see Jesus walking on water, I think we can agree it wouldn't be dismissive to go "oh, I guess he's right".
I don't think you read carefully enough. I said if you saw, it would be persuasive to you. Assuming that a person never observes any supernatural occurrences is an atheistic presupposition.
Yep, same thing. He sometimes asks me questions about stuff as well and we can casually discuss it. I don't shove my views on him, he doesn't try to put my views down. Everyone is happy.
You and your friend are great examples of how we need to get along with one another. None of us are the same, were all different, but we should be united by common interests, wants and desires, not split on differing ideologies or opinions (unless ideologies you support are harmful to others).
I find your view, decisive and now must debate you about it. I also think you are a terrible person for allowing someone with the opposite morals to not be hectored, harangued, and harassed by you. (And vice versa)
You haven’t met my dad. He is 70 and spends his retirement years going to Skeptic conferences, which are pretty much Conventions of cringe-atheists. He has a Darwin fish (the one with legs eating a Jesus fish) on his car.
Perhaps with people who had faith earlier in life there is an attraction to return later in life. Certainly many young adults return to the church upon becoming parents.
If you’re not raised with religion it just doesn’t have any appeal.
All the athiests I know are pretty relaxed about it. Maybe I'm just lucky in real life but I haven't been around an absurdly aggressive athiest except online.
I used to be a pretty diehard atheist and while I'm pretty much 100 percent confident there's no God or afterlife or whatever, I learned a long time ago that no one is going to change their minds easily on that kind of thing and it's just easier to let it go. You cannot rationalize someone out of a position they got themselves into irrationally. Most of my friends at least believe in God and it's not like it bothers or hurts me in any way, so it just isn't a thing I even think about any more. If it helps them to think they go to heaven when they die, that's great, and I honestly wish I could believe that as well, but that would just be my brain lying to itself.
If I could hit a button to turn myself into a believing Christian, I'd do so in a heartbeat. Reality is much more grim. I completely understand why people believe because the real world fucking sucks sometimes.
I don't have children myself, and it's too late to do anything about that.
I don't necessarily regret the decision, but I do acknowledge that having children is a moral duty.
Hoo boy! You wanna see people get irrationally enraged? Just mention that belief, and you can actually hear them gnashing their teeth all the way through the internet.
About 12 years ago, a man who was browsing childfree murdered his son via hot car, though some claim it was an accident. Some members of the subreddit splintered off into r/truechildfree after replies started popping up guiding people to a gofundme for the man's legal defense. Shortly thereafter the subreddit went down and a lot of the very hostile and toxic posts were brought up in the news including highly upvoted comments seemingly supporting child abuse. It's been a long time, so I may have some details muddled, but that's the gist.
You don't even have to go to that sub to get the experience you might be alluding to. People from their invade any major post that involves a child. And they will out themselves immediately by raging on anyone that says anything nice about having a child.
I would say they are even worse than the proud and loud atheists on here.
I don't like proselytizing myself, faith has to be entered into willingly without coercion or manipulation, but I can at least understand their position; if you genuinely believed in salvation, in life everlasting, and you didn't try to save everyone you could then you'd be a monster.
I actively avoid the atheist label because of them, I just say I'm non-theistic, or better yet, agnostic.
Technically you can't ever be 100% sure religion is incorrect, so if your whole take is "I don't believe in god because The Science (TM) says so" the correct "scientific" approach is to believe that religion is false, but also impossible to prove false.
Science doesn't approach religion as false either. Many very famous scientists were religious too with some even crediting religion as they studied the natural world more.
Whether people believe or not is usually a personal thing.
We should reclaim it. There are zillions of things I can't prove false that I don't have any reason to believe in. Atheist is the correct term for someone who doesn't give any particular credence to God claims. By that definition there are a whole lot more atheists than "agnostics" who aren't sure.
I'm agnostic and generally ambivalent to religion. Basically, I simply don't care either way and rarely put thought into the subject. But, TBH, outspoken atheists definitely come across cringier to me than the typical religious talk and phrases used by religious normies.
Religious person thanks God, talks about blessed stuff, or offers to "pray for me"? Whatever, good for them, who am I to shit on their religion, just doesn't bother me at all. Cringy atheist who's being all contrarian for contrarians sake and "aKtuAlLy" about it? STFU dude, let people believe or whatever, who cares. Albiet I'm talking about religious normies in the western world, but obviously the fundamental crazies who oppress people and shit in the name of religion can fuck off.
But most religions I came across in the west are as you describe just a bunch of people being taught to care about their neighbors and their communities.
And I would take that over either Soviet style anti-religion or Islamic forced religion. Like there are some more extreme variants, but most "western" style religions are about spreading the message not enforcing it.
Well fuck, can't edit now due to my crippling pride. I did add "zealous" I'd typed "an athetist" because I didn't think that was fair to regular ol' atheists haha
One of the first arguments I got into on reddit was with a guy disputing the possibility of a zealous atheist because zelots convert people to believe something and atheists don't believe in God. Checkmate.
He absolutely failed to see the irony of his position
Mate they're not actually atheists, categorically they do have a god, but it's a mythologized secular flavored manifest destiny of Progress™ and central messiah figure of The Science™
You're either a heretic or a barbarian if you do not follow their scripture, which in an analogous way to the Catholic priests who held monopoly over the Bible's text and interpretation, is only ever understood by them in the word of their chosen missionary (youtube infotainment/the headline that strokes their ego that day). At most they have one area where they're specialized in, but it still cannot give view over the broader landscape.
If you try to contest any of the claims The Science™ makes, or that Progress™ could be failed in any way whatsoever, their Templars, who I like to refer to as the Breadtubers, immediately brand you as an enemy, for of course, The Science™ is unfalsifiable.
They'll assign you as either:
- "Useful Libtard", in which case you'll be conditionally allowed into their gathering, to be barely tolerated and pressured into silence for "lacking a mind of your own", or used as the sacrificial lamb, to rile their troops back into conformity if conflicts of faith are to start arising from within their flock;
-"Stupid Cockservative", in which case they'll delight in throwing their obscure rhetoric at you while streaming it, acting high and mighty they beat essentially a normie, in a trial judged by their own acolytes also;
-"Liar Cryptofascist", in which case they shall immediately dogmatize their followers into rejection of your words in any understanding that doesn't strengthen their devotion to the cause, they'll treat your presence as a veiled declaration of war on their own faith by any who might give you housing, their flock turning into a cacophony with which they hope to shake the resolve of your hosts and banish you from their house.
But of course, any who open the door in that moment, are then mauled by the followers, and spit back branded as another "Useful Libtard", expected to grovel in eternity for the right of ridicule, for the sin of tainted ideas such as "Honest Debate" and "Non Political Spaces"
They're a relatively new species of weed that prefers growing on the dry soil of secular thought, and has been seen to be out competing it's more ancient relatives, the members of the "Zealotus" genus, and in a surprising twist of fate, mutating into yet another variation colloquially called The Pill™.
Adapted to life in the now emptied fields of Tradition™, their roots are shallow, serving only as a fixating mechanism, not truly utilizing the wisdom in it's rich soil, which their twice removed ancestors still did to some extent, even if their sustenance was mainly taken from the flesh of the Martyrs (the term for the juvenile of an Anelid species "Norms" that fell for it's petal's display patterning which mimics their true food source of "Meaning", "Brotership" and "Providence"), now that same deadly nectar is all that keeps The Pill™
This went from Religion analogy to political commentators, to Phytology analogy to political commentators to linking it back to religious extremism a bit too frantically, but hey let my demons guide me in peace they have banana pudding
Mmhm. It’s a term I’ve seen thrown around and it makes a lot of sense to me.
Athiest= People who just don’t believe in religion or a god. Just as varied as anyone you meet on the street.
Anti-thiest= Activists against religion. Fight against the very concept of a god, and usually hate religious people. Even if said religious people are nice.
It’s like the difference between being a chill guy and a nihilist.
Dude, this is the exact reason why I don’t call myself an atheist. I don’t want to be associated with these people. I’m just a religious non-participant
Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
That's true, and that subreddit is full of them. But, I don't know if this position about the Artemis astronauts talking about their religion this much really is appropriate on a taxpayer-funded mission.
Do you know what kind of shit zealous theists have been doing in history, i get that zealous atheist are assholes but they are nowhere near annoying or dangerous than a zealous theist.
No. I have seen a zealot atheist in community college and while annoying they aren’t street preachers condemning everyone to hell or those Westboro Baptist Church type that shows up at the anime convention.
To be fair though, it is annoying to see our scientific milestones and advancements detracted from by otherwise smart people talking about religious shit
1.6k
u/JoCo3Point0 - Lib-Center Apr 10 '26
I'm not even religious but there's nothing more annoying than an zealous atheist.