It’s fed to unconsenting (uninformed) people on planes, in hospitals, in schools.
One lawsuit against a school is all we need. State shouldn’t be pushing religious food on anyone, it must all be secular.
It’s fed to unconsenting (uninformed) people on planes, in hospitals, in schools.
One lawsuit against a school is all we need. State shouldn’t be pushing religious food on anyone, it must all be secular.
No! People on reddit lie!?
What we see is a fairly weak relationship between national religiosity and average national IQ. Once we get up to about 20% of the population being Atheist, the IQ of the population flatlines at around 100 from then on. Even worse, in the ~0% Atheist range, there’s a wide range of national IQs from 64 to 100+ — with a cluster of low-IQ nations that appear to be driving the “trend.”
Indeed, if we look at income per capita instead of religiosity, we already see a much better correlation with average IQ. The correlation between religiosity and IQ is too weak to suggest that religiosity predicts intelligence on the national level. Anyone who claims otherwise is grasping at straws.
You could study it..
Religions and IQs driving that aren’t all the same uniformly across the planet.
Just look at the West? No?
I created a less misleading version of Kanazawa’s plot below; judge the data for yourself.
Religious people are less likely to attend college, where tests are taken…
The most religious adults had an average IQ of 97.14, whereas the atheist adults had an average IQ of 103.09. That may seem like a wide gap — 6 whole IQ points — until we remember that anyone in the IQ range of 90-109 is classified as having “average intelligence.”
Yeah, it’s a bigger gap than same-race gender, at least?
Under two points, you must be so proud. What measurement error?
So really, all Kanazawa showed is that the average person has average intelligence regardless of how religious they are.
How Cognitive Genetic Factors Influence Fertility Outcomes: A Mediational SEM Analysis
Utilizing a newly released cognitive Polygenic Score (PGS) from Wave IV of Add Health (n = 1,886), structural equation models (SEMs) examining the relationship between PGS and fertility (which is approximately 50% complete in the present sample), employing measures of verbal IQ and educational attainment as potential mediators, were estimated. The results of indirect pathway models revealed that verbal IQ mediates the positive relationship between PGS and educational attainment, and educational attainment in turn mediates the negative relationship between verbal IQ and a latent fertility measure. The direct path from PGS to fertility was non-significant. The model was robust to controlling for age, sex, and race; furthermore, the results of a multigroup SEM revealed no significant differences in the estimated path coeficients across sex. These results indicate that those predisposed towards higher verbal IQ by virtue of higher PGS values are also predisposed towards trading fertility against time spent in education, which contributes to those with higher PGS values producing fewer offspring at this stage in their life course.
Jews score higher on verbal IQ….
Not a study, discusses a study of scientism.
They stated in the press 21% risk, it was actually 37%.
Let’s start with the actual statistics. Was George Barna quoted correctly? We have tried to locate the original stats from the Barna site, and this is what we found:
You can understand why atheists and agnostics might have a high rate of divorce, since they are less likely to believe in concepts such as sin, absolute moral truth and judgment. Yet the survey found that the percentage of atheists and agnostics who have been married and divorced is 37% – (Emphasis mine) very similar to the numbers for the born again population.
You go by if they’ve EVER been divorced, that’s how divorce risk works.
There isn’t a freebie.
I’d also like to see cause, including accusations of infidelity.
Are atheist spouses (no such thing logically) more likely to break their vows to a God they think is a joke?
A survey isn’t really a study, like poll data isn’t a vote, and as we can see, the number crunching sucks.
I’d also need to see the pair combinations and specific divorce risks:
atheist/Jew, atheist/Muslim, atheist/Christian, atheist/atheist.
If they’re a risk to themselves, that would be really damning, they can’t blame religion.
Marriage is religious so the fact they haven’t really studied this topic is indicative.
Barna did not include this enlightening fact in his research. Thus, if 21% of atheists divorce after marriage, and 45 % break up once or more before marriage, what we have is the astounding rate of about 66% of atheist couples experiencing “at least” one break up. If, however, the number is 37%, then we have a shocking figure of 82%. How is that for success in relationships?
dissolving “committed unions”
What needs mentioning is the fact that many atheists do not cohabit as a prelude to marriage. They in fact see cohabitation as “equivalent” to any marriage relationship. Therefore, their cohabitation break ups are to be seen as the end of what was to be a committed relationship. These break ups were not included in the Barna research, thus giving an incomplete picture of the true state of relationships among atheist couples.
yep, should count
especially in America with the idiocy of “common law marriage”
so it legally counts
It should also be stressed that, unlike what atheist propagandists preach on the Internet, it is a well established fact that people who live common law before marriage have a greater, not lesser chance of divorce than couples who don’t live common law. Thus, given the fact that atheists’ cohabitations rates are 51%, it is quite possible that their divorce rates are actually higher than the 37% mentioned by Barna.
Maybe they’re into polygamy (cucking) because they’re physically incapable of monogamy?
We’d also need a follow-up study after a marriage/divorce risk one, on MRI neurological proof of pair bonding structures and ability in religions + atheists.
It would be the KO.
This study could be done.
Breakthroughs in the burgeoning field of neuroscience explain the impact of sex on the developing brains of adolescents and young adults. Through scientific data put in layman’s terms, this book demonstrates that:
- Sexual activity releases chemicals in the brain, creating emotional bonds between partners.
- Breaking these bonds can cause depression and make it harder to bond with someone else in the future.
- Chemicals released in the brain during sex can become addictive.
- The human brain is not fully developed until a person reaches their mid-20s. Until then, it is harder to make wise relationship decisions.
Historically, people waited until their 20s to marry. Men and women, it also avoided production of too many children from teen marriage and maternal death from biological prematurity.
Source on that:
Parents and others who care about young people now have the facts to steer them away from making life-changing mistakes, and lead them toward reaching their full potential.
This book will help parents and singles understand that “safe sex” isn’t safe at all; that even if they are protected against STDs and pregnancy, they are still hurting themselves and their partner.
Connect neurological pair bonding impairment to sexual partner total (oral counts) and it’s over for SJWs. That would logically correlate to psychiatric complaints and other poor life outcomes.
“According to a Washington Post article, “According to calculations based on the American Religious Identification Survey of 2001, people who had been in mixed-religion marriages were three times more likely to be divorced or separated than those who were in same-religion marriages.”  Therefore, it would not be surprising if atheist/theist marriages also have increased marital friction and higher rates of divorce since these two worldviews are so different.”
Alt title: men rejecting their gender role (then blaming women).
“More nuanced and incisive rebuttals, such as Edward Feser’s The Last Superstition and David Bentley Hart’s Atheist Delusions, somehow never quite achieved the same recognition.”
“The questions and debates engaged in by the new atheists were often reductive, emotionalized and glib, but one does have to grant that they at least tackled the great questions of faith in their way.”
All redditfags do is strawman and pretend to be House on social questions while their own lives are miserable bachelorhoods full of porn and video games. It’s like church ladies self-congratulating.
Yeah, in spite of mathematical certainty, they’re all 130+ and can’t spell or compose a sentence for shit. O.K.
The only way they feel good about themselves is crusaderism, finding a “sinner” and making them feel bad or stressed e.g. Christians.
“Its supporters soon tired of tedious and repetitive debates,
with their navel
and they began to argue with each other about social justice and political correctness.”
And failed, clue.
Nothing they say is original. They’re multicultural monstrosities.
“The answer lies in the grey zone between believers and atheists.
If you want to find the real wolf steering sheep away from the flock, look not to fedora-bedecked atheists, but to your average apatheist.”
No, hedonist. They pay lip service to virtue to continue a life of vice, massive cognitive dissonance.
You are not special, broflakes. This is not a special thing worthy of a snowflake term.
e.g. they will say all men should be married, and refuse to get married. Idiots.
They will say all men do better in the military and call the draft “sexist” (like evolution didn’t happen).
Women are weak but should magically overpower any male attacker with kung fu grip (but hitting a man is sexist).
They will know about atheist sub-fertility and refuse to be religious because they think it’s beneath them, a status signal, and again, they’re avoiding patriarchal standards i.e. no manwhoring, no carousing, no drugs, no lechery, actual standards of historical masculine virtue.
They don’t want to grow up or can’t (emotionally regressed). Peter Pan spent all his time “having fun” and dodging responsibility.
The idea of being a gentleman or “respectable” is something they dismiss out of hand with another mis-label, cuck.
No, a cuck is someone who rejects tradition and history in their own life while verbally going on (and on and on…) about its importance, they’re cuckservatives hoping to freeload off the backs of real men’s hard work. For thee but not for me. They’re worthless humans, if they won’t contribute they should emigrate. They’d actually take a class on Penis Studies (Man Studies) because they’re so mind-numbingly boring (predictable, all on the same diet, same clothes, same haircut, same reading material across borders, like a cult of dull) and lacking in individuality.
They’ll say men should be providers – and refuse to provide even for themselves (a mantrum) and worse, defend deadbeats!
“It’s okay when we do it” hypocrites. They’re socialists who self-loathe in different ways. An abortion clinic on every corner and whore pills in every 13yo girl’s hands would be alright by them! Moral relativists. “Social liberal, economic conservative” cucks. All the gibs, as long as someone else pays.
You can only strike from your gender role if you were competent enough to have ever achieved it.
They reject their gender role, like male SJWs, in favour of materalism, atheistic hedonism (acting like an animal). It’s the exact same thing.
In their own ideal society, they’d be rejects!
Nihilism in the pomo sense of the word is the belief system of losers, it’s their cover for postmodernism while pretending to be oh-so different (special) from the SJWs (narcissism of small differences).
Even this article’s like “this is a new and special thing”.
No? It’s just that we notice because dueling is illegal (otherwise their lip would get them shot by a real man) and they can’t be cannon fodder without an overt war. This is what happens in the dysgenic situation when you let the Low IQ males with delusions of superiority (a self-proclaimed penis pass, if you will, on all sin) run their whining mouth about how, in the most spoiled society ever, they’re still abject failures! Oh, poor baby in your air conditioned palace on welfare! It must be so hard!
Their failure isn’t society’s fault, it’s a character fault and on the contrary, the ones bitching online are exclusively reared in the middle-class (they had advantages).
They have no excuse.
If a meme about a spoiled suburbanite Prince stereotype offends you…. it should.
Shame is GOOD.
Their slide down the social mobility scale is a sign the system works. You aren’t entitled to a better life than your parents unless you work at least as hard (complaining isn’t work).
9/10 they’re actually nagging. But they do nothing themselves. Only nag. We have male shrews! They expect the rest of us will step in like their helicopter parents. You’re an adult, we owe you nothing.
The Boomers are right about the entitled ones. It just happens to be the hippy kids.
Nagging only works if you’re bound i.e. parents, marriage. Nagging society doesn’t wash and given the advantages men have on many levels (that they deny “male privilege is a myth” when they seek to evade responsibility or champion with hyperbole “men are superior biologically” to signal, both when it’s convenient, like we don’t notice), they don’t have an excuse that blames women e.g. when boys lose out on math tests and other schoolwork, it’s because they study less around the time they discover porn. Asians can’t watch that stuff all day, look at their grades, it isn’t “all men”, it’s all degenerate men who make poor lifestyle choices. So they want a meritocratic system – but only when it leads to positive outcomes for themselves (liars).
If someone works harder than you, they deserve to beat you! Add up hours studied and you’ll find female (and male) conscientiousness isn’t bias, they activate with their IQ the traits which help them. The guy or girl “winging it” the night before deserves to fail*. Low IQ don’t have the IQ to know what they’re NOT doing! That isn’t everyone else’s fault! If there are systemic forces against men in some fields, the same must be true of women in other fields because that is how systems work, ya dummies!
Otherwise it’s like saying there’s north without south or taste without those tacky cheese squares at the other end of the spectrum. Logic is consistent! Smart men address the topic of stupid men – until they’re shouted down as “sexist” (???), like smart women.
It just so happens by nature that there are more lazy men! So yeah, they fail! Confound!
You cannot ignore the left half of the bell curve, men overpopulate it!
They’ve simply never survived in these numbers before because responsibility is the new leprosy in a decadent West. It makes a lot of sense actually. No prior society (that didn’t collapse) ever had to tolerate this much stupid and it shows.
If we live in clown world, send in the clowns…
War is like sexual selection, it’s a good thing that keeps the bad genes down. The modern world is like adding shit to the pool so it doesn’t feel excluded.
It turns out you don’t need to sterilize irresponsible people, just give them a free sex doll on condition they never have children (or they’d be aborted). We could solve this in two generations if we stopped listening to their “feelings” (they don’t have feelings, relativists, they only ramble and screech).
Seriously, hand them sexbots on condition of no kids to inflict on the future world (and no sex crimes, because apparently their hand wasn’t as big as their ego). They’re genetic suicides anyway, that or move them (could be cheaper) to a literal Pleasure Island with no internet (no corrupting the outside world) and they can never leave (I figured Westworld was about this, a brothel prison with no victims, would’ve been cooler). They’d OD in about a week without the nanny state. Actually, a literal death camp could work very simply: press lever 1 for food or 2 for heroin. Technically, it’s suicide. Dummies are predictably hedonic.
*They’ve been told it’s important for literally over a decade. You can lead a horse to water. Education is wasted on the lazy and stupid, and they’re the same people. That’s Dunning-Kruger. They’re blind to what they’re missing because they’re missing it!
They cannot see past their ego to anything, including Pascal’s Wager. Again, deny and dismiss, typical cuck.
The destructive person (antisocial to society) telling you you deserve to be destroyed (like an SJW) because society sucks unless it’s sucking them off (but it isn’t their job to fix it?)… boys who weren’t raised with real discipline have no shame (sociopath trait). They’ve been allowed to get away with ruining themselves and remaining psychologically as teenagers.
It’s just the dysgenic men too proud to become blatant SJWs.
Actually worse than SJWs, wow. They’d sell their grandma for a porn star.
You can’t sympathize with people who hate you and your people.
There’s the obvious traitor and the sneaky little shits who under-mine attempts to make things better for everyone because the gap to their own life would become greater. Fifth Column is worse.
A humble, soft-spoken conversation… and Americans hate it.
No soundbites, no sneering, jeering, shouting, lying. No verbal gladiator faking for cameras.
They call him the stupid one. Wow.
Would you rather he pretend to know, spoon feed and give you useless information that sounds intelligent? AKA the Jordan method.
No, he gives you snippets neatly stitched together for you to think about and make up your own mind.
That is a compliment.
In case YT deletes this one, a favourite part;
“vulgar secular perversions of (Paradise), in all of our nature to long for the compensation that… we have not had. And to think that they’ll finally be given to us, that which we’ve always wanted. But it may be that that is the only way that many people can live properly, by holding in front of themselves this ideal and trying to earn it. But of course it doesn’t stand up very easily to examination. There’s nothing vulgar or silly in wanting that. And after all, the greatest trial that all human beings have to confront is that of.. death. How to accept the fact that, you know, I will die. What is it that I’ve- how should I think of myself in order to do that? (confronting this) …It wouldn’t make it easier for … (idiots) many people… they need ‘something else’ (blithely)
The concept of consolation that we have is influenced by the Christian religion, foundation of our civilization and it’s what glows in the embers… a tragic quality, a redemptive story. The redemption of the soul through this repudiation of earthly things. …A most extraordinary idea. The ultimate symbol that there is a path… of acceptance. I’m not strong enough… Why should we accept? Well, we have to. There’s two choices. One is to go towards our end accepting it, the other is to be dragged kicking and screaming (tone of distaste) – same outcome, either way. The only thing we have to do is to achieve the serenity beforehand, which comes from willing sacrifice. I think it’s a model of rational conduct” (eye gleam, pointed stare, change of subject)
Yes, he’s a total intellectual lightweight, right?
You couldn’t tell by bone structure? The men are almost pigeon-chested with women’s shoulders an Austen character would be proud of.
New mutations crop up all the time and the genes don’t survive.
It’s kinda like the SJW claim that sexes don’t exist because hermaphrodites do.
Er, mutants exist. They are aberrations. Ironically, they’re seeking meaning like Jesus in toast.
But they would also have had mutant genes affecting the mind.
This is because the brain, home to 84% of the genome, is extraordinarily sensitive to mutation, so mental and physical mutation robustly correlate. If these children had grown up, they might have had autism, schizophrenia, depression… but they had poor immune systems, so they never had the chance.
Why would nature waste resources better spent on the children likeliest to breed?
This is literally Darwin.
Among these, the authors argue, was a very specific kind of religiosity which developed in all complex societies: the collective worship of gods concerned with morality.
It’s no coincidence many atheists are psychopathically broken enough to reject the concept of objective morality, moral absolutes (unless it applies to their opponent, to weaken them). In a small tribe, they’d have been kicked out by the elders at the first sign of criminality and deception to starve. The anti-weasel reflex is still present in us, it makes us get off a bus early when an unstable person gets on or avoid the creepily attentive boy who offers to buy us a drink to spike.
Your instincts keep you alive better than a lazy police force.
Antisocial people hate instincts because it thwarts their lies.
Ask yourself, why did men in all great societies have to leave the home, live alone, prove themselves and follow the law to be worthy of respect? We coddle teenagers and hence we have a society of weak men. They complain about this yet never volunteer to do what needs to be done, a sign of their weakness, it begins with the moral.
If you’re so different from women, ya gotta act like it.
Sitting around complaining among the women is what the gay guys do. Not attractive. How many mistake this vanity for intellect?
Mixed schools were a sign of the mistake. When little girls exercise like little boys, their brains are masculinized. How many pro-Patriarchy guys would prefer a male-only school? Vanishingly few. They’re full of shit. They want all the imagined rewards with none of the effort. But sex-exclusive schools get better grades, with less distraction, as do religion-specific and race-specific ones.
Without morality, there is no reputation. Without reputation, there is no honour and no culture.
Hypocrites who refuse to lead by example because *valley girl voice* It’s HAAAARD.
This very specific kind of religiousness was selected for and, indeed, it correlates with positive and negative ethnocentrism even today.
Genophilia is evolutionally fit, no shit.
The authors demonstrate that this kind of religiousness has clearly been selected for in itself. It is about 40% genetic according to twin studies, it is associated with strongly elevated fertility, it can be traced to activity in specific regions of the brain, and it is associated with elevated health: all the key markers that something has been selected for.
Ask an atheist if he has asthma. That one condition.
They’re lazy moral Marxists. “I can take what I want because I can find an excuse”. It’s a child’s mindset begging their parents for a toy or to “let them get away” with eating a cookie before dinner. They feel the world (and any God) owes them personally, entitlement is the mindset of weakness.
They earn nothing. They get nothing. That is just.
Their failure is a sign the system works. It’s like the “incels” who refuse to develop an adult personality but demand AA for orgasms. Redistribution of hotties and thotties. They’re just fucking marxists. Literally.
“Rejection should be illegal” people. Utterly brittle personalities, sheltered.
There is no right to another person’s body, and this coming from self-proclaimed libertarians? How many hands do they have? Take matters into your own hands.
They think women don’t suffer (aren’t fully human) or that suffering is rare, new and some personal outrage. You can’t argue with reality.
Who wants to sleep with a kid in a grown man’s body?
And it is from here that the authors make the leap that has made SJW blood boil. Drawing on research by Michael Woodley of Menie and his team (see here and here)they argue that conditions of Darwinian selection have now massively weakened, leading to a huge rise in people with damaging mutations. This is evidenced in increasing rates of autism, schizophrenia, homosexuality, sex-dysmorphia, left-handedness, asymmetrical bodies and much else. These are all indicators of mutant genes.
dysgenic, the word you need to use
Pollutants in food, water, air, clothing, medications (neurotoxic) and unprecedented interactions with foreign microbiomes throwing the native ones off cause a hefty amount too. Then there are easily remedied things like non-Indians eating a diet they didn’t evolve for and wondering why gastro issues are through the roof.
I think the antacid people own stock in curry suppliers. White people are dumb.
Peasant food is not good for you. Foreign peasant food is worst for you.
Malthus shall prevail.
All except the handedness is true. Natural variations exist in eye colour, hair, nails, handedness. It doesn’t mean as much as psychologists claim it does, it’s just easy and cheap to study. They’re lazy. You have a dominant foot too but nobody gives a shit.
It’s fucking palmistry.
Most people are slightly ambi.
Mutants are not necessarily dysgenic though, advantageous ones are simply a lot rarer and normally come from better bloodline stock with reduced genetic load (in fact, that might be the deciding factor in whether a trait presents as useful or thanatos).
Look at the HBD studies about SES (class) over multiple generations. Social mobility is a false condition of fiat debt spirals, it will correct too. Champagne socialists will be the elderly people in manual labouring jobs.
Little mentioned but autism is a “low empathy” condition. Like psychopathy. They cannot cooperate properly and lack the emotional intelligence to be leaders. The idea some super-academic smartypants in the white house would solve all problems is symbolic of their deficits. They can’t run their own life in an orderly way.
Low empathy = antisocial, in practice.
They deny this from egocentrism but it’s pathognomonic of the pathological medical condition.
They deny it’s any of the last three things too. It’s part of the condition.
Why deny they lack empathy? They’re shrewd enough to know it’s socially undesirable but if you ask around the idea, they’ll freely admit they hate all people, raging bigots. They’re full of self-pity, self-loathing, refusal to change (like a sociopath) or learn from moral errors and highly reactive to others but in an angry closed-off way.
They think reactivity (over sensitive) and lashing out at people (intermittent explosive) is empathy.
Utterly incapable of humility. That requires the self-awareness of social intelligence but they don’t really see other people. They are not perceptive on the human level. They even crowd out other mental illnesses for more air time.
Super competent and smart, they claim…. until you hold them to that standard.
It’s like how the ADHD guys claim to be slow but also geniuses (logically exclusive). Their own subjective experience of their mind when it sputters like an old car biases them with feeling. They claim they don’t have feelings because they’re constantly over-run with them. Overwhelmed. It’s like Victorian hysteria in men.
A nerve study would be interesting.
They’ll abandon their parents on their deathbed once they hear their name’s on the will, totally callous. Instead of admitting they’re selfish, they’ll go Ayn Rand and claim (intellectualization is their favourite defensiveness) they aren’t bad people (just do bad things, repeatedly, by choice??!!) but society, unwilling to coddle, is dragging them down.
Antisocial people feel the need to destroy and punish all the good of society and spare the bad. It does vary.
In some instances, heartless. Look up stories of women who’ve been married to Asperger’s men, they sound almost exactly like sociopaths. For example, denial of the condition to gaslight then blaming the condition at other times.
So Dutton and his team argue that, this being the case, deviation from this very specific form of religiousness—the collective worship of moral gods in which almost everyone engaged in 1800—should be associated with these markers of mutation.
oh look, a real psychologist and none of the JP fans like him
maybe he should tell them to wash their hands
In other words, both atheists and those interested in spirituality with no moral gods (such as the paranormal) should be disproportionately mutants.
There has never been a pilot country of atheists. They refuse to found so much as a village. When a group doesn’t want to live among itself, it implicitly admits it is damaged.
They can’t play the Poor Me card if they aren’t surrounded by normal empaths who’ll assume the best.
And this is precisely what they show. Poor physical and mental health are both significantly genetic and imply high mutational load. Dutton and his team demonstrate that this specific form of religiousness, when controlling for key factors such as SES, predicts much better objective mental and physical health, recovery from illness, and longevity than atheism.
Can someone film Aubrey when told this?
That’s literally the best Darwinian metric.
I wonder if he could study atheist researchers of the psychology of religion. Would they rig the test? Yes, they’d try. Aren’t atheist researchers of religion a little biased? Nobody brings this up.
It’s generally believed that religiousness makes you healthier because it makes you worry less and elevates your mood,
look at the Wiccans, it’s a connection to the natural world (disconnection from the fake world of urban, neon and shiny atheist crap)
but they turn this view on its head, showing that religious worshippers are more likely to carry gene forms associated with being low in anxiety. Schizophrenia, they show, is associated with extreme and anti-social religiosity, rather than collective worship. Similarly, belief in the paranormal is predicted by schizophrenia, and this is a marker of genetic mutation.
Aliens, bigfoot, Slenderman. Atheists believe in lots of things, diffuse. Next they’ll break out the healing crystals.
Next, they test autism, another widely accepted marker of mutation, as evidenced by the fact that it’s more common among the children of older men, whose fathers are prone to mutant sperm. Autism predicts atheism.
Old men babies are damaged. Huh. If only I had a tag on paternal age.
Genetic disease leads to genetic suicide?
Of course, rather than blaming men for marrying and breeding to late, I’m sure they’ll blame wider society like men didn’t make a series of choices over years that materially harmed their children.
The problem people have with atheistkult isn’t that they don’t believe. It’s that they’re obsessive about how EVIL (but evil doesn’t exist?) this meme is and wish to harm and destroy and crush people who are “dumb” enough to fall for it and be happy and healthy.
Yeah, we aren’t falling for it.
You choose what to believe, you choose to look for it or not. They shut their eyes and cry “why don’t I see?”
Mala fides. If they were women in the olden days, they’d have been killed as witches. It’s amazing given how many claim to be super competent, how their life fails to play this out. We have mewling men who can’t take care of themselves but attempt to guilt trip the rest of us into respecting them and playing into the delusion.
throw on a dress and legally, we’d have to
The atheistkult is trying to replace the dogma of a God with the doctrines of scientism and faith in your fellow man like Saints of Truth. Don’t do that. If you change your beliefs, that’s on you, don’t shrink in agency, externalize your locus of control and shift the ‘blame’ onto someone else. You don’t get to blame life (the fates) or society (elders) or the internet (you don’t have to trust what you see online).
Your brain is your business, you are not being influenced by external forces (demons, in ancient terms).
Own your choices, you scoundrels.
A minor point but many men have a magical conversion from faith when their sex hormones start surging, and happen to magically remember like an 80s movie amnesia patient once those settle down in the 30s/40s and beyond. No. That isn’t how it works. There is no Christian of convenience, you were never Christian. A God-fearing person cannot un-know that intuition about the spiritual world. You cannot un-see the colour blue. You cannot un-understand the structure of a peeled orange.
You are in denial, more clouded in judgement than ever. Look up the psychiatry of Freudian denial, it is just the same. A denial of motives, base instincts and a solution to what we now call cognitive dissonance. By consciously lying to yourself. Otherwise, why feel the need to convert people to atheism, if you are so certain of your position? Why does there need to be a term for not thinking something? Where does the obligation to save them come from? Francis Bacon? Shall we make him a Saint on par with George?
Wait, he was Christian, never mind. Christophobia fits far better than other religions, because the fear demonstrated of Christians, not the Church or state power but everyday happy people minding their own, is astounding. The self-styled atheists posture themselves as anti-Christian. They are some of the most pro-Christian people alive. Why do I say this? They believe Christian culture is the norm, Christian principles and rights (WASP, classic liberalism) are greatest thing ever, undeniable and should apply to the whole world, like missionaries. They want to spread the WEIRD culture, the Western attitudes. Raising awareness and education? Set up an atheist church and stop kidding yourself. Hold meetings every Sunday over a copy of God Delusion.
What will they do when Dawkins snuffs it?
Does he get a funerary rite?
There is no study of Christians and atheists in a hospice or dying at home (that I have seen), but I can bet what it would say. Atheists hate their life (observation), blame God (blame game again) and become bitter with each birthday (since this is all there is and deep down, they know they waste their potential). Wouldn’t such a study prove once and for all which mode of life is superior?
The humble pie would choke such prideful people.
We are not fooled by Churchians or CHINOs. There is no such thing as born-again (American horse-shit) and still, when someone does repent, they don’t arrogantly boast or pridefully boss around others,assuming they are forgiven. You can never presume forgiveness (pride, knowing God’s mind) but must act to prove yourself the rest of your life (yes, commitment!). The former sinner does not have moral authority over people who always did the right thing, what could they possibly have to teach that isn’t obvious?
Most men (mankind) are too weak and selfish to handle the requirements of religion (even fasting) and too caring of materialism or fleeting, false popularity to believe in anything deep (any-thing). They simply aren’t good enough for religion, they know they would fail and so oppose anyone who does embrace it (envy, wrath).
To see someone successful at it enrages them (they seek out Christians for this reason, to troll because they know they have no argument), like an SJW witnessing an attractive, feminine woman, her blood boils.
To tear someone down, they must be above you. It must work. They are dishonest about this.
Religion isn’t the false consciousness (post-Reformation Christianity at least), it’s acting like you have a religion but denying to yourself that you need it psychologically.
You do, humans do (read more studies) but you are bad at it.
If you believe in religious freedom so much, leave the Christians alone. Don’t try to make it political. Go after every other religion, too? All hundreds of them? Apply your Crusaderism to the world, equally and logically.
I keep seeing men getting all craven and become weaklings on the topic of cutting off their spiritual life like it was a tumour. What, like a God figure isn’t going to see into your heart and know it’s full of shit?
They try to make out like piety and the pious are damaged. No, it’s a virtue. You keep it quiet but it’s there. In modernity we call it a conscience and people who mock those are the damaged ones.
At the very least, the protectionism, lies and funding scams on the taxpayer should infuriate these (mostly small government) men but that would require consistency. The Reproducability Crisis barely made a drop in the ocean, such is their pursuit of truth.
You don’t get to define the truth, that is a lie.
The truth exists beyond you, it isn’t relative, it won’t be something you’ll like.
The Boomer switch into postmodernism is rooted in one philosophy that many so-called smart people miss: moral relativism. For something to be good, there must be evil. The world is an absolute down to magnetic spins. You cannot deny this duality, polarity and opposition. You try. Squirm all you like, you know I’m right.
You can’t embrace truth without punishing liars.
hate what is evil, cling to what is good
If you want to be atomic and selfish, don’t inflict it on other people. Cruelty is never a morality. The amoral are united by their cruelty.
Before some troll goes there:
Do I think churches should be taxed? Yes. Fully. If it’s part of society, it should be taxed. Do I think religious schools should be funded on the taxpayer? No, none. Real Christians don’t need a fistful of cash to teach. Schools need huge funding cuts overall and to slice away the Ivy League style donations funds that leeches feed off. These debates are nonsense. There are standards and if Christians cannot meet them, we should all throw a Kool Aid party like war-time Berlin.
We’ll have to when national debt crunches us anyway. (Seriously, a lot of Gen X/Y will kill themselves when the circuses stop, they’re completely maladapted to a real economy).
If they’re going to keep shooting at you, make a smaller target. (Galt, basically).
Listen, if you want to be a conceited prick and lord it over people who deny themselves various things, fine, but you also need to get off your smug high horse to do it. You cannot be both. You cannot think yourself a good person while doing evil (or antisocial) things. If you’re destructive, you don’t get to bask in a halo-like glow of the creative.
You don’t get to pretend you’re deep when your understanding of religion (any) is so facile it was shaken by rhetoric (which is all emotional, you children) and so fragile your lifestyle and mindset can be ‘debunked’ by Youtube videos.
I have seen this claimed and they acted like the internet posters were peerless holders of knowledge. No, that’s a cult. No human knows everything.
Someone who is completely cynical believes in nothing, betrays themselves as incapable of belief and fulfilling that vital side of life (look at the studies into life expectancy and happiness!) and cannot be trusted on a subject they are incompetent at. I do not ask to play netball with a person who has no hand-eye coordination.
These people are not intellectuals and certainly never philosophers.
All they have are buzzwords, memes and smug mockery of people happier than them – narcissists.
Parental issues to one side, they need to look at themselves before judging something they can never see.
Virtue signalling doesn’t work for people who don’t believe in virtue. They grow increasingly desperate and we see that with the mutation of SJW talking points. Dawkins was swallowed by it! Where was the solid security of his principles then? The man is weak, he has the principles of quicksand.
Christianity hasn’t been a ‘threat’ to him in decades. He still spends most of his time grinding away at the Church with a personal grudge, now an angry, bitter old man taking speech shekels. He won’t dare be brave enough to handle the Muslim problems. He won’t admit demographics anymore, such is his love of money…
Typical Boomer logic: I’ll be dead so LOL, that isn’t my problem!
Science is not an opinion, it has never had one unchanging position on anything. Many scientists are religious (there are studies) and it seems the most important the scientist, the more religiosity they have/had. As for ‘stupid’ beliefs, that isn’t how belief (subjective) works. I bet these same guys believe in UFOs instead of angels, Zion or ghosts instead of demons. Demonic AI is like a HIV among atheistkult. Stop.
Powerful thing you can’t see or resist controlling the world? Not Satan, nope!
Could we be living in an evil simulation? is an old idea. Can only rely on a Higher Power.
Demons do not mean what you think they do. Patriarchy and other ‘evils’ could be classified as demonic in ancient societies (Bacchus?).
Silicon Valley comes up with nothing new, it’s full of drug-addicted Ivy League morons raised on Daddy’s cash.
https://www.wired.com/story/the-other-tech-bubble/ You have to be rich to move there.
If you don’t believe in any fate, how can there be any luck? Basic questions never occurred to these supposed intellectuals.
To reiterate my original point, do not blame anyone or anything but especially science. You sound retarded. Science is a tool used by humans, you can no more blame it than a hammer on a bench. There is no divine authority to science because it creates nothing, it reports on somethings that humans note that may/not exist in the way they perceive. Science is a witness, it isn’t the cause of an event.
Accept your impotence.
There is no appeal to sacred science on matters of philosophy because science is a philosophy, a narrow one called empiricism. The Scientific Method is all the science there is and ever will be. It dictates nothing and often slaughters your holy cows e.g. Global Warming predictions, fail.
How could the climate deity betray you? You divined all the omens! Must appease!
Science is permanently changing and the fundamentals of the world do not. It is a logical error to apply it, it does not follow.
The method is a tool used by humans, who can be inept or corrupt or bribed or plain wrong. You have the typical polyanna leftist view of humanity, which all the findings have shown to be mistaken. Only philosophy can compete with philosophy (it is not self-correcting any more than a book is self-reading and whole theories are rarely disproven and discarded) but science is really a practice. You might as well be rain-dancing against the ozone.
Shake your stick, atheists, it’ll make no difference.
Muh Butterfly effect, O.K.
Science isn’t a magical force to replace the magical force you feel you lack control over. There is more in common between scientific reasoning (pattern finding) and folk magic (sympathetic magic) than you will ever know.
You can’t be bothered to properly research it and no, Youtube or Google do not fucking count. Specialist websites and e-celebs do not count, they are biased. You must do the work yourself and read some very old books e.g. Kant’s Pure Reason, any Descartes, some Newton. Do not stick to 20th century ramblings by glorified degenerates like Einstein, there’s a reason the major discoveries occurred before this time, the method has become weak as the people using it. If you dare bring up the sell-out engineer Nye like he’s a scientist, I will find you and fucking cut you on the astral plane. He’s like the mascot Barney the Dinosaur for scientism. A kid’s TV show presenter, look at your claimed authorities and begin to see why everyone ignores you. Society is structured a certain way because people are and people don’t change thanks to propaganda – you’ll know on your death bed.
Popper is a philosopher, not a scientist. There is no experiment to prove or disprove God, Pascal’s Wager is the closest we have and a sound, pragmatic view, but still – do not blame science for your personal flaws/sins. Science doesn’t work that way.
What you are trying to do has been named by psychiatry – like learned helplessness (related), it’s absolution of responsibility. It doesn’t exist.
Your body, your brain, your belief, YOU.
There is no method without experimentation and findings. No, talking does not count.
We were warned – Father of Lies, going all the way back to Loki.
Are you going to deny the frequency of human deception too?
There are plenty of studies, don’t be anti-science!
(Questioning findings is not questioning the approach. like hating one claimed work of art doesn’t mean you hate all art). It reminds me of the vain people who are too stupid to understand that they are disliked for good reasons so they call everyone jealous (clubber types) when you can’t be jealous of a vapid person whose entire life is meaningless crap. Nobody is jealous of shit.
Atheists insult things like white identity because you didn’t build that but hey, you didn’t discover anything past your navel so get off Newton’s dick! You aren’t allowed to be proud of that, it’s really sad.
Atheists fear the deadly sins being a societal standard again. Sloth in particular. Show me an atheist who has Protestant work ethic…. they don’t exist.
Gluttony is a great way to spot a loser group. Which religion has the most obese people? What if we include atheism? Surely the ‘logical’ people would be able to carb-count? If you lack the mental rigour to put down the junk food, why should anyone listen to you?
It’s like the findings on the socialists and communists being weaker and more likely to cheat for money in studies. You choose your belief to fit your personality and your desires, what you wanted to justify doing anyway. This isn’t noble, it’s low. SJWs don’t want to put effort into their appearance, so they claim it’s wrong to. Boom, you get what you want and a lush new moral high ground to boot! PUAs don’t want to admit premarital sex (PC term, actually fornication) would be counted as rape in a Patriarchy, the marriage license is the only valid consent, so they claim it means something else and rewrite history (fail to) – boom, everyone is giving them attention they want for being wrong on multiple levels. None of them want to change anything, like roll back the Sexual Revolution that let them work long careers in a rape culture or be club rats without the pressure to marry and become a Patriarch, it’s a rationalization and most people are like that, they don’t actually think. That’s the norm, the average.
Fine, be an animal. Don’t pretend to be anything else.
Crazy people don’t know they are crazy. Moral insanity used to be a common term. They don’t have it, know it, perceive it, recognize it, value it and scoff at practicing it. They are not free, they are evil. There is only a perversion of what is good for the world, psychiatry abides by this idea. Look at the wages of sin, all the cancers being caused by STDs. Almost like a punishment, isn’t it? In scientific terms, cause and effect? What you reap you sow, later and bigger? Asylums were commonly populated with this type of person, we now have studies proving neurological deficits e.g. hypofrontality. They are literally broken human beings and the behaviour is an outcome, the beliefs are excuses. They don’t have beliefs, they don’t have a moral compass beyond instinct.
A surgeon must cut to correct. A farmer must weed to seed. Wood rot must be exposed to be cleaned. It is the same with immorality.
NOTE: Agnosticism is assisted by science. The not-knowing. The moment you claim to know, that is not science, it is an article of faith.
In pure terms, an absence of faith is not more reasonable. Men are suffering new depression rates more akin to the female rate as their belief systems break down. (No, you’re not special boys, female rates are still higher because you refuse to marry. Little girls don’t fantasize about heading an HR department for fifty years). Remember, God is the ultimate man to believe in. You lose faith, you naturally begin to self-hate. Neither is your father the model of all mankind’s potential, he could be a write-off, you are not trapped by his patterns. Unless you choose to be.
Denial is unhealthy, it leads to physical stress that builds up and causes many chronic, fatal conditions on the rise (cancer, heart disease, MS, drug addictions, promiscuity, things demonstrably bad for you and your body and future). The escapism of substances or habits is particular to the male psyche, society used to protect you from it but you insisted you had the right to slowly kill yourself, waving your credit card in the air and begging to be enslaved.
OKAY, said the politicians, moving around their investments to the alcohol companies.
[Clooney owns one, FFS. Ain’t that a sign of collapse? Saint Jolie, also an alkie. She could be growing food for her little brown slave babies in the colours of Benetton (all brown), snatched from their parents and country into her silicon* claws. You know she bribed some people, you know. I guess slavery is okay if they’re brown and babies.]
It’s phrased like a religious conversion (I was in the darkness of religion but then I saw the light of reason). Reason is not the enemy of belief, reason comes after belief to understand it better.
You don’t doubt your existence, your name, your reality (AI excepting), that’s psychotic, to terminally (neurotic) doubt your faith means you never actually had it. I can’t lose a command of numbers because a few equations came out wrong. Still, the fault would be with me, not reality? Some days it looks cloudy, I don’t start saying the Sun might not really exist because I don’t see it today.
Constantly changing your mind is a sign of a feeble one. If you’re too open-minded…
Enlightenment is a religious concept of this gained knowledge. The first atheistkult tried to steal it as something objective. Nah, man. Not gonna happen. You tell me what an atom is without a continuum paradox and we can talk.
Your epistemology sucks Donkey Kong’s balls.
You know NOTHING.
At least we name the unknown and try to appreciate it (humility). You deny it exists so you can strut around like the Universe belongs to you. You’ll still be worm food, dude. You’ll be sorry. Nobody is impressed by brats.
*Her pick-up line used to be “Guess what’s real”.