How do I stop hating religious people? It's basically just normalized schizophrenia.

How do I stop hating religious people? It's basically just normalized schizophrenia. You got all these retards running around talking about imaginary superheroes that live in the sky as if it's real life. I feel like I can't respect someone's intelligence if they just believe in random shit without any evidence, yet most people are like this.

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    don't hate all of them, anon. save that for the ones who push it on others and children like spiritual trannies.

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What do you mean hate religious people. Do you wake up every day, look at the word religion and are immediately trigged? Do you meet someone who is religious and immediately start frothing at the mouth and have to debate them?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      No I don't try to debate religious people because it's impossible to debate something that isn't based on evidence. Their whole argument would just be "muh faith" so it's pointless. It's more just like, if I meet someone and I find out they're religious, I kinda respect them less and assume they're unintelligent NPCs

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The fact you couldn't help yourself but start deconstruction religion makes me suspect you have autism
        >NO YOU DONT UNDERSTAND I THOUGHT REALLY HARD ABOUT IT GOD IS FAKE AND IT PISSES ME OFF
        Do something else with your time and nonsense thoughts like this won't be spinning in your head nonstop and you won't immediately get angry like a retard.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          NTA but he didn't deconstruct shit, stop taking things personally and attacking him for having an opinion.
          You're just as rabid as you're making them out to be.

          Religion is the single largest midwit filter ever created. If you don’t understand that humans are inherently spiritual for a reason, then you’re actually beyond stupid. It’s basically a human instinct.

          OP already said he thinks they are NPCs, no need to reiterate.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >You're just as rabid as you're making them out to be.
            I don't make threads about how atheist piss me off. OP did. Sorry about your low IQ

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        well yeah, they are less intelligent, but that's no reason to hate them. if anything they deserve pity, like retards.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Yeah fuck those religious people. Stupid retards don’t even believe in something as simple of a concept like the big bang. Only atheists seem to grasp the underpinning of the universe.

          Oh wait.

          >Father Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître was a Belgian Catholic priest, theoretical physicist, mathematician, astronomer, and professor of physics at the Catholic University of Louvain. He was the first to theorize that the recession of nearby galaxies can be explained by an expanding universe, which was observationally confirmed soon afterwards by Edwin Hubble. He first derived "Hubble's law", now called the Hubble–Lemaître law by the IAU and published the first estimation of the Hubble constant in 1927, two years before Hubble's article. Lemaître also proposed the "Big Bang theory" of the origin of the universe, calling it the "hypothesis of the primeval atom", and later calling it "the beginning of the world".

          But hey at least atheists are smart enough to really understand rick & morty

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        well yeah, they are less intelligent, but that's no reason to hate them. if anything they deserve pity, like retards.

        You're here mentally masturbating on LULZ about how enlightened by your own intelligence you are. You're not actually smarter than the people around you, otherwise you'd be outperforming them instead of just impotently complaining about them here 🙂

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I mean you can call it normalized schizophrenia if you want, we already know that if you give yourself brain damage via magnets you become atheistic. So I ask you, who is mentally ill?

    Picrel.

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I execute JUDGEMENT ON YOU COVID 19
    I execute JUDGEMENT ON YOU, SATAN!

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Have you tried r/atheism

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Most of your ancestors were likely religious people Anon. Do you hate them too?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      not him but what is this argument
      if you were german would you not dislike your fascist ancestors?
      if you were american and could trace your ancestry to slave owners, would you not hate them just because you're vaguely related?

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    while sciences based on sense perception and reason may be utilized to learn about physical reality, knowledge of the ultimate reality or god can only be obtained through sacred knowledge, nigga

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Perpetually being upset over something is sure a sign of low intelligence. There's a good reason that edgy teenage atheism is lumped in with joker edits and reddit. There is no benefit to orienting your life around atheism. When you realize that you will stop being mad.

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Most atheists are clinically retarded lmao. I can gaurentee you that you're not one of the people on the right. The only difference is they let retards like you spout their opinions on the internet and the real world instead of locking you up in an asylum.

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I respect his hustle. Godlike grifter. I dont think he is actually a believer

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      He’s an antichrist, one of many antichrists. People forget what being an antichrist means, they think it means being against Christ. It actually means counterfeiting him and trying to take his place.

      So it is not shocking at all when it turns out there are many so-called preachers pastors and priests who think themselves not in service to God, but believe themselves adjacent to God. That’s why you see them acting like they are God and judging others as if they are holier-than-thou. They’re antichrists.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The antichrist is supposed to be charming and handsome. Copeland not so much.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          There’s ‘a’ Antichrist, which anyone can become in their lifetime and then there is ‘the’ antichrist, only one of that guy.

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why would you hate it? Let them have what makes them happy.

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    also reminder that the vast majority of work in science was done by people that believed in God. People like newton, einstein, etc. all believed in God. atheists contributed pretty much null to science.
    picrel

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Wow so you mean to tell me that in the past when basic scientific discoveries hadn't been made people were more religious? I wonder why...

      Most atheists are clinically retarded lmao. I can gaurentee you that you're not one of the people on the right. The only difference is they let retards like you spout their opinions on the internet and the real world instead of locking you up in an asylum.

      Nice graph which essentially proves my point. Barely any high IQ people are religious and the only reason there's atheists in the 70 IQ range is because they can barely process speech and therefore aren't susceptible to religious indoctrination

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Wow so you mean to tell me that in the past when basic scientific discoveries hadn't been made people were more religious? I wonder why...
        Nice job proving my point kek. Atheist once again outing himself as a retard with no reading comprehension lmao.
        You should stick to r/atheism, I'm sure the fellow smart people there will give you plenty of updoots.
        >the majority of atheists are retarded, but most smart people are atheists like me!!
        bahahahah

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Atheist once again outing himself as a retard with no reading comprehension lmao.
          No you absolute retard I understand the dumbass point you were trying to make. You're saying that in a historical era where almost everyone was religious and you were heavily indoctrinated from a young age into believing in religion, the fact that a couple of those people who lived in that era made a scientific discovery and were religious means that all religious people are smart. I was pointing out how retarded that point is but you can't understand sarcasm because again, you're a retard. It can't be helped though you can't control what genes you're born with I guess

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >he's calling me a retard even after I showed him actual numbers proving it's the majority of atheists that are retarded
            Holy cope lmao. Either speak your points clearly or don't speak at all.
            >historical era where almost everyone was religious and you were heavily indoctrinated from a young age into believing in religion.
            Your arguments are all based on faulty assumptions. Scientists back then that created the basis of science were stupid and indoctrinated somehow, but how did this indoctrination stop?
            >inb4 thru scince
            You're going around in circles at that point.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Nta but you once again missed his point entirely.
            >You’re saying that in a historical era where almost everyone was religious and you were heavily indoctrinated blah blah

            Notice how he said nothing of the sort at all. You think he is, you assume he is, because he name-dropped Newton. And your mind flailed at some archetype of antiquity because Newton is from antiquity, like a feminist spazzes out at the 1800’s and virtues like prudence because it reminds them of hit Netflix show ‘handmaid’s tale’.

            You are more interested in picking portions of what the anon is trying to say, missing his whole point, because you want to take small pieces to fit your own narrative and your own bad faith argument.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >Notice how he said nothing of the sort at all.
              I didn't say he did, I was being sarcastic. Not being able to detect sarcasm is a sign of low IQ, sorry to say. I was just pointing out how awful his point is. I was making a SARCASTIC statement to show that you can't just bring up famous people from history and say they were religious as proof that religious people are smart, everyone was religious back then. The difference is that in the modern era, unlike the 17th century, we all have access to way more information, so if you choose to be religious you're choosing to be ignorant, whereas people in the 17th century didn't have the same education and understanding of the world that people do today, they were operating off of what limited information they had, so it's a dogshit comparison. Also it's pretty ironic that he's bringing up historical scientists considering all throughout history science was held back by religious bullshit like the church not letting galileo tell people the earth was round

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                First of all that’s not how you convey sarcasm, second of all it’s been proven that people who rely on sarcasm to convey their thoughts are actually the ones lacking in intellectual maturity. Not the other way around.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >they were religious as proof that religious people are smart
                I never claimed this at all, this is just your black and white thinking. All I claimed is that religion has nothing to do with low intelligence, and that actual numbers show it's atheists that are mostly low IQ, even if the smaller number of smart people are atheists. Theists have the normal numbers. You also straight up ignored the fact that even more than 50% of scientists believe in a god today and just rubbed it off as them being humble. What does that even mean? Keep in mind even hawking himself who was an atheist never denied the existence of a greater power behind the universe.
                >The difference is that in the modern era, unlike the 17th century, we all have access to way more information
                Yes, information based on work done by the same people you called brainwashed and indoctrinated. Apparently they were too stupid to see the truth but you can take a look at the same work they did and see it.
                >all throughout history science was held back by religious bullshit like the church not letting galileo tell people the earth was round
                >what's the islamic golden age
                all of the information you have is unironically from r/atheism lmao

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Notice how he said nothing of the sort at all.
                I didn't say he did, I was being sarcastic. Not being able to detect sarcasm is a sign of low IQ, sorry to say. I was just pointing out how awful his point is. I was making a SARCASTIC statement to show that you can't just bring up famous people from history and say they were religious as proof that religious people are smart, everyone was religious back then. The difference is that in the modern era, unlike the 17th century, we all have access to way more information, so if you choose to be religious you're choosing to be ignorant, whereas people in the 17th century didn't have the same education and understanding of the world that people do today, they were operating off of what limited information they had, so it's a dogshit comparison. Also it's pretty ironic that he's bringing up historical scientists considering all throughout history science was held back by religious bullshit like the church not letting galileo tell people the earth was round

                also the argument you made against the church is nothing more than an argument against the church itself, or rather the church back then. The church of then has no bearing on the idea of a religion or god. The issue with athiests is that they have this weird black and white thinking and generalize everything to a single truth, when that's not the case. Just like you can showed an example of the church being anti science once, I can show you many examples of them not doing that, or christians contributing a ton to science, and same for the muslims that did many things as well like invent algebra.
                Your worldview is based on the fact that believing in god is a sign of low intelligence, that belief in a god is against science, etc. when it's far from the truth and the real world is much different when you take a look at it objectively.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Keep in mind even hawking himself who was an atheist never denied the existence of a greater power behind the universe
                Then he's not an atheist he's an agnostic. He thinks that way because he's a rational person and any rational person will be like yes, anything is "technically" possible, but if you don't have any facts to support your belief system then it's equally as possible as any other theory that you randomly make up. The only difference between religion and cults or schizophrenia patients is that it's so normalized in society that people are conditioned to accept it, yet if you had some schizo guy on meth preaching about a spaghetti monster who created an AI simulation and put us all inside it he would probably get 5150d and sent to a psych ward

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >yet if you had some schizo guy on meth preaching about a spaghetti monster who created an AI simulation and put us all inside it he would probably get 5150d and sent to a psych ward
                It's funny you say this when there are scientists and thinkers today saying it's possible we live in a computer lmao, what wards are they being sent off to?
                Like I already said many times, the idea of a god is a metaphysical/philosophical argument, According to you, pondering over the nature of reality and having a belief system makes you a schizo. Ideas in philosophy aren't "random theories" as it's not a scientific field.
                The arguments you make will get you updoots on r/atheism but outside of there the real world is much different.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >It's funny you say this when there are scientists and thinkers today saying it's possible we live in a computer lmao, what wards are they being sent off to?
                Except those people aren't going door to door handing out fliers, or scamming elderly people of their life savings, or using their religion as justification for genocide, etc. It's ok to have your own personal beliefs and that's why nobody cares if you go "hey wouldn't it be crazy if we're in a simulation haha". But religion takes it many extra steps too far

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You're generalling religion too much. I don't go door to door and neither do 99% of religious people. The groups you're talking about are pretty small, and yes a lot of them can be off their knockers. But that's more of an issue with them rather than religion as a whole. It's no different than making an argument against cars based off the fact that some people crash them into people or have killed others with them, and obviously most religious people aren't out there scamming people out of their savings or killing others lol.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                generalizing*

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >It’s funny you say this when there are scientists and thinkers today saying it's possible we live in a computer lmao, what wards are they being sent off to?
                Nooo! You don’t understand!! Computers are heckin’ smart and clever and made of sophisticated metal and plastic and have intricate currents of electricity which are physical properties. And don’t you understand? Physical properties in our physical universe must mean that it somehow simulated itself!

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >atheists in the 70 IQ range
        those are mac users

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Religion is the single largest midwit filter ever created. If you don’t understand that humans are inherently spiritual for a reason, then you’re actually beyond stupid. It’s basically a human instinct.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      it's human instinct to worship powerful mysteries. the first gods were personifications of nature, as with zeus (thunder) and o-shin-sama (the sun). as we became more sophisticated, we did the same for concepts, such as loki (mischief), kali (death) and yahweh (consolidation, lol). they served as stand-ins for things that have been explained by science in recent times, making most gods irrelevant, as eventually they all will be as we learn more about science. we still leverage this instinct in various clever ways, such as getting children to believe in the mystery of santa claus to get them to behave.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >things that have been explained by science in recent times, making most gods irrelevant
        This is the biggest cope ever. Mind looking up the numbers of how many scientists believe in a god? Also why did people like newton and einstein believe in a god as well?
        The reality is that the concept of god isn't tied in science to any way, the idea of a god is more of a philosophical concept, and science is seen as a way to study god's creation.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          the monotheistic gods will be among the last to die because to make them irrelevant would require science to explain what they represent: everything. so of course you'll have plenty of humble scientists who believe in such gods, because we don't yet know everything, so those gods still fill their roles of being the explanation for the presently unknown.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You're missing the point again. The existence of monotheistic god has literally nothing to do with science proving everything or nothing. It's a metaphysical/philosophical argument that has no bearing on the progress of science. The monotheistic gods you're talking about in reality are just different spins of the same one entity.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >we did the same for concepts, such as loki (mischief), kali (death) and yahweh (consolidation, lol). they served as stand-ins for things that have been explained by science in recent times.

        This is untrue. We did not need to have Gods to personify these concepts for us at all, not then and not now. If we did need them for this purpose, then it does not explain why even in their religious texts they still make a distinction between death & kali for example, or consolidation and yahweh as another example.

        You’d know this if you read scriptures. Consolidation is consolidation and yahweh is yahweh. No one is relying on a deity to give them that concept, not even the religious. And every time I hear a faithless person make this assumption all it tells me is the reasons why they don’t believe in anything. They are telling me that this child-like ignorance that they accuse those of with spirituality is actually something they themselves have, and it’s why they can’t find wisdom in faith, because they are not wise at all.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          There is definitely an evolutionary thing where we assume something living did something we cant explain.

          Set the scene, you and your neolithic cave buddy are in the woods. Theres a rustle in the bush behind you. One of you is startled and turns around ready to fight a predator. The other doesnt turn at all thinkijg "its more likely a fruit fell from the tree and hit the bush".
          Who, long term, is going to live?

          We are naturally inclined to attribute anything we cant explain to something sentient. (Hence why people even believe in ghosts if they're in a house where weird stuff happens) so. Massive lightning rods coming from the sky and crashes of thunder when we have no clue what that is? Obviously some kind of sky beast or all powerful lightning man.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Set the scene, you and your neolithic cave buddy are in the woods. Theres a rustle in the bush behind you. One of you is startled and turns around ready to fight a predator. The other doesnt turn at all thinking "its more likely a fruit fell from the tree and hit the bush".
            >Who, long term, is going to live?

            I respect your genuinely thought provoking imagery via analogy, but it’s not applicable to faith. Anyway to answer your question, long-term survival belongs to the caveman who hides in the bush.

            This is because the one who assumed a threat was lurking was in possession of hyperarousal, hypervigilant thinking, which is a survival mechanism. Of course he is the one who survives. Thing is though, that is a phenomenon where fear is at the root of it. Religion is not centred around fear, it’s centred around its opposite, of faith. And I know the caricature of the religious is god fearing zealotry, that might be true of the religious, because they are human like you or I. But as for religion of itself? It’s of faith. And religion is aware of this. Take 1 John 4:18 from the Christian’s Bible as an example of that awareness

            >There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >You’d know this if you read scriptures.
          even the scriptures contain science. please read ezekiel 1:4-26 and tell me that isn't describing an encounter with an alien spacecraft, i will wait.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Ok
            >reads it
            Thats not an encounter with an alien spacecraft. Thats a guy describing his imagined god vision. You went into it believing in aliens and this matches some vague conception you have of what aliens may look like so you think its aliens.
            And now youre stating it as though what some guy thousands of years ago may have come up is now proof there were aliens.
            A rednecks anal probe account is more credible than this because you can at least still find the guy and ask him.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >imagined
              i accept your concession

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    you guys realize this is just thinly-veiled bait, right?
    you guys aren't really debating each other in earnest, right?

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Get some pussy on your dick that makes you chiller unless you're gay

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I just avoid them. People who need to look up stuff written in 2000 year old books because they have no moral compass of their own to guide their actions are nothing more than animals. Just sit back and watch them kill each other for the lulz.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Your entire "moral compass" is based off that 2000 year old book you stupid twat. The only reason you think killing is bad is because you were raised your entire life in a society that adopted the Christian commandment "thou shalt not murder."
      Also the Bible is only about 1600 years old, but that's ok most atheists have no idea what they're talking about when it comes to religion anyway, you look like as much of a midwit as the rest of them.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I just avoid them. People who need to look up stuff written in 2000 year old books because they have no moral compass of their own to guide their actions are nothing more than animals. Just sit back and watch them kill each other for the lulz.

        the bible also says to not sacrifice your children. Fedora tippers will act like they need to be told that, not knowing that's actually exactly what many people used to do back then.
        To put it into perspective, if you encounter an isolated tribe in the jungle somewhere; I'm sure you would much rather have them be following Abraham morals over something they made up by themselves; which can involve the eating of outsiders being considered moral to them.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          don't need to be told that*

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Sage

    kys homosexual

  18. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    you need to change your idea of what "religious" means. I see it like this: People who believe in a moral system based upon not reason but rather based upon what authority figure tells them. This goes beyond sky daddy. Things like reincarnation, and I would throw in things like the morality of using certain "banned" words too. You will realize that if you include anyone with such beliefs that are based on an authority figure, be it a priest or celeberity ,you will understand that far more people are religious than you think, even if they don't necessarily believe in sky daddy. Once you realize that, you can ask yourself whether you actually hate religious people, or whether you only hate those that believe in sky daddy. Then you can go from there.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *