If Atheists with hard-on's for science can share their views, Agnostics who think there is extremism and fallacies in the science community should be able to share, no?
Being an Atheist doesn't automatically make one a follower of the science community. The idea of such is silly and probably why some of the opinions are so off-putting. Not all lose faith or never had faith due to some powerful revelation due to science. A lot of Atheists are often those who face religious persecution, ie: gay people, so it's especially offensive the way science is discussed here as an ultimate truth when the way science has been used throughout decades to medicalize gay people and justify our mistreatment.
Anyone with even a hint of LGBT history knows that science & religion are sisters that have held hands for centuries in oppressing communities, so the way people discuss science so brazenly is.. odd and even terrifying, and the idea that the space for Atheists and Agnostics is such a circle-jerk for alt-rights to misuse scientific processes to enable their behavior is sad. The worst type of faux-Atheist is an alt-rightist misappropriating science to feel smart and correct in their awful bigotry.
The Atheists fighting for secular worlds and liberation of all people are silenced by the types of people who need Atheism to protect them like a child needs their blanket in a way only an ideology can (just like religion does for religious folks - the irony) and it shows in the emotionally immature behavior like taking pride in telling religious folks they're "stupid" or alt-right buzz topics.
That racist "MUSLIMS ON AIRPLANES!!!" thread just closed really is eye-opening.
The racism is must take to assume "religious & brown = Muslim" is so... scary. Odd how Atheists claim to know the evils of religion, yet can't even tell many apart from one another.
We must help all religions around the world reform and promote the liberation of all (which should be the goal: liberation, since liberation = agency, choice, happiness, empowerment, but liberation =/= eradication). Some women in Hindu-populated areas could be suffering due to misogynistic cultural norms and we'd never know about it or tackle it since some people see "brown" and start ranting about the Quran.
No wonder some Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. are frustrated with many Atheists if many think they're all one in the same.
"- I myself was sentenced to prison for defending LGBT rights and being an atheist. also i'm an Ex-Muslim who memorizes the whole Quran and studied the history of Islam and religion for years. so please don't say i don't know about Islam, i know it better than you."
wow, this video is so powerful! Everyone should watch
That racist "MUSLIMS ON AIRPLANES!!!" thread just closed really is eye-opening.
The racism is must take to assume "religious & brown = Muslim" is so... scary. Odd how Atheists claim to know the evils of religion, yet can't even tell many apart from one another.
We must help all religions around the world reform and promote the liberation of all (which should be the goal: liberation, since liberation = agency, choice, happiness, empowerment, but liberation =/= eradication). Some women in Hindu-populated areas could be suffering due to misogynistic cultural norms and we'd never know about it or tackle it since some people see "brown" and start ranting about the Quran.
No wonder some Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. are frustrated with many Atheists if many think they're all one in the same.
I mean cool but you're the one sporting a sweeping generalization every single time you post with your sig so you're right, but pretty hypocrite at the same time.
That racist "MUSLIMS ON AIRPLANES!!!" thread just closed really is eye-opening.
The racism is must take to assume "religious & brown = Muslim" is so... scary. Odd how Atheists claim to know the evils of religion, yet can't even tell many apart from one another.
We must help all religions around the world reform and promote the liberation of all (which should be the goal: liberation, since liberation = agency, choice, happiness, empowerment, but liberation =/= eradication). Some women in Hindu-populated areas could be suffering due to misogynistic cultural norms and we'd never know about it or tackle it since some people see "brown" and start ranting about the Quran.
No wonder some Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. are frustrated with many Atheists if many think they're all one in the same.
you're so desperate to turn religious ideologies into a race thing when people who are having discussion on important issues of religion. Stop attempting to censor criticizism of harmful religious cultures and views by pairing them with their race. It's truly ignorant.
That racist "MUSLIMS ON AIRPLANES!!!" thread just closed really is eye-opening.
The racism is must take to assume "religious & brown = Muslim" is so... scary. Odd how Atheists claim to know the evils of religion, yet can't even tell many apart from one another.
We must help all religions around the world reform and promote the liberation of all (which should be the goal: liberation, since liberation = agency, choice, happiness, empowerment, but liberation =/= eradication). Some women in Hindu-populated areas could be suffering due to misogynistic cultural norms and we'd never know about it or tackle it since some people see "brown" and start ranting about the Quran.
No wonder some Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. are frustrated with many Atheists if many think they're all one in the same.
It said "muslim" in the title of the video
You can make a point about about double-checking before posting but no one here actually belives that brown people = muslim. And what religion it was is actually irrelevant to the topic at the hand: the discrimination the woman faced.
Quote:
Originally posted by FBF
I mean cool but you're the one sporting a sweeping generalization every single time you post with your sig so you're right, but pretty hypocrite at the same time.
The audacity to scream about generalization when I've lost count how many times he called everyone in here racist,alt-right, white supremacists and even going as far to compare this thread to a Neo Nazi forum
The video was a newscast re-uploaded to a random anti-Muslim Youtube account.
You believe in science as the undeniable truth, but don't even understand the basics of something like fact-checking? You do know not to trust everything you read online, right?
The video was a newscast re-uploaded to a random anti-Muslim Youtube account.
You believe in science as the undeniable truth, but don't even understand the basics of something like fact-checking? You do know not to trust everything you read online, right?
Did you even read past the first sentence of my reply? I agreed with this and said "you can make a point about double-checking before posting" which would've been a valid complaint.
The point is: not double-checking /=/ being racist which is what you are implying.
The audacity to scream about generalization when I've lost count how many times he called everyone in here racist,alt-right, white supremacists and even going as far to compare this thread to a Neo Nazi forum
It said "muslim" in the title of the video
You can make a point about about double-checking before posting but no one here actually belives that brown people = muslim. And what religion it was is actually irrelevant to the topic at the hand: the discrimination the woman faced.
The audacity to scream about generalization when I've lost count how many times he called everyone in here racist,alt-right, white supremacists and even going as far to compare this thread to a Neo Nazi forum
Did you even read past the first sentence of my reply? I agreed with this and said "you can make a point about double-checking before posting" which would've been a valid complaint.
The point is not double-checking = being racist.
To assume religious brown people are Muslim is racist, I'm sorry if that's shocking or surprising to you. If you post a racist video, you are sharing a racist opinion.
Even when confronted with the logical and factual reality, instead of just correcting the title, the original poster only could offer insults about "being triggered". So people who likes facts are "SJWs", yet people who can't discuss religious folks from a predominantly brown part of the world without thinking "MUSLIMS!" aren't the ones being easily triggered?
In any scientific research, if you mislabeled a variable, you would be expected to change it. Anyone who respects science and understands it would never make sure unscientific, illogical (and prejudicial) assumptions. Especially not when science promotes intellectual thought and fact-checking.
To assume religious brown people are Muslim is racist, I'm sorry if that's shocking or surprising to you. If you post a racist video, you are sharing a racist opinion.
Even when confronted with the logical and factual reality, instead of just correcting the title, the original poster only could offer insults about "being triggered". So people who likes facts are "SJWs", yet people who can't discuss religious folks from a predominantly brown part of the world without thinking "MUSLIMS!" aren't the ones being easily triggered?
In any scientific research, if you mislabeled a variable, you would be expected to change it. Anyone who respects science and understand it would never make sure unscientific, illogical (and prejudicial) assumptions. Especially not when science promotes intellectual thought and fact-checking.
Obviously putting a religion on a skin color is racist.
The point is you went and labeled the OP as racist for sharing the video which is an inaccurate conclusion. And that's why I said you can make a point about double-checking first but your knee-jerk response of "you must be racist" is tiring.
To assume religious brown people are Muslim is racist, I'm sorry if that's shocking or surprising to you. If you post a racist video, you are sharing a racist opinion.
Even when confronted with the logical and factual reality, instead of just correcting the title, the original poster only could offer insults about "being triggered". So people who likes facts are "SJWs", yet people who can't discuss religious folks from a predominantly brown part of the world without thinking "MUSLIMS!" aren't the ones being easily triggered?
In any scientific research, if you mislabeled a variable, you would be expected to change it. Anyone who respects science and understand it would never make sure unscientific, illogical (and prejudicial) assumptions. Especially not when science promotes intellectual thought and fact-checking.
except maybe the people assumed they were muslims because they come from the middle east which is majority muslim populated and not because of their skin color? maybe, just maybe that might be the factor?
and not you bringing in science when you said numerous times that scientific facts "don't bother you". Yikes... and science always corrects themselfs, as I did. Most of the problems SJWs, just like creationalists, religious texts, etc. don't change their mind. Well, I was an SJW, I'll admit that, but until I did some research and critical thinking of how most of the ideologes modern SJWs have did made me more open-minded and logical when making arguments, which is something that SJWs don't have or can't get it with their minds.