(August 22, 2026 at 4:18 pm)PepsiMAX Wrote:

(August 22, 2026 at 4:16 pm)Fake Messiah Wrote: Incorrect. You can not shoot someone in the name of atheism because atheism is not an ideology. There is nothing in atheism that says to shoot people like there is in various religions that say you must attack people of different religions.

Source: Wikipedia article(Sutherland Springs church shooting)



Kelley attended the First Baptist Church in Kingsville, Texas, from May to June 2014 and volunteered as a helper for one day of Vacation Bible School.[61] Later on, he stopped volunteering at the summer Bible class and became vocally anti-Christian, posting about atheism online.[48] In social media posts, Kelley often tried to preach his atheism, described people who believe in God as "stupid" (his posts and online hate speech causing numerous former classmates to delete him as a friend on Facebook) and expressed an interest in church shootings.[62][63][40]

Here's something that might help with your discussions here: 

On this forum we strictly use only the "lacktheist" definition of atheism. That is, anyone who lacks belief counts as an atheist. Beyond that, the term "atheist" tells us nothing about that person's other beliefs or opinions. 

So by this definition, we can't say that a school shooter's violence was caused by his atheism. We can say that it was caused by his hatred of religion, but not all atheists hate religion, or think that believers are stupid.

If your only experience of atheists is talking with them on the Internet, it's easy to get the impression that most of them are full of hate. But remember that's a self-selected group, of people who hate religion so much that they go on line every day to express their hate. The atheists who don't hate religion don't call attention to themselves so much. 

(For example, I have always been an atheist, but I find religious art and thought fascinating, and I see no reason to think that the world would be better off without it. So if I say I'm an atheist it would be wrong to jump to further conclusions about me, based solely on that.) 

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy calls lacktheism "psychological atheism." Philosophers of religion, and other people more traditionally, define atheism as a positive assertion that no gods exist. 

Quote:In the psychological sense of the word, atheism is a psychological state, specifically the state of being an atheist, where an atheist is defined as someone who is not a theist and a theist is defined as someone who believes that God exists (or that there are gods). This generates the following definition: atheism is the psychological state of lacking the belief that God exists. In philosophy, however, and more specifically in the philosophy of religion, the term “atheism” is standardly used to refer to the proposition that God does not exist (or, more broadly, to the proposition that there are no gods). Thus, to be an atheist on this definition, it does not suffice to suspend judgment on whether there is a God, even though that implies a lack of theistic belief. Instead, one must deny that God exists. This metaphysical sense of the word is preferred over other senses, including the psychological sense, not just by theistic philosophers, but by many (though not all) atheists in philosophy as well. 

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/athei.../#DefiAthe

This forum only accepts the psychological sense of the word.

Belacqua Wrote:On this forum we strictly use only the "lacktheist" definition of atheism. That is, anyone who lacks belief counts as an atheist. Beyond that, the term "atheist" tells us nothing about that person's other beliefs or opinions.

So by this definition, we can't say that a school shooter's violence was caused by his atheism. We can say that it was caused by his hatred of religion, but not all atheists hate religion, or think that believers are stupid.

It should be obvious considering that I showed groups of people doing violence together in the name of religion versus one guy who decided to shoot people.

And when it comes to describing people on this forum, Belacqua only interacts with new members so that he can be passive aggressive in his supposed description of members on this forum who he abhors and thinks are stupid, but for some reason he can't leave this place. And since his palls here are mostly trolls, he gets very lonely because they usually get banned.

(August 22, 2026 at 7:56 pm)Belacqua Wrote:

(August 22, 2026 at 4:18 pm)PepsiMAX Wrote: Source: Wikipedia article(Sutherland Springs church shooting)



Kelley attended the First Baptist Church in Kingsville, Texas, from May to June 2014 and volunteered as a helper for one day of Vacation Bible School.[61] Later on, he stopped volunteering at the summer Bible class and became vocally anti-Christian, posting about atheism online.[48] In social media posts, Kelley often tried to preach his atheism, described people who believe in God as "stupid" (his posts and online hate speech causing numerous former classmates to delete him as a friend on Facebook) and expressed an interest in church shootings.[62][63][40]

Here's something that might help with your discussions here: 

On this forum we strictly use only the "lacktheist" definition of atheism. That is, anyone who lacks belief counts as an atheist. Beyond that, the term "atheist" tells us nothing about that person's other beliefs or opinions. 

So by this definition, we can't say that a school shooter's violence was caused by his atheism. We can say that it was caused by his hatred of religion, but not all atheists hate religion, or think that believers are stupid.

If your only experience of atheists is talking with them on the Internet, it's easy to get the impression that most of them are full of hate. But remember that's a self-selected group, of people who hate religion so much that they go on line every day to express their hate. The atheists who don't hate religion don't call attention to themselves so much. 

(For example, I have always been an atheist, but I find religious art and thought fascinating, and I see no reason to think that the world would be better off without it. So if I say I'm an atheist it would be wrong to jump to further conclusions about me, based solely on that.) 

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy calls lacktheism "psychological atheism." Philosophers of religion, and other people more traditionally, define atheism as a positive assertion that no gods exist. 

Quote:In the psychological sense of the word, atheism is a psychological state, specifically the state of being an atheist, where an atheist is defined as someone who is not a theist and a theist is defined as someone who believes that God exists (or that there are gods). This generates the following definition: atheism is the psychological state of lacking the belief that God exists. In philosophy, however, and more specifically in the philosophy of religion, the term “atheism” is standardly used to refer to the proposition that God does not exist (or, more broadly, to the proposition that there are no gods). Thus, to be an atheist on this definition, it does not suffice to suspend judgment on whether there is a God, even though that implies a lack of theistic belief. Instead, one must deny that God exists. This metaphysical sense of the word is preferred over other senses, including the psychological sense, not just by theistic philosophers, but by many (though not all) atheists in philosophy as well. 

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/athei.../#DefiAthe

This forum only accepts the psychological sense of the word.

Thats some great rhetoric. I bet Hasan Piker would love your nothing burger argument on why nothing happened to persuade the useful sheep, and the cause of nothing was also nothing. Either case, race commies are the worst.
Asmongold is the best! When it comes to Turk roach anti Western sentiment. Hamas Piker is on top of that hill! (Oh and if you think thats racist? He says Euroids all the time) So no, no it isnt. Racism is opportunism. Remember that!

(August 23, 2026 at 2:24 am)PepsiMAX Wrote:

(August 22, 2026 at 7:56 pm)Belacqua Wrote: Here's something that might help with your discussions here: 

On this forum we strictly use only the "lacktheist" definition of atheism. That is, anyone who lacks belief counts as an atheist. Beyond that, the term "atheist" tells us nothing about that person's other beliefs or opinions. 

So by this definition, we can't say that a school shooter's violence was caused by his atheism. We can say that it was caused by his hatred of religion, but not all atheists hate religion, or think that believers are stupid.

If your only experience of atheists is talking with them on the Internet, it's easy to get the impression that most of them are full of hate. But remember that's a self-selected group, of people who hate religion so much that they go on line every day to express their hate. The atheists who don't hate religion don't call attention to themselves so much. 

(For example, I have always been an atheist, but I find religious art and thought fascinating, and I see no reason to think that the world would be better off without it. So if I say I'm an atheist it would be wrong to jump to further conclusions about me, based solely on that.) 

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy calls lacktheism "psychological atheism." Philosophers of religion, and other people more traditionally, define atheism as a positive assertion that no gods exist. 


https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/athei.../#DefiAthe

This forum only accepts the psychological sense of the word.

Thats some great rhetoric. I bet Hasan Piker would love your nothing burger argument on why nothing happened to persuade the useful sheep, and the cause of nothing was also nothing. Either case, race commies are the worst.
Asmongold is the best! When it comes to Turk roach anti Western sentiment. Hamas Piker is on top of that hill! (Oh and if you think thats racist? He says Euroids all the time) So no, no it isnt. Racism is opportunism. Remember that!

I don't know who Hasan Piker is.

@Belacqua

Quote:This forum only accepts the psychological sense of the word.

Speaking only for myself, I'm perfectly happy with the metaphysical sense - I not only deny that gods exist, I deny that they can exist. If I put any stock in that silly Dawkins Scale, I'd be a 14.

Boru

Quote:This forum only accepts the psychological sense of the word.

I dont!

(August 22, 2026 at 7:56 pm)Belacqua Wrote:

(August 22, 2026 at 4:18 pm)PepsiMAX Wrote: Source: Wikipedia article(Sutherland Springs church shooting)



Kelley attended the First Baptist Church in Kingsville, Texas, from May to June 2014 and volunteered as a helper for one day of Vacation Bible School.[61] Later on, he stopped volunteering at the summer Bible class and became vocally anti-Christian, posting about atheism online.[48] In social media posts, Kelley often tried to preach his atheism, described people who believe in God as "stupid" (his posts and online hate speech causing numerous former classmates to delete him as a friend on Facebook) and expressed an interest in church shootings.[62][63][40]

Here's something that might help with your discussions here: 

On this forum we strictly use only the "lacktheist" definition of atheism. That is, anyone who lacks belief counts as an atheist. Beyond that, the term "atheist" tells us nothing about that person's other beliefs or opinions. 

So by this definition, we can't say that a school shooter's violence was caused by his atheism. We can say that it was caused by his hatred of religion, but not all atheists hate religion, or think that believers are stupid.

If your only experience of atheists is talking with them on the Internet, it's easy to get the impression that most of them are full of hate. But remember that's a self-selected group, of people who hate religion so much that they go on line every day to express their hate. The atheists who don't hate religion don't call attention to themselves so much. 

(For example, I have always been an atheist, but I find religious art and thought fascinating, and I see no reason to think that the world would be better off without it. So if I say I'm an atheist it would be wrong to jump to further conclusions about me, based solely on that.) 

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy calls lacktheism "psychological atheism." Philosophers of religion, and other people more traditionally, define atheism as a positive assertion that no gods exist. 

Quote:In the psychological sense of the word, atheism is a psychological state, specifically the state of being an atheist, where an atheist is defined as someone who is not a theist and a theist is defined as someone who believes that God exists (or that there are gods). This generates the following definition: atheism is the psychological state of lacking the belief that God exists. In philosophy, however, and more specifically in the philosophy of religion, the term “atheism” is standardly used to refer to the proposition that God does not exist (or, more broadly, to the proposition that there are no gods). Thus, to be an atheist on this definition, it does not suffice to suspend judgment on whether there is a God, even though that implies a lack of theistic belief. Instead, one must deny that God exists. This metaphysical sense of the word is preferred over other senses, including the psychological sense, not just by theistic philosophers, but by many (though not all) atheists in philosophy as well. 

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/athei.../#DefiAthe

This forum only accepts the psychological sense of the word.

It tries to appear smart and fails dismally every time.

Maybe his family/friends/boss need to tell him (more often) what a smart boy he is?

(August 22, 2026 at 3:09 pm)PepsiMAX Wrote:

(June 24, 2026 at 1:09 pm)Fake Messiah Wrote: The Catholic Church also blessed both of the atom bombs that were thrown on Japan, when Catholic Chaplain George Zabelka made the holy mass over the bomb and the pilots, as did Protestant Chaplain William B. Downey, which is another reason why Japanese Buddhists convert to Christianity.

And Devin Patrick Kelly, an atheist shot up a church in the name of Atheism . Whats your point? Or is this more of the Race Commie babble of how evil all Westerners are for the past sins?

What does “in the name of atheism” look like?

(August 23, 2026 at 6:12 am)h4ym4n Wrote:

(August 22, 2026 at 3:09 pm)PepsiMAX Wrote: And Devin Patrick Kelly, an atheist shot up a church in the name of Atheism . Whats your point? Or is this more of the Race Commie babble of how evil all Westerners are for the past sins?

What does “in the name of atheism” look like?

Intentions clearly doesnt matter here? Are you guys intentionally playing dumb? Oh well. Reddit Atheist memes in 2010 says it all.
With the trilby hat and neckbeard starter pack