Big Name NFL Athlete Asserts his Atheism

[Statler Waldorf]

O, Statler, don't be so dim. Ever heard of a role model? Ever heard of smashing stereotypes?

Wait, you view an NFL player- someone who plays a game for a living- as a role model for guidance concerning what we ought to believe in regards to the existence of god? You’re joking right?

Don't be dense, Dorf. It's nice because it's a minority (un)belief that I share, and seeing as many times atheists are made out to be somehow "bad" by many Christians, it's nice to see someone with a very public face express that unbelief.

The fact that your entire thread makes no sense in light of the fact that there is no moral imperative for a person to believe what is true in atheistic conceptual schemes in no way means that I am the one being “dense” here.

Speaking as a football fan, if you believe that God is influencing the outcome of the games, what's the point of pretending there's actual competition going on, or that the players and their athletic skills matter in the slightest? If God is really involved, the whole thing is a total farce.

But, that's true about life in general, really.

God pre-ordains all that comes to pass.

If atheism were true you’d have the same issue but to an even more severe degree since all decisions made on the field would be pre-determined by and according to the chemical processes within the brains of the players and coaches. Let’s all cheer for streams flowing, rocks falling, and ice melting! How boring!

It's always nice to see another vote for reason and sanity; particularly in an organization with many members praising the irrational. God gives a flying fuck about football and some jackass making a touchdown? Thank you Jeebus!

What is irrational about believing that God cares about what happens in a football game? He cares about the outcome of casted lots. Atheists love to toss around words like reason and rational without actually knowing or caring what they mean. Additionally, you have no idea what Foster believes, he simply said he’s not religious, that in no way means he’s any more rational than the next guy. Some of the most irrational people the world has ever known have been atheists.

We care about public figures presenting a positive image of to the impressionable youth.

That’s fine, but you’ve done nothing to establish that simply being an atheist is presenting a positive image to anyone.

Atheism is nothing more than insisting believers "show me" and rejection of anything not showable. To date, after thousands of years, believers can do no such thing.

That sounds like poorly stated empiricism, not atheism.

If being a rational skeptic is a religion, sign me up.

What about being an irrational skeptic?

Or, if you haven't got your bigot blinders on, like it's a widely-despised minority that's making progress in social acceptance.

Discouraging incorrect beliefs is not in any way bigotry.

Is your cluelessness pretend or real?

I just like things to make logical sense.

I'd be happy they felt safe enough to be open about it. It's no sillier than things hundreds of millions of other people believe.

GC did not post that, I did. So it does not matter what you believe, as long as you’re in the minority? I wonder...do you apply that same standard to those who reject Neo-Darwinism and anthropomorphic climate change?

There are lots of minority beliefs. They don't have to align, just be tolerated to the same extent as other beliefs.

According to whom?

It's not a bother, but it certainly takes no courage to be open about it.

It’s better to be courageously wrong than simply being right?

That's because you place no value in truth.

Are you saying that people have a moral imperative to believe what is true?