Atheists are mentally ill

[pineapplebunnybounce]

@Min, thanks for the info, I didn't know Baylor is a Christian university, explains why the study was even conducted to begin with. Did a course on drug addiction and rehabilitation and never once did I read an article that says faith based treatment works.

[pocaracas]

Get ready for a lot of butt-hurt. Someone seems to be upset at the articles saying atheists are smarter.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanth...tally-ill/

Obviously, it’s the believers who are smarter. Anyone who thinks otherwise is mentally ill.

And I mean that literally: the evidence today implies that atheism is a form of mental illness. And this is because science is showing that the human mind is hard-wired for faith: we have, as a species, evolved to believe, which is one crucial reason why believers are happier – religious people have all their faculties intact, they are fully functioning humans.

Therefore, being an atheist – lacking the vital faculty of faith – should be seen as an affliction, and a tragic deficiency: something akin to blindness. Which makes Richard Dawkins the intellectual equivalent of an amputee, furiously waving his stumps in the air, boasting that he has no hands.

Apparently, not believing in the magic man watching over your shoulder is crazy.

Perhaps we have just evolved past the need for delusional crutches?

Dawkins may be many bad things... but one that he is good at is evolutionary biologist. He then has a uniquely tuned perspective on how humans evolved the hardware required for faith, or trusting what others say with nothing to back it up.

Elaborating a bit, the mechanism was developed so infants would trust what their parents told them not to eat, so they could remain alive. Also could be applied to certain actions that must be accomplished in a given order, or else you die.
Thousands of generations went into the making of this apparently simple wiring...

Claiming that people are smarter because they are happier is a non-sequitur.
Remember:

[Nine]

Hmmm, telegraph eh?

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/category/religion/

Nope don't see any bias here.. Certainly not preoccupied with having a go at atheists or anything..

[Cyberman]

What's worse is he's not even saying that faith-heads are smarter based on silly, inconvenient things like IQ scores, but that they live smarter based on Pascal's Wager. His entire essay hangs from the single peg of "well, religious folk tend to be happier, live longer and have more kids. Irreligious people must therefore be less intelligent if they choose to live their lives without those benefits." He even states it without shame when he says that if non-believers are wrong they go to Hell.

Another reg flag, steeped in sour grapes, is that oh-so-subtle bit about "anyone who thinks otherwise is mentally ill". In context, not necessarily non-believers but literally anyone who doesn't agree with him.

I can put into five words what he used a thousand to say. Sean Thomas is an idiot. Think the Torygraph would pay me for that the same as they paid him?

[Crossless2.0]

I suppose the article's author believes that the child's laughter at the end of "The Emperor's New Clothes" is an expression of madness, too. His entire "argument" is beneath contempt and is just another example of how desperate believers are to maintain some semblance of dignity in the face of criticism of their risible beliefs.

Pathetic.

[fr0d0]

it's true though isn't it

---

nah just messin with you guys

---

[Fidel_Castronaut]

"Let's ignore arbitary studies that suggest atheists have higher IQs and instead focus on arbitrary studies that suggest theists are happier"

Sounds legit.

---

Hmmm, telegraph eh?

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/category/religion/

Nope don't see any bias here.. Certainly not preoccupied with having a go at atheists or anything..

The telegraph, like the mail, is still struggling to understand how 50%+ of Brits (according to some surveys) can have no religion.

[NoraBrimstone]

Surely that article is satire? Right?

[Faith No More]

As crazy and inaccurate this article is, I doubt anything is going to happen because atheists tend not to take these things seriously. If he'd written about a religion, or even tweeted, the reaction would've been disproportionate.

I was actually planning on suicide bombing this guy's house.

Too much?

---

Surely that article is satire? Right?

It's hard to tell with religious zealots these days, but no, this does not appear to be satire.

It is, however, a Christ-load of sour grapes.

[Cyberman]

Incidentally, I've been commenting on that excuse for an article under the name I use here. I started with a copypaste of my previous post, then there's a couple of replies to some random idiot with an aggressive martyr complex named "Flagellum", who was gracious enough to tell everyone that xtians are so nice and kind that they don't burn unbelievers anymore.