Sneaky, pious, religious proselytising cunts! (A bit of a long one but hopefully with good reason).
Upon reading something recently it reminded me that I used to frequent a now long since departed site which had a wide variety of forums including News and Politics, Religion, Science etc. The forum rules included “No Proselytism” mainly because as it was an international site the forums were open to all comers including many Muslim majority countries and most of said members would shamelessly preach to anyone who would listen and anyone who didn’t want to come to that. I thought they were cunts but I kind of respected their fanatical outlook and didn’t give a fuck about the “No proselytism rule as because they continued to ignore warnings they were generally booted off the site after a couple of days. The Religion forum was for discussing different beliefs, not for flat out preaching or trying to convert. This cunting isn’t about them.
Far worse than the above offenders were the sneaky passive aggressive Christians, especially, but not limited to, the Creationists. These cunts were actually worse than the Muslims because if they got a warning in the Religion forum for proselytising their next port of call was to infest the Science forum, start a thread about some sort of XYZ science subject matter, the Big Bang for instance, the actual subject matter being actually irrelevant as they would slowly turn their thread around to “God did it, God vs evil, God is good, the wonders of God” anyway.
One of the worst offenders was a proper sneaky cunt, for the purpose of this cunting his name will be ‘Piouscunt’. Piouscunt was guilty, among other transgressions of constantly quote mining and cherry picking parts of your post that suited his religious agenda. He tried that shit with me once until I pulled him up and gave him an example of how out of context his quotes were. My example was “Piouscunt supports pea-doos”, then after him throwing a tantrum for a few hours showing him the complete quote would have been “Piouscunt supports pea-doos get longer jail terms”. He never pulled that cherry picking quote mining with me again.
On the subject of the Big Bang, another one of his favorites to turn the thread around to “God did it” was “Nothing comes from nothing”, although he never could explain how this God apparently made himself out of nothing and the Earth and everything on it too. Of course when pushed into a corner and when they have run out of google answers in a science thread of their, or someone else’s making, there is always their get out of jail free card, “Well, God works in mysterious ways”.
Hilariously enough, like all good hypocritical religious types who preach morality at every chance they get, it turned out Piouscunt had started an internet long distance relationship and had been sending semi-naked pictures of himself (and she to him) to a girl, well, less than half his age. When Piouscunt broke this relationship off she started a thread about the disgusting way she had been treated, complete with posting some of his “pictures” and as if by magic Piouscunt was gone faster than a choirboy on cheese and wine night!
Anyway, I’m glad this hallowed site hasn’t got any of these types of sneaky, religious, proselytising, pious cunts. If someone wants to preach they should just be honest about it, after all, isn’t religion about honesty?
And here endeth todays lesson…..
Fuck off!
Nominated by: Coolforcunts
I got a hand written letter from our local Jehovah’s Witnesses. Assuring me they had all the answers and ‘Jennifer’ would help me. Presumably written by an unfortunate brainwashed child. As a holiday treat as Xmas is taboo with these cunts.
It’s a puzzle, because had they checked with the local JW loonies they would have been informed that I have:
told them to fuck off
told them to get a fucking life
accused them of abusing the poor kids they trail about.
Perhaps they thought I have mellowed? I thought they had all the answers.
12
See what happens when you dont check your handle.
6
I’m more interested in just when and where you needed to go under the alias of ‘Marcus Rashford”….. you haven’t been trolling some British Fascist site for your own unpleasant amusement,have you?
You naughty Cunstable.
🙂 .
9
I have been trolling the Morpeth Starve the Children site. Some very unsavoury cunts up there.
6
Just emerged from my pit. WTF is this about? Just read that “trans” are cancelling “lesbians” cause lesbians don’t have penises. Going back to the pit. Morning cunts.
10
I have no idea what this is about but I thought I would mention that Hancock is a complete cunt who should be burned at the stake.
There endeth my lesson.
11
Many cunters on here fiercely argue modern science disproved the superstition of religion many years ago.
They argue it fiercely. They really want you to see the error if your ways. To see the Truth.
Isn’t that proselytizing?
9
The only proselytizing worth a damn is telling people to doubt everything and cracking them over the head with a blunt object until they either open their mind or their skulls.
I believe that’s called Zen.
8
At last we agree on something! Wholeheartedly as it happens.
1
‘I believe that’s called Zen.’
But that’s proselytizing for Zen then?
2
Red herring reply. Otherwise known as, when in doubt* just flipflop the argument, kudos.
* Awaits a vague pathos about “Doubt”
4
Replying to MP, obviously.
2
If you don’t think that the atheism of people like Dawkins has dogmatic elements then I don’t know what to say.
1
Well even if I did flip it it is still a valid question.
Orwell said ‘All art is propoganda’.
You could say I believe all utterance is propoganda.
We are trying to convince the person we are talking to if the rightness if our position.
Even if its Mrs Jones telling Mrs Walker on her doorstep that Mrs Smith four doors down is s bit of a flousie.
She is trying to convince her that her view is right.
2
Flipfloped, there is no “even” about it.
Other than that my nom is about sneaky religious cunts using every opportunity to preach, and when I say every opportunity I mean exactly that. When it comes to guilty as charged the flipflop defensive stance always burns brighter than Hell’s fires themselves.
Still, nothing shifts the focus better than Red Herring fallacies and Strawman arguments when it comes to addressing the actual topic of the nomination I suppose.
4
You haven’t actually addressed WHY it is a red herring argument and shy Dawkins’ brand of atheism doesn’t follow the same pattern of behaviour.
1
Why that should be, not shy. Bloody phone.
0
As rabid as Dawkins May come across to those with opposing views, or even those undecided or of a neutral persuasion, you will probably have to look for his argument, or his take on things. He certainly doesn’t go looking for converts, or knocking on doors or handing out leaflets. If you’ve seen his stuff, you’ve either gone looking for it, or encountered it on a debate, where someone with his viewpoint would be appearing as the argument against religion.
Has anyone ever been accosted by an atheist with the express purpose of trying to indoctrinate them with their opinions? Genuine question, as I can only go by my own experience, and it has never happened to me. Can’t say the same for Christians, catholics, jehovas witnesses, Mormons and Hare Krishna followers.
4
@Coolfircunts
Flat earthers start a discussion on some topic only to bring it round to their theory of the earth being flat. That would annoy me as well. It’s not honest.
I was just making the point that we don’t come to a discussion, without our own presuppositions or assumptions.
Another way of saying that though it does sound provocative unconscious dogmas.
2
‘Has anyone ever been accosted by an atheist with the express purpose of trying to indoctrinate them with their opinions?’
But were accosted or assailed all the time. Maybe not in the street but certainly in the media.
Anybody with two eyes in their head knows that Christianity is under attack. From late night talk shows to soap opera storylines. From Hollywood movies to Facebook posts.
These people attack with the sole purpose of convincing you Christianity indeed all religion is wrong.
They’re seeking to convert you. They’re seeking to convert you away from religion.
IOW they’re proselytizing for Atheism.
0
“But were accosted or assailed all the time. Maybe not in the street but certainly in the media.”
When you mention the media are you referring to the news? Especially when it concerns the worldwide pea dough file ring that is the Catholic Church and their international code of silence and cover~ups about their disgusting conduct, and from recent reports the CoE too etc etc etc?
The truth hurts and that is hardly trying to convince people religion is wrong when just reporting the facts. Still, I suppose if you’re a defensive religious fanatic clutching at straws you could always throw up a false flag claim they are proselytising for atheism for simply daring to report the truth. Perhaps the Boston Globe are in fact an atheist convert gang for reporting the decades of the Catholic Church pea dough file abuse ring and their continual cover ups?
5
Ive never had anyone force their religious beliefs on me,
But no one preaches like a atheist!!
I don’t believe in god, im a not a Christian!
But I try and give atheists a wide berth, fanatical, spiteful, out for a argument, smug, and unforgivably boring.
“Well then, explain dinosaurs?!!”
Just fuck off you boring cunt.
14
I am a trans vegan atheist. I will be knocking on doors down your way.
10
Your not as vegan as I am!
I wont eat anything that castes a shadow!!
5
Exactly! Imagine being an all powerful deity that made himself, the Universe and indeed the Earth out of nothing and not randomly putting dinosaurs on a planet. What a fucking shambles that would have been.
4
If I had my way, I would bring back dinosaurs and set them loose in fucking Downing Street. Velociraptors would be best.
10
noun
the action of attempting to convert someone from one religion, belief, or opinion to another.
“no amount of proselytizing was going to change their minds”
This obviously includes White Privilege.
5
Great nom! 👍👍👍 Nuff said.
6
I’m agnostic, leaning towards atheist, but of the opinion that no one can prove their isn’t a God/Gods and no one can prove their is. It’s just your opinion.
People are entitled to their opinion, but it’s tiresome and fruitless trying to force it on me and I suspect many others.
I have friends who are atheists (as well as remainders) who are on social media passionately trying to ridicule Christianity, though not Islam. They are as bad as the religious fanatics in that sense.
The worst thing is social media has lead to people, trying to force their opinions on everyone, be it about religion, politics, immigration, ecology and racism. Have a different opinion and you’re blackballed.
It’s your opinion. That’s it, an opinion – not fact.
9
Appears bloody spellchecker has put their rather than there twice!
On a lighter note, I was once approached by two male JW followers in the high street. ‘Hi, I’m a missionary’ pronounced one of them. My reply was ‘I’m more of a doggy style man’. Should have seen the look on their faces!
8
one Saturday morning long time ago I heard out two smart dressed young men at the door who told me their “truth” and that now I’d heard it, if I didn’t drop all and follow I would burn in hell for eternity.. thanks a fucking lot cunts
1
My head hurts to much to read this.
Thank dog.
4
It is heavy reading, especially with Boxing day heads, but them’s the breaks.
4
Science is a religion now, you can’t question it, it guides your life even when the evidence of your own senses tells you it’s not right.
The believers will treat you as a blasphemer if you dare to question the high priests.
Science and religion both predict the end times are coming and only they can save us
Science and religion are both powerful tools of manipulation.
The enemy is ignorance, neither would have you do your own research or seek alternative views.
There are eminent scientists who also believe in a god force.
I have no certainty of belief in god or science, I don’t condemn those who do but I do believe we are all entitled to our own beliefs or non beliefs, we all have a duty to ourselves to question everything.
At least I know Proselytism isn’t what the Yorkshire ripper did for a hobby now.
7
Unfortunately science has always been a religious organisation. We revere and worship the gods of the past like Newton for example, taking their discoveries to be unquestionable dogma. Yet how many even know of Goethe’s theory on colour which takes an entirely different philosophical direction to Newton’s?
One of the principle flaws of science, but also it’s greatest strength, is the philosophical belief you can know truth by braking down things into their components or smallest parts, irrespective of any system the object works within (including our subjective involvement). Conversely you get the different disciplines of science, which become islands of expertise that then fight amongst themselves like religious sects.
That is my main gripe with science, the atomistic philosophy that dominates the narrative. It gives rise to athiest philosophy too – easier to justify selfish behaviour when you’re an island.
0
“the atomistic philosophy that dominates the narrative.”
If you want to obtain mathematical descriptions of phenomena (in order to predict outcomes and inform our handling of materials and waveforms), that would seem to be the only way to go. An holistic and unquantified appreciation of the rainbow is not going to lead to the light-emitting diode. Unfortunately, it’s not going to attract money from investors in science either, so science is bound to be a bit biassed against The Higher Consciousness (or whatever)
OTOH – hope you’re reading this far – for a desperate human looking for its place in a pretty random world over which it has little or no control as an individual, some kind of coherent, apparently comprehensible framework which does not requite quantum electrodynamics is absolutely necessary. That’s what religion is for; it can be complete bollocks, and yours can be different from mine.
There is no overlap with science, and neither should be seen as an alternative to the other. IMO.
4
But that’s the flaw again. Why the absolute need for mathematical formulas, models and abstractions? They should serve rather than lead – you need look no further than our current CV19 predicament for an example of that.
The whole of modern science has become obsessed with mathematics, probably because man feels maths is the language of the universe and he revels in his worship to it, despite the possibility he may be just projecting his intellectual superiority.
Look at where we are heading.. digitalIDs, the internet of things, big data, this incessant neurotic desire to classify and label everything.. it’s all based on the same psychology; a very male logical thought process, now taken to the absolute extreme.
I think you’re wrong suggesting there is no overlap. Both science and religion start from the same premise; the mystery followed by the desire to know. Whilst they take different routes ultimately they both end up where they started – the truth is where you are.
The more science tries to isolate itself from the interconnected and embedded systems, the more ludicrous its conclusions become. This is partly why I think many great scientific minds come full circle, they sense this intuitively.
2
Does Science try “to isolate itself from the interconnected and embedded systems?”
Example, please. I can think of no instance in my own field in which researchers have not worked consciously from (atomistic) examination of a system’s components to greater understanding of the system as a whole. From holistic speculation to an account more related to what is observable.
And why “ludicrous conclusions”? Surely these are the province of nonscientists who ignore the essential detail? “The moon is made of green cheese” is rather less valid than “The moon is made of minerals which we can reproduce on Earth …and prove it”, surely?
As to “digital IDs, the internet of things, big data, this incessant neurotic desire to classify and label everything.. it’s all based on the same psychology; a very male logical thought process, now taken to the absolute extreme.” – My gut feeling is much the same. It appals me, but I have to remember that while none of that would be possible without, er, “male logic”* , the cunts who are really to blame are the entrepreneurs who see, in their very male, acquisitive way, an opportunity to enrich themselves. And the cunts who buy this shit and demand more.
Perhaps you don’t appreciate the truly holistic nature of the culture. There are scientists, there are rich investors, and there are customers like both of us. No? What’s that you’re typing on?
*Are we being a tiny bit sexist here? There are plenty of female scientists, and many of them are on Radio 4 today, the wittering cunts.
2
Wimmin would do better being the wife of the scientist, fucking him silly and getting him out of his imagination and back to his humanity! We might have less smart bombs and more beneficial technologies that way.
Western science is wholly fragmented and disconnected though, that’s why we have the separate disciplines connected by this vague nihilistic atomistic philosophy, which culminates in our overarching cosmology of a pointless expanding universe that came into being for no purpose.
The best example of where science has deliberately tried to isolate itself is in cosmology. Specifically, and continually, downplaying the role of electricity in space in favour of a gravity driven paradigm (based around mathematical models), despite the fact that 99.9% of what we can see in space is electrified plasma. A specific example is Arp’s discovery of plasma filaments connecting objects with very different red-shift values, thus contradicting and undermining the conventional narrative in cosmology of an expanding universe and also how galaxies might form.
They continually postulate ever more ludicrous ideas to fill the holes in the mathematical astronomical models, instead of taking what we actually see and working with that. Dark matter.. something we can’t see or test, but is necessary to balance the models lest they admit they may be wrong!
2
Not sure I see your argument any more, BCC. Cosmology’s big enough to entertain all sorts of hypotheses, and they all need testing to acquire validity. If you like electrified filaments holding the fabric together, fine. Data and stats comparing them with gravity telling matter how to move, please. Then publish, peer-review, deal with the objections, and if you’re right there shouldn’t be too much argument from real science.
The trouble with cosmology is that it’s extremely big and (whether particle – or gravity – mediated) extremely difficult to go and look at. We’re stuck with the evidence we can get.
Which is, I resolutely maintain, better than no evidence at all.
2
Yeah that’s great in theory but it doesn’t work that way though. Arp was an expert and they crucified him for even suggesting his hypothesis, despite the evidence. Not because he was wrong but because it would have thrown much into question.
There are numerous examples where observation contradicts the main narrative, but it never gets the attention. Conversely anything that supports the narrative i.e. dark matter, is given a free pass so long is it can be made to fit.
This is why science is a religion. It’s not free of bias, money, and political motivations. The demand for peer review is all good until those positions become corrupted, which I suggest they have.
1
Science that is not free of bias, money and political motivations is not genuine science.
2
Fools! Shudder in fear and bow before the all knowing, almighty one true living God Yasur of Tanna. Bask in the light of his magnificence, beg for his mercy and good favour. All praise unto Yasur.
PS. Having been interned at a papist school we were made to speak and write English on the threat of caning as well if not better than the prods or state school ferals. It’s “proselytising”, no fucking Z.
4
To equate science and history with religious proselytism is bollocks.
And if atheism is a religion then abstinence is a sexual position, bald is a hair colour and not collecting stamps is a hobby.
I am well pissed and Ipswich don’t have a game on Boxing Day because of the lurgy so god is a cunt.
I am well pissed.
5
Afternoon Mike. Is it still your claim that:
“There is an Invisible Pink Unicorn called Gerald who lives in my shoe.”?
4
I always say I’m a Welsh Tobacconist if anyone asks
5
Sorry CMC but I’m not buying that. I’m not religious but people like Dawkins are so dogmatic in their atheism and need to get people to see ‘the Truth’ that it takes on religious characteristics, with believers playing the role of blasphemers. I know, I used to be like that myself.
1
OT. Anyone get the traitor George Blake on the deadpool?
1
There seems to be a lot of hate for atheism. To me, it’s a label some other cunt gives me because I have no time for superstition. Don’t believe in god? Oh you’re an atheist they say, with the distaste of someone being told the ending of a film they wanted to watch. But unless I am being asked if I believe in this stuff, or expressing my opinion on an open forum when the topic arises, for me, it’s not an issue.
As I’ve said before, I don’t feel the need to join an organisation or group that has similar opinions to mine, or seek out the company of like minded individuals to discuss and reaffirm my opinion. I certainly don’t feel the need to stop passers by, or knock on doors to tell others of my opinion, and try to convert them to have the same. When I do a good deed, it is it’s own reward and there is no positive consequence other than the deed itself. Equally, if I be a cunt to someone, I have no defence that a supernatural being influenced me, it was me being a cunt.
I don’t have violent arguments with other non believers or agnostics because they may have slightly different opinions to mine. I don’t tell people they will be judged for not sharing my opinion, and face an eternity of pain and suffering as a consequence.
And, I don’t think suicide is a sin, unless you strap yourself with explosives and murder a load of people, which comes with a heavenly reward of seventy two nine year olds.
5
In a true libertarian society I argue that anyone can put their point into the discussion arena in order to persuade others. It is up to the individual to use their nous to decide if they agree or not and by how much.
6
Believe, do not believe – all fine with me.
But do not tell me green is yellow without providing any proof and insist I have the “blind faith” to subscribe to this nonsense.
The principles of Christianity are what the laws we currently have are based on with the addition of a bit of telling off for doing anything remotely enjoyable! 😃👍
Pagans and druids – worship the miracle of the air we breathe, the water we drink, the food we plant, grow and eat, the meat which runs up and down, the life saving warmth of a fire.
Works for me – I have long held the principle that we are born, we live, we die and when we are done we feed the ground.
*Other opinions are available* – each to their own, and if it doesn’t hurt anyone crack on.
4
As far as ‘nothing comes from nothing’ is concerned, it becomes clearer if you think of it in mathematical terms. One minus one equals nothing, a plus and a minus of equal value will cancel out. The equation can be read as 0 = (1-1) where a vacuum transforms into two equal and opposing values of energy, consisting of matter and radiation on the positive side matched by gravity and negative energy on the other. These are the ingredients that make up our universe, which is merely a realization of the potential energy of the vacuum. It is inevitable that this balancing act will collapse and revert to its original state, in fact it could be said to have already done so.
Our minds are programmed to be susceptible to illusion, not only to the existence of mass but also to the arrow of time, which appears to illustrate the sequence of events that have occurred in the past, that are occurring now and which will occur in the future. In actuality these ‘periods of time’ only exist as artificial constructs of human mentality. An analogy would be that on a digital disc, the beginning, middle and end of a film all exist together in the same place.
3
‘Our minds are programmed,’
Who by?
1
Not by who, by what. Evolution. Most of life on earth exhibits behaviour that has passed on by its species which was beneficial to its existence.
3
quote:
“The special mark of the modern world is not that it is sceptical, but that it is dogmatic without knowing it. It says, in mockery of the old devotees, that they believed without knowing why they believed. But the moderns believe without knowing what they believe – and without even knowing that they do believe it. Their freedom consists in first freely assuming a creed, and then freely forgetting that they are assuming it. In short, they always have an unconscious dogma; and an unconscious dogma is the definition of a prejudice. They are the dullest and deadest of ritualists who merely recite their creed in their subconsciousness, as if they repeated their creed in their sleep. A man who is awake should know what he is saying, and why he is saying it – that is, he should have a fixed creed and relate it to a first principle. This is what most moderns will never consent to do. Their thoughts will work out to most interesting conclusions; but they can never tell you anything about their beginnings. They have always taken away the number they first thought of. They have always forgotten the very fact or fancy on which their whole theory depends.”
— G.K. Chesterton, March 15, 1919, Illustrated London News
4
Fuck me, im hungover today.☹️
God hasnt helped me,
Science has done fuck all.
I’ll help myself same as always.
4
Glib Bert Chesterton again. Fine writer and Catholic propagandist, but just a little bit indoctrinated, wouldn’t you say? A bit like handing out the missal* and telling everyone to use it?
What are your own words?
*This time of year it is customary to drop one on your neighbour’s foot and give her missal toe. I’ll get my vestments.
4
Simply he explains things better than me.
Yes a bit though.
‘A little bit indoctrinated’.
Held to be one of the C20 most original thinkers but because he eventuality became Catholic it was all just indoctrination. Poor stuff Komodo.
.
1
Yes a bit lazy though from me.
1
“…because he eventuality became Catholic it was all just indoctrination. ”
That would be a lazy interpretation indeed, and not mine. He was self-indoctrinated, and this can happen to anyone of any religion. What causes a philosophy to stick is its relevance to an individual’s existence, and individuals are different. The philosophies they first cleave to and then have to justify to themselves (and others, if proselytising) are similarly different. I can find a soft spot for Sufi Islam, Zen Buddhism, Sikhism, even, for instance, while any Christian seed fired at me falls less on stony ground than reinforced concrete, because it simply doesn’t work and makes no sense. It’s obviously different for you.
I would be more sympathetic to Chesterton if he accepted that view, but he goes to some lengths to exclude all other faiths from his idea of validity.
3
I’ll agree with ‘No proselytism’ when Eye Slam (planes and trucks into buildings) doesn’t exist any more.
1