Random Comic
stood

stood

Look at you, sitting there all infidelical. What’s your problem?



└ Tags:

Discussion (25)¬

  1. Chris Hughes says:

    ‘She just sat there ALL SHRILL and STRIDENT’ — masterly!

    I must learn how to do that…

  2. Reg Vernon says:

    A point well made. It is often said that a proselyte practises his faith with more fervour. And I’ve noticed that people who try to convert others to their way of thinking can be both very persistent and blind to competing viewpoints honestly held with equal strength. The argument is even more apposite in relation to the beliefs of Christians and Jews.

  3. Intelligent Designer says:

    Can’t speak for Muslims, not knowing any, and there are probably plenty of uncounted silent Christians around, but there a also a few in my circle of acquaintances who love to tell everyone else how it’s all thanks to God; how they’re feeling full of holy spirit; how we should all praise the lord, etc. Very few non-believers can be bothered with such ‘soft-evangelism’ or think it is necessary to reinforce their beliefs with continual affirmation. And you don’t have to be faithless to find it really annoying, apparently.

  4. Neuseline says:

    If British J&M fans missed Louis Theroux’s documentary on BBC2 last night there is a chance to watch it at http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00ybyxp/Louis_Theroux_Ultra_Zionists/

    Warning: It may make you very angry. Long live militant atheism!

  5. Andrew Hall says:

    I don’t know why militant astronomers are so against the idea of an Earth centered solar system.

  6. Omino says:

    I for one find the gnu atheists “shallow” and “pedantic”…

  7. jerry w says:

    Every success (or goal) “Praise the lord! (or “thank you Jesus!”)
    Every failure (or fumble) “I was blindsided!” (or “my bad!”)

  8. Nassar Ben Houdja says:

    For what they say doesn’t exist
    Atheists become very pissed
    Their missionary zeal
    Has cash donation appeal
    Much like the religions they’ve dissed.

  9. Bodach says:

    I vow to become quietly shrill.

  10. @Omino Since Richard Dawkins is usually considered one of the new atheists, or gnu atheists as you so cleverly put it, though I must admit that I can’t figure out why this supposed to be clever, are you seriously claiming he’s shallow? Have you read ” The Greatest Show on Earth”? Are you seriously claiming that it’s shallow? I can’t imagine anbody doing more to exhaustively explain to idiots why they are idiots. So what exactly do you mean by “shallow” and “pedantic”? Could you give me examples?

  11. Filipe says:

    New atheists are wimps. The first atheist to put his thoughts in writing was a… catholic priest, Jean Meslier, who around 300 years ago

    «…wished that all the great men in the world and all the nobility could be hanged, and strangled with the guts of the priests.»

    Now that’s being aggressive.

  12. Pat says:

    @Nassar Ben Houdja;

    It’s not what doesn’t exist,
    That allegedly makes atheists pissed.
    It’s the lack of debate
    With intelligence inate,
    And strawmen, anecdotalist.

  13. wright1 says:

    Makes me think of my late cat. The very existence of other cats was, to him, a blatantly insulting provocation. The sight of them brazenly napping in their own back yards was intolerable to him…

    The more strident, defensive type of theist definitely considers atheists “provocative” simply by existing, much less speaking out. They’re not going to calm down if we unbelievers keep our mouths shut; they’ll just keep slandering and marginalizing us.

    The late Richard Dysart once said, “No one gives you power; you have to take it.”

  14. wright1

    the beleivers slandered athiests even before we started “getting uppity”

    beleivers opposed women’s rights, equality rights, civil rights, disabled rights and gay rights in the same way

    to characterize their target as immoral, childish and dangerous for existing, despite being a minority

    basically, they are saying that if they can’t have everything their way that they are being treated unfairly.

    so, who’s really the childish ones?

  15. @ Filipe Not exacly wimps. It still takes some courage to stand out in the open in the face of death threats. More than I have, or I wouldn’t be hiding behind a pseudonym. I suggest you mean “subdued” or “less strident” when compared to Jean Meslier. The most we can accuse Dawkins of is being civil in the face of absolute barbarism.

  16. beechnut says:

    Dawkins took seriously his job as fostering the public understanding of science – and he keeps on doing it.

  17. Mary2 says:

    @jerry w – every time they win a tennis match or find a parking space it’s ‘Thanks to God’, every failure = ‘the Devil made me do it’ or ‘I didn’t pray hard enough’

    The only time it has nothing to do with god is when 800 Christians die in mudslides in Brazil – then it is ‘nature’

  18. edd says:

    @Mary2 – Actually, they still claim it’s all part of some unfathomable ‘master plan’ and thank their god for ‘miraculously’ saving any survivors.

  19. Omino says:

    @darwin harmless

    To be honest, I wasn’t seriously suggesting that the new atheists were shallow and pedantic. I was referencing a show called “Family guy”, where one of the jokes is that Peter Griffin calls people “shallow” and “pedantic” without knowing what they mean. It seems to me that people are also using “shrill” and “strident” without really understanding those accusations. I was trying to be funny or ironic, but that obviously didn’t carry. Being an atheist myself, I find the names atheists are called pretty funny if misguided.

    Anyway, no I don’t have any examples of Dawkins being shallow or pedantic, nor have I gotten around to reading the “Greatest Show on Earth” yet.

  20. Omino says:

    Btw, “Gnu atheist” is what some atheists are calling themselves:

    http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2010/10/11/the-gnu-atheist-symbol/

  21. Omino Ah, thanks. I thought “gnu atheists” was a silly slur from the other side. I’m now enlightened. “The Greatest Show on Earth” is a great book. Dawkins goes into details. He covers every silly argument the fundamentalists use to deny evolution, many of them so strange I had never heard them. Also, I thought I was pretty hip to the mechanics of how evolution works, but Dawkins taught me a thing or two about that as well, especially when it comes to time estimate methods and transitional forms. So you have a good book to look forward to.
    His intro was downright touching. Imagine a professor trying to teach Roman history, and constantly being confronted with emotional students who claim, with dogmatic certainty backed up by a book full of nonsense, that Rome never existed. That’s the position of an evolutionary biology professor in his field.

  22. Omino says:

    @Darwin Harmless no problemo. I recently bought it as an audiobook, and have just listened to the intro. It’s really powerful, and I expect the rest of the book to be just as forceful! So many great books, so little time…

  23. gk4ca says:

    Like #1 above, …just sat there ALL SHRILL and STRIDENT …. genius!

    Answering about moslems: same as xtians who refer everything to god’s goodness, moslems also say everything is inshalah (= god willing).
    I think those are prerequisites for semitic religions … :D

  24. Alice says:

    Great! – For what they say doesn’t exist
    Atheists become very pissed
    Their missionary zeal
    Has cash donation appeal
    Much like the religions they’ve dissed.

  25. louis14 says:

    “For what they say doesn’t exist
    Atheists become very pissed
    Their missionary zeal
    Has cash donation appeal
    Much like the religions they’ve dissed.”

    Nassar – so much nonsense in such a small number of words. Congratulations!

Comment¬

NOTE: This comments section is provided as a safe place for readers of J&M to talk, to exchange jokes and ideas, to engage in profound philosophical discussion, and to ridicule the sincerely held beliefs of millions. As such, comments of a racist, sexist or homophobic nature will not be tolerated.

If you are posting for the first time, or you change your username and/or email, your comment will be held in moderation until approval. When your first comment is approved, subsequent comments will be published automatically.