Why do atheist eat babies?

[Jeremiah]

Are religious/philosophical labels more trouble then they are worth? Do we typically pay more attention to the label rather then the person behind it?

Also, what are they good for?

 

[Renji]

Are religious/philosophical labels more trouble then they are worth? Do we typically pay more attention to the label rather then the person behind it?

Also, what are they good for?

Gee, don't eat me, I'm still a kid! lol

 

[Kerr]

Gee, don't eat me, I'm still a kid! lol

But I am hungry!

 

[Azakel]

Are religious/philosophical labels more trouble then they are worth?

Sometimes I think there are, other time maybe not so much.

Do we typically pay more attention to the label rather then the person behind it?

I think so. Sometime we seem to get so caught in stereotypes that we don't remember to look at someone has an individual.

Also, what are they good for?

Sometimes labels are need to better understand something. But they can also be so vague.

 

[Amhairghine]

Many labels make no sense. Atheism is one of them. It means nothing. It identifies a person for what the person does NOT believe.

A-without and theism-believe in a god, God, or gods.

I am a Non-Theists, I don't have a believe in any gods. That means I am called an Atheists.

Atheism can be relative, not all label are absolute and all inclusive.

Christian Fundamentalists are Atheists. The do not believe in Zeus, Ahura Mazda, Brahma, Jupiter, Aed Alainn, Dagda, Thor, Odin, Quetzlcoatl, Atum, Aten, Shiva, Lugh, Crom Cruach, Baldur, Mithra, etc.

Christian Fundies do not believe in 999 of the 1000 named historical gods. I differ in that I do not believe in one more god thant the Fundy.

The labels are silly. They should tell what one does believe in.

I believe in a Naturalistic Univers of Energy (some clumped together to be called Matter). I believe it can be in various forms. It can be gas clouds, nebulae, galaxies, stars, planets, comets, asteroids, black holes, gamma energy bursts, stars can explode in nova's and supernovas. Energy can undergo mergers and mergers to form matter that can combine to form stars, planets, compounds, reproducing compunds -> life -> Bacterial Groups such as Bacteroides, Cyanobacteria (Blue-green bacteria), Flavobacteria, Gram-positive Bacteria, Green Nonsulfur Bacteria, Green Sulfur Bacteria, Purple Bacteria, Spirochaetes, Thermatogales, Metazoan Phyla (the animals), Cnidaria (corals, jellyfish, Hydra), Conulariida, Ctenophora (comb jellies),

DEUTEROSTOMIA (deuterostomes)
---Echinodermata (starfish, sea urchins, sea cucumbers, etc.)
---Hemichordata (acorn worms, graptolites)
---Chordata

Cephalochordata (lancelets)

Myxini (hagfish)

Urochordata (tunicates, sea squirts)

VERTEBRATA (Vertebrates)

ECDYSOZOA (molting animals)
---Arthropoda (crabs, spiders, insects, etc.)

Anomalocarida

Cheliceramorpha (chelicerates & kin)

Crustaceamorpha (crustaceans)

Pycnogonida (sea spiders)

Trilobita (trilobites)

Uniramia (insects & kin)

---Cephaloryncha (kinorhynchs & priapulids)
---Nematoda (roundworms)
---Nematomorpha (horsehair worms)
---Onychophora (velvet worms)
---Tardigrada (water bears)

LOPHOTROCHOZOA (worms, molluscs, & lophophorates)
---Annelida (segmented worms)
---Brachiopoda (lamp shells)
---Bryozoa ("moss animals")
---Echiura (spoon worms)
---Entoprocta
---Mollusca (snails, clams, squid, etc.)
---Nemertini (ribbon worms)
---Phoronida (horseshoe worms)
---Pogonophora (bearded tube worms)
---Sipuncula (peanut worms)

Placozoa (the most simple animals known)

Platyhelminthes (flatworms)

Porifera (sponges)

Rotifera (rotifers) & Acanthocephala

Vendian Animals (the First animals)

This sums up my belief. Don't define me by what I do not believe. I define mythology and superstition believers by what they believe. I define Christians not on the word Christ. I define them as Indo-European Trinity Pagans who believe in a virgin born god-man who died and resurrrected. The word Christian means nothing because it just means annointed belief. Rubbish.

I posted this not because each name was on the tip of my tongue. I did look them up. It is to show the great compexity of all life, plant/animal/protista/ and other. They obviously evolved to millions of different conditions and continue to evolve. It makes me amazed that human beings in the 21st Century are still so retrogressive as to believe in Biblical faerie tales that clearly do not make sense even if one does not know science.

It is more shocking that humans in this world today with all of the information available still believe in Genesis Rubbish.

Amhairghine

 

[linwood]

I came in here hoping their would be some good recipes.

 

[Papersock]

Are religious/philosophical labels more trouble then they are worth?

Possibly. If you don't want people to assume other things about you that might not be true based on a label. Although they can be useful to quickly explain your religious or philosophical views.

Do we typically pay more attention to the label rather then the person behind it?

Some people might. But some people realize that religious views are different for each individual.

Also, what are they good for?

As I said, they can be useful for quickly explaining your religious or philosophical views. If your views do not match any existing label, then they are probably not very useful.

 

[MSizer]

Yes, I agree that we place far too much weight on labels than we should. It's built into our psychology, just like we tend to attribute vices and virtues to individuals, when in fact evidence has proven again and again that to do this is to oversimplify a person.

 

[WhoKnows777]

They don't eat babies. They don't believe in them.:yes:

 

[3.14]

because were not hungry enough to eat adults, and baby's fit in my oven

 

[GiantHouseKey]

Are religious/philosophical labels more trouble then they are worth? Do we typically pay more attention to the label rather then the person behind it?

Depends on the label I suppose.

If somebody is labelled as 'Atheist', in most situations I treat them the same as 'Monotheist'. In religious situations then I feel the terms are important in helping to establish what somebody believes. If somebody says they are an atheist, it should be noted that they don't all believe the same thing, as also applies to every other label

If somebody is labelled 'Klu Klux Klan' or 'Neo-Nazi' or 'Fundementalist Terrorist'... That's when I start treating them differently.

GhK.

 

[3.14]

this is how labels work

species?
gender?
family?
relation?
apperance?
actions?
personality?

now lets say your on a bus next to some stranger:

species= human
gender=male
family= no
relation= no
apperance= shabby
actions= sitting reading
personality=no

so your sitting next to "some shabby guy who's reading something"

 

[Papersock]

Ah, everything is a label. :yes:

 

[Jeremiah]

Ah, everything is a label. :yes:

And a label is a label for a label.

 

[Standup Philosopher]

Lables are mental energy saving devices or mental laziness, depending on your view, but they are here to stay. The best we can do is be aware that they are not completely accurate; and that we all use them all day long.

 

[blackout]

Why do atheist eat babies?

Because the christians are too dry.:yes:









(you know... like turkey... )

 

[dogsgod]

We eat our young because adults taste like mutton.

 

[Renji]

But I am hungry!

Eat somebody else

 

[TheKnight]

1. Yes we do look at the label rather than the person. Why? Because a label implies certain things about its wearer. If I am going to adopt a label for myself, then I also adopt all the positive and negative connotations that come with that label.

2. It's not wrong to judge a person based on the labels the wear, so long as we are open to the fact that they may not necessarily fit all the positive or negative connotations with that label.

 

[Father Heathen]

We eat babies to replenish vital nutrients and to prevent overpopulation and the depletion of resources.