Religulous

[Blunc]

the movie didn't get around to Hinduism nor Buddhism. there probly was no time to address the "less violent" and/or notorious religions.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Crono

Originally posted by: Arcadio
Oh... I just found this thread. Sorry to all for the repost... Sorry everyone. I will now proceed to read some of your posts in this thread. Thanks to the mod who locked the other thread.

I wrote a response to your thread, but it was locked before it could be posted. So here it is:

Because atheism inspires some to extremism - just like it does for some religious people. The core reason for this is, regardless of the belief (or disbelief, if you wish, though atheism really is a belief not the absence of), is that extremists are arrogant but also insecure and fearful. All people confident and secure in their beliefs are willing to educate others, but don't attack with mockery and/or violence. From subtle sarcasm and dripping disdain to threats and persecution, extremism is an avenue by which the darkness of the human heart is displayed.

:roll: Keep telling yourself that.

 

[AstroManLuca]

They're not trying to convert people. The film was made because Bill Maher and many other non-religious people (he has stated he's not an atheist and even that he believes in some sort of higher power, but not a personal god and not any specific religion) see religion as being a great negative force in the world, citing the seemingly endless violence and oppression done in the name of one religion or another. The movie is trying to point out areas where religion is brainwashing people and promoting violence today.

I am non-religious as well and although I share some of Maher's views, I think it's tough to really blame religion for so many of the world's problems. The blame really lies with human nature. Religion is just a convenient rationalization for evil people to use to justify their actions. There have been plenty of non-religious wars and genocides committed over the years, most notably the communist regimes of the USSR and China, but that is no more an indication of secularism leading to violence.

I do still think that people who believe they are going to heaven to meet Jesus and all that nonsense are believing in a millennias-old lie, but what business is it of mine if someone thinks that? If it gives them comfort, fine. If it empowers them to blow up a bus and kill children, then I'd say the problem lies with the person, not with the religion.

 

[Crono]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: Crono

Originally posted by: Arcadio
Oh... I just found this thread. Sorry to all for the repost... Sorry everyone. I will now proceed to read some of your posts in this thread. Thanks to the mod who locked the other thread.

I wrote a response to your thread, but it was locked before it could be posted. So here it is:

Because atheism inspires some to extremism - just like it does for some religious people. The core reason for this is, regardless of the belief (or disbelief, if you wish, though atheism really is a belief not the absence of), is that extremists are arrogant but also insecure and fearful. All people confident and secure in their beliefs are willing to educate others, but don't attack with mockery and/or violence. From subtle sarcasm and dripping disdain to threats and persecution, extremism is an avenue by which the darkness of the human heart is displayed.

:roll: Keep telling yourself that.

Ok, I will. Thanks for the constructive criticism :thumbsup:

 

[Inspector Jihad]

Originally posted by: Blunc
the movie didn't get around to Hinduism nor Buddhism. there probly was no time to address the "less violent" and/or notorious religions.

hinduism isn't any less violent than those other religions

 

[Juddog]

Article up on msn:
Religulous

There is also an interview on NPR with Bill Maher:
Fresh Air

 

[CrazyLazy]

I saw his interview on the Daily Show and the guy kind of came off as an opinionated jerk who refuses to acknowledge other peoples arguments. And I'm an atheist.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: CrazyLazy
I saw his interview on the Daily Show and the guy kind of came off as an opinionated jerk who refuses to acknowledge other peoples arguments. And I'm an atheist.

Yea, those assholes with opinions.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: CrazyLazy
I saw his interview on the Daily Show and the guy kind of came off as an opinionated jerk who refuses to acknowledge other peoples arguments. And I'm an atheist.

He's definitely an opinionated jerk, but there are no valid arguments as to the historical accuracy of biblical events. If you want to tell me Santa is real and accuse me of being a closed minded asshole because I refuse to sit and listen to you "argue", go right ahead. I think that's his position on the issue.

 

[CrazyLazy]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: CrazyLazy
I saw his interview on the Daily Show and the guy kind of came off as an opinionated jerk who refuses to acknowledge other peoples arguments. And I'm an atheist.

Yea, those assholes with opinions.

It's not that he has an opinion, one I actually mostly agree with. It's that sense of smugness and the assumption that everyone that doesn't agree with him is retarded. In the interview he just spent the whole time rehashing the same beaten point and making unfunny jokes well John Stewart gave him so pity laughs.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: Crono

Originally posted by: Arcadio
Oh... I just found this thread. Sorry to all for the repost... Sorry everyone. I will now proceed to read some of your posts in this thread. Thanks to the mod who locked the other thread.

I wrote a response to your thread, but it was locked before it could be posted. So here it is:

Because atheism inspires some to extremism - just like it does for some religious people. The core reason for this is, regardless of the belief (or disbelief, if you wish, though atheism really is a belief not the absence of), is that extremists are arrogant but also insecure and fearful. All people confident and secure in their beliefs are willing to educate others, but don't attack with mockery and/or violence. From subtle sarcasm and dripping disdain to threats and persecution, extremism is an avenue by which the darkness of the human heart is displayed.

Yeah, we're scared. Sure, let's go with that.

The only thing I'd be genuinely scared of is if the Christian God actually existed. He's shown himself to be a genocidal, devious, hypocritical, whimsical psychopath. Add infinite power to that combination, and you've got very bad news.

 

[Juddog]

The Daily Show interview was pretty entertaining. The clip of Bill Maher going off in Europe trying to pretend he was preaching Scientology was pure money.

 

[DangerAardvark]

Originally posted by: skace

Originally posted by: iamwiz82
Yes, and athiests do the same to thiests, labelling a huge group because of a small subset. In my opinion, both sides argue about something that they no proof in.

Ok, so atheists do it to theists and theists do it to atheists, so you felt left out and you did it as well?

I would think most atheists judge theists based on their teachings, sure they might joke about some stupid person, but it's the fundamental teachings that drove them away. Theists that judge atheists based on the few strong theists that argue an ultimately flawed position would be completely foolish.

Exactly. Theists (generally) have a book and all we can do is to take that book as face value. They label themselves.

 

[DangerAardvark]

BTW, he's not an Atheist:

"I'm not an atheist. There's a really big difference between an atheist and someone who just doesn't believe in religion. Religion to me is a bureaucracy between man and God that I don't need. But I'm not an atheist, no. I believe there's some force. If you want to call it God... I don't believe God is a single parent who writes books"

He's also anti-vaccination and into alternative medicine. He may throw the word "rationalist" around, but he sure doesn't practice what he preaches.

"I don't believe in vaccination either. That's a... well, that's a... what? That's another theory that I think is flawed, that we go by the Louis Pasteur theory, even though Louis Pasteur renounced it on his own deathbed and said that Beauchamp(s) was right: it's not the invading germs, it's the terrain. It's not the mosquitoes, it's the swamp that they are breeding in."

This motherfucker rejects germ theory for shit's sake.

 

[thepd7]

Originally posted by: Juddog

Originally posted by: thepd7

Originally posted by: Juddog
Well I personally have had several visits, people coming to my house to "save" me, by using their special book. I have never had an atheist show up one day on a bicycle trying to push a book about atheism on me.

did they call you stupid for not believing? Maybe an idiot? Just curious, because that's what I see a lot on the forums going the other way. I mean, it's happened a few times in this thread already.

Last time this happened, I was listening to death metal in my apartment just by myself, blasting it loudly. I hear the doorbell ring, and go to answer the door wearing a White Zombie T-shirt (the back says "die fvcker die"), when I see who it is, it was two guys on bicycle going door to door with their jesus juice trying to convince me to join up with their church. I opened the door and debated with them about the futility of their actions for about 20 minutes until they left.

Of course it probably didn't help that I had Norwegian black metal playing in the background at loud volume.

Did they call you stupid?

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Dumac

Originally posted by: thepd7

Originally posted by: Juddog
Well I personally have had several visits, people coming to my house to "save" me, by using their special book. I have never had an atheist show up one day on a bicycle trying to push a book about atheism on me.

did they call you stupid for not believing? Maybe an idiot? Just curious, because that's what I see a lot on the forums going the other way. I mean, it's happened a few times in this thread already.

It's all about population. The population of this forum commands that there at least be a few pushy atheists, while the populations of most physical communities do not.

There is also the failure to properly interpret what exactly is being called idiotic. It's not so much someone's mere belief in god that gets attacked, though some few extreme athiests may go this far. Since god can't be proven one way or the other, criticizing someone for simply taking one side or the other on the question should not, and generally is not, the focal point of attack.

It's what I posted previously, namely that when one doesn't simply believe in god, but creates or participates in a ritualized lifestyle replete with dietary restrictions, allowances on which persons one is permitted to have sex with, and the forming and stubborn defense of nonsensical conclusions about reality which are contrary to established scientific consensus, all BECAUSE of the belief. That is what I find idiotic. Not the belief in god, but the strict adherence to religious principles that are based on such belief.

And that is what the movie looks like it is about.

So it's ok for someone to believe something but not apply it to their life? I would argue that it's silly for a person who believes to NOT change their life based on that belief. What is faith if nothing changes because of it?

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: Arcadio
Oh... I just found this thread. Sorry to all for the repost... Sorry everyone. I will now proceed to read some of your posts in this thread. Thanks to the mod who locked the other thread.

To address your post in that thread, being a religious Christian, you have no idea of how much Christianity is shoved in everybody's face on a regular basis. People here like to complain about atheists, but their output isn't even a drop in the bucket compared to what non-Christians endure.

Please, explain. Has anyone ever said you were stupid for not being a Christian?

I am not trying to claim that Christians in the US are persecuted, that term is reserved for people who are beaten, thrown in jail, or die for their faith. But in academia and middle class+ it's very "uncool" to be religious. I have heard many athiests compalin about living in a Christian society but I don't understand how they are affected. Please give me some specific examples of ways this has negatively affected your life or how you have been harmed in any way for being an athiest. I am not being sarcastic rather genuinely trying to understand what you mean.

 

[GeneValgene]

Originally posted by: Jeff7

Originally posted by: RapidSnail
Question: Do those of you who loved Carlin also love Maher? They both sort of have a similar cynicism and position on many topics.

I like Carlin more. Something about Carlin's style is just more, oh, I don't know, "likable."

agree here...i like carlin. something about maher just rubs me the wrong way - seems cocky and condescending, even in topics he's not so knowledgeable about

 

[DangerAardvark]

Originally posted by: GeneValgene

Originally posted by: Jeff7

Originally posted by: RapidSnail
Question: Do those of you who loved Carlin also love Maher? They both sort of have a similar cynicism and position on many topics.

I like Carlin more. Something about Carlin's style is just more, oh, I don't know, "likable."

agree here...i like carlin. something about maher just rubs me the wrong way - seems cocky and condescending, even in topics he's not so knowledgeable about

Maher's earlier stand-up specials were much better than his last two.

 

[shoRunner]

Originally posted by: TehMac
Bill Maher is a talking mouth that's real function corresponds with the anus on most humans.

he's a douche nozzle plain and simple

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: GeneValgene

Originally posted by: Jeff7

Originally posted by: RapidSnail
Question: Do those of you who loved Carlin also love Maher? They both sort of have a similar cynicism and position on many topics.

I like Carlin more. Something about Carlin's style is just more, oh, I don't know, "likable."

agree here...i like carlin. something about maher just rubs me the wrong way - seems cocky and condescending, even in topics he's not so knowledgeable about

And now learning that Maher is a bit psycho about vaccinations and modern medicine.....maybe he did a bit more than the wacky tobaccy.

 

[AstroManLuca]

Originally posted by: Jeff7

Originally posted by: GeneValgene

Originally posted by: Jeff7

Originally posted by: RapidSnail
Question: Do those of you who loved Carlin also love Maher? They both sort of have a similar cynicism and position on many topics.

I like Carlin more. Something about Carlin's style is just more, oh, I don't know, "likable."

agree here...i like carlin. something about maher just rubs me the wrong way - seems cocky and condescending, even in topics he's not so knowledgeable about

And now learning that Maher is a bit psycho about vaccinations and modern medicine.....maybe he did a bit more than the wacky tobaccy.

Another funny fact: Bill Maher is on PETA's board of directors. He says he's not a vegetarian, but it seems he makes up for his rationality in certain areas with irrationality in others.

Especially given his views that run counter to most of the scientific community regarding disease, it seems he's simply replacing one kind of irrationality with another.

And I definitely liked Carlin more. He was able to say the same things as Maher without coming across as a self-important dickhead. While I often find myself agreeing with Maher, I also think he's a bit overzealous, which is just what I dislike the most about religion in the first place, and I don't think he's very funny.

 

[rise]

why even waste peoples time?

those who believe will continue to believe, those that don't i guess may get a laugh.

funnay though they ran out of time/money (yeah right) to address hinduism and buddhism.

the guy is a joke.

edit- btw, i think he's entirely unfunny. his radical peta beliefs aside, he just comes across as an asshole.

 

[johnjohn320]

Originally posted by: RapidSnail

Originally posted by: QED

Originally posted by: RapidSnail
Question: Do those of you who loved Carlin also love Maher? They both sort of have a similar cynicism and position on many topics.

More honestly, it's not that Carlin and Maher share a lot of position on topics as much as it is Maher has coopted (borrowed, stolen, whatever word you want to use) Carlin's ideas for his own.

I honestly thought the same thing. I "discovered" both of them around the same time, and it seems like they are both taking from the same script. Maher appears to want to follow in Carlin's footsteps.

Right, because it's impossible for more than one person to share the same opinion or tell jokes about similar topics.

Hey, I heard there are these comedians who have made jokes about relationships. I mean, at around the same time, they both pointed out humorous observations about the differences between married life and single life! Clearly one copied the other. :roll:

 

[Nightfall]

First off, I am not a huge Bill Maher fan. I have watched his real time show on HBO here and there and its entertaining. However, his atheist rants on just about every show is pretty annoying. I wish he would just use the panel to talk about issues in the election and less about religion. It seems that he has an agenda against it.

Bill Maher is someone I would define as a pushy atheist. He is not as bad as Pat Robertson or some other religious figure on TV preaching the bible and saying New Orleans deserved to be flooded because of godlessness. However, for the 20 minutes or so every other episode, he goes into one of these rants against religion that is really not called for.

I am going to see this movie eventually thats for sure. I am an agnostic, but I would like to see the movie before I judge it.

 

[StevenYoo]

i definitely have to go see this

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: AstroManLuca
Another funny fact: Bill Maher is on PETA's board of directors. He says he's not a vegetarian, but it seems he makes up for his rationality in certain areas with irrationality in others.

Especially given his views that run counter to most of the scientific community regarding disease, it seems he's simply replacing one kind of irrationality with another.

And I definitely liked Carlin more. He was able to say the same things as Maher without coming across as a self-important dickhead. While I often find myself agreeing with Maher, I also think he's a bit overzealous, which is just what I dislike the most about religion in the first place, and I don't think he's very funny.

It's a shame that PETA's got so many nutjobs. Ethical treatment of animals sounds fine. Yes, some are going to be killed for meat. Fine, let's at least give them a decent life, and not one of constant torture. We could stand to at least show a little bit of benevolence in exchange for the animals' unsuspecting sacrifice.


Too bad HBO doesn't have much Carlin on.
HBO2 had a lot of his shows on after he died, but of course, I don't get that channel - that was the first time I'd even heard of the existence of HBO2.