Meme Cards

Anyone that follows me on Twitter (@Atheist_Eh) knows I debate theists a lot.  I found I was often typing essentially the same tweets in response to the same arguments from various theists. I started creating what I refer to as "Meme Cards" to capture these standard responses. Since then I've used it to capture some of my counter-apologetic thoughts. Here's all the Meme Cards I've made to date in no particular order.

Feel free to use them anytime you wish, I just ask you leave the credit in take (no cutting off my name, please).

Guest Meme Cards

On a few occasions I have turned other people's tweets into meme cards or worked in collaboration on an idea:

Why I debate theists on Twitter

The Let's just get this out of the way—I debate theists on Twitter a lot. A LOT. Anyone that follows me on Twitter (@Atheist_Eh) knows this. Not just theists though, I've debated atheists on subjects before too, which I always enjoy. Point is, I debate on Twitter a lot.

With that said, I often get commended by both atheists & theists for the way I conduct myself during these debates. I try to remain calm & polite, even in the face of absurdities, insults & obvious trolls. I don't always succeed, but obviously I don't fail often enough for it to affect people's opinion of me. 

I admit that I take some measure of pride in the way I go about being a "Twitter atheist".

None of this answers why I debate theists though, not sure why I mentioned it, other than setting the stage perhaps. Ah well, here's the meat of this post:

Many probably assume I'm trying to "convert" the person I'm debating to atheism. This is not the case at all. I don't suffer from any grand delusion that I am likely to convince my debate opponent to suddenly see my side & instantly declare themselves atheist. I'd actually be dumbfounded if that ever happened. I do hold some hope that they might go away with a few things to think about—that I may have successfully planted a couple "thought seeds" that might, over time, grow & develop.

Still, this small hope of planting "thought seeds" in my debate opponent is by no means the main reason behind my prolific debating habits. My true target is the audience; especially any theists that might read my debates. While a person is actively involved in a debate, it's difficult to truly absorb the other persons points as they are typically focused on how to counter the last point (or at least how to dodge, deflect or avoid a point).  This isn't the case with the audience. They are detached from the heat of the debate and in a better position to consider the more nuanced aspects of the points being made by both sides. It is far easier to plant "thought seeds" in the audiences minds because of this & so there is a greater chance of them going away with a modified point of view or some new ideas to research & think on. 

The audience is also an important reason I strive to remain calm, polite & rational. To me, when I watch a debate & I see someone responding angrily, or abusivly, they instantly lose some credibility with me. This is doubly so when their opponent responds with calmnes. I'm more inclined to listen to a calm person than an angry one & so I try not to be the angry one.

I'm aware of the "different strokes for different folks" philosophy that says no one debate tactic will reach every audience member, so I'm not trying to claim my style is the best style, only that it is the style I prefer because it resonates with me; based on the number of compliments I get, it seems to resonate with a lot of the audience too.

This means that a actually like it when my debate opponent starts getting irrational & presents crazy assertions. It makes my job easier since it ends up contrasting so sharply with what I try to make a calm, polite response. In those cases, I like to think that I appear to be the saner & more rational one & thus viewed as more credible with my arguments more worthy of deeper consideration. 

The last reason I debate a lot is simple—I just flat out enjoy it. I find it mentally stimulating & the subject of religion fascinates me. It's such a free-for-all subject where literally any assertion can be made, so you have to be ready for some odd assertions at times, which keeps you on your logical toes.

Some people spend their spare time watching "Honey Boo Boo", I spend mine debating people about subjects that I feel have some actual meaning in our world.

So what do I hope to achieve? What's my end game? There's s few.

1) I do hope I can help theists break the yoke of religious dogma. I honestly feel that society would be better off if Religion died a natural death by Education. While it won't solve all of humanity's problems, it will remove one reason for people to hate each other. There are also some unique atrocities that require Religious motivation, such as blasphemy laws, killing "demon possessed" people, killing apostates & child indoctrination to name a few. With that said, I will fight against any calls to ban religion. Thought policing is impossible & immoral.

I'm aware some find great comfort in religion much like, in my opinion, a child does from their Special blankie or teddy bear. I am NOT looking to rob anyone of their Religious security blanket or emotional crutch. Sounds harsh to describe it that way, but that's ultimately how I see religion. As such, I generally do not seek out theists on Twitter just as I don't seek them out in real life to debate. However, if a theist is re-tweeted into my Timeline, tweets me first or if they tweet about atheism, I have no qualms engaging with them.  The same is true if people in real life choose to bring up religion—I will tell them my honest thoughts.

2) I hope to be a good ambassador for atheism to help support #1 by showing theists that their stereotypes are wrong & you can be good without God.  

3) Related to #2, I also wish to be a good role model for other atheists, especially the younger ones. Civility seems to be underrated in today's cyber-society.

4) I hope to teach other atheists some of the compelling reasons why I feel the gods don't exist. Perhaps change a few "lack of belief" atheists into full on "Creationist" Atheists.

Answers to "Questions for atheists" by Matt Slick

I came across this blog entry by Matt Slick, posing 31 questions to atheists. I thought I'd take a shot at answering them.

1) How would you define atheism?

Answer:

2) Do you act according to what you believe (there is no God) in or what you don't believe in (lack belief in God)?

Answer: Of course I act like there is no god. Please note the question is poorly formed as it strongly implies all atheists believe god doesn't exist. Most simply don't believe the god claim.

3) Do you think it is inconsistent for someone who "lacks belief" in God to work against God's existence by attempting to show that God doesn't exist?

Answer: Not at all. It's really the various fan clubs of the gods that atheists are working against by showing god doesn't exist.  

4) How sure are you that your atheism properly represents reality?

Answer: Very. Nothing logical or empirical to support theism, lots of logical & empirical to support atheism. The probability of atheism being true is so much higher than theism it seems like a safe bet. Like betting the Yankees will beat a Little League team.

5) How sure are you that your atheism is correct?

Answer: See #4.

6) How would you define what truth is?

Answer: 

7) Why do you believe your atheism is a justifiable position to hold?

Answer: See # 4

8) Are you a materialist or a physicalist or what?

Answer: First I'd suggest using citations from outside your own website:

Materialism

Physicalism

To answer, these positions are so similar & are often used interchangeably. I currently hold to both positions but if convincing evidence were provided to show them to be false, I would change my mind without issue.

9) Do you affirm or deny that atheism is a worldview?  Why or why not?

Answer: Deny. Atheism is a view on one subject only…gods existence. While my atheism does affect my worldview, it is not, in itself, a worldview.

10) Not all atheists are antagonistic to Christianity but for those of you who are, why the antagonism?

Answer: The antagonistic ones are typically also anti-theists. Don't conflate the 2 positions. 

In my experience, they/we are antagonistic in response to what they/we see as hypocritical & harmful behaviour from Religious people (it's not just Christians).  It's like asking why a Civil Rights protestor is antagonistic to a racist.

11) If you were at one times a believer in the Christian God, what caused you to deny his existence?

Answer: I was raised in a Christian home, but I'd be hard-pressed to ever say I was a Christian. From the age of reason onward I have questioned the validity of Christianity.  At best, I was once a deist, or perhaps the catch all, new-agey "Spiritual, not Religious" view that I now see as just a "moving the goal posts fallacy.

12) Do you believe the world would be better off without religion?

Answer: In general yes. Would the world be perfect? No. Humans, as a race, are assholes & have many reasons beyond religion to kill each other over.  Removing Religion would however, remove one of the biggest reasons.  No, I don't support banning religion.

13) Do you believe the world would be better off without Christianity?

Answer: See # 12.

14) Do you believe that faith in a God or gods is a mental disorder?

Answer: No. Although many are indoctrinated or brainwashed to believe & that is a form of mental disorder. 

15) Must God be known through the scientific method?

Answer: The scientific method is currently the best method we have for validating a hypothesis & "god" is just another hypothesis in my opinion. 

See also If religion were science experiment

16) If you answered yes to the previous question, then how do you avoid a category mistake by requiring material evidence for an immaterial God?

Answer: I don't see this as a mistake. See # 8. There is no reason to believe anything immaterial exists beyond the claims of theists.

17) Do we have any purpose as human beings?

Answer: Your purpose is what you make of it. 

18) If we do have purpose, can you as an atheist please explain how that purpose is determined?

Answer: My purpose has been different at various points of my life. Currently it is trying to raise my 4 amazing children to be good people with or without a god in their lives. It'll be their choice, especially since their mom, my fantastic wife, is Catholic. 

19) Where does morality come from?

Answer: Empathy & social evolution.

20) Are there moral absolutes?

Answer: Yes

21) If there are moral absolutes, could you list a few of them?

Answer:

• Don't cause suffering.
• Reduce suffering whenever possible

Some specifics:

• Don't murder.
• Don't rape.
• Humans are not possessions (No slavery)

22) Do you believe there is such a thing as evil?  If so, what is it?

Answer: Not in the supernatural sense but in the poetic. Murder, rape, slavery, for example, are "evil". Intentionally causing suffering for malicious reasons.

23) If you believe that the God of the Old Testament is morally bad, by what standard do you judge that he is bad?

Answer: The god of the OT doesn't exist. The fictional character of Yahweh, described in the OT is "morally bad". See # 22; Yahweh does not object to slavery & is exceptionally soft on rape. Genocide seems acceptable to him as well (See the Great Flood, plus commandments to kill all men, women & children of rival tribes.

24) What would it take for you to believe in God?

Answer: Evidence. I still wouldn't worship if it turned out to be Yahweh/Allah.

See also http://atheisteh.blogspot.com/2014/08/threshold-of-proof.html

25) What would constitute sufficient evidence for God’s existence?

Answer: 

• Perhaps if he'd stamped his name on our DNA like humans did when we created artificial DNA. 
• Clear, undeniable & well documented miracles.
• Show himself.
• If the Aztecs had been found to have essentially the same beliefs as the Judeo-Christian's it would have gone a long way in proving Yahweh. Why wouldn't he reveal himself to more than one small tribe in the Middle East?

26) Must this evidence be rationally based, archaeological, testable in a lab, etc., or what?

Answer: Yes. Why would I believe irrational, non testable, non falsifiable evidence? There's a word for that…faith.

27) Do you think that a society that is run by Christians or atheists would be safer?  Why?

Answer: Atheists come in all types, good & bad, as it's not a worldview (See #6), so a society run by Secular Humanist atheists would be best.  We've seen what societies run by Christians look like, I think it's worth seeing if Secular Humanists could do a better job.

28) Do you believe in free will?  (free will being the ability to make choices without coercion). 

Answer: I believe we have, as a minimum, the illusion of free will. Whether we actually do, is a debatable subject.

29) If you believe in free will, do you see any problem with defending the idea that the physical brain, which is limited and subject to the neuro-chemical laws of the brain, can still produce free will choices?

Answer: This is exactly why freewill is a debatable topic.

30) If you affirm evolution and that the universe will continue to expand forever, then do you think it is probable that given enough time, brains would evolve to the point of exceeding mere physical limitations and become free of the physical and temporal and thereby become "deity" and not be restricted by space and time?  If not, why not? 

Answer: It's impossible to predict where evolution will take humanity. However, since we've never seen anything be free of the physical or temporal, there is no reason to think humans will ever evolve past them. 

31) If you answered the previous question in the affirmative, then aren't you saying that it is probable that some sort of God exist?

Answer: I didn't answer yes, but let's pretend I did for the sake of argument. Simply being free of the physical & temporal would not make us deities, just different than we are now.

Even still, admitting that some kind of deity may exist, does not automatically mean that the Judeo-Christian god exists or might possibly exist. The Judeo-Christian god has very specific properties, attributes, character traits & stories attributed to it in the bible which can be used to show exactly why the Judeo-Christian god does not exist. 

Too many theists have tried to adopt the arguments of a Deist & it just doesn't work.