Hi all, I am an atheist who does not support contemporary left wing ideology and politics anymore. I am treated as tho you can't be an atheist if you are not leftist first.
Is this a common view amongst atheist now?
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
Yeah... it is pretty common now.. I seem to remember reading somewhere that only about 14% or thereabouts of atheists consider themselves to be conservatives. That may be wrong, but probably not by much. I only found this forum because I was looking something up and Googled "conservative atheism" and there was a link to a thread here titled "How can atheists be conservative in America?". The whole thing was so ridiculous it simply demanded a response...
Just remember; there are more benefits to being a wolf among sheep than there are being one of the sheep... ;)
Thank not god I am not alone.
I put a higher priority on a search for truth above adherence to a pet philosophy or ideology.
I am still trying to get the connection between not holding a belief in god and being a cookie cutter leftist.
I don't pray that the atheist community doesn't become just another leftist platform .
@Terminal Dogma
I certainly lean to the right as well. There is nothing wrong with a country deciding who can and can not live in it. If you are in the country illegally, you are a criminal. It really is just that simple. If you want to stay, apply for citizenship or a visa. How frigging hard is that? I am living in Korea now and they will kick me out in two years. I am currently looking at getting a "Resident Visa." I qualify as I have been in the country for more than 5 years. It just means I can stay here if I like without a job. "Currently I am on a work visa." I will fly to Macau in two months, I have to have a visa. From there I will go to the Philippines. I have to have a visa. Then I will return to Korea, I have to have a visa. To get back into the USA I will need to show my Passport.
I love the new legislation Trump is pushing. If you do not have anything to offer the USA, we just don't need you. Australia has done that for years and I am in complete agreement with it.
Where we part company is the whole RELIGION IN AMERICA BS. Trump pretending to be religious to get votes if Fking Ridiculous. It demonstrates just how ignorant the American Population actually is. That, along with the Left's ideas of PC, safe spaces, and extreme limits on the first amendment, drive me nuts.
It seems apparent to my eyes that the left don't love immigrants so much as they hate themselves. Funny but not funny thing is the the majority immigrants coming in human waves to Europe are culturally predisposed to victimise the left most brutally.
Yeah that was a neat trick trump did getting the Christian vote, people say he's not smart..he is the POTUS ie the most powerful man on earth...arguably.
The sheer brilliance, Christians installed prolly the first atheist prez....just brilliant.
If the guy pulls off off this NK thing he is worthy of a Nobel peace prize legit.
I think the most constructive comment on this subject is 'most people are fiscally conservative and socially liberal'. Far too much is made of left/right and of ideology. What matters is policies on issues and balance of arguments. There is far too much party allegiance and too little success in identifying the main issues for voters and the policies that can be sold to them.
There is also too much cynicism about politicians. Honest politicians like Hillary Clinton are seen as criminals while obvious egotists like Trump are favoured because they are seen as 'strong' or 'successful' instead of foolish and ignorant. Too little effort to understand the issues correctly and get facts right.
I think it always a mistake to elect egotists or criminals.
"Honest politicians like Hillary Clinton..."
You should send that in to Readers Digest. They have a whole page for people like you called "Laughter is the Best Medicine"...
(I got home and realized that I just blatantly ripped that line off from Douglas Adams... So, props to The Man!)
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA ROFLMAO ...... You need a gig at a comedy club! Great JOKE "Honest politicians like Hillary Clinton are seen as criminals" I will give you credit when I repeat it 3 times and then I am claiming it for my own.
Attachments
Attach Image/Video?:
Deriding honest people and considering them as criminal is no laughing matter and will have real consequences for our societies. Politicians in Western Democracies are representative of and generally reflect the opinions and character of the people who elect them.
The real ideologues we need to be worried about and whose actions deserve further scrutiny are the Putins, Xi's and Assads of the world. Undue contempt for western politicians won't help anything but may tend to undermine our democracies.
Z,effD I think Putin is a great leader, would vote for him if I could. Assad is a hero for fighting isis, the west owes him a lot. Xi who?
Thanks for your reply Terminal D.
Xi Jinping is the Chinese leader whose goons kidnap people when they try to stand up for democracy, which isn't permitted in China (by Xi), Russia (by Putin who has murdered and intimidated journalists) or in Syria (by Assad who isn't only fighting Da'esh (ISIS) but also the free Syrian Army and all opposition groups whether secular, democratic, Islamic or otherwise. There is strong suspicion that he has used poison gas on children or has countenenced its use by one of his allies. People may be partly understood by the company they keep.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xi_Jinping
Sky News (Murdoch owned) is hardly left-wing...
https://news.sky.com/story/the-putin-critics-who-have-been-assassinated-...
This is interesting too...
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2018/04/25/north-koreas-nuclear-site-collap...
Although a Fox News item the substance of it largely correlates with more respected news outlets. Only China has substantial leverage over N Korea and Kim (of N Korea) met Xi recently. There appears to be a risk to Chinese territory from fallout from the N Korean site so the changing tone of Kim regarding nuclear testing recently is likely due to Chinese pressure.
(It is alleged that the idea that the Moon landings were faked stems from a Fox News goof in 2010...
https://www.universetoday.com/111188/how-do-we-know-the-moon-landing-isn...
More than 10 years ago, Fox popularized the Moon landing conspiracy with a show called “Did We Land On The Moon?”. They revealed several pieces of evidence about the hoax and cover-up citing incorrect shadows on the Moon, lack of background stars, and more. ..)
The idea that the news landings were faked was popular long before FOX even existed.
- In 1976 there was a book named We Never Went to the Moon: America's Thirty Billion Dollar Swindle, by Bill Kaysing, started an avalanche of books and films that made the conspiracy theory mainstream.
- In 1980 the Flat Earth Society was accusing Stanley Kubrick of faking the whole thing in a Disney Studio.
- A Man on the Moon, written by Andrew Chaikin in 1994, claimed that at the time of Apollo 8's lunar-orbit mission in December 1968 there was already talk that NASA was filming a fake moon landing.
I realize that you're liberal hack. That was pretty obvious when you claimed that Hillary Clinton was honest. Clearly, you'll believe anything bad someone says about FOX, and if I were a betting man I'd put a dollar down that the same is true for Donald Trump, conservatism, capitalism, and the military too. Unfortunately, whatever else may be true in the article you linked, it's clearly written by another liberal hack with an ax to grind against FOX.
The FOX networks didn't exist until 1996, (30 years or so after the moon landing) and there has always been a distinction between FOX and FOX News. When FOX aired their show in 2001 it was probably because they needed the ratings, just like ABC, CBS, NBC, and every cable company in the 80's and 90's made "documentaries" about Bigfoot, The Loch Ness Monster, and alien abductions.
As for your "more respected news outlets, though... You might want to look into the b.s. your "more respected news outlets" are slinging with a more critical eye sometime, though. Just cutting and pasting crap from the same articles you post links to blaming FOX for something that just a few minutes research can disprove is just more evidence that you don't care for intellectual honesty as much as you care for being able to discredit conservatism somehow.
- CNN aired a fake report during the Gulf War.
- For Halloween one year ABC posted a story online about whether the story behind the Amityville Horror was true or not which included this line: "So in the end, who is telling the truth? After nearly three decades, there is very little proof either way". ( That's no different than FOX News airing a story on the moon landing conspiracy theories and ending it with "We report. You decide", btw... )
- 60 Minutes aired a six-part story based on a hoax about President Bush in 2004.
- Brian Williams from MSNBC borrowed a page from Lying Hillary's book and lied about being under fire to make a news story sound more exciting.
- In another example of MSNBC dumbfuckery Rachael Maddow edited an hour long video and tried to pass it off as unedited in an effort to protect ACORN from the O'Keefe expose.
Except for MSNBC, ( I'm pretty sure MSNBC sources most of it's news from The Onion. ) every other news station tries to get the news right as often as they can, but every one of them has screwed the pooch at some time or another. Each station reports the news that their audience is interested in, and they stress the parts of widely covered stories that are relevant to their viewers which is largely why liberals and conservatives have opposing views on most issues. That's how news agencies stay in business. So, just know that a lot of people who have plenty of reasons to think whoever you're getting your news from is full of shit too... And they would be just as wrong as you are.
I pretty isolationist when it comes to imposing one nations values on another thru war or even sanctions.
No matter who is in power some groups will benefit others will suffer, the left seem to think they possess superior policies and expect the world to adopt them.
Humanity is just competing groups of violent tribes, always was, always will be.
The left are eating themselves.
Mak wrote: "As for your "more respected news outlets, though... You might want to look into the b.s. your "more respected news outlets" are slinging with a more critical eye sometime, though. Just cutting and pasting crap from the same articles you post links to blaming FOX for something that just a few minutes research can disprove is just more evidence that you don't care for intellectual honesty as much as you care for being able to discredit conservatism somehow."
And calls me a "liberal hack" and thinks Ms Clinton dishonest. "I realize that you're liberal hack. That was pretty obvious when you claimed that Hillary Clinton was honest."
All that speaks for itself. I see myself as a British conservative (small c).
I was vaguely aware that that conspiracy theory existed before the Fox item, but I think the allegation that it was the reach of Fox that made it taken seriously by so many is probably significant.
There seems to be so many extreme views here and such nonsense (such as "the West should be grateful to Putin"). I wonder how much is genuine opinion and how much is just trolling, but given the election of such a dimwitted egotist as POTUS, I suppose the views expressed are genuine. We in democracies seem to have far more to worry about than the superstitious.