According to an article written by Mathew Archbold that was published on the National
Catholic Register on the 21st of May, 2017, “atheism is uncoolest choice ever”, and
he can prove it!
Get your popcorn kids, because this guy’s gone full-retard…
This, is Atheism is the Uncoolest Choice Ever – Debunked.
So, Mathew, first and foremost, and as I’ve covered in other videos, belief isn’t a
choice… something either makes sense to us, or it doesn’t.
Sure, we can expose ourselves to certain arguments and resources, and we can say that we believe
whatever we want, but we can’t wholeheartedly really believe whatever we want, because that’s
just not how belief works.
I mean try it Mathew, try to believe that the universe was created by the Twelve Olympians
– you can’t; you’ll fail.
Anyhow, now that we’ve addressed the title, let’s get to the article itself…
Number eight: “religious people live longer, happier lives, according to numerous scientific
studies.”
So unfortunately, Mathew doesn’t provide a single link to any of these numerous scientific
studies, and so to my annoyance, I’ve done his research for him.
As it turns out, countries with a very short life expectancy are significantly more religious
than countries with long life expectancy – to name but one example, Japan has a longest
life expectancy in the world, being 75 years, and only 24% of their population considers
religion important; while Samalia has a life expectancy of just 48 years, and over 98%
of their population considers religion important.
However, with this said, when we compare the life expectancy of religious and non-religious
people from the same country, there is indeed some studies that show a correlation between
religiosity and longer life expectancy, and these study speculate that this has something
to do with the community that religions tend to provide, which, considering that we’re
a social species, I’m not surprised by.
But it simply has to be stated that ‘even if it were conclusively proven that the religious
live longer than the non-religious, this wouldn’t make any religion true’; a drunk person
might be happier than a sober person, but the drunk person is still out of his mind.
Number seven: “Michelangelo and Bach (look 'em up kids!) were indisputably awesome Christian
artists.
But hey, atheists have the kid who plays Harry Potter.
Do you really don't want to be a part of any group that includes the actor formerly known
as Harry Potter.
Or maybe you do because that's how uncool you actually are.”
… I honestly can’t tell if he’s being serious at this point.
First of all, Michelangelo and Bach lived before Darwin discovered natural selection,
and that absolutely matters.
Before the discovery of natural selection it was very hard to explain how complex and
seemingly designed organisms can arise without a creator or creators, but we now know exactly
how this can occur and we have unimpeachable proof of it.
Furthermore, Michelangelo and Bach were primarily artists – and art is a passionate subject
that requires introspection and emotion – which is a type of intelligence, but it’s not
the type that develops an accurate representation of reality (that would be science).
And according to a PEW study conducted in 2009, scientists are dramatically less religious
than the general public, and another study conducted by Nature has found that less than
7% of ‘elite scientists’ are religious.
And finally, Daniel Radcliffe is a cool guy.
Number six: “Typical atheist gathering vs. World Youth Day.”
Are you kidding me?
1) even if atheist and secular gatherings were tiny compared to Christian gatherings,
this would have no bearing on the truth whatsoever.
At a time most people believed in Zeus, but that doesn’t mean that Zeus existed… this
is an opaque Appeal to Popularity.
Anyhow, two can play your dishonest game Mathew, just look at this atheist gatherings vs. this
Christian gathering.
Number five: “Most of your big time mass killers of the 20th century were atheists.
I'm talking Stalin, Mao, and Che among others.”
Mathew, did you know that these big time mass killers were also non-stamp collectors?
And that they all brushed their teeth?
Why would you want to be a non-stamp collector?
Why would you want to brush your teeth knowing that these killers also brushed theirs?
The point being is that you’re committing a Guilt by Association fallacy, a type of
red-herring which attempts to discredit something based upon disfavoured people or groups associated
with it.
What you’re essentially saying is that: Joseph Stalin was an atheist.
Stalin killed millions of people.
And therefore atheism killed millions of people.
But this is just as absurd and disingenuous as saying that: Fred Phelps was a Christian.
Phelps preached hate and picketed funerals.
And therefore Christians preach hate and picket funerals.
Find a single quote of these killers saying that they committed their crimes because of
their lack of belief in god, and then we’ll have a real conversation – until then, just
stop being so disingenuous!
Number four: “This is an extreme Christian, and this is an extreme atheist – see the
difference?”
Yeah, one is fraudulent fanatical fundamentalist, and the other is a respected scientist who
passionately defends facts and truth from fraudulent fanatical fundamentalists…
To quote Hitchens, “Mother Teresa was not a friend of the poor, she was a friend of
poverty.
She said that suffering was a gift from god.
She spent her whole life opposing the only known cure for poverty, which is the empowerment
of women and the emancipation of them from a livestock version of compulsory reproduction.”
She wasn’t a good person… because her religion stopped her from being a good person.
She is but one of countless examples of religion making otherwise decent and caring people
say and do atrocious things!
And again… even if Christianity made people nicer than non-Christians, this would not
make Christianity true.
After all, Jainists are almost certainly nicer than Christians, but that doesn’t mean that
Jainism is true.
You seriously are the king of non-sequiturs Mathew!
Number 3: “As a Christian, my wife looks at me like I'm a gift from God.
Seriously, to her that's what I am.
Your atheist girlfriend (should you ever get one after you move out of your stepdad's basement)
will see you as a gel-haired accident in skinny jeans on a lonely rock orbiting a meaningless
sun in a mistake of a universe.
See the difference?
It's kind of a big one.”
… Erh, a gift from god you say… okay, I erh…
I assume you met on April Fools?
Anyhow, me and my atheist girlfriend frequently tell each other how lucky we are to enjoy
however long we’re able to be together in this universe that most certainly doesn’t
have us in mind.
We don’t pretend that the universe thinks we’re special – but we know that we are
special to one-another.
New don’t have to make crap up!
Number 2: “Many of your college professors agree with your atheist beliefs.
How's that for the uncoolest choice ever?
Hey, look at you siding with all the gray-haired tweedy authoritarian types at your school.”
Does someone not like the fact that the more educated you are, the less likely you are
to believe in barbaric inane nonsense?
Aw…
You’re a dying bred Mathew, and you know it.
It might come as a surprise to you since you think that belief is a choice, but when you
care about what’s true and you actually get embarrassed about pretending to know things
that you can’t possibly know, that’s when you’ll appreciate that atheism is the honest
answer.
We don’t share our professors believes because they’re cool… we share them because they’re
based on sound rationality and demonstrability, two concepts that you evidently don’t appreciate!
Number 1: “Atheists have less children and that probably means...well you probably know
what that means since you're all about SCIENCE!”
What?
It means that we care about the population crisis and know how to use contraception…
Furthermore, what do you mean by “you probably know what that means”?
You do know that religiosity is almost exclusively a cultural phenomenon, right?
Genetics has very little to do with it – unless you’re inbreeding, like, to be fair, your
book implicitly indorses… if humanity had to start anew, from scratch, with no information
whatsoever, Christianity, like all religions, would never return, but the truth would – in
time we would once again discover that the earth is a sphere, that evolution is true,
and that the universe doesn’t care about us.
Anyhow, Mathew concludes with, “to sum up, you'll be miserable, have a shorter life,
and quite likely less sex than your religious counterparts.
And you thought atheism was cool?
Reconsider and repent ye' fools.
Jesus said he is the way, the truth, and the life.
Left unsaid, is that He's totally cooler than Richard Dawkins!”
And here’s my conclusion.
To sum up, Mathew, you’re an insincere, lying, close-minded, deluded, scientifically
illiterate egomaniac who doesn’t know how to use a condom.
You are, unfortunate to say, one of the most foolish and uncoolest idiotic mammals alive.
Anyhow, to the rest of you, and as always, thank you kindly for the view, and remember
to subscribe, less you want to be as uncool as Mathew Archbold.
Just before I go however, I thought I’d share this cool gift that I received today
[it’s my birthday.
My good friend Magnus sent me this, and it says to HippieAtheist…
Congratulations for surpassing one subscriber…