Jokes aside, what a weirdly leading question that doesn’t actually lead anywhere— the only reason it is given a name is because the social dominance of theism necessitated the distinction.
There are also plenty of phrases regarding the rejection of something. Put “anti” at the front of plenty of philosophies or systems and boom, there you go.
I don’t think we should hire any Catholics because they believe eat humans and drinking their blood is legitimately okay. The people who believe God decides anything in day to day life should all be fired for not being able to accept scientific theory, which is the same scientific theory that drives the economy in which this company runs. I mean come on they are clearly braindead drones who believe anything they are told and have proven they can’t innovate anything new that could help us. Also all Muslims are terrorists, they’ve been proving it on the news every night for decades, we shouldn’t hire them either.
In most companies they would just get rid of you for talking about the news / politics. If you fire someone for preaching their religion the company can be sued for illegally terminating an employee do to their religious beliefs. It’s not a good idea.
I find you calling me a religious zealot to be hindering my right to tell you why you’re going to hell for the next 8 hours as is my given right now. In fact I think HR may find it pertinent to know you were calling people religious zealots for practicing their legal rights at work.
…it isn’t trolling, it was the discussion as to why this is a bad idea.
No I called Catholics cannibals, which they believe they are. The Eucharist being the actual transformation into the body and blood of Christ is one of the main differences between Catholics and some protestant denominations that split off. Methodists for instance, do not. Lutheran’s believe it is a physical transformation and not just a spiritual ceramony one either.
Thereby, they intentionally eat a person’s flesh and blood every Sunday, or rather they try to.
Also I never called Muslims Zealots, I called them terrorists, because that’s what I learned from the news. Which was obvious satire… Zealots are obsessive, not necessarily terrorists. A good example of zealots would be the Jesuits.
(Though one could argue Jesuits were church sanctioned terrorists… But that’s besides the point)
So your jokes weren’t aside. “I only want people to be publicly atheist and nothing else.”
Asking people to be sane and use some critical thinking in the face of proselytizing woo woo nonsense and rubbish is a reasonable thing to do.
Personally I wish we could all be publicly nothig. Not religious, not atheist. Let’s not talk about it all, at all.
Atheism is funny what else has a name for not believing in something.
Republican = not believing in science and/or data
Jokes aside, what a weirdly leading question that doesn’t actually lead anywhere— the only reason it is given a name is because the social dominance of theism necessitated the distinction.
There are also plenty of phrases regarding the rejection of something. Put “anti” at the front of plenty of philosophies or systems and boom, there you go.
Agnostic
Amoral
Apolitical
What’s your point?
I don’t think we should hire any Catholics because they believe eat humans and drinking their blood is legitimately okay. The people who believe God decides anything in day to day life should all be fired for not being able to accept scientific theory, which is the same scientific theory that drives the economy in which this company runs. I mean come on they are clearly braindead drones who believe anything they are told and have proven they can’t innovate anything new that could help us. Also all Muslims are terrorists, they’ve been proving it on the news every night for decades, we shouldn’t hire them either.
In most companies they would just get rid of you for talking about the news / politics. If you fire someone for preaching their religion the company can be sued for illegally terminating an employee do to their religious beliefs. It’s not a good idea.
Either you’re a troll or a religious zealot.
I don’t think companies should get rid of people for talking about news and politics in a respectful manner
I find you calling me a religious zealot to be hindering my right to tell you why you’re going to hell for the next 8 hours as is my given right now. In fact I think HR may find it pertinent to know you were calling people religious zealots for practicing their legal rights at work.
…it isn’t trolling, it was the discussion as to why this is a bad idea.
You called Muslims zealots, and Christians cannibals and stupid.
Smells like an Atheist religious zealot to me.
No I called Catholics cannibals, which they believe they are. The Eucharist being the actual transformation into the body and blood of Christ is one of the main differences between Catholics and some protestant denominations that split off. Methodists for instance, do not. Lutheran’s believe it is a physical transformation and not just a spiritual ceramony one either.
Thereby, they intentionally eat a person’s flesh and blood every Sunday, or rather they try to.
Also I never called Muslims Zealots, I called them terrorists, because that’s what I learned from the news. Which was obvious satire… Zealots are obsessive, not necessarily terrorists. A good example of zealots would be the Jesuits.
(Though one could argue Jesuits were church sanctioned terrorists… But that’s besides the point)