(no subject)
Question of the Day:
If atheists are the arrogant ones for not finding a need to believe in the existence of a god or gods or spaghetti monsters, why is it that we don't find our opinions amazing enough to joyously attempt to spread them to people without an invitation WHILE THEY'RE TRYING TO EAT THEIR GODDAMN DINNER IN THE UNION BEFORE WORK.
There's a sign on the Union door that says "no solicitors" that should apply to religious nutjobs as well.
Or maybe I should grow a pair and tell them to fuck off so I can eat my Sbarros Pizza in peace.
Hail Satan.
Grrrr. I hate being tricked into conversation. These two guys walked up to my table, sat down, and just started asking me questions about what I was doing. Instead of having the good sense to realize that something must have been wrong with this picture, I awkwardly answered their questions. Then BAM, they go and get their christian dicks out on me. After about five minutes of nodding and whatnot to their talk about Christ and how he had to be brutally murdered so that I could get into heaven I said that I didn't want to waste their time, that I was an atheist, and that I'd like to get back to my math and pizza.
This, of course, is not enough to dissuade the faithful. So they took the all-popular tactic of calling me arrogant for not agreeing with them about their magical book, their magical sky-dictator, and their magical naked zombie Jew. I explained (stupid of me, why don't I just say FUCK OFF?) that I thought that religion is important to many people in the world, that it's possible that many people can't live a healthy mental life without believing in some sort of answer to life's eternal questions, but that I was not one of these people.
They got excited at this,
which makes me wonder after the fact whether or not I said something stupid.
They agreed that the world contains two types of people, those who are "seekers" (a snotty term I have grown to truly hate) and those who are not. The conceit here being that the term "seekers" refers to those who care about life's eternal questions, and therefore choose to answer them with before mentioned magical naked zombie Jew, and the term "non-seekers" refers to everyone else. I told them that I indeed did care about life's eternal questions, but that I would consider myself dishonest were I to answer them with faith rather than... well... an answer. A little too hardcore I know, but this pissed them off, so they left me alone.
The moral of this story is that I should have been rude in the beginning rather than enduring their company, ultimately to be rude in the end.
If atheists are the arrogant ones for not finding a need to believe in the existence of a god or gods or spaghetti monsters, why is it that we don't find our opinions amazing enough to joyously attempt to spread them to people without an invitation WHILE THEY'RE TRYING TO EAT THEIR GODDAMN DINNER IN THE UNION BEFORE WORK.
There's a sign on the Union door that says "no solicitors" that should apply to religious nutjobs as well.
Or maybe I should grow a pair and tell them to fuck off so I can eat my Sbarros Pizza in peace.
Hail Satan.
Grrrr. I hate being tricked into conversation. These two guys walked up to my table, sat down, and just started asking me questions about what I was doing. Instead of having the good sense to realize that something must have been wrong with this picture, I awkwardly answered their questions. Then BAM, they go and get their christian dicks out on me. After about five minutes of nodding and whatnot to their talk about Christ and how he had to be brutally murdered so that I could get into heaven I said that I didn't want to waste their time, that I was an atheist, and that I'd like to get back to my math and pizza.
This, of course, is not enough to dissuade the faithful. So they took the all-popular tactic of calling me arrogant for not agreeing with them about their magical book, their magical sky-dictator, and their magical naked zombie Jew. I explained (stupid of me, why don't I just say FUCK OFF?) that I thought that religion is important to many people in the world, that it's possible that many people can't live a healthy mental life without believing in some sort of answer to life's eternal questions, but that I was not one of these people.
They got excited at this,
which makes me wonder after the fact whether or not I said something stupid.
They agreed that the world contains two types of people, those who are "seekers" (a snotty term I have grown to truly hate) and those who are not. The conceit here being that the term "seekers" refers to those who care about life's eternal questions, and therefore choose to answer them with before mentioned magical naked zombie Jew, and the term "non-seekers" refers to everyone else. I told them that I indeed did care about life's eternal questions, but that I would consider myself dishonest were I to answer them with faith rather than... well... an answer. A little too hardcore I know, but this pissed them off, so they left me alone.
The moral of this story is that I should have been rude in the beginning rather than enduring their company, ultimately to be rude in the end.