this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2026
232 points (96.8% liked)

Europe

6643 readers
319 users here now

Europe

Rules:

  1. All sources allowed. Voting decides what is reliable unless
  2. Articles which have been proven false beyond any doubt may be removed
  3. No personal attacks
  4. Posts in English, translations allowed

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ILikeToMeow@lemmy.ml 11 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (1 children)

In my view, one isn't really an atheist if they are a liberal (or conservative, but I repeat myself) as it is effectively another religion, with Capital as it's "god", it is kind of like those liberals that call themselves "socialist" and support controlled opposition, compatible "leftist", and friend of epstein, bernie sanders.

Edit: for some reason I can't see the rest of the comments while logged in, so I'll put it here: I think a more accurate and inclusive phrase would be "freedom of religion or atheism", as it would be shitty if one had to declare some religion or another without just "none" as an option.

Edit: Edit: From the rest of this thread I think people may be confused, you cannot just "ban" the "opiate of the masses", as long as people are in pain they will seek a painkiller, and denying it to them just turns those very people against you, if the world becomes your enemy you have little chance. To reach synthesis you must collapse the contradiction by combining elements of thesis and anti-thesis in such a manor that it favors the non toxic elements of both and becomes stable.

[–] svcg@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 4 hours ago

If I said that in my view, one isn’t really an atheist if they are a communist as it is effectively another religion with Historical Materialism as it’s “god”, you'd probably consider that a pretty brain-dead take.

Can we leave the no true Scotsman fallacies to the religion defenders, please?