Religulous

Post by **thibodeaux** » Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:37 pm

Mildly humorous. A bit tedious. Not hilarious.

I didn't expect him to confront the Muslims as he did. I figured he'd stick to mocking redneck snake-handlers and tongue-speakers. He even ribbed a Jewish guy or two.

Post by **TPRJones** » Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:41 pm

I thought it was pretty fair and balanced overall. I liked it.

Malcolm · Post by **Malcolm** » Wed Apr 01, 2009 10:02 pm

I've been looking for an excuse to call Bill sane for some time now.

Post by **GORDON** » Wed Apr 01, 2009 11:00 pm

I went through my "athiest with chip on shoulder" phase some time ago. I didn't need to make a movie about it to prove I was a dick.

Live and let live, I sez.... as long as their invisible friend doesn't start telling them to kill me. Then I have a problem with religion.

Malcolm · Post by **Malcolm** » Thu Apr 02, 2009 12:24 am

At the core of damn near all religion is the weird notion that if I don't believe some of the same unprovable rules you do, then I need to be "saved."

This obviously applies to things besides religion. But particularly to it.

Post by **GORDON** » Thu Apr 02, 2009 2:13 am

Not everyone has a need to go out and witness, though. Some peeps just have a need to trust in something bigger than themselves. That's fine. Doesn't affect me.

I read a line in a book the other day, though.... "Never trust a man who prays in public." Interesting thought.

Edited By GORDON on 1238652847

Post by **TPRJones** » Thu Apr 02, 2009 6:53 am

GORDON wrote:"athiest with chip on shoulder"

Nah, he makes it clear he's an agnostic with a chip on his shoulder.

Post by **GORDON** » Thu Apr 02, 2009 11:12 am

Hell, that's worse.

Post by **TPRJones** » Thu Apr 02, 2009 12:59 pm

How so? It pretty much describes my stance.

"I don't know anything about it. And neither do you, or you, or you over there. You're pulling it all out of your asses and beating each other over the heads with it. Ya' pricks."

Malcolm · Post by **Malcolm** » Thu Apr 02, 2009 1:26 pm

GORDON wrote:Some peeps just have a need to trust in something bigger than themselves. That's fine. Doesn't affect me.

Till enough of them group together & start swiping political power in the name of whatever belief they're pushing.

Post by **GORDON** » Thu Apr 02, 2009 1:48 pm

TPRJones wrote:How so? It pretty much describes my stance.

"I don't know anything about it. And neither do you, or you, or you over there. You're pulling it all out of your asses and beating each other over the heads with it. Ya' pricks."

That doesn't sound like agnosticism to me, unless I don't know what agnosticism is.

I thought agnosticism was in the neighborhood of, "I don't know what the deity wants me to do, but I believe he exists."

fake edit - but, I guess upon looking up the definition, I am wrong:

1: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable ; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

"Committed" seems to be the key word, there. If you are committed to the nonexistence of god, you are an atheist.... but if you don't give a shit either way, you are an agnostic?

Post by **GORDON** » Thu Apr 02, 2009 1:50 pm

But then looking up "atheist..."

Main Entry:
athe·ist Listen to the pronunciation of atheist
Pronunciation:
\ˈā-thē-ist\
Function:
noun
Date:
1551

: one who believes that there is no deity

So, is there some overlap in the definitions, here?

Post by **TheCatt** » Thu Apr 02, 2009 2:00 pm

I always thought of it as:
atheist: there is no god.
agnostic: there might be a might.

but both have free weekends.

Post by **TPRJones** » Thu Apr 02, 2009 2:22 pm

That's about right. Some folks further seperate both terms into "weak" and "strong" versions:

Strong Athiesm: "There is no God."

Weak Athiesm: "I don't believe in God, but you go right ahead."

Strong Agnosticism: "I don't know - we can't know - and neither do you so shut up."

Weak Agnosticism: "Maybe, maybe not, but do what you want I just don't care."

I'm that second-to-last one. I consider Strong Athiests to be as silly as Christians; they're asserting a Truth they can know nothing about. If they're all "but Occam's Razor says" then that's fine I guess, but if they aren't expressing some uncertainty then they're just another type of zealot.

Edited By TPRJones on 1238696679

Post by **TPRJones** » Thu Apr 02, 2009 2:30 pm

Oh! The "I believe in God but don't know his nature" is sometimes tagged as Agnostic Theism. Just in case you were curious.

Post by **GORDON** » Thu Apr 02, 2009 3:07 pm

So that would make the film maker (blanking on his name) a strong agnostic?

Malcolm · Post by **Malcolm** » Thu Apr 02, 2009 3:13 pm

TPRJones wrote:Oh! The "I believe in God but don't know his nature" is sometimes tagged as Agnostic Theism. Just in case you were curious.

I always thought that was termed Deism.

EDIT : Apparently not. After a bit of searching, deists are the chaps that think god exists, but think he doesn't waste his time fucking w\ the world. Which appears to be religion minus divine revelation.

Edited By Malcolm on 1238699689

Post by **TPRJones** » Thu Apr 02, 2009 4:02 pm

GORDON wrote:So that would make the film maker (blanking on his name) a strong agnostic?

Sort of. He does seem to drift towards athiesm a bit, but mostly in a "all this crap is absurd so maybe there is no god but honestly I still don't know" sort of way. But maybe it would be better to say he's a Strong Agnostic, but the movie is more about being Anti-Religion (as in against the whole concept of organized religion of any sort, a different kettle of fish from there is no god).

As much as I hate Bill Maher's politics, I can get along with him on religion.

Edited By TPRJones on 1238702688