[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 110 KB, 500x380, 1300086545125.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2867138 No.2867138 [Reply] [Original]

Ever notice how most atheists are single, or can't keep a stable relationship? And I'm talking about the true atheists, not the 'I'm cool because I'm an atheist' kidos
The popular hypothesis is that it is the result of not having faith. Without faith, how could a relationship work?
Further research is currently being done.
What does /sci/ think?

>inb4 OMGZ I'm reporting because this is not science!
It is science.

>> No.2867148

>hypothesis != theory
Or at least the way you stated it.

>> No.2867153

>implying not having faith in god means not having faith in anything

its amazing how one can cherry pick the notion of faith only to insult atheist

>> No.2867159

>implying correlation = causation

>> No.2867162

>Ever notice how most atheists are single, or can't keep a stable relationship?
Nope. Where's your data OP?

>> No.2867166

>Ever notice how most atheists are single, or can't keep a stable relationship?
no, i didn't.
and i live in a country with the most atheists in the world.

>> No.2867167

>>2867148
By hypothesis, i mean a proposed explanation that has not yet been tested.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothesis

>> No.2867177

>faith
>allows relationships

wat.

>> No.2867181

>Ever notice how most atheists are single, or can't keep a stable relationship

No

>Without faith, how could a relationship work?

Even more retarded than the first thing you said.

>> No.2867183

>>2867162
>>2867166
At my community collage over half of my professors that are atheists are single. I'm talking about true atheists. And then you have people like Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Steven Pinker who have all been divorced several times.

>> No.2867188

>>2867166

I didn't think they had Internet access in Cuba or North Korea.

>> No.2867213

1. Atheists are usually miserable people that no one wants to be around.
2. They can't keep a family or marriage together owing to their low moral standards

>> No.2867214

>>2867183
Now that I think about it, there are a whole lot of single atheists.

>> No.2867220

Reported.

Also, OP is a virgin. If religious people have stable relationships, why does America (herpderp religious nation) have the highest divorce rates in the world?

>> No.2867223

I am about as flatline atheist as it gets. I'm open about it, and I'm in a 2 year relationship right now. My last relationship was over a year as well.

butthurt Christfag?

>> No.2867230

>>2867214

They don't believe in the Bible and thus:

"Go forth, be fruitful, and multiply."

-- Genesis 9:7

But that's ok because atheists usually end up removing themselves from the gene pool in true Darwinian fashion.

>> No.2867239

>>2867223
This is anecdotal, it's not science.

>> No.2867241

>advocates faith
>claims it is scientific
>therefore, God exists

Thank you for saving me from a life of darkness, OP

>> No.2867243

>>2867220

We had a lower divorce rate before the stench of the 1960s.

>> No.2867246

>>2867213
>1. Atheists are usually miserable people that no one wants to be around.
this is what bible belt rednecks actually believe

>> No.2867253

>>2867230
>implying atheism is genetic
lolno

>> No.2867256

Do atheists get married conventionally? I've always wondered this

>> No.2867257

>>2867243

Christians also respected science back in the 1960s (space program, nuclear research, etc). Now they're just fucktards.

Good times...

>> No.2867261

>>2867230
There's an element of truth to that: http://news.slashdot.org/story/11/01/29/2350217/Model-Says-Religiosity-Gene-Will-Dominate-Society

>> No.2867262

>>2867246

Hey, would you want to be around some asswipe like James Randi who thinks that everyone sucks but him?

>> No.2867265

>>2867243
Yea, before those stupid feminists men were aloud to keep there wife's in there place. The proper way.

>> No.2867271

>>2867138

Actually, all of the hard core atheists that I can think of off the top of my head (including me) are in long term relationships....

So, no, I don't know what you are talking about.

>> No.2867270
File: 16 KB, 450x386, GWBushSadFlag.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2867270

>>2867257
Christians still respect that science which leads to money or weaponry.

>> No.2867269

>>2867265
Please tell me English isn't your native language

>> No.2867275

>>2867262
>hates Randi
what's the matter, he insulted your pet superstition?

>> No.2867276
File: 79 KB, 750x600, 1300496537886.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2867276

Alternatively, countries with tiny amounts of atheists are therefore in possession of larger amounts of the religious. These countries also tend to have more extreme religious people, and (going hand in hand with increased religious fervour) lesser womens rights & equality.

In these places a divorce is a bigger deal, and a woman who has been married before is more likely to be shunned by the community. Or - in some backwards places - stoned to death for witchcraft. Life is tough in the south. Theres also the fact that in these places the divorce courts tend to side with the male, for the larger half of the possessions or the kids.

In a largely atheist country people stay together only for as long as they are happy, and there is less outside pressure forcing them to stay as a couple, therefore higher divorce rate.

>> No.2867282

>>2867257

The Apollo 8 astronauts read from Genesis and atheists went ballistic. Of course, they're worse today...

To return to your point, mainstream Christians generally accepted evolution at that time. The radical young earth creationist movement only emerged in the '70s.

>> No.2867287

>>2867262
randi is an awesome guy.

i'd rather have him around than a retarded bigot fundie like you.

>> No.2867292

>>2867230
>>2867213
>>2867183

Why do I get the feeling that you are a single, butthurt Christfag?

Do you have a stable relationship Mr. Kettle?

>> No.2867293

If we could have at least agnosticism and a GRADUAL shift to gender equality (unlike the rapid change we've seen), I'd be happy.

>> No.2867294

>>2867265

The radical feminists did jack-all to free anyone. They were really just a front for Marxist class warfare.

>> No.2867295
File: 2.93 MB, 2883x3460, Bible Contradictions.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2867295

2/10 to the OP for keeping this silly thread running.

Especially for using Darwinism to claim a passage from the bible will explain a shift in religious thought as "atheists die off".

Also your original argument isn't science. It's Correlation = Causation, based off of a few professors at your school.

Also enjoy this image i have.

>> No.2867306

>>2867275
I don't like him because he's using people to get rich, he doesn't actually care about the stuff he does, if he did he would be giving the stuff he currently sells (at vastly inflated prices) away to people in the street. Everything he does is a publicity stunt designed to make him richer

>> No.2867310

>>2867271

Banging cheap sluts isn't marriage or a family; it's tantamount to what dogs do.

>> No.2867313

I'm just going to leave this here....

http://articles.cnn.com/2010-02-26/health/liberals.atheists.sex.intelligence_1_sexual-behaviors-libe
ralism-exclusivity?_s=PM:HEALTH

>> No.2867316
File: 45 KB, 734x557, trollwinsflawlessvictory.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2867316

>>2867138
/SCI/ = THE EASIEST BOARD TO TROLL

KEEP FEEDING THE TROLLS FAGGOTS!
LETS FUCK UP THE BOARD REAL BAD!
GET IT DELETED LIKE /NEW/!

>> No.2867319

I'm not necessarily an atheist. I believe in the possibility of forces outside our perceivable universe, able to directly influence the properties of quarks between their blinks of existence. This allows for many discussions but I'll keep my thoughts on Love.

Love is a many splendid thing. Love lifts us up where we belong. Love is all you need. Yes, the best songs and poems are about love; it fills our culture, our business, our learning, and basically every facet of everyday life. This leads to a complex, a social disorder where we are obsessed with "finding" this magical happiness that requires nothing but our acceptance of another person, and (more importantly) their acceptance of us.

However, don't we all already accept everything that happens to us? Yes we have "free will", but how is it used? Why do we initially choose one person over others? This comes from many factors, the primary one being lust/obsession. We long for that which we feel we can't have - perfection. We have this idea of perfection that our social structure places in our minds from an early age.

Seeking perfection, we find all that is imperfect with people, think about it, and if it is good "enough" we deal with it and accept that form of happiness. However, smart people take that perfection complex to a new level because of our thirst for knowledge. This means you seek perfection or nothing at all. Well, there is no such thing as a perfect person, therefore it makes no sense to be with anyone but yourself who (in your own eyes) is the closest thing to perfection (even though you know you have faults, and usually you know these faults).

This leads to the requirement of self-love. You have to love yourself first because that is where all your knowledge is. Without loving yourself, you can't love others, and that makes it hard for them to love you back.

>> No.2867322

>>2867319
Get the fuck back to /lit/.

>> No.2867323
File: 64 KB, 600x750, 1290327630544.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2867323

>>2867138

>> No.2867324

>>2867310

Yeah...3/10 for making me respond like an idiot >.>....

>> No.2867329

And it's harder to maintain a relationship because women tend to be more religious than men.

>> No.2867331

>>2867287

>randi is an awesome guy.

Dare you to go to /x and say that.

>> No.2867335

science has proven that atheists have poorer relationships, depression, more prone to drugs and suicide, etc.

>> No.2867337

>>2867275

Nah, we don't hate him. He's too laughable to hate.

>> No.2867346

>>2867335

Well yeah, because they're miserable, have no morals, and no god to call to for help when they're down and out.

>> No.2867364

>>2867335
correlation != causation

>> No.2867368

correlation does not imply causation.

>> No.2867385

>>2867368

Except when priests commit child rape. Then correlation does = causation.

Methinks there's a double standard here.