Is it More Annoying to Debate Religious People or Statists?

[Wesley]

Just as a brief summary, It seems that statists have over taken religious people 59% to 41%.

 

However, I am getting a couple feelings from the comments that may make the poll not be as separated as it seems.

 

1. Many people seem to indicate that the difference is negligible, so they may have selected one or the other in that it is .1% more annoying or something as small.

 

2. Some people seem to indicate that statists are more annoying because they are at least rational enough to debate and that religious people are so insane that the debate doesn't even occur, and thus they are not annoying to debate.

 

At least some of these might need "annoying" to be defined as there may be a point in which something is so far from achievable that it no longer could be considered annoying.

[Alin]

Religious people who debate are by far the most annoying and retarded creatures the world has ever seen

 

Here's an actualy quote from one of them (and he was serious about it too) : "Obviously you're the one who hasn't done his homework, because you don't realize that religion can solve most of the problems, while reason and logic can't."

[philschneider]

I chose statists because as of right now in America they are causing the most damage and refuse to admit it.  Most religious people I have dealt with can understand Atheism and just disagree because of lack of knowledge argument or proof from a book.  While I obviously disagree I can accept their ideas as having logic and thought behind it.  Statists on the other hand have little to no logic, or evidence to back up their thoughts.  They also lie and cover up their intentions by naming their goals at the opposite of what they are.  I can not respect people who act in this way.

Finally statist goals are to gain power/money for themselves.  While religious people are trying to bring you to heaven/salvation.  While religious people are fools at least they have pure intentions, and respectable goals.

[RyanT]

Finally statist goals are to gain power/money for themselves.  While religious people are trying to bring you to heaven/salvation.  

While religious people are fools at least they have pure intentions, and respectable goals.

 

Don't know about that....

 

[Alin]

" While religious people are fools at least they have pure intentions, and respectable goals."

 

Haha

 

Guess those holy wars, murders, inquisition and tortures were also coming from pure intentions and respectable goals. Someone who threatens me with eternal hell has anything but "respectable goals".

[philschneider]

Yes I know guys that religious people can be manipulative assholes as well.  I was simply talking about my personal debating experience.  Whether you want to agree or not saving someone from eternal damnation is a pretty nice thing to do if you believe that hell is a reality.  You guys can say what you want, but I think people caring enough about other humans to spend their lives trying to stop me and others from ending up in an eternity of hell is a pretty noble endeavor.  It is completely wrong, but in their mind they are saving lives/souls.  There has never been a statist that I have argued with that has ever wanted to change a law for the betterment of other people.  They always want a law changed and a bill passed for themselves and fuck everyone else.  If you can look at it based off my experiences I think you would come to a similar conclusion.

 

I also do not live in the bible belt.  There are not many radical Christians where I live.  Most religious people in the Chicago land area would rather you not be an atheist, but few will damn you for your stance.  Again this is my personal experience.