Slashdot Mirror
USPS Discriminates Against 'Atheist' Merchandise
fish waffle writes "Suspecting that their strongly branded 'Atheist' products may be treated differently by more religiously-oriented postal regions, Kickstarter success Atheist Shoes conducted an experiment. They sent 178 packages to 89 people in different parts of the U.S., each person receiving one package prominently branded as 'Atheist' merchandise, and one not. The results: packages with the atheist label were nearly 10 times more likely to be 'lost,' and took on average 3 days longer to show up when they did. Control experiments were also done in Europe and Germany — it's definitely a USPS problem."
does not imply causation
Yup, you sound fucking stupid, because if you clicked on link or googled you'd see that they're a German shoe brand. Fuck, you can even tell from the summary that it's a shoe brand.
I don't get what you Americans are complaining about. Meanwhile in Belgium a report was just published on "how to integrate muslims : reasonable demands" by the minister for integration. A few highlights : ...
1) we can no longer have freedom of expression. The existing restrictions on "racist speech" are insufficient, and specific islamic restrictions are to be enforced
2) we must accept that when muslims stop working ("for prayer", between quotation marks because I've actually worked with a few), everybody must stop working company-wide, so as to create a "fair" situation
3) muslim dress, no matter how obviously religious it is, and how it obviously leads to physical violence against women, should be "allowed" everywhere. It used to be the case that, in order to guarantee religious neutrality of the state, any public-facing government function cannot allow religious symbols
4) neutrality of the state should be cancelled : single-language arabic government clercks should be allowed (whereas today, the minimum is bilingual dutch-french)
5) what is considered normal dress for women on TV can no longer be allowed
it just keeps and keeps going like that. Mind you this is not some radical imam, this is a minister of the government
Meanwhile we get such nice statistics out of Brussels ...)
51% of muslims is either perpetrator or victim of domestic violence
> 20% of the TOTAL population is single-language arabic
Regular open religious riots in now 3 cities (more like neighborhoods in their size, but
This is not Afghanistan, mind you, this is the capital of Europe.
The evolution of things is not very encouraging either.
First we had "radical mosques" in the poorer part of the country
then we had one "mad" shooter that just happened to shout "jihad" before gunning down >10 people ("only" 2 dead)
now we have "dozens" (according to state intelligence services) people fighting in Syria (you know to "free" their country on one side, also known as religious genocide against alawite muslims on the other side)
And this is nothing compared to what's going on in France.
My point being : you Americans don't know what you're complaining about.
Because of christainity. III Reich was christian to the bone. And nazi murderers had "Gott mit Uns" on their belt buckles.
Nope. It was nordic neopaganism coupled with 18th century ocultism and a few crazy 19th philosophies, the main one of which (Nietzsche's) was in turn inspired by a radical form of greek paganism. On top of all the crazy the Nazis paid some lip service for the German Christians who wouldn't quite like to know about this mess.
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
Given the birth rate difference between atheists versus religious people, how exactly do you atheists hope to prevent a complete Christian takeover in 20 years or so ?
Look outside your country. Consider Italy, where the RC Church is based, They have the lowest birthrate in W.Eeurope. It's not just about religion. Education comes in there too. Your "Christians" like to keep people in ignorance. This is not so much the case on Earth.
I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
You are believing something (no-gods) with no evidence. This is still belief, rather than "no position"; just because it's a negative does not make it less of a belief. You may believe P!=NP, but this is still belief with lack of proof, until you can definitively prove P!=NP.
Unfortunately this comes down to arguing definition. Perhaps someone believes they have a soda can which is god. It's still a soda can in every way, but it's also god, even if it does nothing that a soda can does not, because their definition of "god" does not mean "omnipotent", "omniscient", or otherwise follow the Christian definition.. many gods of old religions lacked these powers as well.
There is therefore certainly a god that provably exists. You not believing in it then comes down to disputing the existence of the can, or the definition of "believe". However, atheism means believing no gods exist, which is shown to be false. Therefore agnostics are less faith- and belief-based than atheists.