-14 votes

Stefan Molyneux and Seth Andrews, host of The Thinking Atheist, discuss breaking free from religion.

Stefan Molyneux and Seth Andrews, host of The Thinking Atheist, discuss breaking free from religion, the social costs of accepting atheism, the predatory targeting of the young, religion as child abuse, the worship of ignorance, the benefits of religion and advice to religious parents.


The Thinking Atheist is a website, radio podcast and online community which rejects faith as a suitable tool for living. - http://www.youtube.com/user/TheThinki... - http://www.thethinkingatheist.com

Freedomain Radio is 100% funded by viewers like you. Please support the show by signing up for a monthly subscription or making a one time donation at: http://www.fdrurl.com/donate

Bitcoin Address: 1Fd8RuZqJNG4v56rPD1v6rgYptwnHeJRWs
Litecoin Address: LL76SbNek3dT8bv2APZNhWgNv3nHEzAgKT

Get more from Stefan Molyneux and Freedomain Radio including books, podcasts and other info at: http://www.freedomainradio.com

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

"Stops people from critical thinking"

So Isaac Newton and Blaise Pascal, two devout Christians, were not critical thinkers?

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, just demonstrate the clear logical fallacy of your statement.

I didn't say it NECESSARILY or ALWAY stops critical thinking...

That would be an extrapolation of the comment.

If I say that "smoking causes lung cancer."

That does not mean that "Every smoker has or will have lung cancer."

That would be a distortion of the first statement. Religious thinking DOES NOT ALWAYS OR NECESSARILY lead to a lack of critical thinking, but it does in many instances.

I don't think you could say the opposite, that: "Atheism leads to a lack of critical thinking."

Nice try.

Can you provide your evidence that it causes "many" to cease critical thinking?

No you can't. Because your statement demonstrates a lack of critical thinking.

Again, my point. You started with "religion stops critical thinking", then you backed off to "religion stops critical thinking in many people, but not all."

In both statements you have ZERO EVIDENCE and only have your FAITH-BASED opinion.

Do you not see the hypocrisy in what you say? You are doing the VERY THING you blame religionists of doing. You are being just as non-critical as you blame the religionists of being.

In other words you are the very object of your own criticism and you don't even realize it due to your own irrational bias.

Irrational Bias

If I wanted to apply an irrational bias, or to call checkmate...

I could have said that your "Isaac Newton" comment above showed a lack of depth and critical thinking.

But if you can't see cases where Christians are hammering a topic related to their religion, then you must be blind.

Abortion, gay marriage, stem cells, evolution, old earth, old universe, war on drugs...

The religious bias pops its head in left and right.

But hell man, you want me to do research and citations like this is my masters thesis? This is the comment board! Not LewRockwell.com or Mises.org!

How about we just make a thread of example videos of religious bias?

Collectivist bias.

And now you are back to collectivist bias.

"Christians" (implied all Christians) do X.

It is illogical to extrapolate from an instance to a whole. It is illogical to extrapolate from a whole to an individual.

Your hypocrisy is evident. You point the finger at religionists; you should be looking in the mirror.

So do you now sow "how divided" this topic makes us???

This scheduled division is brought to you by... RELIGION!

You're funny.

Was it you who called religionists who share their heritage with their own children "child abusers"? Or was that a different atheist in the replies here who did?

But since an atheist said it, it's clearly not divisive? Of course not. LOL

It wasn't me

I didn't say that, but I agree with the person that did say it.

SteveMT's picture

"Can't they just believe it and be happy?"

They both look pretty happy to me. What better forum than this video would you suggest they use to discuss their views? Should they go door-to-door proselytizing like those who "have religion" do? You didn't have to watch the video as opposed to having someone in your face at your door espousing their brand of religion. Some get the door slammed in their face, but generally many people are courteous and listen to their rhetoric. Which way of "proselytizing" is more offensive to you?

Well I think you are illustrating my point.

Like any other religionist, they like to exercise, discuss, share, whatever their religious beliefs.

I never said I like proselytizing by anyone? Of course all kinds of salesemen try to sell you all kinds of things all the time, but you react differently to religionists. In reality it's nothing different. Logically, shouldn't you react the same way?

SteveMT's picture

Selling Girl Scout Cookies vs. religious dogma is not the same.

There is a big difference. The Girl Scouts are not going to kill me if I say no to them. No one hears the voice of a Girl Scout in their head telling them to sell cookies in a way even remotely as commonplace as people supposedly hearing the voice of God in their head telling them to kill people. The former doesn't exist, and the latter is a day-to-day occurrence. Religious beliefs are a private matter to be shared in the proper setting, but not offensively extracted from someone without warning while in their own home. There's a big difference.

Atheism vs. Religionism

What's the difference? They are both opinion-based, personal, faith-based philosophies which are similar in those attributes.

Christians aren't going to kill you. Are you blaming Christians for the existence of irrational Muslim jihadists now?

How ridiculously collectivist is that? How unbelievably irrational is that?

I see you as being just as irrational as any irrational Muslim jihadist, both ignorant and irrational in their personal religious beliefs.

SteveMT's picture

"Christians aren't going to kill you." Oh, no?

Tell that to the Native Americans. The Manifest Destiny was justification to wipe-out the Indians. Convert them, kill them, or banish them to reservations, from sea to shining sea. The Trail of Tears, Wounded Knee, and the Nez Perce War are some examples of just what this "Christian Nation" is capable of.


Plenty of Native Americans are Christian.. and that includes many Mexican who are Native American.

SteveMT's picture

Yes, and the rest of them are dead.

The Natives that survived the slaughter were converted to Christianity in the ensuing two hundred years. The rest are dead.


Since Christipher Colon landed on the shores of what is now called America, the Catholic Church was established and living in peace with the vast majority of Natives. Here in CA only two tribes were warmongering.. most were happy to have the church, agriculture, shelter, stablility, children, fewer diseases.. many converted because the Church had medicine that worked better than the natives could trade. When the catholic Church divided and protestants raised their swords against catholics it happened globally, not just here in America.

My grandmother was half Clatsop and a devout Christian. Her love and belief in Jesus was more real than life itself.

Why is it bad for Christians to convert American tribes from animal gods, but it's great for Islam to convert Arab tribes from animal gods?


SteveMT's picture

Look are what resulted from the Christian conversion of Natives.

They live on Reservations where drugs, alcohol, and disease are rampant. This is the will of God? The Manifest Destiny is not good compared to what the Indians had prior to the Europeans coming to this country. If you think this is good, you need to talk to someone. Stop looking at what others religions do and look to what your religion has done. God is absolute, not relative. This is not a test where the grades will be curved relative to how others do.


Many reservations, at least here in CA, have self determination and are building resorts that are very popular and providing jobs.

And then there are those like my father who joined the military and did exceptionally well. My father joined the military to get off the reservation, as do many natives.. but now that many reservations have become resorts, providing jobs and income, many are happy to have a home.

Indian wars date back to petrogliphs, long before any white man considered the world was round.

My religion is under attack by your religion, churches being burned, people slaughterd, raped, beaten.. I don't see any Christians burning down mosques or raping women or beheading muslims. I see exactly the opposite. Even Budhist temples thousands of years old were destryed recently and for what? What did the Budhists do? Welcome Islam into the communitiy.

God is many things to many people.. why the Catholic Church has so many saints.

SteveMT's picture

Is self-determination building casinos & serving alcohol?

Really? Do you believe that the Natives freely chose to do this OR was this decision the only option left for them? Please, wake up Granger. Constructing gambling casinos that serve alcohol is anathema to God and to the Indians, but good to you because that creates jobs.

"My religion is under attack by your religion" My religion attacks no one. I question what people believe, and why they believe it. That is all. You are so hellbent against Islam that have been blinded to everything else.

Tribal leaders

We have three very popular casions here and the tribes want more. They now have golf courses, small airports, hotels, restarants, and many businesses that support the tourist and entertainment industry that the casinos afforded them. In many ways the natives here are doing better than anyone but state and county govenment elites.

Everywhere there is a war today, Islam is there. Go figure why I am so hellbent against Islam with that FACT: Everywhere there is a war (no American or Jews anywhere around, as they've been slaughtered and purged) there is Islam.

We agree! They are as

We agree! They are as dogmatic in their materialism as are fundies in their's.

I'm not sure which is worse,

I'm not sure which is worse, organized religion or materialist, militant atheism. Science points to consciousness as being the ultimate reality from which all matter arises. Too many atheists have traded one dogma for another, the dogma of materialism. At the atomic level, nothing is solid or continuous. This universe is a magnificent illusion. And one underlying consciousness is behind it all. We have a choice other than the old AND new dogmas! I encourage everyone to learn about science's hard problem : explaining consciousness, a phenomenon not necessary in a mechanistic universe. Dr. Rupert Sheldrake's brief, brilliant, but controversial TED talk is a good place to start. Look for it on youtube and visit sheldrake.org too.

here is the TED talk

I am not sure what I think of this, but it's definitely interesting:


Interestingly enough, check out this article about how the speed of light may not be constant:


“The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants.” — Albert Camus

I see both as equally bad

Beliefs are like prison bars. The more you hold, and the more strongly you hold them, the more they imprison you.

“The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants.” — Albert Camus

If you don't stand for something, You'll fall for anything...

And Freedom is just arbitrary randomness without a greater meaning.

Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

why are you falling for my metaphor?

How many prison bars would it take to imprison you? I didn't say you shouldn't have any beliefs. But too many beliefs can build a prison.

“The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants.” — Albert Camus

Militant Atheist?

I hear this term, it is common now.

What does a "militant atheist" do? How does he get promoted to "militant?"

Does the atheist hijack planes to take down buildings? Does he commit suicide bombings? Does he bomb abortion clinics? Does he kill abortion doctors or threaten to?

Oh; "militant," meaning "repeatedly speaks his mind in a calm and rational way, always falling back on logical, rational, and consistent arguments."

That "militarism?"

Militant atheists, example:


Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

Don't be obtuse. Neither of

Don't be obtuse. Neither of those definitions fits the word.

"combative and aggressive in support of a political or social cause, and typically favoring extreme, violent, or confrontational methods."

That kind of militant, obviously.

"Fundamentalist" vs "Militant..."

These 2 words have been tied though: "Militant" and "Atheist." I often hear of this "militant atheist" or "militant atheism."

"Fundamental" sounds like a comment; good, you have fundamentals.
"Militant" sounds like your ready to stab somebody; what's your problem, why you so militant bro?

I just don't hear the word "Militant" being used elsewhere; not for politicians or news anchors...

So I thought I would point out how funny our use of language is sometimes. Kind of like the "assault rifle" instead of the "defense rifle."

And "militarism," seems to mean "really wants to talk to you, and will not hesitate to POST COMMENTS in the comments box."

The TRUE EVIL of the world; militarism in the comments section. Hahahaha.


BTW you used the word "violent" in your definition of "militant." And I think that is where I want to laugh. Nothing violent about comments, questions, and conversation!