top 94 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 192 points 6 months ago (1 child)

Imagine that you're trying to shoot a baby

No I don't think that I will.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 89 points 6 months ago*

    No, but I'd definitely put that necklace on anyway. Not like the baby knew anything about religion, but it still worked for him; should work for me, too.

  • source
  • [–] 132 points 6 months ago (16 children)

    In order to verify that this wasn't a coincidence, I would need to repeat the experiment on multiple babies.

  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 50 points 6 months ago (13 children)

    Verification is proof and proof denies faith.

    That's not how the magic sky man deal works.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 39 points 6 months ago (6 children)

    Okay, that's great Jesus, but I'm still going to need to poke you in the spear hole before I buy this Third Day Resurrection bullshit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    If you're shooting because you think there's something to the rumor you heard, then that's verification. So you lose.

    If you're shooting for some other reason, wtf? That should itself put you on the bad list.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 42 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    What do Christians think atheists spend their time doing?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 40 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    Funny how they keep relying on impossible hypotheticals.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 6 months ago

    They get weirdly intricate with their baby death fantasies

  • source
  • [–] 24 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    That depends, if I shoot the baby and they die immediately, as if they took a shotgun blast to the face, would you become an atheist?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 24 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    I mean... Why did the God not protect the baby anymore? Is the crucifix a required magic catalyst or something to get Gods protection? Do we have any known cases where the catalyst was not needed?

    I think I'm closer to solving the riddle of Gods power...

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Why did the God not protect the baby anymore

    The entire bible is about a Father who says "Look at what you made me do!"

    On the other hand, the devil never really did anything bad.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    What do you mean he didn't do anything bad?!?!? He convinced some chick to steal an apple. That's like in the top 3 worst things you can ever do.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago

    She didn't do anything bad. The apple didn't belong to anyone.

    The whole story is about God gaslighting them to believe that they should be punished for violating arbitrary rules.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago

    Yeah and how do you know it's not "the devil's" necklace or some demon or god isn't real and it's all demons. With religious logic you have nothing real to stand on to test reality.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 46 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    No. I'd just wear the cross to become invincible.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 6 months ago

    Nothing scarier that someone who believes in shit they can't see that encourages them to be violent.

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Just because the amulet of protection in the shape of a crucifix doesn't mean it has anything to do with god. Wizards are mischievous.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 21 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    wouldnt it be the anti-christ, since hes technically indestructible. jesus can be killed by normal humans.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    What happens when the baby turns to red mist? Is that just "part of God's plan"?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Okay, but no joke, if removing a crucifix suddenly allowed me to turn a previously indestructible baby into red mist, I think there might be a god and he might have had a plan or foresight into this whole boondoggle

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 6 months ago (7 children)

    Maybe don't shoot the baby?

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    While wearing the necklace, can the baby fly? Does it have sharp teeth and can lunge incredible distances with serious force? If they are leaving out this bit of information, it doesn’t help the argument whatsoever.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    Next you say a baby is not allowed to lunge incredible distances or have sharp teeth?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 6 months ago
    [–] 41 points 6 months ago

    you're trying to shoot an indestructible christian baby

    I really want to know why I would be trying to shoot said baby in the first place. Is it the antichrist? Am I being blackmailed? Is this some sick bet?

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 6 months ago

    It's christians who kill babies. Gaza, Iran, and the grandaddy of them all-the Oklahoma Federal Building.

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 6 months ago

    They have atheists and vampires confused I think

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 6 months ago

    I haven't build my identity around not believing in gods. Show me compelling evidence and I'll reconsider. Shotgun pellets bouncing off a baby would definitely offer food for thought.

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 6 months ago

    Got a few issues with this one.

    1. Nobody goes out trying to shoot indestructible christian babies with a shotgun. They're indestructible and shells cost money.
    2. Is having the cross forcefully removed supposed to make the baby no longer christian, indestructible, or "christian indestructible" (and if so, what's that?)?
    3. Would converting therefore involve or require equipping the amulet I've looted off the now dead baby? And if so, will I lose my christian indestructibility if I take it off?

    In essence, would you change your religion if it gave an attunement bonus to something you wore (and perhaps have looted off a murdered faithful)?

    Tbf, it'd be worth the shitload in church tax I'd then have to pay... if it worked. Which is the trouble with these religious relics anyway, eh?

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 6 months ago

    Why would I be shooting a baby with a shot gun?

    I'm an evil atheist, but Christians want to shoot babies with shot guns. Seems legit.

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 6 months ago

    I'd probably start believing in magic necklaces. Then I'd start down a dangerous path of experimentation to test the limits of the necklace's invulnerability enchantment.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 6 months ago

    What the even fuck is this

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 6 months ago

    I’d dislike a god even more choosing to allow such a test to proceed. It’s a variant on the “Trolley Problem”.

    What kind of god would sacrifice an infant to prove belief instead of just popping in with a booming voice and saying “Yes, I’m real you morons!” to prove it?

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 6 months ago

    the question is designed to trick anyone who engages with it into conceding that they would shoot a baby, and then they can turn around and say "atheists want to shoot babies"

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    Old testament god seemed to be pretty good and offing kids so this tracks

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 6 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] -2 points 6 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    Well, there was the global flood that killed most life on the planet. Or was that just allegory?

    How about these?

    1 Samuel 15:

    3 Now go and strike Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and don’t spare them; but kill both man and woman, infant and nursing baby, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’”

    Hosea 13:

    16 Samaria will bear her guilt, for she has rebelled against her God. They will fall by the sword. Their infants will be dashed in pieces, and their pregnant women will be ripped open.”

    Numbers 31:

    17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man by lying with him.

    It was arguably worse for the girls:

    18 But all the girls, who have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

    And of course, 2 Kings 2:

    23 He went up from there to Bethel. As he was going up by the way, some youths came out of the city and mocked him, and said to him, “Go up, you baldy! Go up, you baldy!” 24 He looked behind him and saw them, and cursed them in Yahweh’s name. Then two female bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of those youths.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago

    Nothing about that cruel suggestion makes any sense. Why did it need to a baby, why can't it be trying to shoot the idiot making this insane suggestion who volunteers to wear a necklace and be shot.

    Counter-offer: same scenario to the ignorant Christian who is shit-posting, but the necklace is of Ra, the Egyptian Sun God. Let's see if he would convert. Moron.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    How am I supposed to eat a baby that's either indestructible or full of buckshot?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 6 months ago

    If shotgunning a baby is what it takes to discover immortality...

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 6 months ago

    God didn't stop me from taking it off the baby despite knowing I was going to kill it, so no.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    In all honesty, I'd think the previous shells were functionally blanks.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago

    You have to do more troubleshooting first, like backing up to widen your spread first to see if the shot leaves a baby shaped outline in a sacrificial background target.

    Maybe use multiple boxes of ammo, different brands, different shotguns, etc.

    You don't take an opportunity to prove the existence of a god and just whip the necklace off as step two.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 6 months ago

    Me: I can't believe in a supposed deity who couldn't think of a way to motivate it's followers better than Gary Fucking Gygax.

    Christian: have you considered infanticide?

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 child)

    What if the gun is also cross-shaped?

    (Like in From Dusk Till Dawn)

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago*

    It’s almost like they’re getting it. Yes, fools, if I was shown direct evidence for your imaginary friend in the sky, I might conclude that they do in fact exist. Bring out the babies and the shotguns, by all means.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago

    Killing babies, you know, Tuesdays.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 6 months ago

    I've missed the Christian baby genre and haven't seen it in awhile.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago
    [–] 6 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    I'd turn the gun round

    If I was sick enough to try to x the baby and actually did it would be time to stage left

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›