Talk:Reasons to become an atheist/the sensible version

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This is supposed to be a funny site; not a site used by atheists to convert people to their religion. THis sounds too much like Wikipedia here, not a parody of Wikipedia (I thought Atheism was a belief in Athe!) Stop trying to get people out of believing in God and get down to the "funny business".

Don't like an objective view about how apes with big penises are cool? Then why not check out this or this. I stand by my word though: naked apes are better than mud statues from a non-existent garden. Weri long wang 21:54, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to say it, but this article just doesn't seem appropriate for Uncyclopedia. If people want something "sensible," they should read Wikipedia, not Uncyclopedia. The questions and answers section is particularly lacking in humor or satire. There are enough funny articles about atheism already; this one needs to be put away. 128.2.247.91 17:51, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Agreed.

Please sign your comment mr. "agreed": 66.31.174.231. There are at least two anti-atheist articles already The joke behind the article is a reductio ad absurdum piss take of every anti-atheist comment from "Stalin was an atheist" to "Hitler supported Darwin's idea of eugenics" (which wasn't Darwin's idea, nor did Hitler support what was originaly called eugenics). We need to take the piss out of both sides. This article is not an attempt to convert people to atheists (lack of) religion, but to take the piss out of dumb anti-atheists (like you two). Like I said, if you don't like anti-anti-atheist jokes then there are least two articles (linked to this page) that contain anti-atheist humour. Anyway, here's my new "this person has a right to express himself" template:

FsmReductio ad Stalinum

This article has a deeper political message from a cranky atheist – make sure you don’t pay attention to it.

Well someone seems offended. But I have to agree with either being anti-atheist or anti-Christian on this site is not going to make good humor. I mean, Uncyclopedia should not be a site where people "bitch" about other people's beliefs and calling them "bullshit" because even though its probably letting out anger, it is not good humor at all. Leave the anti stuff at websites dedicated to that sort of thing. --24.98.152.78 08:22, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Read the Wikipedia article and you might understand my style of humour. Then go back to your television set and watch one of your Freinds or Will and Grace DVDs. Weri long wang 01:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

So can i create a serious "Convert to Christianity" article and throw in a few "hitler was a christian, so atheism bad lol" in there? This article sucks 3/10


No matter how much you try and claim this is actually a parody of anti-atheists, i think the fact it has "the sensible version" in the title does kinda give away the fact it's blatent atheist publicity. Put this back where it belongs on rational-responders or some other atheist site, not on uncylopdedia. --195.137.75.44 11:27, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

A call upon all uncyclopedia comedians: This site is meant to be funny, and it is your duty to ensure it is funny. The author of this article admits he intends it to be funny. Therefore as a deed to him and the uncyclopedia community, if you find a single phrase that lacks humour, Make It Funny! This is your duty. --Sharky 20:00, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

edit This article sucks

All the other religious articles were obviously written by atheists, so shouldn't this one be written by theists? The tone of this article is quite obviously in support of atheism (rambling on about how scientists are stupid, when we all know they are smart. Saying that god exists, and all the atheists are dumb for saying one doesn't. This is satire of an anti-atheist, not satire of an atheist), while the other religious articles are anti-religious. Is this right?

This article is not really funny at all, and needs to be changed. All the anti-atheist stuff gets deleted quick by tight-assed 12 year old idiots who think they know what they are talking about.

well fuck you. Like you know what you're talking about... the reson atheisim is cool is that you dont blame or pray to something that doesnt even exist thinking that whoul solve ur problems...relegion has always been the spurce of all our problems anyways...


Lol nice grammar little kid. Sorry, maybe you didn't realize that my comment was directed towards those who have atleast started puberty. Just go away and let the big people talk, kk?
What do you expect from the secular web, and not to mention an entire website based on the childish jealousy of some other website that morons use as their primary source of knowledge. The teenage, angst-ridden bias of this website is obvious...this goes without saying. Pretty sad though that the sole purpose of this website existing is to combat Wikipedia, when in the end, it is pretty much the same in its purpose.
I agree with the first comment... All other religious articles were written to be against the subject they talked about, while this one is clearly ironic against other religions. Except for a few nice parts, all the article needs to be completely rewritten. Why? Because it's not funny (as it should be in this site). It's just a waste of time 85.75.255.15 10:50, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
I agree with the template at the beginning of the page, "God **** this!!!" You're all just ****ing yourselves you know! You hate God, you hate belief in God because you don't want to be told what to do, and you don't want to face Hell. Well get over it! God exists, deal with it! Of course, you alone, kid, are proof of evolution, and probably the only proof there ever will be. This article makes me so mad...I'll fart in its general direction....4.158.210.101 01:14, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Please refrain from ad hominem/red herring/mere assertion. P.S. If we want to make this article pro-atheist, so what? If you don't like it, change it, but don't yell at us for "spewing propaganda". 67.127.103.206 03:56, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Uncyclopedia is supposed to be funny. I'm pretty sure some people don't find this arcticle funny. This should be removed if it's causing trouble and not making laughs. But, keep the funny version. That was actually pretty funny! -- Shooter Guy2

edit Hey.

Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs fixin', please feel obligated to make whatever changes you feel are needed, (even though they'll probably be reverted 5 seconds later). Uncyclopedia is a wiki, so almost anyone can edit almost any article by almost simply following the edit link almost at the top. You don't even need to log in in most cases! (Although there are some reasons why you might like to...) The Uncyclopedia Cabal encourages you to be italic. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly, and your 6 month ban will fly by faster than you think. If you're not sure how editing works, check out proper wiki formatting, or use the sandbox to try out your vandalizing skills. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon Baloon(Tick Tock) (Contribs) 04:00, Apr 8

edit I'm so confused.

What does any of this have to do with molesting young boys? -OptyC Sucks! Icons-flag-us CUN16:19, 4 Mar

edit Not Enough Misinformation

Seriously, this is Uncyclopedia, where is the obvious misinformation that a retarded Alpaca would notice?

Personal tools
projects