Boy tells mum he's an atheist, she freaks

Recon

He's the person to the right swinging in the chair, the mother is in the background. Can't be seen but can be heard!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Iw99I9_xW0

EDIT: youtube embedding thing doesn't seem to be working

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Iw99I9_xW0

thanks Wacker.

PeterIanStaker

Fair play to him, his mother seems like a head the ball.

I lol'd at the dad (or whoever the man is), just sittin' there having coffee, probably thinking to himself "here she goes again".

Zillah

It's a fairly notorious video. What a cow. The way she gets right into his face, ugh, such an obnoxious woman.

fitz0

Yup, I've seen this a few times, and the remixes. It was a meme for a while I think.

"You're gonna get nothing, absolutely nothing for Christmas, because that's what Christmas is all about, Jesus Christ" :rolleyes:

Dave!

Scumbag tbh

Wacker

Recon wrote: »

: youtube embedding thing doesn't seem to be working

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Iw99I9_xW0

Don't paste in youtube.com etc. Just use the reference from the end of the URL.

philologos

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Iw99I9_xW0

Here's the video.

Rev Hellfire

Dave! wrote: »

Scumbag tbh

Which one ? The parent for losing control and screaming at their kid or the kid(s) who staged the confrontation in order to share it among their mates ?

Personally I think they both deserve each other.

Liamario

It's not like the mother knew that the kid was filming it. Her behaviour is completely unacceptable and a little scarey to be honest.
So, no I wouldn't say the kid us as bad as the psychobitch

Dades

Been posted here a few times alright.

Galvasean

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Which one ? The parent for losing control and screaming at their kid or the kid(s) who staged the confrontation in order to share it among their mates ?

He should have sent it to social services TBH.

bleg

Better with keyboard cat.

fitz0

bleg wrote: »

Better with keyboard cat.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyauGeRa5T0

Also

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9ed-hZqqxU

nozzferrahhtoo

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Which one ? The parent for losing control and screaming at their kid or the kid(s) who staged the confrontation in order to share it among their mates ?

You may be right about the intention of the camera. We are not the kid so we do not know. We can only assume.

However judging by the mothers reaction it is probably JUST as likely that he was filming it not with the intention of sharing it with his mates, but to use as evidence against the parents should they turn violent and he had to go to the police after the incident.

If I thought something I was about to say, something which I felt had to be said in fact, was going to result in a reaction like that, I would ensure it was filmed too. I would be mad not to.

Rev Hellfire

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

You may be right about the intention of the camera. We are not the kid so we do not know. We can only assume.

Indeed we can only assume.
Though as such it would not be an unreasonable assumption to assume that perhaps preceding the clip shown they had endeavoured to goad their mother on to elect the response they wanted to film.

I just happen to think the video looks like a set-up and as such is suspect.

nozzferrahhtoo

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Though as such it would not be an unreasonable assumption to assume that perhaps preceding the clip shown they had endeavoured to goad their mother on to elect the response they wanted to film.

True, as I said BOTH of our assumptions appear to be equally valid... as assumptions go. However I must now point out that you are bouying up your first assumption with further assumptions of what happened BEFORE the clip such as previous goading.

We simply have no such data. This may be the first time the kid has EVER mentioned atheism to his parents but was afraid of the response he was going to get due to knowing, as he does, his mother better than we do or ever will.

The only thing I can say without making ANY assumption at all is that I know if I was about to say something that was going to illicit a response of that magnitude or worse, I would film it too. Merely as a precaution.

Are we not also assuming, possibly falsely, that the kid himself released the tape? Or do we know the history of it? Having recorded such a thing myself I would put it into someones hands for safe keeping should anything happen to me. Maybe the "someone" he gave it to thought it would be funny to put it on the net?

As I said, assumption on assumption on assumption... all we know for SURE, is that the actions of the parent ARE contemptible in this video and the actions of the kid MAY be contemptible if they are what you suspect.

axer

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Which one ? The parent for losing control and screaming at their kid or the kid(s) who staged the confrontation in order to share it among their mates ?

Personally I think they both deserve each other.

This looks more like a brother who came along and started filming it. It doesn't look like the kid himself set it up but like said "we don't know" you are just assuming the atheist is in the wrong.

Either way the mother is a scumbag since he is just a kid.

Rev Hellfire

axer wrote: »

you are just assuming the atheist is in the wrong.

Atheist or not has nothing to with it.
I think they're both in the wrong. The mother for losing the rag and overreacting. The kids for creating the situation so they could post a video to ridicule their parent.
Neither camp come out smelling of roses imho etc etc.

axer

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Atheist or not has nothing to with it.
I think they're both in the wrong. The mother for losing the rag and overreaching. The kids for creating the situation so they could post a video to ridicule their parent.
Neither camp come out smelling of roses imho etc etc.

Since the kid did not place the camera there then it is not fair to assume he knew about it before hand.

He is just a kid and she is an adult. She should know better. A scumbag like her deserves to get ridiculed.

nozzferrahhtoo

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

I think they're both in the wrong. The mother for losing the rag and overreacting. The kids for creating the situation so they could post a video to ridicule their parent.

Yes but as I said we KNOW the mother was in the wrong by the actions we have seen. You only THINK the boy was in the wrong by the intentions and actions you are wholly assuming.

The boy might have had entirely pure reasons (such as self defence in a court of law) for filming the exchange.

Not saying you are wrong at all, you are just commenting on the morality of an intention and an action you do not know actually occurred, rather than focusing on the one we know did.

Rev Hellfire

I think we'll agree to disagree.

kiffer

I think if it was a set up we would have more at the start of the clip... Such as the first time he says he's an atheist, instead it starts with her reacting to an unheard comment or conversation...

My guess is that it was mentioned in conversation and a sibling realised what was going to happen so started recording...

strobe

kiffer wrote: »

I think if it was a set up we would have more at the start of the clip... Such as the first time he says he's an atheist, instead it starts with her reacting to an unheard comment or conversation...

My guess is that it was mentioned in conversation and a sibling realised what was going to happen so started recording...

I would have thought that was blatently obvious.........

I guess not to everyone.

loldog

It's amusing the way the father is sitting there probably thinking "phew, for once it's not me that's getting it".

.

kiffer

I like that she thinks that forcing the kid to go to church every week is going to change his position... or maybe it was meant to be a punishment like no christmass gifts?

Still it's mean of the kid to do that to his poor mother, she's clearly not dealing with it well at all.
Should have just done the usual faking going to an earlier mass with friends so that you can make "sport" practice later... But really your secretly going to your communist/humanist/baby eating cult meeting... Or worse.

limklad

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Atheist or not has nothing to with it.
I think they're both in the wrong. The mother for losing the rag and overreacting. The kids for creating the situation so they could post a video to ridicule their parent.
Neither camp come out smelling of roses imho etc etc.

You are jumping to assumptions that the kids posted the video to ridicule their parents. It could also be their way of letting others know how bad their parents are. Abuse comes in many forms, shouting at any kid like the mother did is abuse and she is forcing her ways on the boy is also abuse.

It is all assumptions and speculation, until you get the full picture by interviewing the family, until then the general community will be no wiser.

limklad

No one truly know if god does or not exists and Science has not proven beyond fact either case.
As I say to god believers and non believers alike when I see an argument. It is up to them (the individual) and god and not up to each other or the challenger.

To a god fearing person: I tell them to prove that God told them to verbally abuse non-believers and to force his/her ways on the non-believer. I want hard evidence that can be proven by science not bull.
When they use the bible stories. I tell them that could easily be fiction misinterpreted by poor translation as it was written down by man/woman who is prone to mistakes and miss interpretation during translation.

At the same time I turn to the atheist: I say prove that God does not exists. I tell them that Science is every evolving and constant refining and changing the laws of science.
Once upon a time people believe that the world was flat and very adamant about it. we all know now that the world is a fat globe. Science is constantly discovering new things like bacteria and virus that people suspected but science was not capable to prove in their time and were ridicule about their beliefs because they could not prove it.

This same blunt behaviour is prevalent in aggressive Believers and aggressive non-believers alike. The reality is those aggressive insecure people like to force their views on others disrespecting their victims no matter what position their victims has, in order to wrongly prove their point in an aggressive manner, so they can feel that they are right and feel justified. Just like psychopath murders feels justified killing a person for looking at him/her wrongly or any excuse that pop into their head.

Whatever view is correct or not, their bad behaviour is wrong and not tolerable.

BurnsCarpenter

Galvasean wrote: »

He should have sent it to social services TBH.

What kind of idyllic childhoods did all of you people have that the mother's reaction seems so shocking?

FFS. I got a hell of a lot worse than this bratty kid.

MikeC101

limklad wrote: »

At the same time I turn to the atheist: I say prove that God does not exists.

To those who disbelieve in the invisible dragon in my shed: I say prove he does not exist.

To those who disbelieve in Chtulhu: I say prove he does not exist.

To those who disbelieve in the Flying Spaghetti Monster (PBUHNA): I say prove he does not exist.

And bear in mind that when you try to prove any of the above, I'll move the goalposts all over the place as to what constitutes proof, and ridicule science when it looks like it opposes my viewpoint, whilst eagerly grabbing at anything scientific that I think blosters my viewpoint.

Galvasean

BurnsCarpenter wrote: »

What kind of idyllic childhoods did all of you people have that the mother's reaction seems so shocking?

FFS. I got a hell of a lot worse than this bratty kid.

In my day we had to walk seven miles to school in the wind and hail with no shoes....

I don't care.

ColmDawson

strobe wrote: »

I would have thought that was blatently obvious.........

I guess not to everyone.

Completely obvious, I thought!

Kepti

BurnsCarpenter wrote: »

What kind of idyllic childhoods did all of you people have that the mother's reaction seems so shocking?

FFS. I got a hell of a lot worse than this bratty kid.

I guess if you want to define an idyllic childhood as not having a mentally unstable parent, then I had an idyllic childhood.

GLaDOS

On the subject of parents' reactions to atheism, I thought this blog entry was a good read

BurnsCarpenter

Kepti wrote: »

I guess if you want to define an idyllic childhood as not having a mentally unstable parent, then I had an idyllic childhood.

Well, maybe if you had experienced a bit of deranged screaming now and again, you wouldn't be going to hell.

Galvasean

BurnsCarpenter wrote: »

Well, maybe if you had experienced a bit of deranged screaming now and again, you wouldn't be going to hell.

A place full of deranged screaming. How ironic.

robindch

I'm sure the rant was "administered lovingly".

limklad

MikeC101 wrote: »

To those who disbelieve in the invisible dragon in my shed: I say prove he does not exist.

To those who disbelieve in Chtulhu: I say prove he does not exist.

To those who disbelieve in the Flying Spaghetti Monster (PBUHNA): I say prove he does not exist.

And bear in mind that when you try to prove any of the above, I'll move the goalposts all over the place as to what constitutes proof, and ridicule science when it looks like it opposes my viewpoint, whilst eagerly grabbing at anything scientific that I think blosters my viewpoint.

You are on the same fanatical coin as the religious fanatics as your religion is fanatical atheism and not just atheism.
Tolerance that allow differences is not part of your life as you have proven with your words, yet you have not proved anything, you just smeared others because they believe in any god/s. There is no scientific prove in yours words you posted. You use the same slanderous tools as the religious Fanatics (insults). You degrade others with words to make them feel stupid that they do not believe as you believe. As I say again you are just like the religious fanatics with their degrading attitude since you use the same degrading tools as they do. You are just as dangerous as them and the mother in the youtube video posted in this thread as she tried to make the boy feel humiliated for not believing in her god.

Albert Einstein wrote:

Then there are the fanatical atheists whose intolerance is the same as that of the religious fanatics, and it springs from the same source ... They are creatures who can't hear the music of the spheres.

I personally believe it is the driven ego that drive people to becomes fanatics. It is the same across all religions/non-religion, race and societies.

MikeC101

limklad wrote: »

You are on the same coin as the religious fanatics as your religion is fanatical atheism and not just atheism.

Nonsense - you don't know a damned thing about me, yet you're making ridiculous assertions. I'm simply pointing out the flaw in your "prove there is no god" statement. It can be applied to literally anything.

I doubt I even fit into your idea of what an atheist is. I am not, for example what Dawkins would consider a "strong atheist". I don't profess to know that there is no god, as I don't consider it possible to know such a thing.

limklad wrote: »

Tolerance that allow differences is not part of your life as you have proven with your words,

How on earth do you take that from what I said? I have no interest in trying to change anyones belief system, no desire to see people with different beliefs treated any differently, all I really want that the state be secular. That makes me some sort of raving fanatic?

limklad wrote: »

yet you have not proved anything, you just smeared others because they believe in any god/s.

Again - what? I never claimed to have proven anything.

How does what I said - pointing out that the "prove god does not exist" statement is nonsense, because it can apply to anything - translate to smearing others? Most theists can come up with far better arguments than using the "argument from ignorance" fallacy.

limklad wrote: »

There is no scientific prove in yours words you posted. You use the same slanderous tools as the religious Fanatics (insults).

What the hell are you on about? What scientific proof did I claim to be making? You seem to have misunderstood what I said and used it as basis for a nice old rant - again, my statements point out the flaw in the "prove there is no god" idea. It's not slanderous to anything but logical fallacies.

limklad wrote: »

You degrade others with words to make them feel stupid that they do not believe as you believe.

Do you even know what I believe? And again, pointing out the logical flaw in "prove there is no god" is not degrading anyone - it's pointing out the flaw in your argument.

limklad wrote: »

As I say again you are just like the religious fanatics with their degrading attitude since you use the same smearing as they do.

Absolutely - I'm a militant logicist - Death to argumentum ad ignorantiam!!

limklad wrote: »

You are just as dangerous as them and the mother in the youtube video posted in this thread as she tried to make the boy feel humiliated for not believing in her god.

So pointing out a fallacious argument is dangerous? I should be locked up before I strike again!

limklad wrote: »

I personally believe it is the driven ego that drive people to becomes fanatics. It is the same across all religions/non-religion, race and societies.

I think it leads people to read posts, not understand them, and go off on one, myself.

In case it's not obvious - my argument in my post is solely against the use of the "argument from ignorance" fallacy, and has nothing to do with anything else, and the examples I give are to show how ridiculous an argument it is. I have absolutely no idea why you take that as smearing people who believe in god or any of the other stuff.

Daftendirekt

limklad wrote: »

You are on the same fanatical coin as the religious fanatics as your religion is fanatical atheism and not just atheism.
Tolerance that allow differences is not part of your life as you have proven with your words, yet you have not proved anything, you just smeared others because they believe in any god/s. There is no scientific prove in yours words you posted. You use the same slanderous tools as the religious Fanatics (insults). You degrade others with words to make them feel stupid that they do not believe as you believe. As I say again you are just like the religious fanatics with their degrading attitude since you use the same degrading tools as they do. You are just as dangerous as them and the mother in the youtube video posted in this thread as she tried to make the boy feel humiliated for not believing in her god.

I love* the way when a poster raises a perfectly valid objection to your 'prove there's no god' position, rather than explain why we need proof of a conventional supernatural being's non-existence but not of an unconventional supernatural being's non-existence (and asking someone for proof of something's non-existence is ridiculous anyway), you instead imply that said poster is a fanatical, intolerant, dangerous zealot. Nice.


*Actually I don't love it at all. It irritates me to no end.

sonicthebadger*

limklad wrote: »

...
Tolerance that allow differences is not part of your life as you have proven with your words, yet you have not proved anything, ...

Huh?

Healium

I love how she attempts to quote the confirmation spiel, then realizes she has no clue
"You said in front of the Bishop...eh...what did you say?"

eoin5

limklad wrote: »

You are on the same fanatical coin as the religious fanatics as your religion is fanatical atheism and not just atheism.
Tolerance that allow differences is not part of your life as you have proven with your words, yet you have not proved anything, you just smeared others because they believe in any god/s. There is no scientific prove in yours words you posted. You use the same slanderous tools as the religious Fanatics (insults). You degrade others with words to make them feel stupid that they do not believe as you believe. As I say again you are just like the religious fanatics with their degrading attitude since you use the same degrading tools as they do. You are just as dangerous as them and the mother in the youtube video posted in this thread as she tried to make the boy feel humiliated for not believing in her god.
I personally believe it is the driven ego that drive people to becomes fanatics. It is the same across all religions/non-religion, race and societies.

Reminds me of those self defeating statements like "I hate people who complain", only longer and less interesting.