Atheist Humor

This is the place to post that hilarious irreligious YouTube video, an irreverent, anti-religious cartoon, or other humorous bit of media. Posts that do not reflect an atheist/irreligious theme will be deleted. (Don't make me go Old Testament.)

Members: 2122
Latest Activity: on Sunday

Lewis Black: The Flintstones is not a documentary.

A slightly longer version of the clip that used to be here.

Discussion Forum

Beards and Religion

Started by Patricia. Last reply by Patricia Apr 20. 6 Replies

Comment Wall


You need to be a member of Atheist Humor to add comments!

Comment by ɟǝןıx dǝʇɹɐɹ on November 29, 2009 at 2:20pm
@Jason: I didn't get it...
Comment by Ivy on November 29, 2009 at 2:01pm
@Jason -- Hah! :)
Comment by Louis Davout on November 29, 2009 at 9:06am

Comment by ɟǝןıx dǝʇɹɐɹ on November 29, 2009 at 2:10am

Comment by Monica Meas on November 29, 2009 at 1:40am
Thor nailed Jesus.....think about it....ha, i probably already said it and i forgot
Comment by Sam Kennedy on November 28, 2009 at 7:09pm

Comment by Ivy on November 28, 2009 at 12:43pm
Humor is a surprisingly delicate thing, isn't it? It can be a brick to the head (like Animal House) or subtle and nuanced, dependent upon the interpretive abilities of the reader or observer. Sarcasm or a deadpan delivery can be confusing to all of us at times, and in a text-based environment like this, where non-verbal cues are absent, misunderstandings are inevitable. Add the fact that much of the Web (Atheist Nexus included) is an international community wherein English is not everyone's first language, and it's inevitable that misunderstandings will occur because some kinds of humor just don't translate.

That said, I think we've left this little misunderstanding/fender-bender behind us, and we're none the worse for wear. The folks involved settled up amicably, and got back on the road. Congratulations, guys--reason and rational thinking win again. Brilliant. :)
Comment by IAmTheBlog on November 28, 2009 at 12:38pm
I'm sorry if my post seemed like an overreaction. Maybe "accusation" was harsh, but I think I was understandably concerned and defensive after seeing the post here and one on Jason's website (which is removed now, thank you Jason) saying my blog was a spoof done by a Christian.

Posing as an atheist can get you banned on here. Besides the fact that I really like it here, this is the largest atheist social site out there. This would not be a good place for my small, low-traffic atheist website to be labeled as the work of some Christian kook. For the record, I'm an atheist kook! :-)

I'm sorry for the serious note in an otherwise hilarious group. Let the fun begin again!
Comment by ɟǝןıx dǝʇɹɐɹ on November 28, 2009 at 12:28pm
you are right Larry :). I just wanted to say that not only the message is important but also how it is presented. I definitely make boo-boo's sometimes and I am even in the middle of one right now. :)
Comment by ɟǝןıx dǝʇɹɐɹ on November 28, 2009 at 11:54am
about the last four comments I don't know exactly what was written but I think it could have been done in this way:

Hey man, it was me! (you may insert an "ha ha ha" or ":))" or "lol" or whatever). Did you think I am a Christian? (you may put a ":)" ) I guess this is an example of Poe's Law. Anyway, you should read something else on my website before reacting so quickly. In other contexts, it could bring you troubles, if you don't investigate a little bit before reacting. (":)")>>
The other guy would say oops ! Sorry, it was a misunderstanding, bla bla bla and ha ha ha!>>
"Accusations" is a harsh word, especially if you think these "accusations" were posted for comedy purposes and that they lose their object once one finds that the accused is not what he was accused he is.

This reminds me of Yes Prime Minister: The Tangled Web
[The Prime Minister believes that he gave a clear, simple, straightforward and honest answer.]
Sir Humphrey: Unfortunately, although the answer was indeed clear, simple, and straightforward, there is some difficulty in justifiably assigning to it the fourth of the epithets you applied to the statement, inasmuch as the precise correlation between the information you communicated and the facts, insofar as they can be determined and demonstrated, is such as to cause epistemological problems, of sufficient magnitude as to lay upon the logical and semantic resources of the English language a heavier burden than they can reasonably be expected to bear.
PM Hacker: Epistemological — what are you talking about?
Sir Humphrey: You told a lie.

Members (2120)


© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service