SUBSCRIBE for more!

It's interesting how the push to introduce intelligent design into classrooms in the UK was rejected in the 90s, and yet trans ideology has been mainstreamed in schools with no discussion whatsoever.

I am a devout Christian, but Monty Python and the Life of Brian is probably the funniest movie ever made.

Sorry, KK, but conflating the government's utter failure to uphold enlightenment values due to their own cowardice DOES NOT mean that they should not be put forward and defended in the first place.

2002: "If we get rid of Religion, Society will be so much more Rational." 2024: "Pregnant men"

The main issue is dogmatism.

"I would rather have questions that cant be answered rather than answers that cant be questioned" - Richard Feynman

If I were an atheist, I would be greatly dismayed to see that all the fanaticism and idiocy I thought would go away with the decline of traditional religions, instead simply manifested itself into different forms.

I’m atheist, I don’t have the void you speak of.

You can be an atheist whilst also believing that Christianity is a social good. Believing in the latter does not mean you aren’t an atheist.

Hitchens Razor, “ what can be asserted without evidence, can also be dismissed without evidence “

As a non-believer though, how do you "trick" yourself into believing things that aren't supported by evidence? I'm not sure I understand what the solution being proposed here is.

KK argues that an atheistic, human created set of values is inferior to a religious created set of values. Does he not understand that all religions were created by humans? There are many claims of divine revelation, but no proofs. There are many religions, each with their own set of values. An atheist's humanist set of values is merely one more to add to the pile. Must we take the good with the bad? Why can't we select the good stuff and leave the icky stuff on the pile?

I wish you wouldn't use that zoom effect on your video. I understand this effect is used to keep people from getting bored of watching a static scene, but it's annoying.

Konstantin says that Hitler was an atheist & seems to imply that his actions were due to this, there is some debate about H's religious views & I'm not sure that it supports the argument that this is what informed his actions. The Wikipedia page shows the range of nuance & complexity around this subject: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Adolf_Hitler

He completely skirts that Nordic societies have been largely atheist for decades before any wokism manifested there. Wokism is the effluent of America on the Anglo world, not lack of religion per se.

As a Believer in Christ, In God and in the Bible and what it teaches. I am not a follower of any religion, of any men or church professing some devine knowledge, and I have met many athiests that profess and follow the Golden Rule and, I have met many Christians who are hypocrites to the faith they believe in. Lesson from me... A Belief in, or a Rejection of a Religion in no way makes you Correct or a judge of others. I'll end on this simple biblical passage when Jesus teaches to Love God and then reveales this, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself" ...it really is that simple! Peace. 🙏

That last line: "religious people have the answer... Do we?" Is terrible. Religious people do not have THE answer. They contradict each other, oppose each other and fight each other. The same problems exist regardless of atheism. To pin the entire hopes of humankind on 4 men to deliver us from the hypocrisy and destructive nature of religion is where you went wrong. Between them they've laid out THEIR opinions and thoughts. It's not a dogma. It's literally the opposite. They, and atheism is general, aim to free us from religious shackles, what we do after that is up to us.

No single ideology is ever the problem. It only becomes problematic, if your ideology becomes the single most important part of your personality. This counts for religion, climate change protests, gender/sexuality and everything else.

First, you're assuming that the "woke" are atheists. You're discounting that the religious could also be "woke". In other words, you're advocating for religion so that the woke are curtailed, forgetting that both "wokism" and "religiosity" is a lack of critical thinking. Both are on the same side of the seesaw, whereas critical thinking is on the opposite side.

Stalin was an atheist but Hitler wasn't. I'm not saying he was a Christian but he constantly talked about divine providence guiding him.

Sorry but i can't get on board with this argument. People will always lack critical thinking skills, because it is part of our nature and we aren't taught it in schools. Without religion this oftentimes causes people to latch onto harmful ideologies or movements for a sense of meaning. However, the takaway from this isn't that religion is good, it's that we need to start promoting critical thinking and a skepticism of people who claim to have all the answers. Religion promotes the opposite of that. It's very easy to have a meaningful life without god, meaning comes from the connections we have with other people and knowing we are leaving something good behind, no matter how small, for the next generation.

Does TRUTH get a say in all of this?

The body count argument had always been silly on both sides. Evil cannot be defined by numbers, especially when the mass casualties of the early to mid 20th century are a result of the ability to commit mass casualties that other evil men didn't have. Are the Soviets really multiple times more evil than Isis? After all, give them thousands of nuclear bombs and we'd soon see who'd end up with the biggest body count. Also, Hitler wasn't an atheist. He believed in divine providence and the Germany that he led to commit gross atrocities was overwhelmingly still religious.

Never trust people who act and speak on behalf of their god. Never believe in a god who requires people to act and speak on his behalf.

It is so odd when people talk about "Atheist belief"... what?, it's like talking about the content of a void.

As a Catholic, I'd like to say this massive coordinated push for a return to organised religion across alternative media platforms is weird as hell.

"in absence of god, we can make up whatever rule we want" As if believers aren't constantly making up rules to justify their actions and ideas

If you lost faith in atheism, then you very clearly do not understand what either one of those words actually mean.

Konstantin, I know this is going to sound like a one-liner gotcha, but you really need to think about this deeply. 3:03 The very fact that you had "faith in atheism" is extremely telling of the fact that you never were an atheist.

Sam Harris is not against religion per se.... it is Dogma he opposes. The evil you prescribe to atheism was also due to dogmatic beliefs.... as is the new woke religion you despise. I do not describe myself as an atheist as it tells you nothing about me. We are all atheists in the thousands of Gods we reject. I am a humanist who believes in evidence and reasoned, rational debate my observation would preclude me to think that this is also your underlying philosophy.

Wow Konstantin, what a poor strawman you set up here. You are really misrepresenting the case here, I don't know if it is a shoddy memory of Hitchens, Dawkins and Harris or ill will.

I think video is conflating non-religious with the “woke cult”. There are plenty of people who were into the new atheism movement and were disillusioned by the wokeness creeping in, but that doesn’t discredit it. I do agree that there is a lack of purpose in the west, but that doesn’t mean it has to be filled with religion for everyone. My family is bigger than me, my community is bigger than me, there are plenty of things bigger than me which I acknowledge, but an invisible god isn’t one of them. That gives me purpose.

Beliefs are not always answers. I’m sorry atheism let you down by not providing easy answers. Some people can take it with humility, admit they don’t know, and start using scientific thinking to reveal the underlying truth. It takes time, but most importantly, it takes valor.

Atheism doesn't claim to substitute for a system of belief. Atheism is disbelief, nothing more. As for truth, purpose, and other matters that may puzzle the average individual, that is another matter. The absence of religion in the lives of individuals in secular society ought not to be such a difficult problem, but for too many, it is. It requires deep introspective thought, and it seems that that is too much to expect of modern Western citizens.

There are many Atheists who don't believe in this trans stuff. It barely has anything to do with God. There could very well be some religious people out there that feel trans stuff is valid, but are just not public or loud with their opinion. Also this point 6:35 about Atheists lacking meaning in life is an extremely immature viewpoint. I've been an Atheist for over 10 years having spent the prior 22 years of life in religion. I have developed far more meaning and fulfilment from a lack of belief than with a belief. But I know one measly anecdote isn't enough. So hear is something more concrete. The meaning of life in my opinion is **Love, Friendship, Money, Health and being as a good a person as possible**. That's it. I didn't need God or religions to tell me that. In fact they actively discriminate against each other, inter-discriminate and against non-believers. There you go, a simple God-Less meaning of life.

That's one of the few topics where I don't agree with you The "new atheists" make sure to always stress that they care about truth, it's not about how it makes us feel or behave, it's about truth and about how a society would function if it values truth Today's failed western societies do not value truth (although not because of classical religions but because of new woke dogmas) but that only supports their point IMO They, the four of them are the perfect example of how to have meaning and passion without religion

This is a very weak line of argument Constantine, and disappointing. You are either convinced that there is a personal god or not, if you are than you don’t need reasons for why it might be beneficial, if you aren’t then no benefit can change that and religion becomes a complete nonsense. Think deeper about this, you clearly haven’t yet.

One can argue that Communist USSR was atheist, but Germany? "A census in May 1939, six years into the Nazi era[1] after the annexation of Austria and Czechoslovakia[2] into Germany, indicates[3] that 54% of the population considered itself Protestant, 41% considered itself Catholic, 3.5% self-identified as Gottgläubig" You don't need atheists to think the "other" is a subhuman. And being religious surely doesn't stop you either.

Cmon Kisin.... the problem with not believing in god isn't that "we get to make up whatever rules we want". Why? Because we do in fact make up whatever rules we want, but atheism forces us to use reason in order justify those rules, whereas religion allows us to say "because god" and crush all debate (and all those who oppose us)

ill accept there is an argument for religion being useful, ive yet to see an argument for religion being true, i care what is true

From my experience, the wokest people are not atheist though... they're spiritists who believe in souls and reincarnation

That was poor. The evidence of usefulness of a religion is shaky at best aside from religious people being somewhat happier overall (big daddy watches over and gives rules to follow). Calling Stalin and Mao regimes atheist is a straight out manipulation since both were cult-like which Konstantin clearly knows as a Russian. Besides, both Russia and China had long history of violence in their "religious" periods. Hitler was clearly an occultist as well as his elites which obviously does not qualify as atheism. I agree to Konstantin on many points, but this is not one of those.

The thing is, I just don't believe in God, I just don't. I'm an atheist but I totally agree and desire the values of the west, I see their merit compared to the other alternatives and I don't wish to live like that. I grew up on the ideals of courage, truth, helping your community because it's the right and good thing to do, not for a reward in the afterlife, but because it makes your life better and more enjoyable when people can depend on you and you on them. I don't think I need to believe in God in order to be a good person, and yes, I think that life has no objective meaning and in the end it will all be for nothing, but until that end why not find my own meaning in life by being as good as I can be? sure, I could be bad but that's just not how I was raised. I don't know, I think that people are more than capable of finding their meaning without the need for a God but if that's what helps them wake up in the morning and be kind, good and helpful to their fellow man then I'm all for it. I do however want to be clear that I am against anything that is anti western values and I am willing to fight and kill for the west to survive, I hope you are prepared for that as well, because something tells me we will have to fight the others soon, those who claim to follow a religion of peace but in truth, they only want blood and total control.

The problem with Hicks and his then “just forgive me” is that he neither thinks he’s done wrong nor believes that Christians have a right to protest. One only has a brief amount of time to defy gravity.

Hitler wasn’t an atheist or a Christian. I’m not sure exactly what he was. He had weird views about “Providence” and other Nazi leaders were Pagan and had mystical beliefs. Weird for sure

"Religion bad." "Atheism bad." Apparently, it's just people who are bad. "If you can make them believe absurdities, you can make them commit atrocities." I am an atheist, but unlike most atheists, I have not substituted a belief in a god for another ridiculous belief, as most atheists have. The fact is that most people cannot exist without a belief, whether that is in some god, or in the State, which is basically yet another god. A good example is atheists rejecting the creation story from the bible yet embracing the Big Bang theory. One makes as much sense as the other. It's alright to admit you don't know. It's not alright to come up with fairy tales to explain things we don't understand. We ridicule the old barbarians who explained lightning by attributing it to Thor or Donar, but we in the 21st century are different not one iota. Stop believing in absurdities.

So true...this new woke-religion that filled the vacuum-void is actually worse

Religion is as bad as most political parties, faith is something different.

There have been approximately 18.000 gods and goddesses invented by humans across the millennia. They’ve all claimed to be the “only true one”. I understand that societies somehow feel lost without religion, but knowing everything we do today, how can I be expected to just randomly pick one over the other when they’re all nonsense to me. That’s like deciding to believe the earth is flat, just because society as a whole can’t cope with the fact it’s round. Sorry, going backwards is not the way forward.

I've been atheist (not AN atheist) for about 30 years now. It's apparent that people, collectively, need someone to tell them what to do and how to behave. It's human nature. Religion does just that. Unfortunately it also does a lot more, but to remove religion from the masses just leaves them vulnerable to anything else that justifies their existence.

What fills that void? philosophy and reason .... much better than fairy tales and BS

The C of E is pretty woke. Being non religious is a perfectly rational position and should be respected.

"I lost my faith in atheism" Thats all the evidence i need to know thinking for yourself is not a strength

The answer is to push for critical thinking. Critical thinking would cut through both the old religions and the new.

I know this is a long comment and I am sure few will read it, but I do think it is important to add to this conversation or I would not have taken the time to write it. As a Roman Catholic, and a student of World Mythology and Religions, I was never drawn to the New Atheism movement, not because of my faith, but because of their level on analysis. It is one thing to win in an argument against a creationist (who see religious texts as a historical account rather than poetry, which is how it should be viewed) The New Atheists are correct in their assertion that there is no scientific evidence for the presence of God. And yet, even when science proves without a doubt that no creator awaits us, religion did not go away. This was not because of ignorance, or mad faith, but because humans need stories. Stories, narrative is the one thing humanity has that no other life form on this planet possesses. We need stories to build our cultures on. They are the backbone of culture, and without them, when a society stops believing in the stories that their culture is founded upon, cultures quickly crumble. If science was all we needed, all this faith business would have stopped by the Enlightenment. But it did not. It burst forth in Romanticism which gave birth to the decadence of the West, creating the circumstances for two World Wars, the like of which this earth has never seen. We must not forget that Nietzsche’s assertion that God is dead was not a positive declaration, but a lament for what was to come without Him. Without these stories, without the catharsis they offer, we are not able to get our own psyches in order. We need stories, archetypes, to map the road for us. No wonder pop-culture has made so many leaps and bounds now that the young have no grounding narratives to gird them in their youth. A blueprint for a reborn atheist is Camille Paglia, who sees world religions not as a stain on our resume, but as the greatest creation we have ever mustered. Or perhaps Northrop Frye, who saw narrative itself as the backbone of human thought. C.G. Jung, Mircea Eliade, even Neitzsche these thinkers knew the dangers of parting with story. Without stories, societies fall. We westerners must be aware that there are people in this world who believe in their own stories, and historically, the Faithful tend to win over the faithless. Yes, religion is dangerous, but not because it is religion, but because it is lead by man. Man will use any institution as an excuse to kill his enemy. So we build stories, stories that reflect the world as we think it should be. Instead of weeping over the earth’s natural cruelty, we tell a story of a better world, and bring it into being with the very force of our minds. And so here we stand in the West, our own stories so fractured, we cannot agree on any common thread of humanity between us. All around us, religious extremists buzz, like the vandals and the huns in the late Roman Empire, which also stopped believing in the stories which made them great and terrible. The new atheist is right, God is dead, at least in the West, though His memory lives in the corners of a few hearts here. And now, there is no one to say “help us” to. We should morn the weakened state of faith not praise it. Man is evil, Nature is neutral at best. It is only society that keeps the raw bloody world at bay, and when we destroy our stories (whether you believe in them or not) when you stop telling them, you blow out the flame of the west all the faster. The East will soon follow us in this, as it has these past few centuries. And then, in a world devoid of all meaning, then we will truly see the horrors the world has on store for us.

Spoiler alert to the religious and the atheistic among us: The story doesn't have to be literally true to move us towards wanting to be better people or to think that the world might not be such a awful place all the time. When you read 'Charlotte's Web' to your eight-year-old daughter do you remind her nightly as you close the book after each chapter, that there aren't really talking/writing spiders and that pigs don't really have happy communities of loving friends in the barn? Or do you let her drift off to sleep thinking that at least in the mind and heart of E.B. White and his millions and millions of devoted readers love, kindness, self-sacrifice are real things and worthy aspirations. The literally thinkers ruin everything on both sides, whether they be the 'that's not literally true or you can prove that exists' or the people who think every word of the Christian Bible literally happened as written. We watch movies all the time that uplift us, make aim for great things and want to truly be better than we are, stories that aren't true, didn't really happen, completely made-up, but none the less beautiful, wondrous, delightful stories that someone found in their hearts and wrote down, and thereby made the world a little better to those who listened with their souls. All the great heroes and heroines and other doers of great things believed in their visions, in their feelings, in that great things were possible and either they came from human stories or some great being beyond understanding place those visions in their minds. Nothing exists in the world created by humans but someone believed it into existence.

Lapsed atheist? Meaning what, you don't attend the services anymore? 😂

The only reason we have religion is because we are the only animal that understands it's own mortality. I could be wrong, cos I do have my suspicions about dolphins...

Atheism has nothing to do with whether religion is good or bad or bad, regardless of what any individual atheist’s views are it doesn’t make any claims, it simply the state of not being convince of the existence of a God. I see a sea of cultural/political Christians coming are way 🤦‍♂️

Okay, now tell us what we DO. Do we abandon our commitment to truth? Lie to our children?

The perpetual misrepresentation of atheism as some kind of system or faith is as crass and tiresome as it is disingenuous. My first thought when I saw the title of this clip was was that KK would be attempting to widen his appeal to the religious market.

I used to be a militant atheist in my youth (I studied Zoology at university - which has evolution baked in) and I was a third/fourth gen atheist in the uk in the 90s. What I didn’t appreciate back then is that some people genuinely need something larger than themselves to believe in, and that people who do not have this need - such as my self (and probably Dawkins) are very much the odds ones out and in a minority too small to base a civilisational world view on. So now I’m far more accepting of religion as a concept, but judge each religion based on the relative good vs harm it causes. Sadly we have replaced the benign CoE Christianity with harmful wokeism and the religion of ‘peace’.

As long as a religion is harmless, live and let live.

So in short, the New Atheists are responsible for Wokeness? Constantin has been pushing this line of thought in some of his latest interviews and did not get (from what I've seen) anyone to second it. Not to say I didn't hear this argument before, I think from Jordan Peterson in a debate with Sam Harris, but from what I remember Peterson did not put it as a main reason. He simply made the point that atheism leaves you wide open to be inducted into some other belief system (which I think is true). So I think going through the work to make a video like this greatly overestimates the role the New Atheists have had in the "great awokening". More likely, the roots and impetus of wokeness are coming from the 90s and the takeover of liberal universities by the extreme left (this argument is heard way more frequently and seems to make way more sense, seeing what happens in universities even today). I also found incredibly disengenious that he says something like "we had to invent human rights after WW2 because there was no more a view in which we all deserve respect because we are children of God". This is ridiculous because it assumes that the respect of being a child of god carries over across religions, while indeed, in some horrible situations all the reason religious people need to kill someone is because they pray to the wrong god.

New Atheism? Atheism isn''t a movement it's simply an unwillingness to accept the assertion of a God without evidence, I actually zoned out halfway through this Petersonesque diatribe, the idea that we'd be no better off with or without religion is nonsense, something that sounds intelligent does not make it so.

I'm an agnostic Atheist, and until I see proof of a god of some kind, I will remain so. I don't follow any religion, god-based or secular (woke). I am aware that most humans need a religion, though. I can only hope the peaceful non-authoritarian religions win out.

Let's not leave Stephen Fry out of the equation here. When 'The God Delusion' was trending he busied himself on the lecture circuit with his castigation of religion, particularly, but not particularly bravely, Catholicism ( Other religions are available). Yet, in his last Christmas message he celebrated his Jewishness. Hmmm. Make up your mind, mister.

I think it is a mistake to think that all Christians are young earth creationists. The largest Christian church, Roman Catholism has never made a definitive statement on this and allows a wide range of views. I think the new athiests completely got it wrong but were successful as there was already developing in society a strong anti Christian attitude well before they atacked it. Also strangly Dawkins produced some shows very sympathetic to Bhuddism. He is not anti religion he is just anti God.

Even if my own conclusions are different, I continue to be impressed by the intellectual journey of this apparently open minded young man.

Agreed. Nature abhors a vacuum.

100% top marks, absolutely agreeable. Love you Konstantin, you are very wise, insightful and true 💖

The only mistake is that you made a religion and prophets out of these men which goes directly against the whole point.

The New Academia had these answers millennia ago: self-improvement through living a virtuous life. You don't need gods for that.

This argument doesnt make any sense. 1. Hitchens etc. Didnt only argue the case, that atheism wasnt the motivating factor in Stalin, hitler and so on. They also argued that their regimes were in fact religious in of itself. Totalitarian. Furthermore both Stalin and Hitler very much indeed used the religious memes within their people, and hitler had a close relationship with the catholic Church. 2. That Stalin etc. Used the abscence of god “to make any rule we want” is also just an assertion without any merit.. look at the most atheist countries in the world today, how are the scandinavian countries even comparable with the regimes referenced to in the argumentt? 3. Doesnt religion have a comforting effect despite of it being unscientific? Again, the logic from this just goes straight against everything Konstantin has been arguing with regards to any othe subject.. If we Take the trans-debate.. Well, isnt the idea of some dude being female comforting for that person? Even though it is scientifcly wrong, doesnt the transideology hold some value to the world? I mean, it is comforting for alot of people… one could say - Well they (the most Extreme of Them) try and enforce their views on us and our children, they try and make laws and the threaten with violence.. and then one could ask yourself, doesnt religion hold the exact same prediciment? You cannot find one single video or text with either of the Four horsemen saying people cant be religious, ever single one of Them always says that they just need to keep it to themselves.

I'm an atheist, but I connect strongly with this journey from new atheist supporter to appreciation for religious values. I recently had direct experience with the divine (although I don't believe it to be a God), and made friends with a bunch of Christians. Opened my eyes to how soulless I was.

If not to stamp on atheists and prop up Christian apologists, what is this for? Unless I'm missing something this really doesn't look good

Don't never confuse atheism, with culturel, or political idioligies.

Religions did it to themselves - New Atheism has had a tiny role in the decline of religion in the west.

I started arguing against atheism 5 years ago. Ironically, it was after hearing Dawkins mention that the Church of England could be an inoculation against more pernicious nonsense. After hearing him say that, everything became clear and I realise how terrible I was as an atheist.

Factually wrong on quite a lot of points. Human rights come from the 18th C enlightennent, and are the rebasing of morality on non-religious, non-super-natural ground. This was the conclusion of the wars of the reformation during the preceeding 16th & 17thC Baroque era. Non-religious morality brought the idea of equal rights, and consequently the abolition of slavery, and the establishment of democracy as the only acceptable basis of government. Nazism and Comunism are irrational beliefs that reproduce the core characteristics of religious tyranny and sectarian states.

*The best Christians are sometimes atheists:* How the line between religion and atheism is thinner than you think, how the line between comedy and religion, is thinner than you think: In 1980 I knew an 80 year old British man who faithfully went to the same church for 40 years. He was cremated, his remains are in the church garden under a rose bush now. One day I asked Lawrence about his faith in God. He said, "Oh, I thought you knew. I'm an atheist. I don't believe in God. I go to church because I just like the people, I like the teaching in the church. Good people" I think of him still from time to time now, remembering him as the best Christian I ever met.... Long ago I had a strange thought: Christopher Hitchens, had he gone into the church, Hitchens might have been one of the best Popes we ever had. Instead he bought into The Atheist Delusion. Sam Harris has an admirable intellect. He might have made a fine Cardinal in the Church. Both KK & FF had potential for career advancement if they took up the collar. I think a stain glass window on the Triggernometry set, would not look out of place. Bill Hicks and George Carlin were funny because their humor assumed and accepted a set of moral propositions about reality, which come out of religion. Their humor came out of a realization of the failure of people, to live up to the ideals they accepted. People who did not share their morals would not think both men funny. KK & FF accepted those same moral precepts that motivated Hicks and Carlin. Comedy is about morality, or it's not funny. Comics are priests that think too much, feel too little. The line between religion and comedy is thinner than people think. Again, a Stain Glass Window behind the two, would not be inappropriate. Lawrence knew that. In the same general sense, once you start to look into the Bible and you know a bit about evolution, the line between the wisdom in the Bible and the lessons of evolution, that line is a lot thinner than you might think. For instance Genesis 3:16 reads to me like an evolutionary deal between the sexes. Other people read it as a religious ideal encoded in religion, by men seeking God. I see that verse, as both....atheistic science coming together with religious faith. I see both as true, in a way I don't understand. There is a line between belief and non-belief. That line is a lot thinner, than people imagine it to be.

„The comfort that you get from believing a falsehood, is like a drug.“ Is this not a general statement which can also be turned against the belief that there is no God? The comfort, not having to stand before a just judge at the end of life, not having to bear the results of wrongdoing, not having to respect and accept a creator, someone who owns me and has the right do demand obedience from me? Seems to me like Atheism is also „Opium des (intellektuellen) Volks“ (opium of the (intellectual) people), to state Karl Marx.

I am an atheist but I respect Catholic Druidism.

“Human decency is not derived from religion. It precedes it.” Hitchens. But he's dead. So you should reach out to Harris and discuss your views. It would clearly be an evisceration.

What Void are you talking about? I live in a mostly non religious country. And most people I know have little problem finding value and purpose in life without religion. Maybe its the people and societies recovering from long and fanatic love story with religion that have a hard time getting over the "breakup". I honestly cannot see this Void in my daily life at all. Anyway... Love the channel, keep up the good work guys!

_“I put no stock in religion. By the word religion I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called the will of God. I've seen too much religion in the eyes of too many murderers. Holiness is in right action, and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves. And goodness - what God desires - is here [points to Balian's head] and here [points to Balian's heart], and by what you decide to do every day, you will be a good man...or not.”_ - *David Thewlis as the Knight Hospitaller in the movie, Kingdom of Heaven (2005)*

I feel KK is slowly going down the the JP route. Becoming a Christian solely to combat Wokeness.

Don't forget that the religion you get is not necessary the religion you wished for. What could be worse and more difficult to counter than evil backed up by globally accepted religious dogma?

i'm yet to be convinced that any religious conviction can make a person immune to becoming a genocidal psycho.

I just don't understand why people need guidance and community so much... But I see it too. People replacing religion with wokism or sometimes some sort of personal spiritualistic blend of astrology, mindfulness, buddhism, and their favourite football team. I don't understand why people need this so much, but it's apparent that most people do. What is it that sets us, Atheists with our own set of moral values, who don't need any nonsense to give our lives meaning, from other people? That's what I would like to find out. I think it might have something to do with the fact that people's mental health has been on a steep decline. You need mental strength and resilience to hold on to your beliefs, even when your peers disagree with you, and even when those beliefs weren't designed to give you comfort through bad times. But even if mental health improves, there will always be people who need some sort of religion. But the danger of creating a new religion, updated with modern Western values, is that eventually, it will expire, like old religions. Humanity evolves, and values change. That's why science is better, as it's constantly updating itself with the latest evidence. Maybe we need a self updating sort of religion. It's a tough problem to solve...

Konstantin, please read ‘The Constitution of Knowledge’ by Jonathan Rauch, which is an argument for structured discourse set on a foundation of free speech. It leaves space for religious practices but stresses the importance of objective knowledge to keep society’s truth-seeking healthy

Better the devil you know than the one you don't. I prefer the old ministers of morality in their dresses and funny hats than the new ones in theirs.

I am a secular humanist. I respect the rights of people to believe what they want. I despise all religions as they are all an attempt, by men, to use the incurable need to understand ones place in the universe and the purpose of existence. Atheism is not a religion, it's is only the rejection of an assertion of faith by a "chosen" few. Christopher Hitchens was once asked if he would abolish religion. He said he would not, on the basis that there is an innate desire within humans to believe and search for answers. The trouble is, religions offer false consolation. The following are the things that all religions ought to have on their conscience Lies Violence Irrational Intolerant Allied to racism, tribalism and bigotry Invested in ignorance Hostile to free enquiry Contemptuous of women Coercive towards children The so called "neo atheists" were addressing the behaviour of the monotheisms at that time. Having lost the arguments and being rightly revealed as utter nonsense, the religious apologists are now talking in terms of philosophy, ontology and metaphysics. The anticipated rejection of atheism, based on Lenin, Mao and Hitler are dealt with through an understanding of totalitarianism and the desire of some men to control everything. Totalitarianism is not too far away from monotheism in its objectives. It's only ever about control. Take the risk of thinking for yourself, much more truth, beauty and wisdom will come to you that way. C. Hitchens. When you think for yourself, you will see that all religion is utter nonsense. Konstantin ought to know better than to tar us all with a single brush.

Not everybody is a mere child with ambitions of grandeur. Humans can and do think for themselves. As soon as a religion comes into play, suddenly these same humans become horrid monsters.

I think Konstantin has spent a little too much time with Lizz Truss.. and is now courting the conservative clicks lol

Konstantin saying the reason atheism "lost it's mojo" by not being able to provide any answers to lack of meaning etc is a weird one to me. It doesn't NEED to provide any answers on that front. That's not what atheism is about. Its simply rejecting the notion of a man in the clouds, as intelligent creator, judging us all. 🤔

Hitler was NOT a atheist 😂

I lived in NYC when n!ne/II happened. I started reading more about religion & found it unnecessary & harmful. After a few more terry* a77acks & reading Dawkins I became an edgy Atheist but called myself a Secular Humanist. I loved Hitchens. After what happened in the last 10 years I think Christianity belongs to the basis that started western civilization & a lot of people need it & I might as well.

I was a socialist growing up without realizing it, it took me many many years to actually become to opposite and I am basically a conservative Christian and I love these videos