All memes aside. Was xavier renegade angel the most Optimistic and anti-nihilistic show on adult swim?

No, it was AS greenlighting a low budget show that targeted stoners

No, it was just another adult comedy that mocked various aspects of society. Despite being genuinely funny an entertaining, people think it's deeper than it is because for many it's babby's first contact with symbolism.

Fuck you

...

this

Gonna be frank with you, none of that is intentional it's a result of the creators just using a cgi acid trip to play out all the cheeky wordplay they came up with. This is why Xavier is entertaining, the creators were genuinely just having fun making such an absurd thing. R&M takes itself too seriously for what it is and hiring female writers for diversity purposes proves that faggot Justin doesn't give a shit about fun or humor.

Correct, but the spread of Islam is much more limited to what you think and most Islamic countries are moving away from traditional Shia or Sunni ideals. That's why (((funded terrorist groups))) find it easier to pick apart youngsters of muzzie origin to train into lone wolves. They take them off the streets, give them actual purpose and instruct them with a set of religious laws.

Without God or higher beings to believe in, you're just left with the hypothesis that Life (Life life) is nothing but a coincidence and all human developments are for nothing. Within this framework, a strong individual can still find the will to be optimistic, but the masses would go into, well, mass hysteria.

No.

Good thing here we are individuals and not masses, right? There's nothing inherently wrong with atheism, but even as an atheist I do agree that it shouldn't widespread to the masses because the faggots will not know how to handle it. It's like nihilism as well, see, having no set purpose of life was supposed to be liberating, it means you could do what you want with your life and not what you're told to be, but faggots take it as "just don do anything".
I think Holla Forums hate boner of nihilism is undeserved and their boner for Christianity is fucking stupid. Rick and Morty states that nothing matter because of multiverse and shit, and that's what actually gave Summer a reason to not act like a shit head. at least for a single episode, and that was right, but you still cling to the "doesn't matter" part. As for Christianity, as much as it's true that it's the best for normalfag masses, all it does it makes you faggot act like normalfags as well. That much you want to be part of the mass, even on anonymous boards, and a niche one at that?

Wasn't the diversity hire faggot Dan Harmon?

I'm not even against spirituality, Monotheistic religions are the bane of human society however
Kikes, Christcucks and Mudslimes are all the same trash.
Jesus and God are nothing but a Horus and Ra story retold for Palestinians based on the Old Kike Testament that they followed while being raped by Romans for centuries.

It was a nice tool to tell sheep to stop killing, raping and stealing eachother and later on a nice tool for societal control but in a modern State system its essencially outdated with only its values, that are still ingrained in most people and western societies today, being upheld by a majory of those people, likely even more than before, without the need for supersticious fairytales.

Feel free to scream FEDORA with no counter argument though, I'm agnostic.

But that's inherently wrong.

Regardless of religious or spiritual belief, there's always a constant need to better oneself, from an evolutionary point of view. You need to be better to get more money/influence/power, as that's how you attract a mate and produce off-spring. From there, you need to care for your family, which extends to your community as they care for your family as well.

I don't believe anything is pre-ordained, nor do I believe the human race to be alone in sentience. I feel like every choice I make it up to me, and I make them according to what I wish to happen in my future, but I do follow the general rules of religious/spiritual movements, like restraining from violence/crime, not because I'm told to, but because if I don't, then other people wouldn't be able to have power over their future like I do.

Religion is just another form of government; you have law and punishment systems in place.

This is the worst kind of atheism. It's like centrism, you're either too afraid or too stupid t take a side. At least be aphateist, that's where it is at. Being agnostic or atheism adjudicate importance to the mater when there really isn't, and so not giving a shit about a topic that may have no relevant in your life is the best course of action. If all atheists and agnostics were aphateists the world would still flowing to the masses and it'd be fruitful for everyone.
YOU'RE A PUSSY

This.
Claiming agnosticism is essentially saying "I don't believe in him, but I'll give him a shot just in case so I don't go to hell".

Sure I can't, keep fighting the good fight goy.

God, you're pathetic.

Literally identity politics, I bet you faggots even hate Catholics.

Even as an atheist I can recognize catholicism is shit.

I don't, and I agree with all you said, I just wanted to point out how much of a pussy you are for being an agnostic. You accusing me of hating Christianity is also hilarious considering you used Christcucks in the first place.

Keep pozting

Define conscience, fag, and how it remotely gave us any meaning.

It didn't give us any meaning, just a way to question and theorize upon it and then create one, thus bettering ourselves as a conscious species.

There actually IS something wrong with atheism, but not in the sense that "people who don't believe a greater being exist are dumb look at me I'm smart cause I sit in church and bless jeezus adam n eve not adam n steve". It's wrong as it leads to amorality. The whole point of organized religion and religious institutes is that they strengthen communities by bringing them together, providing morals that the followers must adhere to as much as realistically possible and essentially form a way for people to judge right or wrong by questioning whether such an act would put the whole community in grave dangers.
That's when the show was worth a damn and it wasn't even phrased like that, else she'd have just put a bullet through her head. Original Morty pretty much gave her one of the most honest answers to the meaning of life: it's not that it doesn't matter at all but we're all born out of chaos, no one's in control and must do the best with our lives. He's not telling her to go hog-wild, he just wants to keep the family united. If nothing matters then you've gotta find something that matters.
But no today they would have censored half the dialogue and went with a funny catchphrase and stuff about mama loving her girl's titties.
You mean The Corporate Church of (((Jesus Christ))) sponsored by Socialism (♪When you're hungry and you know it clap your hands~!♪) in collaboration with the LGBTQPCIGXOABCD++* community? Nah, I'll stick to the teachings of old.
Nice meme, I bet all that newfangled tech that lets you live in leisure came out of the Soviet Union or other enlightened atheist countries (spoiler: it came from Christian and Islamic societies, or from other pagan countries of old).
By the way, I'm not correlating scientific discoveries with the existence of a particular faith. I'm just stating that the societies wherein scientific discoveries could be made (and at that, discoveries that were not strictly material or industry-related, but that allowed for a better understanding of our world at large) were, by their very nature, guided by faith in their societies.
We aren't talking about whether or not you can improve with or without God. We're dealing with the fact that, in a society that prides itself onto being extremely "pragmatic" and objective, the only things of value in life would be those that would net the individual any kind of material gaining, instead of the preservation of its race and community as a whole, if not that of the entire planet. If not for my pleasure, then for whom? That's the Chink mentality, by the way. They're not called the Ant People for nothing.

Pretty much. At least an atheist has to show the proof (or point out to the absence of direct proof) for his beliefs. An agnostic is pretty much one of those funny ms paint cartoons caricatures but in real life.

Jayzus exists and science proved it. He was a kike, obviously, since he lived in Judea. But he was also the one kike who stepped all over which is sacred to kikes, from the usury down to the backstabbing. They fucking hate him and if you don't think that the world adopted his religion to prevent kikes themselves from creating a cattle society then you're kind of out of the loop. It's certainly coopted right now, no objections there.

Do you know what's a saint, though?

...

Of course he fucking did, doesn't mean his superhuman deeds did.
Of course it was, whats your point though? Are you saying modern development didn't and doesn't exist?
Reminder that the commies went from a feudal society to a Space faring Superpower in less than a century .
Reminder that Hitler was against organized religion and saw most of spirituality as a crutch while trying to better human beings in hiz own view and brought a country on its knees to a Continental power in less than a decade.
Faith drove progress and development, doesn't mean its the only way.
This has never been true, and plenty of suburban and rural regions are still safe without having a single religion.
Urbanization, governmment social handouts and immigrants populating those were the fact that lead your granpappy to scream "back in the olds days things were better " while hes too stubborn to leave his old house that now has 30 apartements full of niggers next to it or some other minority being relocated to the unoccupied house next door.

People were killing themselves and their same religious neighbours for measly things for years.

Having the same culture matters, not the same religion unless you're a kike.

And none of you have adressed whats so bad about being agnostic.

By stealing Nazi tech and scientists, they did. As did America, to be honest. Hitler himself ordered the destruction of most of the tech that was inevitably going to be stolen, yet most of the Prussian generals refused to do so. Also inb4 "hurpadurp why didn't Germoney win the war against atheists checkmate", manpower is immensely more important when you're dealing with a continent-wide conflict.

There's something inherently wrong in your logic as well. From your post and at least the first paragraph you can conclude that morality is only a direct result of religion, and that's not really the case. By definition, morality is just a proper way to act, it's true that an institutions like the church and beliefs like religion prevented people from killing each other, acting proper, but it have also led to manslaughter, among other "improper" and therefore amoral behavior. My point is that there's no reason to believe faith or anything that is inherent to the church or religion is the cause of morality, and there's no reason to not believe morality can exist without this institutions nor faith. Morality should be something from the individual to the community, religion basically forces the individual to do it, so it's easy to see why once religion stops, the mass becomes amoral as well. But as I said, we are not mass, are we? If we hate amorality, is because we know there's no reason to be amoral other than ignorance, and that may include religion as well, whether you have faith or not.
This statement contradicts itself., because our universe is reduced to us, who can even get out of this damn sentenced rock. What's the difference in putting faith on those things from putting faith in the church when all that comes from men? In the case of government, they manage to establish control of men for men, in the case of technology, it have always led men to further power and knowledge, entertainment is inexcusable other than for fun, though. The point is, all we have ever know is made by men and men alone, and men are what gives men life a reason, the universe may have rewards for us, but right now it fucking doesn't, and our benefits from the universe itself are irrelevant to us, for example, sun light have existed before men and the sun might very well be the end of men if we wait long enough. Basically, we are irrelevant to the universe,
That's the point, she also had the option to off herself or just leave, but the point of that episode was that no matter what you do you did not only had a choice, but the choice would probably amount to nothing, so why not just do the best thing for yourself and everyone around you? The whole problem started because Summer existence fucked her parents over, and she felt like she shouldn't exist, but she already did, and nothing she did after that would really change that, even if she offed herself, which probably would make things worst for everyone else, at least for a while.
I'm convinced this is all in goddamn Holla Forums's head. The show have ALWAYS had those catchphrase since the pilot, and yes, they are distracting and not funny, but only normalfags cling to them. Pickle Rick revealed a side of Rick that was only hinted in the show until the episode, the whole lecture the shrink gave to him was the most hilarious part of the episode, but hey
I'M PICKLE RICK
Is the only thing normalfags cared about. Same with Tiny Rick, and soulless jokes like the Schezwan Sauce and just straight out tasteless shit like Schwifty. My proposition is just to ignore normal fags as always and focus on what really matter, and avoid pointless memes like those.
>You mean The Corporate Church of (((Jesus Christ))) sponsored by Socialism
What's a better alternative? Pedophile approved middle eastern church supported by the same socialists and kikes? And what possible teaching of old you meant?
I wouldn't say that, but they sure overstayed their welcome. But I'm not even too sure of that, because the mass still exists and I can picture it being any less dumb and in need of guidance.
This, exactly this. There's nothing more to it. If you need to believe in something, believe in men.

Germany didn't have a war against atheism, faggot, it wasn't even relevant to the war except for Hitler's own beliefs. He used faith as a tool but also respected it as a choice. Commies were amoral and atheists, but they weren't amoral because they were atheists but both things together were exactly the reason why they were so quick to catch on while using stolen technology, mostly because religion was irrelevant for it's usage.
The problem with your argument seems to be that you can't differentiate atheists from commies and what seems to be worse you seem to think communism is a result of atheism, somehow.
You said yourself here
That's exactly what led Germany to rise, not the faith in God, but their faith in goddamn Germany. Sure, they thought they were backed by God, but all they did was for their country. If something, that just shows masses need a justification bigger than any men to have the resolve to do things for men. Take that as you will.

First point is good
How so?
Social construction and scientific progress was his number one goal where religion affected that.
As long as religion didn't stand in theway he accepted it, but otherwise it was a weakness.
Thats true, I meant to specify religious faith
No, I can spiritually believe in whatever the fuck I want as long as it drives me forward and if theres something that proves me wrong, then I'll adapt to that.

I don't think you understand what an agnostic is, faggot. You don't get to spiritually believe in what you want because your stance on the spirit should be the same as in God. Sure, you don't deny spiritually either, but you sure as hell shouldn't believe on it because there's no proof of it.

It feels like I'm reading youtube's comment section.

You're right, with your post this might as well be youtube comments.

Isn't that a good thing?

more or less

Xavier confirmed to be more offensive than Rick & Morty.

This shit has been out for years, why is it popular now?

Agreed. Always nice when assholes get picked apart so plainly even they realize it

MACHINE MEN with their MACHINE HEARTS

Rick & Morty's growth and inevitable backlash needed a "watch this instead" example. They're both Adult Swim and have some similar appeal, but in every other way they're basically polar opposites. R&M's habit of talking down to its audience with very basic "face the facts" style arguments, then being picked up by it's fanbase leading to them imitating the same shit, ticks people off to no end. So a show that bathes in interpretation and self-mockery was a natural counter-balance. OP's video is cut down and out of context, but the original scene's a good example. Rick & Morty just appeals far too well too edgy internet debaters for it's own good, and Rick avatars are becoming the new generation of South Park OC avatars, swarming youtube comments with posts that usually end with "face it" or "deal with reality".

Basically the fanbase pissed off so many people that they ran to an opposing banner to march under.

Man is a canvas and beliefs are the brushes. You cannot create ideals and values out of nothing.

Evolution is a stochastic process, it doesn't have any actual higher meaning, just survivorship bias; appealing to evolution as a giver of purpose answers nothing about what doth life, only how doth life in the strict empirical sense.

Man is not nothing.

Agnosticism means that you don't give a shit if there's a god or not.
Atheism is about yelling "Hey Morty *belches* there's no God, HAHAHA" and declaring fatwas against christians while protecting the muslims because you want to be on the right side when they take over your country.

fix'd

Difference one ended before becoming trash.

By "strong" you mean "deluded", right?

God is the living root of definition, because He is perpetually consistent and righteous. By comparison to Him we see what is "evil", because evil is not a thing unto itself but the perversion of good - "evil" is to "good" what "bread mold" is to "bread".
Definition's definition requires perpetual consistency, the foundation of objectivity, which is the bedrock of truth. Without consistency there is no objectivity and thus no universal application of truth, making "truth" subjective (person-to-person, culture-to-culture) and thus "truth" no longer truly exists, only personal and interpersonal preferences.

Without God we have no root for the origin of truth, consistency or righteousness. These concepts have no beginning and also have no foundation. Everything becomes subjective. Love is love is love - what is "love"? What is "value"? Why would one man's love for his wife be any more valuable than one man's love for his RealDoll? The man who "loves" his abducted rape victim is just as "true" and "valuable" and "righteous" as the man who loves his wife - because all love is equal when "love" no longer has definition.

Why does this occur? Because man is not consistent. Man is only consistent in his inconsistency, hence "hypocrisy". However, since we seem innately given to inconsistency (changing our mind, making excuses, or outright lying) then where did the concept of "definition" come from, let alone "consistency", "truth" or "good/evil"? Did man make them up? If man made them up then they would reflect man's inconsistency, and yet these things are not inconsistent in definition, only inconsistent in application - and they are inconsistent in application because those who apply them are inconsistent (hence why I said the they would reflect his inconsistency, because his application of them reflects his inconsistency, and yet the definitional concepts themselves do not).
So where'd it come from? Where did "sanity v insanity" and "rational v irrational" come from? I don't mean the words themselves, I mean the concepts and definitions by which we make sense of anything.

Even in what I just wrote I used a lot of words and terms which your mind unconsciously translated into those concepts. What is "wife"? What is "rape"? What is "make sense"? What is "sanity"? What is similarity?

This is where we come to Plato (and Aristotle's) theories of "Forms" and perfect forms. Essentially, everything is a reflection of a higher perfect concept which man innately knows. How? That's a good question. However to really boil it down it basically means that every single definitional concept, such as "definition", "good" etc. are existent beyond man and, ultimately, beyond the material. Man no more created the created the universal laws of logic and morality any more than he created the laws of physics or his own sanity. He may have given these things names, but so, too, did he give names to the stars, to his internal organs and to so much of nature.
God is the origin of all things, including logic and morality, which are reflections of His perfectly righteous, rational and consistent nature.

This is why, when you reject God, you take up a broken presupposition which you cannot live by, and why? Because to do so, to attempt to truly live consistently according to your Materliaist/Atheist presupposition, would make you a literal madman. You would be insane. Instead, you live inconsistent to a presupposition which you espouse, making you not insane but just a fool.

You tell me, according to the logic which we are both beholden to, how rational is it to believe that "Everything came from Nothing at the cause of Nothing" (Atheist view of Big Bang)? Ex nihilo nihil fit: out of nothing, nothing comes. "Nothing" is the "absence of". It is "not a thing", literally "no thing". If there was something then there would not be nothing, and yet you and these supposedly brilliant and wise men you follow say that, yes, it is rational to believe that everything came forth from absolute nothing without any cause. You think it is rational, scientific even, to throw out the scientific fact of Cause and Effect when looking at the origin of existence.
Alternatively you believe in the multiverse bubble theory, which has less evidence than Jesus committing miracles, or you believe that we are in a grand computer/psychic power simulation. No, seriously, those are your alternatives when you reject the Intelligent Designer who designed DNA. You see? Just in this one example you, Atheist, are either insane or foolish. You are irrational.

...

Granted, Africans are just a step above Jews, who managed to create a slave state despite themselves being masters and slaves in the same country.

Correction - you got the scientists, we got the prototypes. Still beat you fuckers to space.

Here we go again with the whole "religion vs. atheism" bullshit. There isn't anything inherently immoral with having either theological position. What is immoral is delegating your own moral judgement and responsibility to someone else - letting them decide what's moral and immoral for you. And that arrangement is ripe for abuse, no matter if you're a theist or an atheist. It doesn't matter if it's a religious figure, a commissar, or some marxist leader telling you how to think or what to do. Either way, you are willingly following the commands of someone else, while not verifying the morality of the commands yourself. Is it any wonder why Muslims don't think it's wrong and feel no shame to rape and groom little girls when their prophet was a mass murdering pedophile? Or why throngs of chinese joined the red guard and murdered millions of middle and upper-class people who never hurt anyone? They were following the commands of their leaders, and look what happened.

False. Atheism states that "morality" is a subjective notion that's inherently promulgated by men. Much in the same way "Love" is merely "a chemical reaction in the brain as a result of stimuli", "rape" is merely "the biological function of procreation practiced without consent". There is no universal good or evil since everything is subjective, and everything is subjective because man is the one who created these notions and these concepts change from time period to region and peoples. Morality is subjective, up to preferance, and so "love" and "rape" are not good or bad but preferable and unpreferable.

Murder of the mentally retarded, mass rape of 2 Million German women by Soviets, #of Jews (and others) culled during the Jewish Holocaust (to say nothing of the Armenian Holocaust prior by the Turks), all those black gangrapist-on-white women attacks, all those sex trafficking and child trafficking rings, gulags, racial attacks, black slavery, rape slavery, brainwashing, MKUltra, September 11th, abortion, etc.
All of this is not "evil". It could be considered "sick" or "disgusting" at best since, again, it's all a matter of preferance. Morality is subjective.

And since Morality is subjective, surely all Atheists should have no problem with webm related, and if they do then it's only because they were raised in a house and grew up in a (previous) neighborhood or society that espoused the view which they now hold. It's subjective.
t. Godlessness

If morality were objective than why are concepts such as "women as property" no longer considered in vogue in civilized societies?

What do you mean by "civilized"? Are you talking sociologically or technologically? Can you call a society "civilized" when it commits perpetual mass suicide via killing its children (abortion) while simultaneously encouraging [mass] immigration, both coupled together inevitably leading to social and cultural displacement? Is that "civilized"?
Or how about this webm ? Is this "civilized"?

If what you mean is just a general notion of "what is moral" shifting in a society then that's different. The answer to that is the same as a man who believes he cannot breathe in water steadily coming to believe he can actually breathe in water - he has become deranged.
In the case you bring up, it's not a matter of a society becoming deranged but society becoming that much closer to sanity.
"Sanity" exists with clear distinction regardless of the number of madmen present. Just because you get fifty insane men crowded together in a room that does not alter the nature of sanity. Can perceptions be altered? Of course, because the "perceptions" belong to inconsistent men. Perception changes. Preference changes. Truth does not change.

But who defines truth? Who defined morality? How do we not know if women are indeed property or not? Are there evidences that they are not? How do we discern these evidences before us?
Even if all the men of the world go blind and all animals lose their eyes that does not turn the sun dark. The sun keeps shining whether we acknowledge it or not.

God, the living source of logic, truth, righteousness, love, morality and rationality as well as the creator of all things, said that men and women are equal in value (not equal in roles), hence whether people acknowledge it or not, now or later if ever, the truth that they are equal in value remains consistent.