S.E. Cupp is a well-paid token atheist amongst conservative fundamentalist Christian pundits.  Many people suspect that she is pretending to be atheist and will eventually have a convenient, profitable conversion to Christianity.  

 

As a single atheist, would you date S.E. Cupp or someone with the same opinions?  Why or why not?

 

If you don't know who S.E. Cupp is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4q_Y0niq28&feature=player_detai...

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/S._E._Cupp

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xdbwxj_bill-maher-s-panel-on-athei...

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZkFqj5cX5U  (debunks some of her claims in the previous clip from Bill Maher's show)

 

 

(Yes I know that there is no standard atheist and that no one can truly know what another person truly believes.)

Tags: Cupp, S.E., atheist, bill, christian, conservative, date, maher, single

Views: 789

Replies to This Discussion

OK, initially, I didn't know who she was, but I finally took the time to track down some videos of interviews she has done, and watched them.

She's fantastic!  I'd give my left arm to find someone like that... intelligent, reasonable, honest, clear-thinking, logical, educated, well-spoken, sensible, rational, easy to get along with, pleasant, attractive... and she's an atheist too!  What a bonanza!  And what a rarity.

 

Date her?  Hell, I'd marry her. Anyone know if she's available?  Only down side is that she lives on the opposite side of the country.

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhh.  :-D

 

Irony I hope?

Uhhh is right. 

Joseph: No, not at all.  Why would you even think that?  Do you have any idea how difficult it is to find a woman who is politically conservative and an atheist?  (I'll give you a clue: it's about as difficult as finding someone who is both an extreme liberal and a fundamentalist Christian.)  Given that I am atheistic and a political conservative, just on that basis, she seems like a excellent prospect to me.  Most women I wind up dating are at least nominally religious, so from my point of view, this is a distinct improvement.

 

So if you met a woman who was on the same page as you both politically and religiously, plus, she was smart & attractive - would you not be even slightly interested?

 

Remember, tastes vary.  Not everyone likes what you do. Have some tolerance for others' likes & dislikes, and they'll do the same for you.

She makes our skin crawl because she says she aspires to be religious one day.  And she doesn't think raising a child with religious nonsense is child abuse.  And the fact that we suspect she is not an atheist, but a Fox News character that will, by the time her next book comes out, miraculously find jesus.

I didn't take her analogy as literally as you do.  I can see some desirable things about being 'religious' (in the general sense), and in that sense I would agree.  For example, many people here are quite religious about their views, which gives them a passion and single-mindedness of purpose that can certainly be useful and even admirable in some instances.  So, in that manner, I can see her point.  I would argue that the cons of a 'religious' attitude outweigh the pros, but that's a matter for debate, not for outright rejection.

Overall, I find her quite a bit more reasonable than many folks here. And accusations of her being a "fundamentalist mole" are simply unfounded.  It could be true, but there's no evidence for it; people here simply want to believe it because it would reinforce their dislike for conservatives.  It's like claiming that Obama, once out of office, will suddenly admit to being a Muslim. Possible, but there is no evidence of it at this time, and no reason to believe it other than out of prejudice.

I personally know about 20 atheist conservatives, so I don't find it at all difficult to believe that she is another. 

Maybe we'll find out, one day. Or maybe not. 

It's like claiming that Obama, once out of office, will suddenly admit to being a Muslim. Possible, but there is no evidence of it at this time, and no reason to believe it other than out of prejudice.

See below.  You're using the same, inaccurate comparison again.

 

I personally know about 20 atheist conservatives, so I don't find it at all difficult to believe that she is another.

We have 5 or 6 Libertarians in my local atheist groups, too.  Feels like more, since they're so damned noisy about it.

Do any of yours spout the shit S.E. Cupp says about admiring religious people, being unable to trust an atheist, and aspiring to become a person of faith?

As a libertarian I'm just glad you're thoughtful enough to not lump us in with conservatives. At this point in history we're just doing like feminists and "raising awareness".

Libertarians are about as conservative as atheists ever get.

 

We should check and see if Michael is also socially conservative.  Anti-abortion, anti-gay rights, state-sponsored religion, traditional male-dominated families, and damned near every other socially-conservative issue are almost exclusively pushed by the theists.  There may be the very rare atheist here and there, but they're almost nonexistent.

Michael, man, read the rest of this discussion and watch the videos.  She's a hand puppet for the fundamentalist Christians on Fox News.  In a few more years (if it takes that long for them to complete their narrative), we'll be hearing how she opened her heart to Jesus and is now a young-earth, fundamentalist Christian.

 

It's not that she's an ultra-conservative; well, okay, it's not just that she's an ultra-conservative.  It's that she's a poser, on the religious front.

You're entitled to your opinion, but I don't share it.  I did read the discussion, and I did watch the videos, and I came to a different conclusion: that most people here dislike her simply because she is politically conservative, and are therefore completely willing to ascribe evil motives to her on the basis of no evidence for the same.

It's similar to the way that many people claim that Obama is a Muslim simply because they disagree with his politics.  They are simply looking for some mud to throw. 

Could I be wrong?  Sure, anyone can always be wrong. She is less critical of religion than I am. But until she actually says or does something to indicate otherwise, I will accept what she says about being an atheist.

One should be careful about throwing mud. It sticks as readily to the thrower as it does to the target.

Less critical of religion than you?  :-D

 

Dude, she endorses it.  She specifically says that she couldn't trust an atheist.  She's a sock puppet.  You're allowing your desperation for a conservative, atheist woman to blind you, as you accuse us of being blind.

 

Also, there's no relation between Obama and the Muslim thing ... and S.E. Cupp and the Christian thing.  That's an equivocation fallacy.  Tea Party assholes accuse him of being a Muslim because they don't like what he says about politics; we accuse S.E. Cupp of being a theist because of what she says about religion.

You say we have no evidence.  Unlike the politics/Islam, what S.E. Cupp says about atheists and her aspirations to become a person of faith is evidence of deceit.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

 

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service