What dissappoints me most when reading posts by many atheists/agnostics is the tendency to blame the victim. I was brainwashed into religion as a child and I know the difficulties of escaping so I'm aware that the religious devotee is a victim of the church, not someone to be ridiculed or reviled. The one's who deserve derision and blame are the ones who take advantage of their followers or who push their creed to advantage themselves. As frustrating as they can be the others deserve understanding and compassion as we might give anyone who was the victim of oppression. Besides that, no one ever came to enlightenment through being subject to blame and disrespect: That just causes them to dig in as it did to the original converts. And I understand how annoying and frustrating they can be with their selfrighteousness but we're not better if all we can do is criticise and denigrate.
27
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
28 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.
You have to remember that if you read posts and comments here on this site, then it is atheists and agnostics talking to one another, most of the posts and comments here are not intended for the religious.
Having said that what you say is perfectly true, and well understood by the churches. That is why many of them send out members to do missionary work and try to find converts, especially to do missionary work in the most annoying ways possible, because that way they are bound to meet with hostility and abuse from the public. Which reinforces the view, that the church is the only source of friendship and comfort, and thereby helps to deepen indoctrination.
Fernapple
Level 9
Feb 24, 2020
7
Which explains work the local Watchtower keeps putting unadulterated bullshit in my letterbox.
@anglophone Yes it is hard to be nice to them, but sadly every time someone gives them the cold shoulder, rebuffs them or refuses to answer the door, they do a little bit of the churches work for it.
@Fernapple They tend to hate me because I expect them to use their brains, to which they take exception:
- Why do I need to be saved?
- Please demonstrate that the universe was created.
- Please demonstrate that the Resurrection happened.
- Where did all the water for the Great Flood come from?
- etc, etc, etc
@anglophone I have thought of using a charm offensive, really give them time and attention until you get a possitive response like. "People don't usually listen to us like you do." And then counter with. "No I am sorry that you don't get listened to, but I am bound to give you attention, because I am the village atheist."
@Fernapple What a wonderful response!
@anglophone Never seem to have the time though.
You're not responsible for believing when you are a child but at some point in your life, you learn to think for yourself.. It's at that point when you become responsible and are no longer a victim... Your belief becomes a choice...
Cutiebeauty
Level 9
Feb 24, 2020
4
That is much too simplistic and lacks an understanding of how hard it is to untrain the mind which has been trained to believe in god. The punishment of eternal damnation in hell was invented for just this possibility of backsliding by believers. The choice seems simple...”just think for yourselves and you will realise it’s all myths and fantasy”, but in reality it takes a strong mind to counter deeply ingrained beliefs and their attendant rewards. . It’s much easier to keep believing than to leave and be treated like an outcast.
We're all at different points along the path of understanding and our choices are likely different depending on where we are.
@Marionville you're correct.. I do lack this type of understanding .. I wasn't a believer...
@Cutiebeauty Neither was I...but I understand people and I understand the nature of mass indoctrination.
@Marionville I understand people too but I don't understand brain washing
@Cutiebeauty No, but you don’t need to ever have been brainwashed to understand how effective the results are,
@Marionville I actually don't even think it's a case of brain washing.. It's indoctrination.. The same as when a parent raises their children.. They teach them what they were taught.... Are atheists brain washed? Or Muslims or Jews? Or even politicians? The goes on and on.. Even gender roles can be considered brain washing, right?
These days., many don't take responsibility for themselves... Watch a few court shows.. The defendants frequently come up with many reasons why it's not their fault when it's obvious it is...
@Cutiebeauty Okay..I probably should more correctly used indoctrination and not brain-washing, although the effects are virtually the same, I acknowledge that they are subtly different. I will change my wording, but it doesn’t change the thrust of my argument in any material way.
Personally, I'm not interested in bringing anyone to "enlightenment". I don't think it's possible anyway.
If anyone comes to enlightenment, they do it on their own.
KKGator
Level 9
Feb 24, 2020
4
Life is made up of choice and chance. Yes, bad things happen to good people. But we can choose our reactions and behavior.
Even in Nazi concentration camps, Viktor Frankl, an Austrian neurologist and psychiatrist, found joy, meaning and purpose in helping others.
“When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves.” ― Viktor E. Frankl, Man's Search for Meaning.
At 13, I chose to become an atheist and carried it forward in life.
I do not see Christians as victims. "In God we trust" is America's national motto. Look at the horrific history of Christian-led genocide and holy wars.
LiterateHiker
Level 9
Feb 24, 2020
3
I agree but I also believe what we know can also shape how we act. "In (a ) god we trust" was not the original motto. It was E. Pluribus Unum [religioustolerance.org] The god stuff was not added to coins until the next century and the term was not added to paper bills until the mid-50's. FFRF has a stamp (which I have and use) which can help to make dirty money into clean money. Simple overstamp the dirty words as substitute "In Reason We Trust" and wa la cleaned.
- Great quote by Frankl. I have learned that we can best effect change by first changing ourselves.
- "In God we trust" - God can be defined any number of ways to any number of religions. In a sense, I would call my intuition or subconscious voice God. And I trust my intuition greatly.
- It is troubling the connection between religion and mass killing. I read a great piece recently that talked about how that is accomplished through dehumanization of others who are considered different. We, as agnostics, also need to be careful of dehumanizing others.
They are not victims but perpetrators. It's all to easy to claim victim hood especially in inter-tribal conflicts.
We don’t all do this, I certainly don’t. I don’t ridicule anyone’s beliefs, nor do I blame them for what they sincerely believe to be true. I do agree however, that sometimes some atheists and agnostics can sound pretty intolerant. When we do that, we become mirror images of them and do what we hate the most about the religious, namely their insistence that they’re right. I think we should keep our derision and hostility for the religious Institutions which perpetrate the indoctrination and be kinder to those who are still in thrall to it, we don’t victim blame in any other form of abuse.
Marionville
Level 10
Feb 24, 2020
3
"You're a better man than I, Gunga Din."
@anglophone I do know the quote....however, I’m a Sheila! 
@Omnedon Thanks for “sticking up “ for me! 
@Marionville I thought you might be amused by that. 
How could anybody blame the victim for the brainwashing process? It began when the victim was a child by the perpetrators, the parents, built by schools, peers, the media and society in general. The issue is once the brainwashed is assimilated to the ranks, it is extremely difficult for those brainwashed to break free. Most of us have been there, not many of us were raised by non religious parents. So how did most of us see the light? It was up to us. Nobody came with a magic wand and said, presto change-o and we became non believers. It is a process of self realization and determination. Now, once the victim is brainwashed, he or she becomes part of the problem when he or she starts to proselytize. If that happens, then he or she is fair game for criticism, and in many cases ridicule. Why? Because he or she now became the perp. It's a vicious cycle. Nobody came to this world a practicing member of religions. In fact we all came as non believers. Most become brainwashed, some through different means decided to get out and be free. I'd say, accept this and stop blaming others for what they do to defend their non belief when usually confronted by those who are brainwashed.
Mofo1953
Level 9
Feb 24, 2020
3
The brainwashed confronting those of non-belief who then defend themselves: I like that idea. Thank you.
@luckytobealive I adore your sense of humour.
The answer to your implicit question about the ability to break free lies in the amount of damage to the prefrontal cortex of the human brain during a child's developmental years. This has become clear in studies in neuroscience and psychology over the last decade. In summary, if the damage inflicted by God Mobsters is not too severe, then people can overcome their own brainwashing, otherwise they cannot, and some of the latter cohort go on to inflict further damage on the children of their day.
@luckytobealive Wow! I thank you ever so much for sharing all that. And ((hugs)) to you as well. My own trauma pales into insignificance compared to your's. I am glad you were able to make your own way out of that evil place.
Very true that the victim is not the one to blame but some victims keep on making it up and hanging on to it. Take the scientist who claims the Grand Canyon was caused by the great flood. That story s not in his magic book. He simply made up a tale in order to keep believing a lie.
DenoPenno
Level 9
Feb 24, 2020
0
We need to understand that when we attack religion we are attacking the identity of the person and most of times his/her definition of self, this don't trigger thinking and reasoning, this triggers self defense.
And once self defense is triggered, dialog becomes impossible.
Religion knows it, and that is why it must be taught during childhood, so it becomes part of the identity.
So yes, one have the right to vent and scream away its anger, but be aware that it don't help your cause, it hinders it.
Same thing for all movements, that are many actions that are legit and you have the right to do it, but it will turn the public opinion against you, so think if it is worthy before.
Pedrohbds
Level 7
Feb 24, 2020
3
Agreed, I see religious fundamentalists as being inclined to take attacks on their ideas as being personal attacks, which is why I tend to avoid them unless they first approach me.
There are times when I despair of their apparent inability to think analytically.
@anglophone The more fundamental the religion is to identity, more careful you need to be when approaching the issue.
That is why things like Sci-fi and fantasy (the good ones)exist, they first take you out of your reality so they can discuss central points of your identity without triggering self defense. But people don't understand.
That is why you have X-men fans that are racist (when X-men is all about anti racism).
Or when you have people that love star wars but can't understand that rebels fighting against oppressive governments will always be labeled as terrorists ans we need to know how to separate real terrorists from rebels against oppression.
That is why if you really want to talk religion with a fundie (and are prepared to loose some mental sanity points) you need to speak about religion without speaking about it. You need to speak about reasoning you need to teach him the tools and let him/her use it by themselves.
You need to corrode this pillar of identity and let it fall over its own weight rather than attacking it directly.
And most of us that have a religious upbringing became atheists/agnostics by this method.
@Pedrohbds I like your analysis. I wish I had your patience. I am infamous for not suffering fools gladly.
No matter how much you attack the idea and not the person, the person will feel attacked because the idea is part of her sense of identity. This does not mean you did something wrong, it means that your message will never go trough, no matter how precise and respectful with people you are
This is not your fault and not under your control, I agree that talking about the idea is something totally valid.
I am not saying that doing this is wrong, you can do it freely. It is just counter productive if your objective is to start a dialogue.
It is not about being right or wrong, is about achieving the desired effect.
If you want to piss of religious people that ca't separate the person and the idea, go for it you will not do anything wrong, atheists will cheer and will piss off a bunch of religious people that can't separate the ideas of religion of their sense of self.
BUT if you want your message to not be received as personal attack then you need to be more strategic and careful.
It is not about what you say, it is about foreseeing the impact on the receiver.
@JohnnyQB I agree with you, relax.
We need both approaches.
We need the spearheads like Hitchens that go on the front and take all in the chest.
But sometimes we need some soft work to not turn soft religious people into reactionary..
If you attack too much the identity of a person (even if is not a direct attack) the person can radicalize instead of noticing the mistakes.
the 2 (or many) approaches are complementary, and we need to have them in our tool box.
And if we don't then we need to choose our battles and not use the wrong tool at the wrong time and make the situation worse.
I am tired of seeing people turning potential allies in enemies because "I have the right of free speech and I will say it just because I can."
Using the wrong tool for the situation, it is not a forbidden or wrong tool, it just not fit for that situation.
I don't know if this expression exists in English but in my language we say
"If the only tool you have is a hammer, you can only see nails."
@JohnnyQB I get it, and I know how to separate the idea and the identity. What I says that the receivers of the message don't know most of times. that's when we must take some extra care, because even if we don't attack the identity, this can be so connected for the receiver that for him, talking about religion is the same as talking about himself.
All the rest I agree and sometimes we need some hammertime against fundies, because sometimes we discuss with the fundie, sometimes when the fundie is a lost cause, we talk with the crowd around him that is what Hitchens do in most of cases, he is not talking with the religious person in front of him, he is talking with the crowd.
@JohnnyQB Yes, but I lived most of my life in Brazil, and believe me, bible belt is a walk in the park compared to it.
And that is where I tell, you criticize religion, people take it personally no matter the effort you put to separate person of the idea.
When I say talking with the crowd means that at some point you stop trying to dialogue with the other person and try to show the audience your point, because the person is inflexible and not really open to dialogue.
You have an experience I have other, you have some tools in your tool box, I have others, isn't it beautiful? I understand your point, I am just arguing it is not the only one.
I come from a place where saying "I think god does not exist" Can trigger a lot of reactions.
Even in the bible belt you discuss about religion. In Brazil they don't even worry to discuss, it is a fact, a reality, god exists. The only question is catholic or protestant, anything else is wrong, degenerate, sinful, and wrong by definition.
The state is secular on paper, but try to argue against it.
It is a waaaay more authoritarian, monolithic and hierarchic environment.
So please stop trying to use authority arguments based on a bazillion years of experience, because your experience is stil limited to the cultures and backgrounds around you. Stop thinking that white united statians from the bible belt are the only Christians on the world.
Even some regions in southern Norway are highly religious also.
@JohnnyQB I use most of times in my initial argument, because I was referring to the original post.
And of course I won't put all premises and consequences in some lines in one post, i am not here to write a thesis.
Depends on what you think as unbeliever. even while I was in church I was adept of some way of rational thinking, this corded my belief and when I had some periods of distance from the church, this feeling-feeding of religion stopped and I saw the bullishit I was stil trapped in. So I don't know how long I am an unbeliever, but I can sy the first time I told I was agnostic was maybe 11 years ago.
@JohnnyQB Well said.
@Pedrohbds Fun discussion guys! I must be weird, these kinds of discussions are something I enjoy first thing in the morning with my coffee. Now I'm gonna go check the weather forecast for the day.
Personally, I have criticized people as well for their beliefs because they simply choose to follow without any questions asked. Any attempt to suggest deploying rationality to analyze their beliefs receives a strong retort 'Not everything is logical. You have to believe and have faith in some things'. It is the lack of effort amongst most religious to give a fair hearing to an alternate opinion once they've been indoctrinated which makes incites the blame.
DSGavde
Level 6
Feb 27, 2020
2
Very well said! We should be more understanding of theists, specially those who have been raised in it. My issue is with the institution itself, specially when it's a destructive force on the community and in the world.
Winchester1386
Level 3
Feb 25, 2020
2
Excellent post!
Another reason not to demonize and ridicule religious people is that, having broken away from religion, we might be judging and exaggerating based on a prejudicial lens. Sometimes in order to spur ourselves into action we might stir up anger within ourselves. The anger propels us into radical change and keeps us from falling back into the old ways.
It is perfectly ok to be angry for as long as necessary but IMO we ought to eventually calm down, cast a sidelong glance at religion, and move on to peace, happiness, joy, and even ecstasy.
WilliamFleming
Level 8
Feb 24, 2020
1
I am sensitive to victims of religion-based medical neglect. Many of these are children who did not have the opportunity as I did to grow up and re-invent themselves. They did not have the opportunity to divorce themselves from their upbringing. I contend that much of religious devotion is mental illness.
I got help as soon as I could afford it; therefore, I do not see myself as a victim after adulthood. ...And, I do not see others in my family that were raised the same way that I was as victims after adulthood.
I don't know how credible this source is but it supports my concern: [childrenshealthcare.org]
LaDizdeOdd
Level 6
Feb 28, 2020
0
Well said. The problem is that a lot of people were indoctrinated at young ages. I was born and raised in the church. It wasn't an option. And when your parents tell you something is true you tend to believe it more. And being intelligent just made me better at apologetics. What eventually helped me see the truth was thinking critically about how the bible treated women and how patriarchal figures casually lied and one thing led to another and suddenly I was seeing Moses as a genocidal dictator.
You really have to treat indoctrination as systematic and layered mental programming that nearly everything in the church is designed to reinforce. And although fear didn't play a large role in my case, I imagine that a lot of people are simply afraid to question, afraid of the consequences, whether to their immortal soul or two very real relationships with other believers; maybe even a spouse. So I think believers should be treated as victims of ancient con artistry that rose to the highest levels of government. And if you want to deride someone for their beliefs then it would make more sense to target ministers, pastors, evangelists, etc.
ZealotX
Level 4
Feb 25, 2020
1
Perhaps it seems harsh but when people, intelligent people, swallow crap they know cannot be true, it angers me. Reason is what makes us, supposedly, superior to the other life forms on the planet. Yes, getting past what we were told as children is hard, but unless you try, you use the intelligence we've evolved into over the past millennia, we will keep perpetuating this fraud played out by so-called religious leaders.
sterlingdean
Level 6
Feb 25, 2020
1
Growing up in a cult myself, I believe I can understand the difference between blaming victims and blaming those that use that membership to be assholes. Some members do the wrong things because they are true believers and believe they are doing the right thing and others are simply assholes and do them because they like it.
gearl
Level 8
Feb 24, 2020
1
To praphrase someone, good people will still do good and bad will do bad ( but for good people to do bad takes religion)
Mostly I agree but I also see the issue as complex. Sometimes 'victims' put or allow themselves (consciously or unconsciously) in certain situations. For example years ago a study was done in Austria about how women behave during different times. Women were asked to allow themselves to be filmed and swabs taken as they entered a club. The swabs showed their cycle and the filming showed how they dressed and acted. Sure enough, at the height of their cycle they dressed and acted more provocatively. Under such a situation men might get wrong messages and act as they felt. We don't control our behavior as we think.
JackPedigo
Level 9
Feb 24, 2020
1
BS. Acting more provocative due to menstrual cycles doesn't give anyone permission to touch you. Just because you're subconsciously doing something isn't a welcome mat for everyone. Sheesh.
@CommonHuman Some do a lot of things that put them in harms way. If someone takes a shortcut through a dark alley and gets mugged of course the 'victim' is totally blameless (not). Sometimes people become victims because they don't use common sense and take precautions. Yes, if someone gets the wrong message and does something they are the bad guys. But we really do need to pay attention to messages we send. Little good comes from claiming victimhood when we have been seriously hurt or even dead!!!
@StarvingArtist What I am saying is there are levels of victim-hood. If one leaves their car unlocked and it gets broken into is this the same as locking ones car and someone smashes the window and gets in? I noted in Europe some police would check cars in a public parking space and any unlocked cars would get ticketed. This is not a simple B & W issue. I could say that when someone criticizes me personally because they refused or didn't understand what I said makes me a victim!?
Acting in any way whatsoever at any time for any reason is no reason for anyone to ASSume they can do anything to me or any other human being. Who funded those charming studies, and who interpreted those actions?! The Rape is Just Peachy Organization? The She's Asking for It Foundation? Sickos!
@AnneWimsey Victimization is not just one (or more) on one it covers a whole range of things. There was once a settlement in Northern Washington. It was a noted slide area yet people continued to build there despite the warnings. A major slide occurred and people died. I am reading a book "Act of God" about how we continually ignore natural disasters like earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, floods and so on because we want to live in a nice place. The list goes on and on. We are responsible to be cautious with our lives but often don't pay attention. People killed in disasters are often called 'victims.'This is what I mean by levels of victim hood. It is not a B & W issue. Israel, after more than 70 years use their 'victim hood as a way for the world to ignore their cruelty to other groups. [en.wikipedia.org]
for a short video
At 19, my daughter was violently raped and beaten by a stranger. Claire was asleep in her bed in college when the rapist attacked her.
Claire and four other girls and took the rapist to court.
The rapist's attorney attacked and blamed the girls for drinking alcohol and wearing short dresses to parties where the rapist spotted them.
Are you saying these girls deserve to be raped?
@LiterateHiker I owe an apology. My comment didn't come out as I had wanted. Next time I will give this more thought.
Through this site I realized my late partner had been raped by her husband hence two abortions and finally getting her tubes tied. I also recently made a post about a friend who wrote several books the first one being about her rape. It is not to be taken lightly and I do not.
In the early 90's we (myself and my then partner) got my 17 year old daughter to live with us. I was unaware of her home situation (Bi-polar mother and alcoholic step-father) and her habit of leaving home. At one point she told us she and a friend were going downtown Seattle at night. They were going to meet some friends around Pioneer Square. Things are bad in that area now but even worse then. We had to force her to not go. She had no idea. Yes, there are victims but not all situations are the same. One has a responsibility, especially in this day and age, to be very cautious. Being a victim does little good when one is injured or dead.
Thank you. Apology accepted.
In recalling my own journey out of religion, I recall being the victim of any number of well meaning religionists acting out of their life long indoctrination/brainwashing. Their concern often manifested in a kind of ridicule intended or not and they often encouraged that I ignore or deny things I learned that made more sense to me than did their alternate inside-the-box explanations. The point here is that those who are still the victims of their lifelong indoctrination/brainwashing - I don't disagree with you on this point - they can also be perpetrators looking for victims to either spread their indoctrination/brainwashing, or victims who need to be reinforced in the indoctrination/brainwashing. The roles an individual can play are not static and can change with the individuals intent in relation to those around them
RussRAB
Level 8
Feb 24, 2020
1
Very well said!
You've expressed it very well. What we can do for believers in gods and such is to emancipate them. They are captives and like physical captives that identify, as with Stockholm Syndrome, with their captors. Most have been brainwashed and addicted to artifice since their earliest memories. They've internalized and become 'as one' with their captivating 'isms', so criticizing their adopted or imposed thought systems or overseers within them is felt by captives personally, as attacks upon them anyway. To directly ridicule or humiliate them personally makes it even worse.
Example is the best teacher because good example attracts attention and curiosity. Kindness in attitude increases questioning. A good friend once told me with the best of meaning, though it felt personally insulting, that I was more Christian than the Christians he knew and couldn't understand how I could be atheist too. Of course, he meant the comparison as a compliment, and I thanked him.
Believers are taught, as some of us were taught before rejecting gods, that atheists are misguided at best and down right evil, untrustworthy and immoral at worst. If we conduct ourselves intolerantly and immorally, (not their morality, but Nature's) it only repels them and confirms the worst they are told about us.
That said, all too many atheists carry resentments toward former captors and, unfortunately, treat those still addicted to theological mythology with disrespect and rudeness; creating misunderstanding of the rest of us. It is also disheartening to observe how many of us think we've become free thinking while clinging to many of the trappings and habits that are rooted in theology and superstition. How many atheists do we know who propagate political and socio-political myths as aggressively as any Baptist who comes knocking at the door. They do the same things. As ardent followers of parties and candidates and political ideologies, they solicit membership in their movements (read missions), financial contributions (read gifts), volunteering for phones and canvasing (read evangelizing) and of course propagating promises of better things in the future for the loyal, the devout. (read pie in the sky and 72 virgins).
Atheists, as a very loosely definable grouping, have a long way to go before we can look upon ourselves as emancipated thinkers. It does no good to escape one confining, fear based thought system if we immediately embrace some other captivating systems that also do our thinking for us in return for false security of even more false identities.
Silver1wun
Level 7
Feb 24, 2020
1
Well, see, we're superior because we chose atheists as parents. Had you choosen to have atheists as parents we wouldn't insult you.
It all goes back to Indiana Jones and the last crusade (as, well, most of life does) and choosing wisely.
1of5
Level 8
Feb 24, 2020
1
I must have used a cheat code then cuz I was born to theists and came out atheist in the end 
1of5:
@demifeministgal wish more were born that way. 
Up, up, down, left, down, right, right, green button twice, down, enter. Think that one works for cathlics.
@1of5 shhh... don't expose the catholic cheat code.... the other catholics must decipher it from the secret messages in the pope's messages and their priests' masses! >.>
1of5:
@demifeministgal dammit! No wonder I keep losing my security clearance.
At what point can we say one is responsible for policing their own thoughts and beliefs? The Catholic church counts one's seventh year as "the age of reason." A seven year old is extremely young.
Deb57
Level 8
Mar 2, 2020
0
I don't know. You'd think there must be a point where we stop blaming our parents for our problems but I think that depends on how much conflicting info there is to help you wake up. I do know that I learnt many of my lessons by running into the consequences of my stupidities but unfortunately that doesn't seem to happen with religion
I was lucky enough to grow up without any serious indoctrination. I can only imagine what it must have been like for you. Of course if your predicates dictate that you aim for the best path for converting others to non-belief then you may be right that a more conciliatory view could be the best approach. I don't know. Sometimes confrontation may be appropriate. Then again I am lucky in another sense, that I grew up in a culture that didn't tend to assume I was a Christian or was significantly prejudiced against my divergent beliefs. I can only imagine what it must be like for atheists to survive in the US Bible Belt or theocracies around the world. Perhaps their predicates are somewhat different. Perhaps they aim mere for trying to live their lives peaceably in a world without the religious presumption and privilege that they suffer from. If so then maybe converting others to non-belief is not a reasonable goal. Perhaps just demanding some respect and consideration is what drives them. Maybe they think that snapping back at those who would stuff religion where it's not wanted is both reasonable and necessary.
MattHardy
Level 7
Feb 24, 2020
0
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.