I have a slightly askew relationship with the “organized atheism” movement, not so much ideologically but tactically – I think some facets of the movement can be a little petty and mean-spirited sometimes (re: the “you know it’s a myth” billboards that amount to a neener-neener against various faiths during their holidays); and I’m unable to subscribe to the tenet that “All religions are bad.” Sorry, I can’t go there – they’re all a little silly, conceptually, sure… but not only are most self-identified persons of faith either decent or at least harmless; the vast majority of the world’s hundreds of thousands of organized-religions are fairly benign.
That having been said, I’m fairly comfortable in my infrequent calculation that while not ALL religions are bad… between three and four of them (the religions) ARE bad – or, at the very least are a net-negative influence on the modern world as a whole to a degree that is not offset by whatever good is done by individual adherents. And this kind of shit is WHY…
That’s Pastor Sean Harris, rather explicitly suggesting that parents should – upon witnessing their children behaving in homosexual and/or gender-non-normative ways – essentially beat the behavior out of them. Charming.
He has, of course, offered a toothless apology on his blog.
There are two kinds of people in the world: Thinkers and Believers. This fellow, and the cheering/clapping ignoramouses hanging on his every word, are Believers; and that designation has NOTHING to do with their being religious and EVERYTHING to do with the words coming out of his mouth.
Oh, and have you heard? Activision has hired right-wing folk hero Col. Oliver North – convicted (later overturned on appeal) in the Iran-Contra Affair – to do commercials shilling next “Call of Duty” video-game.
Yeah, things are goin’ swell…
MOVIEBOB CENTRAL 
“Just out of interest, why is that stupid?”
Well for one, it actually makes a distinction between the existence and non-existence of an idea.
LikeLike
@Jake
“The point is that he says because of the extreamists, it would therfore be better if Christianity never existed. Which is stupid.”
Just out of interest, why is that stupid?
“I doubt most bullys care about God and religion. It has more to do with being “different” then anything.
You don't think the fact that the bible tells the bullies that homosexuality is wrong, that woman are second-class citizens and so on, does not give the bullies a feeling of justification? That it doesn't feed the bullying?
LikeLike
@Anonymous
“Well for one, it actually makes a distinction between the existence and non-existence of an idea.”
Sorry, I don't understand this in relation to my question.
I was asking why it was stupid to say that things would be better if Christianity never existed? I am not suggesting that things WOULD be better… I'm just interested in your reasoning.
LikeLike
@Thorbs
Because the existance of PETA doesn't mean torture of animals is ok. While I don't deny that it's indirectly correlated, bullys usually don't care about religion.
LikeLike
@Thorbs
The world if Christianity didn't exist: No hospitals, no univeristies, and if your a Christian, no access to heaven.
LikeLike
“I was asking why it was stupid to say that things would be better if Christianity never existed?”
Christianity isn't a just a bunch of guys in costumes spouting specific Latin phrases over and over again. Christianity is an idea, and I think far too many people confuse ideas with institutions. But if it is an idea, how can one meaningfully quanitfy its “existence” or “non-existence”. How can something that's just an idea “exist”?
LikeLike
Oh, Bob, someday you'll have to tell us how much Google AdSense money you make on posts like this.
LikeLike
@ jake
Actually, he said the religions are bad.It wasn't a very well written sentence but at no point did he single out christianity. In fact people of other religions could make a case that it's unfair to them to be lumped in with christianity since this guy clearly doesn't represent judaism or buddhism.
He included most religion in the and category and you are only mad that yours was included. That says more about you than it does him.
And bullying can absolutely be caused by religion. I grew up squicked out by gays. You could label me as homophobic. I however wasn't religious, so sometime before puberty i determined that it was my issue, not theirs and if I was uncomfortable, that was MY fault, not theirs. Can you imagine hwo different that would have gone if instead I listened to a priest or read the bible?
Religion imposed artificial rules on people and demand that everyone, even nonadherents, take them seriously. That's a recipe for bullying if I ever saw one.
“The world if Christianity didn't exist: No hospitals, no univeristies,”
More likely better universities and hospitals. Those are institutions that were started by the church because they were the ones who had disposable income in the dark ages. No church means that they would likely have been founded by the nobility or wealthy merchants etc and by now we wouldn't have these idiotic discussions about contraception or stem cells or whether condoms prevent aids when used by black people.
There's also a bit where much of the death in the black plague might not have happened, the library at alexandria would still exist and certain minorities in europe wouldn't have started diappearing aroung the late 30s.
LikeLike
Shit like this is why i never want to visit america. if that guy had a beard he'd be an extremist
LikeLike
@dave
he said that there are 3 or 4 religions the world could do without, he's said this before and I think Christianity is implied. The other 3 I think are Judaism, Islam and Scientology.
They would be violent anyway, they were converted barbarians after all. At least they kept all the classics like Plato and Aristotle.
LikeLike
@Jake
“Because the existance of PETA doesn't mean torture of animals is ok. While I don't deny that it's indirectly correlated, bullys usually don't care about religion.”
I think you are focusing too much on the thought that bullying is caused solely by one nasty/mean kid picking on someone who is smaller/different. There is much more involved than just the bully and his victim.
Probably the easiest way to explain is via a scenario:
Dan is gay. Mike bullies Dan because of this. Dan's classmates know that Mike is being bullied, but they don't help him or tell the teachers because Dan is gay, and as good christians they know that being gay is wrong… they can't possibly defend that behaviour.
Dan has noone to talk to about the bullying. His teachers and classmates don't want to know… they think it's he at fault for being gay. His parents are very religious too, so talking to them is dangerous… what if they can't accept it and throw him out of the house?
Everywhere Dan turns, everything reinforces the idea that the reason he is being bullied is because he is different, because he is not normal.
The bully is only a small part of the whole situation. The culture that Dan is raised in plays a much bigger part, and is much more likely to cause serious harm.
We can't do much about bullying – they'll always be mean-spirited kids and such – but we can sure do something about the culture that feeds it, and makes it so much more damaging.
LikeLike
@Fett
I understand that atheist are having a hard time getting through to the public consciousness, that billboard story is just preposterous and I hope something is done to better the public appearance of Atheists soon. But I honestly think that being assholes and attacking other religions is not a good way to go. There's gotta be a better way to spread word of your philosophy then simply riding on the controversy caused when you insult the beliefs of others.
Notice I said insult. Criticizing the Catholic church for the sexual harassment cases is, or at least should, be treated as an entirely appropriate response against the church. Hell, I did it myself. But, calling all religions myths and scams, thats just being jerks
American Atheists 'Scam' billboard
http://wp.patheos.com.s3.amazonaws.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/files/2010/12/164878_484169682417_71352317417_5731639_1083390_n.jpg
It can't just be me who thinks there's gotta be some middle ground between doing nothing and calling everyone who believes in a God/higher power an idiot.
I get it. Atheists don't have that good a reputation with the general public. Atheists are by and large stereotyped as being immoral, and thats a problem. But you persevere and you work towards breaking that stereotype by encouraging the values you hold dear in that philosophy.
I have absolutely no problem with the “This season celebrate REASON!” line in those 'Myth' billboards, only with the rest of the ad that deems it fit to attack people's holiday traditions.
That line right there is a terrific way to market Atheism.
But thats just my opinion. Whatever floats you're boat man.
LikeLike
@Thorbs
Oh man!
I just love those gender role cartoons. They work perfectly at conveying their message and even do so with pretty pictures ^_^
http://www.comicsalliance.com/2012/04/14/animal-gender-roles-cartoons-humon/
LikeLike
I don't care what faith a person is, or if they have none at all; if your religion or lack thereof leads you to believe that abusing a child is okay, you need a better one, right the fuck now.
Especially since most of the gender-signals he discusses in the odious sermon in question wouldn't have been seen anywhere close to the same way in Biblical times. I once tied to explain to one of the modesty-obsessed types that the Bible didn't prohibit women from wearing pants, because the only people who wore any pants in that part of the world then were “barbarian” horse archers of either sex (although of course men were more common).
LikeLike
I just wish that America could go to the way it was supposed to be. A place made up of all nationalities, races, beliefs, cultures, and ideals. A place where all people, no matter their origin, could live and coexist.
LikeLike
@Jake
“They would be violent anyway, they were converted barbarians after all. At least they kept all the classics like Plato and Aristotle.”
Wow, white man's burden much? Like a culture can't possibly be civilized unless it believes YOUR particular band of fables.
@ Daniel
“But, calling all religions myths and scams, thats just being jerks”
No, that's stating our position. You unintentionally demonstrated the point other have alluded to.
It is not possible for an atheist to state their position without people taking offence.
And even IF we as a group decided to try, the religious would NEVER reciprocate.
The basic premise of christianity is that if you don't give yourself to jesus, you deserve hell. A billboard saying that will never be marked as offensive. Muslims can demand that the rest of the world play by their rules and not show images of muhammed, and most will go along with it for fear of riots and getting van gogh'ed.
The “don't be a jerk” angle seems self evident until it becomes apparent that the other guy will label anything you say or do as being a jerk but will not hesitate to outright slander you in response.
There's a word for going up against a more powerful, better funded, more populous opponent that actively wants to destroy you and arbitrarily handicapping yourself: suicide.
The more shocking billboards serve an important purpose. They let people of faith know we exist and that their views are not due any special protection or privilege, and will receive none from us, and showing people in the closet that while their families and communities may abandon them, they are not alone.
By and large, change doesn't come from asking nicely, because the people who respond to asking nicely, don't let inequitable situations develop in the first place. They gays didn't say “we're here, we're queer, but not if its too much trouble for you.”
LikeLike
@Dave from canada: You are correct in one sense, that any statement disagreed with by someone who is looking to take offense will be labeled offensive. However, that does not make it okay to be douchey and smug in pre-emptive response. Some people will indeed take offense at anything you say, but that should not be taken as a license to give offense. All that's going to do is alienate the only people who might have listened in the first place so that you can get in your digs at the people who'd never have listened anyway. Bit counterproductive, that.
LikeLike
@Jake,
Judaism is not (and would not be) on my “bad religions” list – of this I can assure you.
LikeLike
@Dave from Canada
Now this is just the way I usually go about life, I by no means am saying its the only way or the right way, I just think it's served me in the past.
If you say you know God doesn't exist, if you say that people ideally should hold a secular lifestyle free of superstition or belief in a higher power, if you say religion has caused many problems over the ages. Thats fine by me, you're being a perfectly reasonable Atheist.
If you say that I'm an idiot for thinking God exists, if you say that belief in a higher power is a primitive and weak minded idea that should be destroyed and cleansed from the Earth, If you say religion has caused all problems throughout the ages. You're being a Jerk.
By that same token,
If you're Christian and you say you think embracing Jesus Christ helps you find peace in life and death. You're being a reasonable Christian.
If you're Christian and you say people are going to burn in hell for all eternity because they don't take Jesus Christ as their lord and Savior. You're being a Jerk.
This is all really about phrasing. Even though both people think their factually correct, they need to have some tact and some human empathy to find a way to explain their beliefs in a manner that doesn't offend others. Atheism doesn't have a problem with its beliefs, it has a problem with public image.
An Atheist could walk up to a praying man and tell them that they are talking to nobody, that their isn't a God to pray to and he shouldn't waste his time talking to imaginary friends who aren't going to do anything. Ooooor, he could walk up to him and say “Hey, you know kneeling there isn't going to solve you're problem, why don't you get up and try you're best to find a solution. Also; here's some ice cream.”
Both are basically the same thing, except one of them is understandable and tolerant to the man while explaining the Atheist's position and advice on what should be done without degrading the man's own, also; one has ice cream.
Stating you're position doesn't make you a jerk, stating you're position hurtfully and like a jerk makes you a jerk.
Finally,
“The more shocking billboards serve an important purpose. They let people of faith know we exist”
Is it really worth reminding everyone of you're existence if you're gonna be validating the stereotype that Atheists are jerks in the minds of many?
It is a tragedy that Atheists get profiled as jerks in society. But turning into that stereotype is the worst thing that could possibly be done by the Atheist community.
LikeLike
@ Daniel
What I've been trying to illustrate is that for many, there is no way for an atheist to appear as reasonable.
It isn't the tone that is the issue with them. It's the basic message. That's what you aren't getting.
I've yet to run into a single person who fit your jerk description for atheist, but that won't stop people from calling us that regardless. Look at Dawkins. Gets compared to pat robertson (the guy who said america deserved 9/11 and who asked peopel to pray for more supreme court judges to die so they could put more neocons on the bench) and what did he do? He wrote a book where is explains why he believes there is no god.
Your scenario works great in a honest discussion. But there is little reason for religion to engage in honest discussion. They have a position where it is rude to criticize them. We are rude for existing. They have nothing at all to gain by being honest. But plenty to gain from say, blaming us for the holocaust.(which is what the current pope did..presumably in an effort to see if you could make a statement so ironic it destroyed the universe)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LjEnbMk1q4
Had anyone made that comment about christians, muslims (or if they wanted to completely murder their career) jews, they would have been fired.
I'm pretty sure most atheists in the US would love to be elevated to the same level as people who own bluetooth headsets and talk during movies. because the real stereotype is that they are evil and immoral.
And the reason that stereotype exists is because we said nothing. We were the quiet 'good atheists' the religious wanted and didn't do anything to rock the boat, and got slandered for our trouble. And why? Because while religious people may all have contradictory views of the world they at least share one thing in common which makes us the most convenient target to demonize and that will never change. They can cherry pick all the passages they want to include blacks, women gays, but our very existence is something their religion cannot abide.
Our current mess is a direct result of us being nice.
LikeLike
@ Dave
But the idea behind most social discourse is persuasion. How do you persuade a moderate to your side while also ridiculing them?
And if your interest is not in persuading moderates (because some Atheists say they're not interested in that) then what's the point of having a discussion with people that you can't persuade? It just feels like Atheists on the offensive are either:
1. Doing a poor job of persuading moderates,
or
2. Simply taunting religious people by a sentiment that basically says “I dont want you on my side, I just want you to hurry up and die”
LikeLike
Alright its getting late and I need to get up real early in the morning, so this is probably going to be my last comment for the night.
You're right in saying that their are people who are offended by you're mere existence or will always think of Atheists as an immoral and evil lot. These are those jerks I talked about. I'm not saying its not a problem
And just like they create a disgusting exaggerated stereotype for Atheists, some Atheists create an exaggerated stereotype for believers. Not all of us are intolerant or opposed to reason. About two years ago (Back when I still went to mass) I heard a local priest give out a sermon that basically amounted to; “We are all God's children, whether we know so or not, and it is our duty to be loving and understanding to all of our brothers and sisters”
It didn't specifically mention Atheists, but he did mention “even those who don't think they are” which was pretty telling.The point is; viewpoints, even deep within religion, are changing for the better.
There will be assholes who attack Atheism and call it immoral or evil. But the worst thing to do, is to prove them right, especially when it ends up being hurtful to others who didn't slander or attack Atheism.
It'll change. Time will pass, and so will the hatred of Atheism, eventually it all does.
Sidebar;
Not to start an entirely new argument but…
I read Dawkins' book when I was around 13 so its been a while and I can't really recall much of it, but I distinctly remember placing him nearer my jerk column, as I found the book to be a tad too abrasive and a bit backwards in its understanding of how the world works. But then again, I was a lot more sensitive to criticism of my faith back then as compared to how I am now, so I may need to give it a re-read.
LikeLike
@ Daniel R:
Kudos to you, sir, for offering comments that are refreshingly civil, well-written and I think quite fair-minded regarding the atheism / religion divide. Your efforts at polite discourse are highly appreciated.
LikeLike
What the Christian scum don't understand is that I am really the one true God and they will all be horrible raped by 10,000 rabid tigers for all eternity after they die for not worshipping me.
LikeLike
I was going to read this whole thread, but then I took an arrow to the knee.
LikeLike
>I was going to read this whole thread, but then I took an arrow to the knee.
ITT: Shitty memes from shitty games.
LikeLike
This comment has been removed by the author.
LikeLike
Bob, I'm going to have to remind you of Sturgeon's Law here… which I think is fairly humorous considering you're the one who first introduced me to it.
Yea, there happens to be Christians out there who are assholes. Or, more accurately, there are assholes out there who happen to be Christians.
Yes, I get that, and I'm never going to argue against it.
What I am going to argue, however, the same thing I always argue when you bring this up, is that assholery is not limited to any belief, region, race, affiliation, or gender. And, it's not particularly concentrated anywhere either.
LikeLike
Daniel R
I don’t think you quite get it. You keep trying to break things down into two easily defined groups, one of jerks and one not, with the jerks obviously being the minority. That’s not really the case. In the video I showed, there was one asshole….and an entire studio of people who clapped or laughed. The appeal that most Christian are moderates rings hollow when said moderates are used as a shield by the fanatics, and generally can’t be counted on to protect their own religious rights, let alone those of others.
Look at the recent controvercy about contraception being provided by employers. The catholic league raised a fuss, and the government compromised between doing something they were well within legal rights to do….and what the fanatics wanted them to do. Something like 90% of catholic women in the USA use birth control. And I bet that their partners are ok with it as well. So where was this vast overwhelming majority when phil donohue and fox news were raising a stink over nothing? Largely silent.
Moderates would be great to have as allies if they were A) interested in something that didn’t affect them and B) in any way effectual.
And again, this offence at our existence is not limited to people you would identify as fanatics. Look up what happened to Jessica alquist. This happened in Rhode Island, not exactly the deep south. Look up Rep. Monique Davis and what she said. She’s a democratic rep from Chicago. These are the supposedly liberal Christians that we are supposed to be counting on to help us?
I can’t help but feel like you think the atheism movement just came inot being one day and decide that pissing people off was the best thing to do. We tried the friendly approach. It didn’t work. We tried the silent approach, it reall;y dind’t work. We tried the “donate half a million dollars to cancer research so people can see we give a damn about our fellow human beings” approach and holy hell did that one not work (The American cancer society actually REWROTE their rules so they couldn’t take our money.).
Exactly how long should we keep trying something that has failed every time we attempted it before we are allowed to use what we already know: that the very devout are unreachable, the moderates and liberals too ineffectual in the unlikely event they can be made to give a damn, and everyone else too ignorant to care, even when they are made aware of the issues.
“There will be assholes who attack Atheism and call it immoral or evil. But the worst thing to do, is to prove them right?”
Do me a favour….reread that sentence again and see if you can see what I can.
People who slander atheists get called assholes….but you imply that calling religions scams or being rude is being evil or immoral(hence proving them right)., Even you, who is trying to be conciliatory on some subconscious level will always judge us more harshly than those like you.
And THAT is why we can’t afford to trust you. Because if even the ones who might want to help can’t shake that ingrained prejudice how in the flying hell is everyone else?
RE: Dawkins.
You would be astounded at how often the “general jerk feeling from reading part of it when I was 13 but I can’t think of any specifics” reason comes up for people not liking Dawkins. It fits rather well with my earlier assertion that people get mad at us for pretty much anything, doesn’t it?
LikeLike
@ Dave
I've read through your post maybe a dozen times now and I'm really at a loss to try to help you here. I'm friends with (and have dated) several atheists and have never had any issues with any of them. They've never called me ignorant, and I've never called them heretics… we simply accept each others beliefs for what they are and go on with our lives.
Perhaps it's because none of us really define ourselves by our beliefs, perhaps we just subconsciously choose never to bring it up, or perhaps we're just a particularly enlightened group of people… I don't know.
What I DO know is like any other area of prejudice, this needs to be treated with an “end game” mentality. You have to start asking exactly what the goal is, and trying to figure out what the best way of reaching that goal is.
And, unless your goal is the alienate yourself from pretty much all non-atheists, acting like an contemptuous ass is never going to get you there.
LikeLike
@Dave From Canada
I just think that the Atheist community needs to try and appeal towards the moderate side of all religions. To find a common ground with them. After all, the most important part of both Atheism and a vast majority of religions is the same, be a respectful, kind, and good human being.
Instead, some -a small minority- Atheists insist on antagonizing all adherents to a higher power, including the ones who have neither hurt them directly and could in fact be a great ally in their cause, a fight against intolerance and ignorance.
Its also true that moderates in all religions should take initiative and remind others that the hate spewers that claim to represent them are not the true faces of their faith. They should, as you say, be a bit more effectual in the debacle. This is a problem, and one that needs to be addressed by followers of all religions.
I know that Atheists have tried the friendly way before and it didn't work. So they try it again, and again, and again until it does.
The boundaries we place between us can be brought down by hate and bile, but I believe their is a more gentler approach. Perhaps a longer, harder approach. But one that will only end with a stronger bond between all of us, one of love and respect, between believer and non-believer.
I am not an Atheist, so I can't understand how it feels to be unfairly prosecuted for being one.
But I am a Bisexual teenager attending high school.
Closeted, mind you, but I still get picked on for my more effeminate traits. So I get what it feels like to be harassed.
LikeLike
@Daniel Hear, hear! I'm a Christian, and I accept everyone unconditionally regardless of background, faith or sexual orientation. I'm sick of the hate spewers being the face of our faith. I never realized what an profound impact those assholes had until a few years ago a close friend of mine outed herself as a lesbian to me. I was surprised, but I told her it made no difference, as she was still my friend no matter what. She was really expecting me to condemn her for it, too. Needless to say, she was really happy that I wasn't one of those people.
Since then, I've come to the conclusion said hate spewers are nothing more than pretentious cowards who have decided to subvert our peaceful religion into a movement to justify hatred and bigotry. They don't really believe, they just use God as an excuse for their petty behavior since they know the ignorant will lap it up without a second thought.
Hell, My older brother is a Wiccan, and despite my Christain beliefs, he had me participate in a very crucial part of his wedding ceremony a couple years back simply because I was my younger brother and that he loved me. Is it really that much to ask for people of other faiths as well as Atheism to co-exist together peacefully? It probably is, if the media keeps giving this hate-mongering assholes the spotlight. I'm frankly getting really fucking sick of it.
LikeLike
“I was HIS younger brother”. Sorry. I've been out in the sun working on the lawn, so I'm a little loopy. 😀
LikeLike
@ narf
Not sure the guy who throws a hissy fit like clockwork anytime anyone suggests there might be the slightest thing wrong with neo con Christianity really has much in the way of credibility when it calls to calling other people contemptuous asses.
@Daniel R
At this point I feel like we are just talking past each other because I already explained the reasoning for why your suggestion doesn’t work. And you don’t appear to have even read anything I wrote.
You keep breaking things down into black and white. Good atheists v bad atheists. Good Christians v bad Christians. But that hasn’t played out that way in reality. Even you can’t meet the very standard you set, and I doubt you’d consider yourself a ‘bad christian’.
You talk about antagonizing, but you don’t define what that means, and based on what you wrote earlier we can see that you’ll judge us more harshly even when you are trying to bridge the gap.
“Its also true that moderates in all religions should take initiative and remind others that the hate spewers that claim to represent them are not the true faces of their faith. They should, as you say, be a bit more effectual in the debacle. This is a problem, and one that needs to be addressed by followers of all religions.”
Glad to see you agree. Now what you don’t get is that the ‘hate spewers’ are not a limited self contained group consisting of the members of your religion you don’t like. People you would slot into the good category BECOME hate spewers when we are involved.
“Perhaps a longer, harder approach. But one that will only end with a stronger bond between all of us, one of love and respect, between believer and non-believer.”
That’s a really easy plan to have when it costs you nothing to do. Simply waiting is not an option. Injustice is happening now, discrimination is happening now and no oppressed group in history ever improved their lot by waiting to not be oppressed.
I return to my earlier statement, the gay community did not get respect and legal equality by asking nicely or hiding. We are simply following the same blueprint.
LikeLike
Based on the conversation here, I feel this guy needs a shout-out.
http://www.stufffundieslike.com/
Yes, the blogger (along with most the commenters and forum community) is a self-professed Christian.
LikeLike
For what it's worth, as a gay-rights supporting christian, I would caution against making sweeping generalizations about what “Christianity” or “Christians” are like, lest you fall into the same trap of sweeping generalizations that many churches have inflicted upon homosexuals.
LikeLike
@Dave From Canada
I always read you're arguments, they're sound and I understand you're reasoning.
I just respectfully disagree with it.
I did not mean to offend you, the Atheist community as a whole, or imply in any way they are Evil or Immoral. But if you felt I did, then I sincerely apologize.
Which I guess, means we've reached an impasse. Since our disagreement is based on rather deep, core values held by the both of us.
and, to grossly over-simplify;
You believe action must be taken now to crush discrimination and injustice and ensure a safe and fair life for Atheists everywhere.
I believe that the action must be approached in a different manner by both the Atheistic and religious side of the argument.
I honestly think both those arguments have credence, although they are diametrically opposed in some aspects.
In any case, good discussion. Nice to see the argument from a different perspective. Learned a lot, certainly got me thinking.
Alas, I really don't see where else we can go from here.
Agree to disagree?
@Uncle Tim
Aww, thx!
@KevinCV
What a cool thing to do for you're brother ^_^
LikeLike
@Daniel
You would have to try very hard indeed to offend me. That's not the point. You have been bending over backwards and making a positively herculean effort to try and be on my side here. More than I've seen anyone do.
And you still can't shake that ingrained prejudice that you religion (and culture at large) wrote into you without you even being aware of it.
I don't blame you for it. You almost certainly didn't know it was happening.
But it still bring up my point. Prejudice is so ingrained that even those who would try to be our allies (what few of you there are) still have these issues.
It's not your fault, but it means the best you can do is hinder us unintentionally.
LikeLike
@ Dave
“Not sure the guy who throws a hissy fit like clockwork anytime anyone suggests there might be the slightest thing wrong with neo con Christianity really has much in the way of credibility when it calls to calling other people contemptuous asses.”
I think an important distinction to be made here is that while I am perhaps a bit quick to defend Christianity… I don't have to attack Atheism or any other belief to do so. I generally tend not to attack any other beliefs at all. I've never argued that Christianity is a better or superior belief to Atheism. Just that it's an entirely legitimate belief not deserving of much of the scorn it gets.
I don't see the universe as dichotomous… you don't have to be wrong for me to be right.
I return to my earlier statement, the gay community did not get respect and legal equality by asking nicely or hiding. We are simply following the same blueprint.
The gay community, however, is fighting for legal recognition and protection… Atheism is not. You already have that. “Freedom of religion” already provides Atheism with as much protection as any other belief.
What you're looking for is social recognition, and that's a different can of worms entirely.
LikeLike
@Dave from canada: And you still can't shake that ingrained prejudice that you religion (and culture at large) wrote into you without you even being aware of it.
I don't blame you for it. You almost certainly didn't know it was happening.
It's not your fault, but it means the best you can do is hinder us unintentionally.
And you wonder why religious people get a little pissy when talking to you? I really don't understand how you expect to gain any kind of social acceptance (and as TheAlmightyNarf says, it is social acceptance you're demanding) when you go around talking down to the very people who are trying to reach out to you. “Oh, that's cute of you, trying to be enlightened like me, but I'm afraid you poor moo-cows just can't reach beyond your simple programming to become true sentient beings! You're a dear and all, but you can only get in my way.” No wonder you feel like people dislike you.
LikeLike
@TheAlmightyNarf
“The gay community, however, is fighting for legal recognition and protection… Atheism is not. You already have that. “Freedom of religion” already provides Atheism with as much protection as any other belief.”
“What you're looking for is social recognition, and that's a different can of worms entirely.”
Yes, we're after social recognition (which is a big fight in places like America), but maybe we're also after our governments and the religious to actually abide by that “freedom of religion” law.
Most Christians treat it as “freedom to not be bothered by anyone of another religion.”
They still try to push for prayer in schools, push their mysoginistic and bigotted agendas to interfere in women's sexual health and gay marriage. Preachers openly defy the law to give politically motivated sermons.
I'm not just talking about America either. The exact same thing is happening in the UK, where I am, and the christians are in the damn minority here!
Oh, and let's not forget that in many parts of the world it IS illegal to be an atheist, and in some cases, punishable by death.
LikeLike
@ Narf
So exactly at what point has mainstream christianity done enough crazy shit that the rest of us lowly heathens are permitted to complain? Please tell me because right now it seems like any attack on any individual who happens to be a part of your group conjures up another dose of christian persecution complex from you.
“”Freedom of religion” already provides Atheism with as much protection as any other belief.”
Which believers routinely attempt to violate. I'm fairly sure that mosta theists would be quiet content if we could just get christians to stop breaking the law in order to try and force their viewpoint on everybody else. Freedom of religion may be the letter of the law but getting that law enforced is an exercise in pulling teeth and not even the us government is terribly interested in it.
If we got that i think we'd be happy. And hey, everyone else would benefit as well.
We aren't demanding people like us. If we wanted that we'd smile and nod and never make waves and just quietly go along with the group regardless of what our own personal feelings were.
@John
You'd prefer perhaps I tell him he's a horrible person and that it IS his fault?
Gotta love peopel intentionally misinterpreting what i said to fit the narrative they are trying to create.
LikeLike
This comment has been removed by the author.
LikeLike
This comment has been removed by the author.
LikeLike
@Thorbs: Preachers openly defy the law to give politically motivated sermons.
Uh…what law would that be? You don't mention other countries until later in the post, so I assume you're talking about the US? Because there is no law (federally) that prohibits religious groups from being politically active. None whatsoever.
@Dave from canada: I'd prefer you not be a smug dick. I also think it might undermine your argument that atheists are people too and should be treated with common courtesy less if you weren't exemplifying the same kind of smarmy condescension that some religious people display towards atheists.
But, you know, that's just crazy talk. Clearly you're the wronged party here, therefore any level of petty rudeness on your part towards even the people who are trying to reach out to you is totally justified.
LikeLike
@ john
Since you seem to define being a smug dick as anyone who disagrees with you, you are going to run into alot of those.
Have I suggested that believers were immoral or evil in some way? No, though can't say the same for your side, even when its representative was the one NOT acting out of a sense of prissy entitlement. Did I resort to childish namecalling? Nope, all you bro.
So how's about you define exactly what it is you mean, because right now it just looks like you are mad that i think you're wrong.
And upon reviewing your earlier posts (esp. the comment about stalin) it seems pretty clear that you are looking for reasons to dislike us, which kills your credibility.
Daniel posted over twice as much as you and not once did he pull that shit.
For the record, you can't make any link between stalin's actions and atheism. Atheism is an answer to one question and has no teachings, directives, dogma etc. It has as much to do with his actions as his mustache or his hair colour or his gender- none.
Claiming otherwise is either ignorant, or dishonest.
LikeLike
@Dave from canada: Not that I want this to degenerate in a “nuh-uh!”/”uh-huh!” bickerfest, but I never said you'd suggested that religious people were immoral.
Since you seem to define being a smug dick as anyone who disagrees with you, you are going to run into alot of those.
No, I define it as being rude and smarmy for no good reason. It is entirely possible to express the ideas you've expressed (or most of them, at any rate) without being condescending and arrogant about it; you've simply chosen not to.
For the record, you can't make any link between stalin's actions and atheism. Atheism is an answer to one question and has no teachings, directives, dogma etc. It has as much to do with his actions as his mustache or his hair colour or his gender- none.
Which was basically my point; assholes and monsters come in every creed, and using them to impugn an entire wildly heterogenous but related group of belief systems is ridiculous. The examples given were to point out that similar arguments could (just as unjustifiably) be made against atheism.
LikeLike
“No, I define it as being rude and smarmy for no good reason. It is entirely possible to express the ideas you've expressed (or most of them, at any rate) without being condescending and arrogant about it; you've simply chosen not to.”
Still not hearing an explanation. Just more accusation.
“Which was basically my point; assholes and monsters come in every creed, and using them to impugn an entire wildly heterogenous but related group of belief systems is ridiculous.”
Except you took the time to try and distance your belief system from Hitler, remember? And by salvage, I mean not so subtley imply he was an atheist despite his repeated assertions to being catholic. If it was about showing how these extreme examples didn’t matter then why try and make excuses? Seems to me like you are just trying to salvage a failed argument. But I’ll charitably meet you half way and assume that you were making the very argument you say you were….it still falls apart.
You can’t get from atheism to hating gays. There’s not path, you have to decide for other reasons.
You can get from Christianity to hating gays. The bible is rather specific about them. When you have a book that says gays are an abomination, and that unruly children should be stoned, it’s not hard to see how an adherent of said book would think that it is acceptable to beat the gay out of kids(like Bob’s post). Hell, by biblical standards, he’s a bleeding heart liberal.
You can’t get form atheism to hating jews. You can however get there from a religion that states that it is ok to kill the enemies of god (and then some. The old testament is one rape happy book), and a religious doctrine that says jesus was god and the jews killed him, which were all embraced by the catholic church in hitler’s time. He may have been the last Christian despot to use the bible
The entire Christian/jewish conflict only exists because of issues that are a direct result of religious teachings, like the blood libel and the belief that people without jesus are condemned to hell so really, anything you do to convert them is just tough love anyway, since you are saving them the lake of fire.
Arguing neither side is innocent is absurd when one has policies in place that directly result in atrocity and bigotry. As Dan Savage said, there’s nothing stopping people from ignoring the bullshit parts of their religion (the jews by and large pay far less attention to the rape and murder parts of their theology than most Christians do) but you don’t get to just white wash issues that are explicitly a result of said religion.
There will always be people doing bad things in every demographic, but the second you attach religion to it you grant it automatic legitimacy. This is only exacerbated when individuals such as yourself leap to its defence.
LikeLike
This comment has been removed by the author.
LikeLike
@ Thorbs
“Preachers openly defy the law to give politically motivated sermons.”
I'm fairly certain “Freedom of speech” allows them to do just that. Not that I think they necessarily should, mind you. But, I certainly don't see why preachers should be singled out for political censorship. Why should the church be treated differently than everyone else?
“Oh, and let's not forget that in many parts of the world it IS illegal to be an atheist, and in some cases, punishable by death.”
As is Christianity, last I checked. But, let's focus on trying to solve the problems in our countries first.
@ Dave
“So exactly at what point has mainstream christianity done enough crazy shit that the rest of us lowly heathens are permitted to complain?”
Ok, first off, where is this “lowly heathens” bullshit coming from? No one here is calling you that. You make any claims of persecution all the less credible when you try to put words in my mouth like that.
Anyway… you know what? You are free to complain all you like. But, what good does that do? What does that get you? Tell me. You're the rationalist here… you're the proponent of the scientific method… Think about this scientifically. How exactly does complaining help you?
“I'm fairly sure that most atheists would be quiet content if we could just get christians to stop breaking the law in order to try and force their viewpoint on everybody else.”
Could you, perhaps, elaborate on that?
LikeLike