Why do people discriminate against atheists?

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



Null ARC Avis
In Iran, atheism is a capital crime, as it is in much of the Muslim world. Even in America, there have been many, many cases of discrimination against atheists. Why? what did we do that is so wrong?

Symmetric Chaos
A lot of them are assholes about the who God issue. In terms of what's people deserve to die for Smugness > Crazed Blithering Evil.

Not to mention atheists are hardly a unified group and you can't talk about what they do to "us" in a really serious manner. And as far atheism being a capital crime, well ya'll pride yourselves on logic, figure out the four simple words needed to avoid execution.

Null ARC Avis
By assholes on the god issue, does that mean we are expressing our logical and completely reasonable belief that there is no God (or Gods, or w/e)? I think the people like Ann Coultur, who saie "We should go into their country, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity." deserve death (no one deserves death unless they really commited hanous crimes, but for the sake of discussion, i press on) more than, say, Bill Maher for "Religulous", or Dawkins for "The God Delusion"

Symmetric Chaos
No I mean responses like that where Ann Coulter is somehow a representative of thousands of very different beliefs about God. Tone is much more important than what is actual said when it comes to actually being an *******.

Null ARC Avis
There are a lot of people who agree with Ann Coulter in America. What she says, and what a lot of pastors (do i need to name them?) say is completely ridiculous and morally wrong, yet what atheists like Bill Maher say is completely logical and reasonable. He is talking about religion the same way one would talk about politics. He asks "why do you believe in God?" the same way one would ask "Why are you voting for Barack Obama?" Thats not being an *******, now is it?

chithappens
Christians, black people, otaku, athletes, and noobs are all discriminated against.

How about you try a more specific approach because this sounds like a cheap way to rant about how your feelings are hurt.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Null ARC Avis
There are a lot of people who agree with Ann Coulter in America.

And yet most atheist, theist, agnostics and ignostics will admit that "a lot" doesn't equal "all" or even "most". They will also inform you that there are nearly 200 independent nations around the world, nearly all of which contain practicing theists.

Originally posted by Null ARC Avis
What she says, and what a lot of pastors (do i need to name them?) say is completely ridiculous and morally wrong, yet what atheists like Bill Maher say is completely logical and reasonable.

So? Survival of the fittest *****. If you can't express your beliefs in a way that makes people care/follow them that's really your problem. Stop whining about unfairness and do something about it before you come here and complain like so many people before. Spread some ****ing awareness.

Originally posted by Null ARC Avis
He is talking about religion the same way one would talk about politics.

Then, regardless of his actual intelligence of virtues, he's acting very foolishly.

Originally posted by Null ARC Avis
He asks "why do you believe in God?" the same way one would ask "Why are you voting for Barack Obama?" Thats not being an *******, now is it?

I don't recall insulting Mr. Maher in any way. The question is a valid an fair one. The problem is typically attempts to deal with the response of "because I have faith" or "the Bible says he does". Then people (on both sides, of course) end up making asses of themselves.

Null ARC Avis
Well, you and i obviously have different definitions of "ass" then.

Bobbicus
Logic doesn't necessarily say there is no god, in some cases it says there is. Take for instance the clock and the clock maker. I probably won't get it right but it's something like this. Clocks are very complicated; we wouldn't think it possible that some pieces of metal and glass could just jumble around and form a clock. There has to be a clock maker. Boils down to: If there is a clock then there must be a clock maker. The universe is much more complicated then a clock, so by that same logic it needs a maker as well.

inimalist
thats Paley's divine watchmaker argument

the appendix pokes a fairly large hole in it, as does lower back pain.

inimalist
Originally posted by Null ARC Avis
In Iran, atheism is a capital crime, as it is in much of the Muslim world.

In which Muslim countries is it illegal to be an atheist?

do you define a Muslim country by leadership or be practice of the people?

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Bobbicus
Logic doesn't necessarily say there is no god, in some cases it says there is. Take for instance the clock and the clock maker. I probably won't get it right but it's something like this. Clocks are very complicated; we wouldn't think it possible that some pieces of metal and glass could just jumble around and form a clock. There has to be a clock maker. Boils down to: If there is a clock then there must be a clock maker. The universe is much more complicated then a clock, so by that same logic it needs a maker as well.

Which ignores that the parts of the universe are much smaller than that and happen to be capable of assembling without a watchmaker.

Bobbicus
There are things that self assemble, because of chemical reactions and what not and it being more energetically favorable, but then what makes the laws that govern that self assembly and those chemical reactions? I'm an agnostic by the way, so I really don't think it's possible to prove the existance of some higher being, I just think it's hard to disprove it too.

Null ARC Avis
Oh, of course you cant disprove yahweh, which i believe is the god we are talking about, just like you cant disprove Zeus or fluffy pink unicorns, but i am willing to bet that we are more or less atheist on those subjects. But when it comes to the Abrahamic god, suddenly it is completely different. meh. and the whole clock thing, read The God Delusion. Dawkins explains the holes in that arguement a lot better than i can.

inimalist
God, the way people celebrity worship Dawkins makes me think there is some truth to the idea of atheism as a religion.

Sam Harris on why we shouldn't even call ourselves atheists:

Ok2oJgsGR6c

the woman at the beginning is emblematic of what I'm talking about, but there is generally no difference in saying "Go look at what Dawkins said" or "Go look at what God said". If you can't explain it/understand it for yourself, you are simply believing what is said to you

inimalist
lol, 10 points to anyone who sees the hypocrisy in my last post

I missed it before the 15 mins for the edit sad

Red Nemesis
It is ironic because you post a video on why we should not call ourselves athiests specifically and in the same quote you admonish others not to let others think or explain for you. No?

inimalist
Originally posted by Red Nemesis
It is ironic because you post a video on why we should not call ourselves athiests specifically and in the same quote you admonish others not to let others think or explain for you. No?

indeed...

To take my foot out of my mouth a little bit, I'm against self-identification in general, as it promotes a limited range of openness to ideas, but ya, pretty dumb eh?

Red Nemesis
I dislike being pigeon-holed into terms that don't really apply. I hesitate to call myself a 'Liberal' or a 'Democrat' because then it is assumed that I follow every party line. What does my position on god, abortion or war have to do with what I think about nuclear power? The wall between camps allows single issue voters to screw with election results.

inimalist
lol, totally, agree, I just wanted to make sure I cleared up all that looking-like-the-thing-I-was-criticizing stuff.

EDIT: ie, Harris has a more pragmatic approach to why not to call oneself an Athiest, though I guess at the end of the video it starts to get into that with the spiritual stuff... hmmmm

Null ARC Avis
lol, i cant remember every facet of scientific theory. I reference Dawkins because he is a smart guy who knows much better than me how all of this works. As he should.

Tangible God
One group of people discriminating against a group different from themselves. And you're wondering?

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Null ARC Avis
lol, i cant remember every facet of scientific theory. I reference Dawkins because he is a smart guy who knows much better than me how all of this works. As he should.

So you defer to another authority without taking the time to truly understand what your beliefs are? Knowledge is meaningless without understanding, scientists and religious fundamentalists will both tell you that.

Null ARC Avis
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
So you defer to another authority without taking the time to truly understand what your beliefs are? Knowledge is meaningless without understanding, scientists and religious fundamentalists will both tell you that. I understand it, just putting it into words is difficult for me. I trust Mr. Dawkins or Mr. Harris (who i have also read, and really recommend letter to a christian nation. It take half an hour to read and really gets to the heart of the entire atheist arguement.) to put the explanations into words a lot better than i myself can.

DigiMark007
facepalm

No minority is going to enjoy majority approval. Atheists, however, aren't any more discriminated against than any other minority, and less so than most. I won't lie and pretend like there isn't discrimination against atheists. There is; I've seen it and experienced it. However, it's relatively minor compared to what might be expected from groups who feel biased against.

As for the death penalty stuff in Iran, it's a backwards country for a number of reasons. Respect other cultures, sure. But not the practices in specific cultures that are horrific in their intolerance. Christians would probably be equally as likely to be killed over there. It's not an atheism thing, it's a religious intolerance issue for that particular group of people and/or country. Not all Muslims, or all Middle Eastern countries, certainly. But for those that do have such practices, it's their mindsets that are the problem, not something inherently wrong with atheism.

Most people are going to be fairly rational, however, at least the audience that KMC has. So making a "why are atheists discriminated against" is going to get a lot of blank stares and incredulous replies.

Null ARC Avis
Originally posted by DigiMark007
facepalm

Most people are going to be fairly rational, however, at least the audience that KMC has. So making a "why are atheists discriminated against" is going to get a lot of blank stares and incredulous replies. i should ask in in the bible belt, or the middle east. i think i'll get a very nice answer there. lol. it astounds me how SMART the people here are. Like, in my school, or community, i can never talk to the type of people and on the subjects that i can on KMC. Kinda like a gathering of intellectuals, in a sense.

DigiMark007
Heh.

Well, it's not in every forum. Or even in this one, depending on the thread and who shows up. But I'm glad you seem to enjoy it here.

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by Null ARC Avis
i should ask in in the bible belt, or the middle east. i think i'll get a very nice answer there. lol. it astounds me how SMART the people here are. Like, in my school, or community, i can never talk to the type of people and on the subjects that i can on KMC. Kinda like a gathering of intellectuals, in a sense.

Bardock! Where are you now?!?!?

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by DigiMark007
facepalm

No minority is going to enjoy majority approval.

Not true. A lot of minorities receive majority approval because they possess attributes we look up to. It's minorities that have unpopular differences that are disapproved of.

DigiMark007
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Not true. A lot of minorities receive majority approval because they possess attributes we look up to. It's minorities that have unpopular differences that are disapproved of.

Fair enough. I meant that they'll never have the mainstream acceptance compared to what is considered the "norm." It's almost a de facto truth about minorities. Generally it's because of "unpopular differences" that certain groups are in a minority, not the majority anyway, thus their status as looked-down upon.

I mean this in a sociological sense, btw. Not a racial one. Racial minorities are a different matter. I'm talking about philosophical, religious, lifestyle, etc. minorities.

Atheists are fortunately not among the most harshly persecuted, or even close to it. That doesn't excuse the discrimination that does exist, but it puts it into perspective.

Admiral Akbar
Originally posted by chithappens
Christians, black people, otaku, athletes, and noobs are all discriminated against.

How about you try a more specific approach because this sounds like a cheap way to rant about how your feelings are hurt.

Atheists aren't allowed to testify in court in at least 7 different states because of the fact that they are atheists. That's just one of many examples of how we are treated. (I'm speaking of in America, of course.) Atheists are also not allowed to join the boy scouts. Boy Scouts being a private catholic organization, so it makes sense that Athiests aren't allowed it right? Buddhists however are allowed to join. Not as good of an example are the first, but it's something.

DigiMark007
Originally posted by Admiral Akbar
Atheists aren't allowed to testify in court in at least 7 different states because of the fact that they are atheists. That's just one of many examples of how we are treated. (I'm speaking of in America, of course.) Atheists are also not allowed to join the boy scouts. Boy Scouts being a private catholic organization, so it makes sense that Athiests aren't allowed it right? Buddhists however are allowed to join. Not as good of an example are the first, but it's something.

Wait, really? Hell, I just served on a jury. Not quite the same, but close. They didn't even ask for religious affiliation.

Which states, if I may ask?

...

A good indicator might go something like this:

Could a black man become president? Sure, and likely will soon. Could a jewish person? Less likely. Could an atheist? Not a chance.

I'd actually say atheists are the least discriminated against of those 3 groups, by a wide margin in fact, but there's a more pervasive bias against them in terms of numbers, though not degree of discrimination. It's not as pointed, as hateful, as the discrimination that exists for the other two. It's much more tame. But it exists in more total people. I may be wrong, but that's the sense I get both from personal experience and viewing our culture.

Admiral Akbar
Originally posted by DigiMark007
Wait, really? Hell, I just served on a jury. Not quite the same, but close. They didn't even ask for religious affiliation.

Which states, if I may ask?

...

A good indicator might go something like this:

Could a black man become president? Sure, and likely will soon. Could a jewish person? Less likely. Could an atheist? Not a chance.

I'd actually say atheists are the least discriminated against of those 3 groups, by a wide margin in fact, but there's a more pervasive bias against them in terms of numbers, though not degree of discrimination. It's not as pointed, as hateful, as the discrimination that exists for the other two. It's much more tame. But it exists in more total people. I may be wrong, but that's the sense I get both from personal experience and viewing our culture.

You could be right about them being the least discriminated out of those three. As for the states in which atheists can't testify in court ....

EDIT- I should also mention that they are not allowed to hold public office in some states either. Most likely those that deny them the right to testify in court.

They range from states like Arkansas, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Tennesse, Texas ect...

I will post the section of their constitution which explicitly says so at a later time. Or you could just take my word for it big grin

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by Admiral Akbar
You could be right about them being the least discriminated out of those three. As for the states in which atheists can't testify in court ....

EDIT- I should also mention that they are not allowed to hold public office in some states either. Most likely those that deny them the right to testify in court.

They range from states like Arkansas, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Tennesse, Texas ect...

I will post the section of their constitution which explicitly says so at a later time. Or you could just take my word for it big grin

These are ancient rules that date from the foundation of the States and are not actually enforced. It was a tactical move to limit positions of power to people who were part of an elite group...its quite common and you can hardly say your discriminated against because of these rules...which are never enforced and probably not even still part of State Law.

Atheists can join the Boy Scouts and most Buddhists are atheists.

Admiral Akbar
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
These are ancient rules that date from the foundation of the States and are not actually enforced. It was a tactical move to limit positions of power to people who were part of an elite group...its quite common and you can hardly say your discriminated against because of these rules...which are never enforced and probably not even still part of State Law.

Atheists can join the Boy Scouts and most Buddhists are atheists.

That is correct, however they were enforced before the Torcaso v Watkins case in 1961. That's still pretty recent.

smile Yes they can, as long as they keep quiet about their beliefs , or declare belief in a God.

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/LAW/06/28/scotus.gay.boyscouts/

"The Boy Scouts, which also exclude atheists and agnostics as leaders, said it has the right to decide who can join its ranks.'

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by Admiral Akbar
"The Boy Scouts, which also exclude atheists and agnostics as leaders, said it has the right to decide who can join its ranks.'

It does and should.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Admiral Akbar
That is correct, however they were enforced before the Torcaso v Watkins case in 1961. That's still pretty recent.

Fiftyish years ago, in 1961 they still used Farthings in the UK.

Originally posted by Admiral Akbar
smile Yes they can, as long as they keep quiet about their beliefs , or declare belief in a God.

If they choose to be atheist they should accept some of the difficulties that come with it.

Originally posted by Admiral Akbar
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/LAW/06/28/scotus.gay.boyscouts/

"The Boy Scouts, which also exclude atheists and agnostics as leaders, said it has the right to decide who can join its ranks.'

They're a private organization, the boyscouts can exclude redheaded people if they want to.

Admiral Akbar
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Fiftyish years ago, in 1961 they still used Farthings in the UK.



If they choose to be atheist they should accept some of the difficulties that come with it.



They're a private organization, the boyscouts can exclude redheaded people if they want to.

...

I know which is why I mentioned that was a weak example, because of the fact that the boy scouts are a private organization.

the point I was trying to make is why do they include Buddhists, some of which who are atheistic, but deny atheists/agnostics the right to join?

DigiMark007
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
If they choose to be atheist they should accept some of the difficulties that come with it.

Isn't this a tacit endorsement of the negative bias against them, though? Instead of saying "well that's wrong and we should work against discrimination" it seems to accept it and say "that's the way it is, so deal with it."

I agree that any minority needs to be prepared to some extent, but people should be able to choose whatever they believe without fear of social recrimination. And besides, beliefs generally aren't choices. You believe what you believe. I could "choose" to be a Christian again, but it wouldn't affect my belief (or non-belief, as it were).

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
It does and should.

Again, I understand the legal right of private organizations to relegate their ranks, but it doesn't make their discrimination right. I support it being legal, but don't support it as morally acceptable.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Admiral Akbar
...

I know which is why I mentioned that was a weak example, because of the fact that the boy scouts are a private organization.

the point I was trying to make is why do they include Buddhists, some of which who are atheistic, but deny atheists/agnostics the right to join?

Buddhists believe in various supernatural things such as the soul.

DigiMark007
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Buddhists believe in various supernatural things such as the soul.

What's amusing is that many agnostics are probably closer to Christian beliefs than many Buddhists. Being agnostic doesn't preclude belief in a controlling deity, souls, etc.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by DigiMark007
What's amusing is that many agnostics are probably closer to Christian beliefs than many Buddhists. Being agnostic doesn't preclude belief in a controlling deity, souls, etc.

Perhaps it's the lack of certainty involved.

DigiMark007
Or just that they're backward cultural xenophobes.

srug

Either way, I've never really cared for the scouts, even when I was "acceptable" to join their ranks. Even most church-affiliated groups welcome any and all races, creeds, and beliefs into their ranks. Possibly to convert them, sure, but it still gives a fuzzy inclusive feel, rather than an elitist in-group.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by DigiMark007
Or just that they're backward cultural xenophobes.

srug

Either way, I've never really cared for the scouts, even when I was "acceptable" to join their ranks. Even most church-affiliated groups welcome any and all races, creeds, and beliefs into their ranks. Possibly to convert them, sure, but it still gives a fuzzy inclusive feel, rather than an elitist in-group.

Or at least the head people are. I have a friend who made Eagle Scout but has friends that are Catholic, Atheist, Protestant, Ignostic and Jewish.

Admiral Akbar
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Buddhists believe in various supernatural things such as the soul.

Do all Buddhists believe in such, or only a select few?

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Admiral Akbar
Do all Buddhists believe in such, or only a select few?

Who cares? Can't we just generalize them like we do with Christians?

Admiral Akbar
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Who cares? Can't we just generalize them like we do with Christians?

We could by saying that Buddhism is a religion with a moral code and therefore people of that religion are qualified to become scouts. No matter if they are atheist buddhists or not.

DigiMark007
Actually, Buddhism doesn't include belief in a soul. Their justification for reincarnation, then, is a bit batty, but apparently makes sense to them. You'd have to ask shakya or someone else.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Or at least the head people are. I have a friend who made Eagle Scout but has friends that are Catholic, Atheist, Protestant, Ignostic and Jewish.

Right right. I meant the organization itself and its leaders, not all individuals within them. I had friends in the scouts too.

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by DigiMark007
Right right. I meant the organization itself and its leaders, not all individuals within them. I had friends in the scouts too.

I know atheists who are in the scouts...where is the evidence that atheists are not allowed in...in practice not in theory.

DigiMark007
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
I know atheists who are in the scouts...where is the evidence that atheists are not allowed in...in practice not in theory.

I was just saying I didn't really care for them. The whole "morals and lessons" theme seemed way too heavy-handed. I never really pursued the discussion of whether or not they allow atheists in, and it wasn't affecting my opinion. In wouldn't surprise me at all, given my experience with them and those in the scouts, but I didn't blindly accept it.

Admiral Akbar
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
I know atheists who are in the scouts...where is the evidence that atheists are not allowed in...in practice not in theory.

I have a friend who is an agnostic and was a scout. He didn't have any problems getting in because he lied about being an agnostic! Others of his friends...not so fortunate.

Nobody is saying you can't be a boy scout if you're a non-believer. Simply saying that if you say so explicitly you will be booted out. There are plenty of people who were not allowed in, or booted out because of their beliefs. It would only take a quick google search to find out. I could provide links, if you so wish.

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by Admiral Akbar
I have a friend who is an agnostic and was a scout. He didn't have any problems getting in because he lied about being an agnostic! Others of his friends...not so fortunate.

Nobody is saying you can't be a boy scout if you're a non-believer. Simply saying that if you say so explicitly you will be booted out. There are plenty of people who were not allowed in, or booted out because of their beliefs. It would only take a quick google search to find out. I could provide links, if you so wish.

Please do, because these scouts your talking about are very different from the ones I know in the UK.

chithappens
Similarly, some southern people are stereotypically racist while other southerners are wholesome people. What's the point?

I fail to see how this topic can generate anything new other than a new way to insult a specific "box" so to speak.

DigiMark007
Originally posted by chithappens
Similarly, some southern people are stereotypically racist while other southerners are wholesome people. What's the point?

I fail to see how this topic can generate anything new other than a new way to insult a specific "box" so to speak.

Which was one of my original points. The thread was clearly a soapbox to whine from. It doesn't mean discrimination against religious groups shouldn't be addressed. But there's better ways of doing it.

Admiral Akbar
Originally posted by DigiMark007
Which was one of my original points. The thread was clearly a soapbox to whine from. It doesn't mean discrimination against religious groups shouldn't be addressed. But there's better ways of doing it.
You are an agnostic correct?

DigiMark007
Originally posted by Admiral Akbar
You are an agnostic correct?

Atheist if I want to shock a person. "Non-religious" if I don't want them to stereotype me right away. But atheist for our purposes, since I don't need to mince words on the internet.

...which is indicative in and of itself. I have to temper my response to "what religion are you?" in order to avoid being stereotyped and mistrusted. This isn't always the case, since many people couldn't care less, but it's also not just paranoia...the surprise, confusion, and occasional negativity I've received as a result of my answer has been very real.

Like I said earlier, discrimination isn't as intense as against some other groups (jews, blacks, etc.) but might very well exist in more total people, albeit in a milder form.

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by DigiMark007
Atheist if I want to shock a person. "Non-religious" if I don't want them to stereotype me right away. But atheist for our purposes, since I don't need to mince words on the internet.

...which is indicative in and of itself. I have to temper my response to "what religion are you?" in order to avoid being stereotyped and mistrusted. This isn't always the case, since many people couldn't care less, but it's also not just paranoia...the surprise, confusion, and occasional negativity I've received as a result of my answer has been very real.

Like I said earlier, discrimination isn't as intense as against some other groups (jews, blacks, etc.) but might very well exist in more total people, albeit in a milder form.

Ahh once a Catholic always a Catholic.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Ahh once a Catholic always a Catholic.

Once a Buddhist always a Buddhist. So if a Catholic became a Buddhist would that person explode? laughing out loud

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Once a Buddhist always a Buddhist. So if a Catholic became a Buddhist would that person explode? laughing out loud

I know a Catholic who became a Buddhist...and he is still alive!

(Its a saying in the West of Scotland where tensions between Protestants and Catholics are pretty high)

DigiMark007
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Ahh once a Catholic always a Catholic.

erm, wut?

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by DigiMark007
erm, wut?

Its a joke about how Catholics can never escape their upbringing...

DigiMark007
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Its a joke about how Catholics can never escape their upbringing...

Oh. K then. Not sure how it applies to my post that you quoted, but I understand the reference now.

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by DigiMark007
Oh. K then. Not sure how it applies to my post that you quoted, but I understand the reference now.

Its because you said you were an atheist. lol

DigiMark007
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Its because you said you were an atheist. lol

I am.

We might take an approach that Bertrand Russell did, which (this is heavily paraphrased) was talking about different types of atheists as having differing worldviews depending on their upbringing. So a formerly Catholic atheist would likely have a different approach to atheism than, say, a lifelong atheist. Or a formerly Jewish atheist. Etc. etc. Which makes sense, despite their shared beliefs.

I take it you mean it in that sense, which is fine. If you mean that I still retain Catholic beliefs because I was once Catholic (devoutly so, at one point) then no. But the former interpretation is fairly rational, and somewhat encapsulates the sociological aspect of it.

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by DigiMark007
I am.

We might take an approach that Bertrand Russell did, which (this is heavily paraphrased) was talking about different types of atheists as having differing worldviews depending on their upbringing. So a formerly Catholic atheist would likely have a different approach to atheism than, say, a lifelong atheist. Or a formerly Jewish atheist. Etc. etc. Which makes sense, despite their shared beliefs.

I take it you mean it in that sense, which is fine. If you mean that I still retain Catholic beliefs because I was once Catholic (devoutly so, at one point) then no. But the former interpretation is fairly rational, and somewhat encapsulates the sociological aspect of it.

Do you perhaps feel that your Catholicism has had an effect on your world view, which might be very different if you had been raised a Calvinist or so...?

(Just out of interest.)

DigiMark007
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Do you perhaps feel that your Catholicism has had an effect on your world view?

(Just out of interest.)

Hard to answer. No, in the sense that I hold pretty much none of my former beliefs. None, in fact, that I can think of. And certainly none that are at or near the core of Catholicism.

But yes in the sense that my sense of social propriety and morality stems partly from Catholicism. Though I hesitate to say even that, because there's not much discernible difference between the morality of myself and, say, the morality of my friends who were out-of-the-womb atheists. Which leads me to believe it's more social conditioning than religious conditioning.

I no longer justify actions (or condemn them) based on Christian morals, but it's likely that my intrinsic determining of what is "right and wrong" is partly due to Catholic upbringing. "Right and wrong" would exist anyway for most people, but it would likely be a different set of standards depending o how I was raised.

DigiMark007
I don't begrudge my upbringing, btw. It was great. The friends and experiences were awesome, as was the spiritual aspect of it. And religion provided the backdrop for it.

The fact that I no longer believe any of it, and am happy about that fact, doesn't change the fact that Catholicism was fairly good to me.

But I feel lucky to have been on both sides. I know what it feels like to be in love with God, Jesus, feel loved back, and feel the "blessings" of religion through community and prayer. Which gives me perspective on just how intoxicating religion can be, and what it means to some people, and why the atheist cries for "logic" often fall on deaf ears.

Don't let that fool you. I'm fairly militantly atheist (though not abrasively so, I hope), and feel religion to be a greater net "bad" than "good." But I understand it, and why it exists in such a strong form.

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by DigiMark007
I don't begrudge my upbringing, btw. It was great. The friends and experiences were awesome, as was the spiritual aspect of it. And religion provided the backdrop for it.

The fact that I no longer believe any of it, and am happy about that fact, doesn't change the fact that Catholicism was fairly good to me.

But I feel lucky to have been on both sides. I know what it feels like to be in love with God, Jesus, feel loved back, and feel the "blessings" of religion through community and prayer. Which gives me perspective on just how intoxicating religion can be, and what it means to some people, and why the atheist cries for "logic" often fall on deaf ears.

Don't let that fool you. I'm fairly militantly atheist (though not abrasively so, I hope), and feel religion to be a greater net "bad" than "good." But I understand it, and why it exists in such a strong form.

Whats worse, it will never go away.

Admiral Akbar
Originally posted by DigiMark007
Atheist if I want to shock a person. "Non-religious" if I don't want them to stereotype me right away. But atheist for our purposes, since I don't need to mince words on the internet.

...which is indicative in and of itself. I have to temper my response to "what religion are you?" in order to avoid being stereotyped and mistrusted. This isn't always the case, since many people couldn't care less, but it's also not just paranoia...the surprise, confusion, and occasional negativity I've received as a result of my answer has been very real.

Like I said earlier, discrimination isn't as intense as against some other groups (jews, blacks, etc.) but might very well exist in more total people, albeit in a milder form.

I.....I was just curious.

I understand what you're saying and I agree that discrimination against Atheists might not be as intense. Polls however say otherwise, but from experience I would say that the negativity is minor. Some people would disagree. Again, I guess it depends where you live. In california being gay is the norm wheras somewhere like texas which is heavily religious being gay might pose a problem.

DigiMark007
Originally posted by Admiral Akbar
I.....I was just curious.

I understand what you're saying and I agree that discrimination against Atheists might not be as intense. Polls however say otherwise, but from experience I would say that the negativity is minor. Some people would disagree. Again, I guess it depends where you live. In california being gay is the norm wheras somewhere like texas which is heavily religious being gay might pose a problem.

Same with atheism generally. Being around cities helps, even in the south, where there is a larger concentration of both atheist and gay than in rural areas.

And your words reinforce my point, so we're in agreement. Minor negativity, but it exists in more people. And I've heard allusions to the polls you mentioned. Haven't seen the results myself, but apparently atheists are just a small notch above Satanists and such in terms of public trust.

DigiMark007
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Whats worse, it will never go away.

What won't? Religion? Or my upbringing?

I'm fine with both. Once you're happy with both yourself and your beliefs (I am) what happens with things you can't control generally isn't much of a concern.

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by Admiral Akbar
I.....I was just curious.

I understand what you're saying and I agree that discrimination against Atheists might not be as intense. Polls however say otherwise, but from experience I would say that the negativity is minor. Some people would disagree. Again, I guess it depends where you live. In california being gay is the norm wheras somewhere like texas which is heavily religious being gay might pose a problem.

And is that wrong?

Originally posted by DigiMark007
What won't? Religion? Or my upbringing?

I'm fine with both. Once you're happy with both yourself and your beliefs (I am) what happens with things you can't control generally isn't much of a concern.
Religion

Admiral Akbar
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
And is that wrong?


Religion

What is? Being gay..no it isn't. Do you believe it's wrong?

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Admiral Akbar
What is? Being gay..no it isn't. Do you believe it's wrong?

I think he's asking if discrimination wrong when you can just go somewhere else. In fact there's no way that he could possibly be asking about being gay based on what's written.

DigiMark007
Hopefully he doesn't mean that they should just go somewhere where they aren't discriminated against. That would be a callous answer to an unfortunately beleaguered group of people.

DigiMark007
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Religion

Of course it won't go away. I wouldn't expect it to. At least not in our lifetimes.

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by DigiMark007
Hopefully he doesn't mean that they should just go somewhere where they aren't discriminated against. That would be a callous answer to an unfortunately beleaguered group of people.

Actually, what I meant is: is discrimination against homosexuals wrong? If so why.

(I know why I believe its wrong, I can probably guess why he thinks its wrong too, however I would like to know his explicit reasoning behind the idea that discrimination against homosexuals is wrong.)

DigiMark007
Because discrimination begets suffering and removes happiness. And suffering in all its forms is regrettable, and something to be worked against.

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by DigiMark007
Because discrimination begets suffering and removes happiness. And suffering in all its forms is regrettable, and something to be worked against.

Is he allowed to speak for himself?

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Is he allowed to speak for himself?

No.

DigiMark007
I can't answer for MYself? This is an open discussion after all. He's obviously more than welcome to posit his own answer, and I wasn't pretending to speak for him. You need to tone down the assumptions, Gav, and try not to make every post an accusation at me.

DigiMark007
Eh, ignore that. Gav's ok, though the points in my last post stand as it pertains to my own response, not pretending to be for him.

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by DigiMark007
I can't answer for MYself? This is an open discussion after all. He's obviously more than welcome to posit his own answer, and I wasn't pretending to speak for him. You need to tone down the assumptions, Gav, and try not to make every post an accusation at me. Originally posted by DigiMark007
Eh, ignore that. Gav's ok, though the points in my last post stand as it pertains to my own response, not pretending to be for him.

What was that?

To be honest Digi, and I mean this in the nicest way it can get a bit tiresome when other users hide behind your knowledge and arguments. I was wondering if he himself actually had a reason for believing that kind of discrimination was wrong.

Though I don't wish to dwell on this becuse I wasn't trying to accuse you of anything.

DigiMark007
K, fair enough. I got snippy because it sounded like you thought I was answering for him.

And why not hide behind my arguments? I'm always right.

cool

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by DigiMark007
K, fair enough. I got snippy because it sounded like you thought I was answering for him.

And why not hide behind my arguments? I'm always right.

cool

Yeah but you remember your Uni Tutorials, its no good if one person sits and answers everything and the others just ride along on his coattails.Its bad for them in the long run- they need independent thought stick out tongue (says a Catholic)

DigiMark007
Independent thought is overrated. Follow me instead (says an atheist).

evil face

Symmetric Chaos
Hey I figure there's only so much evil in the world. If people didn't discriminate against atheists the Third Reich probably would have come back by now. Is that what you want? Do you love Nazis?



F*cking racists . . .

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by DigiMark007
Independent thought is overrated. Follow me instead (says an atheist).

evil face

I...I don't see the irony. confused

(stick out tongue)

DigiMark007
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
I...I don't see the irony. confused

(stick out tongue)

No irony intended. I just want to rule everyone.

no expression

inimalist
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Do you love Nazis?


does Jesus love nazis?

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by inimalist
does Jesus love nazis?

Yes. But they don't love him.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Yes. But they don't love him. Depends on the Nazi, I reckon.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Bardock42
Depends on the Nazi, I reckon.

Youbetcha.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Youbetcha.

Yeah, not every Joe Nazi is the same.

Camden
People discriminate largely because they can and because they have been brainwashed sometime somewhere to hate that which is different from themselves.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Camden
People discriminate largely because they can and because they have been brainwashed sometime somewhere to hate that which is different from themselves.

We call that brainwashing life and sociological experience.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by inimalist
does Jesus love Nazis?

Jesus never knew what a Nazi was. They did not come into existence until ~2000 years after he died.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Jesus never knew what a Nazi was. They did not come into existence until ~2000 years after he died.

You forget, he came back.

Deja~vu
Well he must have forgotten something cause he's coming back again. huh

lil bitchiness
Originally posted by Null ARC Avis
In Iran, atheism is a capital crime, as it is in much of the Muslim world. Even in America, there have been many, many cases of discrimination against atheists. Why? what did we do that is so wrong?

And what do people in America ''do'' to atheists that compares to a capital crime in certain muslim countries?
What is it that atheists are leashed of in America today?

Are atheists denied jobs? Threatened with death? Killed? Tortured? Denied right not be believe?
What?

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Deja~vu
Well he must have forgotten something cause he's coming back again. huh

Freud* said you leave things behind because you want to come back. Jesus' will come back and be like "hey, anyone seen my sandals" and we'll be like "Jesus be honest, you're not here for sandals" and then he'll be like "okay you ****ers can die for your mother****ing blasphemy".

Or something. I think I lost my train of thought somewhere.

by which I mean a fictional character who said that Freud said that

DigiMark007
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
And what do people in America ''do'' to atheists that compares to a capital crime in certain muslim countries?
What is it that atheists are leashed of in America today?

Are atheists denied jobs? Threatened with death? Killed? Tortured? Denied right not be believe?
What?

A valid reply to his original topic. I tried to reframe it slightly to make it more pertinent. Atheists are certainly a minority, and experience a general mistrust from society (public opinion poll results can and have corroborated this) but the discrimination is less overt. More widespread, I might argue, since there may actually be more total people who mistrust or look down on atheists than, say, Jews or Blacks. But of course the level of discrimination for those groups of people is far more severe when it occurs.

Personally, I've been told I'm not welcome in households simply for leaving a religion, had a vaguely agnostic/spiritual (i.e. not terribly religious) girl break up with me for my atheism, and received hosts of questions tinged with incredulity and a touch of mistrust when people find out I'm atheist. And I'm in what would be considered a moderately liberal area...I'm not in the deep South of anything. Nor am I terribly militant with spreading my opinions. It does exist, but at the same time I don't feel actively discriminated against. So it requires a more nuanced discussion than cries of violent discrimination that your questions suggest.

Though to be fair, the thread is generalized to the point that it doesn't focus specifically on America. Your questions are valid for our country, but his examples of discrimination in the Middle East remain true and valid, though obviously not as pertinent to our daily lives and discussions. But I agree that Null's take on this topic is needlessly heavy-handed.

deathbucket
Originally posted by DigiMark007

Though to be fair, the thread is generalized to the point that it doesn't focus specifically on America. Your questions are valid for our country, but his examples of discrimination in the Middle East remain true and valid, though obviously not as pertinent to our daily lives and discussions. But I agree that Null's take on this topic is needlessly heavy-handed.


Good reply

I think that also the discrimination against atheists in the US is more subtle because it's partially rooted in Cold War fear (Russia and China being both communist and atheist nations at the time). We put the phrase "Under God" in the pledge of allegiance in the 1950s to distinguish ourselves from the "godless" countries we were intimidated by. Not that there wouldn't be discrimination against atheists without this history -- any minority has to deal with that -- but the nature of the sentiment would be different were it not for these political factors.

Think about this last election...you can call someone a "socialist," still, even, and it's an insult in the US. I think atheism is probably an even worse insult, and the connotation is the same -- godlessness is akin to anti-Americanism. We'll probably have a black, woman, and homosexual president before we have an (out-spoken) atheist president.

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.