It's a pretty amazing false equivalence where "religious fundamentalists oppress and kill people on a large scale" gets countered with "but there are mean atheists on the Internet."
How about a respectful religious vs non-religious discussion?
- Thread starter TrickyDickie
- Start date
I honestly find that baffling. But then again it is probably an effect of threatened privilege. Christians used to dominate society and tell everybody else how to live their lives.
To give a similar example:
Some men experience an astonishing amount of anxiety when faced with the perceived loss of privilege. And those men think there are mean feminists everywhere even though nobody who actually cares and knows about feminism encounters these chimeras on a regular basis. These men are simply surprised and shocked that their voices aren't the only voices that matter in society anymore.
The same seems to be true for many Christians. They're used to the privilege of being the only group in society whose voice mattered. So when they encounter an atheist or atheist beliefs they immediately feel threatened. They perceive people who dare challenge that dominance and privilege as "mean".
This.
I know you weren't speaking literally, I was just noting that the stereotype of the proselytising atheist doesn't seem to be borne out anywhere in reality except in anecdotal stories from religious people who claim to have been offended by them on the internet.
You'd think, given how widespread Atheism is in the UK and that they now outnumber Christians, that they'd be on street corners spreading the word, and yet I still only see Christians doing that. Odd, isn't it.
I would agree with that. I also think a lot of very religious people are quite insecure, and that the more dogmatic a person is, probably the more of a crutch their religion is for their underlying insecurity issues (that's a loose rule of course). They don't like to see people walking without that crutch.
I think what is happening is these people are encountering trolls online and don't know that they are trolls. For all I know they could well be Christians setting out to reinforce the already bad stereotypes. I've seen worse behavior from some of them.
I only know they exist because I used to be one. Took being humiliated by a wiser atheist to get me to knock it off. Take that for what it's worth.
Unfortunately we can't choose our relatives though. I get it so much of the time I'm with my brother. I am continually embarrassed by his diatribes to other people's, then when I ask him afterwards to stop continually harping on it makes him worse - he goes into uncontrollable hissy fits that include screeching like a parrot on fire. It doesn't matter the time or place, he thinks everyone must want to hear him pontificate. But he bails people up literally 2 metres from their loved one's coffin to let them know God doesn't exist - at a time when they are trying to find what comfort they can.
When I'm not with him he sends me articles from James Randi and other zealots from both sides trying to prove their own points without even pretending to to be courteous. My inbox was overcapacity because of all the 'proof' I have been sent -in written form and DVD. Mr Ed the Talking Horse, would have been much better to listen to at the end of a loooonnngg daaaay!
Thank you Coloratura for explaining that to me. Initially I didn't use any pronoun as I wasn't quite sure. Then I took my cue from your avatar and Snuggle Princess. I'm pleased you explained, and as you have no preference I would like to use the female pronoun as you take it as a compliment. If at any time that changes I will, of course, use your preference.I do want to note something before we begin that discussion. I identify as cisgender male, so you don't have to refer to me as she if you don't wish to do so. If you do, I'm fine with that, too, and I'd take it as a compliment. In short, I have no requirements on how I am addressed.
Funny thing about religions is when one becomes politically dominant, its followers impose their dogmatic ideology through legal legislation (or worse means) deeming what is socially and personally acceptable according to their religious orthodoxy.
Take Greece for example. The birthplace of Western Civilization. The Greeks and in particular Athens gave birth to formalized Democracy, Citizenship, Philosophy, Theosophy, Medical Ethics, Science, Mathematics, Theater Plays (comedy & tragedy), the Olympics and an abundance of history.
What happened when Christianity solidified its hold becoming the dominant power in Europe? The Dark Ages. It wasn't until The Renaissance followed by The Age of Enlightenment when Christianity was challenged that the teachings of Greece could be safely reexamined.
Fast forward to today and religions still look like the Dark Ages all over again.
Back in the 70s the group that is now known as the religious right just wanted to be 'heard'. They wanted a 'place at the table'. No one had a problem with that. This is America, right? Goldwater knew what would happen.
Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the
[Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a
terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and
governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting
in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried
to deal with them. ~ Barry Goldwater
They got a place at the table alright. Now they want to run the table.
My parents were Republicans back when it was radical to be Republicans. My family was, for the most part, Southern Unionists during the Civil War and I can remember when growing up in the south being the only Republican family around (With the exception of some African American people we knew) We all know about the great switch over.
Imho the ones in the religious right you need to be most concerned about are the one who espouse something called Dominionism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominion_Theology
I wouldn't be surprised if many of the current leaders of the religious right didn't secretly hold to a lot of these ideas.
And keep in mind when I say religious right I don't mean all conservative Christians. Not all of them are a part of this.
Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the
[Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a
terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and
governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting
in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried
to deal with them. ~ Barry Goldwater
They got a place at the table alright. Now they want to run the table.
My parents were Republicans back when it was radical to be Republicans. My family was, for the most part, Southern Unionists during the Civil War and I can remember when growing up in the south being the only Republican family around (With the exception of some African American people we knew) We all know about the great switch over.
Imho the ones in the religious right you need to be most concerned about are the one who espouse something called Dominionism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominion_Theology
I wouldn't be surprised if many of the current leaders of the religious right didn't secretly hold to a lot of these ideas.
And keep in mind when I say religious right I don't mean all conservative Christians. Not all of them are a part of this.
I don't have a problem with people believing in God. Heck, I'm not sure what I believe on that matter. But I do have a huge problem with religion. It feels like it was created by Man as a tool using God's name to attempt to control society.
To make logic and curiosity such a huge part of our makeup and then tell us not to use it to pursue the answers to questions about our place in the universe and where we come from seems contradictory.
All in my opinion.
To make logic and curiosity such a huge part of our makeup and then tell us not to use it to pursue the answers to questions about our place in the universe and where we come from seems contradictory.
All in my opinion.
Mr. Goldwater had a good gift of discernment... Power can lead to corruption. Some people believe they are immune and that good intentions will protect them. We know from history that that is not the case.
Don't have much to add except to say that in my experience there are assholes in both groups. As a catholic I tend to experience the bad "holier than thou" religous attitude from baptists. Most atheists l know rarely bring up religion but some do act like dicks and demean you for "believing in a fairy tale."
I was having dinner at my mums house a year ago, and someone said something in passing about god, all of us atheists, just a comment about society, and her friend (they shared the house, flatmates) who was drunk (alcoholic, can't fix her.) just started screaming "HESNOTREAL! HESNOTREAL! Stop ####ing lying to yourselves you delusional ####ing ###holes!!!"
Yes, it was the drink, but still very surreal.
Yes, it was the drink, but still very surreal.
I do find amusing the thought of religious assholes from differing faiths fighting about angels on the head of a pin.
You're entitled to your fairy tale. Just don't try to push it on me, or enact or suppress legislation based upon it.
As soon as I stopped drinking, it was suddenly legal to buy alcohol on Sundays.
Last edited:
O Fortuna velut luna statu variabilis
One day I will be able to buy potting mix on Good Friday, and the world will be perfect.
The idea of the "Dark Ages," as it persists in popular culture, is dubious at best. Scholarly historiography has long moved beyond this simplistic notion.
http://www.medievalists.net/2014/02/04/why-the-middle-ages-are-called-the-dark-ages/
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...ter-than-we-give-them-credit-for-8215395.html
http://www.slate.com/blogs/quora/20..._age_often_characterized_as_dark_or_less.html
News from the Raven: Essays from Sam Houston State University on Medieval and Renaissance Thought, pages 51-54
Kor
Thank you. Example A of what I was talking about.
Similar threads
