So, I don't understand...

I am an atheist, but I come from a family that has 3 pastors (one passed away recently) so I can understand the mentality. I can't understand that since I do not believe in God, why is it that many of my fellow disbelievers are so antagonistic towards those that believe in God? Why is is so hard for a person to be respectful of another beliefs, as long as they do nothing to harm you? I understand that it can be annoying at times especially when they attempt to fulfill their mission to spread the word, but many atheist seem just down right nasty in how the approach "believers". They belittle, antagonize and degrade. makes no sense, as most people of religion seem to may not agree with you but at least be respectful.

I think if you want to live in peace, you should at least act like it.

 

My experience on this Forum is that Atheists often attack believers saying such things as God is a 'Flying spaghetti monster" etc. Atheists seem generally upset and have a chip on their shoulders because the U.S. was founded upon Judeo Christian values, morals and philosophy. The same values, morals and philosophy that allows them to believe in their Atheism.

 

Since none of the "holy books" teach tolerance and respect for other people and their beliefs why should those people respect their religious beliefs? If their favorite deity is real then it can defend them.

 

They seem to be very angry about something and seem to want to take it out on religious people. Look at a thread like this: http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=392353&p=1064658281#post1064658281. Does Jesus rank on the list of worst torturers of all time? It's just mean spirited.

 

This forum is infected with antiTheists. They are blinded by their disdain for Theists.

 

And yet the vast, vast majority of religious people are tolerant and respectful of other people and their beliefs, so how do you reconcile the expanse between what you are saying and that fact.

 

I couldn't care less what sort of fantasy one choses to accept as their own, personal truth. I say "live and let live" -- so long as they don't attempt to have their unfounded beliefs become the law of the land and impinge upon my own freedom. When that happens, then the issue is no longer what one chooses to believe.

 

Beliefs, such as this one, a belief that god doesn't exist, are rooted in delusion, in that certainty is involved, when certainty is impossible. There is no certainty, in either believing that god exists, or that he doesn't exist. With a belief in god there comes an accepted standard of behavior towards others, and while all of the believers in god do not always exhibit this, many of them do, and the core of it is just simple respect towards the other human being. Atheists have no code of conduct, implicit in their belief system, so they tend to be disrespectful of those that believe in god, and love to ridicule, as if they were actually certain of their own beliefs. They claim certainty where none exists in the question of a god or no god. The delusion of certainty itself can cause anyone to be a bore, disrespectful, claiming to know what it is impossible to know, which is just the nature of the human ego.

Atheists perhaps have the most overblown egos, and people like this are seldom capable of just admitting the truth, that their beliefs are just as questionable as the beliefs of the theists. You will be hard pressed to ever make an atheist understand that his belief is just a belief, and there is no way he can be certain.

The agnostic, that admits to himself that he simply doesn't know the answer, and that perhaps given the nature of what we are, that perhaps we can never know, has much less of an ego, than the atheist or the theist. He has something not present in those other camps, which is humility. A humble atheist is an oxymoron. So, lacking humility, the atheist tends to be lacking social lubrication, for he is just as delusional as the man who believes in a god created by the human brain. Neither one can see inside their own delusions of certainty, where certainty simply does not exist.

Atheism has all of the things that religion has, its own doctrine and dogma, and its just a reactionary thing. And reactionaries have a tendency to not respect what they are reacting against. The insist that they know the truth, when all that they have is an opinion, and when people do not know the difference between the two, well, they exhibit arrogance, in their ignorance. And this permeates the personality. I would much rather have lunch with an agnostic than a theist or an atheist. They have better personalities, easier to get along with, for an ego is not always imposing itself incessantly.

 

. Most atheists go through such a stage when they first come to terms with doubts which had solidified into something stronger through a thinking and analytical process personal process, and then are forced by friends and family to justify their rejection of predominant religious views. It begins as a 'coming out of the closet' process and they are pushed to practice these arguments repeatedly. They are often faced with some harassment from theist family and friends trying to reconvert them and are occasionally confronted with stereotypes, even outright bigotry and discrimination, like other minorities. That can radicalize a percentage of any minority population and once radicals in a minority population connect with each other, psychological benefits accrue that re-enforce behaviors and thinking patterns.

Once some of them realize how much their atheism is perceived as a threat by a narrow segment of theists, what was a defensive skill, can become an offensive one, the basis of a sort of rather addictive power trip gets wired into the behavior. If they make the leap from atheist to angry anti-theist and feel emotionally re-enforced by victory in these 'debates it can form into a dysfunctional addictive pattern.

Its also about insecurity about what connects them to their own community( street cred) and self identity as atheists. Gotta prove how long their intellectual penis is by flashing it all over the place.

Most atheists and agnostics out grow any need to prove themselves a year or two after coming out of the closet, and they have gained some emotional perspective on the discrimination they faced, and periodically still face as a minority.

Fanaticism about most anything is about a psychological need fulfilled through habitual behavior and its reinforcement by a small community people. Its really not about the religious, anti-religious or political ideas expressed as justification for the behavior. its a sense of social identity + a sense of empowerment fueled on a history of victimhood and discrimination.

 

I hope you understand this is an internet debate forum and it is very unlikely that anyone acts that way outside of it. Honestly, there are some very religious people in my family that I have never discussed religion with and never will. The internet forum platform tends to create discussion and debate far and above "real life" interaction.

 

My advice to the religious? Suck it up and take it, you have been dishing out wildly threatening and hateful dialogue for thousands of years, only recently when atheism and humanism are no longer a death sentence have we raised our voices in unison. Believe what you will, I will neither defend or attack your faith, but, the second you transgress into my personal rights I reserve the right to show all the disdain I feel appropriate toward anything you post. If this offends you feel free to go to one of the many places of worship your town provides, passing by the 0 (zero) amount of atheist places of communion. You see knuckleheads, your faith is under attack only by logic and reason and fortunately for you that is a rare enough occurrence that you can safely wade through huge crowds of sheep just like you, safety in numbers. We take turns feeling sorry for you and laughing at you when you act this way.

 

I suggest you ought to look at the man in your mirror first.

You're being highly disrespectful and disdainful of a lot of people right there, all the while you're espousing the virtues of understanding and respect. I suggest you try to practice what you preach, and not insult people left, right and center because their views differ from yours.

 

We get angry at religious people not for their religious beliefs, but because they are conditioned to believe that all atheists everywhere are bad bad bad people because morality only comes from god and no one can be moral without god. Therefore, atheists are evil creatures who will sacrifice your child to Satan so therefore they must not be allowed to be part of society.

Oh, and Stalin was a theist (which is wrong) so all atheists must be like Stalin, they have no value for life so they will kill you.

The sad thing is Jesus would never treat atheists like this.

We are not bad and evil.people.

Like in any large group of people, there will always be someone who is bad. Why should all people be demonized and treated poorly for the sake of a few?

This is a trait of humanity I'd love to see purged. Only the bad people should be punished, not the harmless ones who only want to live their own life.

But, Christians are a lot like they Borg. THEY WILL ASSIMILATE!

This is all I have to say, because explaining these things to some people is a fruitless endeavor when people are too invested in their beliefs they just can't see the harm they're doing to other people.

 

And you haven't read this thread obviously....tolerance and respect from believers ??!!! Where?


And no, the religious are NOT respectful of other's beliefs, they constantly want THEIR beliefs FORCED onto others.....they even, in their sinful Pride and arrogance claim this country as their own....

 

You are right...completely mean spirited. Where is the rationality that was supposed to draw the conclusion that due to lack of evidence there is no God beyond a reasonable doubt? I could never show such disrespect to another human simply because they held a different belief system than I as long as they are peaceful.

 

This is an excellant post- thank you. You made some very, very good points which will garner some thought proving research.

 

Of course, some are not tolerant of other's belief systems, but the vast majority are, from my experience. Most do not make sweeping generalizations reagrding others with different beliefs. A fine example of that is here:

As an athiest I do not find my belief system to be superior, just different. I came to my conclusion msed on critical thinking, and they came to their based upon faith. I can respect such a thing.

 

The problem here is the rationality you seek in your philosophy, eludes you in this post. 'The religious' have not been dishing out wildly threatening and hateful dialogue for thousands of years. Most have lived rather quiet lives, living day to day with occasional forays into a house of worship and some minutes of prayer here and there throughout their days. Some offered opinions on atheism or atheists, or parroted those that they heard with very little thought or passion because atheists did not show up on their radar. Those two groups represent most theists on this globe. Too busy, too distracted, too self-absorbed with life and kids and toil to do more.

It is a fair generalization that those that did take an interest and who developed an agenda, well - they were not giving sermons on understanding, tolerance and the values of diversity. They sent out almost universal messages of hate and fear, or scapegoating perceived atheists for personal power, glory and treasure themselves or for their church. Thousands of atheists and theists were tortured and died from accusations of apostasy, and witchcraft, and religious 'crimes'. None of that is the responsibility of the theists who read this post of yours. Yours is the language of group-rage not rationality.

here is another example. "...I will neither defend or attack your faith, but, the second you transgress into my personal rights I reserve the right to show all the disdain I feel appropriate toward anything you post."

Well I may be concerned about folks transgressing into my personal rights but my concern rests with the transgression. I am just as worried whether it is based in secular or religious based, and I am under no illusion that my rights are more likely to be attacked by one or the other.. the motivations behind collective action to restrict my rights come from a diverse set of needs and wants and agendas secular and religious intermingled, and clothed in language designed to deceive. They include fear, greed, a desire for control/ power, and a sense of moral authority that the a public good will result. Its about Cesaer's desires and excuses as well as Peter's. It is rarely appropriate to show distain ' towards any thing you post' and it sure is illogical. Just show distain for bad arguments on which the attack is based and let it rest there.

You are just too angry to allow your reason to frame your response to threats, and discern the patterns. that leads to blind unfocused attacks on religions, their followers everything you connect with either. And that can lead to fear, scapegoating and a lot of bigotry, much like happened in the above discussed cycle of history.

 

Christians require nothing from you. Your disdain for Christianity is your own burden. The condition is simply remarkable.

 

Have you tried not being an apologist? You admit that they force their beliefs upon the nonbelievers but somehow you can't understand why that would make unbelievers angry?

Why should we respect beliefs? Beliefs aren't people. Beliefs don't have feelings. Beliefs don't have rights.

- - - Updated - - -

The religious are the ones with ego problems. Religious people are the ones saying things like, "I survived the car accident because God has a special plan for me," because apparently that 4 other people who died in the car accident God didn't give a (*)(*)(*)(*) about.

- - - Updated - - -

The problem is that the religious believe that they have a right to force their beliefs upon you and you not accepting it is a hate crime.

 

Another wonderful post.

I have to wonder if the wildly irrational posts from some of my fellow atheists are endemic of the possibility that they did not become atheist utilizing critical thinking and logic but instead are simply parroting a belief system that they really don't understand, perhaps for political reasons?

 

Oh I don't wonder about that so much. They are just people who are as prone to emotional responses as anyone else. In short, they can think dispassionately much of the time; have and use well developed critical thinking skills, and then get royally ticked when someone pisses them off, like you must have done with clarkatticus. Just as I suppose people of faith can have well developed critical thinking skills, understand what constitutes 'scientific evidence/ proof most of the time and yet suspend disbelief on matters on miracles, virgin births, and resurrections, obliging a leap of faith to facilitate a different kind of understanding, connection or emotional experience.

 

Seems to me like it is just easier being agnostic. Saying you simple do not know, is also the most honest stance to take. For no one really knows, regardless of what they profess to believe. So, I say I just do not know, and a true believer tries to convince me that I can know, I will simply ask that god come down and reveal himself to me. If he does, then I will believe he exists, but until that happens, I just really do not know. If the atheist tries to convince with science, I would say that unless science can present me with something other than a limited knowledge, my stance will remain the same...in that I simply do not know. And I am not sure if anyone can ever know.

And at least being an agnostic has a great deal of humility involved as well as sheer honesty. I like humble honest people. Easier to get along with.

 

I am both an agnostic and an atheist in the sense that I do not know if there is a God, and it is also true that I do not believe in God. In yet another conclusion that I draw, I think the existence or lack of a God is unknowable in any clinical, reasoned sense. This all becomes very muddied by definitions of what it is to know, what it is to be an agnostic and what it is to be an atheist. Trust me when I tell you that the semantics game is not worth the trouble on this one. Its easier to do exactly what you and I just did, and explain what we think, and let others apply their labels to our statements. you can call me an atheist. you can call be an agnostic. You can form a compound noun out of both and apply it to me, just as long as we understand there three different ideas here, and that we understand each other so that my beleifs are not misrepresented. Oh and I agree about the humility part, but that is more about how we debate and discuss than what our position actually is and it sure is in short supply on this kind of stuff.

 

Keep in mind that one's religion is predominantly determined based upon the culture one is born into, and as an individual matures and becomes autonomous from their parent's teachings they either carry on, or reject it. There are vast stretches of this country where religion plays a crucial role, hence the term Bible Belt, and it was and still is common in many of these communities to be ostracized for going against the established religion of the community. So yes, there is resentment among many atheists because of the ostracizing. Many atheists, as myself, have taken great efforts to understand the origins of their faith and find many unanswered questions that can only be addressed on blind faith alone, and that isn't proof of anything.