&quot;On The Other Claw....&quot;

That's why it's my goal to be the most moderate person alive.

From:

shdragon.livejournal.com

I used to work with a militant Athiest. The "all religion is evil and everyone who believes is an idiot sheep" type who was all logic all the time, science science science.

I pissed him off regularly by asking him to stop "evangelizing [your] religion to me" all the time. Because that's what it was.

From:

I don't think it's accurate to call atheism a religion -- it's ideological, certainly, but it's not a religion.

That said, the angry, zealous atheist types are certainly very annoying, and very... lacking in self-awareness.

From:

kymri.livejournal.com

My (rather shallow, probably) take on it is thus:

The majority of religions teach peace and goodwill. Not exclusively (this is one thing Christianity and Islam certainly agree on), but they all basically teach some form of (as William and Theodore might say) Be excellent to each other.

The trick is that most religions get organized and when they get organized they start to control people; usually it at least starts out for the good. Don't eat this or the other thing because in the places where we live, eating these things will jack you up. But organization brings with it secular influence. And the more secular influence an organization has, the more of it and the more overall control they tend to want. (See: The Catholic Church.)

Of course, the extremists are also a problem, but they find it easier when there's some sort of religious (or other philosophical or cultural) scaffolding to cling to. That said, I haven't seen a whole lot of Buddhist suicide bombers; the 'extremists' of that group were more likely to immolate themselves; including at least one famous incident during the Viet Nam war caught chillingly on film.

From:

silussa.livejournal.com

Radical
Religious
Right.

Notice I don't specify which religion.

From:

Atheists are the most hated group of people in America. Thanks for spreading the hate a little bit more.

From:

yourbob.livejournal.com

Religion: "a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe"

Doesn't have to be ritualistic or supernatural. Atheism is a religion (therefore protected by 1st ammendment).

and angry, zealous people are very annoying and ...

From:

hafoc.livejournal.com

Izzakly so, in my crackpot opinion. In fact, I've come to the conclusion that my problem with unquestioning (insert religion here: Christians, Hindus, Moslems, Libertarians) isn't the (Insert religion here) part, it's the unthinking part.

Of course my Cannned Rant Number Seven is the one that says that the reason people adopt these fanatical views is often because thinking is too much work, or (more often) too scary. That's why they get so angry when you question their beliefs. It isn't that your failure to believe as they do makes you evil, although they believe that too. Underneath it all, IMCO, the real source of their rage is that your disbelief THREATENS THEM. Just by showing it is possible to doubt, you might poke holes in their worldview and let reality in. And there is nothing more terrifying than that.

From:

Yeah, I don't think a lot of religions innately teach the "be excellent to one another" thing as the major part of their broader message -- at least not the older ones. That's us attempting to impose our modern, progressive narrative on them so that we can feel comfortable integrating the religions in our society.

Pretty much all of these religions started out as bloody, tribalist, and fearful. They were inextricably intertwined with our culture and science -- all these things were the SAME thing; we didn't differentiate. Humanity has changed a lot in the last ten thousand years. But our foundations are all wrapped up in apes throwing feces at each other. There's nothing particularly noble or admirable about our past, or the mythological narrative we used to define it. Religion is simply a reflection of our culture beliefs at a given time. Fundamentalism is attempting to lock ourselves into the traditions from cultures from thousands of years ago. And our modern view of religion, so that we can accept each other with all our varying beliefs, is to politely pretend that we had the same beliefs and values back then or over there as we do here and now. But it's not true. We all just have to keep politely pretending that it is so we don't offend each other.

From:

I don't accept your definition of religion. Even within it, I don't think atheism has much to say about the "purpose" of the universe, so it wouldn't really qualify.

Edited Date: 2010-05-20 11:09 pm (UTC)

From:

yourbob.livejournal.com

Feel free to not accept it. But, IMHO, if you use a word in public, you should know the dictionary definition (you don't have to like it, but you should know it). And that's what that is.

From:

Did he do that? Or did he challenge the tendency of atheists to see themselves as the enlightened few - to basically exchange their previous theistic exlusionary creed for an atheistic exclusionary creed? He's absolutely right that the attitudes are the same.

In the interest of full disclosure, I'm a former Christian and current atheist who is not particularly evangelical about the spirituality I find in my secular humanism. I occasionally slip up because I was raised to be an evangelical, and I'm fighting to acquire and maintain a worldview that frames religion as many paths to walk.

From:

It doesn't bother me that we have to pretend that religions, a long time ago, was civilized and rational. What bothers me is that we have to pretend that a lot of religions, right now, aren't equally bloody and backwards. And it bothers me that fundamentalists use their more tolerant co-religionists as a shield to defend their blood and hate and it bothers me that . . . many of their co-religionists allow themselves to be used thus.

From:

Yes, he did. Atheism was the only ideology that was specifically mentioned by name. Also, I believe it's fair to bring up the fact that atheists are the most hated group in America, and comments like this should be taken in that context.

From:

Well, that's one definition, from one dictionary, and you conveniently omitted part of it.

You might have used the OED version if we're being authoritarian about definitions:

1. Action or conduct indicating a belief in, reverence for, and desire to please a divine ruling power; the exercise or practice of rites or observances implying this.

2. A particular system of faith and worship.

3. Recognition on the part of man of some higher unseen power as having control of his destiny, and as being entitled to obedience, reverence, and worship; the general mental and moral attitude resulting from this belief, with reference to its effect upon the individual or the community; personal or general acceptance of this feeling as a standard of spiritual and practical life.

4. Devotion to some principle; a strict fidelity or faithfulness; conscientiousness; pious affection or attachment.

Of these, you might for the fourth as indicative of atheism being a religion, but I'd require some sound convincing -- it is the least of the definitions. Note that the other three require a level of faith or spirituality. I doubt that atheism would qualify as a religion given the way most people use the word, and I think most would agree with me. And that's because I cannot accept that the mere refusal to accept someone else's belief system comprises a belief system in and of itself.

Look at it this way: suppose you knew a Christian Scientist who was deathly ill with an easily treatable but otherwise fatal disease, and this Christian Scientist, in accordance with her religion, was determined to heal herself solely with the power of prayer. If you care for this person, and you implore her to go to a doctor to receive a treatment so that she does not die, is your entreaty a religious one? I would argue not. If you think that to do so IS religious, then fine, we have a practical disagreement in definition. If you think that it is NOT religious, then perhaps you will reconsider my point that simply refusing to accept someone else's faith as an accurate description of the way the universe works does not in itself comprise religious belief.

From:

Put another way: we are both atheists. I simply believe in one fewer religion than you do.

From:

It's interesting that you feel attacked by what he said about atheists, but I don't. If he was attacking all atheists, I would have felt attacked too - I have certainly felt that in the past when others over-generalized about atheism.

It seems to me that you're attempting to derail a valid point by pointing out that it might possibly be related to an ingrained hatred (which I have never seen from Athelind the entire 3+ years he's been on my much-used religious seeking filter.) There are fundamentalist atheists. They use turns of phrase and us vs. them mentality to just about the same extent that fundamentalist Christians or fundamentalist Muslims or fundamentalist patriots do. If you choose to try to deny this, I'll point you to a few dozen examples, but I don't really think that's a constructive path to take here.

From:

Of course there are fundamentalist atheists. There's fundamentalist everything. People murder in the name of soccer, for crying out loud! But the only group of people who were singled out were atheists.

Y'know, the most hated group of people in America.

From:

As a kind of a test, I've written this:

The thing most racists, regardless of ethnicity, have in common with each other is the unalterable view that their own race is superior to every other.

Proportionally, I've seen as many black racists as I have seen racists of other ethnicities and their reaction to Thoughtcrime is just as zealous.

See it now?

From:

scarfman

When you're so insistent, I'd like to see a citation that verifies atheists are the most hated group in America.

From:

Even that statistic rings a bit hollow to me. It sets up, or at least allows the discussion to be framed by those with, an us vs. them mentality.

In the religious discussions I've been involved with, I often find that people set up a dichotomy, whether as an example of other ends of the scale or simply because they see things in black and white. When religious people are setting up dichotomies, they don't look to soccer fans for the other end of it. They look to those seen as opposing their specific creed. That's the atheists.

So if Athelind made a mistake here, it was in giving in to the prevailing framework of us versus them religion - implicitly talking about Christians and Muslims (and don't tell me you didn't get that inference at the beginning of his post) and then using the framework to come up with the opposite.

I suppose part of the reason I'm challenging this is that I don't want to engage in the tug-of-war that is dichotomous political correctness. It's counter-productive.

From:

No problem. You can Google "atheists most ha . . ." and it autofills the rest.

From:

Well, Athe's the guy who set it up us vs. them by specifically mentioning atheists, IMO. I didn't bring 'em up. If he'd said what he said without referencing atheists, I would have supported him. But by singling me out, he is the person who framed this him and people like him vs. me and people like me.

(On the other hand, I'm not offended by us vs. them thinking. I'm against, say, organized crime, for instance. It isn't the vs. that's the problem - it's what you do, what they do and why you're against them that matters.)

Also, atheists are the most hated group in America.

From: