Am I A Hypocrite? Anti-Religion and Smoking

oeb

I just thought.

I have been an Atheist for a very long time (Since I was old enough to think for myself). Over the years I have moved towords the way of thinking that religion is fundimentally wrong. Religion is responsible for more of the worlds ills than nearly anything else in my opinion.

I was just outside having a smoke. Does this make me a hypocrite? Smoking also kills and causes hardship.

I realise that there is a major difference of course, for all the publicity that the dangers of smoking and the huge numbers of deaths it causes is dwarfed by the amount of death, hardship, persecution and suffering that religion causes. Of course I also don't rub my smoking in anyones face, I won't smoke in a room with non-smokers present, I smoke outside, I don't smoke in front of my son, I don't try to convert people to smoking. I realise that my smoking may very well kill me (Addiction + Lazyness FTW).

But am I sitting up on my high horse calling people out on being ignorant fools, while being an ignorant fool in my own special way? Is there any other paralells that can be drawn here? (Between religion and other lesser social blights, for example alchohol and drug abuse) Or am I just talking crap as I am known to do?

Are you anti-religion? Do you smoke? Do you drink? Do you take drugs? Do you belive in the tooth fairy?

Dades

Having difficulty with the religion/smoking parallel, myself.

Requires a few too many assumptions, tbh.

seamus

It really depends on the basis of your viewpoint. If you're atheist because religion has caused/causes so much hardship, then perhaps there's some hypocrasy in it.

However, if you're atheist because you don't believe in all that religion stuff, then smoking is of no consequence, it's not relevant.

If you believed that smoking did no harm to yourself or others, all the while telling people that they were idiots for believing in God, you'd have a point.

Goduznt Xzst

the difference is you know you are being an ignorent fool for smoking Religious people don't

If religious people accepted that what they believe is wrong but continued believing it anyway, then I'd be ok with that.

5uspect

Don't smoke, don't drink, I'm always conscious of the speed limit, I'm perfect.

Are there any religions that say that you must smoke/drink/speed in order to save your imaginary immortal soul? Well yes, but its ideas like an imortal soul and being vessels of gods will that are the dangerous bits not the individual actions.

Such as the idea that smoking doesn't cause cancer.
That drinking makes you a big tough man.
That speeding show how good a driver you are.

seamus

As an addendum: Atheism may confer on one an additional requirement to be informed, generally. I would find it odd if a staunch atheist were tell me (for example) that they were voting for Fianna Fail, but have no idea what their policies or the policies of other parties were.

This may be what you're referring to, but I see no problem in someone making a "wrong" decision, so long as they understand the decision in the first place.

oeb

I would just like to clarify here. I am not just an atheist. I am completly anti-religion. I will agressivly argue against religion every time it comes up. I have no problem telling religious people that they are idiots to their faces and their beliefs in a fictional sky fairy are just as silly as a belief in Santa Clause. Only Santa Clause does not hate gays etc.
(My granny does not like me much any more.)

EDIT : There I go ranting again and missing my point. What I am trying to bring across is my beliefs are so strong with regard to this, but is smoking/drinking/taking drugs/speeding just another side of the same coin so to speak.

I don't mean for this to turn into a "god is stupid LULZ" thread, and I apologise if my statements can make it seem that way.

smk135

oeb wrote: »

I have been an Atheist for a very long time (Since I was old enough to think for myself). Over the years I have moved towords the way of thinking that religion is fundimentally wrong.

in this frame of thought though, are religious smokers and drinkers not just as hypocritical?

And anyway, you did not become atheist because religion kills and is reponsable for most of the ills of the world but you "moved towards" that thinking. So no, you're not a hypocrite.

In fact, you sound like quite a respectful smoker - and good to hear you don't smoke in front of your son.

FruitLover

oeb wrote: »

Religion is responsible for more of the worlds ills than nearly anything else in my opinion.

I would put the blame on human ignorance and intolerance, rather than making religion a scapegoat.

Have a read of your own posts in this thread, note the tone, and tell me whether you're guilty of the above....

oeb

FruitLover wrote: »

I would put the blame on human ignorance and intolerance, rather than making religion a scapegoat.

Have a read of your own posts in this thread, note the tone, and tell me whether you're guilty of the above....

Religion is a vehicle of human ignorance and intolerance. It just makes them socially acceptable.

I fail to see how calling a spade a spade makes me ignorant or intollerant.

OK-Cancel-Apply

Well, as far as many own position goes, I'm anti-religion, but it's not like I go around picking on the religious. I'm very much 'live and let live'. I've met a few Christians, however, who aren't.

Sangre

OK-Cancel-Apply wrote: »

Well, as far as many own position goes, I'm anti-religion, but it's not like I go around picking on the religious. I'm very much 'live and let live'. I've met a few Christians, however, who aren't.

So I won't be seeing you at the picketing of Pope Benedict's funeral then?

Dades

oeb wrote: »

I have no problem telling religious people that they are idiots to their faces and their beliefs in a fictional sky fairy are just as silly as a belief in Santa Clause.

While I don't endorse your approach, I only request that you do not do it here. There is a Christianity forum you can vent in before an inevitable ban. :pac:

Hivemind187

Like a lung full of tar, this is sticky.

Depends what kind of smoker you are. If you are smoking in the full intellectual knowledge that you are causing physical harm to yourself - but you do it willingly because you enjoy or you do it unwillingly because you are addicted - but you dont profess the contrary either to yourself or to others then no, I dont think you are a hypocrite.

Religion is similar, if you are attending mass or saying prayers in the full knowledge that it is bunk yet you do so because you are a) enjoying it or b) obsessive compulsive then having ahteistic view points is not necessarily hypocritical (since the crucial intellectual investment in the practice would be absent). If you held atheistic beliefs or viewpoints and continued these practices then yes, you would be a hypocrite.

Now, apply that logic to the smoking/religion thing.

Assuming that you are an atheist by choice then you can apply the following logic (open to correction and dealing in asolutes).

Atheist by choice (full intellectual knowledge that religion is bunkum).
+ Smoker by choice for pleasure, and not saying otherwise = Not a hypocrite.
+ Smoker by addiction and not saying otherwise = Not a hypocrite
+ Smoker by choice for pleasure and telling folks otherwise = hypocrite
+ smoker by addiction and tell folks otherwise = hypocrite.

This assumes that in each case you are aware of how and why you have each pursuit.

Tim Robbins

oeb wrote: »

But am I sitting up on my high horse calling people out on being ignorant fools, while being an ignorant fool in my own special way?

Were you indoctrinated with a particular brand or did you pick it after rational examination?

Zillah

I've actually thought about this before, it is more easily answered than it might seem:

List your reasons for being anti-religion. For me it is primarily:
- Its not true.
- Its so not true that its hilarious/depressing.
- It causes harm to large amounts of uninvolved people.
- It threatens to retard the social and technological development of our species as a whole.

Then check to see if your smoking involves any of these. Unless you are in the habit of smoking in enclosed spaces with others then no, its not hypocritical.

However, if the following is one of your reasons for being anti-religious then you can bet its hypocritical:
- Religion is an uneccessary activity that puts a person at risk for marginal benefits.

ps, Shocked and appalled at the tea-totaller count!

Goduznt Xzst

Zillah wrote: »

ps, Shocked and appalled at the tea-totaller count!

why so? I would of thought a realization of ones own mortality and the intellectual fortitude to see flaws in ones habits would remove a lot of the vices that adversely affect ones health.

Plus smoking, drugs and alcohol give me nothing I require in life. I'd rather be free of addiction and have my senses about me for as much of my short life as possible.

ChocolateSauce

I have no problem putting substances into my body provided I find the risk to my health (and that of those around me) to be acceptable.

Likewise with religion, I have no problem with it provided the risk to people's "health" is acceptable.

Like drug abuse, not only does too much religion screw the indulger up, it also affects those around him or her, and that is when I have a problem with religion/substance abuse.

But heavy smoking? Just so long as you don't give smokes to your kids, I don't mind.

Tim Robbins

Zillah wrote: »

I've actually thought about this before, it is more easily answered than it might seem:

List your reasons for being anti-religion. For me it is primarily:
- Its not true.
- Its so not true that its hilarious/depressing.
- It causes harm to large amounts of uninvolved people.
- It threatens to retard the social and technological development of our species as a whole.

Then check to see if your smoking involves any of these. Unless you are in the habit of smoking in enclosed spaces with others then no, its not hypocritical.

However, if the following is one of your reasons for being anti-religious then you can bet its hypocritical:
- Religion is an uneccessary activity that puts a person at risk for marginal benefits.

ps, Shocked and appalled at the tea-totaller count!

Not quite true. If you get lung cancer you cost the state a lot of money in terms of treatment. Cancer treatment is shockingly expensive.
Not the case with Religion.

I don't see Religion as pernicious per se. It didn't cause the credit crunch and it didn't cause the No to Lisbon vote. It also didn't have anything to do with our ridiculous planning laws and the fact there are very few decent planning laws and our public transport is a joke despite 10 years of a boom and massive returns to our exchequer. I see extreme Religion as pernicious, that which isolates itself from rational criticism, but extreme anything usually is.

Beruthiel

oeb wrote: »

But am I sitting up on my high horse calling people out on being ignorant fools, while being an ignorant fool in my own special way?

You're going to die anyway, might as well be having a good time when it happens.