"Atheists are just as intolerant, if not more so, than most religious" - discuss

RichieC

passarellaie wrote: »

Uncle Joe,Chairman Mao Kim Il Sung not to mention his dear son werent very tolerant were they?

I had a look at your post history. neither are you.

passarellaie

I would strongly disagree with that I just find it objectionable that some people can easily insult Catholics whilst it seems its outragous for the boot to be put on the other foot.Theres a lot of stuff i find intolerant on here but few are sensitive to my sensibilities.

RichieC

passarellaie wrote: »

I would strongly disagree with that I just find it objectionable that some people can easily insult Catholics whilst it seems its outragous for the boot to be put on the other foot.Theres a lot of stuff i find intolerant on here but few are sensitive to my sensibilities.

taunting none believers about a tipic as serious as suicide to score points..

anti immigrant tyrades..

you seem like a lovely person indeed..

passarellaie

RichieC wrote: »

taunting none believers about a tipic as serious as suicide to score points..

anti immigrant tyrades..

you seem like a lovely person indeed..

Everything about beleif is serious and taunting people about their beleifs is equally as serious.All life is a serious matter for me and as I have suffered from same dont insult me by saying I am taunting when I ask a question.

If you think that in a situation where 50000 Irish people leaving Ireland every year whilst we have so many people from outside the EU entering is a tyrade well so be it you are entitled to your view as I am to mine or do you not allow that?
I dont beleive in doing the Stasi stuff so i dont really know what you are like but its not too promising i have to admit

RichieC

passarellaie wrote: »

RichieC wrote: »

taunting none believers about a tipic as serious as suicide to score points..

anti immigrant tyrades..

you seem like a lovely person indeed..

Everything about beleif is serious and taunting people about their beleifs is equally as serious.All life is a serious matter for me and as I have suffered from same dont insult me by saying I am taunting when I ask a question.

rightO it was a serious question...not a point scoring hit and run :rolleyes:

passarellaie

RichieC wrote: »

rightO it was a serious question...not a point scoring hit and run :rolleyes:

Fair play

J C

Just reading the current edition of Hi! (Humanism Ireland) ... and an article that co-incidentally addresses the very topic of this thread ... tolerance.

The columnist has insightfully addressed the issue of tolerance as follows:-

"No belief system/philosophy/world view convinced of being right and concluding the competition must therefore be wrong can in all honesty be tolerant.
Whether you're a theist or an atheist - your compassion for your fellow creatures makes it imperative to deliver them from their present state of darkness and ignorance. You have to gift them the light of Christ or Reason.
So you argue for tolerance while you're a precarious minority - and you lay down the law once you're in power."

It's actually the age-old issue of 'power corrupting ... and absolute power corrupting absolutely' ... and it's the reason why the Christian Church has historically been organised on local basis ... to avoid the concentration of power in few hands.
Other checks and balances to avoid the worst excesses of power, includes allowing the maximum amount of individual choice, being guaranteed by law ... and genuine respect for equality, diversity and the free exchange of ideas ... the alternative is Totalitarianism in one of its many guises ... and with all of its many vices

Sarky

J C wrote: »

and it's the reason why the Christian Church has historically been organised on local basis ... to avoid the concentration of power in few hands.

LOL WAT

18AD

J C wrote: »

"No belief system/philosophy/world view convinced of being right and concluding the competition must therefore be wrong can in all honesty be tolerant.

No one who believes in something can be tolerant? So, tolerance and belief cannot co-exist?

That sounds kind of wrong to me.

J C

wrote:

Hi! Ireland
"No belief system/philosophy/world view convinced of being right and concluding the competition must therefore be wrong can in all honesty be tolerant."


18AD
No one who believes in something can be tolerant? So, tolerance and belief cannot co-exist?

That sounds kind of wrong to me.

I didn't say that I agree with the Hi! quote ... although, I think that it is insightful about the way people generally behave.

I agree with you that you can be tolerant of other beliefs, even when you know that what you believe is the truth.

For example, I know that what I believe on a number of issues is true ... but I tolerate ... and indeed encourage alternative points of view ... and I then gently (and with love) point out the errors and weaknesses in their arguments.

Everybody learns in such an environment.:)

... and, believe it or not, I sometimes find out that I don't know everything about everything during the process!!:eek:

ShooterSF

J C wrote: »

The columnist has insightfully addressed the issue of tolerance as follows:-

"No belief system/philosophy/world view convinced of being right and concluding the competition must therefore be wrong can in all honesty be tolerant.

J C wrote: »

I didn't say that I agree with the Hi! quote ... although, I think that it is insightful about the way people generally behave.

I agree with you that you can be tolerant of other beliefs, even when you know that what you believe is the truth.

For example, I know that what I believe on a number of issues is true ... but I tolerate ... and indeed encourage alternative points of view ... and I then gently (and with love) point out the weaknesses in their arguments.

Everybody learns in such an environment.:)

So insightful and wrong?

philologos

RichieC: passarellaies' posts are no less vitriolic than yours can be in all honesty. That's why I'm all in favour of toning down the idle rhetoric and focusing on the actual argument.

I found what JC quoted to be interesting in that they have made the mistake of assuming that tolerance means that you wholesale agree with everything that people say rather than simply agreeing to disagree. Being convinced that you're right has nothing to do with tolerance as long as you're willing to allow others to disagree with you.

J C

ShooterSF wrote: »

So insightful and wrong?

Insightful and right ... about how people generally behave ... and wrong about how they should behave.:)

... although, in fairness to the columnist, he was also aware of the issue that you have raised ... and he expressed the wish that "maybe it (the competition between worldviews) will be humanised by some restraining rules, now that secularism has civilised the discourse somewhat."

I'll believe it, if and when I see it in practice !!!:eek::)

ShooterSF

"No belief system/philosophy/world view convinced of being right and concluding the competition must therefore be wrong can in all honesty be tolerant."

This is a statement of fact. It is either right or wrong. It is not a behaviour.

DrCmen

Being a lazy SOB, I didn't read all comments...
I don't believe in anything, but why does the average joe think that if you say NONE when asked about Religion [Hospital] they have to tick Atheist???
Just me? Ok...

J C

ShooterSF wrote: »

"No belief system/philosophy/world view convinced of being right and concluding the competition must therefore be wrong can in all honesty be tolerant."

This is a statement of fact. It is either right or wrong. It is not a behaviour.

Tolerance is a mode of behaviour ...

... for example, when you think that you are right ... tolerance is allowing other people the right to be wrong ... and to express their opinions.:)
... and it's realising that you could also be wrong ... and that one of the ways of testing your idea is to listen to other people's opinions on it.

... tolerance is also accepting that there are no 'sacred cows' that cannot be questioned without risk to life or limb!!!

... the alternative is fascism (I know best and I'm going to force you to comply with my beliefs whether you want to or not).

... and as I have already said, the Hi! columnist recognised that tolerant behaviour can be encouraged by 'restraining rules' which he believes Humanists (and others) should subscribe to (for everyone's benefit).

All in all it is a well balanced article ... and proves that there are still liberal Atheists out there, that can see both sides of an argument ... and aren't afraid to admit it!!!
Well done to Lothar Luken for a good thought-provoking article.

fisgon

The title of this thread is a complete red herring, and comes down to what many religious people see as intolerance.

For many religious people, brought up to believe that their beliefs are special, any disagreement, criticism or even debate can be interpreted as intolerance. This is why many believers on this thread see atheism as intolerant. They are threatened by any expression of unbelief, and so claim intolerance. They want their beliefs to be given special treatment, and be ringfenced from criticism or mirth. If this does not happen they scream 'Intolerance!'

There is also the fact that many believers love feeling like they are being persecuted. Brought up with stories of martyrs, being persecuted makes them feel more validated in their faith, and so they tend to see persecution and intolerance where there is none.

The truth is that if religious believers are being persecuted, or not tolerated, anywhere in the world at this moment, it is believers of other religions that are doing the persecuting, not those nasty atheists.

J C

fisgon wrote: »

The title of this thread is a complete red herring, and comes down to what many religious people see as intolerance.

For many religious people, brought up to believe that their beliefs are special, any disagreement, criticism or even debate can be interpreted as intolerance. This is why many believers on this thread see atheism as intolerant. They are threatened by any expression of unbelief, and so claim intolerance. They want their beliefs to be given special treatment, and be ringfenced from criticism or mirth. If this does not happen they scream 'Intolerance!'

There is also the fact that many believers love feeling like they are being persecuted. Brought up with stories of martyrs, being persecuted makes them feel more validated in their faith, and so they tend to see persecution and intolerance where there is none.

The truth is that if religious believers are being persecuted, or not tolerated, anywhere in the world at this moment, it is believers of other religions that are doing the persecuting, not those nasty atheists.

Both Atheists and Theists are people ... capable of all of the virtues ... and vices ... that this implies.

Criticism of my beliefs isn't intolerance ... provided that you are also prepared to respectfully listen to my criticism of your beliefs.

Tolerance also implies that you aren't mandating that everybody must believe what you say ... and/or that they can't express their beliefs in the public and/or private spheres.

The title of the thread is a gentle (and timely) reminder to Athests and Atheism that they are also fallible Human Beings with all of the potential weaknesses that this implies.

philologos

fisgon: Really? I've never thought that particularly.

18AD

J C wrote: »

For example, I know that what I believe on a number of issues is true ... but I tolerate ... and indeed encourage alternative points of view ... and I then gently (and with love) point out the errors and weaknesses in their arguments.

Everybody learns in such an environment.:)

I appreciate your sentiment. However, you encourage alternative (wrong) viewpoints so you can then (lovingly) point out how they're wrong?

How? Why?

J C

18AD wrote: »

I appreciate your sentiment. However, you encourage alternative (wrong) viewpoints so you can then (lovingly) point out how they're wrong?

How? Why?

... I don't encourage wrong viewpoints ... but I accept that they have the right to be wrong (on my terms) ... and to express their opinions, in a free society.

... and (because our information is imperfect) I / you could also be wrong ... and one of the ways of testing my / your idea is to listen to other people's opinions on it.

The alternative is fascism, in one of its many guises ... but it always amounts to the same thing ... I know best and I'm going to force you to comply with my beliefs whether you want to or not ... and whether it turns out that I am right or not.:)

Happy New Year to everyone on the A & A ... and may all of your New Year Resolutions last more that a week ... it's usually about 5 days for me!!!

flash1080

A lot of atheists are really intolerant, they feel the need to force their beliefs on everyone else.

Ellis Dee wrote: »

Yes indeed, remember the 30 Years War between the Swedish and the German atheists and their respective allies, just one example of all the wars that have been fought between atheists of different stripes in an effort to make the other accept their way of not believing anything ... It got pretty nasty between those Green and Orange atheists in the Six Counties for a while there, too. And only today some Afghan atheists set off a bomb that killed at least twenty people who did not disbelieve in the same way as themselves. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

I know some atheists who went to Afghanistan to fight against people because they don't disbelieve in the same way as themselves. Intolerant bastards.

18AD

J C wrote: »

... because they have the right to be wrong ... and to express their opinions, in a free society.

... and (because our information is imperfect) I / you could also be wrong ... and one of the ways of testing my / your idea is to listen to other people's opinions on it.

The alternative is fascism, in one of its many guises ... but it always amounts to the same thing ... I know best and I'm going to force you to comply with my beliefs whether you want to or not ... and whether it turns out that I am right or not.:)

Is fascism a wrong idea? If it is, then surely fascist people have a right to be so.

J C

18AD wrote: »

Is fascism a wrong idea? If it is, then surely fascist people have a right to be so.

Fascists may have a right to hold their fascist ideas ... but, in a liberal, tolerant and diverse society ... they don't have the right to impose their ideas on other people.

J C

flash1080 wrote: »

A lot of atheists are really intolerant, they feel the need to force their beliefs on everyone else.

Some Atheists are intolerant ... and some aren't.

My liberal Atheist friends are quite tolerant of diversity (including Creationism)!!!)

I'll leave the lurkers to judge where the Atheists on this thread, are on the 'tolerance scale'.:eek:

dead one

"Atheists are just as intolerant, if not more so, than most religious" -

“Man is what he believes.”

professore

There is no evidence that atheists (why do some people insist on a capital 'A' BTW?) are more intolerant than members of organised religions.

I can't recall a single case of a religious person or people being attacked or abused by atheists identifying themselves as such. I'm sure that people will come back with examples such as communist or fascist persecution of religions but this is invalid as these leaders persecuted everyone they saw as a threat to their power. In fact many of the people in these countries would have been religious themselves.

The fact remains that more people have been killed in the name of a god than by any other method throughout history.

Improbable

Generally speaking, when people refer to intolerance of religious people for other religions or for people with no religion, they refer to the adherents of those religions or to atheists. When people refer to the intolerance of atheists for religious people, they refer to the ideas of religious people. Perhaps the reason you think atheists are more intolerant is because you're confusing intolerance of a person or a group of people versus criticism of an idea?

Galvasean

professore wrote: »

There is no evidence that atheists (why do some people insist on a capital 'A' BTW?) are more intolerant than members of organised religions.

Even that in itself is vague. It's unhelpful to lump all religions in the same boat since they vary wildly in terms of beliefs and tolerance. It's essentially saying Hari Krishna's and the Westbro Baptist Church are more or less the same thing.
Similarly, saying 'atheists are more or less tolerant' isn't all that helpful either when atheists do not share a common believe system (a lack of one particular belief is not a belief system). You could be the most tolerant person in the worl or the least tolerant, but it doesn't have nay bearing on how much of an atheist you are.