darkman2 wrote: » Just wondering do you agree with the title statement that Atheists are, far from being of a new more informed age, in fact more intolerant of others beliefs then among the religious faithful?
J C wrote: » I can literally think anything that I want. There are no limits to Human thought and ingenuity!!!!
/\/ollog wrote: » Every single atheist I've spoken with, or been around has always been a complete tool, and completely intolerant of other's beliefs.
robindch wrote: » I rest my case.
ShooterSF wrote: » Explain please. How does me having the freedom to drink beer today impact on others ...
ShooterSF wrote: » ... or my freedom not to have seconds in turkey or not go to church or not believe in god or not work on the Sabbath or eat meat on "good" friday as long as I don't demand that you do any of these things?
/\/ollog wrote: » The ones who don't call themselves atheists but just say "I don't believe in God/Religion" are the ones that are tolerant, and I can respect. In my experience, calling yourself an athiest = announcing your intent for asshattery.
/\/ollog wrote: » The ones who don't call themselves atheists but just say "I don't believe in God/Religion" are the ones that are tolerant, and I can respect.
MagicMarker wrote: » So to sum up, every single atheist you've spoken to is a complete tool and intolerant of other's beliefs, except for the atheists who aren't complete tools and intolerant of other's beliefs.
robindch wrote: » I completely disagree. Until relatively recently, religions had acquired sufficient civil power in most societies that they could enforce their totalitarianisms on all citizens. They still do in many parts of the world, helping to produce massively inequitable societies, huge social problems and personal, familial and polity-level unhappiness on a grand scale. What's different now is that people in many countries are no longer afraid of the social or civil power of religions and because of that, they're no longer prepared to grant the religious the free hand they had, and no doubt, still wish they had. The biggest change is that people are now speaking up against religious nuttiness and the religious are having a very hard time dealing with that. It does not help that many religious believe ideas, or at least their ideas, should be respected.
yawha wrote: » What category do I fall into? Can you give some examples of the types of discrimination against religious people these people you know who call themselves atheists are promoting? I've never really heard much about atheists who promote discrimination like this.
/\/ollog wrote: » Oh look at you, arguing like an atheist.
J C wrote: » One man's 'Bovine excreta' and fairytales is often another man's worldview.
/\/ollog wrote: » The first group, tend to try to "convert" religious people to nothingness. The latter, are fine to be themselves and won't try to "convert" others. What I'm saying is, my experience has shown people who are outward in their support of atheism tend to try to convert others, and show absolutely zero respect for others beliefs, while those who aren't as vocal about their own beliefs tend to leave well enough alone when others say they believe in a God or whatever.
MagicMarker wrote: » How do the villainous atheists try and convert others to nothingness?
Dudess wrote: » All non believers are atheists. "Atheist" isn't a term that's just applied to those non believers whom you don't like.
Paarthurnax wrote: » As an atheist I agree completely with that statement! Everyone is entitled to the own worldview but I would respect the individual more if they had come to there own conclusions no matter how bizzare. What I dont agree with is that some non individuals believe in other generalised Bovine Excreta and Fairytales by default before being objective or making their own descisions.
/\/ollog wrote: » See below, and thanks for throwing words into my mouth/post. Makes the turkey easier to swallow with that "villainous" taste. I don't "don't like" people who don't believe in a religion or a God, or gods. I don't care what anyone else believes, I have my own set and it's not my place to preach to others in my opinion. I don't like people who do, however. Religious conversion is one thing, they're coming from a point of "this is what we think", atheists start from "your religious views are flawed because of..." A negative approach isn't as welcomed by myself (because if infers lack of respect for a person's current beliefs(intolerance)), but I don't particularly mind it. Nobody likes Jehovah's, so why are you more welcoming of Atheists doing the exact same thing?
yawha wrote: » As for what you have to say about atheists trying to convert people. I personally haven't found that. Like, I've never been approached in the street by someone spreading the word of atheism, for example. And I haven't personally encountered anyone who would bring up their atheism unless it was relevant to a subject that happened to come up (since I was like 16/17 anyway). I feel that ultimately all you're saying is that you know some atheists who are assholes and some that are not. Which isn't really much of a revelation. Just because you're an atheist doesn't exclude you from being an asshole. It's a little intolerant of you to brand anyone who identifies as an atheist an asshole merely because you know a couple of people who do and are assholes. Also, nothingness is inaccurate. That would be nihilism.
MagicMarker wrote: » I don't see any attempted conversion here, can you expand? Or are you mixing up the word 'convert' with 'question'?
/\/ollog wrote: » Nobody likes Jehovah's
/\/ollog wrote: » why are you more welcoming of Atheists doing the exact same thing?
/\/ollog wrote: » I don't get what you want me to expand on. The people what try to "convert" others would ask others their current beliefs, and then attack those beliefs, with the intent of "converting" then to atheism. I've seen it happen a great many times, and usually it works since people are sheep and go from believing in a flying spaghetti monster to nothing when someone questions the type of spaghetti it is.
MagicMarker wrote: » Well, this is incredible stuff, how many times have you witnessed such an incident? I've never seen it myself and by golly I'd bet good money that most people in this forum hasn't. And apparently all people who label themselves as atheists (including the people on this forum) do this?I think you should go public with this, the world needs to know the truth.
J C wrote: » All countries impose restrictions on alcohol (including beer) consumption because of its various impacts on other people. Some countries go as far as banning it completely. I share Jesus Christs endorsement of alcohol ... His first miracle created alcohol out of water ... and one of His last acts was to ask his people to share alcohol in solemn memory of Him. ... so I think that I'll now crack open a can and join you!!! Like I have said, I'm a liberal ... and tolerant when it comes to other people's rights to drink ... or not to drink, as they see fit!!!!! I have no problem with any of these freedoms for you ... as long as you don't start discriminating against me if I choose to do the opposite ... for myself and my children!!!
darkman2 wrote: » P.S what do atheists call St Stephen's Day? You don't call it "Boxing Day" do you? Cause that would be a bit British and not liable to make you even more popular:D
darkman2 wrote: » Thanks for the replies. My own opinion is that alot of atheists I have listened to do come across as if they think they are somehow intellectually superior to those who believe in the more established religions. They may not even recognise it themselves that they come across like that. However there are some major problems outside the realm of whether a God or higher power exists or not. For the purposes of this particular post I would like to mention capitalism. (Where is he going with this you are asking to yourself, just bare with me!). I regard myself as a capitalist with a sprinkling of socialism to even things out somewhat. Now we all live in that system. That system only works with the co-operation of a majority that have no real net worth. These people generally are in so called working class areas and the lower middle class bracket which make up a small majority of the population - the coping classes if you will. What these classes have in common generally is religious faith which for them provides for some comfort and even moral guidance and maintains a certain social cohesion which allows the rest of society to function and make money essentially. For the upper middles classes is where dominance of religion over society breaks down and more liberal attitudes are prevalent generally. That's ok for them - they have wealth, they have money to varying degress. They are comfortable if not "rich". They have security. So it is all fine and good to be atheist if you don't require some sense of hope and community. To cut a long story short the various religions which atheists rail against do provide a vital service for society though they may not like to admit it. Religions like Christianity do provide for a moral code backed up by hope (or even fear if that code is regularly broken) which is a good glue for society generally. My point is what future does capitalism have if atheism became prevalent in society and what effect would that have on society as a whole? In upper middle class areas things might be ok at least for a while. But take away that comfort and moral blanket for those struggling to survive week to week as it is and I am not sure atheism can provide for that hope that they need. I hope you understand what I mean. I will try and make a better point of it later. Essentially we need elements of every religion to maintain solid social cohesion especially through tough times.
/\/ollog wrote: » Hi, re-read my words. I said they labeled themselves atheist.
I don't "don't like" people who don't believe in a religion or a God, or gods. I don't care what anyone else believes, I have my own set and it's not my place to preach to others in my opinion. I don't like people who do, however.
Religious conversion is one thing, they're coming from a point of "this is what we think", atheists start from "your religious views are flawed because of..." A negative approach isn't as welcomed by myself (because if infers lack of respect for a person's current beliefs(intolerance)), but I don't particularly mind it.
Nobody likes Jehovah's, so why are you more welcoming of Atheists doing the exact same thing?
MagicMarker wrote: » I have no idea what capitalism has to do with anything, but basically your argument boils down ... Also, I think you may be overestimating how much social cohesion is provided by religion in working class and lower middle class areas.
/\/ollog wrote: » So you can use the argument in reverse, but others can't use the same arguments to support their own agenda?
