I only became an atheist a few month's ago, but whenever I'd hear someone was an "atheist" I took that to mean either they were those crazy in-your-face atheists, (I'll have to go re watch tosh.0 when he had that atheist lady on, because I think my perceptions may be different now, that will be weird for me), or they were just confused people I cared about, but they weren't truly an atheist, because....how could they be? they're more likely than not a confused agnostic.
This might have just been my own intolerance, but I don't think these are uncommon views. When I first discovered there were people like Dan barker & Richard Dawkins (I didn't find out about them until after I became an atheist). and I watched a few of their video's, I heard them say quite a few things that i know would have upset me to the point where I would have written both of them off as crazy lunatics. (I also found a video of when Oprah had atheists on her show way back in like the 80's or something & it's really weird to watch those now, because i know 6 months ago I would have thought the atheists were loony. I would have agreed with nearly everything said & questioned in the audience, but watching it now, nearly everyone in the audience sounds like they've had a 3rd grade education, and the atheists are the one's speaking reasonably.)
Anyways, my point being, I think there is a general perception of us, that we are just "looking for a fight" and we talk down to those who haven't had the realization's we've had. (Ricky Gervais is another example for me, when I first heard him commenting on his atheist view's, he seemed to be doing so with a grin/smirk on his face, I'm sure this is mostly because he is a performer and that's his nature. I was likely extra sensitive to it because he was saying things that are contrary to my belief's, but I decided I no longer wanted to be exposed to his view's because of this. )
If this assessment is accurate, then what do you guys think about the potential need for us to be especially sensitive of these misconceptions of us, and even potentially modify how we interact with non-atheists? Please don't get me wrong, I 100% see the NEED to decrease the influence of religion on our society today, but I think that we can be more effective than we are now? (but what do i know, I'm only contemplating these things for the first time)
Here are a few examples of what I mean,
1.Spaghetti monster, it's already been created(the idea), & yes it's fun for us because WE understand it, but to a person who believes wholeheartedly in a personal creator, it's incredibly offensive, are there better ways to achieve the same result when we refer to the spaghetti monster? Or is it a necessity?
2.Pretty much anytime we respond to what we know to be a ridiculous/ignorant question about atheism, or a reference to religion, it seems atheists are always coming back with some smart-alek response rather than trying to rationally and reasonably speak with the other individual, and yes, I'm guessing that typically it's the religious person who's being irrational & unreasonable (I haven't had these discussions yet personally, but I've heard religious counterpoints on some videos that make absolute no sense). But isn't the onus on us to try to reach out to them and bridge that gap in our discussions with them, since we're the one's who have rationally thought this out? (at the moment, the best analogy i can think of is teaching a child. If we're joking around with them, or being sarcastic or joking to try to make our point, the point that's being made is going over their head, and the point will only be for our benefit. (there is value in that, but is that what we are trying to accomplish?)
3. there's a guy in Florida I recently read about who doesn't like how the city council opens their sessions with a prayer....(of course, I also have issue with this, this practice needs to stop, but...), his method of correcting this is to demand the right to be able to say a satanist prayer before the meeting as well. (I read about this just a few days ago actually), When I first read about it I thought "OK, some crazy satanist" (just like the crazy christians), but as i read further, buried into the story is the fact this was actually an atheist trying to make a point with the satanist prayer. It just seems like the point he was trying to make could have been made in a better way.....yes, the ultimate result of what he's trying to accomplish will likely be achieved, but couldn't/shouldn't the separation of church/state be enough?, why does satan have to be dragged into it, why couldn't he have chosen a less controversial religious prayer to have made his point, or even use the opportunity to explain why it is offensive to atheists?
What do you guys think?
Is the general image of atheists one similar to what I've described here? (regardless if weather it's the fault of the atheist or just an intolerant view)
Is it an image that can be/should be adjusted just in how we interact with non-atheists?
(if not, can you please explain how it benefits us for people to have these views? i don't understand)
This might have just been my own intolerance, but I don't think these are uncommon views. When I first discovered there were people like Dan barker & Richard Dawkins (I didn't find out about them until after I became an atheist). and I watched a few of their video's, I heard them say quite a few things that i know would have upset me to the point where I would have written both of them off as crazy lunatics. (I also found a video of when Oprah had atheists on her show way back in like the 80's or something & it's really weird to watch those now, because i know 6 months ago I would have thought the atheists were loony. I would have agreed with nearly everything said & questioned in the audience, but watching it now, nearly everyone in the audience sounds like they've had a 3rd grade education, and the atheists are the one's speaking reasonably.)
Anyways, my point being, I think there is a general perception of us, that we are just "looking for a fight" and we talk down to those who haven't had the realization's we've had. (Ricky Gervais is another example for me, when I first heard him commenting on his atheist view's, he seemed to be doing so with a grin/smirk on his face, I'm sure this is mostly because he is a performer and that's his nature. I was likely extra sensitive to it because he was saying things that are contrary to my belief's, but I decided I no longer wanted to be exposed to his view's because of this. )
If this assessment is accurate, then what do you guys think about the potential need for us to be especially sensitive of these misconceptions of us, and even potentially modify how we interact with non-atheists? Please don't get me wrong, I 100% see the NEED to decrease the influence of religion on our society today, but I think that we can be more effective than we are now? (but what do i know, I'm only contemplating these things for the first time)
Here are a few examples of what I mean,
1.Spaghetti monster, it's already been created(the idea), & yes it's fun for us because WE understand it, but to a person who believes wholeheartedly in a personal creator, it's incredibly offensive, are there better ways to achieve the same result when we refer to the spaghetti monster? Or is it a necessity?
2.Pretty much anytime we respond to what we know to be a ridiculous/ignorant question about atheism, or a reference to religion, it seems atheists are always coming back with some smart-alek response rather than trying to rationally and reasonably speak with the other individual, and yes, I'm guessing that typically it's the religious person who's being irrational & unreasonable (I haven't had these discussions yet personally, but I've heard religious counterpoints on some videos that make absolute no sense). But isn't the onus on us to try to reach out to them and bridge that gap in our discussions with them, since we're the one's who have rationally thought this out? (at the moment, the best analogy i can think of is teaching a child. If we're joking around with them, or being sarcastic or joking to try to make our point, the point that's being made is going over their head, and the point will only be for our benefit. (there is value in that, but is that what we are trying to accomplish?)
3. there's a guy in Florida I recently read about who doesn't like how the city council opens their sessions with a prayer....(of course, I also have issue with this, this practice needs to stop, but...), his method of correcting this is to demand the right to be able to say a satanist prayer before the meeting as well. (I read about this just a few days ago actually), When I first read about it I thought "OK, some crazy satanist" (just like the crazy christians), but as i read further, buried into the story is the fact this was actually an atheist trying to make a point with the satanist prayer. It just seems like the point he was trying to make could have been made in a better way.....yes, the ultimate result of what he's trying to accomplish will likely be achieved, but couldn't/shouldn't the separation of church/state be enough?, why does satan have to be dragged into it, why couldn't he have chosen a less controversial religious prayer to have made his point, or even use the opportunity to explain why it is offensive to atheists?
What do you guys think?
Is the general image of atheists one similar to what I've described here? (regardless if weather it's the fault of the atheist or just an intolerant view)
Is it an image that can be/should be adjusted just in how we interact with non-atheists?
(if not, can you please explain how it benefits us for people to have these views? i don't understand)
