Angry Atheists and Anti-Theists

[notimportant1234]

There is no stoning of women which had sex before marriage in modern non-theocratic societies. The fact in theocratic societies there is stoning proves the point that it's relevant. It is also evidence that you can have religious institutions without an enforcing political theocracy and not have that particular tenant, so it's obviously not a universal tenant. That points to a problem with the political regime using theocracy to enforce their beliefs not their religious tenants.

Religion does inform and influence people and that is exactly why it is relevant to people finding comfort. A belief doesn't inform our reality. It's not a one to one relationship, it's a many to one. I am informed by my love of psychology, and philosophy as well as my religious belies and my family and society. These inputs make me feel comforted. Perhaps you don't find comfort in religious doctrines and wish others not to find any comfort in religious doctrines? Why must you, as an anti-theist, feel just in a desire to remove a sense of comfort from those comforted by religion, if they're not proselytizing to you. Even if they were coming to your door and evangelizing every day, how would you still justify a desire to have someone stop believing in something that informs their happiness and comfort in life? If you're solid in what you believe and don't and know why, is there a need for an anti-anything at the individual level? Don't your beliefs stand on their own? Anti-theism isn't just a slam the door in their face thing though. In practice it's just as annoying, intolerant and hateful as what they're professing to be fighting against.

I understand the arguments from annoyance and wasting time. I understand the desire for retribution of a personal wrong. I could even understand retribution at the institutional level for wrongs. My bottom line is if it doesn't really affect your beliefs why would YOU feel justified in limiting or restricting that belief in someone else. I'm all for limiting harmful ACTIONS for a societies sake, but beliefs, not so much.

Take religious no-vaxers for instance. They are entitled to their belief, regardless of how wrong/right I think it is. Schools and daycares are also entitled to limit their children's access to public places because of their actions on that belief. I would even go so far as a public registry or medical bracelets like that of child molesters  or asthma sufferers to protect the public.

Bold. Sorry, now we have judging and shaming instead, and excluding sexual workers, actors in the porn industry and in the video chat industry with our dubble standards. 

You make an emotional argument, than you make an argument from personal experience. I called your emotional arguments from my previous post, that is why I told you that people's comfort doesn't matter.

And no, no one is entitled to their beliefs, nor me nor you, if you want to hold a belief and influence other people lifes with it than you have to have arguments for it and it should be held up for scrutiny. 

 The problem with you is that you value belief over people. Please come back when you are ready to leave the arguments based on emotions aside.