A postscript to "what happened to me"

[Belacqua]

Yeah, one ambiguous post that I read incorrectly and things kind of spiraled. Kind of funny, really.

What's funny to me -- but also pleasing -- is how thoroughly the responses here proved my point for me. 

To be clear, my point was this: A commonly held view says that if we're talking to or about someone we approve of, we ought to be kind and understanding. But if we're talking to or about someone we don't approve of, we have a right to be as rude as we want.

This came up because someone suggested we should still be sympathetic to Rob, even after he got Red-Pilled. Someone else suggested that we can say nasty things about him while he's believing these odd fantasies. 

On this forum it's common to see over-the-top comments about religious people. Some of them are so wild they really amount to slander. But these are generally given a pass. It's OK to say nasty things about a group we dislike. If we disagree with someone over a point of metaphysics, there's pretty much no limit on the nastiness with which we can reply.

Now what's funny to me is that posters who aren't bothered at all by unfair statements about religious people suddenly turn into offended snowflakes if it appears I've said a bad thing about a member of a protected group. It goes from "fuck 'em if they can't take a joke" to a deep concern that social norms may not have been scrupulously observed. 

Sometimes this double standard is justified by the fact that this is an atheist forum. But the only thing all atheists have in common is that they don't believe in something. There is nothing intrinsic to atheism that says we enjoy double standards or tolerate bigotry.