Why are all atheists liberals?

[Dystopia]

That's called the peer effect, no one actually says they are not so liberal because of fear of repercussions.

I have some political beliefs that I have never revealed because I don't want to get a shit-storm of comments.

Except I've been saying that I'm a conservative on here for years! I don't even use a fancy term like classical liberal. I think that's part of the reason I like the term conservative, even though you are right, classical liberal is more accurate than either that or libertarian. Conservative is just so much more in your face. It's the same reason I tell people I know in real life that I'm an Atheist, even though Agnostic is probably more accurate. Atheist is just so much more fun and in your face.

If you want, you can create a topic to proclaim your conservatism

Except that I'm most likely a classic liberal:

Classical liberalism is a political philosophy and ideology belonging to liberalism in which primary emphasis is placed on securing the freedom of the individual by limiting the power of the government

I'm a classic liberal with some post-modern liberal views (a bit of social justice here and there) and some conservative views (anti-European Union, against affirmative action, support decreasing welfare expenses and support deporting useless immigrants). I'm a bit of everything I guess, I may even hold some ideologically technocratic views

[CapnAwesome]

If you want, you can create a topic to proclaim your conservatism

I actually did that back in 2012. It was one of the first things I did on these forums. I called it "Why don't Republicans go after the Atheist vote" and the first thing I did was talk about being a conservative Atheist. I think I caught quite a bit of flak from it.

http://atheistforums.org/thread-16026.html

I am fairly conservative compared to other members of this board. I take sympathy with many conservative positions and often style myself as a Goldwater conservative. I think there are many other conservative Atheists, they just tend to call themselves Libertarians instead. However I, like most conservative atheists don't vote republican, because the party is openly hostile towards Atheists.

[Jenny A]

Definitions are slippery things when it comes to politics.
On gay rights and many other family value issues I'm left or more rightly (pun intended) libertarian. On the capitalist versus socialism scale I'm pretty conservative or more rightly libertarian. But there are atheists who are so conservative they leave in shaking my head. Every so often I voice my opinions about economics, but it takes energy to respond to what sometimes feels like the whole forum.

I think there's plenty of atheists who think like that - In fact, atheists who have taken a degree on economics will probably think like that

It didn't take a degree. Just dipping a toe in the water.

I still think you must be a classic liberal like the other thousands of people who claim to lean libertarian, simply because you probably don't agree with the extremist of non-state intervention some libertarian policies propose.

No, I would not. Somethings simply must be regulated: external costs (such as pollution); and commonly held resources (the ocean, the atmosphere, groundwater). Other things need regulation in order to give everyone the knowledge necessary to make rational financial decisions like securities. And there are things that are really better provided by the government like roadways.

It's not that I think that all government regulation is inherently evil. Most of it's well intended. It's just that so much of it creates problems worse than the diseases it was promulgated to fix. For example, rent control tends to lead to house shortages. Overly free student loans lead to high tuition. If minimum wage is too high, you get unemployment, etc.

Do you think someone should be left to starve if that person doesn't have any money? If you answered "no", then you are not so libertarian.

Yes, and no. Welfare of some kind is a basic duty of the state. Care for the temporarily unemployed, disabled, and minors are all good things. But, if you ask me if the state should pay to keep a person who can, but will not work from starving my answer is no.

[Dystopia]

I can't really say anything unless you explicitly tell me what your political beliefs are with detail (if you want you can send me a PM) - And it's hard for me to measure because a conservative in America is different from a southern European conservative or a Brit conservative

Regardless, the rightist party in America looks pretty religious and hostile towards atheists. There's many misconceptions on all sides about political ideologies. For example, liberals often think all conservative are jesus freaks and gay haters, and conservatives think all liberals are rich-haters and in the closet gays. It's complicated to discuss political ideology when the audience is biased towards one side.

---

No, I would not. Somethings simply must be regulated: external costs (such as pollution); and commonly held resources (the ocean, the atmosphere, groundwater). Other things need regulation in order to give everyone the knowledge necessary to make rational financial decisions like securities. And there are things that are really better provided by the government like roadways.

It's not that I think that all government regulation is inherently evil. Most of it's well intended. It's just that so much of it creates problems worse than the diseases it was promulgated to fix. For example, rent control tends to lead to house shortages. Overly free student loans lead to high tuition. If minimum wage is too high, you get unemployment, etc.

My vision is that the government should compose about 10-15% of the economy. However I have a hard time with this idea - I think countries ought to keep a strong government with some authority for questions of security, the 10% of the economy the government controls should be controlled with authority, strength and efficiency - Basically I think that when the government pulls the strings it has to be done correctly. I also favour Keynesian ideas - When it's crisis time, the state should increase intervention to correct market problems.

Yes, and no. Welfare of some kind is a basic duty of the state. Care for the temporarily unemployed, disabled, and minors are all good things. But, if you ask me if the state should pay to keep a person who can, but will not work from starving my answer is no.

I support a small but strong and well regulated welfare state, but that's something conservatives in my country support as well


Jenny, I'm not trying to label you, but I think rightist libertarianism is too associated with anarchy or ultra-low state intervention to accurately represent more moderate "libertarians".

[JesusHChrist]

I'm an atheist and definitely not a liberal. Libertarian, but not liberal. Anti Christian, yup. Guilty as charged.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I'm sorry to have missed this dipshit.

Just curious?

Does this mean you are :
Pro gay, anti-hetero, anti-christian?

Also from a political standpoint - do you guys want a totalitiarian Orwellian Socialist Government year after year after year? If so, how do you plan on getting rid of the 'unwanted' citizens that don't contribute to our GDP and the faith of Atheism?

We'd barbecue 90% of them as infants, and brainwash the rest.

[liberalNutjob]

I'm a far right wing conservative atheist (borderline Nationalist).

I believe Christians should have the rights they currently have. Gay marriage should be a government thing only and should not force the Catholic church to accept gays if they don't want. I believe the peasant class is a burden and therefore we should reduce the amount of illegal immigrants to the system. Capitalism is king. Jewry indoctrination of Israel is the cause of all evil. And Atheism should stop enforcing their doctrines on Theists - it's almost like the Atheist Crusade going on here in the western world I feel.

I've already accepted that my faith in Atheism is that "a faith that intelligent design does not exist because science cannot prove or deny if intelligence created the big bang".

[Pizza]

I'm a liberal but I would vote Republican if they would stop being enforcers of a bigoted status quo. I think come next election for representatives in my district I'm going to vote for the libertarian option; I live in a red area because of gerrymandering so no democrat option. Gerrymandering sucks.

[Delysid]

I'm a liberal, although I don't necessarily oppose a Socialist Democracy type of system... pure Socialism though? No. Some would even call me a Libertarian, I've been named a Socialist Libertarian by some political compass tests, which I suppose can be equated with Anarchism. Whatever. I don't claim to be the most politically informed person, and some may see some contradictions in these different labels I've mentioned concerning my own views, but I'll defend that by saying I have very different views on how the world COULD be in an ideal situation as opposed to what's actually realistic.

I'll go as far as to say liberals tend to be more rational than conservatives, the latter tends to be more concerned with traditional thinking than rational thinking, which isn't always wrong. Atheists tend to be more rational than religious people. Yes I'm making generalizations here, ones I'll gladly stand by.

[Jenny A]

Jenny, I'm not trying to label you, but I think rightist libertarianism is too associated with anarchy or ultra-low state intervention to accurately represent more moderate "libertarians".

This is true. The problem is that in the U.S.'s two party system I have no home. A plague on both their houses. So I hold my nose and vote for the least wrong party at the given moment or more often, the least frightening party.