Why are Atheists afraid to insult Islam and Jews?

[Hatshepsut]

I just made the observation in anther thread that troll threads usually evolve into intelligent conversation...

I never thought of that. Troll threads, evolving like polychaete worms. Fascinating. I can see your point that the OP was a turd (the mods have pulled the flush lever) but in this one  case I thought he had something to say.

How many people who criticize religion....have actually studied deeply human psychology to see how it works? How many people in the west criticize anything other than the Abrahamic god? Are religious people irrational? The Japanese are 80% Shinto and they seem pretty rational, productive and have high IQ's.

To come out and argue the atheist position in public took real guts 75 years ago. Today, it's become just one of five hundred bandwagons all clamoring for attention. There are serious arguments from atheism, which in my opinion the religious aren't doing a good job of answering. Yet both sides of this fence are mostly populated by parrots now.

I wouldn't say you have to have a degree in anything to contribute meaningfully. But you do have to have read. A lot of people complaining about religion from a "scientific" viewpoint haven't read any science  either, much less philosophy or theology related to the belief systems they wish to trash.

[Faith No More]

Now, granted I don't know a lot of atheists in meatspace, nor do I spend much time listening to the internet atheist community outside of this forum, but I've never come across an atheist that was afraid to criticize a religion, except maybe Islam in a public setting(some people just like having their heads attached to their necks).

[nihilistcat]

I would say, here in the US, Christianity is by far the predominant religion (so it makes sense to focus mostly on Christianity and its followers), and there is a tendency towards Islamophobia and Antisemitism that most atheists don't want to risk being associated with (which can happen inadvertently). The so called "new atheist" crowd has been very vocal when it comes to Islam (Bill Maher, Sam Harris, the late Christopher Hitchens, etc.), so not all atheists share this aversion to discussing Islam.

But there's another often ignored dynamic at play here. Most atheists are left of center on the political spectrum (and they tend to be more intelligent than the general population). So they realize that US and British intervention into the Middle East (and Islamic world more generally) has been an important factor in creating the needed space for Islamic extremism to thrive. Realizing this, they're not real happy with the "new atheist" mantra with regard to Islam (which they feel tends to ignore the role western intervention has played in this mess).

[downbeatplumb]

Min is a single person among many here on the board, and thus singling out Min is an entirely irrelevant response to what I just said.

No one else here said Moslems should act American or leave. That's why Min was singled out. Hiding racism behind atheism like he does is complete garbage.

Islam is not a race.

[Hatshepsut]

But there's another often ignored dynamic at play here. Most atheists are left of center on the political spectrum (and they tend to be more intelligent than the general population). So they realize that US and British intervention into the Middle East (and Islamic world more generally) has been an important factor in creating the needed space for Islamic extremism to thrive...

While not doubting that western governments' policies in the Middle East have made the West a target for Islamic ire, I wonder why causal explanation for the rise of Islamic militancy depends on political leanings. It's become a litmus test: Either they envy all our freedoms (right), or they just don't like the West's meddling (left), and more importantly, accepting the right's or left's thesis on the matter automatically means rejecting the other thesis. To me, both theses seem to make sense. Extremism has always been a major current within Islam even if only a minority of Muslims espouse it. Islam itself began in violent military response to the prevailing 7th century world situation, having never made a formal ideological retreat from this root. Meaning there is a genuine incompatibility of values between western thought systems and Islam that goes beyond religion: Islam simply doesn't countenance the Enlightenment or separation of religion from the state, among other things, with the possible exception of a few recent Muslim scholars who are reassessing these issues. Yet U.S. conservatives on their part refuse to acknowledge that nearly every thing we do over there makes the problem worse.

[Rhondazvous]

Fuck Jews and fuck Muslims.

Yaweeee and Allahhhh can take turns ass fucking Muhammad in the ass.

Ooh you did it. now you gonna get it

[nihilistcat]

But there's another often ignored dynamic at play here. Most atheists are left of center on the political spectrum (and they tend to be more intelligent than the general population). So they realize that US and British intervention into the Middle East (and Islamic world more generally) has been an important factor in creating the needed space for Islamic extremism to thrive...

While not doubting that western governments' policies in the Middle East have made the West a target for Islamic ire, I wonder why causal explanation for the rise of Islamic militancy depends on political leanings. It's become a litmus test: Either they envy all our freedoms (right), or they just don't like the West's meddling (left), and more importantly, accepting the right's or left's thesis on the matter automatically means rejecting the other thesis. To me, both theses seem to make sense. Extremism has always been a major current within Islam even if only a minority of Muslims espouse it. Islam itself began in violent military response to the prevailing 7th century world situation, having never made a formal ideological retreat from this root. Meaning there is a genuine incompatibility of values between western thought systems and Islam that goes beyond religion: Islam simply doesn't countenance the Enlightenment or separation of religion from the state, among other things, with the possible exception of a few recent Muslim scholars who are reassessing these issues. Yet U.S. conservatives on their part refuse to acknowledge that nearly every thing we do over there makes the problem worse.

I totally agree, and the facts support exactly that. 

One example, the Muslim Brotherhood. Founded in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna, one of the primary reasons he cited was loose western morality (and the freedoms western women enjoy). And this was before any significant western intervention (and before the US achieved its current hegemonic status). Much of the ideology that informs these extremists originates from Wahhabism, a movement within Sunni Islam. This toxic ideology was crafted by Muhammad al-Wahhab, who lived in the 18th century (so we certainly can't blame American for that one). Incidentally, the founder of the Saud family dynasty (that today rules Saudi Arabia), Muhammad bin-Saud, was a contemporary and ally of Wahhab.

However, US and to a lesser extent British intervention, played a role. For example, in 1953 US and British intelligence orchestrated a coup d'état in Iran against the democratically elected and progressive/social reformer, Prime Minister Muhammad Mosadegh (because he expressed an intent to nationalize the Iranian oil business). Also, 1979-89, Operation Cyclone in Afghanistan, where the CIA provided material support to what would become the Taliban, to try and kick the Soviets out of Afghanistan. This latter case isn't as bad from a culpability perspective as the Iran case (after all, the Soviets were pretty bad, and so from our perspective we did what we had to do, even if there was some unforeseen blowback, and I suppose few are more devoted than religious fundies, so I can understand the reasoning, whereas the Iran case was something we did out of pure greed, power lust, and a desire to control resources). 


So it's a mixed bag, not as simple as someone like Sam Harris would have us believe, nor is it as simple as a leftist like Chris Hedges would have us believe. But I will say, there's a lot of flaws in Harris' methodology. In his writings on this subject he does things like cite surveys of Muslims that indicate widespread support for extremist ideology. The problem is, he ignores qualitative factors. For instance, how truthful should we expect people who are living in a dictatorship to be? Will we only look at regions where more fundamentalist forms of Islam dominate, or is it more fair to also look at moderate regions (like say Indonesia, Malaysia, etc.)?


And then of course there's this terrible slippery slope that can happen in cases like this. Assume most European Muslims are moderate, many went to Europe in the first place to escape fundamentalism. But then a few attacks, guys like Harris beating the drum, suddenly you get a backlash against Islam, and western Muslims turn to fundamentalism (particularly their young males). It's this tendency that we should want to avoid, and I'm a little bothered by the fact that some prominent atheists are fueling the fire so to speak. We can say they don't speak for all atheists, but unfortunately, that's not how public perception works. So I do think the atheist community should put pressure on these guys and try to convince them to be a little more responsible in their rhetoric. 

[Rhondazvous]

Islam isn't a race.

Neither is Judaism, for that matter.

[Brian37]

This forum has a sub-forum for 'Christianity' , because no one will call you a bigot for insulting them.

But imagine if this forum had a sub-forum for:
Jews : the site would get shutdown by the Zionists Jews and called anti-Semitic
Muslim : site would get hacked and be called islamaPhobe

As an atheist, I insult all religions equally. I do not discriminate. But unfortunately, like many liberals and comedians ,  my atheist friends are yellow-belly-cowards chicken to insult any other religion except for beating the dead horse "Christianity".

I think you need to check your sample rate. I myself am a flaming social and economic liberal. But, at the same time I also have a huge problem with political correctness. 

I love my well intended friends on the left, but what they do not understand is that the same books they may read to justify empathy, are the same books with the same words that others use to justify cruelty.

Humans deserve rights, but ideas should never be given blind value or be blasphemy free. 

I do criticize Muslims and Jews and Hindus and will also Buddhist and go after atheists who I think get it wrong. 

One huge problem I have with ALL religions and they all pull this crap, when you tell them it is not a race they flip out. I have seen Muslims and Jews especially when you point out religion being the cause of their needless conflict they cay "no it is not a religion it is a race".

A black Muslim in Africa does not look like a olive complected Muslim say in Turkey or Pakistan. Had a Hindu once accused me of racism because I simply said his religion was not any different than anyone elses and just as made up. Despite pointing out to him Indian atheist groups whom have people born there with the same backgrounds and skin complexions.

I don't expect the population of Israel to move, but to me their land grabs are no different than what European Christians did to Native Americans when they migrated here. On the other side only a fool would claim that Islam isn't the backers of the idea of wiping Israel off the map. And if "Jew" were a race then why doesn't Israel's population look like Sammy Davis Jr.

And a few months ago there was a story out of Israel where their right wing sexist nuts held a flight back 11 hours becuase those fuckwads refused to sit next to women.

And stupid things like male or female genital mutilation which all three do. And thinking dietary rules handed to you by a god, like eating fish on friday(Christianity) or abstaining from pork because you are Jewish or Muslim or not eating cow because you are Hindu, is just flat out superstitious bullshit.

I go after atheists too. I know Aynd Rand ass kissers who are atheists who would love us to look like a 3rd world country masturbating over cheap labor. I know other atheists who think getting rid of the private sector on a planet of 7 billion is a good goal. I know other atheists who have conspiracy crap like 9/11 and JFK.

I personally wish all three religions would stop using the only home I have as their giant pissing contest. But everyone is fair game to me, not out to silence anyone, just saying no one deserves a pedestal.

[nihilistcat]

This forum has a sub-forum for 'Christianity' , because no one will call you a bigot for insulting them.

But imagine if this forum had a sub-forum for:
Jews : the site would get shutdown by the Zionists Jews and called anti-Semitic
Muslim : site would get hacked and be called islamaPhobe

As an atheist, I insult all religions equally. I do not discriminate. But unfortunately, like many liberals and comedians ,  my atheist friends are yellow-belly-cowards chicken to insult any other religion except for beating the dead horse "Christianity".

I think you need to check your sample rate. I myself am a flaming social and economic liberal. But, at the same time I also have a huge problem with political correctness. 

I love my well intended friends on the left, but what they do not understand is that the same books they may read to justify empathy, are the same books with the same words that others use to justify cruelty.

Humans deserve rights, but ideas should never be given blind value or be blasphemy free. 

I do criticize Muslims and Jews and Hindus and will also Buddhist and go after atheists who I think get it wrong. 

One huge problem I have with ALL religions and they all pull this crap, when you tell them it is not a race they flip out. I have seen Muslims and Jews especially when you point out religion being the cause of their needless conflict they cay "no it is not a religion it is a race".

A black Muslim in Africa does not look like a olive complected Muslim say in Turkey or Pakistan. Had a Hindu once accused me of racism because I simply said his religion was not any different than anyone elses and just as made up. Despite pointing out to him Indian atheist groups whom have people born there with the same backgrounds and skin complexions.

I don't expect the population of Israel to move, but to me their land grabs are no different than what European Christians did to Native Americans when they migrated here. On the other side only a fool would claim that Islam isn't the backers of the idea of wiping Israel off the map. And if "Jew" were a race then why doesn't Israel's population look like Sammy Davis Jr.

And a few months ago there was a story out of Israel where their right wing sexist nuts held a flight back 11 hours becuase those fuckwads refused to sit next to women.

And stupid things like male or female genital mutilation which all three do. And thinking dietary rules handed to you by a god, like eating fish on friday(Christianity) or abstaining from pork because you are Jewish or Muslim or not eating cow because you are Hindu, is just flat out superstitious bullshit.

I go after atheists too. I know Aynd Rand ass kissers who are atheists who would love us to look like a 3rd world country masturbating over cheap labor. I know other atheists who think getting rid of the private sector on a planet of 7 billion is a good goal. I know other atheists who have conspiracy crap like 9/11 and JFK.

I personally wish all three religions would stop using the only home I have as their giant pissing contest. But everyone is fair game to me, not out to silence anyone, just saying no one deserves a pedestal.

While I agree with much of your sentiment, IMO there is a certain degree of ideological arrogance implied by these words. Basically, you've narrowed it down to saying (without saying) everyone besides progressive democrats are stupid and have a substandard ideology. 

In my mind, it's not all that unreasonable to think that the existence of federal regulatory agencies makes corruption of our political system inevitable, and so the idea of simply getting rid of them, isn't so outlandish or stupid. Indeed, maybe it is better to simply regulate via case law, instead of limiting the right of citizens to sue tortfeasors (as federal regulation does under the supremacy clause), why not abolish these agencies, which would have the effect of making every lawyer, every judge in the country, a potential regulator (much more difficult to bribe millions of attorneys, particularly when the payout for winning a lawsuit against a huge company can be so big). 

As a veteran (who has used the VA on numerous occasions), I think rather than funding the giant mind numbing, psychologically assaulting bureaucracy that is the VA, vets would be far better off if we simply gave them private medical insurance. And why should the post office be allowed to retain a monopoly on first class mail anyway? 

I'm not saying I agree with any of this (for the most part, I don't, I think there's better ways to deal with corruption at both the agency and political level), but none of this is unreasonable or stupid. Indeed, the only thing that's stupid is tribalistic partisanship! It's submitting to a voluntary sort of censorship. The DNC doesn't want its adherents talking to, much less cooperating with, people who hold other ideologies. Same with the RNC.