Ex-theists are often like ex-smokers, sanctimonious and insufferable.

[Whateverist]

Don't get me wrong, I still don't like inhaling tobacco smoke.  Not one bit.  But on the whole I may just prefer the company of smokers to the zealot nazis some become once they escape the habit.  Especially to people who still smoke of course.  Having finally conquered that one life challenge really brings out the condescending cunt in lots of people.  Same goes for some ex-alcoholics and some ex-druggies of course.

Now we spend a lot of time around here discussing the nuances of being a non-theist vs being an anti-theist.  But then where do ex-theists fall?  Do they merely have no belief in god like a non-smoker has no desire to smoke?  Clearly not.  The ex-theist is at war with himself and gawd help you if he decides you represent the shadow he wishes to project outside himself.  The ex-theist resents those who are weaker than themselves a lot, hates them really .. nearly as much as they hated being too weak to stop sooner themselves.  

The non-theist merely has no theist in them.  That can't be said of the theist hating, ex-theist.  You can get them to recognize all the easier absurdities of theist beliefs but it is much harder to get them to recognize the more obnoxious attitudes of the theist.  Just as so many smug, self-satisfied Christians just have to 'witness' every where he goes, you know, throwing his net wide in the hopes of bringing even just one more lost soul to God, so the ex-theist just has to do his best at all times to pull the head of even one more theist up out of sands of ignorance.

No one said atheism would be easy, especially for theists.  But please, if you're going to attempt it for god's sake stay the course and finish the job.  Get out all the theism or maybe it would be better to just remain one?

[abaris]

Don't get me wrong, I still don't like inhaling tobacco smoke.

It's one of my flaws that I do.

But you're right, atheist missionaries are as repugnant as the religious ones. But one of the reasons why I don't like Sam Harris. But he's certainly only one of the more prominent ones.

[Dystopia]

I think suffering at the hands of religion causes people to become revolted and they have a need to start conflicts with their former beliefs - It is a natural reaction. I was never a big believer and I never had bad experiences with religion, so I really don't give a fuck, but perhaps I'd think differently if I was indoctrinated since birth.

I'm interested in creating a more humane and critical-thinking society, whether that results in more atheism or not is really none of my concern. Being an atheist means you got one thing right, kinda like not smoking means you made the healthier choice - It doesn't make you special aside from the fact you don't believe and you are prone to the same groupthinking, dogmas and delusions as everyone else - We all are - People have need for dogmas and principles to guide their life and they end up replacing religion with something else that suits them, whether it's Richard Dawkins,a political ideology, a list of moral ideas or some philosophy you approve of.

[Whateverist]

He has annoyed me at times too, as does the physicist who wrote the book about nothingness. You can be really, really smart and still be a jerk of course.

[abaris]

You can be really, really smart and still be a jerk of course.

Not mutually exclusive. There's that saying about the smart idiot. Being smart doesn't prevent you from being a social idiot.

[Dystopia]

Sam Harris has some interesting ideas on science and morality, I like his oratory as well - He's just not right about everything. He did recognize not everything about religion sucks like by saying that the meditation involved in eastern religions, whether you believe in it or not, is good for your well being.

[Pyrrho]

The analogy of the opening post is way off.  Religious people murder people every day.  They discriminate against people every day.  It is right and proper to fight against such things.

If religious people did not affect others with their poison, then tolerating them would be fine.  But those fuckers are all about fucking over other people, and they should be stopped.

[Dystopia]

The analogy of the opening post is way off.  Religious people murder people every day.  They discriminate against people every day.  It is right and proper to fight against such things.

If religious people did not affect others with their poison, then tolerating them would be fine.  But those fuckers are all about fucking over other people, and they should be stopped.

People of all beliefs and backgrounds do that everyday. How are religious people special? If you accept the idea that religious people do harm because of religion, then are you ready to accept the balance by good deeds done by religious people, or do you think only bad deeds count? How does that work?

[Tonus]

At least have some consideration for x-theists, who seem normal until they reach puberty and BAM... they're reluctant super-heroes, serving a world that hates them for who they are.

[Pyrrho]

The analogy of the opening post is way off.  Religious people murder people every day.  They discriminate against people every day.  It is right and proper to fight against such things.

If religious people did not affect others with their poison, then tolerating them would be fine.  But those fuckers are all about fucking over other people, and they should be stopped.

People of all beliefs and backgrounds do that everyday. How are religious people special? If you accept the idea that religious people do harm because of religion, then are you ready to accept the balance by good deeds done by religious people, or do you think only bad deeds count? How does that work?

Of course the good deeds done due to religion count.  Now, tell me, how many good deeds does it take to balance against a beheading?  If you need more examples of the deeds caused by religion, you don't have to look very hard for them.  All you need to do is keep looking at Minimalist's threads in which he keeps adding atrocity after atrocity to the lists.  Or, if you want, you can search on your own.

Maybe you think it does not matter because the example to which I link above is about some brown-skinned woman in a poor country.  I say, religion needs to be combated, as it is a danger to civilization.  Religion may be mostly tamed in your country, but that is not how it is elsewhere.  And it has not been tamed by its choice in your country either.  Given the chance, we can expect the same actions as were the case in the past.  After all, they still have the same texts and organizations of the past that inspired such things.


Edited to add:

When smokers and drinkers start beheading others due to their smoking and drinking, then we can start to talk about how such things compare with religion.  But otherwise, it is a bullshit analogy.