Questions for your Religious friends.

[brewer]

IMHO gained over the last year, AF is more lively and entertaining when religious members are active. When religious members contribute less, such as happened about a year ago, the threads get stale quicker. I debated with myself about whether to become active again since the discussions did not seem interesting any more. But I reminded myself that it is up to members, like me, to make positive contributions, which is what I am trying to do and remaining mindful that people are more than the sum of their beliefs. Disliking someone for their beliefs feels rather juvenile to me.

You can dislike the belief without disliking the person, but often the two are entangled.

Can you really 'like' a outwardly vocal white supremacist?

[Mister Agenda]

Arent pagans religious people as well? I will assume by religious people you mean Christians, please correct me if I'm wrong in that assumption. Well, I suppose for the same reasons so many atheists hate Christians. Personally, I don't think hate is the right word to use here. I don't think Christians hate Atheist, I think they just strongly dislike the fact that some Aethesit are extremely condescending and arrogant. Some atheist are very disrespectful towards Christians and mock us and disparage us with unruly remarks. Such as calling us dumb, stupid, ignorant, backwards, bigots, racist, homophobes etc. Many atheist insult God and Christ in so many ways and many Christians find that very off-putting. Some Christians believe that you are trying to take away their faith from them and cause them to be persecuted. Many think that you guys only live to remove God from everything we hold dear to us and value. For example, legalizing abortion. We as Christians are mostly against abortions and when you have atheist call us stupid bigots and misogynist and push for abortions up to full term they feel like you are infringing on their rights and beliefs are when atheists try so hard to remove God from say the dollar or the pledge again they see that as an attack on their faith. Many hold the idea that this country (USA) was founded on Christianity and that atheist are trying to change the fact that this is mostly a Christian nation and has been for centuries and make it into some type of nihilistic dystopia. 

I don't think the question was specifically about Christians, most theistic religions seem more likely to jump on atheists than each other, anecdotally speaking. Regarding legalizing abortion, in the USA the majority of white and black mainline protestants think abortion should be legal in all or most cases: https://www.pewforum.org/religious-lands...-abortion/

This is kinda a hard question to answer though because not all Christians feel this way, but you must understand that not all of us are 4th, 5th, 6th generation Christians not all of us grew up Christian we are not just blindly following our parent's religion and when you make broad generalizations about us and our faith we find that very hurtful. Constantly mocking our God and telling us horrible things about a Being that we truly believe in for example Richard Dawkins famous quote 
 
 “The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”

You see that doesn't go over so well with us. We find that very hurtful. Now that is what I know from speaking with fellow brothers and sisters.

I've never heard of an atheist who got mad at a Christian for being too forgiving, too kind, too charitable, or too loving. If people (not just atheists) are getting a negative idea of Christianity, it's largely due to the way a significant portion of American Christians act, and it seems to me that anger directed at people who notice that rather than people who are making Christianity look bad is misplaced. Dawkins' representation of God would seem laughable if it was disconnected from how about a quarter of the American Christian population read the Bible (it was more like 40% as recently as the mid-eighties). The same American Christians who largely are comfortable about talking about the gods of other religions being imaginary or demonic. The irony of Christians complaining about Dawkins is that he probably would never have become such an activist if he didn't have to address Creationists and Creationism so often in his biology classes. If Creationists had focused on the science they were there to learn instead of arguing with the professor on the basics, tens of millions fewer people whould ever have heard of Richard Dawkins.

Now let me tell you how I feel about it. It hurts. It really does. I truly love God with all my heart, soul, mind, and strength I really do and when I see people calling God a fictional character or any one of the things mentioned above it really does hurt me. I understand that you have your own thoughts on Him and thats fine and I can typically take a punch, but then you call me a racist which I am far from it and call me a child abuser because I raise my children in the Christian faith, that hurts because I love my children deeply and do everything in my power to take care of them and provide for them I work hard to be a good dad and husband but when I see this it hurts, but I still try to respect your views and opinions and try not to do the same back. 

I haven't called you a racist or a child abuser, but you're painting me with the same brush, and that hurts my feelers too.

[quote='johndoe122931' pid='2040964' dateline='1622648845']
So you see a lot of it has to do with simply that our feelings are hurt. How else would you like people to respond by being told constantly that they are stupid and dumb etc? It's not easy hearing this stuff over and over, some of us are stronger than others, but we are flesh and blood humans just like everybody else we have feelings and emotions just like you. I know none of you likes hearing those things either so why do it to us? I could go on and on but I think you get the point.

Flesh and blood human beings that say they follow a religion that expects them to 'turn the other cheek'. I've met about an equal number of non-Christians who actually do that as Christians in a country that is majority Christian. You're not asking us to be the same as you, you're asking us to be better than you (you being the sort of Christians I'm talking about). And when it comes to the likelihood we'll gleefully imagine slaughtering Christians, I'd say we are better.

https://forum.samharris.org/?ACT=28&fid=...board_id=1

Now disclaimer. When I say "you" I don't specifically mean you it's a generalization and again I am not saying all atheist do these things but a lot do. I personally just want to get along with everybody and love one another. I don't want to fight and argue I just want us all to be friends and love one another.

Here's the thing. A little lack of nuance is acceptable when you're second-class citizens punching up. You should know you're not the target if you're 'one of the good ones'. The minority shouldn't have to put a disclaimer of 'not all Christians' before every criticism just as a racial minority shouldn't have to remember to include the caveat of 'not all whites' or a woman shouldn't have to say 'not all men'.

It's a little different when you're punching down from a position of being part of a majority that holds nearly all the levers of government power at a group that is only jammed together in the first place because the one opinion we all hold in common is considered threatening by many members of the majority. If you will refrain from overgeneralizing about atheists, I will refrain from assuming you are part of the complaint du jour about Christians. When I complain about Christians, it's nearly always about fundamentalist Christians trying to impose their religon on those who don't share it. I try to be careful about generalizing about racial, ethnic, and religious minorities; and I'm not even in any of those categories. You can do that too.

[tackattack]

@Angrboda

I'm not lying or being disingenuous, but you're entitled to your opinions.
I agree that numerous studies show the general population would see atheist (or muslims) as strong vocal advocates for their beliefs and are more likely to argue with them. That's what makes them dislikeable, not thee content of their beliefs.

I am not minimizing the reality or denying facts. I dislike active "Karens" far more than I dislike active atheists. I'm saying those facts you cited are not the same as the case you're making. You are playing the "Why do Christians hate us" card. I'm just here stating that I don't hate you. I disagree with you. If rational discourse can't be made on the topic, I'm happy to discuss other topics, but where our topic is religion it is diametrically opposed by definition. You'll have to forgive me for being human and desiring to get along with other people.
Some simple questions to resolve this:
1. Do you (you personally) feel hated by me personally?
2. Do you feel disliked by me personally?
3. Do you feel hated by Christians in general?
4. Do you feel disliked by Christians in general?
5. Do you believe I personally am representative of Christianity?
6. Do you hate or dislike me personally?
7. Do you hate or dislike Christians generally?
Then we take those answers and ask why.
I've answered you as to why I don't hate Atheists and why (with specifics to when) I dislike conversing with atheist. I feel I am a generic representation of Christianity within the group I am part of. If there are more questions you have, I'd be happy to answer them.

I've presupposed the why to some of your responces to those questions and why you ask that "Why do Christians hate atheists more than different believers?"

To answer you i've listed Pygmalion effect on both sides or cited several biases could be at play on either side like commitment bias, in-group bias or confirmation bias. I'm certain that your statistics and Agenda's are factually correct. But what are those studies actually measuring? It's dislike not hate. I dislike pedophiles, nazi's and most old people that drive. I dislike them for their actions. Atheism isn't an action, therefore I have no dislike of atheist generally. Those that want to take action on their beliefs I might have a problem with (depending on their actions individually). Similarly, I'm typically tolerated around here as long as I don't actively try to convert people.

Amazing research. You mean to tell me 2 diametrically opposed groups dislike each other? /sarcasm

I dislike arguing with atheist, but that doesn’t mean I dislike atheists. Both of those are a far cry from hating anyone. I’m certain non of the question in those studies was “do you hate atheist?”

Honestly I would expect a minority group of typically hyper-skeptical, opinionated, vocal nonconformists with axes to grind to be on the colder side of many social scenarios.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25590340/

Exactly my point... The angry atheist is a myth, as is the hateful Christian being straw-manned here. As I said above, the axis that aligns with my religious belief and every religious related opinion of the atheists on this forum is topically and diametrically opposed by definition. That doesn't mean I hate atheists for their religious opinions or want them to be quiet about them.


As for me being a bigot... well.. I'm not. You're still attributing a lot of hate to me that I'm simply not expressing anywhere. I'm biased, but I'm not the one obstinately or unreasonably holding a position or antagonizing anyone nor am I prejudicially ignoring your evidence. I'm simply offering a different, more direct line of questioning. Maybe if I suess-ify it it'll be clearer. Sorry if this is bad, I'm not practiced at it and I'm at work.

I do lumps atheists in one big pot
they're all people was my only thought
Atheists are no more in my mind
than anyone else when they're being unkind
When they open their mouths,
when they become hyper-skeptical, opinionated, non-conformists
They still don't make my naughty shortlist.
Everyone has an opinion and unique view
It's called perspective and I respect yours too
In your quest to vilify, don't deny
the timber in your own eye.

[Angrboda]

I've presupposed the why to some of your responces to those questions and why you ask that "Why do Christians hate atheists more than different believers?"

The question wasn't about you, nor was it about Christians. You've projected your religion and yourself specifically into a question that was about neither.

Apparently, you're out exercising a healthy persecution complex. Badly.

As to your questions, no I don't like you. I think you're a fakir and pretentious. It has nothing to do with religion. And no I don't feel that Christians hate me. I don't feel anyone hates me. Ignorance is bliss.

[Neo-Scholastic]

Secular does not mean humanistic. The founding principles of the USA would be better described as non-sectarian natural law.

[vulcanlogician]

The founding principles of the USA would be better described as non-sectarian natural law.

Why do you say that?

I personally think it is more social contract theory than natural law.

[Neo-Scholastic]

IMHO gained over the last year, AF is more lively and entertaining when religious members are active. When religious members contribute less, such as happened about a year ago, the threads get stale quicker. I debated with myself about whether to become active again since the discussions did not seem interesting any more. But I reminded myself that it is up to members, like me, to make positive contributions, which is what I am trying to do and remaining mindful that people are more than the sum of their beliefs. Disliking someone for their beliefs feels rather juvenile to me.

You can dislike the belief without disliking the person, but often the two are entangled.

Can you really 'like' a outwardly vocal white supremacist?

Someone, now deceased, who was close to me was in most other respects an admirable man of honor and ability but...he was a white separatist in the sense that while he believed blacks and whites were existentially equals that the cultural differences were too great for blacks and whites in the US for them to live together harmoniously. When I remember him it is never about his opinions but the many kindnesses he showed to those around him and I am totally sure he never mistreated anyone because of their race. So yes, I am conflicted because the book didn't seem to match the cover in his case and I belief it takes some maturity to understand that everyone is very complicated and filled with contradictions. The compassionate effort to still see them as a human being like unto one's self is worth it.

I have tried to cultivate this understand of the human condition as one of the central features of my Christian faith. When I read the Passion story, I see the universal flaws of humanity exemplified in the deeds of Pilate, Peter, Judas, the Pharasee's and the Crowd. IMHO the human heart cries out for redemption. Maybe to an empty universe, as many here think, but I cannot help but sense a divine presence in the world. Maybe that instinct is false, but I can hope that it isn't just as easily as I can dismiss it. If honoring that insinct makes me a better person then I will treat that sense of the divine as-if it is what it seems to be.

---

The founding principles of the USA would be better described as non-sectarian natural law.

Why do you say that?

I personally think it is more social contract theory than natural law.

Social contact too. I wouldnt exclude it from the mix of influences. I was Mostly thinking because IMHO the concept of inalienable rights is linnked to natural law in the D of I.

[Nay_Sayer]

You are an Independent Fundamental Baptist, ergo not a Pastafarian, and ergo rejecting the truth that can only be revealed to you by faith in FSM or if you were lucky enough to catch Xis tv special in the 90's 'Religions greatest secrets finally revealed'.

Xhe is the Flying Spaghetti Monster. I thought that was fairly obvious.
RAmen

Interesting, so where can I find this tv show. I would love to watch it.

Also, was wondering, the FSM name is Xhe, are there other FSM or is Xhe the only one. Where can I find more info on Xhe and his doctrine?

Sadly the show doesn't air anymore. I blame new-fangled programming.

https://www.spaghettimonster.org/   The journey is life long and only those with a true heart who reject the false prophets can achieve enlightenment.

May Xis noodles unharden your heart.
RAmen

[Brian37]

IMHO gained over the last year, AF is more lively and entertaining when religious members are active. When religious members contribute less, such as happened about a year ago, the threads get stale quicker. I debated with myself about whether to become active again since the discussions did not seem interesting any more. But I reminded myself that it is up to members, like me, to make positive contributions, which is what I am trying to do and remaining mindful that people are more than the sum of their beliefs. Disliking someone for their beliefs feels rather juvenile to me.

You can dislike the belief without disliking the person, but often the two are entangled.

Can you really 'like' a outwardly vocal white supremacist?

^^^^^^ So much this.


I have no contact with my biological family. Most of them are right wing fundies. But the reason I don't have contact with them, isn't that they believe, but more so in that the time we did interact, I constantly felt like they were sucking the life out of me. But especially my older brother, he was the worst. He took everything seriously, even outside of religion. We once went to a billiards bar, and I could not understand why he was so stone faced, and I got to the point where I asked him if there was anything wrong, and he literally shouted at me to the point the rest of the bar turned and looked at him when he shouted, "YOU DON'T THINK I AM GOING TO LET YOU BEAT ME".

And that was not a "friendly yell", it literally was an utterance of the bullshit tribalism he'd been indoctrinated with his entire life and my post adoption when we were kids. 

I can't claim that my brother was/is a white supremacist, but I can say he is a nutcase. 

Unlike my biological brother, my late mother was a bit of an authoritarian growing up, but not for religious reasons. She was a lifetime Catholic, even up until her death. My biological brother was some sect of evangelical, never figured out the exact sect. But between the two, while my adoptive mother was a hardnose, I never had the sense of "I will drowned you like Andrea Yates".  My biological brother always gave me the creeps.

[johndoe122931]

People have a right to disrespect gods, sacred symbols, your sensibilities, feelings, ridicule your religion.

At least they have that right to disrespect and offend in free countries. That's why the founding fathers didn't make this country on some religious principles, but secular, humanist principles.

Where people don't have these freedoms is in theocracies.

The moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible.

Agree 100%

---

Interesting, so where can I find this tv show. I would love to watch it.

Also, was wondering, the FSM name is Xhe, are there other FSM or is Xhe the only one. Where can I find more info on Xhe and his doctrine?

Sadly the show doesn't air anymore. I blame new-fangled programming.

https://www.spaghettimonster.org/   The journey is life long and only those with a true heart who reject the false prophets can achieve enlightenment.

May Xis noodles unharden your heart.
RAmen

Thanks for the info. I will check it out!

---

What oppression did I claim? 

Yes, the fire department should show up to a building that is on fire regardless of what the building is used for.

That crap about being hurt by removing in god we trust and under god in the pledge. Our currency (manufactured by the state) contains a religious belief added because of cold war fears. The cold war is over. Under god was also added due to the cold war. Those actions were not necessary for the 178 years prior. Keeping it is special privilege for the religious. But OMG, talk about removing those words and you go off.

Fire departments are primarily funded through local property taxes. Churches don't pay property taxes. Why should the church get a service that they don't help pay for? Again this should be viewed as special privilege.

Your religious false entitlement is showing. It's almost childish.

Edit, late addition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_privilege

Oh, you misunderstand, I can care less about the removal of that phrase from currency. 

The church is not the building, the church is the body of believers. The building is just a building where the church comes together to worship God. The individuals that all go to the building to worship God pay taxes. Most of us are business owners who have jobs and own homes. We pay our taxes and the property tax on our homes as well. But because an individual does not pay taxes or property tax does not mean they should be deprived of basic life-saving services. If I am being attacked should the cops not come to help me because I don't pay taxes that fund them? 

Do you think that if a church is on fire that the fire department should not come and put the fire out?