John HSOG said:
I am saying that Atheists are more interested in other's religions more than those people are interested in their own religion.
I think Atheists come in various forms, sometimes multiple forms in one person. They are jealous of the tranquility that religion brings to some people's lives. They are looking for something to believe in and for someone to make them believe. They hear religious people warning them and others of the ways they live their lives, that being immoral or otherwise wrong and they attack religion in an effort to conceal the fact that they are living in error. Then there are some, albeit few, who feel threatened by religion being pushed on them without invitation. These people are justified in attacking whatever religion is being shoved down their throat. Some people see it that way and are simply wrong, however.
See above? That's why!
The necessity to categorize. Imagine an atheist proposing a similarly negative opinion on religious people. This would be instantly cathegorized as an attack on religion. At the same time, I feel John possibly can't even realize how small-minded was his commentary.
My retorts:
1- Atheism is not a religion. saying so will
never make it so.
2- I submit that wheter you have tranquility or not, you's can be equal to mine, but never superior. Why? Because I have absolute tranquility. I do not feel irritated or unconfortable in geberal, and certainly, not at all due to the dismissal I oppose to etheral thoughts. Here, you have set a phony arbitrary consequence to atheism in order to support a prejudiced perception of it.;
3- Some atheists may be looking for "something to believe, and someone to make them believe". This certainly don't fit, like, 90% of the atheists I know, but I certainly can't blindily dismiss it entirely. Anyway, neither should you apply it to the whole group - but among us, I was the only one to exercize restriction.
4- Your assumption that atheists are defensive for they feel threatened when warned of the immorality and wrongness of their ways by the religious is, once again, a prejudiced view, a.k.a. to "
how would atheists be in evangelical fundie guy paradise? Thing is that I don't feel atheists get defensive much, and when they do, 9 out of 10 times is due to a previous deffensive strike from the religious person on the other side of the debate. Thing is that, in real life, we are hopelessly in minority, save for some areas in Europe. Believers aren't used to take criticism that go as deep as the fundament of their believes, and when it comes, tey tend to take it as an assault or insult (even when it isn't). Hence, an atheist who won't listen to a little of preaching has a closed mind, and pone who have the sligthest to say about religion is agressive and incponvenient. Sight. Sociological demands gives us a debate handcap, for you have an emmotional "don't offend me" card which we can't evoke - and that is why you feel O.K. to spouse the opinion yoiu just gave.
5 - Rather than feeling threatened by religioun being pushed down out throats, we feel
annoyed by it. We are socially forced to go to religious services (marriages, funerals, etc...), we have to obey laws that have religious fundaments behind it (gays can't marry, steam cell can't be researched) and, in general, we have the way we want to live our lifes hindered by the faith of the whole. Want to end criticism tomorrow? Start keep your services
inside your temple.
Regards
.
Kudos on that. Though it is a two way street that both Atheists and Theists should leave each other alone and not chastize each other for believing in or not believing in God.
Spoken like a Baptist........
