I've had enough of people bashing others for their religious views!!

[UrbScotty]

I've seen way too much of it on DU. And quite frankly, it's just as sick as the shove-it-down-your-throat extremism practiced by certain people on the 'right.'

To me, respect is a major part of being a liberal. And if you can't respect other religious beliefs besides your own, then I have to wonder how you can call yourself a liberal.

[TexasObserver]

1. Wrong forum.

And get serious. The hate comes mainly from religious types, not at them.

[ashling]

8. It cuts both ways

there is a type of evangelatheism which is quite as vile as a lot of fundie stuff.

I am an agnostic tending toward atheism, and have been scarred by a lot of the uber-Christianity, but I also almost went to a methodist seminary and was a youth minister and social-ministries board chair, and I can feel it from the other side too

[TexasObserver]

14. Only because the religious believe it's their right to not have their beliefs questioned.

[jgraz]

19. +1

[TexasObserver]

32. And, right on cue ...

they go into their routine, eh?

It really gets old, this persecution complex the religious tend to drag around, their personal cross.

[goclark]

28. -1 Why are we being all put in one basket?

Never mind, I see where this is headed.

[optimal-tomato]

74. You're not all like that.

I don't know what religion you are, but be honest:

The mascot of Christianity is a guy being crucified. Their early cultural history focuses on (very real) persecution nearly two thousand years ago. (Since then, they've pretty much had the run of things.) It's part of their doctrine, part of their culture, that they should suffer for their beliefs, and as a result many Christians claim persecution at the drop of a hat.

Because Christians are the majority of Westerners, we tend to focus on their hang-ups. As an ethnic group, Jews have been persucuted horribly in recent history, and sometimes have some legitimate reason to claim anti-semitism. Muslims have their own persecution/inferiority complex, as well. Scientologists are super-defensive and constantly afraid that you're an SP!

But no: Not all believers are like that. Probably most aren't. But they aren't the ones that post things like the OP, asking people to stop denouncing (their) faith.

[ashling]

29. There certainly are a lot of "Christians" who feel that way

but then there are a lot that don't.

When someone of good faith (not in a religious sense, but in the sense of fair play) comes forward to discuss a socially relevant point about feeding the poor, etc. and mentions their faith in a god, what is the point in jumping all over them for their "ignorant superstition?"

Some people are not capable of carrying forward a conversation without soundly thrashing the person because they" believe in a myth". How does that get the poor fed?

I am not defending religion, but I am defending a person's right to hold their religious beliefs whithout being attacked for it whenever they bring it up, along with your right (and mine) to be able to express our non-belief without the prosletizing that comes from them.

[TexasObserver]

35. I don't have a problem with faith in God. It's religious dogma and privilege I find offensive.

I do real charitable work. For most churches their real charitable work is hardly a line item on the church budget, which leans towards constructing ridiculous edifices and hiring self aggrandizing ministers.

One doesn't need a religion to be spiritual or to do good charitable work.

[ashling]

40. Believe me, I am there with you

You don't have to believe in "God" to be ethical or moral. There are a lot of "Christians" who are neither.

But there are people of religion who are also ethical and moral.

I'm just saying that it cuts both ways.

[TexasObserver]

42. I know many Christians who are good, decent people.

My sister and her partner are two of them. They love their church and go every week.

Some people need church. Some don't.

[ashling]

45. exactly

and those that do shouldn't be subjected to insults any more than those who don't find it necessary.

[Control-Z]

62. ' When someone of good faith

(not in a religious sense, but in the sense of fair play) comes forward to discuss a socially relevant point about feeding the poor, etc. and mentions their faith in a god, what is the point in jumping all over them for their "ignorant superstition?"'

1.) Injecting ones religious beliefs into the conversation precludes any 'sense of fair play'.

2.) I've NEVER heard an Atheist gratuitously include their non belief in any situation, nor have I done it myself. Ever.

But what if I were to? What if I came 'forward to discuss a socially relevant point about feeding the poor, etc.' and mentioned that I was doing so despite the absence of any gawd, or that I was working in the name of my disbelief in gawd? (There really is no equivalent to talking about "faith" so I'm not sure how one would even word that.) So anyway, what do you suppose the response would be? Every Christian I have ever met would take that kind of information as an assault on their beliefs and would respond to it accordingly. Christians virtually always jump all over atheists every gawd damn time it comes up while Atheists tolerate their crap and seldom say a word.

'I am not defending religion, but I am defending a person's right to hold their religious beliefs whithout being attacked for it whenever they bring it up, along with your right (and mine) to be able to express our non-belief without the prosletizing that comes from them.'

Yes, you are. The religious are being defended. Once again. As always. It is tiring.

[ashling]

72. You are wrong♦

'I am not defending religion, but I am defending a person's right to hold their religious beliefs whithout being attacked for it whenever they bring it up, along with your right (and mine) to be able to express our non-belief without the prosletizing that comes from them.'

Yes, you are. The religious are being defended. Once again. As always. It is tiring.

What I am defending is civil discussion and civil treatment, i.e, the right to not be insulted - or rather I am condemning the insulter... no matter who it is. If you are insulted or abused in a particular conversation, then...and only then...do you have the right to respond in that manner.

Don't assume that because some "Christian" somewhere insulted or abused you, that you have the right to gratuitously insult or rang on some other Christian or individual about their religious beliefs.

[Control-Z]

76. You obviously chose to ignore what I posted.

I'll quote myself for you:

'1.) Injecting ones religious beliefs into the conversation precludes any 'sense of fair play'.'

'2.) I've NEVER heard an Atheist gratuitously include their non belief in any situation, nor have I done it myself. Ever.'

'Every Christian I have ever met would take that kind of information as an assault on their beliefs and would respond to it accordingly.'

Some "Christian" has not insulted or abused me. Every single one that I've ever met has. I wouldn't know about any that might be private about their beliefs, because, well, they are private about their beliefs (as they should be). And, once again, I have never "gratuitously insult(ed) or rang (sic) on some other Christian or individual about their religious beliefs.' Ever. I quietly accept and tolerate them no matter how much gawd crap they throw my way. I am polite, while they are offensive.

You're barking up the wrong tree. It is Christians who do what you claim. Not me. Not most Atheists. And don't ever accuse me, especially after I've explained my patience for Christians and other people like you.

[Dorian Gray]

79. If every single Christian you have met

have insulted or abused you, you must be surrounded by a shitload of assholes.

Luckily, I surround myself with nice people who respect others beliefs, no matter what they be.

[Control-Z]

81. So you've never met a "vocal" Christian?

Riiight. They're all so polite. So you're posting about something you know nothing of then, or you're not being honest about being one of them. Your defense is transparent.

[Dorian Gray]

83. Of course I have...

And nothing is transparent. I just find it hard to believe that EVERY SINGLE CHRISTIAN you've ever met has attacked you.

If that is true, then you are surrounded by a load of mean people.



Which is possible, I suppose. I have friends of all backgrounds, and nobody treats each other with disrespect or ridicule. If I feel like someone will attack another person for their beliefs,
they won't be friends with me.

[Control-Z]

86. Oooh. You are so precious

Only the good Christians seek you out. The ones that most of us have never had the chance to meet. Funny how literally everyone on this site has had to put up with far right lunatic fundies. But not you. I get it. You're just so much better than the rest of us.

"Luckily, I surround myself with nice people who respect others beliefs, no matter what they be.

I surround myself with nice people too. If they are Christian and they don't talk about it or preach about it, I won't know or care what their belief system is. If they're talking about it and preaching to me it is insulting and offensive. I have yet to meet a vocal Christian who could shut the fuck up and keep their religion out of my face. Fact.

You like people like that? Your problem, precious. You're probably one of the people who has never faced some of the problems we talk about here on DU and who doesn't understand why people just don't fix things by doing it your way.

Take your god and enjoy, but quit trying to convince me that Christians are so wonderful. It is exactly why I can't stand people like you. You're going to argue with me about my life's experiences and the people I KNOW. You can't do that. Only a fool would try.

On Edit: Why don't you just admit that the believers are the ones who attack, preach, and annoy 99.9 percent of the time. The occasional non believer who voices an opinion is not only the exception but is more than likely defending his/her beliefs.

[Dorian Gray]

91. Now you're just being cantankerous...

I also think you're full of crap... "Most of us...????" Whatever. There are plenty of nice Christians out there. There are also plenty of nice everyone else. If you act cantankerous, you'll probably attract cantankerous.

That's life.

I'm not trying to convince you of anything. Of course believers can attack. There are also assholes of every single stripe. I think this topic has proven that all around.

[Control-Z]

158. ...

Nopw. Just proved you were lying about not being a Christian. That you've had an agenda from the start.

'Most of us...????' Indeed. :rofl:

[beam me up scottie]

277. WTF??? DG has been one of our greatest allies on DU and no doubt in the real world as well.

She has been more than patient and repeatedly tried to reason with you but your intolerance is preventing you from listening to liberal christians and learning from them.

I feel sorry for you.

[Dorian Gray]

304. Did I ever say

I was not Christian? I'm a pretty out and about Catholic on the religion forum.

I don't care whether you like Christians or not. I just thought saying every single one you ever met had abused you was pretty sad.

[beam me up scottie]

285. You rock, DG.

Lots of hypocrites in this thread, but you're still walking the walk. :)

[timtom]

291. +1

[Dorian Gray]

305. Thanks

BMUS

Though I don't think I always walk the walk, as I am human after all.

:)

[beam me up scottie]

317. Don't mention it, you don't deserve to be treated like that.

I try to curb my snark too, but it's not easy for any of us to take the high road when someone keeps waving that red flag in front of you.
For some reason GD brings out the worst in people, R/T is positively tranquil by comparison.

[timtom]

328. Don't waste your time

Control-Z lives in a special place where EVERY Christian he/she has ever known has tried to proselytize him/her or slipped some religious thought or phrase into conversation.

Life must be hell for him/her.

[and-justice-for-all]

59. +1

[optimal-tomato]

67. +1

Everyone's free to express their own views, and their assessment of views presented to them. If your faith (or lack of faith) is so weak that it can't withstand criticism, then that is a reflection on your faith (or lack of faith), not the criticism.

[TexasObserver]

73. Indeed. Free Will versus Destiny is a great argument.

I am troubled with the viciousness that accompanies disagreements over beliefs in things that are inherently UNKNOWN. It's not as if anyone can prove there is a God, muchless THEIR God.

[hedgehog]

188. It's not that one's faith can't withstand criticism, it's that after

a while it's gets tiresome to see the same rude comments presented over and over as if they are samples of sparkling wit.

[TexasObserver]

203. You should try to do as Jesus taught you.

I don't care. The same whiners complain every time religion is discussed.

Don't you ever tire of complaining about what others think of your religion? None of this is new to you. It is unreasonable of you to expect others to tip toe around your personal beliefs.

[timtom]

78. I've made this point on several other threads:

It finally isn't about disagreeing, or arguing theological points.

It's all about tone.

"Religion sucks."
"woo-woo talking to sky fairies"

That sort of rhetoric is less than useless. And, it seems to abound here.
Comments of that type pop up whenever Christianity is even remotely suspected.

Tone.

And wit.

[TexasObserver]

141. It's about the religious complaining that their beliefs aren't respected.

I don't respect most of the silly beliefs that the religious embrace. If I told you that I believed a cold was caused by a spell someone had cast, you'd think that was pretty stupid, and you'd be right. Religious beliefs are not that far removed from believing in gnomes, trolls, fairies, and the like.

This is a progressive site. If you want support for your religious beliefs, you should find a religious board, where people worship that kind of stuff. This is a site that values logic, reason and science, not superstition and a belief in the supernatural.

You are free to believe anything you wish, but don't expect the thoughtful to respect those beliefs.

[timtom]

150. You demonstrate a profound lack of

depth and insight into philosophical matters.

Ya might wanna read some stuff: Baghavid Gita, some Baha'i writings, maybe "Zen Flesh, Zen Bones", the Koran, the Bible, some Merleau-Ponty, for openers.

I always chuckle when some lame materialist dismisses what his senses don't reveal to him.

What statements about reality would you make if you were born blind,for example? "Color? Doesn't exist!"

The "trolls, fairies" meme are so kindergarten.

But I know you have a handle on the nature of the Universe, cuz Dawkins spelled it out for you.

[TexasObserver]

154. Nonsense.

I've read all writings you mention, and many, many more. My position comes from knowledge, not ignorance. I can tell by your post you don't have anything important to contribute, and will treat your comments accordingly.

[timtom]

163. Disagree with your high-handedness, eh?

Equals "nothing to contribute".

Tee hee!

[Arugula Latte]

187. Many of us have read the Bible -- and that's why we're aghast that people put any stock in it.

That is one freaky ass book, full of contradictions. Yes, the people who made it up had vivid imaginations, I'll give them that. And I love how incest produced the human race, where a man and a woman had two sons and, well, you figure it out from there.

[timtom]

200. You guys are looking at fingers pointing to the moon

and not seeing the moon.

But, more importantly, you are justifying trashing the views of some of your fellow DUers because it's so terribly important for us to know how smart you are. You are incapable of meaningful dialogue. At no time have I challenged another's views. What I do is challenge the use of cheap diatribes as a substitute for vigorous dialogue.

"I think religion is stupid." serves no purpose other than to bitterly denounce.

There are several posters on this thread who have disagreed with religion without name-calling.

You and that Texas fellow aren't among them.

[TexasObserver]

204. It's great literature in places, and mainly fiction.

[hedgehog]

190. It's not that the beliefs aren't respected, but that the persons

holding the beliefs aren't respected.

[TexasObserver]

207. Lack of respect is earned.

By conduct.

If you want respect, stop trying to force others to tip toe around you and your beliefs. No amount of crying, cursing, or screaming on your part is going to make me suddenly accept your point of view.

Turn the other cheek. Shake the dust off your feet. Or, just accept that you don't control the universe and the opinions of everyone in it. If you want my respect, you'll have to gain it by behaving more maturely than you have.

[Political Heretic]

170. Overgeneralize much?

[TexasObserver]

208. Redundant much?

Find a new word.

[Political Heretic]

230. Not its actually not

"generalize" and "overgeneralize" - both words - are different things.

[Arugula Latte]

184. You're right, TexasObserver. They think the "Faith" label is equal to a "No Criticism" label.

I respect facts, not "faith" -- which, as Mark Twain said, is believing what you know ain't so.

[TexasObserver]

202. They think that it's a one way street.

It's never about them respecting the different beliefs other holds, but about others respecting their beliefs. They don't know HOW to respect the beliefs of others, because they spend their entire lives expecting others to bend to their curious ways.

[Eryemil]

323. Exactly, if you don't want to be told that your beliefs are irrational then simply...

...don't fucking mention them in every fucking sentence.

No idea is above scrutiny and no belief is sacred. The biggest scam of religion has been to convince the masses that religious ideas somehow automatically deserve respect simply because some people really want them to be true.

I don't have to to respect your beliefs. The most you can ask of me is that I not gut you like a pig and hang you from the city square for holding them; that I do not prevent you from practicing them (as long as they don't interfere with my life) and that I do not keep you from speaking about them.


"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
In other words: grow the fuck up!

[anneboleyn]

211. I agree with you. In fact in my field, academia, I have encountered far more of the former.

Anyone who demonstrates any religious belief (unless that belief is in a very obscure, "protected" sort of religion or even say wiccan) will be completely ridiculed (usually behind their backs) and judged as being intellectually inferior, regardless of field or of the quality of their work. I have seen it across disciplines.

[CBHagman]

326. I don't recall hearing the term "evangelatheism" before.

But yes, that's what I'm seeing. I have to admit I had expected more of a live-and-let-live attitude than the aggressive tone I've noticed at DU only in the last couple of years.

[anonymous171]

30. WHAT!? Are you serious?

Plenty of atheist types post inflammatory anti-religious threads on here. Why, just look at this one:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6038902&mesg_id=6038902

[TexasObserver]

36. Yes, I'm serious.

The thread you linked is hardly an "atheist type inflammatory" thread.

[pnwmom]

41. Check out post #5 for an example of the attacks that are constantly

directed against people of faith on DU.

If you have a religious faith according to this person, you are an "irrational fool."

[TexasObserver]

46. Why don't you follow the instructions of Jesus on this topic?

If you're a Christian, you have to know what Jesus told you to do when someone offends you. Did he say "pester them until they agree with you"? Did he say "get mad and call them out"?

My biggest problem with the religious is they almost never follow the teachings they purport to believe. You're angry that your choice of a set of rather bizarre beliefs are not more readily accepted by those who value science and reason over myth and superstition.

Who said "if you love me, you'll keep my commandments"?

Who said "turn the other cheek"?

Who said "shake the dust off your feet"?

You fail to follow any of those instructions, and you get angry when posters don't treat your religious beliefs as their own. Where in the Bible does Jesus support your actions?

I'm not a Christian, but I know what Jesus taught.

[A HERETIC I AM]

117. I don't know if you intended to or not, T.O., but you quoted my sig line.

I'm flattered.

[TexasObserver]

135. Did not know that. Coincidence.

Wrote it off the top of my head.

The history of religion and science is a curious one. Science was the basis for astro theology, a way to preserve what was at its core scientific knowledge - the position and movement of celestial bodies. But over time, the stories and the belief in "gods" associated with the heavens outlived the scientific aspect, and the mythology of religions grew.

Ultimately, religion became its own force and has since treated science as an interloper. Great scientists have had to overcome the superstitions of religion for millennia. We've actually lost ground in that fight the past 50 years. And the primary reason for those losses? Why, the adamant demands of the religious that their baseless superstitions be given the weight of scientific evidence.

[A HERETIC I AM]

142. I can't possibly claim ownership of such a simple phrase. I merely wrote it down.

I agree completely with your post. Many authors have pointed out in the past that science has dragged religion into the future kicking and screaming for centuries. What astounds me about your point re: the last 50 years is not so much the push-back but its success.
One of my favorite cartoons on this subject;

[TexasObserver]

144. Ha! That's a great cartoon!

I don't care for deus ex machina in science or film.

[pnwmom]

124. Where am I pestering people or getting mad and calling them out?

Jesus never said people can't discuss issues with one another.

[TexasObserver]

136. Uh ... everywhere.

[rd_kent]

109. Thats not an attack

that is a statement with a valid point

[pnwmom]

125. Of course it's an attack.

Only an irrational fool would say otherwise.

[TokenQueer]

129. "Irrational fool"? Hey wait! That's OUR line.

:P

[pnwmom]

134. LOL.

:)

[TexasObserver]

137. WWJD?

I think he'd tell you that your conduct isn't remotely close to the conduct he encouraged.

You do know what he said about NOT calling anyone a FOOL, don't you?

[spoony]

217. Cute.

Baiting people then critiquing their reactions. But it's an old play, only the very new at this will be impressed.

[TexasObserver]

227. Thanks. Good of you to admit you're wrong.

[spoony]

228. Hmm, the inability to form conclusions that flow from conversation

isn't exactly an endearing trait. In other words, I have no idea what you're talking about. Maybe you think I'm some other poster.

[TexasObserver]

229. Of course I accept your apology.

Since your posts have no bearing to mine, I thought I'd return the favor.

[timtom]

331. I can't believe TexasObserver!

I think this person has SOME intelligence, but, except for one post upthread, has failed to demonstrate that intelligence resoundingly.

[pnwmom]

235. I didn't call anyone a fool. But if the shoe fits . . . nt

[rd_kent]

108. And whats wrong or inflammatory about that?

Pretty much speaks the TRUTH, huh?

[sarcasmo]

244. What is an Atheist type?

[pnwmom]

39. Not on DU. Here most of the nastiness is from atheists to believers of any faith.

[TexasObserver]

48. That's the kind of self indulgent victim playing that offends so many here.

It wasn't atheists who passed Prop 8.

It's not atheists keeping gays from getting married.

It's not atheists teaching students the world is 6000 years old and that Jesus rode dinosaurs.

It's not atheists who have held the presidency and every major office in America.

Atheists are beat down by your religion all over America. No one will kill you faster than a person who believes in his or her God, and finds out you don't.

[Jennicut]

90. Those are more conservative Christians, in my church being gay is no issue

My Pastor is very tolerant of others. Many churches are no longer right wing bastions of hate. In fact, in my church we pray for the President every Saturday/Sunday. Liberals are not looked down on.
The vocal religious nuts do not represent all of us Christians but they might be more active against certain things, like gay marriage (which I am for and my state recognizes). Maybe its just I am in liberal CT.

[TexasObserver]

139. There are certainly areas where religion isn't such a negative force.

But on the whole, at least in America, religion is held closely by the most closed minded, bigoted individuals. There's a reason why most Republicans go to church and why most who go to church vote Republican. Consistency of prejudices.

[Thothmes]

237. Have you been in any AA communities

recently. Do you find them closed mided, bigoted.

[Jennicut]

242. Well, up here many of us Yankees go to church but don't shove it in anyone's face

LOL.

There is a mindset in New England that you don't interfere in other people's business and you don't shove your views down anyone else's throat.
I don't know if I could ever live anywhere else because of that.

[pnwmom]

121. And it also wasn't progressive people of ANY faith who did those things.

(Except for holding political office.)

[rd_kent]

149. Perhaps if people of faith took back their religion, we wouldn't have this problem.

Moderates of all religions should be held accountable when people do insane things in the name of religion. If moderates took responsibility for their religion, it would solve most of the problems.

[Telly Savalas]

226. So if a radical Muslim in Indonesia explodes a bomb that kills people

it's the responsibility of Unitarians living in South Dakota?

What specific actions should those South Dakotans be taking to "take back the religion"?

If your worldview is more correct than those South Dakotan Unitarians, shouldn't it ultimately be your responsiblity to convince all people of faith how wrong they are?

[rd_kent]

302. No, Its the responsibility of other

muslims, just when a xtian fundie kills a doctor or bombs an abortion clinic, its the responsibility of the xtians. Whats so difficult to understand about that?

[Mythsaje]

55. Pagans get it too...

And the atheists here refuse to acknowledge there's a problem.

[Control-Z]

68. That is only because

the "believers" do not recognize their comments to be offensive. They are. But they feel entitled to say anything they want, to anyone they want, whenever they want. They make their beliefs known. They spout off during any and every discussion. Doesn't matter the subject. It is always ok to bring their god into it. They push their religious beliefs on the rest of us. And they expect us to graciously, and quietly, accept all their gawd talk.

[spoony]

172. You must be joking.

Are you talking about DU?? This DU? A place where believers "spout off during any and every discussion. Doesn't matter the subject"?? Utter nonsense.

[Political Heretic]

173. Another mass generalization.

:eyes:

[timtom]

330. Couldn't you please

provide a couple of examples?

Truthfully, I've not seen a post of that sort coming from non-atheists here on DU (not saying they don't exist).

[Christa]

167. Thank you!! NT

[bobbolink]

210. Oh, of course you are right. Like saying that all Christians should be killed.

That's not hate, and so very "progressive"

It must be nice to always be on the "right" side, no matter what.

[Name removed]

213. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

216. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[madfloridian]

2. Religious people should respect us enough not to force laws..

regulating people's lives in the name of their God.

Until then I will post about the union of government and religion....a terribly scary thing.

[bertman]

4. I'll second that, Madflo.

[pnwmom]

123. No one, believer or not, wants to have to follow the dictates of someone else's faith.

Many people of faith strongly believe in the separation of Church and State because it protects EVERYBODY.

[leftstreet]

3. I wish people would stop talking about religion on political forums n/t

[madfloridian]

6. I wish politicians would stop forcing religious laws on us

.

[leftstreet]

15. Amen!

:o

[optimal-tomato]

75. Hell yeah!

[Solly Mack]

94. True that

[LostInAnomie]

5. Well, once religions start using rationality and reason to defend their positions...

... I'll actually think about respecting them.

Until then, I have no reason to pay any heed to what a bunch of irrational fools believe.

[and-justice-for-all]

58. +1

[spoony]

174. Classy. And why should people you insult

try to discuss anything with you? Is ripping on people your idea of "rationality and reason"?

[LostInAnomie]

249. No. Not believing in a magic man in the sky with a beard...

... and all the other irrational crap religious fools believe makes me rational. They have the right to their opinion, but if all they have backing them up is superstition, I have the right to mock them.

[timtom]

292. Tweet! Tweet!

and tweedly-flipping-dee!

"Magic man in the sky with a beard"

What'd I tell you all?

What did I say?

Bwaaa-haaa-haaa!

[LostInAnomie]

294. I'm sorry, exactly where is that description incorrect?

Essentially, that is what all Abrahamic religions believe. Some magic man, out where no one can see him, is sitting back and judging us. And, somehow I'm the crazy one for not believing it? HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Even the non-Abrahamic religions expect us to believe in irrational, non-factual, non-evidentially based nonsense. I saw you post the example up-thread of a blind man not believing in color. The difference is that we can evidentially prove color. We have facts to prove its existence. We don't rely on the revelations and recollections of mad-men for our only proof.

The wailings of mad-men is all religionists have.

[timtom]

295. Well!

You certainly brought me up short!

There is a certain litmus test I use to evaluate profundity of thought and understanding of the ineffable.

You passed it. Certain catch-phrases, doncha know?

[Deep13]

312. If the counter arguments have been repeated...

...it is because the theistic arguments are always the same.

[timtom]

327. Here's what I find annoying.

I'm arguing for respect of person,
You and your ilk are arguing religion.

You seem unable to be able to discern what the fuck you're even arguing about.

One poster upthread was told he would earn respect when he...nah, that's too difficult. Here:

Hedgehog post 190 - "It's not that the beliefs aren't respected, but that the persons holding the beliefs aren't respected."

TexasObserver post 207 - "Lack of respect is earned. By conduct.
If you want respect, stop trying to force others to tip toe around you and your beliefs. No amount of crying, cursing, or screaming on your part is going to make me suddenly accept your point of view."

See? You people keep responding to the wrong question. Many of us wonder why.

(Personally, I think it's agenda, but I could be wrong.)

I challenge you to show me where, in this thread, one person of faith has remotely attempted to "accept their point of view" (as to what to believe).

See, little one, you're still arguing religion (which, finally, is inarguable).

[Deep13]

334. I know what you find annoying.

I think you are wrong. I'm not going to abide by debating rules that slant the deck in favor of religion. Those who believe religion is a bad thing have no duty to shut up and spare your feelings. And as far as my "ilk" goes, I take no responsibility for what anyone else says or writes.

[Deep13]

311. I blind man also can't believe in widgets, which don't exist. nt

[Deep13]

309. ripping on people?

No one has a right to have the factual basis of his or her beliefs go unchallenged. That's not ripping on people. That's trying to find the truth.

[timtom]

332. ???

Here's what some of us are concerned about:

Scenario 1 - Religion sucks all people of faith are stupid believing in a (I love this one) "sky fairy bearded man in the sky" (tell that one to a Sufi)

Scenario 2 - I disagree with the teachings of the Christian Bible. Here are some of the (substantive) points I find lacking

See the difference?

[Deep13]

333. Religion does suck, but religious people are not stupid.

At least not usually. Rather I see it as a product of how our minds work. We evolved needing to believe what our parents tell us and with an inate tendency to assign purpose to everything. These are important learning tools that allowed us to survive in pre-civilized days, but are now causing us to believe the impossible.

As far as the characterizations of your god, frankly the descriptions I have heard from believers are pretty fanciful and in my judgment deserving of ridicule.

[imdjh]

7. I'll defer to HL Mencken.

"We must respect the other fellow's religion,but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart." -H. L. Mencken

[xochi]

49. Agreed. I'd even say that all belief is overrated.

We cling to our beliefs (and our other neural habits) so desperately, out of so much fear of the unknown, but they're, in essence, so insubstantial. Clouds passing overhead are more real.

[Subdivisions]

9. Religion kills. n/t

[Cant trust em]

10. ....

:popcorn:

[donheld]

11. Aaaack!

sorry someone shoved a cross down my throat

[SammyWinstonJack]

95. +1

:spray:

[scheming daemons]

12. My god has a bigger dick than your god....

...so there.

[Teaser]

80. Really? Cause my god is Priapus

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=post&forum=389&topic_id=6038973&mesg_id=6039042

[Douglas Carpenter]

13. I agree with you 100,000%

if you can't respect other religious beliefs besides your own, then I have to wonder how you can call yourself a liberal.

Maybe I am just old fashioned and square but I find it bad form to disrespect a persons, country, family or religion.

On top of all of that, given that the vast majority of Americans do embrace some religious belief, anyone who thinks that there is even a remote possibility of building a progressive majority without the support of a whole lot of religious people of all persuasions are simply being delusional.

There certainly would have never been an abolitionist movement, an anti-child labor movement, an anti-war movement or a civil rights movement without the support of a a very large number of religious people.

Recognizing that working class people, poor people and most definitely third world peoples are by a large majority - religious people - to disrespect their beliefs is to show contempt for those whom those of the left would claim to be sympathetic to. One certainly cannot be pro-poor people or pro-third word and contemptuous of the beliefs of the vast majority of poor people and third world peoples. That is absurd.

[silverweb]

16. Fine tune the parameters.

I must respect the right of others to believe what they will in terms of religion. They must also respect my rights equally.

I do not have to respect their religion, believe in it, or acquiesce to dress or livestock, or sharecroppers, or attempt to destroy my belief se frevolously. I only have to respect their right to believe what they wish in terms of religion.

My standard line is: You demand respect, but you deserve respect only as you show it to others in equal measure. Check your measure.

Thanks again.

Dagny for Dolores Croneberger

[Ohio Joe]

17. hmmm

While I try not to be obnoxious about it... Honestly, I don't respect any religious beliefs.

Some would ask, how could a perfect God create a universe filled with so much that is evil. They have missed a greater conundrum: why would a perfect God create a universe at all?
Sister Miriam Godwinson, "But for the Grace of God"
Sid Meier's Alpha Centuari - Designed by Brian Reynolds.

[JackRiddler]

18. Why don't you move to Ireland, which just passed a blasphemy law...

and where people can now be fined 25000 EUR for saying things that members of any religion (sic) find outrageous.

Really, this just happened - look it up.

[imdjh]

100. Lots of blasphemy laws in the British Isles and Europe

From making it illegal for an English deli to sell in imperial measures, to a lawsuit against a Swedish lawyer who said that whiplash "victims" were essentially scammers, to prosecution of Geert Wilders for speaking his mind on the effects if immigration, seeking prosecution of Holocaust deniers, and probably some aimed at "global warming deniers".

Glad I live in America, where at least I know I'm free to hate Lee Greenwood with a passion, and say so.

[hedgehog]

193. Reminds me of the people who used to tell anti-war protesters

to go back to Russia.

[JackRiddler]

250. Me too, after I wrote it, but I didn't mean it that way.

And I didn't say "back to." After all, we antiwar protesters didn't come from Russia!

I was merely pointing out an alternative of a great place to live - no doubt about that - that has now, inexplicably, criminalized statements like, "God is imaginary," once believers express that this outrages them.

The OP seems to very much be in that vein.

[Deep13]

314. Holy shit!

It is now a crime in Ireland to tell the truth.

[azurnoir]

20. I respect others beliefs if your religous thats fine

but the cut off point IMO comes when people try to force by any means those beliefs on others or believe they are somehow superior because of them and I agree you can not be a liberal and disrespect other religious beliefs

eta-that applies to atheists too

[RandomThoughts]

21. If someones religious beliefs tell them to do something to society

That I think is wrong, I will respect their right to believe what they want, as I point out what they believe, and why I disagree with it.

People can believe any religion, but when they use it for a rational for actions that seem to be less then good, and those things are done in secret, then the religion becomes a motivating factor, or a common denominator of ideology of a group.

As an example, the fundamentals in Utah were religious. They taught children not to cry or feel, to be non passionate about anything. Heard that before? And their abuse of children makes their teachings a societal matter.

Anyone can believe what they want, but when they hit someone because of that belief, and use it as a rational, it becomes part of the conversation.

Although the stereotyping on religion here is a bit rampant.

[WillyT]

22. Face It Man... You Are A Fluke Of The Universe...

Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1NAwlepnSs

:evilgrin:

[snooper2]

23. that's real deep

:rofl:

[MajorChode]

24. It's not the views, it's the behavior that goes with it

I could really care less if someone wants to pray to a bearded white man who lives in the clouds or sacrifice goats on their backyard pentagram. So long as you're not bothering anyone else, believe what you want to believe and do what you want to do.

The problem comes in when they start using the collectiveness of their views for bigotry and to exclude others in society. I see far too much of this an not enough from those who are supposed to be leaders of those views to stand up against it. That's what I have no respect for and not individual views.

[western mass]

25. if a religious view conflicts w/ liberal values...I WILL bash

A "Liberal" is defined by a set of values. One of them isn't "respect for hate groups."

[Iggo]

27. Dayum!

:thumbsup:

[Irreverend IX]

26. Beliefs in things that cannot be proven by empirical observation do not deserve respect. nt

[anonymous171]

31. That's your belief. nt

[goclark]

33. Thank you for being so brave

to post what some of us are feeling.

It is extremely hurtful to be a Christian and posting at BU.

As progressives, we should stand for the rights of all people to worship or not worship as they please.

I would not presume to think that everyone should be a Christian but I am. I find great strength from my faith.

Why such hate ~ no one is trying to make anyone here a Christian, no one.

[tkmorris]

43. It's pretty damned hurtful to be an Atheist and just live in the US

If all I had to do to escape the hatred we get was avoid one website I'd be happy as a clam.

You're not persecuted. WE ARE.

[hfojvt]

71. I might find that argument to be more credible

if I hadn't previously spent 4 or 5 years as an atheist. Never noticed the persecution. In fact, my best friends in college were all fundies.

[tkmorris]

77. I could care less what you find credible

I have spent a lifetime as as an Atheist, your dabbling as one in college (bandcamp) means little. Try living in the real adult world as one. Try sending your kids to school armed with the information that Mommy and Daddy are Atheists. Try fielding sly questions on job interviews by answering honestly that you don't believe. Try handling a theist judge who just learned you (apparently) worship the Antichrist. Try having a relationship with relatives or indeed ANYONE who firmly believes that it is impossible to have any sort of moral code without religion.

I AM an Atheist. I didn't dabble in it for a few years, on a lark. It's what I AM.

[rd_kent]

114. So you WERE an atheist?

What convinced you otherwise? I would really, in all seriousness, like to know.

[hfojvt]

168. certainly not a single event

I am not sure I would say I was 'convinced' either in the sense of absolute certainty. It's more of a path I choose to walk, and it seems to me that it's a good path, and unlike an atheist path it is one that allows me to hope there is something more at the end of my life than a permanent sleep. I take some comfort in that hope, even though I also often think it's probably a false hope. But I've gotta have something to keep me slogging on and not just sinking in the swamps of sadness.

[spoony]

224. And why should we have to avoid it?

What about being hated by people in the real world makes it okay to take it out on posters here who aren't like those people?

[spoony]

232. Nevermind, I already have my answer from elsewhere.

What a sad, sad thread.

[beam me up scottie]

278. "If all I had to do to escape the hatred we get was avoid one website I'd be happy as a clam"

+1+1+1!

Truth! :headbang:

[Tan Gent]

96. Maybe this will help

[Hansel]

322. Awesome chart. I need send it to my extreme Catholic inlaws.

I'm so sick of the "we're being persecuted" viral emails. The funny part is that every email whines about being persecuted by the non-religious while at the same time pointing out that the non-religious shouldn't have their way because they are only 15% of the population. That 15% of the population must be powerful as hell. Well if we believed in hell.

The irony seems to go right over their heads.

[rd_kent]

113. Who is preventing you from worshiping?

No one is. You can get up, pray to your god, go to your church, all without interference. You are free to worship anytime you like. But that freedom ENDS when you bring it up and it gets in the way of MY freedoms NOT to do those things. WHen xtians and others try to make laws based on the bible, that has crossed the line.

[orleans]

34. oh please

watch this story about these "christians" and tell me i should respect this crap

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x335521

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x335463

[snooper2]

37. There is a cool site for you then

It's called raptureready.com ( I've been banned from there already :rofl: )

[ashling]

44. The point is, that those people are not

representative of all people who claim to be religious

[snooper2]

38. There is a cool site for you then

It's called raptureready.com ( I've been banned from there already :rofl: )

[Touchdown]

47. Do you guys ever give it a rest?

"I'm a Christian! I'm picked on!" The martyr/persecution complex is sickening. Grow some skin.

[TexasObserver]

50. well said

Jesus told them that if they suffer for his namesake, it's to their glory.

So why all the complaining?

[Touchdown]

52. Paul told them they would be victimized a couple of volumes later.

I think it was in 1st Corinthians and the Half Blood Prince. He said they will be persecuted, and so they have to fish around and extrapolate quite a bit to make that prophecy come true.

Lions are going extinct, so finding persecution these days is pretty slim pickings.

[TexasObserver]

53. Like European basketball. A lot of flopping.

The biggest floppers in the NBA are Euros. Varejao, Scola, Ginobili, to name three.

[charlie]

70. "1st Corinthians and the Half Blood Prince"

*snarf* :D

[Toasterlad]

111. "1st Corinthians and the Half Blood Prince"

That might, in all seriousness, be the funniest thing I have EVER read. I am totally stealing it from you.

[scheming daemons]

63. Yes... "I'm part of an oppressed minority that represents 80% of this country!"

:eyes:

[TankLV]

105. THANK YOU!!! It needs to be said...over and over and over again...

some NINTY PERCENT profess to be "christian" and somehow THEY are the "persecuted" ones...

that is LAUGHABLE at best...

[hfojvt]

161. the percentages seem to be reversed on DU

or maybe ya'll make up for lack of numbers in volume and obnoxiousness.

[TankLV]

268. intelligence was never your strong point, was it...

[hfojvt]

298. actually it is

There are good odds that I have more education than you, have done more reading, got better grades and could beat you in chess. Not 100%, of course, but even if you were in the 5% above me would not make me a nidiot.

But you certainly proved my point about the obnoxiousness.

[Fumesucker]

51. When the Atheist Witnessess come uninvited knocking on my door..

I will agree that atheists have become as shove-it-down-your-throat extremist as the theists.

What you fail to see is that what you endure on DU we atheists endure in the rest of American society. Would you willingly change places with us, endure attacks and discrimination in the rest of your life in exchange for being free from such here on DU?

How would you like it if the very coin of the realm in your pocket bore the legend "There Is No God"?

How would you like it if every politician ended every speech with "There Is No God"?

How would you like it if theists were the most distrusted group in America, barred by (unconstitutional) laws from holding office in many states?

Of course there are rigid and defensive atheists, we are but only human and share all the foibles and quirks of the rest of humanity (save one).

I suspect however that if you go to a country that is less blatantly theistic than the USA then the atheists will be less rigid and defensive, being constantly attacked tends to make people rigid and defensive.

Matthew 7:3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

[Mythsaje]

54. I'm an agnostic and I don't like it either...

I don't like watching bullies of any belief system (or lack thereof) thinking they can ride roughshod over everyone else.

[Touchdown]

56. Talk to the big guy then. Have us smited/smoted/smutted

You got all the power in the universe to crush us. All you have to do is kneel and tell him to punish us with eternal damnation for sassing off to you.

[scheming daemons]

64. +1

[sendero]

82. LOL....

... they can't even get God to pay off their outrageous credit card debts. No was He is going to deal with you.

[and-justice-for-all]

57. I respect your right to worship as you so choose..

but my free speech rights says I can say that I still find religion childish and a burden.

I suggest that you not wear your invisible friends on your sleeve.

[SidDithers]

99. +1...,nt

Sid

[Q3JR4]

60. Speaking as a former

christian-turned pagan-turned agnostic-turned atheist, everyone has a right to believe whatever it is they want to believe. Don't push your beliefs on me, don't legislate your religious practices.

Even if you don't step on my toes and I don't step on your toes that issue is going to come up. In a polite society one doesn't discuss religion or politics and since--in this country--religion influences politics and this is a political board, I don't see how we can get away from friction caused directly by this issue every now and then.

Secondly, If you want me to accept the belief that a giant sperm whale spat the universe whole from it's holy bile ducts, it's simply not going to happen. I will, however, tolerate that belief (and any other) as long as it doesn't effect me negatively or positively. Don't make me eat certain foods on certain days or refrain from doing certain things on certain days because you want to convince the holy curtain rod not to end life as we know it in the universe, and I will defend your right to do whatever it is you need to do to protect your soul.

Every one of us has a right to tolerance, but not respect. Tolerance is what you give to anyone who wants to live however it is they want to live, or believe whatever it is they want to believe. You don't respect random beliefs, unless you've chosen to give that belief a place of honor in your life. The only beliefs I hold to be true are those that can be shown to be true empirically and so require no belief.

So, yeah, I guess I don't respect religious beliefs.

But I do tolerate them.

Q3JR4.
"The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins." - Oliver Wendell Holmes

[TexasObserver]

65. Good assessment of "tolerate" versus "respect."

[LeftyMom]

61. Cue pie chart.

[scheming daemons]

66. +1 billion

Great pie chart

[TexasObserver]

69. That is terribly accurate, too.

In God We Trust

God Bless America sung at sporting events.

Prayer before our government officials meet.

The Ten Commandments in government buildings.

Christians baptizing each other on Reality TV.

It permeates the culture, and Christians never stop swinging their angry meat axe, always railing about the non believers. Not all Christians, but a huge number of them, in the name of their religion.

[spoony]

93. It was a given that would show up here.

Of course, it's just as inaccurate here as anywhere it's been used on DU. People are asking for respect, not saying they're "oppressed." All posting that does is show others that you a) don't understand what the discussion is about and b) are not interested in civility.

[enlightenment]

115. Then perhaps they should stop suggesting they are being

oppressed.

What you're saying is that the faithful should be allowed to bring their faith into the conversation at any point, for any reason, without comment - because from your perspective that is not offensive or disrespectful of others, it's just their personal belief.

You (and others, including the OP) fail to recognize that it is the constant insertion of faith into discussion that becomes offensive AND disrespectful to people who do not share the belief.

If someone rings my doorbell with the intent to proselytize to me, they are being both offensive and disrespectful, in my view. In their view, they are simply 'sharing'. Do I have to be polite, simply because they want to share? Why should I grant them any more respect than they have shown me, by appearing at my door uninvited and intruding on my time?
(Note in my own defense - I wasn't raised by hyenas and as long as they take 'not interested, thanks' as an answer I will be polite and gently shut the door rather then slam it in their face).

The point is that many people of faith believe that they have a right to 'share' at any time with any one in any situation or conversation - and many don't seem to grasp that it is the 'sharing' that others find disrespectful. I can count on one hand the number of times a person of faith has asked me if I mind that they constantly reference their deity - they generally just assume that it is their right.

Which it is - but it isn't very civil. I don't bring my lack of faith into conversation on a daily basis - why should I unless it is the topic of the conversation? If I did do that I am sure that those of faith who had to listen to me would find my constant references at first tedious, then annoying, and finally (and likely after not very long) offensive and disrespectful of their faith.

It's a two-way street.

[spoony]

169. What you're describing does not match DU's dynamics.

At all. You're talking about people knocking on your door as if that has any bearing on this discussion. Believers here generally do not start threads outside the religion forums about our religion. On the other hand, we are constantly treated to threads full of nastiness and venom directed at us. Not just our beliefs--us. So you sometimes get OPs like this one. People can only take so many posts calling them insane, dangerous idiots before it becomes intolerable.

That is not about oppression, it's about people being decent people to each other.

[enlightenment]

218. Which is what I was trying to discuss. Civilly.

You say that 'people can only take so many posts . . .'.

I also said that people can only tolerate so much - only I was talking about the religious side continually bringing their faith to the discussion. Which they do, whether you care to admit it or not, even here on DU.

I used the concept of door-knockers as an example; it was, perhaps, a poor one. That doesn't change the point of my post.

I agree, civility often takes a back seat in this debate, but I only see one side whinging about the nastiness and venom - even though it is spread around in equal measure by BOTH sides. And what that comes down to, spoony, is the one side believing that neither their belief system or their willingness to share it with everyone - regardless of whether or not others want to share it with them - should be questioned or criticised in any way.

It would be nice if you could at least try and understand why atheists find the constant, casual referencing of faith, religion, deity, and doctrine tiresome and, often, offensive. It might make it a little bit easier for you to grasp why we find posts like this OP both typical - and laughable.

I don't expect you to try, though.

[spoony]

222. But rudeness is not only encountered

as the result of a religious person talking about religion here. And again, I must most strenuously disagree with your perception of the interactions on DU, because mine is wholly opposite yours. DUers bring up their religions far, far less frequently than people in real life do, perhaps in part because they know what the reaction would be. It is not scorn we invite. It crops up on news threads, discussions about science--even when the topic is not about something like creationism, and even in unrelated threads where you're just not expecting it.

And, lastly, while I realise you may find references to religion tiresome, unless the actual content is offensive I do not understand taking offense. Should it really offend people to hear others state things about themselves so long as they are not spoken against someone else?

[enlightenment]

234. You are of course free to disagree with my perception -

I am not at all surprised your experience is different.

I agree, religion does crop up in news threads, discussions about science and in various unrelated threads . . . but that's not what you're saying, is it?

As to the last; for myself, I find the constant referencing of religion/deity/faith/etc more tiresome than offensive - but I admit that some days it does pass into that realm. Yes, it is annoying and offensive to have someone else expect that it is perfectly acceptable to share their faith whenever they feel like it. Why? Because I am expected to keep my mouth shut and allow them free range of expression, regardless of how illogical I find their statements. Failure to allow them an uncontested platform is proof that I am uncivil - however civil my response to their statements might be.

It's pretty much a no-win situation - and over time it has led to a hardening of the positions on both sides.

Regardless. You see this through the filter of your experience. I see it through mine. I won't suggest you are wrong if you'll refrain from suggesting that my perception is wrong because you see it differently.


edited for correction

[timtom]

329. Say...

do you have an example of "the religious side continually bringing their faith to the discussion"?

Why, this thread might even offer up a good example. (No fair picking one of the myriad atheist posts which abound.)

[LeftyMom]

162. Dude, I could accurately reply to 90% of your posts with that chart.

So quitcherbitchen.

[Name removed]

171. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LeftyMom]

199. On second thought, I'm going to take a hint from your imaginary friend.

Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you. Matthew 7:6

[TexasObserver]

212. Good quote.

Everything they do wrong is attacked by Jesus in his quotes from the Bible. That's what's so hilarious about the way they pitch a fit. First they create a religion that isn't remotely like the man they claim to follow, then they ignore EVERY instruction he gave them.

Arrogance, bigotry, hatefulness - these are the most favored attributes of the self righteous religious person. I wish Jesus was coming back, so I could watch him tell them all they're an embarrassment to him.

[spoony]

220. Just more of the same

Do you think you're winning points by acting like that? Are you doing it for the high-fives of your fellow anti-theists? Or does it simply give you personal satisfaction to trash people?

[LeftyMom]

231. Yep, you've figured it out, we're all just trying to score atheist points.

I do in fact get points for pissing you off which I can redeem for valuable godless prizes. It's like those old IGA green stamps.

The good news is that if you throw one more tantrum like the one that got deleted upthread I can get one of those fancy stainless wastebaskets signed by PZ Meyers (desecrated Jezits not included,) but I think I'm going to keep saving them up and get the Christopher Hitchens bar set.

[beam me up scottie]

280. "one of those fancy stainless wastebaskets signed by PZ Meyers (desecrated Jezits not included,)"

:rofl:

[Duke Newcombe]

306. Great opportunistic use of Scripture...well played.

Now...I'm wondering why would you even use it, what, it being from a follower of an "imaginary friend"?

[LeftyMom]

325. It's not half bad advice, even if placed in the mouth of a fictional figure.

Kind of like quoting that bit from Star Wars: "Do or do not. There is no 'try.'" It's sometimes appropriate advice.

Only most of us realize Yoda's fictional.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

206. Of what "lot" do you speak? Please describe it. -nt

[saltpoint]

84. Religions can sanction the pure intent. I don't think we're stingy about

that point or unkind to those people.

Religions can also be manipulative and cruel. I do think the manipulation and cruelty are the source of the problem and justifiably prompt scorn.

A church that rails against Hallowe'en trick-or-treating strikes me as howlingly stupid. Telling kids that a bag of candy and a ghost costume leave them "vulnerable to the occult" is ridiculous.

People who discover images of Christ and Mary on a Ritz cracker need to be institutionalized.

If churches remain tax-exempt and are unfettered in pursuit of their tenets they must also remove their obnoxious hindends from the world of politics. When they insist on pushing their private beliefs onto public policy, they trespass and are subject to appropriate response.

[hedgehog]

194. Some people find the wonder of the universe in a sunset.

Some people find it in a pancake. Isn't it a bit snobbish to make fun of the pancake people?

[saltpoint]

197. I like pancakes just fine. Blueberry pancakes especially. But my relation to

the pancake is not ordinarily greater than human-to-pancake.

People who find the Virgin Mary on their pancakes are wackos.

[RagAss]

85. Read my sig line. Accept the challenge and get back to me with an answer. If you can !

[spoony]

92. ....what does that have to do with the OP? nt

[undeterred]

87. I agree with you.

Its all about respect.

[TokenQueer]

88. Why are Christians whining? Their holy war to overthrow our government seems to be working.

The United States was not founded as a Christian nation. In a treaty with Tripoli that was drafted under George Washington in 1796 and signed by John Adams in 1797 the following was stated:

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

Yet just this week we were informed that the architect of the Capitol was instructed to etch the words "In God We Trust" onto the Capitol building.

Madfloridian has been maintaining a thoroughly terrifying and highly informative thread on the super-secret "C Street" cult which includes such "holy men" as Sanford and Ensign.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6018961

This is not about message board niceties. This about protecting our nation from a theocratic coup.

[RagAss]

138. Agreed .....This is my Country, Not your Church !

[muffin1]

148. Good post!

I guess if enough fundies say this is a chritian nation it will become true. I call bullshit on that.

[beam me up scottie]

281. "The United States was not founded as a Christian nation." I wish I could believe that.

It always has been and always will be. They own it, they run it and we're lucky they've moved on from burning us at the stake to barely tolerating our presence.

You've come a long way, baby.

[Jennicut]

89. I am very religious but I hate the religion in our politics and the persecution of people who don't

believe.
My husband is a church organist and choir director. Before I met him, I was agnostic but I have gotten more and more involved in the church over the years. Its a Lutheran Church and very tolerant. However, as a Christian I do not feel slighted against in any way. Like many here said, we are the majority religion in the US. Atheists are treated badly by the right wing Christians. I think we have freedom of and freedom from religion here and yet its shoved down our throats all the time....like with the Capitol visitor's center. Ridiculous. Keep it out of the state.

[SidDithers]

97. Religious beliefs are no more deserving of respect...

than political beliefs, economic beliefs or social beliefs.

Why should religious beliefs be respected?

Sid

[beam me up scottie]

282. We don't respect the religious beliefs of freepers, nor should we.

They would gladly finish us off out given the chance.

[Solly Mack]

98. On a message board you're given options

- called ignore and hide thread

In real life, just continue to surround yourself with people who think like you, who never question your beliefs, and who you can always count on to see your expressions of faith as a brand label for "one of us."

In other words, never leave your comfort zone.

You're currently out of your comfort zone.

[imdjh]

101. But seriously- do you have respect for all religions? nt

[Douglas Carpenter]

102. I wonder why bashing religion is acceptable but bashing nationalism or patriotism is not at all

acceptable in all but the most extreme circles.

They are both deeply emotional and carry with them beliefs that are fundamentally irrational. They both require a deeply flawed and uncritical mythological view of history. Still they are both ideas embraced by the vast - overwhelming majority of people. Thus I feel it incumbent upon me not to knowingly and needlessly cause offense.

Even on this and most other progressive forum, there are rules enforced against saying things that are unabashedly unpatriotic. I don't dispute the appropriateness of such rules. Because saying things that causes deep offense and does little to facilitate any understanding does no one any good at all.

Still, on a purely personal level, I do not understand patriotic emotions and I frankly believe that when these emotions are generated in a major world military power, they cause far more harm than good and are quite dangerous. Still the principle that one should not knowingly hurt other peoples feelings is a rule of thumb I try to follow.

I once had a professor who said that during the Renaissance and the enlightenment, "nationalism became the new religion in the western world". After all, very few people in the western world feels it is acceptable to kill or die for Christ anymore. But to kill for the nation-state is the only acceptable form of killing that is actually still venerated in the modern world even in liberal circles and in unjust wars propagated by endless litanies of lies. Even in the Islamic world, most conflicts that do adopt the language of holy war, are actually conflicts involving ethno-nationalist or proto-nationalist movements. The religious language simply provides the moral legitimacy.

Not having these emotions myself used to get me into a lot of trouble with a lot of people, even some very liberal people. But I have learned that it is best not to cause offense that only leads people to closing their minds to more important issues.

Either way, the overwhelming majority of Americans are both religious and patriotic. There is no way it is even remotely possible to create a progressive majority while campaigning against either God or country.

[TankLV]

103. It's NOT the "non-religioius" "from the "left"" who are trying to SHOVE THEIR VIEWS ON EVERYONE ELSE

"Respect" is EARNED.

The FUNDY RELIGIOUS WACKOS have NOT and DESERVE NO RESPECT.

We must actively work AGAINST such SCUM - and I will never cease to untiol they are once more MARGINALLIZED as they should be!!!

[slackmaster]

104. Some religions are stupid

They can't all be right, but they can all be wrong.

[rd_kent]

106. There is a simple solution

Religious types should keep their religion to themselves and perhaps non religious types wouldn't tell them how they feel about it. Kinda like a "Don't ask, Don't tell" for believers.

[spoony]

225. So you agree with DADT?

And in many cases the hostility toward believers here is of its own accord.

[rd_kent]

264. C'mon man, stay on topic

This is not about DADT and you know it. I was trying to make a point.

[elocs]

107. "Bashing religion": it's what we do here.

I bet your thread has more UnRecs than it could ever overcome.

You would think that respect is a major part of being a Liberal, but when it comes to religion at DU you would be wrong, especially and particularly concerning Christianity where it is viewed that a Christian is a Christian is a Christian.

[Toasterlad]

110. When Christians Stop Telling Me I Can't Get Married and That Women Can't Have Abortions...

...they won't be subjected to my anger any more.

I don't "bash" anyone who hasn't bashed me first. The problem is not the non-religious people. The problem, by and large, is the judgmental, holier than thou, not-content-to-fuck-up-my-own-life-with-my-childish-fantasies-but-have-to-try-and-impose-them-on-you-too religious jackoffs.

[TexasObserver]

156. Thank You! It's the BASHING they do which should be addressed.

When a group embraces bigotry, ignorance, and mythology, opposing them is not BASHING them. They've appropriated that word and use it to describe all who logically see their beliefs as illogical and overbearing.

[spoony]

175. And on DU?

Why the anger toward liberal Christians? Where does that come from?

[Toasterlad]

284. I Only Get Angry With Christians Who Try to Pretend Their Church Isn't a Haven of Bigotry.

And, of course, those (MANY) christians who practice bigotry overtly.

You have never seen - and never will see - an OP from me "attacking" religion out of the blue, for no other reason than to criticize and ridicule christians or other religious people. Nor will you see such an OP from the vast majority of non-religious people on DU. What you HAVE seen - and will continue to see - are responses to posts of the numerous atrocities of bigotry, hate, intolerance and just plain evil that are committed on a regular basis by the any number of religious institutions, whether it be Fred Phelps latest hateful protest, the pope's latest anti-homosexual, anti-abortion, anti-free thought rant, the horrific treatment of gay men in Iran and other Islamic countries by the upright religious people there, and so on. When one of these atrocities is posted - as they are on almost a daily basis - it is completely rational and QUITE appropriate for those people in the maligned group, whichever it may be, to respond with anger toward a belief system that at best encourages and a worst demands this barbarism.

Enter the self-righteous religious DUer, who is not so concerned about whatever atrocity has just been committed as he is in making sure that NO ONE is attacking his faith just because members of his faith have been, say, gluing the anuses of gay men shut and then forcing them to drink diuretics, or, perhaps, claiming that gay people represent a worse threat to the United States than terrorism. To the religious DUer, it is the faith under "attack" that deserves the defense, not the people who are victims of the outrageous religious atrocity. And they ALL say the same thing: "Those people aren't TRUE Christians/Catholics/Muslims/Mormons."

NEWSFLASH: if you contribute money to the Catholic church, you are supporting intolerance and hate, not mention pedophilia and misogyny. If you support your Christian church of choice monetarily, there's a good chance your money is going to fund efforts like Prop 8 and other anti-same sex-marriage agendas across the country, not to mention abstinence programs like the ones killing thousands of Africans every year and anti-abortion groups that breed doctor-killers. The mormon connection to Prop 8 has been well-established. The barbarism of the Islamic clerics is a matter of record.

There ARE no "TRUE" christians/catholics/muslims/mormons, just as there are no "FALSE" christians/catholics/muslims/mormons. There are only religious people and their victims.

The correct response to a thread attacking a particular religion for its latest outrage isn't to defend the religion. It's to express SHAME at being in any way associated with that religion, followed by a pledge to do everything you can to make sure those responsible for the outrage are punished.

You don't get to be outraged at people outraged at your religion's outrages. If you do, you deserve every bit of venom directed at you.

[beam me up scottie]

286. Jesus Christ on a trailer hitch. Game. Set. Match. That's the post of the year.

That. Was. Awesome.

Can I quote you?

[Toasterlad]

288. Please Feel Free.

[redqueen]

112. It's really sad

that the world isn't yet all flowers and care bears and nobody says anything nasty to hurt anyone's feelings, but there it is. So if you don't want your faith criticized, then save it for a place where you can be certain not to have anyone disagree with you saying it.


Religion has infiltrated every aspect of government, and all it's done is empower those who would make their preferred religious delusions into law. In other countries, it's even worse. The hostility about the subject should really not be any surprise to anyone.

[saltpoint]

116. I think there is a reflexive reverence for the spiritually genuine. Also

I think there is reflexive disregard and scorn for the spiritually hypocritical.

There is a tendency in organized religions, no matter which one, to veer by design AND inadvertence toward some half-assed, watered-down, lame-brained version of its original expression. In the extreme examples you have on one hand the rag-tag desert wanderers in the ministry of Jesus and on the other, crystal cathedrals rising through the clouds on national tv.

There are degrees of that polarity, of course. But the polarity is still a polarity and IMO the cathedral builders -- whether a Catholic cloud-puncturer or a Protestant Megachurch -- make themselves huge targets.

"...it shall cause thy tower to fall
and make it be a pyre of flame
O God the pride of man
broken in the dust again."

[rrneck]

118. Claiming to be a christian

is to declare membership in a tribe. How bad does the tribe have to become before you get tired of being associated with them and start your own?

Here is the obligatory reference to the "One True Scotsman".

[spoony]

178. Well presumably you're a liberal

And despite that I cannot stop being liberal because they are my beliefs. Just as my religion is mine, and not belonging to Fred Phelps or anyone else.

[rrneck]

186. If and when liberalism

diverges significantly from what I think is right I'll shitcan it right quick.

The question is not whether or not one one agrees with their religion, but rather, when has their religion become something other than they thought it was.

I suspect Christianity jumped the shark around the middle of the fifteenth century, although there have no doubt been lots of fine christian people doing good in the world since then and will continue to do so.

[BurtWorm]

119. I don't respect your disrespect of my disrespect.

That's just the way life is. I'm not going to pretend to respect views I find ridiculous, any more than you're doing right now. I won't do what you're doing and say, "I've had enough of your ridiculous views and I don't see how you could be a liberal with them." But that's just me.

[leftofthedial]

120. what are you?

some kind of bible thumper?

[Lars39]

122. How much flack do you get in real life over your religious beliefs?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

126. This is a forum about "views". Political, philosophical, social, and religious.

Those views are are debated, questioned, refuted, bashed, and (on rare occasions) even agreed on.

Religion is a belief system and an institution that is not above the fray.

[Bluenorthwest]

127. When people co-opt their 'faith' and use it as a political device

they should not be surprised when it is treated as a political device. Try to grasp this. It is not up to others to sanctify your faith, it is up to you. But those religious people who go political profane their faith, and it is duplicitous and deceptive to suggest that certain political tools can not be responded to because they have been wrapped up in religious lingo.
When people politicize their faith, it is they themselves who have disrespected it. They are using it for their own worldly agendas.

[TokenQueer]

130. Yup.

:thumbsup:

[spoony]

179. We're talking about on DU.

So these excuses and rationalisations about the anger toward believers here are, frankly, pathetically thin.

[Sophie-Helene]

128. I've had enough of people bashing others for their religious views!!

I'm new here, so I don't have any knowledge of past experience on this particular website. But I would like to say that I enjoy a reasoned discussion about the historical background of different religions and the way they have evolved. This includes questioning their authenticity and the way people choose to translate these religious edicts into individual beliefs. I certainly agree that this should be done in the most respectful manner.

[BlooInBloo]

131. Poor persecuted christians.

[spoony]

180. Poor persecuted (fill in the blank)

Nice way to dismiss entire groups of people and excuse your rudeness toward them. Not that I'd expect anything different from you.

[BlooInBloo]

233. I dismiss the ones who whine about how persecuted they are in a country...

that they totally dominate. I make no excuses for that.

[saltpoint]

132. Progressives tend to mock the fundamentalists not because of the

fundies' religion but because of their failure to adhere to their religion.

Jerry Falwell was a self-important arrogant blob of bias and bigotry. No Christian was hurt in the composition and display of that sentence. Because Jerry Falwell was not a Christian.

[spoony]

182. Nope.

What we're talking about is not aimed at 'fundies' or hypocrites unless every believer is defined as such. This is about a group of DUers who think that wanton, unchecked hostility toward religious people is acceptable.

[saltpoint]

198. Sorry, no. Short of naming names, religioius belief here or anywhere else

is subject to the same Constitutional responsibility and privilege of free speech as it is a protected expression itself.

The Constitution that permits a television evangelist or the most quiet and anonymous monk to express their faith also sanctions others' right to criticize them. Not slander, but criticism.

There are no arbitrary lines to be drawn. Either the Constitution protects us all or it does not, and since it says it does, if I don't like Rev. Bill Moyers and/or Rev. John Danforth, I am entitled to say so. I can also use cartoons and humor and skits and so forth, so long as I do not libel or slander them.

Generally speaking I am not hogwild about tax-exempt authoritarianism.

[spoony]

223. Um, I am talking about name-calling, actually.

And this is not a 1st Amendment issue. It's an internet message board.

[saltpoint]

243. This is a message board? Well hells bells.

Honestly. I had no idea.

[HOLOS]

133. +1

[Name removed]

140. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mr Generic Other]

143. christianity is a social construct not a dictate from christ.

all groups are held together by a variety of structures that reinforce each other and serve to self-legitimize the group (this holds true for countries too). we have both a social structure and an economic system that are grossly out of balance and it is christians who defend that inequality since their own faith recognizes inequality among individuals (there can be only one "big G' in the sky and only one pope to represent him on earth and so on down the social triangle). the political structure, while touted as democratic, is run by the "chosen" who don't heed their constituents concerns or needs because the system subscribes less importance to those on the bottom than those on top. our governments are still legitimized by divine right as are wars and domestic and foreign policy.
it is my belief that man created god rather than the other way around, a probability that is constantly demonstrated by man's use of god as a tool for social. political, and economic control over others.
why is it that the powerful rarely fear the wrath of god while they insist that the rest of us do?

[TexasObserver]

146. Yes, Christianity tends to have little of Jesus in it.

Reading the teachings of Jesus, one would never imagine the dogma his alleged adherents have created.

The mother of Jesus as an icon? Ridiculous.

The Pope as God's voice on earth? Ridiculous.

The theology of prosperity? Ridiculous.

Prayer in public places? Ridiculous.

Support for the death penalty? Ridiculous.

Support for wars of conquest? Ridiculous.

[Occulus]

145. I can't respect a religion that calls me an abomination

Sorry.

[dysfunctional press]

147. religion is a balm for weak minds, and the bane of civilization...

imho.

[spoony]

183. You should take the h out of that.

There is no humility in what you said. Or truth, but that's another matter.

[dysfunctional press]

191. h is for honest.

which part, in your opinion isn't true?

[spoony]

195. Then you should still remove it. nt

[dysfunctional press]

196. all say-so and no why-so...?

typical. :eyes:

[beam me up scottie]

283. Honesty offends you? So we should lie and say we love being dominated by a tyranny of hypocrites?

You first. I'm sure you personally welcome our Dominionist Overlords.

[Rob H.]

151. "...if you can't respect other religious beliefs..."

I respect people's right to believe whatever they want to believe, but the beliefs themselves? There's no way that's happening, especially if I think their religious beliefs are stupid, oppressive, dangerous, or all of the above.

[seabeyond]

152. i agree with you. we dont allow religion to interfer with our christianity.

on du, christians believe, speak out, vote for seperation of religion and state. many on du seem to be challenge with seeing the distinction.

[Reeta77]

269. +1 n/t

[lame54]

153. Leave Tom Cruise Alone

[saltpoint]

201. : )

[spiritual_gunfighter]

155. More Christian martyrdom

spare us.

[rucky]

157. You can disagree with a belief system without getting personal about it.

I think.

That's a difficult one.

[PassingFair]

159. Every poll I've ever seen on DU puts non-believers numbers WAY ahead of believers.

Perhaps YOU are not USED to being in the minority.

Perhaps YOU are not used to hearing objections to
belief in supernatural beings.

Challenging unsupported beliefs and statements is
not "bashing", and it is NOT disrespectful.

There are many good arguments AGAINST religion
and its mandates and its results.

You will hear them all if you post in an OPEN
forum.

[BuyingThyme]

160. Always respect people. Never respect religion.

[timtom]

164. Got some stubborn atheists in here today.

"No, darnit! I have earned the right to mock the beliefs of others! And that's that!"

Unwilling to consider that disagreement doth not equal trashing. And, in so doing, they demonstrate a sublime lack of class.

Just had to put another one on ignore.

[LWolf]

165. While I agree with you in theory,

the stumbling block is this:

The religious "bashing" you see here on DU is almost always of christianity.

Christianity invites that bashing. It is a faith that seeks to be the "only," to label all others as damned, and actively programs members to proselytize.

A faith that doesn't actively advertise itself, seek to grow it's membership, display corrupt power-mongering characteristics; a faith that waits for interested people to seek it out, rather than seeking to dominate the world, won't come in for that level of "bashing."

The practices of the faith itself are not "liberal," regardless of how "liberal" the man that gave the name may have been.

And yes, I know that there are some denominations that are not as obviously corrupt as others; some that are ecumenical, tolerant, and strive to be more like the christ. It's a shame that the more corrupt contingents give them a bad name.

I don't know how those cleaner groups become more noticeable without succumbing to the same corruption ruling the rest.

Meanwhile, while organized christianity continues to work politically, you are not likely to see real liberals back down on attacking them.

[TokenQueer]

176. Well said.

:thumbsup:

[Christa]

166. I respectfully disagree

I have had it with religion being pushed down my throat left, right and center.

Atheists get NO respect from believers, why should I respect them just because they believe in something that has never ben seen, heard or for which there is no evidence?

Will they respect me if I start believing in a an alien who is supposed to watch my every step?

[Political Heretic]

177. At DU, fundamentalist atheists are the dogmatic nutcases like evangelicals at a right wing board.

There's a small minority of loud, obnoxious irrational dogmatic absolutists with the small minded all or nothing ideology that basically sounds nearly identical to fundamentalist evangelicals of the right -

- the only difference being that their finger pointing judgmental dogmatism and blind certainty that they are absolute arbiters of ultimate "truth" is based on their warped understanding of "reason" rather than a warped belief in a "god."

Both are extremely ugly and disgusting. And neither speak for a broader community - nutcase evangelical fundamentalists don't represent all religious persons or views; nutcase dogmatic absolutist non-believers don't represent all atheists persons or all secular views.

[Arugula Latte]

181. Would you post: "i've had enough of people bashing other sor their political views!!"

Probably not.

Why? Because political views are beliefs that people have chosen.

Religion is also beliefs people have chosen.

Therefore, if political beliefs are open to criticism, which of course they are, so are religious beliefs.

Labeling something "Faith" doesn't give the religious immunity from criticism. In fact, I'd argue that faith should be criticized more, because it's not based on fact. It's based on stories, myths, and the supernatural.

These beliefs have consequences, and have influenced political policy in this country dramatically.

We will not shut up.

[spoony]

185. This board is based on shared political views

not on religious ones. That means that liberal believers are rightly here. We are not Republicans. We are not theocrats. We are not the enemy. It is too bad you speak to us like we are.

[MellowDem]

189. A lot of the replies you'll get...

are from atheists with no respect for those who are religious, even if they don't personally push beliefs down their throats. So many of them have become hateful of religion through their own experiences. Ironically and sadly, these same atheists who will make fun of you for your beliefs have become just like those they hate so much.

When an atheist tells you that you believe in fairy tales, guess what, that atheist is pushing his beliefs down your throat. Somehow a lot of atheists don't see that they have become missionaries of their own non-belief.

Also, don't expect these certain types of atheists on here to be able to seperate their reality from this discussion board. Because they are still oppressed in their own world, they believe you have no right to ask for respect on a liberal message board. Remember, you aren't dealing with people who want mutual respect, rather, you're dealing with people that have a very intolerant view of all religions and a very narrow mind, so don't expect them to veer from their "eye for an eye" reasoning. They've had to deal with religious assholes in their lives, so now they will be assholes to everyone who is religious.

It's a double standard here on DU, but the truth is, when you are considered an oppressed minority like Atheists generally are by many on here, you are given leeway to act like an asshole and be intolerant because of it. In the end, these types of atheists, just like asshole religious people, only excaberate the problem and embolden their hateful counterparts.

[TokenQueer]

192. Oh boy...

:popcorn:

[Starry Messenger]

205. That is so funny I don't know where to start.

I see so called Christians dish out the hateraide on people here almost daily, often in the name of "respecting beliefs".

[MellowDem]

236. Well, you didn't start anywhere...

Whoever said all Christians or any religious person is perfect? I haven't seen too many religious people openly making fun of atheists or agnostics though for their beliefs.

[Starry Messenger]

239. You haven't?

You've had a sheltered life then.

[MellowDem]

241. On this board

In real life, I've seen atheists and agnostics demonized by some, but not by people I know personally. But on this board, I have as of yet to see a post where a religious person makes fun of an atheist or agnostic for their belief in no God (or questioning or whatever).

[armyowalgreens]

214. I can tolerate ones belief without respecting it.

Do I believe your beliefs are absolutely irrational and harmful? Yes.

Do I think the world would be better off with out religion? Yes.

Am I going to force you to abandon your religion? No. I'm not into mind control and I think people should be allowed to believe in ignorant things if they wish to do so.


But I certainly do not respect your beliefs. How can I have respect for something that has no foundation? It has little positive influence. And the history of such beliefs is drenched in blood.

[MellowDem]

238. Respect comes through understanding...

And your understanding of religion is incredibly general. You do not know what my specefic beliefs are, yet they are irrational and harmful already simply because they're "religious".

Your idea that the world would be better off without religion is interesting. What proof do you have that this would be the case? Haven't we seen plenty of examples within this last century of regimes that actually tried to quash religion and have some of the most blood on their hands of anyone? I always find the idea that a utopia exists just around the corner if there is no religion hard to swallow, just as hard as the idea that the world would be perfect if everyone followed a certain religion.

And blaming the blood of history on religion is just as irrational to me. Religion was used for justification in many wars, but without religion I can't really see those wars of conquest and expansion not happening nonetheless. And oddly enough, religion was also a barrier to different tyrants in many ways. It was and is still used as a tool by many heads of state, but I don't think you can blame such a tool itself for the history of violence in the world. There was plenty of violence and many wars that had little to nothing to do with religion. And there will continue to be unfortunately.

And of course religion has inspired positive advances throughout human history as well. It's too complex of a matter to view as being only a good or bad thing for humanity. It is something that is constantly changing and adapting along with the rest of humanity.

If you do not respect the beliefs of your fellow religous liberals, who share a common value system with you, then how do you expect progressivism to move forward? You can respect someone's beliefs and still disagree with them. I fully respect your beliefs, because I can understand where you are coming from. If you can't do that, then you won't be changing anybody's minds, much less build consensus.

[Mr Generic Other]

263. actually you seem to have a somewhat confused view of the role that religion has played in history.

it is always connected to the power structure and is always invoked in war. religion is a tool to control the masses and support the social/economic structures of the state. all leaders understand this.
the fact that some conscripts find solace in their "faith" does not transform this reality.
rules are made by rulers for the ruled. this is why rules don't apply to rulers.
whether or not the world would be better off without religion is an interesting question. there are many religious models and they don't all support the exclusivity and the social and economic hierarchies that the christian model promotes and which has caused so much suffering. to promote social and economic equality communist experiments needed to dump religion that preached inequality.
religion, economy, politics, social structure and military structures are all integrated elements of society.
to view them as separate entities is naive.

[timtom]

335. Yeah!

Jesus was connected to the power structure.
Bahá'u'lláh was connected to the power structure.
Siddartha was connected to the power structure.
Gandhi was connected to the power structure.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer was connected to the power structure.

Hmmm...

[Iggo]

215. .

:rofl:

[Warren Stupidity]

248. The hell-bound unbelievers were at my door again this morning

preaching and proselitizing their atheism and mocking my religion. Why can't they just leave me alone?

I turned on the news and there was the president proudly proclaiming 'there is no god'. Why? Why can't he keep his atheism private? Everywhere I turn it is clear that the government has been taken over by atheists. As I walk the streets, lonely in my faith, the people I pass are all festooned with their darwin fish, shoving their unbelief at me, flaunting it, letting me know just how alone I am.

[Duke Newcombe]

307. Well...the Darwin "fish" IS a fine bit of assholery....

Baby step, you know. ;)

[beam me up scottie]

319. I have an EvolveFish pendant which I love dearly.

I have to wear it on my dog tag chain or not at all when I go for job interviews. Where I live I don't even dare put my DU bumper sticker on my car.

[frogmarch]

209. You may be right, but

I do like this sentence from One Sentence Stories:

After calculating that I wasted 6500 hours in church the first 25 years of my life, I vowed to spend 6500 hours doing volunteer work that would actually make a difference in the world.

http://onesentence.org

[dmallind]

219. Kind of hard to respect those who think a perfect being would send you to hell. NT

[Orsino]

221. I heartily applaud the bashing of "religious" views...

...that amount to bigotry, willful ignorance and cowardice. I advocate the bashing of their support for hierarchies that undermine families, happiness and peace.

[NoSheep]

240. Then go elsewhere.

[BlooInBloo]

245. I agree. I wish someone would ask christians to please stop doing that.

[sarcasmo]

247. Bingo.

[sarcasmo]

246. Is there not a Religion/Theology forum?

[grantcart]

251. as a non Christian I have to say that the most agregious bigotry is aimed at them

things that are said against Christians would never be tolerated against Muslims, Buddhists or Athiests.

[RagAss]

252. Muslims, Buddhists and Athiests aren't trying to throw science out of my kids school !!!!

[grantcart]

254. There is no difference between fundamentalist Muslims and fundie Christians

The percentage of Christians who believe in Darwin's theory of evolution is much higher than the percentage of Muslims that do, and I say that from someone who has lived in Islamic countries and has Muslims in my family.


So you are judging the actions of the entire community of Christians based on the lunacy of a few, this is bigotry.


Now I say so being a confirmed anti Mormon bigot, but that is a long family tradition, one that I am reluctant to part with, as we earned our prejudice honestly.

[RagAss]

256. I am commenting on what is happening in the United States.

In school boards throughout the south. I have no doubts that there are similar views in Islamic countries.

[grantcart]

257. But the point that has started this thread and others like it

is condmenation of President Obama for appointing a leading genetic scientist to the head of NIH. The man is a Darwinist, against creationism, supports pure science, and is highly critical of insurance companies for possible misuse of genetic information.

He also has given his time to treat patients in the third world.

He is opposed here simply because of his Christian faith.


Of course everyone at DU is critical of far right winger Christians, that should not give license to hostility to Christians here at DU or Christians generally.

[RagAss]

260. I didn't realize that. It wasn't mentioned by the OP.

I have no issue with this appointment myself and don't see how this man was rolled into the group of pro-creation fundamentalists. That's just plain ignorant to me.

[Starry Messenger]

274. He is not opposed here "simply for his Christian faith".

He has some really iffy ties that deserve looking into. The son of the Founder of the Templeton Fund gave over a million dollars to Yes on Prop 8. Collins' new project biologos is funded by the Templeton fund. THAT bothers me.

edit:typos

[DRoseDARs]

253. As a theist, I've never understood how other people's faith is so weak they can't stand up to ANY...

...criticism. Me? I shrug it off. My personal beliefs are compatible with scientific inquiry, strongly encouraging it actually, and I don't feel the least bit threatened or offended by someone saying mean things or whatever. If God can't be bothered to give two shits about someone talking smack, I can't be bothered to give even one shit.

It's like when I first had a MySpace page. Someone posted one of those inane circlejerk chain letter-esque bulletins asking people to "Stand up for God." Bloody Jew on some wood, get a grip. God is not so shallow and vain as to need a fucking MySpace pity party. That bulletin is about its posters and their completely weak faith in their own beliefs plain and simple, not God's dependency/martyr issues.



Point of clarification: In the title, it looks like "As atheist" I meant it as I typed it: "As a ... theist" as in I have belief in a God or Gods.

[BurtWorm]

258. As an atheist, I applaud your point and your post.

:applause:

[DRoseDARs]

259. Atheists are great people...

I mean, sure, when they die they'll fall off the edge of the Earth and never see the bottom of the stack of turtles, but other than that, they're great people. :)

[BurtWorm]

261. Ha ha!

:thumbsup:

[DRoseDARs]

262. Earthquakes amuse me more than they scare me.

Goddamn turtles humping. It's like they aren't even aware they're stacked on top of each other and holding up the world. :thumbsdown:

[ZombieHorde]

255. Heaven's Gate, OM Supreme Truth, 700 Club, religious terrorists, ex-gay movement, ......nt

[WolverineDG]

272. Do any of these people post on DU?

I could understand it if the religion-bashing was limited to the right-wing nut jobs, but it's not. My impression of atheists & agnostics that I get from DU is that the first requirement for being either is to be an asshole who berates anyone (including liberals) professing to have any kind of religious beliefs.

dg

[ZombieHorde]

290. What would be an example of "berating"?

Comparing god to Santa?

Claims of religion being responsible for many of today's woes?

Claims about astrology having no factual basis?

[WolverineDG]

296. pick any thread that mentions religion or spirituality

and there will be at least one, many times more than one, atheist or agnostic dumping on it as rudely as possible. I don't recall atheists & agnostics being subjected to the same treatment on DU they so willingly dish out to others, hence my assertion that being an asshole is a requirement to be either.

dg

[ZombieHorde]

297. Here are three threads from the top of the R/T list.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=212810&mesg_id=212810

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=212788&mesg_id=212788

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=214x212877

I don't see what you are talking about.

[donco6]

265. Poor thing

Hope you find somewhere your irrationality remains unquestioned.

[rd_kent]

266. Where's the respect when an uninvited knocks on my door

and tells me I'm going to hell?

[bobbolink]

299. you have lots of DUers knocking uninvited on your door and telling you you're going to hell?

Shame on all those DUers!

:sarcasm: :crazy:

[TankLV]

267. ...so says the OP while BASHING others he complains about...!!!

there's a TERM for what you are - and "HYPOCRITE" doesn't quite cover it properly, honey...

[Moochy]

270. Plonk

That's as much respect as this post deserves.

[Warren Stupidity]

271. Wait, what is this actually about?

Are you upset about all the recent posts regarding The Family, the C Street Gang, and the real possibility that our federal government is at least partially controlled by a secretive dominionist theocratic organization?

Is that what this is about?

[conflictgirl]

273. I do agree with you

I know that in society as a whole, atheists and agnostics are an oppressed minority. However I have not seen examples of atheists being disrespected HERE as much as Christians are, even if atheists may be disrespected in society.

Until recently I considered myself an agnostic and have recently started attending a church. I am not sure what I believe yet but I can say that it fits well within my liberal views. I do believe it is possible to be a Christian without being a fundamentalist and without using your religion as justification to discriminate against others. DU was never a place where religious views were the majority and that was fine, but it does feel like now there is a great deal of disrespect for anyone who considers themselves a Christian. Even a majority of Democratic voters are Christian, statistically, but you would never believe it judging by the threads here lately.

I will say that overall DU has felt like a hateful place in general lately and the religion aspect is just one reason. I joined this site around the 2004 election and have never been the most active poster, but I will say that it feels much more disrespectful here now than it has at any time in the 5 years that I've been a member.

[timtom]

336. Finally!!!

A well thought and evenly presented post.

Thank you!

[JackDragna]

275. Here's what I think the issue boils down to, for me:

I will defend to the death the right of every person to have whatever religious views they want. The religious, however, must accept that anytime they promote their religion as a force for good, being rational or having any other facet that is beneficial for society, society has the right to critique their claims. Much of the "religion-bashing" I've seen here has been legitimate criticism of various religions. The modus operandi for a free-thinking society should be this: it's fine to think X, but you had best be ready to defend X from broadsides of all kinds.

[earth mom]

276. Religion is what is destroying this planet. It doesn't belong in politics.

UNREC.

[tbyg52]

279. Uh, I am not required to respect anyone's religious beliefs - just their right to hold them.

There's a difference, you know.

[krabigirl]

287. Meh..I'm tired of being bashed for my non-religious views, in daily society here in America.

Or, for my non-Christian (ie Buddhist or Pagan) interests when I was younger.I was pretty much disowned by my mother for a few years in my twenties when she found out I was pagan. But dare I question her claims that she has visions from the Virgin Mary, and she screams about how cruel I am to her precious religious views.

When Christians stop trying to shove their beliefs into politics (like the flyer I saw at my parents' Catholic church...that Caesar..ie government, must obey God), then I will give it a bit more respect. Until then, deal with it.

[madmom]

289. I will respect a person, I will not respect a religion. I respect the things

religious people do (Mother Teresa,ML King) not because of their religion, but because of their actions.There are just as many good atheists as there are christians but you will never know it because atheists cannot proclaim their beliefs without being ridiculed or demonized.

[ZombieHorde]

293. The core teaching in Christianity is the Holy Bible, which is anti-gay, pro-slavery,

pro-killing of witches, etc.

I know not all Christians feel this way, but they chose to join a club which plainly advocates these hateful ideas.

I feel no obligation to respect a book which advocates slavery, homophobia, or witch killing, and I feel no obligation to respect any religion which is based off of a book which advocates slavery, homophobia, or witch killing.

Unfortunately, some members will get their feeling hurt when their religion is philosophically attacked, just like members of political types will get their feelings hurt when their political philosophy is attacked, but philosophies are fair game, especially on a debate board.

[gleaner]

300. When people try to substitue....

any particular religion for the rule of law, or forget that separation of church and state is a basic tenet in this country, it does need to be brought to their attention.

Isn't one of the items DU sells a T-Shirt with the slogan "This is our country not your church"? If that is what you are calling bashing, I don't see it that way. I do think religion or spirituality is a personal thing which should not be imposed on anyone else unless they ask you about it. I don't see that it has any place in a discourse about secular politics or laws.

[asteroid2003QQ47]

301. Religion is an equal opportunity poison deserving of NO respect!

Error: you can only UNrecommend threads which were started in the past 24 hours

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Religions play bare-knuckle rough all the time, while demanding kid-glove treatment in return.
--Salman Rushdie

[HarveyDarkey]

303. Why is "belief" (ie blind acceptance witbhout proof) beyond scrutiny?

If you believe in an all powerful, invisible sky daddy, why can't we ask for some proof? Inquiring minds would like to know. Why does this belief deserve respect?

[Echo In Light]

313. The same can be applied to "belief" in the two (one) party system, and there IS proof....

...that it's largely illusory, yet the majority clings to it.

[Deep13]

308. "And if you can't respect other religious beliefs..."

You mean if I can't pretend to respect them. And once again, having no respect for religious ideas is not the same thing as having no respect for religious people.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=214&topic_id=196408

[CBHagman]

310. Yes, I couldn't agree more with you.

There's a bizarre sort of fervor on the part of certain nonbelievers/doubters.

[Echo In Light]

316. Read Chris Hedges book, I Don't Believe in Atheists

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20070523_chris_hedges_i_dont_believe_in_atheists/

[Deep13]

318. Nothing bizarre about it.

We care about the truth and know that being Pretestant, for example, is not the same as being Black, or female or gay. It is merely a closely held opinion. Why is it okay to ridicule Rush Limbaugh for his opinions, but not the irrational basis of religious opinions? Ultimately, the reason religious people want their ideas shielded from criticism is because they know they are indefensible.

Anyway, we have the same right to expand our non-religion as the Chrisitans and Muslims have to spread their ideas. We have no special duty to shut up.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

315. Throughout history, people have died for their faith.

Comments on a message board are an inconvenience at best.

[harun]

320. I agree.

[Javaman]

321. I know those unrec people are just so annoying!!

:rofl:

[GoneOffShore]

324. Seen recently on an atheist blog ....

And I agree wholeheartedly!!

There are two main views concerning the reason why Americans are so pathetically fucking delusional at the population level concerning the nature of objective reality, especially in relation to the history of the planet Earth.

One view is that the problem is that scientists and science teachers are no good at explaining science to laypeople and students, respectively. The other view is that the problem is that American society is grotesquely polluted with patently absurd wackaloon religious bullshit from top to bottom, stem to stern, and port to starboard.

If you buy in to the former, then you concern troll scientists and science educators and tell them that they are DOING IT WRONG. If you buy in to the latter, then you implacably debunk patently absurd wackaloon religious bullshit everywhere you see it.