Do the religious hate athiests in America?

[Newell Steamer]

What is deemed as "the religious"?

If it is the self hating, control obsessed creeps that try to vilify love, caring and understanding - yes. The religious hate athiests, since athiesm would relinquish the control through fear they (the religious) have over certain people.

If the religious are normal church going folks, who mind their own business and the business of their community - no. The religious do not hate athiests.

What is deemed "athiests"?

If an athiest is an uneducated brat that picked up the idea from the internet - yes. Athiests do hate the religious. Because it will get them more fame and "recongnition" on the internet (re: reddit).

If an athiest is an educated and thinking person who came to the idea of "there is no God, or god-like being" - no. Athiests do not hate the religious.

 

[ch33zw1z]

I understand where you're coming from, but you seem awfully paranoid. I am a firm believer of keeping religion out of State matters entirely, and with laws like SSM taking hold, etc, you don't have anything to worry about.

*shrug*, so I'm paranoid. Also known as thinking.

 

[jackstar7]

I didn't say that it was there before 1957. Hoever it was on coins way before that.

Why shouldn't it be there? It doesn't sanctify any one religion.

If you are an athiest why would you give a crap if it is there or not?

Why should it be there? What is it doing that's positive?

Rather than ask people to argue a negative, why not advocate on behalf of your position with the reasons you believe it should be there?

 

[MagickMan]

Atheist doesn't even mean "there is no God, or god-like being", it can also mean you reject the notions established by organized religions. Ex. There could be a god, but it sure isn't some old guy with robes and a fluffy beard, waiting to pass judgement on humanity for not sucking up to him enough.

 

[WelshBloke]

I agree about the State having an official religion, they should not. I'm taking about making people tear down crosses that have been in place for decades, wanting in God we trust removed from our currency ... all of those looney things.

I'd say that that's because crosses and God are "your" things.
If it was a golden sickle on the lawn or it said "In Shiva we trust" you'd probably have a different opinion.

Personally it doesn't bother me as
A) I'm not American (the fact that all your notes are the same size and look the same bothers me more)
B) I'm not invested in any religion so a state showing preference for a religion bothers me less than a state spending money supporting religion in general.

I do think that destroying historical stuff just because it's religious and on state land sounds idiotic but spending state money putting up crosses on state land also sounds idiotic.

 

[JEDIYoda]

I attended Baptist, Methodist, Catholic, non-denominational churches, among others. There are definitely different sermons. One week, it might be about "God is love", the next....choose him or burn. That's the choice. Bottom line, we're all going to face death at some point. We all know it, and it's something that ignites fear in our hearts. Religion capitalizes on that fear.

Then you attended the wrong churches! You are lumping your experiences to be the same in every church!

I have attended all the above churches as well as synagogues. I found most of the churches that I attended to be loving and caring and very low key in how they presented the gospel.

I feel that you are allowing your paranoia to influence you. When just the opposite is true concerning the presentation of the gospel in a loving and caring manner@!!

I also feel that in your case even the mere mention of the gospel is tantamount to being pressured.

Perhaps to the extent that somebody on the street were to walk up to you and say -- Jesus Loves you!! Then they were to walk away, that you would take that as a pressure tactic.....

Again you are entitled but just remember that there are churches where fear mongering never ever happens!

 

[JEDIYoda]

Also known as thinking.

how so??
Again.....ch33zw1z Jesus Loves You!! There is no pressure in that statement!
or God sent his son into the world to save the world! -- where is the pressure?

Your definition of the word thinking does not add up to what you have been posting.

So paranoid is a very appropriate and more accurate than what you describe as "thinking".

 

[ch33zw1z]

Then you attended the wrong churches! You are lumping your experiences to be the same in every church!

Your opinion. My parents would disagree with you.

I have attended all the above churches as well as synagogues. I found most of the churches that I attended to be loving and caring and very low key in how they presented the gospel.

Again, there's different sermons, different delivery methods, and different deliverers. It wasn't all fire and brimstone every week, but in the end everyone chooses the path of religion out of fear for their soul. If you believe in a God that can save you an eternity of damnation...then it's a no brainer.

I feel that you are allowing your paranoia to influence you. When just the opposite is true concerning the presentation of the gospel in a loving and caring manner@!!

lol, sure...

I also feel that in your case even the mere mention of the gospel is tantamount to being pressured.

Incorrect

Perhaps to the extent that somebody on the street were to walk up to you and say -- Jesus Loves you!! Then they were to walk away, that you would take that as a pressure tactic.....

Incorrect

Again you are entitled but just remember that there are churches where fear mongering never ever happens!

Good to know. Not that I really care either way..

 

[ch33zw1z]

how so??
Again.....ch33zw1z Jesus Loves You!! There is no pressure in that statement!
or God sent his son into the world to save the world! -- where is the pressure?

Your definition of the word thinking does not add up to what you have been posting.

So paranoid is a very appropriate and more accurate than what you describe as "thinking".

What exactly am I paranoid of? Someone talking to me? lol...

Save your energy for all those souls you need to go save.

 

[IronWing]

Preaching is also a selfless work and a form of community service.
Open your mind a bit

That's just ridiculous. Preaching is all about the preacher.

 

[Retro Rob]

That's just ridiculous. Preaching is all about the preacher.

Not really. Let be more clear. Going out to the "people" on your own personal time and at your own expense, is selfless, particularly if you're not trying to convert people. You can only convert yourself, fwiw....no one can convert you. I don't understand why people still say such silly things like that.

Depending on the person's motives, they can make it selfish (ie for sole reason of getting people to come to your church, or give you money) or it can be selfless if you're looking to impart what you think is good information.

But regardless, I think depends on why they're doing it, not so much of the fact they're doing it.

 

[alzan]

I think what I mean is that "God" is ambiguous, and can be whatever you want it be, or mean...just like "Man" isn't pointing to one particular individual.

That's a nice explanation but it doesn't exactly jive with the history of the incorporation of the phrase onto our money and our countries' "motto"; including the groups/individuals that were pushing for it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_God_we_trust

 

[alzan]

Not really. Let be more clear. Going out to the "people" on your own personal time and at your own expense, is selfless, particularly if you're not trying to convert people. You can only convert yourself, fwiw....no one can convert you. I don't understand why people still say such silly things like that.

Depending on the person's motives, they can make it selfish (ie for sole reason of getting people to come to your church, or give you money) or it can be selfless if you're looking to impart what you think is good information.

But regardless, I think depends on why they're doing it, not so much of the fact they're doing it.

So you agree that Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, et al are imparting what they think is good information.

Good to know.

 

[Retro Rob]

So you agree that Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, et al are imparting what they think is good information.

Good to know.

Precisely!

...and I think we've been over this before...you and I. If you think its important for me to know something, by all means, bring it to me (if so inclined), email me, catch me on the street, or whatever.

If I don't think I need the information, then its my job to let you know.

 

[alzan]

Precisely!

...and I think we've been over this before...you and I. If you think its important for me to know something, by all means, bring it to me (if so inclined), email me, catch me on the street, or whatever.

If I don't think I need the information, then its my job to let you know.

Better idea: keep your(communal your, not personal your), information to yourself and if people ask for the information; either by coming to you, asking you to speak at their meeting, etc. then it can be imparted.

That way no one is verbally assaulted.

 

[Retro Rob]

Better idea: keep your(communal your, not personal your), information to yourself and if people ask for the information; either by coming to you, asking you to speak at their meeting, etc. then it can be imparted.

That way no one is verbally assaulted.

Unfortuately, Freedom of religion here in the US allows for sects to practice how they see fit, and they're protected from folks (like you) who would love to put a stop to this facet of their practice.

Afterall, how are you being harmed by them preaching? If you don't agree with what they're doing, you can simply stick your head in an oven for all I care.

 

[alzan]

Unfortuately, Freedom of religion here in the US allows for sects to practice how they see fit, and they're protected from folks (like you) who would love to put a stop to this facet of their practice.

Afterall, how are you being harmed by them preaching? If you don't agree with what they're doing, you can simply stick your head in an oven for all I care.

Very nice. Pray tell from which part of the Bible can that be found? After all a Christian seeks to become more like Christ; in which of Christ's teachings does he exhort the bolded statement?

I'm not being harmed. I'm concerned for: those who have not yet learned to stand up to the religious bullies who berate them unbidden; those who have not learned to laugh uproariously in the faces of the religiously humble and meek; those who have not yet learned that the religious seek only the conformity of thought and word so that they may quell the uncertainties and mysteries of life with the amazingly inaccurate and simple-minded phrase "G-d did it."

Plus, in case you haven't learned your freedom to "practice as you see fit" is not always protected. No freedom is absolute. Not to mention you're only protected from the government attempting to quash your religious rights; private citizens may do as they please within the limits of the law.

 

[Retro Rob]

Very nice. Pray tell from which part of the Bible can that be found? After all a Christian seeks to become more like Christ; in which of Christ's teachings does he exhort the bolded statement?

Ovens weren't invented back then, but I'm sure someone would have bidden you to do something similar, particularly after telling them not exercise the rights granted them by this Constitution.

If you grant gays, for instance, the right to publicly display their affection, then how can you tell a religious person not to publicly share his beliefs? If you hate preaching, there are countries that ban certain religious preaching..you might like it there.

What you're suggesting is un-American. You sir, are a hypocrite.

Plus, in case you haven't learned your freedom to "practice as you see fit" is not always protected. No freedom is absolute. Not to mention you're only protected from the government attempting to quash your religious rights; private citizens may do as they please within the limits of the law.

Well, I know that. Religious people can't stone sinners in this country, that I know. But if you cannot demonstrate how preaching is bringing you harm, then you can stick your head in an oven.

 

[BUnit1701]

Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.

This x1000.

 

[alzan]

Ovens weren't invented back then, but I'm sure someone would have bidden you to do something similar, particularly after telling them not exercise the rights granted them by this Constitution.

If you grant gays, for instance, the right to publicly display their affection, then how can you tell a religious person not to publicly share his beliefs? If you hate preaching, there are countries that ban certain religious preaching..you might like it there.

What you're suggesting is un-American. You sir, are a hypocrite.



Well, I know that. Religious people can't stone sinners in this country, that I know. But if you cannot demonstrate how preaching is bringing you harm, then you can stick your head in an oven.

So Christ himself would've bidden me to "stick my head in a fire" for taking exception to his words? Funny I was taught that Christ sought to edify, not belittle or suggest that I give myself 1st/2nd/3rd degree burns. Once again, exactly where may one find the "stick your head in a fire/oven" attributed to Christ?

Then again the constitution wasn't invented "back then" either.

PDA's by gays or anyone else don't insult me or my intelligence. Religious zealots and their need to "spread the Word" do.

Ah, the old "if you don't like the law, leave" meme. If you think about it, the way it's set up is "if you don't like law, change it".

What I'm suggesting is actually part of the very essence of being an American; I can worship any or no g-d(s).

I already said I wasn't worried about harm to myself necessarily so I'll keep my head out of the oven.

Preaching harms psychologically and in different ways: the "you're going to hell/fire and brimstone" approach, the "do this or G-d's gonna (metaphorically) spank you" approach, the "you won't live forever" approach, etc. Whether preached from a positive or negative outlook it's all about punishment for using the gift of "free will" which G-d allegedly gave us. G-d to mankind: "Here's a gift but don't you dare use it, especially if it means not worshipping me."

Preaching to those with limited life experience is especially harmful since they for the most part are not thinking logically. As well, preaching to those with diminished mental capacity, either from mental illness or addiction takes advantage of the diminished capacity and does psychological harm.

Preaching to those who already have spiritual beliefs may not be harmful but it's mostly an insult.

 

[Retro Rob]

PDA's by gays or anyone else don't insult me or my intelligence. Religious zealots and their need to "spread the Word" do.

Well, our laws aren't framed around what "insults you". Listen, I have no problem if you care nothing for what religious people preach...heck, I don't care for much of it myself.

But who am I to tell them to "keep it to themselves" because I am offended?

The "stick you head in an oven" remark is nothing more than "deal with it"...it's a part of our culture, and nothing you say will convince me that just because you disagree with what I may say, that's "harming" anyone somehow. I'm talking about preaching only.

Preaching harms psychologically and in different ways:

No, it doesn't.

the "you're going to hell/fire and brimstone" approach, the "do this or G-d's gonna (metaphorically) spank you" approach, the "you won't live forever" approach, etc

I agree that's an unpleasant thing to say, but also, "your G-D doesn't exist" is harmful as well. Should we, therefore, tell atheists to keep that to themselves?

Preaching to those with limited life experience is especially harmful since they for the most part are not thinking logically.

How is that the fault of the preacher?

As well, preaching to those with diminished mental capacity, either from mental illness or addiction takes advantage of the diminished capacity and does psychological harm.

That can equally apply to anything.

Preaching to those who already have spiritual beliefs may not be harmful but it's mostly an insult.

How? I may not know they already have a belief.

 

[Munky]

Do leftoids get a smug sense of accomplishment from throwing a bunch of memes and images onto a page as if it conveyed some profound message?

 

[ch33zw1z]

No response for the oven bit, eh? Getting all Old Testament on him! Fire and brimstone, turning people into pillars of salt, faux human sacrifice, man that OT is a good read.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Good to know. Not that I really care either way..

actually you did care or you would not have made such a big deal out of things!!
Good to know that deep down you care, inspite of what you want us to think!

 

[ch33zw1z]

actually you did care or you would not have made such a big deal out of things!!
Good to know that deep down you care, inspite of what you want us to think!

You mean responding to what you and Rob M regarding religious fear mongering people into believing? Yea, I care when it gets near me or my family.

What I don't care about is that there's some churches that don't do it. I don't care because it doesn't affect me.

See the difference? and that's why I responded to that small section with the words: Good to know, not that I care either way.