Do the so called Atheists on AT give Atheism a bad name in general?

[Braznor]

I think most of the so called professed Atheists on AT give atheism a bad name with their immature ways of attacking religious beliefs. I'm a weak atheist bordering on agnosticism and bouncing between the two without ever making up mind completely on either side. I think it is possible that human beings may not be the only sentient beings in this universe, but also believing that even if more powerful beings exist, their existence could be as logical as ours. I also believe that the true nature of this universe is unknowable and anything can be possible without us ever discovering the answer to everything in all its finality. So I repeat, do you think the virulent so called atheists in AT give sensible Atheism a bad name in general with all their vitriol and their immaturity?

 

[UglyCasanova]

First of all, lol @ the description of what you are.

Second, the overly zealous ones give atheists as a whole a bad image just as much as any overly zealous member of any group portrays the whole negatively. It's not just AT.

 

[sigurros81]

(Fill in blank) on AT gives (same group) in general a bad name.

 

[Jaskalas]

Religion has a lot to answer for, by the failings of its followers who have reaped evil upon this world. Yet anyone who understands the selfless sacrificial message of unconditional love would know you cannot fault the crucificial core of western religion.

The attacks on religious beliefs are par the course for our society, driven by partisan narrative, where things are divided and conquered along a political spectrum. Religion just happens to be an easy target. Not helped in the least by a religious "agenda" contrary to the very notion of a free society. Made horribly worse by a Bible filled with fiction, written by men but clung to as if divine. Creationism is a tough pill to swallow.

Religious people do themselves a great disservice via aggrandizement of fantasy, and of pushing for a legislative agenda. They have failed to stick to their roots, of opening hearts and minds. Of a message of love, and ONLY love.

So today Atheism strikes back against an organized mess that betrays its own tenants and threatens our own. It's easy to see where they overstep, but let he who has not sinned cast the first stone. We all overstep. It's not their fault really, but the human condition. If Atheism has a bad name, then that name is human. Something we all share in common, much to our despair.

 

[Abraxas]

I think most of the so called professed Atheists on AT give atheism a bad name with their immature ways of attacking religious beliefs. I'm a weak atheist bordering on agnosticism and bouncing between the two without ever making up mind completely on either side. I think it is possible that human beings may not be the only sentient beings in this universe, but also believing that even if more powerful beings exist, their existence could be as logical as ours. I also believe that the true nature of this universe is unknowable and anything can be possible without us ever discovering the answer to everything in all its finality. So I repeat, do you think the virulent so called atheists in AT give sensible Atheism a bad name in general with all their vitriol and their immaturity?

I reject your premises and so unsurprisingly I reject your conclusions. In what way is the conduct of atheists on this board markedly different in quality to that of the general level of discourse around here?

 

[88keys]

I don't have a problem with healthy debate. But my biggest problem with religion is mainly people to this day trying to impose their will on others through legislation. And furthermore we have these people who are electing to teach creationism in public schools which is like teaching astrology and alchemy. But beyond, that if people wish to practice it in private it is and should be their right providing they commit no harm to others.
And if that makes me a zealous, militant, immature atheist, than so be it.

 

[Doppel]

I think most do. They are very hard-on to promote their views at any opportunity.

 

[PokerGuy]

Religion has a lot to answer for, by the failings of its followers who have reaped evil upon this world.

You'd be a fool to think that the same evil would not have been brought onto the world without the existence of religion. Religion is often used as justification for evil, but that doesn't mean that in its absence the evil wouldn't exist, it would just be justified by other means.

Anti-religion zealots (of which there are many on AT) are no better than the religious zealots. They just can't seem to grasp the idea of being comfortable with others believing something different and living their life accordingly.

 

[Zebo]

Islam will take care of nasty atheists once and for all. Jesus was a chump. Do you see any atheist running around in the middle east? I think not.

 

[DominionSeraph]

I think most of the so called professed Atheists on AT give atheism a bad name with their immature ways of attacking religious beliefs.

Our conservatards are so stupid that Sarah Palin is an intellectual beacon to them. There's really not much to do with minds of pudding other than to call them pudding.

 

[zsdersw]

You'd be a fool to think that the same evil would not have been brought onto the world without the existence of religion.

You should note that nowhere was such a claim made.

They just can't seem to grasp the idea of being comfortable with others believing something different and living their life accordingly.

That's something zealots of all stripes share.

 

[zsdersw]

Religion has a lot to answer for, by the failings of its followers who have reaped evil upon this world. Yet anyone who understands the selfless sacrificial message of unconditional love would know you cannot fault the crucificial core of western religion.

The attacks on religious beliefs are par the course for our society, driven by partisan narrative, where things are divided and conquered along a political spectrum. Religion just happens to be an easy target. Not helped in the least by a religious "agenda" contrary to the very notion of a free society. Made horribly worse by a Bible filled with fiction, written by men but clung to as if divine. Creationism is a tough pill to swallow.

Religious people do themselves a great disservice via aggrandizement of fantasy, and of pushing for a legislative agenda. They have failed to stick to their roots, of opening hearts and minds. Of a message of love, and ONLY love.

So today Atheism strikes back against an organized mess that betrays its own tenants and threatens our own. It's easy to see where they overstep, but let he who has not sinned cast the first stone. We all overstep. It's not their fault really, but the human condition. If Atheism has a bad name, then that name is human. Something we all share in common, much to our despair.

Agree, 100%.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Do the so called Atheists on AT give Atheism a bad name in general?

In general, I don't think so. I think most atheists handle themselves fairly well. There are a few that appear to be irrational to me at times and a few more who hold their anti-religion bigotry close to their heart; however, for the most part they are no better or worse than those theists who give religion a bad name by doing the same.

 

[Xonim]

So today Atheism strikes back against an organized mess that betrays its own tenants and threatens our own. It's easy to see where they overstep, but let he who has not sinned cast the first stone. We all overstep. It's not their fault really, but the human condition. If Atheism has a bad name, then that name is human. Something we all share in common, much to our despair.

Very, very well written. +rep to you.

I do have to note though -- I'm from Minnesota, and there used to be this thing called Minnesota-nice. It's popped up in various movies and tv and stuff, so you may or may not have heard of it.

What hasn't really surfaced yet is that Minnesota-nice has pretty much gone out the window in recent years -- the same years that have seen an unprecedented decline in the number of families that attend church on Sundays.

Now days if you say "hello" to a stranger, they look at you like you're crazy. If you do something as simple as holding a door for someone, they make it a big deal because it doesn't happen anymore. Think about schools where if someone dropped their books, people used to stop and help pick them up, now they just laugh and watch that person pick them up alone. My Dad used to play peek-a-boo with small kids in front of us in church -- but now that's creepy and weird. What happened to the world?

Political stances aside, my opinion is that the decline in friendliness over recent years is tied to the decline in the number of, well, religious people. I'm sure there's more tied to it like the increase in social media usage and mass media influences, but it all starts somewhere.

EDIT: The dillholes in /r/atheism are WAY worse than AT. We've got nothing to worry about for now.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Very, very well written. +rep to you.

I do have to note though -- I'm from Minnesota, and there used to be this thing called Minnesota-nice. It's popped up in various movies and tv and stuff, so you may or may not have heard of it.

What hasn't really surfaced yet is that Minnesota-nice has pretty much gone out the window in recent years -- the same years that have seen an unprecedented decline in the number of families that attend church on Sundays.

Now days if you say "hello" to a stranger, they look at you like you're crazy. If you do something as simple as holding a door for someone, they make it a big deal because it doesn't happen anymore. Think about schools where if someone dropped their books, people used to stop and help pick them up, now they just laugh and watch that person pick them up alone. My Dad used to play peek-a-boo with small kids in front of us in church -- but now that's creepy and weird. What happened to the world?

Political stances aside, my opinion is that the decline in friendliness over recent years is tied to the decline in the number of, well, religious people. I'm sure there's more tied to it like the increase in social media usage and mass media influences, but it all starts somewhere.

EDIT: The dillholes in /r/atheism are WAY worse than AT. We've got nothing to worry about for now.

Of course that is what you think, you suffer from confirmation bias. There are a multitude of factors that can influence your perception. And, it is also heavily reliant on anecdotal sampling. Yet you have decided it is people turning from religion, one religion in particular no less.

 

[nehalem256]

You'd be a fool to think that the same evil would not have been brought onto the world without the existence of religion. Religion is often used as justification for evil, but that doesn't mean that in its absence the evil wouldn't exist, it would just be justified by other means.

See for example the Soviet Union.

 

[Xonim]

Of course that is what you think, you suffer from confirmation bias. There are a multitude of factors that can influence your perception. And, it is also heavily reliant on anecdotal sampling. Yet you have decided it is people turning from religion, one religion in particular no less.

It absolutely is based on on my perception and on my experiences and the experiences of people I know. Heck, the whole "Minnesota nice" concept is/was based on experiences in and of itself, it's nothing scientific. I just happen to be a native Minnesotan on this forum, so you get to hear about my experiences.

It could be due to religion or whatever tv/movie/music or the isolation that results from social media usage or more broken families or education or whatever. My bet is on religion, because in my opinion, religion at one point influenced all of those other things. And though I was raised in a religious family, I'm not exactly what I would call a religious person today.

/shrug

 

[DAPUNISHER]

It absolutely is based on on my perception and on my experiences and the experiences of people I know. Heck, the whole "Minnesota nice" concept is/was based on experiences in and of itself, it's nothing scientific. I just happen to be a native Minnesotan on this forum, so you get to hear about my experiences.

It could be due to religion or whatever tv/movie/music or the isolation that results from social media usage or more broken families or education or whatever. My bet is on religion, because in my opinion, religion at one point influenced all of those other things. And though I was raised in a religious family, I'm not exactly what I would call a religious person today.

/shrug

Fair enough. Arthur C. Clarke said it better than I ever could, so I'll let him respond.

One of the great tragedies of mankind is that morality has been hijacked by religion. So now people assume that religion and morality have a necessary connection. But the basis of morality is really very simple and doesn't require religion at all.”

 

[FerrelGeek]

See for example the Soviet Union.

Or Maoist China.

 

[IronWing]

When we have a forum well stocked with religious trolls, OP included, it is to be expected that folks will respond to the trolling, usually in the same ridiculous vein as the trolling. In the rare incidents when an OP is truly attempting to initiate a philosospical or theological discussion folks are generally much more civilized with the sniping tending to occur among theists of differing views rather than with the atheists who tend to lose interest in what they preceive to be intellectual masterbation.

 

[nageov3t]

I would say most people online give most groups a bad name.

 

[Ryan]

I would say that followers of religion already do enough to thoroughly sully their own name that Atheist discourse will always pale in comparison.


If you truely believe that it is impossible to know the validitiy of religion in general, anyone who claims any certainty on the subject of religion must be wrong.

 

[thraashman]

See for example the Soviet Union.

Interesting thing about the Soviet Union is that it was mostly just a small group in power using that power for evil. The thing religion tends to be able to do that is more difficult without it, is get the masses behind that evil. Anything that causes the appropriate zeal can be used, the raping of Nanking was nationalistic zeal not religious for example. Religion just makes it easy to evoke that evil from a group that is already zealous and just needs a focus.

Also, in relation to the OP, it seems to me that most atheism related threads on AT aren't started by atheists but by religious folk and atheists come in angry defending themselves. Anyone pushed to defending themselves will likely come off as a jerk.

 

[lotus503]

So how is this politics or news?

 

[IronWing]

So how is this politics or news?

Maybe we should move it to the video card forum and let the true religious zealots have a go at it?