Should Atheists Criticize Religious People?

[Tennesseer]

Sept 10, 2014 13:36:15 GMT -5 @xmascookie said:

Sept 10, 2014 13:17:25 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

It's not enough. Not when atheists are prohibited from holding public office.

Maryland

Article 37: “That no religious test ought ever to be required as a qualification for any office of profit or trust in this State, other than a declaration of belief in the existence of God; nor shall the Legislature prescribe any other oath of office than the oath prescribed by this Constitution.”

From your link

"However, the Supreme Court ruled in a 1961 case that a Maryland man appointed as a notary public didn’t have to declare his belief in a supreme being to hold office, arguing it violated his rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Since then, these restrictions haven’t been enforce, said Dave Muscato, a spokesman for American Atheists."

We have a lot of stupid laws still on the books.

In your example, the man was appointed and not elected to office.

[Tennesseer]

Here is another case to discuss:

Atheist must swear to God -- or leave US Air Force

The US Air Force has told a sergeant he will have to leave the military unless he agrees to take an oath with the phrase "so help me God," officials said Tuesday.

In the latest religious controversy to roil the air force, the atheist airman last month was denied his request to re-enlist because of his refusal to swear to God -- and he is now poised to take the military to court, his lawyer said.

"We have not received word from the Air Force regarding our letter. It has not indicated a willingness to settle out of court," said Monica Miller, an attorney for the American Humanist Association, which has taken up the service member's case.

With the deadline for re-enlisting expiring in November, the technical sergeant at Creech Air Force base in Nevada -- whose name has not been released -- will be forced to sue the government in a federal court, Miller told AFP.

In the past, an airman could opt for an alternative phrase and omit the words "so help me God," but the US Air Force changed its policy in October 2013.

The other branches of the American military do not require the reference to God and make the phrase optional. (Highlighted emphasis mine.)

"This is the only branch to my knowledge that's actually requiring everyone in all instances to use the religious language," Miller said.

The requirement violates the US Constitution, which bars religious tests to hold office or other positions, Miller said of the case, which was first reported by the Air Force Times.

"The government cannot compel a nonbeliever to take an oath that affirms the existence of a supreme being," she said.

Rest of article here: Atheist must swear to God -- or leave US Air Force

[Deleted]

Sept 10, 2014 11:14:59 GMT -5 sesfw said:

When someone is using god or the bible in an attempt to pass some law or public policy. Laws shouldn't be passed based on the bible any more than they should be passed based on shariah law.

While I agree with the intent of this statement ......... all over the world we have TONS of paper dedicated to enforcing the Ten Commandments in one way or another.

Especially how we treat each other.

We do?

Funny... I can only think of three "commandments" that are written into laws. And in each of those three cases there's an unwelcome impact on others. Do not kill, do not steal, do not lie (well... the law is "do not lie under oath"... but that's close enough).

Those three make sense even to the cave men, way back before religion was even a concept... so of course they were going to be included when the religions were created.

[Deleted]

I don't think I should be barred from criticizing people just because they are religious...

[Deleted]

Sept 10, 2014 13:47:00 GMT -5 ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ said:

There was a time until not that long ago, when you had to swear on the Bible to tell the truth "So Help you God" in most court proceedings/testimonies and when giving witness statements, etc.

This is true.

I know it's a movie, but it's based on fact. I loved the scene in "The People vs Larry Flynt" where Larry was asked to swear on the Bible "so help you God", that went like this:

Clerk: Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Larry Flynt: No.
Judge Thomas Alva Mantke: No?
Larry Flynt: Your honor, I'm an atheist. I can't very well, uh, swear to a God I don't believe exists.

[mmhmm]

I've gotta wonder why it's so darned important to criticize people. If someone asks for criticism, I don't see a problem. I do see a problem if one finds it necessary to criticize just because they wish to do so. Seems like a waste of energy to me.

[ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ]

Me too - I prefer not to be critical of - especially if it's something as simple as someone having a different perspective than me - like this topic (religion) for example.

The OP question was: "Should Atheists be Critical of Religious People?"

I ask: "Should Religious People be Critical of Atheists?"

I don't see too many Atheists criticizing those who believe. Yet I see many religious people criticizing or forcing their beliefs on others - whether asked for or not. People knocking on the door to save me or convert me, or leave me some "reading material" to help see the light, etc - often very pushy and not willing to take "no thank you" for a response.

My parents were church-goers, and we were too, as children. But we were also encouraged to do our own research and find what worked for us, and to make our own choices once were were old enough to do so.

I'm neither Religious or Atheist - I consider myself an Agnostic and am more focused on evolution, the sciences and things that can be proven as fact. But I'm also spiritual - and that's also a personal choice.

I still attend church occasionally, but I leave all doors open to come to my own conclusions.

[weltschmerz]

Sept 10, 2014 22:17:02 GMT -5 ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ said:

Me too - I prefer not to be critical of - especially if it's something as simple as someone having a different perspective than me - like this topic (religion) for example.

The OP question was: "Should Atheists be Critical of Religious People?"

I ask: "Should Religious People be Critical of Atheists?"

I don't see too many Atheists criticizing those who believe. Yet I see many religious people criticizing or forcing their beliefs on others - whether asked for or not. People knocking on the door to save me or convert me, or leave me some "reading material" to help see the light, etc - often very pushy and not willing to take "no thank you" for a response.

My parents were church-goers, and we were too, as children. But we were also encouraged to do our own research and find what worked for us, and to make our own choices once were were old enough to do so.

I'm neither Religious or Atheist - I consider myself an Agnostic and am more focused on evolution, the sciences and things that can be proven as fact. But I'm also spiritual - and that's also a personal choice.

I still attend church occasionally, but I leave all doors open to come to my own conclusions.

I actually had two Jehovah's Witnesses knock on my door TODAY! How serendipitous!

I wasn't busy and wasn't in a rush, so I had a little chat with them.

I was quite magnanimous, once I reminded myself that they were two nice little old ladies and not contentious message board posters.

[Green Eyed Lady]

Sept 9, 2014 13:02:58 GMT -5 Sum Dum Gai said:

If everyone treated their religious beliefs like their dicks (keep it to yourself except between consenting adults, never whip it out in public, etc) we'd all get along.  Instead I get people knocking on my door at home trying to convert me, following me around in the grocery store parking lot trying to get me to take their stupid handouts, and worst of all coming into my business and holding up my checkout counter to yammer at me and see if they can leave their propaganda pamphlets on my counter.

Normally, I would agree with that sentiment as I usually have no desire to flaunt anything about my personal life in public.  The issue I have is this mantra only seems to apply to those who believe in God.  When people stop whipping out their sexuality in public...when people stop whipping out their lack of belief or different beliefs in public....I'll stop whipping mine out.  Until that point, if I have to deal with every detail of someone else's life being shouted from the rooftops, they get to deal with mine.

[Deleted]

It irritates me to see people mock other people's spiritual beliefs as long as those beliefs are not harming anyone.

As far as atheists, I'm sure I know some atheists IRL but I'm not aware of it because religion doesn't come up very often in my conversations. I know someone that isn't an atheist, but they are a different religion than me and I don't agree with a lot of things they believe. They try to have conversations with me about religion, but I usually shut it down because they don't know how to have an exchange of opinions on the subject without being insulting when I disagree. Like calling me a heathen, which makes me want to fire back with how their religion is more like a cult imo and all the reasons I think they're all kind of crazy. To avoid all that, I shut it down as soon as they bring the topic up in any way.

I don't mind discussing religious beliefs or lack thereof, as long as everyone is respectful. I've had those types of conversations before and I find them interesting. If I can be open-minded and try to understand what you're saying to me even if it's different from how I think, I expect the same courtesy to be extended to me. A lot of people can't seem to be respectful on that particular subject though. 

[Green Eyed Lady]

That's a Christian's charge, Shaun - to spread the word.  I certainly can understand if it is offensive and bothersome to you.  I couldn't do it and it's just one of my big failings.  It's my opinion that having someone's sexuality plastered all over EVERYWHERE I look...having protestations about even mentioning God plastered all over EVERYWHERE I look is just as offensive to me as having your doorbell rung is to you.  Each of us has things that bother us.  Keep in mind I have NO issues with the way a person lives their life (as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else) and I absolutely don't care what someone's beliefs are.  I just won't be told I'm the ONLY one who has to keep quiet about mine. 

[Green Eyed Lady]

Sorry.  I don't find that to be the case at all.  I find most religious discussions arise from somebody objecting to something remotely religious - like "under God" being said in the Pledge of Allegiance.  I completely disagree that it's the "believer" who starts most discussions.  I don't think that's even remotely accurate.  But it really doesn't matter.  Both have a right to their opinions and neither party has to "shut up" about it unless both parties shut up about it.

As for these boards, it's the most unfairly and prejudically monitored subject here.  One is perfectly allowed to scream their non-belief from the proboard mountaintop but should someone mention they do believe - they get relegated to this tiny portion of the board.  Very unfair and discriminatory and shouldn't be allowed.  But it is and I don't make the rules.  It's my choice to follow them or leave (or be kicked out) but I've mentioned before, I will no longer limit expression of my beliefs to one area unless others are made to do the same thing.  It wll probably cost me my membership at some point, but some hills are worth dying on!

It's perfect ok here to make fun of people who believe in God and refer to him in all sort of derogotory manners.  It's perfectly fine to call Christians and other faiths "deluded", etc.  But boy howdy!  If like comments were made about homosexuals or people of different races, the poster would be out of here so fast, smoke would emerge from his/her keyboard. 

I did a little allbymylonesome study here in the last couple of weeks.  I reported a few posts - 3 I think.  Can't remember exactly.  I'm not the reporting type of person, but I wanted to see what happened.  One post reported.  Name calling.  Result?  They were chastised.  Another post reported.  A poster harassing another poster.  Result?  They were chastised.  Another post reported?  Nasty remarks about someone religion.  Result?  Absolutely nothing.  I found that interesting.

[mmhmm]

Sept 15, 2014 13:03:50 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

Sorry.  I don't find that to be the case at all.  I find most religious discussions arise from somebody objecting to something remotely religious - like "under God" being said in the Pledge of Allegiance.  I completely disagree that it's the "believer" who starts most discussions.  I don't think that's even remotely accurate.  But it really doesn't matter.  Both have a right to their opinions and neither party has to "shut up" about it unless both parties shut up about it.

As for these boards, it's the most unfairly and prejudically monitored subject here.  One is perfectly allowed to scream their non-belief from the proboard mountaintop but should someone mention they do believe - they get relegated to this tiny portion of the board.  Very unfair and discriminatory and shouldn't be allowed.  But it is and I don't make the rules.  It's my choice to follow them or leave (or be kicked out) but I've mentioned before, I will no longer limit expression of my beliefs to one area unless others are made to do the same thing.  It wll probably cost me my membership at some point, but some hills are worth dying on!

It's perfect ok here to make fun of people who believe in God and refer to him in all sort of derogotory manners.  It's perfectly fine to call Christians and other faiths "deluded", etc.  But boy howdy!  If like comments were made about homosexuals or people of different races, the poster would be out of here so fast, smoke would emerge from his/her keyboard. 

I did a little allbymylonesome study here in the last couple of weeks.  I reported a few posts - 3 I think.  Can't remember exactly.  I'm not the reporting type of person, but I wanted to see what happened.  One post reported.  Name calling.  Result?  They were chastised.  Another post reported.  A poster harassing another poster.  Result?  They were chastised.  Another post reported?  Nasty remarks about someone religion.  Result?  Absolutely nothing.  I found that interesting.

That is not true, GEL. Mentioning your belief is not going to get your post relegated to Religious Discussions. It doesn't now, and it never has. Quotations of scripture, proselytizing, and co-opting a thread to have a detailed discussion about religion is what gets posts/threads moved.

If someone calls you deluded, Report the post. That is a personal insult but you cannot expect us, as staff, to see everything you see. I know I've removed posts that called religious people deluded and I'd be willing to bet others have, as well.  If you've Reported posts and the poster was chastised what, exactly, is your complaint? Did you want them banned? Did you want them hanged? What did you want? As to the "nasty remarks" about someone's religion, I don't recall the Report but I assure you I'll be looking into it. I will say, it looks to me like you may be looking to fail so you can complain. If you're not the "reporting type" you really don't have a complaint as you're not willing to help us help you. You also can't expect every complaint you make to be taken as legitimate. That's decided by consensus, not one individual.

mmhmm, Administrator

[Green Eyed Lady]

I refer you to the "evil" thread, mmhmm, when people were told to keep their religious beliefs out of the discussion.  Those of us who do believe in God believe you can't have a discussion about evil with mentioning God.  I can't speak for anyone else, but I wasn't proselytizing or quoting scripture and you, personally, said we could have this discussion without bringing God into it.  That's simply not true for me.  And it's unfair. 

Here is your post.  It contains nothing about quoting scripture or proselytizing.  It simply states "religious pathways" should be avoided. 

You guys are welcome to discuss evil. However, if you're going to take it down the religious pathway, the discussion will have to be moved to Religious Discussions. The subject can be discussed without following that path, though. - mmhmm, Administrator.

As for your question about "chastizing", I don't think perhaps I was clear enough.  My point was that posters were chastized for just about everything BUT making fun of God and people's beliefs.  Of course I don't want to see anyone banned.  I'd just like to see everyone treated fairly.

[Green Eyed Lady]

If someone calls you deluded, Report the post.

I did report the post.  As I said, it was part of my own little study.  It wasn't a personal insult, but rather just a general demeaning comment about those who believe in God.  That was the point.  I DID report it but was told that while the moderator didn't like it either, it wasn't against the CoC.  It's not equitable.  Demean anyone else and you are in big trouble!  But please, feel free to demean Christians!

You are a good person and I don't want to argue with you about it.  I have my opinion and you have yours and yours is the one that counts!  I am still a member of this posting community and I will no longer be told I can't discuss a subject because there are those who don't agree with my views.  Nobody else is subjected to those stringent guidelines other than people who believe in God.  If it is your decision I leave, so be it.  My boss will probably thank you! 

[mmhmm]

Sept 15, 2014 13:22:06 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

I refer you to the "evil" thread, mmhmm, when people were told to keep their religious beliefs out of the discussion.  Those of us who do believe in God believe you can't have a discussion about evil with mentioning God.  I can't speak for anyone else, but I wasn't proselytizing or quoting scripture and you, personally, said we could have this discussion without bringing God into it.  That's simply not true for me.  And it's unfair. 

Here is your post.  It contains nothing about quoting scripture or proselytizing.  It simply states "religious pathways" should be avoided. 

You guys are welcome to discuss evil. However, if you're going to take it down the religious pathway, the discussion will have to be moved to Religious Discussions. The subject can be discussed without following that path, though. - mmhmm, Administrator.

As for your question about "chastizing", I don't think perhaps I was clear enough.  My point was that posters were chastized for just about everything BUT making fun of God and people's beliefs.  Of course I don't want to see anyone banned.  I'd just like to see everyone treated fairly.

That's fine, GEL. However, those who do not believe in God don't feel you can't have a discussion about "evil" without mentioning God. Which group should we cater to? That's what you seem to want us to do. We've given, instead, a place to discuss evil (or whatever) in its religious context. That is the compromise and we believe it to be fair and appropriate. If you're going down the religious pathway, the thread belongs in Religious Discussions and will be moved there. That's what the topic is for.

Everyone is treated as fairly as we can possibly manage. Those who come out on the short end of the stick are going to feel they were treated unfairly. That isn't always the case, but I'm sure it feels that way. I haven't found your Report of a post that contained a nasty remark about someone's religion. If that happened, it should have been removed. If I can find it, it will be if it's actually nasty and insulting.

[Green Eyed Lady]

Sept 15, 2014 13:15:33 GMT -5 Sum Dum Gai said:

Under God shouldn't be in the pledge though. It wasn't historically. It was added during McCarthyism when everyone was overreacting to the spread of communism. Religious folks saw an opening to intersect religious belief into public discourse and took it. I'm not attacking religious belief when I say it should be removed. I'm asking for a restoration of our history, and that we follow the constitution, which has a very clear separation of church and state. Individuals are free to practice their religious beliefs, including proselytizing even though I personally find it obnoxious, our government is not however.

I actually understand why some don't like it, Shaun.  I understand because I know how I'd feel if someone told me I had to STOP saying "under God".  I can't ask that people respect my beliefs if I don't respect others. 

[mmhmm]

Sept 15, 2014 13:26:30 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

If someone calls you deluded, Report the post.

I did report the post.  As I said, it was part of my own little study.  It wasn't a personal insult, but rather just a general demeaning comment about those who believe in God.  That was the point.  I DID report it but was told that while the moderator didn't like it either, it wasn't against the CoC.  It's not equitable.  Demean anyone else and you are in big trouble!  But please, feel free to demean Christians!

You are a good person and I don't want to argue with you about it.  I have my opinion and you have yours and yours is the one that counts!  I am still a member of this posting community and I will no longer be told I can't discuss a subject because there are those who don't agree with my views.  Nobody else is subjected to those stringent guidelines other than people who believe in God.  If it is your decision I leave, so be it.  My boss will probably thank you! 

I'm not arguing, GEL. I'm trying to clear up what we do and why we do it. That's why I'm here. Otherwise, I stay out of this topic for the most part.

It's not my opinion that holds sway here. It's the consensus of the staff behind the CoC and, most of all, the ToS.  Nobody has told you you cannot discuss any subject. You most certainly can, provided it doesn't break CoC or ToS. The Religious Discussions forum is here precisely for the purpose of giving those in whose life God moves a place to discuss their beliefs, and what's important to them. We don't tend to leave political discussions in EE, or one of the music or movies forums, either. That's not discrimination. It's organization. Politics, like religion, can be a very contentious subject. There are those who can't resist the urge to proselytize and tell others how to think, just as there are those who can't resist the urge to poke and prod at believers. In the Religious Discussions forum we have the option to block those posters from even posting if they insist on continuing the behavior. I consider that to be a good thing, as spiritual beliefs are deeply personal and very, very important to those who hold them.

[Green Eyed Lady]

Sept 15, 2014 13:36:55 GMT -5 Sum Dum Gai said:

Sept 15, 2014 13:29:43 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

I actually understand why some don't like it, Shaun.  I understand because I know how I'd feel if someone told me I had to STOP saying "under God".  I can't ask that people respect my beliefs if I don't respect others. 

You wouldn't have to stop saying under God, you'd be free to say it however you want, or not say it at all if you chose. The official wording should have been left as it was is all. If Muslims ever become a majority in this country how would you feel about them changing under God to under Allah? That's roughly how us heathens feel about having under God in there in the first place.

I totally understand.  As long as people understand I've have no intention of not saying it, everybody should get along just fine!  As far as the "official wording", I guess I really don't care as I intend to say it as I wish.  I absolutely see the point and don't disagree at all.  My only reason for bringing it up was to point out that it not always the "religious" people that start these discussions.

[mmhmm]

Sept 15, 2014 13:36:55 GMT -5 Sum Dum Gai said:

Sept 15, 2014 13:29:43 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

I actually understand why some don't like it, Shaun.  I understand because I know how I'd feel if someone told me I had to STOP saying "under God".  I can't ask that people respect my beliefs if I don't respect others. 

You wouldn't have to stop saying under God, you'd be free to say it however you want, or not say it at all if you chose. The official wording should have been left as it was is all. If Muslims ever become a majority in this country how would you feel about them changing under God to under Allah? That's roughly how us heathens feel about having under God in there in the first place.

I understand exactly what you're saying, Shaun. I was in grade school when the pledge was changed. I refused to change the way I said the pledge then, and I still won't say it any other way than the way I learned it originally. There are a lot of us who feel that way. It isn't because we think Christianity is awful, and it isn't because we're trying to get in other people's faces. It's because we don't feel the phrase "under God" belongs in the Pledge of Allegiance.