|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Are atheists a persecuted group?
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
Well said.
That was certainly not lost on me as I read here. The irony is intense.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
One more point re: perception of atheism in the USA. Remember the Cold War? The godless communists? That probably didn't help. (And I suspect it also has a lot to do with why Americans aren't so keen on unions, either.)OliviaG
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
Americans aren't so keen on Unions, as they suck. Mafia connections. Treat members like shit. Etc. What's to like?
![[Biased]](wink.gif)
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Geo:
Americans aren't so keen on Unions, as they suck. Mafia connections. Treat members like shit. Etc. What's to like?
If supporting a union means all your neighbours and co-workers will think you're a godless communist, that really puts a damper on grassroots involvement and leaves the way clear for the weeds. The mafia/union thing doesn't really happen in Canada. (IIRC, the Teamsters elected a Canadian woman to try to get their union back.) OliviaG
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by dogwonderer:
Doubts have been raised (by people who are not atheists) that atheists are, in fact, persecuted. I have said in all honesty on this thread that it's truly my belief that it would be a disadvantage for me to be open about my atheism. This has, astonishingly, been disputed by people who know nothing whatsoever of my situation. My genuine disinclination to be ‘out’ as an atheist has been prejudicially dismissed as ‘precious’, ‘histrionic’, ‘ridiculous’, ‘particularly stupid’, ‘extremely silly’, and ‘absurd’. By my posts on this thread, I have been accused of ‘playing victim’ and, repeatedly, of ‘whining’.
To answer the OP, I don't know if atheists are persecuted as a group, but I feel at least one certainly has been, individually.
I would like to point out that I'm the only one who used the word "ridiculous," and it wasn't directed at you.
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
(And you guys do realize that a lot of us weren't always religious, don't you? It's not genetic, you know.
As I said before, many of us once identified as atheists; we're not just talking through our hats. Anyway, I never addressed any sort of remark to your own situation, dogwonderer, except that I understood the closet quite well.)
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by OliviaG:
One more point re: perception of atheism in the USA. Remember the Cold War? The godless communists? That probably didn't help. (And I suspect it also has a lot to do with why Americans aren't so keen on unions, either.)OliviaG
Tangent: What do labour unions have to do with communism or atheism?
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
Tangent: What do labour unions have to do with communism or atheism?
They're all un-American. Didn't you get the memo?
OliviaG
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
....It's not genetic, you know....
That, is highly debatable. Or at least quite potentially likely to have a genetic component.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
Tangent: What do labour unions have to do with communism or atheism?
Socialists in the diapered decades of the 20th century were among the most vocal advocates of safe working conditions, 8-hour day, those other evils that the labor movement has saddled our societies with.
After the Great War (in the USA, at least), the megabusinesses (particularly steel) worked very hard to crush unions and other quality-of-employee-life threats to profits, and one of the most useful (and most insidious) weapons they used was painting the unions, unionists, and worker-rights advocates as Bolsheviks. It worked a charm, and the association of the two in the public mind has never quite been erased.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Geo:
That, is highly debatable. Or at least quite potentially likely to have a genetic component.
Is there anything about people anymore that does not have a genetic component?
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
Mirrizin.
Very little. Very little indeed.
MT:
Somehow I don't think Commie is the term that it used to be. I don't think the boomers, Gen x, or whatever the current arrogant batch of younguns are called are concerned in America about the Communist threat in any way shape or form. I'm quite sure the young adults could find a commie if it was tied to their ass. They were wearing Che shirts until like five minutes ago with literally no idea who Che was.
More seriously, the reason Unions don't work around here is that we are doing fine, whining from hankysqueezers notwithstanding.
It's hard to work the workers up into a nice Bolshie froth when they can get a Starbucks job that pays $10-$12 an hour, kids are no longer employed as slave labor, and OSHA fines bad employers practically out of existence.
The American Dream works for most of us, and appeals to the rest. They don't want to be burdened by union assholes either, when they get to be owner/boss.
But we SERIOUSLY digress.
[ 25. July 2007, 23:45: Message edited by: Mad Geo ]
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Huh? Wha? Lietuvos asked, "What do labour unions have to do with communism or atheism?" Is my answer wrong?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
I was responding to this:
quote:
Originally posted by MouseThief:
....the megabusinesses (particularly steel) worked very hard to crush unions and other quality-of-employee-life threats to profits, and one of the most useful (and most insidious) weapons they used was painting the unions, unionists, and worker-rights advocates as Bolsheviks. It worked a charm, and the association of the two in the public mind has never quite been erased.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Right, which answered L's question. That's the connection between the two.
Am I missing something?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
I was digressing. Not important. Back to those bastard Commies, I mean atheists.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Back to those horrid, evil, baby-eating atheists: Does having people say derogatory things about one on a website constitute "persecution"? I'm having a hard time seeing that.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
Of course you are. Your not the one being persecuted. I mean atheists aren't being called nigger or bitch, right?
More seriously, it is a small symptom of the bigger issue. Not the problem itself IMO. As long as the potential for termination in the workplace exists for outing oneself (either way), one can claim the word "persecuted" in my opinion. I think women are persecuted. Of course the Lion-in-the-Arena-standard crowd would disagree.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
If I were in a situation dominated by atheists (and I have been) and was regularly being heckled for being a Christian (as I was), I wouldn't cry persecution (and I didn't). But maybe I have a thicker skin than most atheists.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by MouseThief:
Huh? Wha? Lietuvos asked, "What do labour unions have to do with communism or atheism?" Is my answer wrong?
That's crap. I was born in America in 1954 and lived most of my life there. The AFL-CIO were still quite strong and pervasive when I was growing up. They had a strongly anti-communist, blue collar American ethos. Indeed, although they were supporters of the Democrats, they were rather reactionary, if anything. It's true that prior to the merger of the AFL and the CIO, which took place before I was ever born, the CIO had a true communist element (during the Great Depression), but that had pretty much died off or been internally rooted out even by the post-War era. It may be the case that there were a few extreme right-wing Americans or ultra-capitalist oligarchs who engaged in red-baiting toward the unions in the post-war era, but if so, it was really quite a fringe thing -- rather like the John Birch Society (remember them?). The unions were mostly slagged off in terms of organised crime connexions (Teamsters, Jimmy Hoffa) or simple management-labour power politics.The equation between athiest and labour unionist is an absurd quantum leap, as indeed the idea that trade unionism was generally besmirched with allegations of communism. The one equation that is correct is that international/soviet communism was seen as "godless" and that atheism was equated with communism, adding to the intrinsic evils of Marxism-Leninism.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wulfstan
Shipmate
# 558
|
Posted
Mad Geo said:
quote:
More seriously, it is a small symptom of the bigger issue. Not the problem itself IMO. As long as the potential for termination in the workplace exists for outing oneself (either way), one can claim the word "persecuted" in my opinion.
No I don't think so. I think you're conflating workplace bullying with persecution. A boss could sack someone for being and atheist, but also for having the wrong religion, politics, sporting affiliations, birthplace etc. And I have no doubt they do so, often. The problem here is that they are able with very little effort to put their personal prejudices into action because they hold a position of power. Your definition allows pretty much everyone in the world to claim persecution so long as they can give one example of when someone in a position of authority was a jerk about whatever it was. Persecution suggests something more widespread that people are attempting to justify with some kind of ideology, like with McCarthyism.
So in the UK I can confidently say there is no persecution of atheists, although there may be the odd boss who lets his prejudices run free, and acts like a jerk.
I'd be surprised if persecution of atheists was countrywide in the US, though there may be regional pockets. But I think you'd have to be specific with your evidence.
Posts: 418 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Geo:
As long as the potential for termination in the workplace exists for outing oneself (either way), one can claim the word "persecuted" in my opinion. I think women are persecuted. Of course the Lion-in-the-Arena-standard crowd would disagree.
I guess I'm in the Lion-in-the-Arena-standard crowd, then. I am quite certain that women, blacks, atheists, homosexuals, and many other groups are discriminated against in the workplace, and are sometimes subjected to harrassment at work and in the family, but I don't think harrassment and discrimination are the same thing as persecution.
I dislike word inflation. If you use persecution to describe being preached at at work, or disowned by family, then you're left without a way to differentiate between that and being barred from working entirely, jailed, assaulted, or killed.
FWIW, I know Christians who use the word persecution in the same way you're using it, and I tell them they're wrong to do so as well.
--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
That's crap.
I shall never again answer a request from you for historical information. My bad for doing so this time.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Otter
Shipmate
# 12020
|
Posted
I asked Mr. Otter if atheists are persecuted, he looked at me like I had two heads, and asked what in the world I was talking about. I gave him the ultra-condensed non-partisan version of the thread, and asked if he would ever hesitate to identify himself as an atheist. He said nope, he wouldn't, and he doesn't think atheists are persecuted.
I'm making a guess here, that *maybe* it depends to some extent on what professional field you're in? Mr. Otter is a software test engineer, a very techie job, and I think there's a tendancy for techies and to be more skeptical, "show me the numbers"-ish than some groups. Much as we accuse them otherwise, computers are unthinking machines - garbage in, garbage out, etc.
On the other hand, Dogwonderer as a doctor is in a field where the human mind and spirit have a lot more influence - patient attitude, placebo effect, or whatever. Perhaps there's it's not coincidental that DW feels more anti-athiest sentiment in his field.
On the third hand, you'd think Mad Geo's field would fall more on the techie-skeptical end of the spectrum. Maybe MG ran into a bad apple? Different parts of the country have something to do with it? Maybe I'm guessing wildly? Who knows?
--------------------
The plural of "anecdote" is not "data", YMMV, limited-time offer, IANAL, no purchase required, and the state of CA has found this substance to cause cancer in laboratory aminals
Posts: 1429 | From: Chicago, IL 'burbs | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Wulfstan:
Mad Geo said:
I think you're conflating workplace bullying with persecution. A boss could sack someone for being and atheist, but also for having the wrong religion, politics, sporting affiliations, birthplace etc. And I have no doubt they do so, often.
Yes they do so, and in the US, if you can prove it, you can sue their asses off the map for relgion, political affialiation, and birthplace as well as race, color, sex (whether or not of a sexual nature and including same-gender harassment and gender identity harassment), age (40 and over), disability (mental or physical), sexual orientation, or retaliation. Welcome to America.
We have a name for "workplace bullying" in America, it's called Workplace Harrassment, and it's illegal. We take it very seriously.
Frankly, I have thought a couple of times that if someone were fired for being an atheist whether the law would cover it under religious harrassment.... I doubt it under this Christo-fascist administration and its court, but maybe....
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
I dislike word inflation. If you use persecution to describe being preached at at work, or disowned by family, then you're left without a way to differentiate between that and being barred from working entirely, jailed, assaulted, or killed.
That is certainly your perogative to try to correct me. Good luck with that.
More seriously, it has often been my observation that word inflation and other hyperbole-laden things are the only things that get peoples attention in this Jerry Springer Era. One has to "burn bras" in order to get crap corrected. Maybe that's not "right" but then neither is workplace harrassment, the glass ceiling, etc. etc.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wulfstan
Shipmate
# 558
|
Posted
Mad Geo, I'm aware of workplace harrassment, but I agree with Josephine. Even you seem to admit it's word inflation. And you have yet to point to any evidence of widespread, or regionally specific ideologically based antagonism, of a practical and aggressive kind, towards atheism in the US. If you were setting up a Young Atheists Club in Montgomery, Alabama circa 1920, you might have a point, but we're not. In the UK I'm sure that what you describe is covered by unfair dismissal/harrassment(non-specific)/unprofessional conduct-type legislation. It sounds like you have a not dissimilar set-up, but need a proper system of legal aid, like the one the UK recently abandoned. So the problem would not be one of specifically atheist persecution, or of any other type, but an inability to get justice even if the law is on your side. Which is another issue entirely.
Posts: 418 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
If almost everyone is afraid to come out of the closet as an atheist, how would we know if they are being peresecuted? It's a chicken and egg. Dawkins actually was calling for people to come out of the athiest closet in his latest book. I have a feeling that very soon we will start to see some of the backlash. Of course with the religious conservative courts we are currently running, the law may not be of much use....
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wulfstan
Shipmate
# 558
|
Posted
MG said:
quote:
If almost everyone is afraid to come out of the closet as an atheist, how would we know if they are being peresecuted?
But you're still not giving evidence that this is the case. So if there's no evidence of persecution, I don't think you can reasonably claim it. You're using circular logic. Is the reason no-one I knew at work came out of the closet as a Morris Dancer because they were terrified of persecution?
quote:
Dawkins actually was calling for people to come out of the athiest closet in his latest book. I have a feeling that very soon we will start to see some of the backlash.
Against what???
quote:
Of course with the religious conservative courts we are currently running, the law may not be of much use....
Are you suggesting that the US has some Conservative-Protestant version of Sharia Law in operation? Or is it really that you live in a country that is predominantly religious, with atheists as a pretty insignificant minority as yet?
I'd suggest you move to Europe but I think you'd find it disturbingly socialist...
Posts: 418 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
The trouble with non-persectuted, non-persecuting people saying there's no such thing as persecution is that they may be associated, by the persecuted, with the persecutors- since the persecutors also say there is no such thing as persecution.
It's like the non-Nazi Germans who denied the holocaust. (Apologies to Godwin's Law aficionados).
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
benjdm
Shipmate
# 11779
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by MouseThief:
If I were in a situation dominated by atheists (and I have been) and was regularly being heckled for being a Christian (as I was), I wouldn't cry persecution (and I didn't). But maybe I have a thicker skin than most atheists.
Could be. I haven't even been heckled, directly. I would not consider myself persecuted nor would I consider atheists as a group persecuted in the U.S. Culturally ostracized, probably, but we have plenty of company there.
Posts: 357 | From: Northeastern U.S. | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Geo:
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
I dislike word inflation. If you use persecution to describe being preached at at work, or disowned by family, then you're left without a way to differentiate between that and being barred from working entirely, jailed, assaulted, or killed.
That is certainly your perogative to try to correct me. Good luck with that.
If you are on a picnic at a park, and someone's dog starts annoying you, maybe drooling on your belongings, or grabbing your frisbee, or even snatching your food, if you start calling for help, shouting that you're being attacked by a vicious killer dog, when people run to your defense, they're going to look at the situation, roll their eyes, and walk away.
If, on the other hand, you called out that someone's ill-mannered dog was being a major pest, and it needs to be kept under better control by its owner, you'd have had a fair number of supporters -- including nearly every dog owner at the park. But by claiming a risk to life and limb, when there was no such, you put off the people who would have otherwise been on your side, and you make yourself look ridiculous.
And if you were to make a habit of making such claims -- you know the story of the boy who cried wolf. Instead of running to your defense, or even to coming to find out what's going on, people will say, "It's that old MadGeo again. You'd think he'd learn to tell the difference between a slobbery old Labrador that's making a nuisance of itself and an attack dog on the loose." And they'll ignore you.
There is no excuse for religous harrassment in the workplace. None at all. If you have been the victim of such, you were wronged, and the people who wronged you should be held accountable for it. I'll stand with you on that one, in any way I can.
But please don't undermine your position by ratcheting up the rhetoric to the point where it's absurd. You do yourself a disservice that way, and make it harder for your sympathizers to provide support.
--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
Wulfstan,
IIRC atheists, that will declare it, are ~7% of Americans.
Studies Show that atheists are more despised than homosexuals and muslims in America. Tell me that doesn't manifest itself in other ways. People won't let their daughters marry an atheist, for example.
All I am saying is that atheists get shit done to them, even if it is only social stigma. That's why they hide it. Being thrown out of families, not being able to marry someone, firings, whatever. That is all persecution to me.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
quote:
Originally Posted by dogwonderer:
[It's like the non-Nazi Germans who denied the holocaust. (Apologies to Godwin's Law aficionados).
Apology accepted. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
If it comes down to that, I'll to the wall with you.
I don't think it's gone that far, and I doubt it ever will, but I will keep my eyes open.
At the same time, I'm also reminded that even the Nazi movement started out as a revolution by an oppressed people. You have to be really careful when you start accusing particular groups of people of being the natural source of all evil. That's exactly what the Nazis did to the Jews, and it disturbs me to hear atheists start blaming this "religion" bogeyman for every atrocity people ever committed against each other. People scare me when they claim to have ideological "solutions" to the problem of the human capacity for evil, and when those solutions include a scapegoat, especially when that scapegoated group includes me.
Feel free to invoke Godwin's Law.
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
Wait, according to the poll I just cited, Atheists are the source of all evil in America. Does that mean that they get to worry about being scapegoated? Here, they are the moinority and the Christians are the ones at risk of being the oppressor.
[ 27. July 2007, 17:39: Message edited by: Mad Geo ]
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
So the problem is not particular ideologies but the existence of oppression and "scapegoating" at all. I can agree with you completely on that front, as a Christian.
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
Hmmm. Just as a point of debate/thought:
If Christianity or some other religion for that matter, claims to certain things that result in harm to others, mental or physical, and people legitimately criticise it on those points, is that scapegoating, or is that merely constructive criticism?
Christianity is the clear and overwhelming majority here. They have absolutely no real fear of persecution and in fact under the current administration are trying to codify their belief systems at the expense of others, and at the expense of Constitutional liberties, including other religions and atheists. It has not been my observation that the Majority gets to cry "Scapegoat" when they are packing the courts with their advocates. I am willing to be corrected.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Geo:
Hmmm. Just as a point of debate/thought:
If Christianity or some other religion for that matter, claims to certain things that result in harm to others, mental or physical, and people legitimately criticise it on those points, is that scapegoating, or is that merely constructive criticism?
Saying "Christians really need to work on this" is constructive criticism. Saying "Christians are all oppressing us" is exaggeration. Also, what makes particular styles of criticism constructive versus destructive? I get in arguments all the time on my other board with atheists, and they seem to go absolutely nowhere except atheists saying (in so many words) "See! You're a deluded freak who makes no sense!" because I don't buy into their logical scheme. Sometimes my frustration with that attitude transfers to this board, for which I apologize. And not to say all atheists are tossers, but I think you can get a model for oppression in any ideology. All you need is a scapegoat, and for many atheists, religion does appear to be a scapegoat. I've been told to my online handle that the world would be peaceful if only we could magically remove all the religious ideas (except for the ones we like, of course ). quote:
Christianity is the clear and overwhelming majority here. They have absolutely no real fear of persecution and in fact under the current administration are trying to codify their belief systems at the expense of others, and at the expense of Constitutional liberties, including other religions and atheists. It has not been my observation that the Majority gets to cry "Scapegoat" when they are packing the courts with their advocates. I am willing to be corrected.
But Christianity is not a united front, as this board illustrates. And I don't see the evidence of the administration literally "codifying" their "belief system" into law and succeeding. For the most part, Creationism is the national laughingstock, and with good reason. So far, the free marketplace of ideas seems to be succeeding.
The war on Iraq was also about money and power and oil, and I sincerely think that religion is just a veneer, a mask they wear to hide their actual interests. To me, that's a mockery of religion and it's showing in the fruits this war has produced.
Also, I don't like being lumped in with the Bush administration. I was active on the Gore campaign, and I voted against Bush both times. Most churches I've been to (granted, we're liberal heathen by Southern baptist Convention standards) tend to be opposed to Bush & Co. Our church here is putting up a sign on the wall saying it rejects war. It's not much, but what do you expect of a small urban congregation? A manifesto? Headline news articles? Do you really expect us to police the entire Christian world for you?
To police every religious institution in the world would require the sort of hierarchical authority that produces a lot of the problems of the Catholic Church. I think when you ask us to police the "freaks," you're asking the sociopolitically and institutionally impossible. We're not Thought Police.
FWIW, I see what you're afraid of, I think, and it scares me to, even if I think you are exaggerating the claim (perhaps for emphasis, as per Hitchens' style), but I don't think saying "Christians are all oppressive dictators" is going to help that movement along. You're just cutting out potential allies by drawing your circle so that atheists are the innies and the rest of us are either outies enablers, even against our will.
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Littlelady
Shipmate
# 9616
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Geo:
If almost everyone is afraid to come out of the closet as an atheist, how would we know if they are being peresecuted?
MG, are you serious about atheists being in the closet in the States or is that a speckling of hyperbole? It's just that I struggle to grasp the idea that atheists feel the need to be in a closet. Things aren't like that over this side of the pond (hence why I struggle to grasp the idea).
--------------------
'When ideas fail, words come in very handy' ~ Goethe
Posts: 3737 | From: home of the best Rugby League team in the universe | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
benjdm
Shipmate
# 11779
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Littlelady:
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Geo:
If almost everyone is afraid to come out of the closet as an atheist, how would we know if they are being peresecuted?
MG, are you serious about atheists being in the closet in the States or is that a speckling of hyperbole? It's just that I struggle to grasp the idea that atheists feel the need to be in a closet. Things aren't like that over this side of the pond (hence why I struggle to grasp the idea).
About half of atheists / agnostics will lie to a human pollster, and probably another half of the non-liars will lie to their friends and relatives.
http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=707
quote:
Important difference between online surveys and surveys conducted by telephone interviewers
Over the last few years, several different surveys have found that more people admit to potentially embarrassing beliefs or behaviors when answering online surveys (without interviewers) than admit to these behaviors when talking to interviewers in telephone surveys. They are also three times more likely to say that their sexual orientation is gay, lesbian or bi-sexual. Researchers call this unwillingness to give honest answers to some questions in telephone surveys a "social desirability bias."
It is therefore no surprise that in this online survey, more people say they are not absolutely certain there is a God than have given similar replies in other surveys conducted by telephone...
This survey found roughly 1/4 of the U.S. were atheist or agnostic, roughly double - triple what most other surveys find (like http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2006-09-11-religion-survey_x.htm):
Current coming out / not coming out threads over at iidb:
I should come out, but i keep digging myself in deeper
Another Day in Fundieville
I only outed myself in the last year or two. Atheist carries a serious social stigma here. Perhaps the best example was a CNN special on the topic. CNN's Paula Zahn show was doing a weeklong special on discrimination. They would show some prerecorded segment of people experiencing discrimination and then come back to a three person panel in the studio. For this episode, the three person panel consisted of a black female journalism professor who was pro-affirmative action, a black male sports commentator, and a Jewish female conservative lawyer. During the pre-recorded segment they showed two families who had basically been run out of their homes when their atheism became publicly known. When they came back to the studio, the background graphic read: "Why do atheists inspire such hatred ?" The three panelists then began to debate whether atheists need to shut up or whether a whole bunch of groups including atheists need to shut up - that was the range of opinions. Worth watching.
Prerecorded segment
Panel discussion
Posts: 357 | From: Northeastern U.S. | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
JoannaP
Shipmate
# 4493
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
I'll put my hand up and say I don't see any persecution (right-side of Pond) - up to and including Christians can't own and operate a TV station but atheists can, Catholics can't marry an heir to the throne of the UK but atheists can. Atheists can affirm in court rather then swear on any holy book, become members of the police, the judiciary, the armed services, members of Parliament, upper and lower houses, own their own home and withdraw their children from RE lessons.
So no, not really.
To be fair, what Brits really object to is someone holding strong opinions and then insisting on talking about them. Thus Steven Green and Richard Dawkins are equally reviled.
The heir to the throne and their spouse must, by law, receive communion in the Church of England, so I am not sure that it is fair to say that an atheist could marry the heir to the throne.
I do agree wholeheartedly with your last point however.
--------------------
"Freedom for the pike is death for the minnow." R. H. Tawney (quoted by Isaiah Berlin)
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Benjamin Franklin
Posts: 1877 | From: England | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by benjdm:
About half of atheists / agnostics will lie to a human pollster, and probably another half of the non-liars will lie to their friends and relatives.
That kind of puts a kink in arguments citing poll results to show how tiny the atheist population is and how numerous (and therefore monolithic and overbearing) the Christian population is.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
Mirrizin,
If you can find anywhere where I said ALL Christians were oppressive dictators or that they ALL were oppressing atheists, I will take it back immediately and buy you lunch when given an opportunity to meet. Because of course that is absurd. If I said the people in power definitely are starting to resemble oppressive dictators and are not afraid to use it to advance Christian opinions at the expense of others opinions, well that would be true.
I would say that there are some, if not, many Christians that would oppress atheists if given the opportunity. That oppression might be as subtle as not allowing their marriage into the family, or as complicated as firing them, or worse. I know these people. This is not theory, I have heard it at (Conservative) round table discussions. Sometimes it's good to be a Libertarian that can cross lines and hide in the midst of the freaks.
Of course Christianity is not a united front. But there are generalizations that can be made from observations from the bigger denoms. Those denoms have great power in certain areas such as the Baptists in the South. George Bush has been called the most openly religious president ever. Bush stated that creationism should be taught alongside evolution in public schools since "religion has been around a lot longer than Darwinism." We have already started to see the results of his religious opinoins on abortion via SCOTUS, they upheld that the Federal Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act does not violate the constitutional right to abortion (avoid the dead horse folks). And so on.
In less than two months the Creationism Museum has drawn 100,000 visiters (avoid the D.H folks). That's pathetic. For those in England, please consider that, do you think a creationism would make it over there? I think not.
Can you imagine this debate happening over the PM in Britain? I would be surprised if you have a religious right, as such, in Britain? (Maybe the RC in Ireland?) Here they are literally a force to be reckoned with. A Republican without a religious right base is a guaranteed loser.
When I tell people that business should police it's own ranks instead of having heavy ham-handed legislation such as the Sarbanes Oxley Act, I get told by them that it will never work. They say government has to enact rules to protect us from business. I am basically giving you the same option. Police your own freaks. Because I believe in (Religious) Freedom even if it makes me gag personally sometimes. Full stop. Since I won't tell you the government should shut down the televangelists that say stupid shit like "Homosexuals are to blame for Katrina", or that "the ministry will close if we don't receive $1 million in donations by Tuesday", or whatever.
I won't take your freedom from you. I need you to get off your (collective) asses and tell James Dobsen that he is a patronizing masoginistic Christian asshole that needs to shut the fuck up. That your gods don't smite entire cities with Hurricanes because they do X. That not all of you think a living woman should have her rights taken away from her to decide what happens to her body. And so on. Police your damn freaks. Please. Lest someone(s) in Washington eventually does it for you. I'd hate to have to defend your rights from the government, mostly because I disagree with many of your bretheren, becaise I support your right to have wacky religious ideas.
Little Lady.
I swear to you not a hint of hyperbole. I personally know quite a few closeted atheists. I go to a book club that I happen to know has around 10 atheists in it, two out in the open. I have three other friends that don't broadcast it. I am a non-theist zen buddhist. I rarely tell anyone, and if I do, I only mention the Zen Buddhist part.
Would you talk about a belief you held if you knew that you could never hold public office if it got out? If Christians (which is a huge portion of the population) practically couldn't resist arguing and or being condescending to you? If it got to your boss you might be fired? If people might actually keep their children from being around you?
I think not....
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by benjdm:
I only outed myself in the last year or two. Atheist carries a serious social stigma here.
Again, this is just not true where I live. Atheist is normal around here.
We keep having this same discussion over and over here. First it was the "gun culture" thing; then it was creationism; now it's atheism. People are extrapolating from their own local experience and are making broad claims that don't hold on that basis.
Perhaps it's due to the fact that Americans generally have a very difficult time seeing things from another's point of view? (It's an interesting study, BTW.)
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Geo:
Would you talk about a belief you held if you knew that you could never hold public office if it got out?
Not commenting on the other questions, but this one doesn't move me at personally, since I'm not the least bit interested in holding public office.
Maybe you should move up here, MG -- when you tell people you go to church every Sunday they look at you like you said you believe in a flat earth and wear a tinfoil hat. In general it's not something I say out loud a lot, even if it fits into the conversation.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by MouseThief:
That kind of puts a kink in arguments citing poll results to show how tiny the atheist population is and how numerous (and therefore monolithic and overbearing) the Christian population is.
How do you figure that?
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
I know two atheists that might hold public office someday. It's a relevant issue. Not necessarily because of the small amount of people that might want to hold public office, but because they might not be able to at all if it were known.
Funny you should mention potentially moving to Seattle.....
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beautiful Dreamer
Shipmate
# 10880
|
Posted
How would you suggest we police our own freaks other than calling them out when we see them? Most of us do not have our own tv stations or anything more public to speak on than a message board. And how do you know we aren't 'voting with our feet' so to speak, in terms of giving our votes to the people who aren't in favor of creating a Christian theocracy over here? I do not vote for any Religious Right members if I am given the chance to elect someone else into office, but apparently there aren't enough people who think like me around.
I had a problem with the way my former church was going and with the way it seemed to want to police everyone's life, so I left. And anyone in my frame of influence has heard me call out freaks on their antics. But I am only one person. I do not know what more you would have me do.
--------------------
More where that came from
Now go away, or I shall taunt you a second time!
Posts: 6028 | From: Outside Atlanta, GA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beautiful Dreamer
Shipmate
# 10880
|
Posted
I apologize if my last post seemed a bit rash, but I do want to know what you would suggest John Q. Christian should do to police our freaks that he isn't already doing.
--------------------
More where that came from
Now go away, or I shall taunt you a second time!
Posts: 6028 | From: Outside Atlanta, GA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
benjdm
Shipmate
# 11779
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by MouseThief:
quote:
Originally posted by benjdm:
About half of atheists / agnostics will lie to a human pollster, and probably another half of the non-liars will lie to their friends and relatives.
That kind of puts a kink in arguments citing poll results to show how tiny the atheist population is and how numerous (and therefore monolithic and overbearing) the Christian population is.
In terms of the general population I think you're right. In terms of the elected government I think we do have a monolithic and overbearing Christian population. Even the lowest poll results put atheists at ~3%. Congress has 1 atheist out of 535 members, and the 1 atheist is the first openly atheist member of Congress ever.
Posts: 357 | From: Northeastern U.S. | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Geo:
quote:
Originally posted by MouseThief:
That kind of puts a kink in arguments citing poll results to show how tiny the atheist population is and how numerous (and therefore monolithic and overbearing) the Christian population is.
How do you figure that?
Are you serious?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
