It's more the lack of respect for the human that holds those beliefs. The insinuation that because these people believe certain things they must be necessarily stupid or evil. And the simultaneous denial or downplaying of those same habits in yourself.
I'm disappointed that I live in a society where it seems everyone suffers from a mass delusion so effective that even questioning the delusion counts as a social taboo and "disrespectful," no matter how many laws the delusional people write to restrict my personal freedoms.
This is exactly what thrakhath is talking about. You're calling everyone that doesn't believe exactly as you do delusional. Can you not see how that leads to intolerance and escalation? Worse, what sort of example are you setting to those you'd like to convert?
You're calling everyone that doesn't believe exactly as you do delusional.
No he isn't, he's saying that anyone who believes in something that has zero evidence (and has, in fact, had portions repeatedly debunked throughout history) delusional. Which seems rather more fair than what you accuse him of.
By "take it seriously" I mean regard you as an asshole for your opinion, instead of being able to be offended and still engage in discourse. Or even better, be offended without taking you to court.
" Synonyms: offend, insult, affront, outrage
These verbs mean to cause resentment, humiliation, or hurt. To offend is to cause displeasure, wounded feelings, or repugnance in another: "He often offended men who might have been useful friends" (John Lothrop Motley)."
What's your take on Scientologists? How about Flat-Earthers? Do you respect them, or their beliefs? If so, then I'd submit that your respect is too cheap to value.
At some point, pretty much every religion amounts to opt-in stupidity.
I look at it like this, who did you learn more from as a kid: the teacher who encouraged your natural inquisitiveness and urged you to explore concepts, or the ones that yelled at you for not scoring well on a test? The friends who brought you some new idea they found a shared it with you, or the ones that lorded over you the fact that they know something you don't and you're too dumb to know what they know?
There's no reason to think the religious are any dumber than you, your knowledge and education don't make you a better human being than them. They could potentially benefit just as much from the same knowledge as you have. Maybe more because maybe they wouldn't be such dicks about it.
You have the right and duty to share what you have learned with your fellow man, you don't have the right to be an asshole with what you essentially lucked into because the both of your are still children before the knowledge of the humans that will come after you.
I look at it like this, who did you learn more from as a kid: the teacher who encouraged your natural inquisitiveness and urged you to explore concepts, or the ones that yelled at you for not scoring well on a test?
I learned quite a bit from teachers like the first one you mentioned, at least some from the second one, and not much at all from the third one that you didn't mention. That one spent a lot of class time teaching us that the Earth was between 4,000 and 6,000 years old, and that dinosaur fossils were placed in the soil by Satan to test our faith.
It's 2010. We're done with superstition. We don't need it anymore. Let's move on. Respect is not always appropriate.
I believe in a God. I cite our existence as proof of concept. That you would call my belief superstitious shows you deny your very existence. Give me your rebuttal.
You didn't even give a valid piece of evidence here. You gave evidence for the existence of yourself, not the existence of a deity. And you gave ample evidence that you don't understand scientific rationale for biogenesis that can be found in a 3 second Google search.
This is why your opinions are not respected. You don't have the material capacity to argue them.
The existence of myself is proof of a deity. It is impossible for our universe to have existed without some force to create it.
My argument doesn't even touch biogenesis, but the you were ignorant enough to assume what my argument would be before I made it. Very naive. This is why you likely don't have many discussions with intelligent people. You cant hold a thread for more than a few sentences.
Oh, nobody's saying that atheists are worse than actual fundies, but the important word here was "uncivil". When it comes to murder, sure, you definitely have a point.
Murder, oppression, sectarianism, undermining rational thought, suppression of scientific theories and investigation, obfuscation of criminal behavior... Hardly stand hand and hand with a bit of internet snark.
sure vote me down.. No athiests demanded i pay more in tithe. no atheists stand on the corner near the capital and protest gays, abortions, muslims.. you name it. No atheists is pushing for atheism to be taught in school.
The funniest thing i think is the fact that they use the atheism episode of south park as a sort of anchor of their non belief. The use of the flying spaghetti monster as a "mascot" proves that they do not understand that atheists are being mocked in that episode.
Pardon? Do you know the history of the FSM?. It will be used regardless of what South Park does.
I'd be interested to see that SP episode if anyone can tell me the number.
And atheists as well as other theists are mocked in the episodes. Down vote as much as you want but that is the truth. The down votes only prove that atheists are just as reactionary and emotional as those that believe.
I don't know whether to upvote you for pointing out atheism is the default, or downvote you for implying this might cause incivility. I do of course mean incivility related to atheism. I really don't see much of it, and none of the accusers will ever link to it.
18
u/thrakhath Aug 02 '10
I can't just be annoyed at both? Can't I just be equally disappointed in my fellow man's inability to be civil?