How Are Atheists or Secularists Harming You, Your Kids or Your Country?

[Paradox22]

These questions go out to theists, atheists, agnostics and pretty much any dairy product you can think of.

(1) In what ways are the actions of atheists or secularists threatening you, family, or the country?
For example, just off the top of my head I can imagine someone saying that teaching evolution is harmful to their children, or that it is important that the people running this country believe in God.

(2) Are atheists trying to convert people in the same way that religious people do?

(3) If atheists are trying to convert people, Is it better or worse than when people of other religions try to do the same?

(4) would a rise in secularism be bad for America? Why or why not?

 

[StarryNightshade]

1.) None whatsoever.

2.) No. At least, not as a whole. Although I have come across a couple (repeat: only a couple) who have tried their hardest to "de-convert" me and other religious people to their "correct way of thinking".

3.) It's neither inherently better or worse.

4.) It's not. Hell, as one who is religious, I also am unapologetically secular.

 

[philbo]

1) Quite the reverse: people who don't believe in a god are far less likely to do something bat**** crazy because they think their invisible friend is telling them to do it

2) Of course not.

3) see 2)

4) I thought your constitution was pretty explicit in its definition of America as a secular society. Too many of your politicians feign a religious stance because they think they need it to be elected, but it's blatant self-interest wrapped in a bible: there's precious little Christian thought in the biggest bible-bashing "Christian" right. From outside, it looks far more like the US is threatened by unthinking religiousity far more than secularity (which is not synonymous with atheism, quite the reverse. It's just that church and state need to be kept separate for the good of both)

 

[Thana]

1 - They're not really. Anti-Theists are a different story, however.
2 - As far as I'm aware, They don't go door to door, But then neither do Jews or Hindu's so that doesn't mean much. Yes I do think they Proselytize and preach, I've seen quite a few Atheist billboards, Podcasts/Ads and such all for the purpose of converting people to Atheism.
3 - Neither. Proselytizing is Proselytizing. I don't like it, No matter who does it.
4 - Yes and No. There isn't really a reasonable answer to that question.

 

[Bunyip]

These questions go out to theists, atheists, agnostics and pretty much any dairy product you can think of.

(1) In what ways are the actions of atheists or secularists threatening you, family, or the country?
For example, just off the top of my head I can imagine someone saying that teaching evolution is harmful to their children, or that it is important that the people running this country believe in God.

(2) Are atheists trying to convert people in the same way that religious people do?

You can't be converted to atheism - it would be deconversion.

(3) If atheists are trying to convert people, Is it better or worse than when people of other religions try to do the same?

You can't convert to atheism.

(4) would a rise in secularism be bad for America? Why or why not?

The US was founded as a secular society, it has always been a secular society - the majority of Christians and Moslems are secular. Secularism has nothing to do with atheism.

 

[gsa]

These questions go out to theists, atheists, agnostics and pretty much any dairy product you can think of.

(1) In what ways are the actions of atheists or secularists threatening you, family, or the country?
For example, just off the top of my head I can imagine someone saying that teaching evolution is harmful to their children, or that it is important that the people running this country believe in God.

(2) Are atheists trying to convert people in the same way that religious people do?

(3) If atheists are trying to convert people, Is it better or worse than when people of other religions try to do the same?

(4) would a rise in secularism be bad for America? Why or why not?

1. They do not threaten anything. State secularism is just a constitutional imperative. Religious people who reject scientific facts, including evolution, are entitled to their private opinion, but not to government endorsement of a religious viewpoint.

2. No. There are some atheists who are attempting to persuade people to abandon belief in God (and the supernatural and paranormal) through rational argument. On the whole I don't think most atheists are terribly interested in doing so. They are certainly not going door to door or engaging in atheist missionary activities.

3. See the answer above. But I will say, as overbearing as some of the self-proclaimed atheist spokesmen can be in their writings, I rarely see it as rising to the same level you see among evangelicals. Within the space of a year, I've been visited by at least a dozen Christian missionaries, while not a single atheist has arrived to proclaim the good news of God's nonexistence. Nor is the market flooded with books on atheism in the way it is with Christian literature.

4. Probably. By your use of secularism here I assume you mean growth in non-religious affiliation or belief, as opposed to state secularism (i.e., the First Amendment). A rise in secularism will mean the diminishment of some forms of religious orthodoxy, and although I am not hostile to liberal and moderate religious expression, I don't think that there is much room for fundamentalism. I don't believe that fundamentalism's contributions to society outweigh its risks or its negative impact, so a secularization trend that diminishes fundamentalism is very welcome. On the other hand, a secularization trend that simply leads to diminishment of liberal and moderate religious expression and results in polarization between larger camps of the non-religious and fundamentalists is not necessarily healthy.

 

[Skwim]

Atheists and agnostics have conspired to suck the blood of all Christian infants whenever they get the chance. Most often taking the form of a small vampire bat and striking at night when the parents are out of the room and fast asleep. In turn they infect the infant with a virus that eventually turns it into a Republican, red neck, homophobe.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Atheists are making gas prices go up and inspiring kids to drop out of school and snort chili power

 

[EyeofOdin]

These questions go out to theists, atheists, agnostics and pretty much any dairy product you can think of.

(1) In what ways are the actions of atheists or secularists threatening you, family, or the country?
For example, just off the top of my head I can imagine someone saying that teaching evolution is harmful to their children, or that it is important that the people running this country believe in God.

(2) Are atheists trying to convert people in the same way that religious people do?

(3) If atheists are trying to convert people, Is it better or worse than when people of other religions try to do the same?

(4) would a rise in secularism be bad for America? Why or why not?

1) Moderate Atheists don't threaten me, family nor my country, generally.

2) Although moderates are usually fine, militant atheists always try to convert others to a secular, non-theistic point of view. I mean, sure, militant atheists don't go door to door and say "Did you hear the good news?! There is no God!!" but they subscribe to the same colonialist, proselytizing practices, preaching Atheism as the "only true" rationality (sound familiar? just replace "rationality" with "god" or "way").

I'm a Heathen, a pagan/polytheistic tradition. We pagans don't carry the opinion that there's a sacred duty to expand, spread and conquer for our gods. We actually find that a little silly, yet militant atheists automatically, almost by instinct, will attack paganism because we're a religious group and that apparently means that paganism (being typically benign, biocentric and multicultural) is exactly like Christianity (for the most part, historically fundamentalist, anthropocentric and colonialist). What did I ever do to them that I get insults connected to ignorance, superstition, bigotry and superiority thrown in my face? It's really annoying!

3) Neither. Practices based in colonialism is bad. Period.

4) That depends. Militant secularism is , I believe, a reaction to a combination of monotheistic oppression and a surge in historical knowledge accessibility. People are seeing the horrors of Colonialist Christianity that had been swept under the rug for a really long time, along with more liberal views on gender, ethnicity and sexuality that aren't biblical by any means, something that we Heathens are also very passionate about, being reconstructionists whose ancestors were victims of the same colonialist group. The issue is that Atheists have equated "religion" with "Christianity" by now, and don't think that there were gods before Abraham. If those gods and pagan traditions are brought up, the ones who are familiar say "oh yeah, but they're all the same anyway! Superstitious, violent holy wars, conversions, religious genocide blah blah blah, it was just Zeus' Heaven vs Thor's Heaven instead of Allah's vs God's" < couldn't be further from the truth. Superstitious, arguable but subjective. Violent holy wars? conversions? religious based genocide? Conflictions of acceptance of savior hood between two culture's deities? These things are very much NOT pagan.

Sure pagans had their wars, but they were over things, frankly, war is supposed to be about, like territorial disputes or resources. They had their conflicts and were violent, but would never think to take a people from their native culture in rapture. Pagans took land, slaves, food and money in their battles. Abrahamic colonialists did all the same, but on top of that, they stole the Natives' souls (Germanic peoples, African slaves, Indigenous Americans etc.).

My point is that the Richard Dawkins Atheism is just as bad as Fundamentalist Christianity or Radical Islam in my opinion, and they all have no place in the 21st century. Moderate Christianity, Islam and Atheism can stand along side the pagans as we strive towards the future.

 

[ratikala]

These questions go out to theists, atheists, agnostics and pretty much any dairy product you can think of.

(1) In what ways are the actions of atheists or secularists threatening you, family, or the country?
For example, just off the top of my head I can imagine someone saying that teaching evolution is harmful to their children, or that it is important that the people running this country believe in God.

personaly I see the rise in atheism and the rise in secularism to be changing both world and society , we have become more selfish and focused upon our own desires and imidiate requirements ,
not that all atheists are bad people as there are good and bad selfish and un selfish individuals amongst theists and atheists alike , ...

as far as I see it , ...to talk of the welfare of ones family or of ones country is a symptom of this secularisation , ....yet when a society does not hold to a beleif in there being a greater good they do not nececarily look at the welfare of all beings equaly .

(2) Are atheists trying to convert people in the same way that religious people do?

there are hardline atheists who regard religion or theism to be backward and feel that science has , or can find the answer to everything , and yes , there is an attempt on the part of such people to establish science as the new inteligence . where as to a theist Science has its uses but also its limitations .

(3) If atheists are trying to convert people, Is it better or worse than when people of other religions try to do the same?

when the educational system gives preference to science above religion , then this is an unhealthy Bias , ....
I think that we do not realise that the world of science is not neautral it too has its own aggendas .

(4) would a rise in secularism be bad for America? Why or why not?

if without religion there is a rise in self interest and a loss of ballance , then it is bad for America and bad for the World , ..

 

[philbo]

Atheists and agnostics have conspired to suck the blood of all Christian infants whenever they get the chance. Most often taking the form of a small vampire bat and striking at night when the parents are out of the room and fast asleep. In turn they infect the infant with a virus that eventually turns it into a Republican, red neck, homophobe.

Would I be correct in the assumption that you're not being entirely serious in this reply? Because I think you might be being a little bit unfair on the agnostic vampire bats, who aren't sure who to bite..

 

[icehorse]

Hi ratikala,

I think if you do a bit of googling you'll see that - per capita - some of the most secular and/or atheistic countries are also the most charitable. (I'm thinking of Scandinavian countries off the top of my head.)

 

[Bunyip]

I don't have time to convert people!

Between spending all weekend and holidays with my local atheist dinosaur bone burying group and of course roaming about the town all week with my atheist gang maliciously not believing in stuff there is no time for evangelising.

 

[Skwim]

Would I be correct in the assumption that you're not being entirely serious in this reply? Because I think you might be being a little bit unfair on the agnostic vampire bats, who aren't sure who to bite..

It goes much deeper than "who to bite," but to bite at all. While atheists dive right in and gorge themselves on infant blood an agnostic will often hang back trying to decide whether or not to go to the bother. This sometimes occurs at the sight or even mere mention of a Big Mac, which can put him off human blood for a full week.

 

[psychoslice]

I feel that religion has had its day, we need to grow up from children believing in stories, we need to find our true inner self and make that our own religion. Religion stunts peoples growth, and keeps them in a prison where they can never grow, while wasting their lives hoping for a better life after this one, its full of greed mascaraed as someone who is nonmaterial and only fooling themselves.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram

Hi ratikala,

I think if you do a bit of googling you'll see that - per capita - some of the most secular and/or atheistic countries are also the most charitable. (I'm thinking of Scandinavian countries off the top of my head.)

I am not wishing to say anything against the charitable nature of a country as it is certainly a wonderfull thing .

but I am sceptical about how data is gathered for charitable giving as each person gives in very different ways according to their means , and as a whole countries can only give dependant in some respects upon their wealth and stability ,
we had this conversation before regarding India where only a small minority are wealthy enough to give in any way that can be measured .
there are many things that I beleive you will not find statistics for , such as how many people give their time and money to support volunteray activities which benifit their own imidiate comunities and organisations with far reaching remits , ...

 

[ratikala]

I feel that religion has had its day, we need to grow up from children believing in stories, we need to find our true inner self and make that our own religion. Religion stunts peoples growth, and keeps them in a prison where they can never grow, while wasting their lives hoping for a better life after this one, its full of greed mascaraed as someone who is nonmaterial and only fooling themselves.

I am greatly saddened that you feel religion to be so stiffeling , however many have a very different oppinion , ..to my mind religion very much helps us to live better and happier lives here and now , it is not just about securing a better afterlife , it is also about sharing .

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Hey ratikala...

There were aspects of your post that I feel misrepresent of atheism, so wanted to address those;

personaly I see the rise in atheism and the rise in secularism to be changing both world and society , we have become more selfish and focused upon our own desires and imidiate requirements ,
not that all atheists are bad people as there are good and bad selfish and un selfish individuals amongst theists and atheists alike , ...

as far as I see it , ...to talk of the welfare of ones family or of ones country is a symptom of this secularisation , ....yet when a society does not hold to a beleif in there being a greater good they do not nececarily look at the welfare of all beings equaly .

Belief in a greater good ALSO does not mean people look at the welfare of all beings equally. There are plenty of devoutly religious people who would separate people due to their very religiousness. Equally, there are religions which encourage individualism and self-actualization at the expense of community.

Secular humanism is the complete opposite to this, and actively encourages treatment of all people as being of equal value.

I'm not suggesting atheism is less selfish than theism. I'm suggesting that people are people for the most part. There is very little evidence that what you've suggested is true.

there are hardline atheists who regard religion or theism to be backward and feel that science has , or can find the answer to everything , and yes , there is an attempt on the part of such people to establish science as the new inteligence . where as to a theist Science has its uses but also its limitations .

I share a disdain of fundamentalism, be it atheist or religious.

when the educational system gives preference to science above religion , then this is an unhealthy Bias , ....
I think that we do not realise that the world of science is not neautral it too has its own aggendas .

This is where I have a major difference with you. The educational system cannot and must not be used to promote religion. It also cannot and must not be used to push anti-theism. These ideas are not appropriate to large scale public schooling. By their very nature, pushing ideas of one religion is to grant it favour or gravitas.
This does not equate to thinking that science is neutral, nor that science doesn't have agendas. What children are taught in schools does not merely comprise of science, and nor should any discussion on religion and education be seen as a choice between religion and science. School is for secular education.

if without religion there is a rise in self interest and a loss of ballance , then it is bad for America and bad for the World , ..

This last makes little sense. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.
If the lack of ANYTHING causes a rise in self interest and a loss of balance, then it's bad for America, and bad for the World. This does nothing to show that a lack of religion promotes a rise in self interest and a loss of balance though.

You argued that statistics from secular countries such as the Nordic countries, Australia, New Zealand or Canada which show generally favourable levels of charity are biased, and I can understand your thought process. How, though, do you reach a conclusion that secular thought it responsible for LESS community interest or acts of charity?

 

[Gnostic Seeker]

These questions go out to theists, atheists, agnostics and pretty much any dairy product you can think of.

(1) In what ways are the actions of atheists or secularists threatening you, family, or the country?
For example, just off the top of my head I can imagine someone saying that teaching evolution is harmful to their children, or that it is important that the people running this country believe in God.

(2) Are atheists trying to convert people in the same way that religious people do?

(3) If atheists are trying to convert people, Is it better or worse than when people of other religions try to do the same?

(4) would a rise in secularism be bad for America? Why or why not?

Atheists don't bother me, and I really prefer them above some religious ideologies, just because they're less extreme. I'm not sure why you associate secularism with atheism though. I'm a secularist. I believe in total separation of the church from state.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram mr miller , ...

Hey ratikala...

There were aspects of your post that I feel misrepresent of atheism, so wanted to address those;

personaly I see the rise in atheism and the rise in secularism to be changing both world and society , we have become more selfish and focused upon our own desires and imidiate requirements ,
not that all atheists are bad people as there are good and bad selfish and un selfish individuals amongst theists and atheists alike , ...

Belief in a greater good ALSO does not mean people look at the welfare of all beings equally. There are plenty of devoutly religious people who would separate people due to their very religiousness. Equally, there are religions which encourage individualism and self-actualization at the expense of community.

Secular humanism is the complete opposite to this, and actively encourages treatment of all people as being of equal value.

that is why I said , ......
''not that all atheists are bad people as there are good and bad selfish and un selfish individuals amongst theists and atheists alike ,''

I share a disdain of fundamentalism, be it atheist or religious.

likewise .

This is where I have a major difference with you. The educational system cannot and must not be used to promote religion. It also cannot and must not be used to push anti-theism. These ideas are not appropriate to large scale public schooling. By their very nature, pushing ideas of one religion is to grant it favour or gravitas.

agreed education should not promote any one thig over another or to the exclusion of , ....

nor should there be favour to one religion (unless it is a faith school )

This does not equate to thinking that science is neutral, nor that science doesn't have agendas. What children are taught in schools does not merely comprise of science, and nor should any discussion on religion and education be seen as a choice between religion and science. School is for secular education.

Oh I agree Science is not neutral , not neutral at all.

to me school should be for education in all areas not just selective ones , ....

quote ratikala, ...
if without religion there is a rise in self interest and a loss of ballance , then it is bad for America and bad for the World , ..

This last makes little sense. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.
If the lack of ANYTHING causes a rise in self interest and a loss of balance, then it's bad for America, and bad for the World. This does nothing to show that a lack of religion promotes a rise in self interest and a loss of balance though.

please bear in mind that I am of Dharmic faith , not christian , the entire Dharmic premis is that of Duty , of there being a common law which binds man , and dictates our responcibility to one another , without that common law to bind us , ....if (and I did say if )the lack of religosity brings about a rise in self intereset then that universal law collapses Dharma comes from the sanskrit root , 'to support' , ....so as with any law , without it there is dissorder , ...therefore ballance is dissrupted or lost ....

You argued that statistics from secular countries such as the Nordic countries, Australia, New Zealand or Canada which show generally favourable levels of charity are biased, and I can understand your thought process. How, though, do you reach a conclusion that secular thought it responsible for LESS community interest or acts of charity?

not so much biased , but data collected in the west is often a reflection of financial support and giving , , ...I wonder what the statistics would be if it were possible to measure time and effort given in support of others in need , ....there are countries too poor to give financialy but they may be very giving people when it comes to non material support , ...sorry I am just not particularly won over by statistics , I am not sure that they truely reflect (in this instance) charitable giving .