Who is the least tolerant?

[ChristineM]

I voted "religious people", but with an explanation.
Both religious & non-religious folk can be intolerant.
We've highly intolerant examples of the latter here on RF.
But religious prescriptions & proscriptions can impose
intolerant values upon otherwise tolerant people.

You talking about me again?

 

[Revoltingest]

You talking about me again?

I wasn't.
Should I be?
(I haven't spread any specious rumors about in over 2 days.)

 

[ChristineM]

I wasn't.
Should I be?
(I haven't spread any specious rumors about in over 2 days.)

Ok, I'll believe you.

Should you be? I don't think im intolerant, others may

 

[PearlSeeker]

We all have our intolerances. However some religious people have a claimed inerrant basis in their books to justify their intolerances, a luxury not afforded to those without religion. I'm intolerant of that.

Are you sure? You have some Old Testament at disposal:

Marx: The Communist Manifesto

The four gospels of "new a(nti)theism" are also available:

Sam Harris: The End of Faith
Daniel Dennett: Breaking the Spell
Richard Dawkins: The God Delusion
Christopher Hitchens: God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything

 

[Twilight Hue]

I see more intolerance here than in real life.
But then, here is a place where things are discussed, debated, dictated, etc. in more depth than in real life.
At least for me.

I think a lot of has to do with emotional investment. Its why sensitive topics are so difficult imv.

 

[Secret Chief]

Are you sure? You have some Old Testament at disposal:

Marx: The Communist Manifesto

The four gospels of "new a(nti)theism" are also available:

Sam Harris: The End of Faith
Daniel Dennett: Breaking the Spell
Richard Dawkins: The God Delusion
Christopher Hitchens: God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything

There's myriad books like that. There is no single recognised equivalent of the Bible that all atheists look to.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Are you sure? You have some Old Testament at disposal:

Marx: The Communist Manifesto

The four gospels of "new a(nti)theism" are also available:

Sam Harris: The End of Faith
Daniel Dennett: Breaking the Spell
Richard Dawkins: The God Delusion
Christopher Hitchens: God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything

Perhaps these books, along with so many more, might have effects on some, but I tended to read them to be up to date on what arguments are used against religions - with me forming my non-belief decades before any of these were written, as I suspect would be the case for many others.

PS Never read Marx that I can recall.

 

[Revoltingest]

Ok, I'll believe you.
Should you be? I don't think im intolerant, others may

I haven't heard them claim you're intolerant.
But some call you "French".
Naturally, I defend you.

 

[ChristineM]

I haven't heard them claim you're intolerant.
But some call you "French".
Naturally, I defend you.

Only you have called be french in a futile attempt to trigger my intolerance,.

 

[ChristineM]

Are you sure? You have some Old Testament at disposal:

Marx: The Communist Manifesto

The four gospels of "new a(nti)theism" are also available:

Sam Harris: The End of Faith
Daniel Dennett: Breaking the Spell
Richard Dawkins: The God Delusion
Christopher Hitchens: God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything

The acclaimed "four gospels of "new a(nti)theism"" are just books like many others and are in no way considered gospels except as a derogatory dig by religious folk.

I have a suspicion that they are far more read and studied by christians searching for ammunition than by atheists

 

[Revoltingest]

Only you have called be french in a futile attempt to trigger my intolerance,.

Well...my rumor mongering is limited to Revoltistanians on RF.

 

[ChristineM]

Well...my rumor mongering is limited to Revoltistanians on RF.

You do humour? Wow, i never realised

 

[Prim969]

I have observed, far too often in these forums, that there are people who are essentially intolerant of others who don't conform to one or another set of norms, views, beliefs, sexual expression, and so on. And I've also observed that there are many who are pretty accepting of all sorts of things, usually providing that they do no harm to others.

Now, I think (and this is based on no rigorous data) that the most intolerant people are very often those who are pursuaded by religious beliefs, often citing scripture to back up their intolerance. And I think that I've also observed (again with no rigorous data) that people who are more accustomed to free thought about everything (that is, not relying on scripture or dogma that is required to be believed) are much less likely to be intolerant of others -- often, in fact, being quite ready to accept and explore other viewpoints, cultures and so forth.

But many things impact our thinking, and religion (or irreligion), racism (or lack of it), politics, culture and so on inform how we relate with other people. But for my purpose here, I want to restrict the choice to just two: Are religious people more tolerant of human diversity, or are the non-religious more likely to be so?

Evangelicalhumanist I haven’t voted on the poll simply because there should have been a third option ( BOTH ) I take no pleasure in seeing the church punish some unfortunate for merely being gay and having a hot coal placed up their behind to purify their soul for the afterlife. I take no pleasure with the communists who during the Franco civil war took it apon themselves to rape Nuns and murder Priests who often had their genitalia cut off and placed in their mouths. The human heart who can really know it when you think apon the evil that lurks within. Especially when left to its own devices. So when it comes to secular or religious it does not discriminate between neither when it comes to that. As to the solution I do not know. Only that we should always try and guard our own hearts from such evils along with being very diligent with whom gets to admire our sweet asses as well.

 

[PearlSeeker]

There's myriad books like that. There is no single recognised equivalent of the Bible that all atheists look to.

Also @ChristineM

Not all. But "new atheism" movement caught some attention. There was even proselytizing - Atheist Bus Campaign - Wikipedia.

 

[ChristineM]

Also @ChristineM

Not all. But "new atheism" movement caught some attention. There was even proselytizing - Atheist Bus Campaign - Wikipedia.

Wow.

A bus, compared to 200+years of do it our way or die

​

 

[Secret Chief]

Also @ChristineM

I'm impressed! Does she do speaking tours?

 

[epronovost]

No. Both are virtues though.

In what manner is shyness a virtue?

 

[eik]

It would seem to me, based on what you wrote above, and this post early this morning Ditching a friend for offensive beliefs? ought to mean that you voted for Option 1 - Religious people are less tolerant.

As others have remarked the proposition you ask for a vote on is largely meaningless in using words like "tolerant" and "diversity" and "religious." It's just so broad it cannot be used for any purpose. "Religious" doesn't mean Christian. Anyone can be religious, even an atheist.

What I usually find is that devotees of nature religions are amongst the most intolerant bigots in the universe because they cannot stomach anyone who disagrees with their way of life and their worship of self.

 

[Heyo]

I have observed, far too often in these forums, that there are people who are essentially intolerant of others who don't conform to one or another set of norms, views, beliefs, sexual expression, and so on. And I've also observed that there are many who are pretty accepting of all sorts of things, usually providing that they do no harm to others.

Now, I think (and this is based on no rigorous data) that the most intolerant people are very often those who are pursuaded by religious beliefs, often citing scripture to back up their intolerance. And I think that I've also observed (again with no rigorous data) that people who are more accustomed to free thought about everything (that is, not relying on scripture or dogma that is required to be believed) are much less likely to be intolerant of others -- often, in fact, being quite ready to accept and explore other viewpoints, cultures and so forth.

But many things impact our thinking, and religion (or irreligion), racism (or lack of it), politics, culture and so on inform how we relate with other people. But for my purpose here, I want to restrict the choice to just two: Are religious people more tolerant of human diversity, or are the non-religious more likely to be so?

"Are religious people more tolerant of human diversity,"
With that specifier I have voted religious people to be less tolerant.
Overall, I think it may be a wash.

 

[Piculet]

In what manner is shyness a virtue?

Haya (Shyness)