Well, to repeat the quote:
Not a lot of warm-and-fuzzy benevolence with these guys.
As a Jew, I wouldn’t give a hoot if some Christian, Muslim, Hindu, or whoever sprinked some water and said, “Please God, keep the drivers here safe.” It’s the creepy “I hope bad things happen to non-Christians” subtext of Polk Under Prayer that bothers me.
And the same goes for religious people too, right? If it won’t change anyone’s opinion, why should religious people attempt to be understanding and tolerant of other people’s beliefs and opinions?
Come to think of it, is there any reason people should be nice and respectful towards eachother at all?
I don’t endorse the initial blessing, given the language the blessing appears to have had. Wishing ill towards non-Christians and all that. That kind of bull isn’t anything the God I believe in would respond to positively. Proof once again that we Christians can be a damn diverse bunch of wackjobs.
But at the same time, I’d consider the first ‘blessing’ invalid to begin with, and not worth responding to in any way. The same way I’d feel if a Satanist tried to make the ground I stand on ‘unholy’. It just isn’t worth my time trying to rectify an action that was invalid in the first place.
As far as I am concerned, this entire incident was nothing more than political posturing. It and provides no more progress towards rectifying the issues at hand than burning books(either religious or non-religiious ones) does.
What better way to call attention to the stupidity of the initial blessing than by doing a prank like this? Would you rather the atheist started ranting or picketing? Or should we just grin and shuffle and take it? If other Christians called attention to this thing I didn’t notice it in the article.
The think about Christianity is that being nice to a Jew or atheist involves trying to convert them. Historically, by force if necessary.
Confusion indeed reigns supreme if anyone thinks the atheists thought either the blessing or unblessing would have supernatural effect.
I admire the atheists, who are trying to counter the pernicious effect of excessive religiosity on American politics. (Unfortunately, I’m just an apathist – someone who can’t be bothered to compare the details of agnosticism and atheism to see which best applies to me. :smack: )
Well of course the whole thing is “poltical posturing”. As a rule, atheists don’t care much about theology. Why should we? If there’s no God, theology is pretty much a waste of time.
But a lot of us do care about politics (and so should theists). Politics is important. It can affect real people’s lives. A county sheriff has the power to arrest people. A county school superintendent is entrusted with educating everyone’s children, Christian, Jewish, and atheist alike. And all of these sheriffs, school superintendents, and mayors are spending money (collected from taxpaying citizens of all religious viewpoints) to do their jobs.
When you get sheriffs, public school superintendents, and mayors involved with some movement whose goal is to have everyone who doesn’t submit to (what they believe to be) God’s will “incarcerated or removed from the county” you aren’t just talking about “theology” anymore. It’s not just “well, when you die (of natural causes), you’re going to hell!” Talking about wanting people to be “incarcerated” is a political statement, and damned well deserves a political response.
And the same goes for religious people too, right? If it won’t change anyone’s opinion, why should religious people attempt to be understanding and tolerant of other people’s beliefs and opinions?
[/quote]
They won’t, unless a government steps in and uses force to make them. Your reciprocity argument fails because the believers are never going to be any more tolerant than they are forced to be.
In my experience, atheists are no more tolerant than theists. Niether side has the high ground as far as being accepting of other people’s views, IMO.
To be fair, the Christian group did think they were doing something tangibly useful. It’s the athiests who spent an afternoon doing something that they admit has no use or benefit beyond making a statement.
That’s standard pro-religious rhetoric; it’s unthinkable to admit that atheism is in any way beneficial.
I’ve heard through the grapevine that Mormans have gotten hold of a large number of road atlases and are baptizing roads throughtout the USA whether the locals want it done or not.
And in my experience, any atheist who dares to come out as an atheist is pointed out and the believers will make a concerted effort to convert the atheist. I’m perfectly willing to let believers believe whatever nonsense they want to…until they try to get that nonsense taught as facts in school, such as creationism or Intelligent Design. And I don’t want my tax dollars spent on religious rituals. If a private group wants to bless highways, that’s one thing. When it’s endorsed by public officials, IN THEIR CAPACITY AS PUBLIC OFFICIALS, that’s another thing…and it’s a wrong thing. When a sheriff misuses his powers to harass someone for no reason (other than that she’s an atheist), that’s wrong.
Umm, you live in Texas. In a city next to the city with the most churches but maybe not. Experiences very much vary depending on geographical location.
Yes, experience vary. However, I haven’t always lived in Texas, and my experience has been the same all over…once a believer finds out that I’m an atheist, many of them will attempt to convert me, or try to pressure me into putting my child into Sunday school and/or get her baptized (back when she WAS a child). It’s not enough for me to just not interrupt someone when they’re saying Grace…they want me to join in, too.
Now, not all believers are like this. But enough of them are that I am willing to say that many believers are simply not content to let atheists be atheists, they want atheists to at least follow the believer’s rituals.
Ummmmm…where in my statement did you distill that message? I have been persecuted in my social circle for being a Christian. I have had that experience. At the same time, however, I’ve had some of the most interesting conversations of my life with atheists. Religious debate is a challenge to me, and I LOVE discussing it. In church, I often take the atheistic outlook when I talk with people, just to bring up some of the valid points the movement has. And I’ve been an atheist(or at least an atheist-leaning agnostic) before accepting a Christian outlook on life only a few short years ago. So to condemn atheism would be nothing short of hypocritical for me. I’ve been there, I know what it is like to believe that way, and I don’t hold a grudge, or think any less of a person for continuing to hold to that view.
Without atheism, religion would have no counterbalance. Some of the most horrific things humanity has ever done has been in the name of God(a fact that I have no doubt He dislikes.) Having atheists in society is a damn good thing. And plenty of people live wonderful, fullfilling lives with little help(and in some cases a lot of hinderance) from religion.
But pardon me if I don’t think that atheists are any better at accepting the views of believers than believers are at accepting theirs. If this belief counts as ‘pro-religious’, I wonder if there is any moderate stance to be had here.
Why do I, as an atheist, have to accept religious views? Especially if they’re scientifically invalid? Can’t it be enough that I simply don’t try to convert or deconvert believers? All I want is to be left alone. Isn’t that enough?
Oh you don’t have to accept them. No more than anyone has to accept anyone elses’ view on anything. You have every right to feel that religious views are scientifically invalid. Just as they have every right to feel that your conclusions about the universe are fundamentally flawed.
Let me clarify that this does NOT mean they have the right to harrass you about it. In fact, there is nothing worse that they could do. All that kind of behavior does is make life difficult for all involved. And the worst part is, they think they’re doing you a favor. :rolleyes:
Yes, it should be enough that you try to leave well enough alone. I tried that for a while after I became a Christian. I just didn’t talk about it. But once my social circle knew, a lot of them would throw these barbed comments like ‘So you don’t think evolution is true huh?’ or ‘Maybe you should just skip science class, man. Not like you believe any of it.’ or ‘You’re going to be so boring now.’ They made me feel like my opinion held no value, and that this one change would now define me more than every other aspect of my character combined.
I had to cut contact with a lot of people, because they simply couldn’t accept that I had reached a different conclusion. There are people like that on both sides of the issue. If you can’t just cut contact with them or convince them to knock it off, the only thing to do is ignore them. Because they will not change, and arguing with them won’t do any good. Their behavior is not worthy of your time.
For what it’s worth(not much, I’ll admit), I’m sorry you have to deal with that kind of patronizing behavior in the first place. But as they say, life’s a bitch, and then you die.