Y’know, that is true, though it would take some de-and-re-construction of their beliefs to make them see it. But that comes from hanging out with Evangelical Lutherans, who often consider themselves conservative but, if they really looked at it, would not. Crazy world, where the folks who thought they were upholding traditional beliefs find out they aren’t.
Thing is, you can prove whether or not a person is a duke or a senator or a spy because there are tangible ways to determine so, and there is a much narrower standard to base that proof on.
Christianity is very splintered and freeform, and there’s no tangible set rules to go by. People make it up as they go along. You can say you like some of what jesus stood for and call yourself a christian. You can interpret scripture in a wide variety of ways so that the jesus thing fits your lifestyle, and no one can tell you you’re wrong, since so many interpretations are accepted.
In short, you can have your own opinion on what a christian is, but in the end it is only an opinion.
a) I can’t recall mass killings of atheists in particular either. However, not believing in salvation through Jesus got plenty of non-Christians tortured and killed during the Spanish Inquisition. It is true that Mao and Stalin killed loads and loads of people and they were atheists, but they didn’t kill people FOR believing in God so much as they did for NOT believing in The Party and The Motherland.
According to polls (if you think I’m hunting for a cite in non-GQ/GD you’re psycho) people in the US are more likely to trust a muslim (you know, current religious BOOGYMAN) or homosexual than an atheist. In several states it is still technically illegal for an atheist to hold public office. A chunky percentage of people who identify as Christian would not trust an atheist with their children.
As a note: I am also an afairyist, an acentaurist, an ababayagaist, an amermaidist, and many others. It’s not that I actively don’t believe in them; they’re just not real, and no one has ever given me evidence that they are. Also, I don’t know any atheists who “hate Jesus” any more than they “hate Satan” or “hate the Tooth Fairy.”
I’ve never heard that atheists can’t hold public office in some states. Got a cite for that?
I did hear some British guy recently in a similar vein. He said something to the effect of, “I don’t call myself an atheist. It hardly seems worth having a word at all for something you don’t believe in.” And then he went on to list some other things he didn’t believe in, pointing out there were no specific words for them.
Clearly, he has missed out on your dictionary. 
http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/StateConstitutions.htm
I doubt any of them are in force, or would hold up to a challenge.
They can’t be in force. They are in violation of the U.S. Constitution.
I would rather see organizations like the Freedom from Religion Foundation spending their money to force out clauses like these from the various state constitutions, than going after Christmas displays on public lands.
Jesus Christ, it’s tough to imagine that crap like this is still on the books in this day and age.
I’d agree with your definition of both “good Christian” and “Christian”, but I still think QG’s point doesn’t work. As you say, being a good Christian has some outward sign, if a bit more difficult to measure than being a duke or senator. But the Christian part remains a matter of personal belief. After all, one could outwardly show all the characteristics of being a “good Christian” without actually believing in God or Jesus.
I’m pretty sure they wouldn’t stand up to a challenge because even though atheists are not exactly “mainstream” yet, barring a person from being confirmed due to his/her atheism would be a political nightmare. Or should better fucking well be.
Might have been Richard Dawkins, though he’s usually the one who says he’s also an a-toothfairy-ist. I like his way of thinking: “Christians are atheists as far as Allah, Ganesh, and Poseiden are concerned; I just go one god further.”
Way, way back to the OP, if I am remembering aright…
I grew up Roman Catholic. Although I never really felt a belief, I followed my devout family’s lead and did all the things I was taught to do. I learned that to be a good Catholic, it was more important that you be a good person than to follow the “rules”, though - this may be because our upbringing was in the midst of the SJ’s, IHM’s and RSM’s, though. (Slightly more liberal orders of priests and nuns)
Somewhere in High School, I had a problem with Ash Wednesday. I remembered the story Jesus told about the guy in the front of the temple loudly proclaiming his piety being actually less of a “good guy” than the guy in the back who prayed quietly and unnoticed. So I asked the nun teaching my religion class how that could be reconciled with Catholics going around “proclaiming piety” by wearing ashes on their foreheads. She agreed that it was a mixed message…
That leads to my discomfort with the whole fish/bumpersticker/in God we Trust/day of prayer thing. My family members are all still Catholic. They are good people, who devote a lot of time and effort into helping anybody who they can, regardless of any differences.
I’ve been noticing that the people I see being good folks and helping others where ever they can are mostly Christians, (due primarily to my location and social structure these days) but none of them have a fish/bumpersticker/IGWT declaration prominent in their lives. From what I know, they are Lutheran, Methodist, Catholic, Baptist, MCC and many unknowns.
The point of this whole ramble is to agree that the folks with all the stickers/fish etc scare me. They make me feel like running and hiding - like I am on the “opposing team”. Around here, MANY of the stores proclaim their Christian beliefs prominently - it took us 2 years to find an auto mechanic who didn’t! (I kind of worried that my car, with a rainbow on it and no Christian stickers, would get a lesser grade of service. I am much more comfortable with letting folks know that I am a lesbian than with letting folks know that I am NOT a Christian!
Oh - and to head off any arguments that I am being hypocritical by having a rainbow sticker on my car - I am now in a VERY conservative area. Gays out here are few, far between and hide very well. I made a conscious decision to let “my folks” know that if they need an ally, I am out here - but I still don’t see the point of having a sticker on my car to proclaim myself part of the majority!
(For the folks keeping score, I am an Atheistic Agnostic - I don’t believe, but I know that I don’t know everything!)
This sums up my experience exactly. And throw in the “If you ain’t with us, you must be against us…” mentality to describe Christian tolerance of differing belief systems.
(I have known a few loving, tolerant Christians, but I feel certain that the same people would be loving and tolerant individuals even without the pressure to conform to a regional religious habit.)
I really love this:
This is the reason I get told I “hate God” after I state that I am an atheist.
Yeah but you won’t know. You can’t call up the CIA and ask if Fred’s really a spy.
And plenty of people have been fooled by con men who claimed to be all manner of fabulous things who weren’t at all.
Not really. Christians are supposed to be good to other folks. The Man said so. You see someone putting the hate on who does it on a regular basis, doesn’t matter if he calls himself the Pope Incarnate - that is no Christian.
Huh?
Nope. Christopher Hitchens. I heard him say that exact thing on The Daily Show Thursday night.
Word. Ask any christian.
Now you’re going to have to define good. As with christianity, good comes in many flavors; not all of them appealing to everyone.
You’re quite correct. Nevertheless, it is possible to find out that way. There is tangible evidence that exists outside of their mind. I might not have access to it, but someone does. The same is not true of religious/irreligious belief. The only evidence for that is in their mind, only accessible by them. We can only ever go by someone’s word that they believe something.
And here lies another couple of problems. Who do Christians have to be good to? What does “good” mean? How far should a Christian go foresaking their own happiness?
People who call themselves Christians may answer these very differently. It’s all well and good to say “Christians must be good - we can measure that!” but there’s no concrete example for us to go on. They should give 10% of their money to the church. They should help the church, but only when they can afford it. They should make sure religion is part of government, so laws reflect the laws of God. They should keep religion out of government, because people need to be free to do what they want.
So three problems. A - who decides what the definition of “good” is, since people who call themselves Christian and (if we assume they aren’t lying) believe in God and JC may have very different ideas on that. And B - Why is their definition better than anyone else’s? And C - Under your own definition, Christians are supposed to be good. Not are. Supposed to be. So even if we were able to get a definition of good, and get it from a person who defines accurately, we still aren’t left with anything to measure. Not believing and not being a “good” Christian could easily look exactly the same.
Just as a side question on your own personal definition; it seems to me, then, that under it the statement “All Christians are good people” is by definition true, and that “A bad person cannot be a Christian” is likewise true. Would you agree?
Read back up. I already posted a relevant quote. Attributed to JC himself.
You’re assuming he’s an authority (if he existed at all) on “goodness” and that goodness can only be defined by him. Such is not the case.
Unless and until you get a majority of the Supreme Court to rule that way, your interpretation of the First Amendment is entirely irrelavant, “smart legal minds”, notwithstanding. :rolleyes: