No, it’s not harder to deal with someone who believes in witchcraft. It’s exactly the same thing for me.
As to why you see little scorn for that here, the thread’s name limits it to Christians and atheists.
Gandhi believed that he needed to sleep with his underage nieces to keep his spirit “uplifted”.
Outside of being a good mathematician, Newton is not actually the pinnacle of rationality. For the most part he was a second rate thelogian who is largely ignored by theologians for being rather woo-woo.
And I’m not sure why you’re adding in MLK as a potential example of rationality. He was a charismatic speaker and fought for his people, but that doesn’t take a lot of rationality. Personally I would say that Malcolm X’s more strongarmed approach probably was a wiser one. Martin Luther King’s kinder doctrine is possibly one influence in keeping black people from forcing their way up the social ladder in modern day.
I knew a Buddhist girl and was equally :dubious: about that as well. But short of any Buddhist people to be :dubious: about, Christians are most of all that’s available.
Point in fact, I also dated a girl who was into Native American beliefs and outside of any common-sense teachings from it, I was still pretty consistently :dubious: about it.
Ah, well, there’s only so much room in a thread name. But I think I mentioned it in the OP. Perhaps I should have been less specific, but then it is all about me…sort of. I was just trying to broaden the scope.
You’ve phrased that like I said I couldn’t be with a Christian because I’d be annoyed with their Christianity.
Did you read anything I wrote?
It’s all about the fact that someone actually believes in myths and gods and afterlife that I have a problem with.
Speaking for myself, and only myself, there’s not much difference. From my perspective, the Wiccan Rede and Rule of Three (which I really quite like, at least in concept) are essentially “Lead a good life” and “do unto others.” Witchcraft and magic aren’t any more or less believable to me than prayers and divine intervention. And I rather like that the holidays that are tied to predictable, astronomical phenomena.
I think Christianity has been singled out in part because of the thread title, in part because most of the posters here come from countries where Christianity is the dominant religious force and are therefore more likely to come across close-minded jerks who are Christian rather than, say, close-minded jerks who are Hindu.
However, if you’re looking for one element common to Christianity - at least, many denominations of Christianity - that is almost guaranteed to raise friction with atheists, look no further than the need to proselytize. I’ve never been stopped in the parking lot by a Buddhist handing out pamphlets. Never had a Wiccan ring my doorbell to inquire about my religious beliefs. Never been unable to walk in my local park because every block I’m stopped by a Muslim asking if I’ve accepted Allah into my heart. Never received requests for donations so the local synagogue can build a youth center designed for teenage belivers to pressure non-believers into joining “an army for God.” Never been told by a Sikh bride that she planned to all of her wedding gifts at auction to buy books used to convert “natives in the Congo” to the one true religion. I’m sure many other religions do take efforts to approach non-believers in an effort to convert them, but I have yet to experience anyone other than a Christian interrupting my day unsolicited to tell me everything I believe is wrong.
I’m well aware that not all Christians feel the need to convert others, any more than all atheists have the good sense to know when to keep their mouths shut. If I lived in an area where another religion dominated, I’m sure I’d have plenty of stories about thoughtless adherents of those religions, but so far, I don’t.
I’m sorry, kittenblue. I want to get into an explanation, but anything other than a broad brush will look like a personal attack, or worse, look at though I am insisting that *you personally * defend your faith. I cannot speak for other atheists, but I have no plan to convert or win over anyone to my “side”. It is not my intention to be unkind, but it is difficult to offer an answer to the question of mixing faith with non-believers without saying something unintentionally challenging. Please let me try again.
Of course anyone who seeks to improve his life and that of his family by studying the Bible is full of good intentions. That in itself is taking personal responsibility for happiness. Nothing to disparage there. But taking personal responsibility (to me) also means accepting the fact that if you abuse drugs, neglect your children or cheat on your spouse that you are entirely responsible, not Satan. Taking personal responsibility means that if your crop fails, you take steps to educate yourself to improve next year’s crop instead of blaming the failure on God. Taking personal responsibility means that you accept illness and death as the natural cycle or life instead of imagining that God is plucking each and every one of our strings for some unknown but surely divine purpose. It means taking proactive measures as necessary to improve things instead of pondering over a book and waiting for God’s intervention.
I’m sorry if I was unclear about the family that I married into, but none were fundamentalist Christians. Only one aunt and uncle (out of 11 children) regularly attended church. The family was blessed with musical talent and they were far too busy playing music, dancing, and drinking to bother with getting up to go to church. They weren’t conservative in dress, behavior, or habit. But they did regularly and routinely answer any unknown question or quandary with “God’s plan.” They all carried Bibles in their cars, displayed well worn Bibles on coffee tables, and consulted the Book whenever life dealt a blow. They spoke frequently of Jesus Christ and testified to His influence as a matter of course, and not to witness. They were examples of the most casual Christian I come in contact with. *But a casual style of worship does not automatically grant a curiosity about the natural world. A casual style of worship does not imply tolerance for variation. *
Don’t let the statues and cool robes fool you-people who follow the teachings of the Buddha don’t believe the Buddha is a god. They believe in espousing a philosophy of kindness to all living things regardless of sin, orientation, behavior or actions. The Buddha was a man, not a mythical being. Buddhism is a philosophy- a reasonable, attainable pattern of human interaction that is not a religion. People who follow the teachings of the Buddha encourage others to follow the beliefs of their choice and feel that any person of any belief system can also study and benefit from the path. People who follow the teachings of the Buddha are receptive to science and medicine and willing to replace ancient beliefs with facts as they are revealed. And they don’t recruit.
Uh, some religions do not believe that you have to be a believer “of the right kind” in order to go to Heaven, or even any kind of believer. Some don’t believe in Heaven.
Not married here, but one of my oldest friends (very Catholic and very passionate) is married to a blah. He isn’t so much an atheist or agnostic as, well… a blah who sees religion as “a bunch of damned constraints”. Then again, he is blah in many other things. Anyway, she claims that she was a virgin until their wedding night because she knew it was the one thing that would make it clear to him how important her religion was to her; if he’d been a believer they’d probably have done the deed several years before. He had to accept the possibility of taking the kids to a Catholic school if it happened to be the best in town (he’d wanted state school); she has no problem with taking them to a secular school if it happens to be best.