I suspect it’s the “religionists” appellation Dangerosa is referring to.
Doesn’t mean that it’s very good, given such a low hurdle.
I find it to be a nice catch-all phrase.
No, why would I want to watch something about a movie I saw myself? Especially when everyone who told me to watch it also told me I was a moron.
Because then you could discuss the review with all the other posters, instead of being the guy who pops into a thread just to tell everyone what a lame subject they’re discussing.
Horrors! Save us from the harmony! 
You’re not understanding me. I don’t have a problem questioning someone’s belief. I’m talking about the nature of the questioning.
Let’s say you have a brother you are very close to, whom you love and respect, who had suddenly had some miraculous religous experince that he was excited about. Can you imagine having a conversation with him about why you don’t believe his experience was a supernatural event, without trying to make him look foolish or laughing at him? Or calling him delusional? Or referring to God as a Sky Pixie?
This sounds more like an inferiority complex on the part the believers.
Moderator note:
With apologies to the OP, I can’t see any reason now why this shouldn’t go to Great Debates. I was inclined to leave it, but after noticing the page count and reading through it, a debate is what we have ended up with. It’s virtually impossible to bring up the theist/atheist divide here without engendering a debate. If nothing else, this seems to show that the theists aren’t beaten down completely.
It doesn’t seem all that odd to me, much less insulting. People use the term “co-religionist” to refer to someone of the same religion for example.
I get it. Point taken, understood, accepted, agreed with.
I didn’t, but I do now. There is snarking on this board for no good reason and then there are people trying to claim evidence for a belief system that is predicated on the absence of evidence (i.e. ‘‘faith.’’) I have been conflating the two. They both exist, but I understand your point.
I think it depends on the context. I do think religion is a special case, in the same way that anything that provides meaning for one’s existence is special. It’s one thing for someone to argue scientific proof of God’s existence and be rightfully slapped down, another thing entirely for an atheist to throw condescending remarks and insults around every time the religious are mentioned. Both appear to occur here. The former makes sense within the context of a rational debate, the latter just seems unnecessarily rude.
This sums up my philosophy. I was recently at the funeral of a beloved professor of my husband’s. It was a Catholic funeral. At once point while I was standing there, and the preacher was droning on and on about heaven, I had the fleeting thought, ‘‘People really believe this shit?’’ I did not at any point express this thought, because it would be inappropriate and impolite. It wouldn’t occur to me, in fact, to ever state something like that aloud unless I was in the presence of people who unanimously agreed with me. There is a time for calling people on their bullshit and there is a time to just respect differences. I feel like some posters on the Dope really lack that ability to discern between the two.
Follow my chain of reasoning here.
-
You believe the god you believe in exists, without evidence.
-
If you believe god X exists in this way, you can’t complain when someone else claims god Y exists using the same basis you use.
-
I’ll assume that your god X has some influence on existence, even if just creating it. I’ll also assume that god X is tied to some sort of moral code. For our purposes let’s say the moral code of God X is something most atheists can buy - do not kill, be good to others, etc. You say this moral code comes from God.
-
Perhaps God Y does care what I do. Perhaps God Y is against gay marriage. Person Y says he must oppose it because his God tells him to.
So, what do you say to the believer in God Y? You can’t argue that his moral code is invalid because his god does not exist, because he uses the same non-rational argument you do. You can’t say his moral code is wrong outside of god belief since a god, by definition, will trump moral arguments from logical ethical principles. Would you tell him no god would be so mean, which is imposing your morals on a deity?
The moral is that if you start accepting the existence of powerful setters of morality without evidence, you can easily run into trouble.
The difference is, most people care if their brother likes them.
I am not at all convinced that the number of non-believers is actually 50% or more. For one, there’s oodles of Americans, and the US is one of the most religious countries in the world. Secondly, my poll about agnosticism turned up a figure like 30% of self-identified agnostics on this board are actually believers.
I do suspect many of the more religious types stay out of Great Debates.
If I were debating my brother on a message board dedicated to fighting ignorance(please do try to remember the venue), and he put forth some of the fake “facts” and dubious “evidence” that I have seen presented on this board at times, I would treat him no different than anyone else. I respect intellectual honesty-if that gets thrown in the dungheap, all bets are off.
When people start barging into threads to sneer about religion where someone is talking about how their father passed away and is in heaven today, you’ll have a point (and they’d likely get banned or suspended for doing so). But when people debate religion in Great Debates or express an opinion on religion in In My Humble Opinion or complain about religion in the Pit…that sort of thing is what those forums are for.
Whereas some people think everyone deserves to be treated with dignity and respect. It’s in our baptismal vows. 
I don’t see where intellectual honesty is being sacrificed by being nice to people you disagree with.
How far would you apply this same logic? Let’s take Jenny McCarthy as an example - she’s as dedicated to her cause (promoting the anti-vax agenda) as any religious person, and no doubt she sincerely believes it. But it’s bullshit - delusional bullshit and she’s causing real harm. What sort of respect should be given to her beliefs because they are so important to her that they give her life meaning?
Do I have to debunk her dispassionately while making no judgements about her character as a person or what she’s doing? Would it be out of line to call her a nut or make what could be construed as condescending statements about her motivations or critical thinking skills?
Essentially, I’m asking why religion deserves special treatment. “It’s really important to that person” is a decent start, but do we give equal regard to other silly beliefs that are really important to people?
I think you’re massively overstating the degree or ubiquity of rudeness as it relates to religion on this board. There is something exactly analogous to what you said - if someone posted an MPSIMS thread and said “Well, my dad died, but at least I know he’s in heaven” and someone chimed in with NO HE’S NOT YOU IDIOT! HE’S DEAD! that would clearly be rude.
But almost all of the rude behavior towards religious people on this board comes during discussions of the nature of religion or of atheism. You seem to think that people are just randomly attacked for their religion all over the board, but it doesn’t seem to be the case for me. Similar to how you held your tongue at the funeral, people mostly leave the rude thoughts out of discussions that aren’t centering on religion. But if we have threads that discuss the nature of religion, then examining those beliefs objectively and not giving a reverence to religious beliefs that you wouldn’t give for other beliefs is fair game.
I made a poll to check this out. Please please fill this in.
I think religion should get no special treatment in a debate. So don’t say “sky fairy” about God and don’t say that Jenny McCarthy is a blond airhead if you debate her on vaccines.
If my brother sacrifices intellectual honesty, in a venue dedicated to fighting ignorance, such as this one, my brother is going to get the beat-down he deserves. Let’s just nip this little intellectual exercise in the bud. If you were expecting me to say that I would never treat my own brother in such a way, just so you could come back with “Well, all men are your brothers, aren’t they?”, don’t hold your breath. If you don’t respect me enough to be intellectually honest with me, you are setting the pace, not me.