# More Atheists Than I Thought! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 12, 2006, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-atheists-than-i-thought/372470 "2006-09-12T23:01:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Lord\_Ashtar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ea924/32.png) [@Lord\_Ashtar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Ashtar)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2006, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-atheists-than-i-thought/372470/101 "2006-09-15T18:15:11Z")
[QUOTE=GLWasteful] Now, was that so hard? [/QUOTE] If I’d’ve known that was all you wanted, I would’ve given it to you years ago. ---
**Author:** ![Pazu](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pazu/32/15522_2.png) [@Pazu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pazu)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2006, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-atheists-than-i-thought/372470/102 "2006-09-15T18:19:35Z")
[QUOTE=sinjin] Here’s an interesting letter written by one Gary Christenot, a devout christian who has recently converted to the anti-school prayer side of the aisle. The gist is that this devout christian decided that he no longer supports school prayer, having attended a football game in Hawaii where the prayers were conducted from the Buddhist perspective. It’s funny what being in the minority will do to your ideas about ‘just be quiet and it will all be over soon.’ Of course, he finishes by saying that he’s grateful his kids don’t go to a school with prayers so he “[don’t] have to worry about them being confronted with Buddhist, Shinto, Wiccan, Satanic or any other prayer ritual [he] might find offensive,” but beginnings are delicate things. [Linky linky](http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46828) [/QUOTE] Although I find the personal perspective of the article quite repellent, I agree with his overall conclusion. I wish everyone in the country could read this article. What’s kind of interesting is the ignorant assumption that Buddhism (and Shinto) are automatically “inimical” to his faith. I can’t speak for Shinto, but I know that it’s entirely possible, from the Buddhist perspective, to be a Buddhist Christian. A shame that the tolerance doesn’t go the other way. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2006, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-atheists-than-i-thought/372470/103 "2006-09-15T19:56:19Z")
[QUOTE=mrrealtime] Both ignorance and religion are results of incredible subtleties, complexities, nuances, predispositions historical context etc. Both require a complex series of events and circumstances to be overcome. The act of disseminating knowledge is just part of the process. If there wasnt more to it, we wouldnt need schools, just libraries. Now, when I said “cite” above, what I should have said was “What are you talking about, I do not understand this statement”. You did cite Boyer earlier, I realize that. Therefore, I still am quite convinced that religion=ignorance. What you seem to fail to realize is that “ignorance” or the “state of ignorance” is arrived at by all the same complex nuances you seem to claim “religion” has the corner on. [/QUOTE] Here is an example of this. In **The Age of Reason** , Tom Paine spends a lot of time explaining why he does not believe in Christianity. But he was not an atheist. He talks about how the arrangement of the planets in the solar system cannot be accidental, and led him to believe in a deity. A deistic one, who did not interfere, but a deity nonetheless. I wonder if Paine would still be a deist if he lived today, and could have learned that a god is not necessary to explain the solar system. I think this is an example of how ignorance of the true cause of something led many to invent a supernatural cause. ---
**Author:** ![CurtC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ce73a5/32.png) [@CurtC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CurtC)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2006, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-atheists-than-i-thought/372470/104 "2006-09-15T19:59:11Z")
I’ve long thought that many or most of the deists of 200 years ago would be atheists today. It just wasn’t that plausible to them that the world got to this state without being put here by someone. If they had access to our knowledge of astrophysics and evolution, they could let go of those ideas, exactly as we modern atheists have done. ---
**Author:** ![sinjin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ebca7d/32.png) [@sinjin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sinjin)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2006, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-atheists-than-i-thought/372470/105 "2006-09-15T23:18:25Z")
[QUOTE=Pazu] Although I find the personal perspective of the article quite repellent, I agree with his overall conclusion. I wish everyone in the country could read this article. What’s kind of interesting is the ignorant assumption that Buddhism (and Shinto) are automatically “inimical” to his faith. I can’t speak for Shinto, but I know that it’s entirely possible, from the Buddhist perspective, to be a Buddhist Christian. A shame that the tolerance doesn’t go the other way. [/QUOTE] And I wish that I’d been paying attention when I changed didn’t to [don’t] instead of [doesn’t]. :smack: As for the tone, he does sound a bit self-satisfied with his Christianity, doesn’t he? With regard to accepting other religions, I’m pretty sure that Christians are allowed to worship at the Altar of the Holy Potato. So, you know, baby steps. ---
**Author:** ![sturmhauke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e47c2d/32.png) [@sturmhauke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sturmhauke)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2006, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-atheists-than-i-thought/372470/106 "2006-09-16T05:57:11Z")
> [@TimeWinder](#): > > I can’t remember a single case, ever, of someone trying to tell you that you can’t display your faith in public, except in the sort of curtesy sense of not praying loudly in libraries. > [@ambushed](#): > > But your claims are just plain stupid. How could you not have heard of all the hundreds of times we secularists have told believers they can’t display their faith in public places? Such as with Christmas creches on public property? Such as with enormous crosses on public property? Such as with the Ten Commandments in courthouses? > [@Cervaise](#): > > “Praying in public” **is very much not equal to** injecting religious ceremony into official public functions. > > I have absolutely no legal or moral objection to anybody festooning their car with crucifixes and scriptural verse. I have **strong** objections to the same decoration being placed in a courtroom. > [@ambushed](#): > > So since you denied I told the truth, you must believe, as TW claimed, that **NO ONE** has **EVER** tried to stop Christmas creches on public property! You must believe, as TW claimed, that **NO ONE** has **EVER** tried to stop enormous crosses from being erected or maintained on public property! Look, ambushed, you’re barking up the wrong tree here. A person expressing their beliefs in public is not the same thing as some sort of permanent or semipermanent display on public property. Public property is in fact owned by the government, so such a display is implicitly sanctioned by the government. Likewise, a government employee expressing religious beliefs to an audience while on the job (e.g., a teacher leading prayer at a school function) also implies government sanction of those beliefs. If that same teacher is on the subway and starts handing out Chick tracts, there is no implication of government sanction, unless the teacher is trying to have a prayer meeting on campus or something like that. What we object to is **not** the expression of religious belief in public, but the appearance of government sanction of religious belief. ---
**Author:** ![ambushed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@ambushed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ambushed)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2006, 9:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-atheists-than-i-thought/372470/107 "2006-09-16T09:54:47Z")
[QUOTE=mrrealtime] I never ONCE said religiosity/religiousness is a result of ignorance, I said it is ignorance, more specifically a kind of ignorance. [/QUOTE] That’s absurd and picayune hair-splitting that is utterly irrelevant to everything I’ve written. Religiosity is absolutely, positively, definitely **NOT** ignorance! Ignorance usually plays a role, but to equate or blame religiosity on **NOTHING** but ignorance is mind-bogglingly stupid and ignorant! Over and over again I’ve explained why, but you keep ignoring what I’ve written and thus have retained your profoundly ignorant assertion against all reason and logic. You’re demonstrating the very **worst** aspect of too many of our atheist colleagues: **extremely arrogant over-simplification and mindless demonization of theists**. I dearly wish there were FAR fewer such as you on our side. After all, aren’t we the ones who are supposed to value and rely most strongly on reason and science? But you aren’t doing that! You’re even foolishly asserting that the words “religiosity” and “ignorance” are exact synonyms, which is patently false! [QUOTE=mrrealtime] I also did not say religiousness can be fought with knowledge. I dont know where you got that idea from. [/QUOTE] WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU MEAN YOU DON’T KNOW WHERE??? Ignorance is _defined_ as the lack of knowledge! Don’t you know what your words mean? When you repeatedly asserted that religiosity=ignorance, you’re **IMPLICITY AND SIMULTANEOUSLY** saying that religiosity can ONLY be fought with the opposite of ignorance, which is **knowledge**! It’s called logic. Look into it. [QUOTE=mrrealtime] Both ignorance and religion are results of incredible subtleties, complexities, nuances, predispositions historical context etc. Both require a complex series of events and circumstances to be overcome. [/QUOTE] That utterly and completely contradicts what you’ve been saying all along. It’s what I’ve been saying all along, but that’s exactly the **opposite** of what _you’ve_ been saying all along! [QUOTE=mrrealtime] Therefore, I still am quite convinced that religion=ignorance. [/QUOTE] **THAT DIRECTLY CONTRADICTS WHAT YOU"VE JUST SAID IN THOSE LAST TWO QUOTED SENTENCES!!** :smack: You can’t even keep straight what you’re saying! You’re all over the place. Your thinking and writing is horribly, horribly muddled and unbelievably ignorant. I can only hope everyone knows that as well as I do and ignores you. You’re terribly hurting atheists and atheism. ---
**Author:** ![ambushed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@ambushed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ambushed)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2006, 10:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-atheists-than-i-thought/372470/108 "2006-09-16T10:01:22Z")
[QUOTE=Sunrazor] My mind does not work like yours. Mine is open. [/QUOTE] Open it may be (just like a garbage can, perhaps?), but it also appears to be replete with misunderstandings, ignorance, unscientific and sometimes sophomoric thinking, and error. ---
**Author:** ![ambushed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@ambushed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ambushed)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2006, 10:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-atheists-than-i-thought/372470/109 "2006-09-16T10:20:11Z")
[QUOTE=Cervaise] You really don’t understand this stuff at all, do you? [/QUOTE] I obviously understand it far better than you. Especially since you clearly implicitly agree with **TimeWinder** that, among all the other things he’s listed, **NO ONE** has **EVER** tried to remove the Ten Commandments from courthouses and other public buildings! Yes or No: _Has_ anyone ever tried to remove the Ten Commandments from courthouses or other public buildings? If they have, then you agree with me that TimeWinder’s claims in the post in question are FALSE, which is all I’ve said. If you think they haven’t, then please carefully explain exactly why and how the court’s cases, judgements, and their records on this issue are completely fabricated, such as in the case of Glassroth v. Moore. [QUOTE=Cervaise] P.S. Switch to decaf. [/QUOTE] Only if you agree to switch to honesty. ---
**Author:** ![ambushed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@ambushed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ambushed)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2006, 11:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-atheists-than-i-thought/372470/110 "2006-09-16T11:10:53Z")
[QUOTE=sturmhauke] Look, ambushed, you’re barking up the wrong tree here. A person expressing their beliefs in public is not the same thing as some sort of permanent or semipermanent display on public property. Public property is in fact owned by the government, so such a display is implicitly sanctioned by the government. Likewise, a government employee expressing religious beliefs to an audience while on the job (e.g., a teacher leading prayer at a school function) also implies government sanction of those beliefs. If that same teacher is on the subway and starts handing out Chick tracts, there is no implication of government sanction, unless the teacher is trying to have a prayer meeting on campus or something like that. [/QUOTE] AARGH! How can you and Cervaise **possibly** believe I’m so incredibly ignorant that I don’t know all that perfectly well and agree entirely? **I HAVE NEVER DISPUTED ANY OF THAT NOR HAVE I EVER CLAIMED ANYTHING REMOTELY TO THE CONTRARY!** I am an educated man and a secularist and atheist and I’m familiar with the full range of meanings and implications of the First Amendment and it’s related jurisprudence. It’s utterly unjust and insulting that you and Cervaise keep talking down to me. I’ve very long known and agreed with everything you said, but your and Cervais’s responses to me are utterly and completely off point and irrelevant to my posts and the issue at hand! I don’t understand how you two can so completely misunderstand the extreme simplicity of what I’m saying. You **must** be reading things that simply are NOT there! You’re not reading me literally enough. You’re not taking what I’ve written at face value. It is **EXTREMELY** simple and straightforward, but you’re imagining all kinds of things I never said. Look: _PLEASE_ read carefully and work with me here. This is about **NOTHING** more than correcting **TimeWinder’s** profoundly false assertions that **NO ONE** has **EVER** tried to limit **ANY** public display of faith. That’s all I’ve ever said! I’m sorry to sound condescending in return, but please recall and consider what the words **“NO ONE”** , **“EVER”** , and **“ANY”** mean. They’re absolutes. They don’t allow **ANY** exceptions or interpretations or nuances. Don’t you see that **TimeWinder’s** assertion that **NO ONE** has **EVER** tried to limit **ANY** public display of faith necessarily includes even those public displays of faith that are clearly and indisputably (and illegally) examples of the official government sanction of religious belief? So I ask you this Yes or No question: Is it true that **NO ONE** has **EVER** tried to limit **ANY** public displays of faith, even those that involve official government sanction of religion? If you answer “No” – the only possible answer that comports with reality – then you are agreeing with me that **TimeWinder** was wrong, and thus you are agreeing with what I wrote to TW (since all I said is such absolute claims are false). But if you answer “Yes”, then you have to explain why and how every single report of such attempts in all American history are nothing but lies. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2006, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-atheists-than-i-thought/372470/111 "2006-09-16T15:53:12Z")
**Ambushed** , please switch to the decaf. You’ve used up a week’s alotment of boldface for the entire SDMB. Yes, I see the point you were making and I see where it is frustrating that others have not grapsed it, but it is counterproductive to get so worked up over that particular point, (particularly when you are fighting with people who are mostly on your own side of the larger debate). It has affected your attitude to the point where you are getting dangerously close to hurling personal insults (your “garbage can” comment) over what is, basically, a pretty trivial misunderstanding. ---
**Author:** ![sturmhauke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e47c2d/32.png) [@sturmhauke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sturmhauke)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2006, 5:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-atheists-than-i-thought/372470/112 "2006-09-17T05:47:55Z")
[QUOTE=ambushed] Look: _PLEASE_ read carefully and work with me here. This is about **NOTHING** more than correcting **TimeWinder’s** profoundly false assertions that **NO ONE** has **EVER** tried to limit **ANY** public display of faith. That’s all I’ve ever said! [/QUOTE] You’re arguing against a point that TimeWinder never made. Do us all a favor and reread these quotes carefully. The first one is from TimeWinder’s first post in this thread. > [@TimeWinder](#): > > I can’t remember a single case, ever, of someone trying to tell you that you can’t display your faith in public, except in the sort of curtesy sense of not praying loudly in libraries. > > I hear this all the time from the religious, how we’re trying to make their kids not pray in schools, make them not say “under god” in the pledge, make them not honor or display the ten commandments, make them… This one is from a clarifying post later in the thread. > [@](#): > > But the words “a private citizen” are important there. Courthouses are not private citizens. Public sports events, teachers, judges, etc. are acting as representatives of the government, which isn’t allowed to do these things. We did NOT sue to prevent prayer at football games and in schools: there’s a ton of it going on, and the constitution protects it. We sued to prevent MANDATORY or ENDORSED (i.e. organized by the state) prayer at football games. > > This distinction is critically important. Please go back and reread my post, because I stand by my point: we’ve never made any (successfull, anyway) effort that I can think of to prevent private citizens from displaying their belief–so long as they’re not asking the government and taxpayers do endorse and fund it. [emphasis added] It’s quite obvious that when he said “you” in the first post, he was referring to private citizens displaying their personal faith. You’re seeing giants where there are nothing but windmills. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2006, 12:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-atheists-than-i-thought/372470/113 "2006-09-17T12:27:21Z")
[QUOTE=Beaucarnea] In my small Southern town (population 45,000; median income $30,000), there are 12 public schools and a courthouse, where religious icons cannot be displayed by law. There are 163 churches and 9 private schools where displays of faith are permitted, encouraged; expected. Christians fought a very public battle to keep the Ten Commandments in our local courthouse (a huge plaque was just removed 3 years ago) and the fight continues. The plaque and paper copies are continuously posted by unknown persons and are removed so frequently it no longer makes the newspaper. I cannot understand why Christians feel so unfairly persecuted by the laws that protect public buildings from endorsing their faith. [/QUOTE] Not all Christians feel persecuted, just those who have doubts about their beliefs unless every one believes the same as they do. The first and early Christians didn’t display their faith in public places, I think the modern Christians in the USA have sincere doubts about their own faith and there fore are afraid they may be wrong and need bolstering up by public display. If they really trusted in their God they would just pray and live as their faith instructs them to do. Before the 50’s" Under God" was not added to the Pledge, The world is no better since it was added. Displaying The Ten Commandments doesn’t help to convert anyone. The majority of people in Prisons are not atheists. There is a difference in being spiritual and religious. Jesus pointed this out(According to the gospel writer) in his criticism of the Pharisees .for makeing a public display of their faith instead of just living it. Being religious is not ignorance as religion appeals to the emotions and satisfies an emotional need to most believers. Monavis ---
**Author:** ![fessie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c37758/32.png) [@fessie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fessie)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2006, 1:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-atheists-than-i-thought/372470/114 "2006-09-17T13:32:02Z")
Jumping back for a second to the OP, I thought I’d read recently that “Believe in God, but not a member of any religion” was becoming much more common (we live in a red state with strong church affiliations, so such stories are always news-worthy). I couldn’t find the exact article, but [here’s a site with data on various polls](http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_prac2.htm) that mentions the phenomenon. While I agree that atheism is a valid option that deserves representation (and has helped keep religions in check), it’s my opinion that the growth of “Spiritual, not religious” is a more hopeful sign. “God” is not the problem, per se; it’s the organized part of organized religion that causes trouble. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2006, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-atheists-than-i-thought/372470/115 "2006-09-17T14:02:05Z")
[QUOTE=Eve] I detect not so much hostility as a complete lack of awareness that we exist. “In God We Trust,” “God Bless America,” the Prez talking about how “all Americans are united in prayer” and so-forth makes one feel rather . . . alienated? [/QUOTE] Which was exactly Michael Newdow’s point that he took to the Supreme Court. ---
**Author:** ![mrrealtime](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e8c25b/32.png) [@mrrealtime](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mrrealtime)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2006, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-atheists-than-i-thought/372470/116 "2006-09-18T00:02:45Z")
ambushed, In spite of all you’ve said, I still feel that my simple formula has not been logically defeated, its been attacked, put down, and lashed out at by you, but not defeated. To paraphrase a quote, we are men of action, tantrums do not become us. ---
**Author:** ![ambushed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@ambushed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ambushed)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2006, 4:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-atheists-than-i-thought/372470/117 "2006-09-18T04:38:00Z")
[QUOTE=Sunrazor] Any priest will tell you religion is illogical and unreasonable, and therein lies its attraction and its beauty. [/QUOTE] I’ve already disputed that statement, but I want to add further evidence that your view is not widely held. I quote from [this](http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1534640-1,00.html) article from TIME magazine: > [@](#): > > His [the Pope’s] discourse Tuesday sought to delineate what he sees as a fundamental difference between Christianity’s view that God is intrinsically linked to reason (the Greek concept of logos)… ---
**Author:** ![Sunrazor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sunrazor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sunrazor)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2006, 5:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-atheists-than-i-thought/372470/118 "2006-09-18T05:16:59Z")
[QUOTE=ambushed] I’ve already disputed that statement, but I want to add further evidence that your view is not widely held. I quote from [this](http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1534640-1,00.html) article from TIME magazine: [/QUOTE] You disagree and you think I’m lying. I got that the first time. ---
**Author:** ![ambushed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@ambushed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ambushed)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2006, 5:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-atheists-than-i-thought/372470/119 "2006-09-18T05:58:46Z")
[QUOTE=Sunrazor] You disagree and you think I’m lying. I got that the first time. [/QUOTE] No, I absolutely do NOT think you’re lying! I think you’re mistaken. ---
**Author:** ![ambushed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@ambushed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ambushed)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2006, 9:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-atheists-than-i-thought/372470/120 "2006-09-18T09:48:56Z")
[QUOTE=tomndebb] Yes, I see the point you were making and I see where it is frustrating that others have not grapsed it [/QUOTE] Hallelujah! Thank you! Trivial misunderstanding or not, the fact that all the others plainly couldn’t grasp my _extremely_ simple point drove me to utter distraction. I’ve rarely known such frustration! Personally, I thought I handled myself with considerable self-restraint in the face of such puzzlingly inadequate comprehension. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-atheists-than-i-thought/372470.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-atheists-than-i-thought/372470.md?page=7)