I meant to refers to atheistic systems there, so thanks for pointing it out. 
It may not matter to you, but it’s still a point worth making. What you’ve described could be evidence for any subjective moral standard. It is evidence not only for any God that does exist but many gods that don’t. Many more gods that don’t than do, in fact.
You’re simply incorrect on this point. Not universally so – no doubt there are plenty of theists who do actually hate atheists – but in general.
Where were you raised? If it was in a particularly strict, religious community or family, I wonder if that is shaping your judgement on this matter. I’ve lived my whole life in New York, and I don’t doubt that my association with liberal Northeast Christians has shaped my understanding of religion. I went to Catholic schools through Grade 12, and the faculty there – lay and ordained alike – were uniformally very accepting of my atheism, and always willing to discuss spiritual matters rationally and dispassionately. There was no hate coming from them, nor did they feel threatened by me. My Jesuit high school even let me be a group leader on a Kairos retreat my senior year. (Worst. Wikpedia article. Ever.)
Don’t you see that you’re the mirror image of the hateful theist stereotype you rail against? As far as I can tell, in fact, you’re the most hateful person on the SDMB. Congratualtions.
Hardly, since the religious in this country really are in power, and really are hostile to unbelievers. And for that matter, I’m not trying to get my personal beliefs written into law either. Nor am I beating or killing people who disagree with me. Or protesting the funerals of the religious, or terrorizing children about the consequences of not following the one true way, or doing any number of other things that I’d have to do to put myself on the believer’s level.
Neither are most theists. Is it just that you’re painting with an unnecessarily wide brush?
Well then you should criticize those who are legislating theology, or otherwise persecuting atheists. You should not characterize all theists as diseased, mentally disordered thugs. At best you’re merely incorrect and rude. At worst. . .
You’re the mirror image of hateful theists because you despise those you never met purely on the basis of their spiritual beliefs – and also because when I read your posts, I feel the same way that thoughtful Christians feel when they read about Fred Phelps & Co. You’re a liability. It’s harder to make any headway towards acceptance of atheists or a more fully secular society with people like you out there scaring the religious folk into digging in their heels. Your methods lead to conflict and unhappiness – you’re doing more harm than good.
Please tone it down.
Plenty are; such as all the good Christians who voted against gay marriage across the country. And plenty others stand by while others do evil in the name of religion.
I didn’t say that they were all thugs. I do consider all theists to be mentally diseased, because I consider religion to BE a disease.
No, I will not tone it down. I refuse to suck up to people I fear and despise. And I don’t consider this society salvageable, or worth salvaging for that matter. And regardless of what I do or say or how I say it, the religious will not stop hating unbelievers; it’s a basic part of religion, especially Christianity and it’s relatives.
And again, comparing me to Phelps is ridiculous, and shows just how far out of whack the double standard is against atheists.
Actually, my religious beliefs, however delusional they may be, require that I treat you with courtesy and respect whenever I deal with you and prohibit me from hating you. However, since I know I won’t receive courtesy and respect from you in return, I choose to deal with you as little as possible.
Not only do I not hate all atheists or atheists in general, some of my favorite posters here are atheists, and I have far more respect for an atheist who has honestly examined his beliefs and come to the conclusion there is no god than a Christian who simply parrots what he heard in the pulpit on Sunday without thinking about it or someone who claims to be a member of a religion without following or knowing much about its tenets. I have known a few people like that in real life.
I am, I admit, a somewhat unorthodox Christian. What a person does or does not believe doesn’t matter much to me; what matters is the way he or she acts in general. I don’t believe any one belief system has a monopoly on morality or that belief or disbelief in a deity or deities says anything about one’s character. I also admit that all this Christianity business could well be complete and utter nonsense, but it gives me joy, comfort, and, in a couple of hours, a chance to sing some really great music. On the other hand, I do tend to get defensive when I’m attacked. I don’t care for being called “delusional” or “illogical” (by some atheists) or “heretical” or “in league with the devil” (by some Christians). Is there anyone who likes being insulted?
I agree with others who’ve said it’s not attacks on religion alone that makes people defensive; it’s attacks on any deeply held conviction. Look at suggestions that America might not be the greatest country in the world or that there might be some merit to Communism. For that matter, why not ask why people get defensive about gun ownership?
There is an argument to be made that religious beliefs are akin in nature to Stockholm Syndrome . People know that what they profess to believe is irrational, but they’ve been associated with it for so long that it has become habit and ingrained, and they now identify with it and will defend it.
Is there an atheist here who has paused to consider that we might hold onto our faith simply because it corresponds to what we have experienced in our lives?
Is it the commonly held concensus among atheists that there must of necessity be something wrong with us, whether something as horrible as what Der Trihs describes or something as innocent as what Clothahump describes?
As a more pertinent example, perhaps, suggest that an atheist might be “missing” something important, like some piece of the evidence or something. There will be bristling aplenty.
There’s some not-insignificant fraction of atheists who believe as much, but I wouldn’t call it a concensus. Most of us, it seems to me, just think that you’re mistaken about god, which of course is a necessary corallary to our atheism.
Yes and not that I know of respectively. Like you’ve said in the past, if i’d lived your life, and you mine, we’d probably be in each other’s shoes (ignoring biology).
Generalising about atheists in return isn’t going to help matters, I would wager. Responding to the Der Trihs of the world who suggest all religious people are alike by suggesting all atheists are alike is probably not the most diplomatic idea. I don’t believe I would “bristle” at the idea that i’m missing evidence, and I find it very likely that I am. I may disagree with you a lot, but I thought better of you than this.
I consider people of faith much the way I consider small children who believe in Santa Claus; they derive joy from it, and it would be rude and insensitive to deprive them of that joy. But I am still hopeful that they will eventually outgrow this childish fantasy, which is annoying when taken to extremes.
Probably a lot of atheists think that. I think that.
So far in this thread, your attitude toward atheists is that they are smug, that they ignore evidence, that they are dismissive of theism and contemptuous of theists. In painting with such a broad brush, you are guilty of the very sins of which you accuse the atheist.
Believe me, Revenant. I know that not all atheists are alike. I’ve seen how **SentientMeat ** and **Gaudere ** and you and others can be. But there have been atheists who have indeed bristled at the notion that they are missing something, and I have thought rightfully so. If indeed they are missing anything, it is on a temporal basis only. And besides that, I am missing quite much myself. I mentioned it in the hope that someone could understand why people of faith bristle at insults. But as you saw, trying to provide a common frame of reference by comparing my love for God to my love for my mother failed. **Czarcasm ** missed the point entirely and turned into yet another attack. What does one do?
On preview:
See the response from Fear Itself. The condescension is a mile thick. I’d rather he’d hate me than take the view he takes. If we are not allowed to bristle when people talk about us that way, then we are being held to an unreasonable standard. We may have faith in Christ as our savior, but we aren’t Christ Himself and do not have His patience and tolerance. (I would acknowledge exceptions, like **Triskadecamus ** and others, but still.)
It’s a problem of spreading. One person says something bad or insulting or condescending about all whoever, and a person from that group then gets annoyed and responds in kind (even if they wouldn’t think that when unprovoked), and then someone from the first group gets annoyed. There’s enough people in either group that it only takes a small percentage to get pissed enough to hit back to propogate it. I used to think the only way to get out of it was to just not respond, but often that can be taken as smugness. I think really the only way to stop it if for enough of a person’s own group to point out their idiocy for them to either shut up or for the insulted party to see the insulter is on their own.
So I guess it’s human nature to bristle, and if at times it’s too much to ignore, try and remember to take it out equally. Which isn’t hard when you see someone like Siege respond to someone like Der Trihs and see who looks the far saner of the two.
I disagree with this, VarlosZ. There are a handful of Christians here who consider themselves Hammers of God and who have no problem expressing their perverse joy at the hellfire and damnation that they believe atheists will experience after death. What is more hateful than hoping for eternal torment for another human being?
Der Trihs may be guilty of forgoing tact, but he is not guilty of wishing a big, empty existence on those who subscribe to religious belief.
I’m sorry but does this make sense to anyone? Besides DT I mean.
I think anger, mockery, and resentment are pretty much the same regardless of the details. See Sermon on the Mount. 
I don’t know what Der Trihs does or doesn’t wish on believers. I do know that he despises them because they don’t think like he does. That is what I was referring to.
I think he’s trying to say that there are many religious people who hate atheists; they would persecute him, and hate him personally if they knew of his existence specifically, but since they don’t and since he doesn’t make his atheism known, he isn’t persecuted.
I’m just translating, I don’t agree with him.