Furthermore I’d would imagine that @Eonwe may also have an issue with Khuda Hafiz in the same manner - since it literally means God Protect You.
@iSiddiqui - I have Christian Arab friends who use Insha-Allah to mean “God willing”. I never disagreed with you.
The point I am trying to make is : a society getting more religiously conservative changes culturally accepted phrases to become more religious (like khuda to Allah Hafiz). Similarly when the society gets more religiously liberal, it can change culturally accepted phrases to become less religious.
Just because a religious phrase has been in use for history doesn’t stop people changing the phrase to become “more religious” or “less religious”. It’s a conscious effort in either direction and is not excuse.
The issue being argued isn’t changing a phrase to become more or less religious, but rather than phrase itself is a subtle religious play. I believe this started with the phrase “God Bless You” for a sneeze. Which hasn’t changed in hundreds of years, but is considered problematic due to perpetuating religious dominance.
They do pay sales tax.
That say $10B would increase overall state/local spending by 2%.
But if we taxed churches, we also have to tax Non-profit colleges and hospitals, etc. That 2% is so tiny and the good that Non-profit colleges and hospitals do (not to mention churches), that I will willing to give that up.
In any case, $10B is a far cry from $80B.
Agreed. What some of us are saying is “religious play” is in the eye of the beholder. To someone from the same religion/belief system, it may sound like an innocuous phrase but to someone else it may sound like a religious phrase.
And some of the phrases are neither innocuous, nor are they historic, like the example posted above for “Allah Hafiz”.
“God bless you" is attributed to “Pope Gregory the Great” from the 6th century. “You’re so good looking” works equally well 
Actually, the common expression “goodbye” comes from “god be with ye” and variations of it can be found in Shakespeare too.
I am sorry, my figure is incorrect- that $10B would increase what state & local govt get from property taxes by 2%, thus it would increase overall budgets by less than 1%.
Alabama is one of only a handful of states that imposes its sales and use taxes on churches.
So states don’t impose sales/use tax.
If your organization makes taxable sales or purchases, obtaining South Carolina sales tax exemption will allow your nonprofit to allocate more funds towards pursuing its mission.
That was supposed to say “So most states don’t impose sales/use tax”
Right. And Holiday comes from Holy Day. There is a lot of developed language that arises because of the centuries long cultural importance of religion. That even atheists will use without a second thought. That’s different than deliberately using religious language to proselytize. After all, how many people think of Saints Feast Days when they talk about Holidays - and how much does that term perpetuate religious preeminence?
There is a lot of developed language that arises because of the centuries long cultural importance of patriarchy or sexism, too. That even women will use without a second thought.
- That doesn’t make it right, and it certainly is no excuse for not fixing it.
So the English language has evolved to use new or modified gender neutral words like S/he or congressperson or businessperson. And it will keep evolving to replace historically patriarchal words with more gender neutral words and phrases.
Sexism is a more urgent issue in modern day sociocultural arena and hence the conscious emphasis by society to change these words. Equal rights/representation for atheists is not a burning issue in the same arena. However, when, and if it does comes to the forefront, words with religious connotations will change. Historical use of the words or phrases , not withstanding.
So you are dedicated to not saying holiday or goodbye then?
Or perhaps you can actually acknowledge there are different levels to religion based words - and that quite a few have lost their religious connotations quite long ago.
That’s a reductio ad absurdum.
The aim of the posts above is to show that religious bias exists in language. Although I gave examples in English and Arabic, it’s in all languages.
As cultures evolve, I hope these biases will be addressed just as the sexist biases are slowly being addressed.
I will note you didn’t even acknowledge those terms are different than other more intentional religious terms. It’s more showing how deep some of these cultural traditions go. To the point where people don’t even consider them to be religious in nature. Same as Norse deities as names for the English days of the week. Not to mention having 7 days of the week in the first place.
You seem to completely minimize the differences in those terms or practices that stem from religion as opposed to intentionally provacative religious greetings. Why is that?
I guess you an an atheist can work yourself into a position of power and influence and then work to undermine them. For example, work in Hollywood and make any depiction of religion a joke or worse. You can also work in the universities and always work to put anti-religious themes into your coursework plus use subtle persuasion to get religious students to question things.
Oh, but remember. Only go after Christians. New agers, wiccans, buddhists, muslims, hindus, those are all ok.
Sounds dangerous. They might think for themselves.
urbanredneck2: “…work in Hollywood and make any depiction of religion a joke or worse.”
I find your alternate version of reality less than compelling.
Oh, like putting evolution in a biology class? Or the Big Bang in a physics class? Or a history of the Middle East which does not include the Davidic Empire?
College is about every student questioning things. Questioning is good unless you are scared of finding answers that might make you change your opinion on things.
Atheists are really simply in the position of LGBT people a few decades ago. They just need to wait until the weight of societal opinion tips in their favor, then they’ll be on top and it would be promotion of religion that becomes far riskier societally than opposition of it.
LGBT people are far from “on top” in any society these days.
Although they are better tolerated than in the past… which is a very low bar to get over.