Why are atheists so intent on scorning "believers"?

by Chariklo 553 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Chariklo

  Sizemik

  "There is no God" is a statement of belief.

  "There is insufficient evidence for God's existence" is a suspension of belief . . . the two are actually worlds apart.

  It's clear to me that there is an international difference in word usage here. Almost, but not quite, Churchill's two nations divided by a single language. (I don't mean you, Sizemik.)

  I don't make myself an authority. Still, here goes, for me:

  "There is no God" is a statement of belief. Yes. That's a perfect illustration of an atheist.

  "There is insufficient evidence for God's existence" is a suspension of belief . . . the two are actually worlds apart. Absolutely. Perfect example of an agnostic.

  An agnostic may range from half believing to not sure, to being almost completely certain that there isn't any God but allows that they simply don't 100% know. An agnostic will never categorically say either that there is no God or that God doesn't exist. he or she will always preface such a statement with something like "I don't think/believe that..."

  It's a very honest and laudable position and stance.

  Berengaria

  Why are atheists so intent on scorning "believers"?

  Huh? They're not.

  Maybe you're new to this thread. I started it, with very good intentions. When I saw how people were reacting, I apologised for not having phrased it better to read "some atheists", and not be as though I was generalising about all athesits. I don't. I have atheists, humanists, pagans and every possible spectrum of belief among my friends. In the UK, pretty well no-one cares what you believe; this atheism/believer stuff really isn't here in Britain. But, on this thread, I'd noticed a smallish group of self-proclaimed and vociferous atheists almost ganging up on some posters with hostility and scorn, and I'd experienced it myself first hand. It's not nice, and I was hoping to understand why they did it and that through a process of openly airing it, it might lessen or stop.

  I could not have been more wrong, but actually, as the thread has gone on and as people have expressed their point of view, in much the same way as they do elsewhere, ithe question has been illustrated and answered very clearly, though in an unexpected way.

  Personally, I find the development and results depressing. Speaking personally, as the person who began the thread with the astonishingly naive intention and expectation of doing some good, I feel that it has almost completely failed, with the dubious exception that some of us have seen it in action.

  Great thanks from me to those who have been very supportive, often privately, because not everyone feels they want to subject themselves to open attack and derision. (I have had the other sort of PM too...it's to be expected.)

  Personally, I think the thread has run its course and has nowhere else to go, but if others think there is still benefit to be had then no doubt it will go on.

  Edit:-afterthought.

  I've seen this thread referred to as the "atheist-bashing" thread. That's actually propaganda. It isn't. It was a thread designed to discover why a few atheists here on this board behave as they do, and hoping that things might improve. Thus, to my mind, a failure, though others have been kind enough to say openly and privately that it is not.
• 

  NewChapter

  I'm reading something interesting. It's says that Christians have a higher divorce rate than atheists, and that what we call the Bible Belt in America has a higher divorce rate than the rest of the country. The rate goes up the more conservative a Christian is.
• 

  transhuman68

  Gonna see if I can kill this thread, lol.

  This is just an internet forum- it's not real life, and most people just spend a few months or a couple of years here, de-briefing or sorting out their beliefs, and then moving on. There is always going to be arguments & controversy here; and misunderstandings. Not to worry- I'm sure it will all come out in the wash, lol.
• 

  still thinking

  It is fascinating when you start to really look at it isn't it NC...I found this whilst doing some surfing...

  Denmark, which is among the least religious countries in the history of the world, consistently rates as the happiest of nations. And studies of apostates — people who were religious but later rejected their religion — report feeling happier, better and liberated in their post-religious lives.

  A growing body of social science research reveals that atheists, and non-religious people in general, are far from the unsavory beings many assume them to be. On basic questions of morality and human decency — issues such as governmental use of torture, the death penalty, punitive hitting of children, racism, sexism, homophobia, anti-Semitism, environmental degradation or human rights — the irreligious tend to be more ethical than their religious peers, particularly compared with those who describe themselves as very religious. http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/laurilebo/4576/are_atheists_more_moral_than_the_religious
• 

  NewChapter

  Isn't Denmark also pretty rich? I think it ranks in the top 10, and they are about 60% atheist. (I have to look it up to be 100% accurate). Of course, money is just money, but when coupled with the happiness meter, they are doing pretty darn good. I would love to visit Denmark.
• 

  NewChapter

  On basic questions of morality and human decency— issues such as governmental use of torture, the death penalty, punitive hitting of children, racism, sexism, homophobia, anti-Semitism, environmental degradation or human rights — the irreligious tend to be more ethical than their religious peers, particularly compared with those who describe themselves as very religious.

  Yes, in the US, all of these things weight very heavily with the conservative right. Some reasons? Not sure about the death penalty and torture, unless it is OT stuff. Sexism? Well more bible stuff, along with homophobia and anti-semitism. The environment? A lot of Christians here just think this earth is temporary and here for our use, so there is no problem using it up. Human rights?---BIBLE. Spare the rod, spoil the child.

  We even had a congressman read the bible on the house floor to support his stance on not addressing global warming. That's enough to make the blood run cold. LOL

  Of course, not all religious people fall into this category, but I think that the conservative numbers concentrate such among non-atheists in my country.

  There are many kinds of non-atheists, but the numbers are still interesting. It doesn't really address individuals. To me, it seems the farther they get away from the original religions, the better they are for society. So having someone more liberal and not as attached to the ancient moral codes, makes things much easier for the rest of us.
• 

  still thinking

  I think I'd like to visit there too...look at this ..LOL

  Peter Steinfels writes all about it in The New York Times.

  Phil Zuckerman spent 14 months in Scandinavia, talking to hundreds of Danes and Swedes about religion. It wasn’t easy.

  Anyone who has paid attention knows that Denmark and Sweden are among the least religious nations in the world. Polls asking about belief in God, the importance of religion in people’s lives, belief in life after death or church attendance consistently bear this out.

  Zuckerman writes all about his findings in the book Society Without God.

  How weird is this alternate non-religious universe?

  Thoughtful, well-educated Danes and Swedes reacted to Mr. Zuckerman’s basic questions about God, Jesus, death and so on as completely novel. “I really have never thought about that,” one of his interviewees answered, adding, “It’s been fun to get these kinds of questions that I never, never think about.”

  This indifference or obliviousness to religious matters was sometimes subtly enforced. “In Denmark,” a pastor told Mr. Zuckerman, “the word ‘God’ is one of the most embarrassing words you can say. You would rather go naked through the city than talk about God.”

  One man recounted the shock he felt when a colleague, after a few drinks, confessed to believing in God. “I hope you don’t feel I’m a bad person,” the colleague pleaded.

  http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2009/02/28/what-happens-when-atheism-is-the-norm-instead-of-the-exception/
• 

  still thinking

  We even had a congressman read the bible on the house floor to support his stance on not addressing global warming. That's enough to make the blood run cold. LOL

  Oh...dear God
• 

  still thinking

  Lower Rates of Infant Mortality
  Infant mortality is a measure of the survival rate of new-born babies within a country. Typically it is tracked by how many infant deaths occur per 1000 full-term pregnancies. You would think that technologically advanced countries would have a distinct advantage over the less technological in their ability to save the lives on newborn infants… but according to the data, secular beliefs are far more beneficial to newborns than technology.

  Why do religious countries have higher rates of infant mortality? It is probably because of the demonization of unwed mothers by religious societies. Combine this demonization with an inability to receive an abortion, and you will have a large group of mothers having children that they don’t want and/or can’t economically afford. Whether it is a conscious or an unconscious decision by the mothers to inadequately care for themselves during pregnancy, or it is the societies themselves that are not willing to provide the needed care, is not important. The point is that societies that demonize certain classes of individuals due to religious rules of acceptance are going to cause increased rates of infant mortality.
• 

  still thinking

  Lower Abortion Rates
  This is one of the hardest and most bitter pills that religious nations have to swallow, their policies of restricting the ability of women to receive an abortion, actually results in increased rates of abortion. Secular countries tend to provide free no-questions-asked abortions to any woman that wants one, and yet these countries have rates of abortions as much as 10-times lower than religious countries. Clearly, the religious desire to control the bodies of women and forcing them into having children, does not work in reducing abortion rates.

  http://www.atheistconnect.org/2011/11/26/top-10-reasons-to-be-an-atheist-nation/