Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The bigotry of atheists
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 1 of 53 (495071)
01-20-2009 6:05 PM


Broadly speaking, any group of people of sufficient size is likely to contain at least one person that would generally be considered a 'bigot'. The word bigot is somewhat subjective, so some people would consider different people to be bigoted under different circumstances. I imagine most people have been accused of being a bigot at least once in their lives, I know I have been accused of similar on these very boards.
However, Bertot recently brought up the "bigotry and intolerance of the Atheistic Secular Fundamentalists twords nearly all religion and Theism". I'd like to discuss this in more detail. Two examples have been suggested:
quote:
...the comments by Pope Dawkins that religion is a mental disorder and it should be outlawed.
I have not seen any such comments from who I presume is Richard Dawkins. He did mention that certain specific beliefs of certain religious characters should be considered delusional in the sense that they are fixed false beliefs held despite evidence that contradicts them. I think he may have even clarified that he didn't mean it strictly in the psychiatric sense but more in the colloquial.
Further, I've read a lot of Richard Dawkins' work, seen a lot of his talks and debates. I've never once seen him call for religion to be outlawed - quite the contrary in fact. He has put forward his opinion that teaching children certain religious beliefs might be considered child abuse - but not as a call to outlaw the behaviour but more as a call to raise consciousness about the mental harm done to a young child that genuinely and completely believes (because they were told so by their trustworthy parents) that its recently deceased best friend is roasting in eternal hellfire because they were a Protestant.
So, if those examples are not sufficient, does anybody have any examples of intolerance or bigotry coming from 'atheist secular fundamentalists'? If anyone wants to supply actual evidence that the above positions stated by Bertot are positions Dawkins has actually taken, maybe they would serve at least certain definitions of bigoted - depending on context of course. Either individual cases, or better still events or actions of intolerance supported or carried out by organised groups of same?
As a point of order, I'd like to discount a certain possible 'kind' of bigotry and intolerance. If, for example, a group of people are deliberately lying about the way a lethal virus is spread resulting in thousands of deaths per year - being intolerant of that group's actions doesn't count for our purposes even if that group is religious or their actions religiously inspired. Let us call this 'kind' of intolerance constructive intolerance. It is intolerance against immoral actions rather than simply intolerance against beliefs or skin colour or what have you which we might call 'destructive intolerance'.
Nor am I looking for examples where someone or some group has simply criticized religion or religious belief as a whole. Bigotry can be done under the guise of criticism, so I guess this might be tricky to unravel - but a philosophical objection that just happens to equally apply to all religious belief is hardly to be considered bigotry.
My terms aren't precise, but I'm hoping everyone involved will be able to understand the spirit of my request.
Theoretically, this could continue at On this day, let us all be proud of America, but I thought it might be nice not to distract that thread with such specific side issues such as this one which it is in danger of doing. This is a Coffee House topic, but I thought it wise to run it past an admin given its unfortunate potential to blow up out of proportion quickly.

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by RAZD, posted 01-20-2009 10:17 PM Modulous has replied
 Message 5 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-21-2009 12:21 PM Modulous has replied

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 2 of 53 (495080)
01-20-2009 6:39 PM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 3 of 53 (495119)
01-20-2009 10:17 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Modulous
01-20-2009 6:05 PM


It's simple, Modulus,
However, Bertot recently brought up the "bigotry and intolerance of the Atheistic Secular Fundamentalists twords nearly all religion and Theism".
Anybody that objects to the take-over of the US by fundamentalist Christians is obviously biased, bigoted, intolerant of any and all theistic thoughts.
The fact that fundamentalist Christians are pushing falsehoods about the age of the universe, life, evolution, etc, and that the objections are to the falsehoods, pointing out that these are delusional beliefs contradicted by evidence, has nothing to do with it.
If anyone wants to supply actual evidence that the above positions stated by Bertot are positions Dawkins has actually taken, maybe they would serve at least certain definitions of bigoted - depending on context of course. Either individual cases, or better still events or actions of intolerance supported or carried out by organised groups of same?
There are a number of his essays on the Council for Secular Humanism website
"What Use is Religion?" is one. You can also read "Ignorance is no Crime", which discusses his well known quote:"It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked, but I'd rather not consider that."
And you can search the site for "Richard Dawkins" and then search the authors to find his articles.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Modulous, posted 01-20-2009 6:05 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by Modulous, posted 01-21-2009 12:13 PM RAZD has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 4 of 53 (495166)
01-21-2009 12:13 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by RAZD
01-20-2009 10:17 PM


There are a number of his essays on the Council for Secular Humanism website
Are you suggesting that one of those essays supplies the necessary evidence of bigotry or were you just providing a resource for those who wish to look for this evidence?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by RAZD, posted 01-20-2009 10:17 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by RAZD, posted 01-21-2009 7:40 PM Modulous has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 53 (495173)
01-21-2009 12:21 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Modulous
01-20-2009 6:05 PM


I think bigotry is a bullshit term.
Bigotry:
quote:
1. stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own.
2. the actions, beliefs, prejudices, etc., of a bigot.
intolerance
quote:
1. lack of toleration; unwillingness or refusal to tolerate or respect contrary opinions or beliefs, persons of different races or backgrounds, etc.
2. incapacity or indisposition to bear or endure: intolerance to heat.
3. abnormal sensitivity or allergy to a food, drug, etc.
4. an intolerant act.
From these definition we can see that even an unwillingness to respect contrary beliefs is bigotry.
So, if those examples are not sufficient, does anybody have any examples of intolerance or bigotry coming from 'atheist secular fundamentalists'?
Its not that hard to find atheists disrespecting christians on the web.
As a point of order, I'd like to discount a certain possible 'kind' of bigotry and intolerance. If, for example, a group of people are deliberately lying about the way a lethal virus is spread resulting in thousands of deaths per year - being intolerant of that group's actions doesn't count for our purposes even if that group is religious or their actions religiously inspired. Let us call this 'kind' of intolerance constructive intolerance. It is intolerance against immoral actions rather than simply intolerance against beliefs or skin colour or what have you which we might call 'destructive intolerance'.
But whether or not something is immoral is just your subjective opinion and people aren't going to agree on what is constructive and what is destructive.
The group that cries intolerance the most is in no better position to determine whether or not something should be tolerated and they end up doing the same thing that they are fighting against.
People reply that being intolerant of intollerance is not really intolerance, but they use thier own subjective opinions to determine just what should be allowed to be tolerated, just like the group that they are opposing.
Its hypocritical bullshit.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Modulous, posted 01-20-2009 6:05 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Modulous, posted 01-21-2009 12:47 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 6 of 53 (495177)
01-21-2009 12:47 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by New Cat's Eye
01-21-2009 12:21 PM


Agreed - but I'd still like to see what people are thinking of when they talk of the bigotry of atheists especially in a post that focusses on the changing landscape of racial bigotry in the US.
We'll never agree, of course - but when has that impacted debating around here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-21-2009 12:21 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-21-2009 1:29 PM Modulous has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 53 (495186)
01-21-2009 1:29 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Modulous
01-21-2009 12:47 PM


Agreed
Really? That crying bigotry is hypocritical bullshit? Huh....
but I'd still like to see what people are thinking of when they talk of the bigotry of atheists especially in a post that focusses on the changing landscape of racial bigotry in the US.
Don't forget to consider the source
From my experiences, atheists tend to be smug and condescending to theists. That's bigotry as defined above.
We'll never agree, of course - but when has that impacted debating around here.
Of course not... Who wants to sit around and agree all day!?
not people who frequent a debate board
Edited by Catholic Scientist, : spelling

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Modulous, posted 01-21-2009 12:47 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Modulous, posted 01-21-2009 1:51 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 8 of 53 (495192)
01-21-2009 1:51 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by New Cat's Eye
01-21-2009 1:29 PM


Really? That crying bigotry is hypocritical bullshit? Huh....
I'm not sure if it is hypocrisy. But I do agree that the term is very much subjective and problematic. Not entirely useless, however.
From my experiences, atheists tend to be smug and condescending to theists. That's bigotry as defined above.
Would you say that being smug is 'complete intolerance'? It seems to me to be pushing the limits of the subjectivity beyond reasonable capacity there.
Of course not... Who wants to sit around and agree all day!?
not people who frequent a debate board
I disagree.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-21-2009 1:29 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-21-2009 2:02 PM Modulous has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 9 of 53 (495196)
01-21-2009 2:02 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Modulous
01-21-2009 1:51 PM


Would you say that being smug is 'complete intolerance'?
I don't know what makes intolerance complete.
From the definitions above, intolerance is unwillingness or refusal to tolerate or respect.
Being smug is disrespectful, but completely? I don't know.
It seems to me to be pushing the limits of the subjectivity beyond reasonable capacity there.
How do we know where the limit, or what the reasonable capacity, is?
Of course not... Who wants to sit around and agree all day!?
not people who frequent a debate board
I disagree.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Modulous, posted 01-21-2009 1:51 PM Modulous has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 10 of 53 (495252)
01-21-2009 7:40 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Modulous
01-21-2009 12:13 PM


Hey Mod,
... or were you just providing a resource for those who wish to look for this evidence?
Providing a resource, as well as choosing a couple of examples that one would expect to include such bias.
And one (the second) that every creationist should read just so they know where they stand.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Modulous, posted 01-21-2009 12:13 PM Modulous has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 11 of 53 (495604)
01-23-2009 3:32 PM


DA's latest thread
Underpass stains, burnt toast & the pervasiveness of the Cult of the Virgin Mary
Where we get such gems as:
quote:
I understand not every religious person believes these things (i.e. images of Mary or Jesus burnt onto toast are some type of divine sign from God) but why does humanity (religious or otherwise) even entertain stupid, ignorant, pseudoscientific bullshit phenomena as such? In addition, why does the media feel like this crap is worthy of being on the headline news?
quote:
This is pure emotional greed bordering on psychosis.
Bigotry?

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 01-23-2009 3:38 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3102 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 12 of 53 (495605)
01-23-2009 3:38 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by New Cat's Eye
01-23-2009 3:32 PM


Re: DA's latest thread
If this is bigotry, I would say it is justified.
If you want to go by the dictionary definition of bigotry which according to Merriam-Websters is "a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices" than everyone on earth is a bigot to one opinion or another. But if you read on it further refines this defition: "especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance".
I am not a racial or ethnic bigot. Just maybe an anti-idiotic behavior bigot BTW, I do not hate these people. I just think it is a waste of time, money and effort that could be spent to better use elsewhere.

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-23-2009 3:32 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-23-2009 5:10 PM DevilsAdvocate has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 53 (495619)
01-23-2009 5:10 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by DevilsAdvocate
01-23-2009 3:38 PM


Re: DA's latest thread
If this is bigotry, I would say it is justified.
I'd bet that most bigots do feel that their bigotry is justified.
If you want to go by the dictionary definition of bigotry which according to Merriam-Websters is "a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices" than everyone on earth is a bigot to one opinion or another.
Yeah, its a bullshit term.
But if you read on it further refines this defition: "especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance".
Did you consider that intolerance includes a refusal to simply respect?
I am not a racial or ethnic bigot. Just maybe an anti-idiotic behavior bigot
Without a standard for idiocy, you're no better than the racial and ethnic bigots.
BTW, I do not hate these people.
But you've refused to respect them, bigot.
I just think it is a waste of time, money and effort that could be spent to better use elsewhere.
Just!? Riiight...
That's why your OP just said:
"Look at this. It is a waste of time, money and effort that could be spent to better use elsewhere."
...and nothing more

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 01-23-2009 3:38 PM DevilsAdvocate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 01-23-2009 5:32 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4229 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 14 of 53 (495623)
01-23-2009 5:29 PM


LOL this is funny sofar. I have to agree with Catholic Scientist.
bigotry is a paradoxical term. in order to call some one else a bigot you have to be bigotted toward them. and then we are all bigots in that regard, so what is the point of the term if it is all encopmassing to begin with?
for humor: RWSkiller2 Toddler T-Shirt Bigot: Toddler T-Shirt | CafePress

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 01-23-2009 5:40 PM Artemis Entreri has replied
 Message 20 by Rrhain, posted 01-23-2009 6:11 PM Artemis Entreri has not replied

  
DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3102 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 15 of 53 (495624)
01-23-2009 5:32 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by New Cat's Eye
01-23-2009 5:10 PM


Re: DA's latest thread
I'd bet that most bigots do feel that their bigotry is justified.
LOL, So that means you are bigoted about me being supposedly a bigot? Do you see the slippery slope here?
Yeah, its a bullshit term.
So what is your definition of a bigot?
Did you consider that intolerance includes a refusal to simply respect?
You are not respecting my "bigoted" beliefs, so that makes you a bigot as well.
And how do you define "respecting someones beliefs"? I disagree with the belief that a salt water stain on a concrete wall of an underpass is a sign of god, however that is not so much what I have a problem with. If one morning someone woke up and saw a image of Jesus on there pancakes and thought it was a message from God I could care less, they have the right to believe whatever they want as long as it doesn't trample the freedoms and rights of others.
However, if you read the story these people are wasting tax payer money by making cops and other public servents divert there time to direct traffic, keep people from getting run over, doing research on the damn stain, etc as well as media attention that could be spent better elsewhere covering real stories like the millions of men, women and children who die everyday of starvation, of sectarian violence or of deadly diseases. THAT is what we need to focus our attention on. THAT is what I get upset about!
Without a standard for idiocy, you're no better than the racial and ethnic bigots.
My standard of idiocy is that if your supernatural beliefs interfere with the rights and freedoms of others, than you are in the wrong.
But you've refused to respect them, bigot.
And you refuse to respect me, bigot. See where this gets us?
Just!? Riiight...
That's why your OP just said:
"Look at this. It is a waste of time, money and effort that could be spent to better use elsewhere."
...and nothing more
So you think this is a good expenditure of our taxpayer money? To protect people while worshiping a piece of concrete? To spend money and time investigate this rubbish on the news? That is a good expenditure of time, money and energy? Really !?! I could find a hundred better ways of expending this time, money and effort.

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-23-2009 5:10 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-23-2009 5:46 PM DevilsAdvocate has not replied
 Message 19 by Brian, posted 01-23-2009 6:08 PM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024