I was informed by a coworker who did not know I was atheist that atheists have no morals. After I nicely told him I was an atheist, he awkwardly looked at me and shut up. My supervisor got angry and told me I was being offensive. Apparently, it's okay to label an entire group of people as immoral, but it's not okay to simply state your lack of religion.
I would like to know what you say when people call you immoral or what you would day if someone said this to you. I'm just wondering in general, not necessarily in a work setting. I live in the Bible Belt, so this comes up in my life more often than one would expect.
*Sorry for any typos. I'm on my tablet.
"I would like to know what you say when people call you immoral..."
I politely agree, then rip out their spleen and eat it raw in front of them.
As for your supervisor, I guess it depends on the nature of your working relationship and your employer, but I don't think I would let that slide. I tend to find a series of innocent questions can work many people down to either a retraction or to the point where it's too much hassle to bring it up again. It won't change anyone's views, but it keeps them toeing the line (unless your employment can be terminated without providing cause).
I would'nt bitch slap them, but I'd high-five their face.
I call that "a friend assisted face plant". LOL
LOL “that’s offensive” o’ how I love irony. I usually just ask them where they think they get there morality from. Then simply break down the hundred of falsities’ when they most likely say God and/or Bible. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBezvtQ_3a8&list=PL6912C12FF73FBFC3
Biggest thing to keep in mind, is that your are criticize religion not them- try and keep them separated as much as possible to hopefully keep them from taking it personal and thusly responding defensively.
That's certainly a preferred goal, Thomas, but it's been my experience that they are so closely knit with their theosophy, that it's impossible to separate them.
I point out that morality and ethics arise from the conflict between survival instinct, and grouping instinct that we possess by being social animals. The conflict exists because different people draw their own lines at different points along this individual welfare vs. group welfare line, and this is a conflict reflected broadly in philosophy and politics.
Morality and ethics do not arise from belief in magic, super-powered, imaginary friends. Neither do they arise from books that promote or condone genocide, the murder of children, slavery, the reduction of women to property, and the abuse of fig trees because they don’t yield figs out of season.
Speaking of people with no morals, I found this from the Secular Coalition for America, regarding the Republican Party, hopeful:
The Republican National Committee held its winter meeting last week in North Carolina, where the Party discussed new strategies it could employ in future elections. Quietly discussed were ideas on how the Party can track and work with the religiously unaffiliated going forward.
Say "bye-bye," Tea Party --
I have no morals nor ethics, they just get in the way when I'm having sex with 8 year old children...and I eat babies too.
The above statement is as stupid as saying someone doesn't have morals, everyone (with the exception of the mentally deranged) has morals, it's impossible to be sane without them.
The religious on the other hand will consider any act as moral as long as they feel their doG has sanctioned it.
Who's moral now believer???
What??? No "Thy Pedophile Priest Neighbor"
Not to turn this into a finger pointing session.. (well ok, I guess I am :)