As a woman, as a mother and as a student surrounded by creative young men and women, I am often chastised by others for not being tolerant of religion.  I am told that being an Atheist requires just as much assumption as being religious and that in my dismissal of all faiths I am ignoring the good that religion brings into the world.

I do not believe that there is any good that religion, any religion, is doing in the world.

I think that every faith promotes ignorance, separation, discrimination and hatred.

When people contrast their faiths to those more extreme (often the Taliban) I compare them.

I do this because I am intolerant of the crutch of religion. I do this because when someone tells me that they are Christian, but have nothing against homosexuals, it rings about as honest as a Neo-Nazi telling me they have nothing against minorities.

I find their accusations that I would be happier in my "traditional place as a woman," to be hateful and coming from a place of spiteful ignorance.

I am aggravated as others try to hang a label of "agnostic" on me, when what I really am is an atheist.

I have no doubts that I have made the right choice to abandon the myths of my mother and her mother. There is no question in my mind.

People have said to me that they cling to the belief in gods out of a hope for cosmic justice.

I think that it is the belief in these gods that create most of the injustices we suffer in our lives. Our feelings of frustrations, our self-imposed limitations on our hopes for love and happiness, our misery in the feelings of constant scrutiny from an unloving, constantly judging omnipotent figure of our own design, all of these things are the waste product of an out-dated hate machine.

I find nothing redeeming in religion. Religion flaunts opulence in the face of starving believers and implants hatred in the innocent and inquisitive minds of children. It creates division where there should be none.

I am not tolerant of religion any more than I would tolerate any other form of indoctrinated bigotry.

Views: 987

Comment by Carol Foley on February 28, 2013 at 11:43pm

You're citing a pseudo-scientist as a mark against actual science?

Some whack job going radically against the grain of the advancements of the scientific community at large can not be used as an argument against science for bigotry.

Science does not support bigotry.

Science is a method.

Comment by Carol Foley on February 28, 2013 at 11:53pm

I'm not opting to force people to abandon their idiotic religions at gunpoint.

I will not humor the idea that religion is somehow sacred, beautiful, or helpful to humanity.

Religion is poison because it stops people from questioning their uneducated judgements against others and allows them to quote "The Word of God!" while killing gays, 'witches,' adulterers and anyone else they fear for being different.

I've been down the road of religion, and it is ugly, cold, and answer-less to someone who someone who seeks the truth of the beauty of humanity.

Religion divides us into groups of believers and non-believers.

Science unites us as Homo Sapiens.

Comment by Joshua D. on March 1, 2013 at 12:04am
In your first comment replace science with religion. Or am I not allowed to pick and choose what I define as religion? You are doing the same with Lysenko simply because he doesn't fit into your idea of science. Religion is a method as well.

Nature is like a book. The tool used to examine it is science. Religion is a similar tool and as I've demonstrated both can be used to do horrible things.

What's the real problem though? And what would actually fix it? Your intolerance of the religious? Does that make you better?

It hasn't stopped me from questioning. I don't engage in any of those behaviors and abhor those who do. How do you account for me?

Scientism is just as dangerous as religion. It sounds like you threw off religion only to pick up another.
Comment by Gallup's Mirror on March 1, 2013 at 12:07am
What evidence do you have that indicates religion is responsible for the atrocities you mentioned?
Religions based on the worship of gods, or cults of personality based on the worship of men, have either caused or failed to prevent every war in human history, Joshua. The staggering failure of religions in the prevention of war is particularly implicating all by itself. But it doesn't stop there. The fact that religions overwhelmingly claim themselves to be the absolute, exclusive, and conflicting sources of morality and goodness are endless sources of conflict, both in antiquity and the present.
How many wars have occurred because people were willing to reconsider their positions as new evidence came to light? How many suicide bombers blew up buildings because they were being too rational? 


Death Toll - Event

66 million - Second World War (98% of Nazi's were Lutherans, Catholic, or Neopagan)
40 million - Mao Zedong (mostly famine) (Cult of Personality)
40 million - Genghis Khan
27 million - British India (mostly famine and disease)
25 million - Fall of the Ming Dynasty
20 million - Taiping Rebellion
20 million - Joseph Stalin (Cult of Personality)
18½ million - Mideast Slave Trade
17 million - Timur Lenk
16 million - Atlantic Slave Trade
15 million - First World War
15 million - Conquest of the Americas
13 million - An Lushan Revolt
10 million - Xin Dynasty
10 million - Congo Free State
9 million - Russian Civil War
7½ million - Thirty Years War
7½ million - Fall of the Yuan Dynasty
7 million - Fall of Rome
7 million - Chinese Civil Wars

The list goes on and on...
Comment by Joshua D. on March 1, 2013 at 12:15am
The failure to prevent war is the evidence? What responsibility would it have?how could religion even do such a thing?

I feel this argument is awful and shifts the blame away from the awful PEOPLE who were ultimately responsible for those travesties.

Rational thinking doesn't cause any of those things but rather irrational thinking which is responsible for all the events you describe. Religion in itself is just one in many vehicles we as people use to cause destruction.

Shameful really...
Comment by Carol Foley on March 1, 2013 at 12:19am

Science and religion are not interchangeable.

Religion requires you to fit observations into the mold of your preexisting religious dogma. If you choose as an individual to not do so, you are no longer applying your religion to your observation, you are making your observations in spite of it.

The claim that religion is as valid a tool for understanding the universe as science is ludicrous. So is calling science a religion.

It is a free country, you can call whatever you like "religion," but reality does not bend to your whims.

What's the real problem though?

The real problem is bigotry supported by the masses out of an Emperor's New Clothes style fear of standing against the claim that you must be righteous to feel this invisible god. It is the battle cry of the believer as he praises god while bathed in the blood of heathens like me.

And what would actually fix it?

Embracing the real science that shows that we are all the same. Understanding that what counts is how we treat others because this is what we actually have. This life.

Your intolerance of the religious?

Intolerance of RELIGION, not RELIGIOUS.

Does that make you better?

Better at thinking before I jump to conclusions about my fellow humans? Sometimes. I don't hate people because they are gay, or religious, or a religion other than my parents', or a different race, or gender identification. I only hate people for being awful towards other people.

Comment by Gallup's Mirror on March 1, 2013 at 12:24am

Or am I not allowed to pick and choose what I define as religion?

You want to pick and choose your own personal definition of religion?

Religion: a highly seasoned, hard sausage of beef and pork.


Comment by Gallup's Mirror on March 1, 2013 at 1:15am

I feel this argument is awful and shifts the blame away from the awful PEOPLE who were ultimately responsible for those travesties.

How is God not ultimately responsible for what he created and has absolute control over? Why doesn't God stop the rivers of blood gushing from the bodies of millions who die while praying for his protection? Why does God ignore the 9 million, mostly young children, who die of starvation every year while begging for his help? How could an all-loving and benevolent God do that?

There are three possibilities here.

1. God refuses to help.
2. God is powerless to help.
3. God is imaginary.

What's it going to be, Joshua?

Comment by Karl Mugele on March 1, 2013 at 5:15am

@MikeLong & unseen

Wow guys - is there such a thing as a religious hospital nowadays in your area?

In the UK some, possibly even many hospitals are called "St." something  - e.g. St Barts.  Religion plays no part in their function though.  The names are just traditional.

Some hospitals - possibly all - have some kind of prayer area for believers. I've never heard of a religious hospital though...seems anathema to me ;-)

Comment by Gregg R Thomas on March 1, 2013 at 6:56am

Yes, you are intolerant of religion...feels great, don't it. :)


You need to be a member of Think Atheist to add comments!

Join Think Atheist

© 2015   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service