A Christian’s Plea to Get Her Community to Stand Up for Atheists

[rug]

November 7, 2014 by Hemant Mehta 219 Comments

Rebecca Florence Miller, one of the evangelical Christian bloggers on Patheos, recently got in a conversation with a bunch of atheists (on this site, I believe), and came away with a few important conclusions:

I came away from this conversation challenged that I need to do more to stand up for the rights of atheists (and those of other religions) here in the United States. Not because I agree with them on God and theology, but because they are human beings who deserve respect. Because when we stand up for someone else’s rights, we are appropriately loving our neighbor and treating them as we would want to be treated.

She gets specific, too:

We can defend the child who is serious enough about his beliefs that he won’t “fake it” and stand up for the part of the Pledge of Allegiance that says “one nation under God.” We can stand against any instance when the government tries to establish some form of state religion. We can decry death threats against those who are speaking their beliefs, loving them enough to defend them even if we disagree profoundly with them. We can do this by considering that certain governmental expressions of religious faith may not be the greatest idea.

That’s really what most of us are asking for. Atheists, for the most part, aren’t interested in forcing our views on everyone else the way many Christians seem to want. We want the government to maintain neutrality on religious issues instead of promoting Christianity (or theism in general).

It’s been said before, but atheists are fighting to be treated the same as everyone else, while Christians often want special treatment. They get defensive when a city council says a Nativity Scene or Ten Commandments monument can’t be placed on government property… or angry when an atheist display goes up right next to their own. They think the whole world is an extension of their church and get upset when the same rules don’t apply (see: Football coaches who think prayer during practice is never a problem).

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2014/11/07/a-christians-plea-to-get-her-community-to-stand-up-for-atheists/#ixzz3IQl1bqnK

[cbayer]

1. Well done on her part, but I wish the friendly atheist would stop painting

with such broad brushes.

He's in no position to say what most atheists want (although I think he is most likely correct) or what apparently all christians want (since he makes no distinction and is clearly not correct).

Not very friendly.

[Nobel_Twaddle_III]

2. death threats against those who are speaking their beliefs - Not very friendly.

[cbayer]

3. I am not sure what you are referring to.

I agree that death threats towards anyone who is speaking their beliefs or non-beliefs is not very friendly, but don't get your point beyond that.

[shenmue]

4. Don't you know, all religious people are the same?

And we all know each other, and are to blame for one another's actions, no matter when or where they happened?

[cbayer]

5. Oh dear, I completely forgot!

Honestly though, I don't know what he was trying to say.

Was he talking about the Indian couple that were just brutally murdered by a mob for being christian? Or something else entirely.

[Curmudgeoness]

20. What the poster was doing

is to pull a statement from the OP.

We can decry death threats against those who are speaking their beliefs, loving them enough to defend them even if we disagree profoundly with them.

It wasn't aimed directly at you or any person of religion. If you would have read the entire OP (and you didn't even have to open the link for this one), you would have understood the context of the comment.

[cbayer]

21. And the whole point of the article is that the person it is about strongly advocates

for standing up against those kinds of things.

So I still don't understand what the point was.

I'm still not even clear whether they were talking about people of faith who are subject to this or atheists.

I've read the OP and I honestly do not understand what he was trying to say here.

[Curmudgeoness]

25. I see your point

about not knowing which the poster was talking about. I guess we may never know.

[cbayer]

26. He's got a great name though, lol!

I hope he comes back around.

[okasha]

10. And we all go yachting about

except when we're jetsetting about in our Gulfstreams.

[shenmue]

16. Yep!

[Nobel_Twaddle_III]

33. that would be the point, death threats are not friendly, and not Christion.

Doesn’t the invisible man in the sky frown on such activity?

[cbayer]

34. The person this article is about is the one making that point.

She is endorsing strong opposition to death threats towards those because of what they believe.

So, I agree, it's not friendly and not christian.

I still don't get your point. I was being critical of Hemant Mehta because I think he paints with too broad a brush and supporting the woman he is writing about.

Your response doesn't make sense in context, but I generally agree with it.

[AtheistCrusader]

6. Too little, too late.

[rug]

7. Ok, I'll tell her to forget about it.

[AtheistCrusader]

8. You do that. I find the courts more reliable than fair weather friends.

[rug]

9. Anyone else you'd like me to notify?

[AtheistCrusader]

11. I'd say 'your god', but we both know it's imaginary.

[rug]

12. You "know" that?

[AtheistCrusader]

13. Do you know Odin isn't real?

Your supposed god kind of made it a mutually exclusive proposition, after all.

[rug]

14. Odin is not "my" god. You were not talking about Odin, now were you?

I "know" the ascribed characteristics of "my" god are considerably different from those of Odin. Loki too for that matter.

[AtheistCrusader]

15. whoosh

[rug]

17. Leave Superman out of this.

[Odin2005]

57. Excuse me???

[hrmjustin]

19. That is harsh. Rug is a believer like myself.

Are you saying he really doesn't believe?

[AtheistCrusader]

35. I don't believe

any of you anymore.

That tête-à-tête certainly devolved into a dig, between Rug and I. When I say it to you, it is without acrimony. I simply don't believe that you actually believe in a god, at your core. Especially so for believers who acknowledge they experience doubt.

[rug]

37. Is there a reason I should believe you actually don't believe in a god, at your core?

[AtheistCrusader]

38. Ah, I see you've observed this gambit before.

You've probably already guessed someone tried it out on me this week.

[rug]

39. The only thing I've observed is your prior post.

It's a statement that works both ways.

[AtheistCrusader]

40. Yes.

Yes it does.

[hrmjustin]

42. So you are calling me a liar now.

You know the sad thimg was I generally got along with you. I always took you at your word.

But if you are going to call me a liar I don't think I can talk to you anymore.

Good-bye.

[AtheistCrusader]

43. Well... bye.

If that's how you are determined to take it, don't let me stop you.

[AtheistCrusader]

44. Before you play up the wounded animal schtick too much

Keep in mind the same precise thing is being said when someone says 'I don't believe in your god' when you claim god exists.

"I don't believe you."

If you think that is fully equivalent to someone calling you a liar, you're going to have a hard time in life.

[hrmjustin]

45. How was I suppose to take your comment sir?

[AtheistCrusader]

46. The same way anyone takes a comment when someone tells them "I don't believe you."

Which happens all the time.

[hrmjustin]

47. I take it you are calling me a liar.

[AtheistCrusader]

48. If that's how you insist on reading it, i can't stop you.

Just know that the benefit of the doubt that I have never extended to your God's existence, I no longer extend to your claim of belief. That's all.

[hrmjustin]

49. Thus you question that I believe what I say I do.

Thus you are telling me I am a liar. You can try to be cute all you want but I never questioned whether you were a real atheist or not nor would I.

You went too far.

[AtheistCrusader]

50. Feign personal insult all you want. It's a cheap rhetorical trick and I am not impressed.

Not extending you the benefit of the doubt, or saying "I don't believe you" is not the same as saying you are a Liar.

Otherwise, we could never disagree. You say your god exists, I say I don't believe you, am I now calling you a liar? No. You wont silence me by pretending any form of disagreement is a personal insult.

I'm not that stupid, to let you get away with it. The only one playing cute games here is you.

[hrmjustin]

51. You are the one who said you don't believe me.

[AtheistCrusader]

52. Correct.

Your response makes zero sense. I just said, several times, I don't believe you.

You asked a question, I answered. I have always been honest with you, even of you don't like the answer.

[hrmjustin]

53. When you tell me you don't believe anything I say i take that that you think I am a liar.

[AtheistCrusader]

54. Did I say 'anything'?

No I did not. You seem to be doubling down on the ideas I must accept anything you say, or, I am implicitly personally insulting you as a liar.

You are attempting to silence disagreement.

I don't react well to attempts to silence me.

[hrmjustin]

55. Silence you! are you kidding me.

You told me you don't believe us anymore and you don't believe I belie e in God at my core because I admitted to doubt.

I told you i take that as you calling me a liar. You are the one who is all over the map here.

Look you just poisoned the well with me so I don't care what you have to say to me anymore.

You can get the last word in if you need but I am done discussing this with you.

[AtheistCrusader]

56. You are telling me i can't doubt you without implicitly calling you a liar.

A form of personal attack that could reasonably get my post hidden by a jury. So yes, you are trying to silence me.

My point has been entirely consistent through this thread. If I'm all over the map, its because the map is very small, simple, relevant, and easy to comprehend.

[goldent]

18. While you are at it

maybe you could suggest she run her ideas past this group before she goes off spouting them to the world. Would save everyone a lot of time

[Curmudgeoness]

22. I commend her for speaking up like this.

It really is all that I have ever wanted from the religious community. Have your beliefs, but don't force them on people who do not hold such beliefs, and don't treat people who believe differently with disrespect.

[cbayer]

23. Do you feel that happens here?

Do you feel that people share your wish that everyone is entitled to their beliefs and no one should force theirs on people that don't share them?

Do you think people here that believe differently are treated with respect?

I think it does happen here to a degree. In fact, I think most people do exactly that, even when engaging in vigorous debate.

But it's not across the board. You are very respectful and open when you are posting in this group. I think that in this group you exhibit exactly what you are asking for.

I try, but I don't think I am as successful as you.

[Curmudgeoness]

27. I see a lot of people posting here who show respect to each other,

but there is also disrespect from both sides of the issue. I have not been here long enough to know the history behind some of the feuds that seem to be prevalent, so I am not sure if it was started by one or the other, or if it just happened. I know that there are a few believers here who never fail to upset me with their comments and I try to avoid getting caught up in the fray with them. Actually, I rarely check in to this group for that reason.

And regarding my posts in other places, that is my place to vent about the problems that we encounter as atheists, and those comments are often not suitable here in this group. Sometimes we have to get issues off our chests and sometimes we have to make light of things and I believe that is what that group is set up for...to let us feel free to bang our heads against the wall in frustration. I do know that posts there are open for public viewing, although I would like to be generous and think that people would not go there just to check out what we are saying. I have never gone into the safe haven religion groups to see what they are up to, with the exception of one time when there were some posts about Interfaith and I looked to see what it was. It just doesn't seem right to me, but I know that is not the case with others from both believers and non-believers. I suppose that it is easier to be respectful here when I have found another place to go when I get ticked off.....but don't consider me "open" in this group. My agenda is always to champion the atheist side. I just don't care much if others have beliefs so don't see a need to poke fun at them.

[cbayer]

28. I feel the same about there being a few people here that never fail

to upset me. Most of them I do not engage with at all, and the ones that I do I generally regret having gone there.

I understand that the A/A group serves a purpose for venting. I don't agree that the purpose of a safe haven is to provide a place where people can say things that they couldn't say elsewhere. The purpose is to keep out those that would attack the members, not provide a place where other members can be negatively talked about and mocked with impunity.

I go there because I am repeatedly and openly called out. Since I interact with some people, like yourself, outside of that group, I want to know what they say about me behind my back. Some people are very nice to my face, but not so much in the comfort of their safe haven. I don't think my wanting to know that is an abnormal response.

If it doesn't seem right to you then consider championing the cause of not tolerating the kind of thing that makes people want to look.

Championing the atheist side is a good thing and you should surely keep doing it.

[Curmudgeoness]

29. Speaking for myself,

don't get me wrong.....I don't hide from any of my posts in A&A, but I do think that there are things said there that do not belong in other groups. Let me be clear, I think that religions were all created by the powers-that-be to keep the masses in line and to give hope to the hopeless so that they will be good little citizens and live in paradise after their trials on Earth are over. And I would freely say that in A&A. But I don't see where it is a good idea to say that here. It is not respectful.

I have no idea if I am called out in other groups, although I have the feeling that someone would inform me if that were the case, but I don't really care, nor do I want to be bothered by it. Like everywhere in life, I prefer to be fat and happy and not know what people say behind my back (but I will say that a discussion board isn't really behind anyone's back).

Regarding challenging those who are not respectful from the atheist group, I have let it be known when I think that they have gone too far, but I cannot make it stop. I especially cannot make great inroads on that issue when I see that the antagonism is not one-sided. We have to accept that this group is a contentious place, and not spend too much time here that causes us to be sucked in to it all.

[cbayer]

30. Your position on religion is perfectly reasonable and legitimate.

I think you could say it here without any ill effect. The way you put it is respectful. It doesn't attack religious believers but presents a historical view on religion, even if it is negative.

I've never seen you called out, but I think that if you were to the extent that some people are here you would most likely be quite bothered by it. Particularly if it were often based on false information. And when I say "behind my back", it is something of a metaphor. I can read anything I want, but I can't respond there. I can, however, respond elsewhere and I will when I think it's appropriate to do so.

Being fat and happy is a good thing. I generally ignore those IRL and those on discussion boards who I just don't care what they say about me. It generally works pretty well and I feel most of my discussions go pretty well.

I do appreciate some of what you do and say and it's not always easy, I know. I am not your enemy and we have much, much more in common than we have differences, I am sure.

[Curmudgeoness]

31. I believe that everyone here

has more in common than they have differences. The problem is that we are in a group where only one issue is under discussion, and that is religion. It is not Obama vs. Romney or Democrat vs. Republican. Since everyone here is a Democrat, and most likely a liberal Democrat, we do indeed have a lot in common. But not religion. That is why this group is so hard to deal with for me.

Excuse me while I go back to my home across the hall and bash religion.

[cbayer]

32. No doubt - it is contentious by it's very nature.

It is hard to deal with and I appreciate you taking the time to talk with me today. I know you are not comfortable in this group and my appreciation is sincere.

Bash religion all you want. Bash religious believers, but be circumspect. But please don't bash individual members of this site unless there is a compelling reason to do so. That's what I ask.

[pinto]

24. There's a difference between a simplistic "us vs. them" and mutual support across the spectrum.

Miller gets it. Different points of view are a given. Yet there's a lot of room for common interests.

Some may prefer to step aside from the prospect, I get that. Some may simply prefer to keep it personal, no more nor less. I get that. But for those that choose to engage in discussions I encourage a look at common ground.

[AtheistCrusader]

36. We don't have any common ground.

We pass each other in the night, on neutral territory politically, perhaps. But I don't see any common ground.

It's not enough for someone to hold an idea that I agree with. If we are to actually have common ground, we need to agree on why they hold that idea.

Alliances built on anything but core principle aren't binding and don't last.

[pinto]

41. What are your core principles?

That seems to be worth a start.