Why is any mention of God met with condescension?

[TexasTowelie]

By Leonard Pitts, Jr.


All she asked was that someone pray for her.

As relayed on Twitter by the activist Brittany Packnett, the unnamed woman certainly had good reason to seek help, divine or otherwise. She was one of the people held hostage by a gunman last week in an L.A. Trader Joe’s. According to Packnett, her friend was hiding in the back of the store with her husband and a pregnant woman. All three survived, though another woman was killed.

The prayer request was too much for “Elizabeth Post,” a self-described “Australian who is sickened by hypocrites.” Though she has the name of a famous etiquette writer, Post responded with a series of tweets noteworthy for their remarkable lack of grace.

“Has that worked in all the other shootings?” she demanded. “No. Prayer does nothing. If prayer worked, there would be no shootings.”

And: “It only makes you feel good. You only ask others to pray on Twitter & Facebook to gain popularity for yourself.”

Read more: https://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/article215698300.html

[Xipe Totec]

1. Yo Soyateo, Gracias a Dios

(Soyateo) - Drink soyate
(Soy Ateo) - I'm an Atheist

So I (can) drink soyate, thank God,
Or I'm an Atheist, thank god.

Take your pick.

[Eko]

2. Sorry TexasTowelie,

a lot of people think that "God" is the ultimate in fake news.

[Funtatlaguy]

3. Many are sick of thoughts and prayers taking the place

of action and reform.

[Ferrets are Cool]

5. This x 1000

It's less than worthless.

[tymorial]

4. Perhaps

The issue here (imho) has little to do with God; belief or disbelief. The woman experienced serious trauma and and asked for prayers. She received contempt and a distinct lack of compassion. That tells me more about the Australian woman and her character than it does about religion and atheism in general. I am all for intellectual debate on these subjects but a person seeking prayers, compassion or consideration during or after a horrible traumatic event is not one of those times.

Quite frankly, I have observed that the behavior of some Atheists is really no different from the religious types who endeavor to impose their beliefs on others. The belief or disbelief may place the two at opposite sides but the manner by which they express themselves overlaps.

Basically, people can be giant aholes even if they have nothing in common BUT their gross and disgusting behavior and attitude

[Eko]

6. Interesting.

Pointing out that someone believes in things not real is not the same thing as not having compassion for them. They are two separate things. Another way to tell this story is that a person I know has a "magic rock" in their pocket, they will take it out and show it to you if you ask. They got into a car accident one time and "prayed" to the magic rock. Should we respect the "magic rock" and tell them it's ok? Should we further normalize the "magic rock"? Or should we deal with the situation in a reality based manner while showing compassion? At what point can we talk about the problem of believing in the "magic rock", especially if belief in the said magic rock has stopped legislation that would have mitigated the car crash?

[Mariana]

10. Apparently, yes, you must respect belief in a magic rock.

If you don't respect someone's belief in prayer to a magic rock and you have the colossal nerve to say so, why, you're exactly the same as those religious people who are working day and night to pass laws that oppress women, LGBT individuals, and religious minorities. Isn't that nice to know?

[tymorial]

13. Comparing a hostage victim to a car crash...

This is exactly the type of behavior I referenced in my original response. The fact that you glossed over this to bandwagon the argument is certainly good to know and is absolutely like the behavior I referenced.

Quite frankly, I dont lnow why I bothered to respond to these posts.

[Mariana]

18. This is what you said:

Quite frankly, I have observed that the behavior of some Atheists is really no different from the religious types who endeavor to impose their beliefs on others.

Except they are very different behaviors. Are you really pretending not to understand that?

[tymorial]

12. Comparing a car accident to being held hostage is quite the mental leap

Talk about your false equivalency. While I understand your argument, it's a ridiculous comparison to the events cited. If the atheist is unable to offer condolences without attacking the victims religion, the compassionate response is to say nothing.

eom.

[Mariana]

23. You made the comparison.

You made the false equivalency. You said, "Quite frankly, I have observed that the behavior of some Atheists is really no different from the religious types who endeavor to impose their beliefs on others."

[Eko]

25. Im sorry, the rude lady was not talking about being held hostage.

She was talking about guns. It's well known the connection to religion and guns, hence the phrase "god and guns". The Christian religion has a lot of history of being against gun laws almost as if they go hand and hand. Sure, there are Christians against guns, but most people that are pro-gun are religious. It's like the saying, not all republicans are racists but all racists are republicans. Not all Christians are pro gun, but all pro gun people are Christians at least here. I did add this "especially if belief in the said magic rock has stopped legislation that would have mitigated the car crash?". It doesn't seem quite the mental leap to me when you are talking about a belief that is being used to actively work against fixing the bad thing that happened to you. Where do you draw the line with these things? If a Dump supporter who believes in him is hurt by his policies and still believes do you offer condolences to them or point out the errors in their thinking? What about if they say they believe in Dump because god wants them to and then loose their farm? Do you offer condolences? Some people see Dump supporters believing in fake things as a problem, I see a county believing in fake things as the problem. Calling out a belief is not attacking a person, the fact that you would say that is extremely worrisome. If that's really the case for you then you can never, ever, say anything to a dump supporter for their beliefs and that starts on the road to us being truly lost.

[MineralMan]

17. There are no "magic rocks."

A business I once owned sold mineral specimens to collectors from a website. Unlike many others who sold such specimens, I had no interest in selling to people who believed that mineral crystals had some sort of esoteric powers. I did not market to such people. In fact, there was a section of my website dedicated to debunking such nonsense.

Nevertheless, I sometimes received orders from people who asked questions like, "Is that crystal good for warding off diseases?" I routinely refused such orders and sent a reply to those people explaining that mineral crystals have no powers of the sort. For me, my personal and business ethics prohibited me from any actions that advanced such silly superstitions.

One situations stands out for me:

A woman sent me her credit card information to purchase a stalactite of malachite. Such specimens are unusual, expensive, and are found primarily in Zaire. Looking strikingly similar to a green human penis, they are quick sellers on mineral websites, and cost a pretty penny. This particular specimen was priced at $250.

As a note in her order, the woman said that she wanted the specimen to treat her cancer of the cervix. She explained that her "practitioner" had told her that inserting it vaginally and leaving it there would cure her. Her telephone number was also provided with the order. So, I called her. I explained that not only would malachite not cure her cancer, but that malachite is water soluble to some degree and that could be absorbed into her body if used that way. I explained further that malachite is also poisonous if absorbed, and could cause serious health problems, or even death by copper poisoning. I refused to sell her the specimen and told her that she would be far better served if she visited an oncologist to discuss treatment for her dangerous illness.

She got very angry with me on the telephone. I remained adamant about not selling her the specimen, since I knew what she was going to do with it and could not, in good conscience, cause harm to her in that way. She hung up on me.

I never heard from her again. The malachite specimen was sold shortly thereafter to a mineral collector, who was planning to put in on display in his collection. I was more than happy to sell it to that collector.

Sometimes, we have an ethical responsibility not to reinforce false ideas held by people. In fact, we sometimes have an ethical responsibility to inform people if their beliefs can cause them harm.

[better]

7. Actually, it is of course a rather complicated subject.

Even just taken at face value on its own pertaining only to religious faith, it is complicated, and that's to say nothing of it being tied in to the intractable problem we have with gun violence in this country.

Now having said all of that, I realize that you, TT, haven't personally really said anything at all in your own words here (unless you are Mr. Pitts), but the article does raise several questions with which we as a society really need to grapple, not least of which is the one in the article's title.

On that question, I think there is some kernel of obvious truth in the reported self-description of the woman who responded with condescension, and that of course is an acquired intolerance of hypocrisy. It saddens me to say, but ask just about any unbiased observer, and I suspect they will have countless experiences of witnessing religious hypocrisy. Tie in the gun debate and what we generally hear from which sides, and we can also start to see where politics itself is another culprit.

But there seems to also be the deeper problem wherein we have either regressed or failed to progress enough with regard to hearing the deeper meaning of what people actually mean to say, instead of just the superficial aspect of the words they use in an attempt to say it, in large part because so many are too quick to rush to respond, often without the important counter-balancing drive to first observe.

For example, the initial reaction to which recent media trends (both news and social) have predisposed me would have been to assess that Ms. Packnett drew the ire she did because she identified herself as a hypocrite by calling for prayers instead of action. But tempered by my drive to first observe (and understand relevant context), I did a quick Google search of Ms. Packnett, and very readily came to the conclusion that such a call for prayer instead of action would actually seem quite notably out of character for her.

And that brings me, lastly, to another flaw which I observe to be rampant across society, and of which I myself am sometimes guilty.
We can become so enraged by an injustice that in our haste to combat it, we fail to properly discern friend from foe.

[4now]

8. She was in pain and asked for help

We were in pain so we attacked her.

[Cartoonist]

9. Who's We?

Not Me!

[Major Nikon]

27. Notice how the OP also asked a loaded question

Religion must be allowed to freely promote itself in any and all situations and any resistance to this effort or the promotion of alternate ideas is automatically billed as intolerance. Privilege must be maintained.

[Mariana]

28. Did you follow the link to read the piece?

Privilege has so blinded many Christians that they'll even flatly disobey Jesus to maintain it.

Jesus told Christians very clearly and unambiguously what they are supposed to do when people say mean things to them or about them on account of their faith. Jesus told them to rejoice and be glad. But instead of being happy as he was instructed to do by his Lord and Savior, this author is angry. He wrote this essay-length whine about how Christians are so persecuted, because someone on the internet expressed annoyance at being asked to perform a religious ritual by and for a complete stranger.

[Major Nikon]

29. Dogma isn't a tool used for self regulation

It’s a tool used for self righteousness.

[Mariana]

11. We? Speak for yourself, please. nt.

[tymorial]

14. People her attacked because she asked for prayers

It didnt matter her trauma or circumstance. She expressed religious belief and for some that overrides any instinct to offer care or compassion. Instead it becomes a mission to correct, educate, convert.

[Mariana]

20. According to the article, wasn't it only one person

who gave her a hard time about her request?

Discussing the story here in this group, which exists for this kind of discussion, isn't in any way "attacking" her.

[Act_of_Reparation]

15. What do you think mentions of atheism are usually met with?

[Mariana]

19. Oh, but that's entirely different!

Imagine this scenario: You're a victim of a horrendous crime, and here come the religious people out of the woodwork saying they'll pray for you. You say something like, "You know, I'm an atheist and I'd rather you didn't. If you really want to help, please volunteer to help pass better gun control legislation instead." Everyone knows what the response from the religious would be, and it wouldn't be nice at all.

[Act_of_Reparation]

21. Yeah, atheists have lost friends and family members for just not believing.

But someone was condescending to a theist. On the internet.

FOOOOOOOOOOOR SHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAME.

[Major Nikon]

26. Almost as bad as the War on Christmas

[MineralMan]

16. Some people are just plain rude.

Nothing is accomplished by denying the existence of deities to someone who is praying for her life. That's just rude. Asserting that there is no evidence of deities in a discussion forum on the internet that is dedicated to discussions of religion is another matter. This is one such discussion forum.

[Iggo]

22. Not always.

A lot of times it's met with ridicule.

[Major Nikon]

24. I'm going to address the subject line and not the example given

Quite often expressions of faith are far more about expressing privilege. If you are a member of a dominant faith, then you probably have no idea what it’s like not to have that privilege. If that person is ever reminded to check that privilege, they are likely to receive it as an insult.

As far as the example in question goes, I certainly can’t condone the behavior that person received, but I have to wonder if those so concerned about it are equally concerned when the shoe is on the other foot. I suspect not many are.

[guillaumeb]

30. It is generally met with condescension by those who love to condescend. eom

[Mariana]

31. And that is generally met with whining by those who love to whine. nt.

[guillaumeb]

32. Did you notice that I did not refer to one of my favorite observations?

[marylandblue]

33. I had not noticed, but I congratulate you on your restraint

And I hope you keep up the good work.