Why are many atheists only anti-Christian?

Post Reply New Topic

One thing you will not see is a Jew trying to convert a non-Jew to Judaism. If someone wants to convert to Judaism, it is made difficult and that person must take the initiative.

ruveyn

Why the difficulty?

I wouldn't consider myself an "Athiest". I believe in the afterlife and I believe in karma or some form of consequence for all our actions. I just don't believe in a God or Gods who created rules for everybody to follow. I believe people make their own rules and sometimes other people rebel against those rules to make new rules. Because life and the universe is chaotic and always changing like that, even the animals and land do it so it's not just us humans.

But like so many people said, Christianity is the most dominant religion in the world and most countries tend to follow it. I think the reason people who are against religion tend to attack Christianity the most is due to it being influental in their lives more then any other belief. That doesn't mean that they're only against Christianity, just that it's the only one they have any real knowledge about.

It's because Christianity is shoved down our throats more. Thankfully it's not as bad in the UK as it is in America.

No one is forcing anyone to submit to Christianity in the U.S.. Legally Religion and Government are separate. No one has to listen to evangelists on t.v. or the radio either and the news media are wonderfully bland and secular.

So far the fundies have not forced their superstitions on the rest of the country (U.S.). Attempts at teaching creationist nonsense in schools have been stopped in the courts (see stuff on Dover PA trial).

The U.S. is not and has never been a theocracy. Not ever.

ruveyn

Arguable.

I'm not a practicing Jew, but if I recall it has something to do with the historical struggles of the Jewish people; after all that they've been through they don't feel that joining their ranks should be easy.

I think of myself as a non evangelical atheist, I don't care for religion or it's influence but don't really take much interest in changing other people's minds either way. As far as disliking various religions, I definitely have a hierarchy though it has more to do with how they are practiced versus simply disliking specific faiths. To explain, I reserve my highest disdain for expansionist and intolerant religions, e.g. those that attempt to convert others and are abusive to non-believers; while I generally don't mind most forms of Buddhism, Shinto, Paganism, etc that mostly leave other people alone. I have the highest respect for private codes and faiths, less for organized religions in general, and none at all for fanaticism and zealotry.

I understand the country is, in general, fighting against it and trying to maintain the seperation of church and state. It's still much worse for you guys- in most other western countries such attempts wouldn't even gain traction to begin with. The USA is just a more religious country in general.

And succeeding too. We don't have Sabbath Laws any more in most of the States nor many so-called "blue laws". Publication of off color material is not interfered with. Abortion is legal and no one is forced to attend services at a church nor is one forced to support a church financially. In short the religious crazies do not have the power of the State at their beck and call.

Because we have freedom of speech we have to put up with some of its results, to wit, religious pests are free to broadcast or publish their nonsense. We are also equally free to ignore them.

ruveyn

I do not see why trying to share one's beliefs should be in and of itself offensive; people can agree or disagree with beliefs.

Being an ass, however, or being destructive (and I include both physical AND verbal abuse in that definition), and claiming that you're doing that in the name of God...well, I am a Christian and I DESPISE when people do that--not just because it's mean-spirited, but because I also think it flies against the Bible itself and what it says about how a Christian is supposed to teach.

Last edited by SoSayWeAll on 12 Aug 2010, 10:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I agree with this post a lot. I'm not atheist, but I'm not skeptical either, I just don't have interest in taking sides and becoming a religious or anti-religious person. But I definitely have a hierarchy of how I like the different religions. I like religions that I have an ethnic connection to (Czech Hussite and Serb Orthodox Christianity, Judaism) and I think Asian religions are harmless, but then again, neither is ethnic specific Christianity or Judaism.

On the other hand, I look at religions like Catholicism and all of the atrocities the Catholic Church has committed, and am so disgusted that I will never set foot in a Catholic church in my life. And Islam, which is basically a religion stuck in the dark ages, that represents everything wrong with religion - sexual repression, stoning of women and homosexuals, intolerance of any criticism, etc. Most atheists get pissed off at Christianity because of the whole Bible Belt thing, but they fail to realize the world does not revolve around America, and there are Christians outside of America who are quite different from them. Basically, as a logical agnostic, I can say that Islam and Catholicism are by far the most, for the lack of a better term, "backwards" of the religions.

I can see your reasoning, but I don't think that this court ruling was tantamount to forcing people to become Christians. It only ruled that evolution should not be taught as a fact, which is a big leap from indoctrinating the students. Evolution being taught as theory isn't forcing Christianity upon people.

Last edited by ChrisVulcan on 13 Aug 2010, 3:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

^
There is also a constant battle to keep the ten commandments out of courthouses and prayers to JAY-sus out of city council meetings.

Not to mention the federally sanctioned 'National Day of Prayer' that comes down complete with suggested bible verses to contemplate. Finally found unconstitutional recently, but on appeal.

Then there's 'under God' in the pledge of allegiance and the change from 'E pluribus unum' to 'In God we trust' as the national motto, both of which were added in the 50's.

And, of course, there are all of these:
http://www.ffrf.org/legal/challenges/ongoing-lawsuits/

wrt the OP, two (Hitchens and Harris) of the four horsemen of the new atheists are strongly (some might even say rabidly) anti-Islamic as well as anti-Christian.

Maybe its because the specific atheists you refer to blame the church for things like the crusades, the inquisition, persecution of scientists for heresy, sheltering pedophile priests well into the 20th century, providing a moral basis for slavery, and other wicked acts done "in the name of the lord"?

What is unique among Christian apologists is they claim their belief is rational / scientific, and some of them go into studying the likes of creation science, etc.