Religious or not: Does it annoy you when people "ask a question" that is merely a thinly veiled insult at some group of people?

@Fluthermucker Um… ok…
@Kelly_Obrien No.

It doesn’t really bother me.
It just shows their ignorance by making some type of ridiculous generalization over an entire group of people.
I laugh, perhaps call them on their bullshit and move on.

I don’t think religion deserves respect anyway, so it doesn’t really bother me.

@Vunessuh I suppose this is me “calling them on their bullshit”.. XD

@HumourMe What about a subject you do think deserves respect?

I am not a religious person, I consider myself an agnostic. But yes, absolutely, I find it as you stated in your question. This is something, I am trying to get used to here on Fluther, when I read such a question, because I am not use to non believers being disresptful in such a way. The non believers in my personal life, don’t disrespect someone elses belief, as I have seen on the internet.

I just don’t even stop in to even read those type of questions anymore, I just pass them by.

Obviously if you disrespect someone as an individual or based on their beliefs or race/nationality then that is wrong but if a question is asked that is thinly veiled as an insult to religion itself then I wouldn’t mind.

Nah. I, like many other people, use the Internet as a safe outlet for emotions we otherwise would have difficulty expressing in daily life without compromising our relationships with others.

I’m an atheist. My husband’s a believer. He refuses to accept my stance on religion. This isn’t a big enough deal to cause a problem in our relationship, but I would like to have some place to vent about certain things. Since my husband isn’t the right person, I use the internet. Social websites are an excellent place to get into heated debates and effectively blow off steam.

So, while I won’t ask the questions myself, I will occasionally feed the troll when I have a bunch of bait lying around.

I tend to believe that if it were some other subject (not religion) that was being “mocked” .. I would be getting some different responses .. but because religion is so often the butt of the joke it has calloused society.. desensitized them to it .. maybe I’m wrong.. but that’s what it seems like.

I agree with @Seek_Kolinahr But also, people ask questions like that when they are angry or annoyed with a group of people so they ask it to try and seek justification of their feelings towards the people/subject.

When the question receives answers that agree with the asker then they feel that they were right and justified with their view on the particular subject. That’s basically the reason why they ask questions that may seem disrespectful, offensive or insulting.

@NaturalMineralWater

Well, let’s put something else in religion’s place.

@Seek_Kolinahr Ok. Let’s say the question concerned homosexuals and mocked them. Wouldn’t people be quick to “fight” and tell the person asking the question that they are wrong?

I remember the only time I got really upset over a question like the one you’re talking about, is when somebody asked why mothers don’t just abort mentally disabled children since they know beforehand and since these types of people can’t contribute to society.
This fucker totally stood by his argument too. I was pretty pissed and yes of course, it bothered me tremendously.
I just told him what I thought of him and moved on.
I didn’t want to feed into his bullshit anymore than that.
Sometimes people who ask those types of questions are just looking to start a riot and upset people. It’s really not a good idea to give them what they want.

@Vunessuh You are, of course, right. We shouldn’t give such people the time of day.. What concerns me is that so many people not only give them the time of day… they rally behind the question like it’s the last bottle of water in the desert. Like cockroaches. I suppose it’s just disturbing.

—@naturalMineralWater, If the question was about homosexuals, then just like religion, an opinion can be given, without disrespecting someone else’s opinion, or what they believe in.—

People are going to disagree on subjects, but it doesn’t give them the right to be disrespectful and mocking of the person, or their beliefs. If a person can’t handle a debate, without, being sarcastic and condescending, then they should go play with the little kids, who haven’t learned yet, that, that isn’t the way to get your point across.

—I personally shut down, when a person gets nasty, I refuse to have any type of conversation with them, they aren’t worth my time.—

@NaturalMineralWater Some people have nothing better to do.
For me personally, it took me a while to not get involved with such nonsense. I had to learn that every single person on this site is their own individual with a different culture/background and a different set of values, morals and beliefs. No, it doesn’t necessarily justify their disrespectful and mocking actions, but knowing how ignorant they are, helps me to not even care enough to fight about it.
Sometimes, people will catch me on my bad days, and I may resort to being ruthless in an argument (if it’s something I’m really passionate about), but for the most part, I learned that it’s important to not be tricked into doing so. It doesn’t mean you’re a coward and not sticking up for a group of people. It means you have better things to do than being involved in such stupid, negative energy.

I’ve seen it. don’t like it. It occurs far less frequently here than on many other sites. Such questions are usually pretty transparent; if you are in a mood to argue, fine. If you don’t want to drain personal energy on it, just move on.

It irritates me.

Thus:
I suppose this is me “calling them on their bullshit”

Then allow me to call you on yours.

Ouch. Somebody did their homework.

In the end we all have asked questions perhaps when we were angry or annoyed at something. It’s human nature to express our feelings, thoughts and opinions towards the subject. If people find it subliminally insulting or offensive that’s their problem.

We all have a right to the type of questions we ask, it’s freedom of speech within reasonable grounds. Of course if it’s blatantly and clearly a disrespectful, vicious attack on someone/something then that is crossing the line and shouldn’t be accepted.

Yes. I also have a powerful aversion to blanket generalities about people, whether unfavorable or favorable.

I really dislike generalisations too but sometimes you just can’t help it. It’s hard to avoid in some situations.
No one can claim to be completely free of generalising, it happens to all of us, I guess it’s about realising when you do make them and asking yourself is this fair? Is this a true assumption? And challenging yourself to think differently.

@HumourMe An apology to the person or persons wronged is a nice touch, too.

@Fluthermucker Yes that would help as well.

I have seen a lot of “Sarcastic” or “Disrespectful” rpelies and comments regarding various religions etc…. BUT; nothing that would be a “Veiled Threat” ....

We need to remember that this is AMERICA ; so as long as we have the Freedom of Speech , which certain countries DON’T… we can say whatever we want to as long as it does not directly damage or threaten another person, race, religion etc…..

It isn’t PERFECT; BUT ; I believe thta it is the BEST in the World right now….

@HighShaman I don’t remember reading anywhere in the thread about any “veiled threats”, only “thinly veiled insults”...and there are plenty that are veiled and even more that are running around naked, in my opinion.

@HighShaman, okay, but, back to the question: Does it annoy you when people “ask a question” that is merely a thinly veiled insult at some group of people?

@Fluthermucker Ok ..even “Thinly Veiled Insults ” Sorry about that…. But; who cares ..really ?

If we have to watch and weigh our words before we speak… we are heading for total CENSORSHIP…..

“Veiled Insults” .. just have to overlook and consider the source of the ignoramuses who throw such insults around…. Not too my=uch else we can do without stepping on the toes of FREE SPEECH .

I’m with @HighShaman people seem to get “offended” or insulted by so many things these days, it’s discouraging free speech. We already have to watch what we say more than ever before.

If you don’t like the question then don’t answer it, just move on but don’t try and stop people from asking it. Even if it is annoying to see questions like that we still should allow them as long as they aren’t completely hateful and demeaning to the point that it genuinely hurts people. It all comes down to using common sense when asking a question if it still exists these days.

@HumourMe When someone insults me, I get insulted. That, too, is free speech. You feel you have the right to insult someone, I feel I have the right to be insulted if you do.

@Fluthermucker Outstanding point.
People have the right to be insulted and defend themselves if they choose to do so. For some odd reason, this seems to give everyone else the right to call them sensitive. I don’t get it.

I guess places like Fluther, would be the place to vent, mock, belittle. It’s safer for sure, that way you don’t take the chance, of getting your teeth knocked out.

@smashbox Word, my brudda. I can assure you that there are few that would dare to speak the shit they spew on here if they were in my arms length, and there are none that would do so with impunity.

@Fluthermucker, I do believe you are absolutely right

Yeah, but I already used my Thinly Veiled Insult at a Group of People rant quota this week already, so I have to chill.

@SABOTEUR ~That sucks. Can’t you just fall back to that old standard People I Wanna Be Dickish to?~

Yeah…but then I’d have to forfeit 10 Davy Jones’ Revenge awards.

That really sucks.

@Fluthermucker But they’re not asking the question to make you feel insulted, you just chose to feel insulted and chose to take it the wrong way. You could easily ignore the question or you could decide to get upset and offended by it.

But what ever you choose don’t make the asker not ask his/her question because you feel insulted. It might not be insulting to everyone else. So I still think we have the right to free speech.

Of course people wouldn’t say things in real life that they say on here. That’s what the internet is for, anonymity, and the ability to do that.

@NaturalMineralWater = the pot.

@HumourMe I agree 99%. When people say, “we have the right to free speech” they’re usually inferring that people “who choose to be offended” don’t have the right to challenge free speech. This ignores the fact that challenging free speech is free speech too.

@SABOTEUR Yes, we all also have the right to challenge and defend free speech it’s all wrapped into one. But if people are going to defend every single little thing that they deem to be offensive, it get’s a bit pointless and as Vunessuh mentions, yes perhaps they are a little too sensitive.

Fluthermucker waves his BULLSHIT! flag

In the real world no one gives a shit if you’re offended by what someone says. Why should we all have to sugar coat every pathetic little thing so that it doesn’t cause offense? I don’t go out there purposely looking to offend people.

@HumourMe Right again! Well perhaps we could apply some “guidelines” in the use of “free speech”. Before speaking, we might determine whether what we say is

* True
* Kind
* Necessary

If our speech doesn’t meet all three standards, we shut the @#$! up. We’re not going to do that, of course, because we love our points of view too much so…

…we’re stuck with too sensitive and his pointless buddy.

@HumourMe Why so testy? Can’t have your way so you get ignorant? What’s up with that?

I think the most important thing to come out of this discussion is to realise we just need to use common sense when communicating with others, don’t say things you know are going to hurt you if they said it to you. Treat others how you want to be treated basically.

@HumourMe I never said anything about not letting someone ask a question just because it offends me or others. I just think it’s stupid to advocate free speech and then call someone sensitive if they choose to defend themselves. Choosing to be insulted or defensive is still free speech. And since when is being sensitive a bad thing anyway? We toss that word around so much as if it’s a horrible thing.

@HumourMe And the other “important” thing is there are those among us who insist they know how other people should feel and will insist on saying whatever the hell they want to say…online.

There’s a difference between being a naturally sensitive person and just defending every little thing that to you is offensive or isn’t politically correct.

@HumourMe That “politically correct” argument is another tool in the arsenal of those who know how everyone should feel. All I can say to them is, get over it.

@Vunessuh I didn’t say anything like that I just mentioned the fact that you brought up sensitivity in your answer.

@HumourMe Indeed. Most people don’t know how to recognize that though and just call so-and-so sensitive because they have nothing better to say.

—Umm, umm, bu-, bu- what I mean…is ahh…Oh my God, this isn’t a parachute…it’s just a backpack.

Quite frankly, if someone asks a question on any subject that includes a thinly veiled insult I either express my own and typically opposite opinion, or I flag the question as not being helpful. I can only assume that someone who asks such a question must not be very bright, well-educated, or well-traveled, or possibly they are simply evil scum who like to stir up trouble. In the latter case I flag them.

Religious are ridiculious… so deserving of ridicule. IMHO.

@Darwin I never thought about the flag idea. I guess that is probably the best defense against ignorance. Thanks for the reminder.

@Darwin But surely you’ve asked a question like that at least once in your life? I’m sure you weren’t uneducated, unbright and not well travelled because of it. Everyone asks questions that might be a “thinly veiled insult”. I challenge anyone who says they haven’t.

I’m often surprised and sometimes amused by what makes it through to the main page. If a post doesn’t interest me much here, I rarely bother. In fact, I could have ignored this post as I do many but my two cents is having an issue to fall asleep so…

@hungryhungryhortence Your response is beyond awesome. Such wit I can appreciate.

@hungryhungryhortence Same here.

it’s all the rich foods that have my blood sugar wonky (Dan White twinkie madness setting in, watch out).

Yes it annoys me. Two types of people I can’t stand: The obsessive religious and the obsessive atheists. I want to bang their heads together and scream “you’re both as bad as each other!”

@HumourMe – I try very hard not to ask such questions, online and IRL both. I try very hard, with a fair amount of success, to not generalize based on a few traits. My parents believed very strongly that maligning others is the wrong way to do things and taught us accordingly.

@Darwin I agree with that.

No, that thinly veiled insult simply invites response from the taget group. It is an abashed request for dialogue.

@HighShaman My only concern is that “freedom of speech” is only free if it fits a certain agenda.. you’re completely free and clear to mock religion .. but make fun of a homosexual and you could be fired… I realize that with one it is more of a personal attack.. and the other is more of a general thing but… I’m just sayin..

ditto Robaccus!

@NaturalMineralWater

“Ok. Let’s say the question concerned homosexuals and mocked them. Wouldn’t people be quick to “fight” and tell the person asking the question that they are wrong?”

Completely different story. You’re confusing prejudice based on genetics with certain people’s willingness to be brainwashed by a centuries-old moneymaking and political control scam.

Obviously, the religious are completely free to mock atheism twice a week inside their temples, and out on the streets, littering our public restrooms and neighborhoods with their pamphlets. Not only do the religious ridicule Atheists, but they make threats of hellfire and brimstone at the least. The religious, particularly Christians, have a great amount of “free speech” in this country (The USA), even to the point of directly influencing our lawmaking process – which, I might add, is directly unconstitutional.

For what it’s worth, Constitutional freedom of speech (a la 1st Amendment) only concerns itself with Congress. As long as Congress doesn’t pass any law abridging your free speech, your first amendment rights are not being violated – even if you are fired from your job or moderated on Fluther for what you say.

It irks me when people misunderstand the first amendment, and think it means that they can say whatever they want, whenever they want, with no repercussions – or when they think that their speech “isn’t free” if people call bull$hit on their hate speech.

@Seek_Kolinahr I didn’t mean to press any of your buttons… as you’ll notice I didn’t close the conversation to just religion… I’m talking about questions of all types that are like this.. but I guess everyone wants to talk about religion… XD

I find it a bit caustic of you to suggest that I am brainwashed.. especially since you don’t even know me or what I believe.. and fyi .. saying “Christian” isn’t really very specific.. so I’m not sure which people you are complaining about.. As for litter and pamphlets and what not… I’m sure you are ok… they are just pamphlets… it’s not just religious people passing that stuff out..

Either way…if you look at the big picture you should really thank those people for caring enough to want to prevent you from going to hell… I’m just sayin… even if you don’t believe it… they do .. and they are concerned that you will be spending an eternity in hell… even if they are complete nut jobs for thinking so… it’s still rather nice of them to want to prevent you from an eternity of torment…

@tinyfaery How so? Do explain.

It’s amazing how often people who are acting like dicks will scream “censorship” or ’“freedom of speech” just so they can continue to act like dicks.

I’m sure it was very kind of the Jonestown people to pass out the poisoned KoolAid to their kids too… because it was protecting them from the evils of capitalism.

I still think it’s absurd that this country has freedom of religion, but not freedom from religion. It’s shoved down our throats unwillingly every single day of our existence, and we can’t say or do a damned thing about it – because the Christians just “want to save us from hell” and we should be thankful.

And, just for the record – the reason people keep bringing up religion, is because you put it in the question.

@Seek_Kolinahr I couldn’t agree more. The reason why we can’t do a thing about religion is because it is given so many rights and demands so much respect and tolerance.

It’s put on a pedestal and treated like it’s above everything else in society. Which isn’t fair to those just trying to live our lives normally without religion bleeding into it.

@Seek_Kolinahr I’m sorry to have to say this but playing the victim isn’t going to get you any sympathy. As someone who believes in a higher being but isn’t exactly religious I see just as many atheists that ram their opinions down other peoples throats as religious people. From what I have noticed the overly religious and the overly atheist are just as bad as each other and whining from either side doesn’t help their causes.

@Leanne1986

I am not looking for sympathy, I am stating facts. The OP wants to know why people insult her magical invisible sky-daddy, then uses the Constitution as a defense, and I’m telling her why her question is bullshit.

I want someone to tell me why it’s OK to come to my door, put things in my mailbox (a federal offense, by the way, O Local Church of God), litter public areas with pamphlets, and threaten my family with hellfire and brimstone, but there are still laws on the books that prevent an atheist for running for public office in twelve states of the Union.

And, not only should I not be offended by being considered a second-class citizen in my “freedom of religion” country, I should be grateful to the schizophrenic adults who pay 10% of their salary for the privilege of talking to their imaginary friends twice a week – because they’re just trying to protect me from my rational self.

@Seek_Kolinahr Even though I am someone who you consider to be “brainwashed” I agree with some of your points but it’s your agressive manner towards the OP who hasn’t even mentioned what their own religious beliefs are that I find a bit pathetic and all I am saying is that by calling us brainwashed and the like makes you just as bad as the religious you despise so much. Thank you for proving my point.

In order for us all to live and let live both sides need to accept the other and mind their own business. Yes, forcing religious beliefs onto others is wrong. I hate being pestered in the street by religious know-it-alls and more often than not I throw any religious pamphlets that are posted through my door in the bin. However, as someone who chooses to believe in a “sky daddy” in private without feeling the need to convert others I feel slightly offended (although I don’t lose sleep over it!) when someone calls me brainwashed.

I believe that religion should only play a part in the lives of those who want it to and for that reason I am sad to here that you feel like a second class citizen where you live (can you give some examples of how?) I am pleased to say that religion doesn’t dictate very much where I live.

Brainwashed : (adj) brainwashed (subjected to intensive forced indoctrination resulting in the rejection of old beliefs and acceptance of new ones)

@Seek_Kolinahr You’re point being what? Yes, some religions treat it like a cult and if that is what you are reffering to then I will agree that their’s is an unhealthy obsession but then, I have already said that I agree with you on certain points. However, I do not believe that you should be tarring everyone who believes in a higher being of some sort with the same brush. We are not all obsessive, we have not all been raised in a religious enviroment, we have not all had religion forced on us making us think that there are no other options and we do not all deny science or “logic” and we are not all brainwashed.

I have no real beef with agnosticism, though I do find it has some serious logistical flaws. If you want to have an imaginary friend without a face, you go right ahead. As long as you’re not evangelizing, you’re more than welcome to waste your own time as you see fit.

I still think (and have the right to think) that you’re crazy, as I would think anyone who believes Elvis is living on Venus is crazy. There is no more evidence for a supernatural deity than there is for Elvis living on Venus, nor will there ever be. But, as long as you’re not attempting to preach the gospel of the Venusian Elvis Presley, no biggie. Capice?

I think, for some reason, you felt the need to interject where your “religion” was not ever mentioned. I stated my issue with evangelical religions plainly; those that pass out pamphlets and seek to have a direct influence on the lawmaking process. I don’t have a problem with religions that keep their mouths shut and suffer the indignity of their illogic in peace and quiet – because at least they aren’t trying to make my kids salute a flag ordained by some “god” at the beginning of each school day.

I don’t think it’s too much to ask for the atheists of America to have the freedom to remain untouched by the religions of other citizens. Honestly, when will the infamous “they” realize that atheism – the lack of religion – is the default setting of the human mind, and that no one believes in a god until they are trained to set aside the rational process of logic in order to accept one (and thus, become brainwashed – by definition)?

@Seek Kolinahr you sound like you are evangelizing, your beliefs/opinion. We get it, your an atheist, and you don’t want others preaching to you, pushing it down your throat, and being rude to you. Okay, so what is the difference in your giving your opinion on atheism, and someone who believes in something else, giving theirs. None.

“I have no real beef with agnosticism, though I do find it has some serious logistical flaws. If you want to have an imaginary friend without a face, you go right ahead.”

I don’t understand – are you saying that agnostics believe in a god of some sort? I thought agnostics were noncommittal about the whole thing, saying there isn’t any proof one way or the other. Agnostics are rarely evangelical, although some atheists and some religionists are.

ag·nos·tic :
n.
1.
a. One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
b. One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.
2. One who is doubtful or noncommittal about something.

@smashbox

This is an open forum, that has somehow become relevant to the subject. This, if anywhere, is an acceptable place to discuss the topic of atheism vs. theism. I am not stuffing peoples’ mailboxes with “There Is No God, So Stop Fucking Worrying About Hell Already” flyers, or getting with my fellow nonbelievers to petition laws directly supporting my (non)belief system.

It is impossible to evangelise atheism, as it is not a religion. Atheism is a state of logic that has been left to its own devices. No one operating with a rational mind would look a the world and think “Gee. I think this was all created in six days by an invisible guy with a long white beard, who would be directly responsible for ordering the deaths of millions of people immediately after demanding humanity not to kill, then would impregnate a virgin, who would give birth to his son, who was really him, then would commit suicide/infanticide by making the Jews and the Romans conspire to crucify his him/his son, and then would have numerous people write conflicting reports about the incident, all of which will be His perfect word, and beyond question”

It is, quite literally, the equivalent of my pressing the “Coke” button on a soda machine, seeing the can pop out of the dispenser, and immediately coming to the conclusion that tiny purple elves lived inside the machine, and created my can of soda from a vast assortment of glitter and shoestrings.

@Darwin
“One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.”
That’s the logistical flaw. A thing simply does not exist until there is some evidence to prove that it does. As there is still no proof of God, the belief that one could exist (in whatever form) is a logistical flaw. Agnostics, in my opinion, are those that are swayed by Pascal’s Wager – those that would live like there is a God, just because they’re afraid to find out there is one if they don’t..

@Seek Kolinahr, you want respect then give it, you want others to stop preaching to you, then you stop preaching atheism, oh wait, you aren’t preaching, your giving your opinion . You have insulted everyone who believes in something other than atheism. Everyone is wrong, but you and anyone who belives what you believe. You have a chip on your shoulder, and no religious person, or agnostic put it there. You must live in one hell of a town, to be bombarded with so much religious propaganda being stuffed on you.

@smashbox

This is a relevant forum. Hijacking the discussion in order to tell me to stop talking is not in any way a contribution. If you have anything useful to contribute, please feel free. If not, you know where the “stop following” link is.

@Seek Kolinahr…now don’t go putting words in my comments, I never said you couldn’t stop talking. Don’t change the subject. Nothing looks worse than someone ranting, and then trying to play the victim.

Still waiting for the useful contribution on the discussion

The discussion being: Why atheistic people insult religion, why the religious insult atheism, and why one is “protected by the Constitution”, and the other apparently is not. Also, why religion is given so much power in our government’s lawmaking process, while that is directly unconstitutional, whereas atheists are barred from running for public office in several states of the Union.

No that is not the discussion, read the question at the top. You changed the original question, to what you wanted to talk about. So your waiting for my contribution, I gave one, of course you wouldn’t find it useful, that is because, it is not in agreement with yours. You on the other hand, never answered the original question. Your only comments are how you are a victim of religious people, and even insulting agnostics. Your comments state nothing but contempt, for anyone who doesn’t believe the way you do.

Au contrare, @smashbox, my first comment on this thread answered the question as asked. Pay closer attention.

Afterward, another discussion formed, to which I contributed, as well as the OP and several other people. Then, Leanne hijacked the thread with a direct insult against me, claiming I’m “playing the victim”, looking for “sympathy”, and “whining”. None of which occurred in the discussion prior to her joining. Leanne’s only input was an ad-hominem attack, as is yours. I did notice your answer to the OP’s original question was in favor of mocking and belittling others.

There is no denying the fact that atheists are second-class citizens in America. Because we are not an organized group, we do not have the funding, the lobbyists, or the political power of the major religious groups. Thus, even though atheists make up a good 12% of the population (and that’s only the ones who are “out of the closet” as it were) and there are more atheists in the population than every religion other than Christianity, combined (represented by 11% of the population) we are not represented at all in Congress.

Atheists are the single most hated group of people in America – more so than the LGBT community, Muslims, or anyone. They are related to immorality and criminal activity – even though there is a smaller percentage of atheists in prison than any other group.

My only question is: Why?

@Seek_Kolinahr Wow, I have been around a while and I personally have never heard a single disparaging comment about atheists, other than they are somewhat misguided in their thinking, and that by people with a religious faith. You think they are nuts, they think you are. But no outright hatred that I’ve witnessed, only pity. Based on that I would have to dispute your claims of victimization. I’m not saying it isn’t true, just that I have never heard of it in print, on TV, radio or even by word of mouth. I see no attempts to eradicate atheists, like say, Islamic Jihadists. THAT is an idea I can personally get behind, eliminating people who want to eliminate me.

On another note, atheists DO proselytize. They have recently put up billboards claiming there is no God, and have even lobbied for equal space in public forums, so I would say that qualifies, if not as a religion, certainly as an advertisement of who they are and what they stand for. And that is, in itself, a marketing tool, which is an overt or subtle attempt at converting people to their way of thinking, depending on how you look at it.

@Fluthermucker

Yes, in very recent history attempts have been made to somewhat “organize” and start lobbying for atheist rights. All of these are being fought tooth-and-nail by the religious community – even though for years Christians have had “Don’t make me come down there—God” billboards on the highways, and crosses erected all over the place, and Creches and christmas trees on public property. Why should my tax money be used to promote something that I don’t believe in?

The hatred I am talking about refers to polls that have been taken, in which it was shown that a majority of Americans would rather their child not marry an atheist over a list of other “unfavorable” groups, and polls in which it was shown that the majority opinion on atheists listed them as threats to American culture, that they are viewed as criminals, or immoral, etc.

I can read and comprehend quite well. You sure have a way, of turning everything around as your being the victim, instead of seeing yourself as the perpetrator. You have blamed others for what, you yourself have done yourself. Also, where are your facts that atheist are second class citizens, and not respected by Congress, and were are your facts that atheists are the single most hated group in America. Show us some facts, instead of emotional hearsay. Also, please point out where anyone here insulted or belittled your beliefs, I may have overlooked it, because all I am reading, is how intolerant and insulting you are of others beliefs.

@Seek_Kolinahr Polls=people stupid enough to answer the phone and talk to a pollster. I put no stock in them whatsoever. I would admonish you to do the same. Do NOT believe anything you hear and only half of what you see with your own eyes.

—@Seek Kolinahr…I wouldn’t let polls or anything else like that bother me. An aethist is no more criminal or immoral, than any other human being. I wouldn’t even contribute to a nonsense poll, like that. Polls on the internet don’t represent all of America.—

I’m finished. Don’t let the hate of others, control who and what you are, is all I am trying to say. When you speak, speak with respect, you will get someone to listen to you much quicker.

@Seek_Kolinahr – So what is wrong with hedging your bets?

Some agnostics also identify as theists or atheists. Those who identify as theists are simply saying they’ll believe even though there is no proof. You might want to review this information.

“No matter how much I prove and prod,
I cannot quite believe in God;
But oh, I hope to God that He
Unswervingly believes in me.”
~E.Y. Harburg, attributed

“I simply haven’t the nerve to imagine a being, a force, a cause which keeps the planets revolving in their orbits, and then suddenly stops in order to give me a bicycle with three speeds.” ~Quentin Crisp

@Seek_Kolinahr Personally I don’t care what you think of my beliefs and if you want to think I am crazy then so be it. What is extremely boring about your post is the whiny, aggressive tone to it towards the OP and anyone else who has different beliefs to you. You proved my point in my very first comment on this post that the hard core religious and hard core atheists are both as bad as each other. Tolerance works both ways and you can’t expect respect from those who you don’t agree with when you are not willing to give it. I have already said that I agree with you in that I do not believe in forcing religious opinions on others but in this post, with your name calling (sorry but regardless of your dictionary definition, “brainwashed” is still name calling) and references to “sky daddies” etc you have proved that you are no better than those you disgree with so much. Your tactics are just different.

@Leanne1986 @Seek_Kolinahr Now girls…both your dresses are pretty. Let’s all be nice to each other, do each others nails and have a tickle fight. When we get finished, let’s look into some more of that whole Islamic Jihadist mess, shall we?

@Seek_Kolinahr: Please stop misusing the word logistical.

That’s the logistical flaw. A thing simply does not exist until there is some evidence to prove that it does.

No, that is the logical flaw. Do the billions of people on this planet not exist until you have your own proof of their existence? Don’t be solipsistic.

As there is still no proof of God, the belief that one could exist (in whatever form) is a logistical flaw.

Again, no, that is neither a “logisitcal” nor a logical flaw. It would be illogical only if God were disproved, but that hasn’t happened. The only flaw is your fallacious conclusion. Your assertion is an argumentum ad ignorantiam. I.e. you believe something isn’t true simply because it lacks proof. But the logic you covet doesn’t work that way.

I’m an atheist-agnostic for the record.

Wow. This has completely ceased to be fun.

@Absalom – if I wanted to, I could personally visit each and every one of the billions of people on this planet, touch their faces, hear their voices, etc. I have enough evidence that the people in my own neighborhood exist to infer that there are very likely other neighborhoods elsewhere in the world.

God does not need to be disproved, he needs to be proved. There needs to be one – just ONE – shred of empirical evidence that something exists that cannot be seen, heard, smelled, tasted, touched, or measured, and that that thing has some effect on our universe as we know it. Once that single shred of evidence has been presented, then we can worry about disproving it.

@Seek_Kolinahr

The evidence of other people outside your own “neighborhood” is inferred. You’re making inferences and drawing conclusions, which is exactly what a religious person does with his creed and god(s). How can you criticize him for that? I understand believing differently, but we’re all in the dark here. It’s better not to claim to see any more clearly than others, because you probably don’t.

God does not need to be disproved, he needs to be proved. There needs to be one – just ONE – shred of empirical evidence that something exists that cannot be seen, heard, smelled, tasted, touched, or measured, and that that thing has some effect on our universe as we know it. Once that single shred of evidence has been presented, then we can worry about disproving it.

At this point you’ve just begun to reiterate the same tired arguments that never were logical in the first place. Moreover this is obviously only your own, personal need for hard evidence (rather than a logical need). That’s fine, but know that there is little (if no) more logic in atheism than there is in theism.

(I was only having fun in pointing out the irony of your post, which for all its talk of logic contained none. I think we know who’s ruined the fun here.)

I don’t believe in God for the same reason I don’t believe in pink unicorns. There is no evidence to suggest there is one.

The fact that humans have invented various gods for thousands of years in order to make themselves feel better about the harsh world they live in is not evidence. If you have found a reason to believe there is a god, please share it. Please. I would love to be proven wrong.

It makes people happy. For some that is reason enough. :]

Nothing more happy than the idea that one wrong step could make your loving and forgiving god send you to be tortured for eternity.

Good thing my God forgives me and allows reincarnation then.

Now, to the question.

Yes, it does bother me mainly because it means the thread will be people arguing about things they will never agree on. One might as well go and yell at a mirror for all the good it will do.

I read the question and if I think it’s a thinly veiled request for an echo chamber, I just move on. Plenty of good questions floating around to keep me entertained.

@Seek_Kolinahr: You’re conflating every god with a traditional Old Testament God. That’s not the case, as @gemiwing demonstrated.

Yes, it’s an unfortunate phenomenon. Here’s a recent example:

What is the word for someone who follows the teachings of the bible, but doesn’t believe in the stories?

http://www.fluther.com/disc/67171/what-is-the-word-for-someone-who-follows-the-teachings-of/

One way to deal with is to show that the sarcasm can be redirected toward other specific groups of people by actually using the structure of the original question. Like this for example:

What is the word for someone who has an opinion about religion, but doesn’t know the difference between a myth or a parable and a historical event?

Well it’s actually two words: atheist fundamentalist

(an alternative description would be: ignorant person)

What is the word for someone who has an opinion about science, but doesn’t know the difference between a myth or a parable and a science textbook?

Again it’s actually two words: religious fundamentalist

(an alternative description would be: ignorant person)

I’d like to quote Michael Shermer:

“Myths are about the human struggle to deal with the great passages of time and life—birth, death, marriage, the transitions from childhood to adulthood to old age. They meet a need in the psychological or spiritual nature of humans that has absolutely nothing to do with science. To try to turn a myth into a science, or a science into a myth, is an insult to myths, an insult to religion, and an insult to science. In attempting to do this, (young-earth) creationists have missed the significance, meaning, and sublime nature of myths.”