Are atheists intolerant ?

Post Reply New Topic

Even though I was christened as a baby I've now grown up to have the freedom to believe in whatever I want to believe in and I have chosen to believe that there was no God that created the universe and the world and look to logical explanations and science for answers to things I may not understand. But I don't ram my beliefs down other people's throats if they believe in a God or Gods but I can't stand some people who do though but I suppose in a society with freedom of expression and religion we must tolerate those views we may find offensive, questionable or even quite extreme as long as they don't incite violence against other people and I get frustrated by some people's inability to understand or accept my beliefs and may go on to say for example, I will burn in Hell if I don't except their God. I don't like it when people who have chosen not to believe in God are still to this day get accused as being ''immoral idiots, blasphemers and even communists''. We shouldn't be associated with atheists like Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot who killed millions, and destroyed anything that was religious such as churches and temples. I accept other people's different beliefs and find some religious places like cathedrals and churches very interesting places to visit as I like reading about history. I think its appalling when there have been both atheist and religious extremists that have destroyed ancient temples and burned books they disapprove of.

Yes, as much as anyone else. It varies from individual to individual, but intolerance is very much a human trait, not something specific to religious believers or unbelievers.

I'm intolorant of theists shoving god in my face and acting like I am doing a sin and that I am doomed for not having faith in god and I am also intolorant of people using religion to harm others.

If you were to tell me you go to church or to talk about your faith, it wouldn't bother me because you are only talking about yourself and your own religion, not shoving it down my throat.

They can be.

Most often this takes the form of looking down on other religions as illogical, superstitious, or backward.

Atheists are able to be intolerant in about as many ways as theists. The justifications are just secular in nature.

Sure, many atheists are intolerant. As are theists. As are pretty much most people.

Anyone can believe and say what they like “in the marketplace” and in their own homes. Your freedom of speech ends at my doorstep. I am under no obligation to tolerate beliefs and opinions I disagree with. No one is. Tolerance means that people ARE so obligated.

You can say that tolerance just means leaving people alone to say, do, believe as they wish, but it’s not that simple. People throw that word around to mean not simply leaving others alone and keeping quiet if you disagree, but to really mean acceptance of views and actions you disagree with. So while I support your right to do, say, believe as you like in public and in your home, I expect my right to same to be respected.

Depends on the individual; there are atheists who are very intolerant about religious people, but also religious people who are very intolerant about people of other religions. I mean, people have fought, and probably still do, wars to get their own religion to be a dominant one in a country/area. Isn't that a prime example of intolerance for other religions? Of course, in many cases those people want power first and foremost and use "the correct religion and god" as excuses, but still.

I find it difficult to tolerate atheists when they keep the best beer and blunt to themselves.

In Christianity, Islam, and in Mormonism, you are supposed to spread the good news, and to make converts.

There is nothing in the scripture of Atheism that mandates that you have to make converts. In fact Atheism has no scripture.

But individual members of every creed, whether the creed believes in missionizing or not, can be intolerant.

I guess you mean intolerant towards religionists. Probably depends on what the religionists are doing that might require tolerance. If they're keeping it to themselves, consenting adults in private and all that, what is there to tolerate? But if they do things that are annoying, painful or provokative to those who don't share their ideology, why is it considered a good thing to forbear it? And I suppose there's a grey area where a religionist might do something that some would call offensive and others wouldn't.

As a rule I don't try to upset religionists just for being religionists. I've got one or two Facebook friends who sometimes post religious propaganda, most of which annoys me, especially when it's dishonest atheist-bashing, or one of St. Paul's more controversial opinions, or just so "goody-goody" that I can't believe it's sincere. Occasionally I was tempted to argue back strongly, but I found a plugin that filters it out of my newsfeed, so I decided to set that up instead of getting into disputes that probably wouldn't have done any good. I'd have to be feeling quite angry with them to even tell them that I was filtering that stuff out. What's the point hurting their feelings when they'd probably never understand where I was coming from? And yet I wonder, if they're entitled to speak their religious views freely, shouldn't I be equally tolerated for putting forward another way of seeing the matter? If I practise more than a certain amount of sensitivity and tolerance towards some views, I begin to feel oppressed and tempted to argue against them. I'm not convinced it's healthy to just absorb it indefinitely.

Here's an example - if somebody expressed this view to me, I'd probably feel entirely justified in arguing back, and in anger I might err on the side of insulting them for their arrogance:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-59884801

It seems to be a fairly clear example of a religionist crossing a line, sitting in judgement on behaviour that's none of his business. As it was a general audience, I wonder if anybody dared to argue with him, or if they all just sat there and tolerated what he said? If I'd been there I'd have been sorely tempted to tell him what I thought. One thing I'd like to happen in churches is for it to become less top-down, to have a question time at the end of the sermon where people would point out the flaws in the priests' assertions. But if I keep out of churches, it scarcely matters to me.

I remember when someone said that Hitler was an atheist. Well, clearly he wasn't as he considered himself a Christian and he viewed atheists as uneducated and associated atheism with Bolshevism and Communism.

Intolerant by word or Intolerant by action?