"James" <shiv_@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1151m3rhdtmf613@corp.supernews.com...

It’s pretty obvious that we’re not all meant to get along, especially on
Usenet, but I have to wonder if the seemingly mutual hate between
atheists and theists here indicates a bigger problem. Is there any
reason why atheism can’t coexist with Christianity, or any other major
religion, as seems evident on Usenet? Or are many of us just assholes
behind monitors?

I don't personally have a problem with christianity or christians in
general. Virtually everyone I associate with is christians, the majority of
them catholic. We all know each others POV on the subject of religion and
respect either others beliefs or the lack thereof. As long as no one is
pushing their religion, it's not even an issue.

Sadly, I've been recently informed that my MIL is mounting up a campaign in
an effort to have my husband and I raise our daughter in the catholic
faith - Something she's already been told will NOT happen. I'm afraid it
will all end badly :(

I don't personally have a problem with christianity or christians in
general. Virtually everyone I associate with is christians, the majority of
them catholic. We all know each others POV on the subject of religion and
respect either others beliefs or the lack thereof. As long as no one is
pushing their religion, it's not even an issue.

Sadly, I've been recently informed that my MIL is mounting up a campaign in
an effort to have my husband and I raise our daughter in the catholic
faith - Something she's already been told will NOT happen. I'm afraid it
will all end badly :(

"James" <shiv_@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1151m3rhdtmf613@corp.supernews.com...

It’s pretty obvious that we’re not all meant to get along, especially on
Usenet, but I have to wonder if the seemingly mutual hate between
atheists and theists here indicates a bigger problem. Is there any
reason why atheism can’t coexist with Christianity, or any other major
religion, as seems evident on Usenet? Or are many of us just assholes
behind monitors?

In Canada, there is a sizeable population of individuals identifying
themselves to be of “no religious affiliation.” Statistics Canada (2001)
indicates it to be 4.9 million of our 30 million residents, or 16% of the
population. Granted, this doesn’t mean they’re all atheists, but that’s
still a pretty big number to attribute to non-practicing theists.
Moreover, the 1991 Census put the number at 3.4 million of 27 million
residents, or 13%, which indicates a modest growth factor.

If the number of “no religious affiliation” residents is growing, and the
religious fervor in politics is growing in both Canada and the United
States, is there some sort of climax that must be reached? Considering
atheism is “non-denominational,” meaning that as a state of mind we don’t
have any sort of organized hierarchy, is rational discourse resulting in
some sort of acceptable conclusion even possible?

In many ways tolerance is on the decline in America. This is especially
ture among those who preach "tolerance."

It is also true the the most exterme cases on both sides of the fence are
driving the debate more and more. Of course Usenet is infamous for
attracting the most activist from both sides.

It's not new for fundies to rail against us atheists. Many of us are
wise enough to recognize that we are a minority and will probably always
be a minority and we should just learn to ignore some things. This is
especially so, when one realizes that those fundies represent the extremes
of religious intolerance rather than being the representative of the
moderate majority.

But we have become so hypersensitive that every symbolic afront to our
sensibilities has become fodder for a new court case, to be heard by
compliant judges. Their rulings (usually not even based on the
Constitution) have forced one unpopular change after another in this
country.

Consider the poster who responded with, "If theism were practiced in
private and totally removed from government then the major source of
contention would be gone."

Such people are staunchly supportive of idiots like Ward Churchill's
rights, but can't begrudge the same rights to the vast majority of people
in the country.

How enlightened. Such people are no better and probably worse than the
most virulent evangelist.

IRL, I don't know any other atheists. I live in a world of theists, most
of whom are content to leave me alone. Those few who aren't represent no
more than a minor nuisance to me. They're one nuisance among many others
and less annoying than some. I prefer to live my life and let them live
theirs rather than go to the courthouse every time I percieve an insult or
slight. I find that it is much more effective to changing opinions about
atheists to show them that we're not all assholes, rather than proving to
them they are right about us. I think that more atheists would do alot
better in general to drop their anti-theistic attitudes in favor of a
little of that "tolerance" that we hear so much about these days.

In many ways tolerance is on the decline in America. This is especially
ture among those who preach "tolerance." It is also true the the most
exterme cases on both sides of the fence are driving the debate more and
more. Of course Usenet is infamous for attracting the most activist from
both sides. It's not new for fundies to rail against us atheists. Many of
us are wise enough to recognize that we are a minority and will probably
always be a minority and we should just learn to ignore some things. This
is especially so, when one realizes that those fundies represent the
extremes of religious intolerance rather than being the representative of
the moderate majority.

But we have become so hypersensitive that every symbolic afront to our
sensibilities has become fodder for a new court case, to be heard by
compliant judges. Their rulings (usually not even based on the
Constitution) have forced one unpopular change after another in this
country. Consider the poster who responded with, "If theism were practiced
in private and totally removed from government then the major source of
contention would be gone." Such people are staunchly supportive of idiots
like Ward Churchill's rights, but can't begrudge the same rights to the vast
majority of people in the country. How enlightened. Such people are no
better and probably worse than the most virulent evangelist.

IRL, I don't know any other atheists. I live in a world of theists, most of
whom are content to leave me alone. Those few who aren't represent no more
than a minor nuisance to me. They're one nuisance among many others and
less annoying than some. I prefer to live my life and let them live theirs
rather than go to the courthouse every time I percieve an insult or slight.
I find that it is much more effective to changing opinions about atheists to
show them that we're not all assholes, rather than proving to them they are
right about us. I think that more atheists would do alot better in general
to drop their anti-theistic attitudes in favor of a little of that
"tolerance" that we hear so much about these days.

But we have become so hypersensitive that every symbolic afront to our
sensibilities has become fodder for a new court case, to be heard by
compliant judges. Their rulings (usually not even based on the
Constitution) have forced one unpopular change after another in this
country. Consider the poster who responded with, "If theism were practiced
in private and totally removed from government then the major source of
contention would be gone." Such people are staunchly supportive of idiots
like Ward Churchill's rights, but can't begrudge the same rights to the vast
majority of people in the country. How enlightened. Such people are no
better and probably worse than the most virulent evangelist.

IRL, I don't know any other atheists. I live in a world of theists, most of
whom are content to leave me alone. Those few who aren't represent no more
than a minor nuisance to me. They're one nuisance among many others and
less annoying than some. I prefer to live my life and let them live theirs
rather than go to the courthouse every time I percieve an insult or slight.
I find that it is much more effective to changing opinions about atheists to
show them that we're not all assholes, rather than proving to them they are
right about us. I think that more atheists would do alot better in general
to drop their anti-theistic attitudes in favor of a little of that
"tolerance" that we hear so much about these days.

Is this an "atheists vs theists" question, really?

In most parts of the world (unless I'm very severely mistaken!) both groups
get along pretty well. It's certainly the case here in Germany.

From what I see on usenet, and in a number of fora I am part of, the
conflict usually is spawned by _fanatical_ theists ranting about what they
call the "evil atheists" (and evil theists of other faiths, and liberals,
and homosexuals, and... and... you get the picture). Naturally, some
atheists react accordingly. It all gets even worse - much worse! - when
fanatics try to force their sick beliefs down everyone's throat by trying
to get legislation in place that establishes their cult as a state religion
(needless to say that this is illegal in most of the developed world).

As for me, I'm no longer a christian but I don't have objections against
theists _per se._ When I spot what looks like a tendency for fanaticism,
_that's_ when I polish my blade.

James wrote:

It's pretty obvious that we're not all meant to get along,

especially on

Usenet, but I have to wonder if the seemingly mutual hate between
atheists and theists here indicates a bigger problem. Is there any
reason why atheism can't coexist with Christianity, or any other

major

religion, as seems evident on Usenet? Or are many of us just

assholes

behind monitors?

In Canada, there is a sizeable population of individuals identifying
themselves to be of "no religious affiliation." Statistics

Canada

(2001) indicates it to be 4.9 million of our 30 million residents, or

16% of the population. Granted, this doesn't mean they're all

atheists,

but that's still a pretty big number to attribute to non-practicing

theists. Moreover, the 1991 Census put the number at 3.4 million of

27

million residents, or 13%, which indicates a modest growth factor.

If the number of "no religious affiliation" residents is growing,

and

the religious fervor in politics is growing in both Canada and the
United States, is there some sort of climax that must be reached?
Considering atheism is "non-denominational," meaning that as a

state of

mind we don't have any sort of organized hierarchy, is rational
discourse resulting in some sort of acceptable conclusion even

possible?

Absolutely not. How could there? "Acceptable conclusion"? Either
there is a god, or gods, or there is not. If I say there is not,
theists will disagree. If theists insist there is, I disagree.

As far as the animosity, well that is the fault of the theists.
Atheists would love to just live and let live, but the theists won't
let us. They keep trying to push their beliefs on us. Both personally
and through government run programs. They just won't let anyone live
without paying homage to their delusions, and when we try they claim
they are being discriminated against.

So you come to usenet, the one place where an atheist can vent in
relative safety, and you see atheists venting at the worst of the
theist proselytizer and you are surprised at the hostility. You
shouldn't be.

You want everyone to get along? Get theists to stop trying to take
atheist's rights away. Get them to leave us alone and we'll gladly
stop cussing them out in the dark room of usenet.

jwk