Do you think atheists can be called a "discriminated against minority"? - Page 3

[kallyn]

I went to elementary school in the midwest, and I once had a little girl run away from me screaming because I told her I had never been baptised. She wouldn't be friends with me any more after that because she thought I was evil.

I think atheists definitely have discrimination leveled at them, and I think it's mostly because religious folk don't understand them. Even just the word itself, atheist, implies that you are purposefully setting yourself at odds with their god. I can't think of any other group that is defined that way, by their nonbelief. I think that that language is part of the problem.

I don't believe in any kind of god, but I also don't like being labeled an atheist. It's not that I "believe there is no god." That in itself is a belief, and it implies that the default is that there is a god and that I am choosing to go against that. I don't "believe" anything. Instead, I have a complete lack of belief. It's hard for me to explain this, and the distinction is perhaps subtle, but I think it's important. I mean, I don't think that unicorns exist either, but I don't go around calling myself an a-unicornist. Does that make sense?

[orangebird]

Originally Posted by kallyn

I went to elementary school in the midwest, and I once had a little girl run away from me screaming because I told her I had never been baptised. She wouldn't be friends with me any more after that because she thought I was evil.

I think atheists definitely have discrimination leveled at them, and I think it's mostly because religious folk don't understand them. Even just the word itself, atheist, implies that you are purposefully setting yourself at odds with their god. I can't think of any other group that is defined that way, by their nonbelief. I think that that language is part of the problem.

I don't believe in any kind of god, but I also don't like being labeled an atheist. It's not that I "believe there is no god." That in itself is a belief, and it implies that the default is that there is a god and that I am choosing to go against that. I don't "believe" anything. Instead, I have a complete lack of belief. It's hard for me to explain this, and the distinction is perhaps subtle, but I think it's important. I mean, I don't think that unicorns exist either, but I don't go around calling myself an a-unicornist. Does that make sense?

Totally. Exactly my point. I don't have to tell people I am an a-unicornist, or a-teapotist, or a-anything.

We do need to do something about that language. I remember Sam Harris saying some interesting stuff about that topic.

[carriebft]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,308405,00.html

For those who don't like clicking on fox:

BAKERSFIELD, Calif. — Trustees of the largest high school district in the country voted 4-1 Monday night to mandate displays bearing the nation's motto — "In God We Trust" — and other historical documents in over 2,300 district classrooms and offices.

The classroom displays were first suggested by the non-profit group In God We Trust — America Inc., whose president, Jacquie Sullivan, is a Bakersfield councilwoman.

"I encouraged the trustees to put this on the agenda," she said. "It's very important. We need to promote patriotism and promote it in our schools. We can’t just assume that the younger generations are going to have that strong love for God and their country the way the older generations do."

"We are faith-based people for the most part," Sullivan said. "Sometimes you have to go with the majority."

Though this is a fine example of discrimination against other groups besides atheists.

Date on the story?
Tuesday, November 06, 2007

[wasabi]

Originally Posted by mightymoo

It's also hard to find a reason to come out as an atheist, you know? What point is there to being a 'proud atheist' and declaring it to the world? I think unlike the other groups you mention, being atheist by definition means I disagree with something you believe in, so unlike saying 'I'm proud to be a woman', saying 'I'm proud to be an atheist' comes off a lot like 'I'm proud to not believe in something you believe in' and so naturally others are upset by our very existence.

I've known quite a few atheists that come off this way. Not all by any stretch but quite a few that come off as smug and superior for being above my simple beliefs. I have no problem at all with you believing or not believing whatever you choose. I don't feel I'm superior because I'm Christian. However I don't feel you (general you invoking all atheists) are intellectually superior to me because you don't believe in God. I think the pride in not believing is what can make it come off that way. I don't have pride in being a Christian because again that would indicate I'm better than you because I am Christian kwim? I'm not ashamed of it and nor should you be but I'm not proud either. I don't know if I'm describing what I'm meaning or not but I know what I mean.

[suzywan]

Originally Posted by kallyn

I went to elementary school in the midwest, and I once had a little girl run away from me screaming because I told her I had never been baptised. She wouldn't be friends with me any more after that because she thought I was evil.

I think atheists definitely have discrimination leveled at them, and I think it's mostly because religious folk don't understand them. Even just the word itself, atheist, implies that you are purposefully setting yourself at odds with their god. I can't think of any other group that is defined that way, by their nonbelief. I think that that language is part of the problem.

I don't believe in any kind of god, but I also don't like being labeled an atheist. It's not that I "believe there is no god." That in itself is a belief, and it implies that the default is that there is a god and that I am choosing to go against that. I don't "believe" anything. Instead, I have a complete lack of belief. It's hard for me to explain this, and the distinction is perhaps subtle, but I think it's important. I mean, I don't think that unicorns exist either, but I don't go around calling myself an a-unicornist. Does that make sense?

Bah - just this morning on the radio, some windbag was going on about how atheists want to "scrub" religion from American culture in an effort to seperate church and state, but "do they know that they are replacing the Christian Religion with the Atheist Religion?" Is that not the most ridiculous notion? What the hell is the "Atheist Religion"? Only someone who truly cannot think outside they're limited and narrow worldview could possibly come up with such a term.

[kallyn]

Originally Posted by suzywan

Bah - just this morning on the radio, some windbag was going on about how atheists want to "scrub" religion from American culture in an effort to seperate church and state, but "do they know that they are replacing the Christian Religion with the Atheist Religion?" Is that not the most ridiculous notion? What the hell is the "Atheist Religion"? Only someone who truly cannot think outside they're limited and narrow worldview could possibly come up with such a term.

I think that all relates back to the language issue I mentioned. Most people would define an "atheist" as "a person who does not believe in god." Like they are actively sitting around all the time denying god. I think there is also a subtle connotation in there that the atheist knows or concedes that god might exist, but chooses to deny it anyway. So, in that case, the religious could argue that atheism is like a religious because it still requires a belief - a belief that god does not exist.

Obviously, to the atheist him/herself, this is ridiculous. Atheism is not a religion, it is the absence of religion. It is a worldview based on science.

Most atheists demand scientific proof for things. The religious hypothesis "there is a god" is completely unscientific because it is unfalsifiable; you can never disprove it. You can always say "well I still hypothesize that god exists, I just haven't been able to find/record him yet - but I will someday." The atheistic hypothesis that "there is no god" IS falsifiable. It is a testable working hypothesis because you can disprove it if in fact you are able to find/record god somehow (and then if someone else is able to reproduce your results). That is the way science works. You come up with a hypothesis and then try to prove it wrong to see if it holds up.

[Cassiopeia]

It would be nice if there were more community. I think there are a lot of people (me included) who spend years trying to force themselves to believe in something that makes no sense to them, just to fit in or find community. Thankfully, I have several atheist friends now and am feeling pretty comfortable with being an atheist myself.

As far as passing, it's pretty easy where I live now, but when I lived in South Carolina it was not, not at all. Religion permeates that area in a way that is hard to believe for those who haven't lived there. And I think it's hard for those who have only lived there to get that it isn't the same way every where.

[aprildawn]

Originally Posted by kallyn

I think that all relates back to the language issue I mentioned. Most people would define an "atheist" as "a person who does not believe in god." Like they are actively sitting around all the time denying god. I think there is also a subtle connotation in there that the atheist knows or concedes that god might exist, but chooses to deny it anyway.

What about someone like Richard Dawkins who spends a lot of time writing books and speaking about how God does not exist and people who believe otherwise are deluded? Is he sorta like the Pat Buchanan or Jerry Falwell of atheism? He's a well-known atheist who speaks of atheism a lot and it's assumed that if you're an atheist you must be like him? As a Christian I hate it when someone like Buchanan speaks out for Christians because he doesn't speak for me. Dawkins shapes my views of what atheists are like. He comes across as arrogant and superior. The very title of his latest book, The God Delusion, implies such.

(I'm not trying to be snarky, btw. It's an honest question. I'm trying to gain understanding, but sometimes that doesn't come across well via the internet.)

[kallyn]

I think that's probably a fair analogy. Dawkins irks me for the same reasons he irks you. To me he comes across as someone who was burned by religion when he was younger and now how some sort of vendetta against it. Whenever I hear about him I'm like "that guy? geez, what is his problem anyway? he is obsessed." I wouldn't call him representative of all atheists in the same way that I wouldn't call Jerry Falwell representative of all Christians.

I mean, 99% of the time, I just don't think about religion at all. No thoughts anti- or pro-. I certainly don't make it my job to go around telling other people they're stupid for thinking differently than I do. But, I was raised without religion. I guess it might be different for someone who was raised in a religion and then had to actively deny it...they might think about it quite more often and might be more bitter about it (the way Dawkins is).

I guess it all boils down to the fact that people can be huge jerks no matter what they believe!

[aprildawn]

Originally Posted by kallyn

I guess it all boils down to the fact that people can be huge jerks no matter what they believe!

Yep.

This thread has me wondering if I know any atheists who maybe haven't told me. I know a few agnostics. I try to never assume what anyone believes. That's just really short-sighted and ignorant, IMO.

[lotusdebi]

Originally Posted by Jasmyn's Mum

Can you imagine being an atheist 20 or 30 years ago?

I was an atheist 20-30 years ago. I was raised as an atheist by my strong atheist father and my Catholic-nun-turned-agnostic mother. I was bullied throughout my childhood by anti-atheist Christians - children and adults alike - simply on the basis that I was an atheist. It seems that atheist children are still experiencing this in the 21st century.

Originally Posted by whateverdidiwants

Nothing like being told by your classmates that you're going to burn in hell because you don't believe in Jesus, and that you must be a Satan-worshipper!

I got tons of this (plus the "you must be evil/ have no morals" b.s.) as a child in Maryland.

Originally Posted by whateverdidiwants

Out of curiosity, what do you think would be a "polite" way to say it? This is a conversation I had with a co-worker years ago, and is pretty typical, ime.

Co-worker, on a Monday morning: I'm glad to be at work today; this weekend wiped me out. I never have time to get everything done that I need to - I'm 4 loads behind on laundry and I haven't vacuumed in nearly a month!

Me: What did you do this weekend that took up so much time?

Co-worker: Saturday the kids had baseball all day, and then we got up at 6 yesterday to go to church, went to a service, went to my parent's house for a family lunch, and then went back to church.

Me: That sounds busy. I generally do all my cleaning on Sunday mornings, after we sleep in late.

Co-worker: So you go to afternoon services?

Me: Huh?

Co-worker: When do you go to church?

Me: I don't go to church.

Co-worker: Why not? You haven't found one you like since you moved here?

Me: No, I don't go to church at all. I'm not a Christian.

Co-worker: Are you Jewish?

Me: No.

Co-worker: Are you Mormon?

Me: No.

Co-worker: What ARE you?

Me: Nothing, I'm an atheist.

Co-worker: An ATHEIST? Oh my god! How can you not believe in God? What's wrong with you?

This conversation has played out *dozens* of times in my life, and every time it starts with a "believer" talking about church or holidays or prayer or something and when I don't immediately chime in with my own similar beliefs, I get interrogated, and then they get offended when I tell them I'm an atheist. What else am I supposed to do? Lie to placate them? Believe me, trying to change the subject doesn't work once you tell people that you don't go to church or celebrate whatever - they want to know *why* you're not like them.

I've had many, many, many similar conversations.

Originally Posted by whateverdidiwants

A few years back there was a march in DC, Godless Americans,

I was there! November, 2002, IIRC.

Originally Posted by suzysprite

I feel silly taking the bait offered above, but I'm pretty offended at the statement that I believe in nothing. I have strong set of moral values, grounded in philosophy and a deep love and appreciation for mankind. I also believe in the eternal balance and rhythm of nature, and hold it in great awe and respect.

: Absolutely. Throughout my life.

Originally Posted by orangebird

Until the polls don't show that we are the most untrusted minority, until they don't show that we are the least minority parents would want their children to come home with romantically. Until our ex-living president takes it back that atheists can't be patriots and shouldn't be considered citizens.

Until an atheist doesn't have to be secretive about his beliefs in most workplaces.

We are discriminated against in child custody cases, boy scouts, politics.

I would answer the original question with a yes.

Yes to all of that.

Originally Posted by wasabi

I've known quite a few atheists that come off this way. Not all by any stretch but quite a few that come off as smug and superior for being above my simple beliefs. I have no problem at all with you believing or not believing whatever you choose. I don't feel I'm superior because I'm Christian. However I don't feel you (general you invoking all atheists) are intellectually superior to me because you don't believe in God. I think the pride in not believing is what can make it come off that way. I don't have pride in being a Christian because again that would indicate I'm better than you because I am Christian kwim? I'm not ashamed of it and nor should you be but I'm not proud either. I don't know if I'm describing what I'm meaning or not but I know what I mean.

I know I've been smug in the past about my atheism. It came from a place of frustration and anger. After being bullied for so many years, having friends dump me because their parents found out I was an atheist, and thus must be a bad influence, been yelled at by people who came to MY door to "spread the word", etc. etc. etc.... I was sick of it. I was the most loving, caring, selfless, ETHICAL person that I knew. And I was treated like dirt because I didn't believe in something that I had no reason to believe in. The Bible was a book of stories - less interesting, to me, than Aesop's Fables. I didn't read Aesop and start believing in talking animals. The whole concept of believing in something that was in a book, and frankly wasn't at all believable, made no sense to me. And that I was so frequently attacked for not believing, though I showed everyone I encountered every kindness that I could... smacked of the worst kind of hypocrisy. I got fed up. I got angry. I became anti-religion. And, yes, I felt very smug that I wasn't suffering from the mass delusion of "God." I felt much more intelligent than all the hateful religious people I encountered. I absolutely felt superior.
All of those feelings were a reaction to being abused by the religious for MY ENTIRE LIFE.
I got over it. I healed. I experienced some things in my life that led me towards agnosticism, and then Taoism and Buddhism. But, while I no longer describe myself as an atheist, I'm not a believer in the sense that most people in the U.S. are. And I still relate more to atheists than to anyone else because of my upbringing, and the discrimination and prejudice I've faced.

[holyhelianthus]

Originally Posted by mom de terre

I am an atheist.

I see several distinct possible reasons for the lack of an "atheists' rights movement."

1. Atheism is essentially solitary; movements require leaders.

2. I think that most atheists tend to be privileged in other ways (class, education), and thus the force of discrimination against them is effectually muted.

3. Overall, the 90% of people who profess faith in a higher power are doing an admirable job of saving religion for Sunday morning. Our quotidian society is so secular that it's possible to "pass" as an atheist most of the time.

Of course, I live in New England, and MDC often reminds me that my experience of "America" is through navy blue glasses, so I might be wrong about that third one.

very interesting points. number 3, i'm not so sure about (just want to think on it more) but number 1 really hit me. what you need is a Jerry Falwell for Atheists- someone loud and pushy to get things done.

Originally Posted by orangebird

Until the polls don't show that we are the most untrusted minority, until they don't show that we are the least minority parents would want their children to come home with romantically. Until our ex-living president takes it back that atheists can't be patriots and shouldn't be considered citizens.

Until an atheist doesn't have to be secretive about his beliefs in most workplaces.

We are discriminated against in child custody cases, boy scouts, politics.

I would answer the original question with a yes.

and this is why i love you... :

[lotusdebi]

Originally Posted by mz_libbie22

FTR--I am an "agnostic-atheist" and I saw you roll your eyes at my thread title :P

This thread isn't meant for debate about whether atheists are discriminated against-they are, look it up. This thread is to discuss whether atheist Americans are a united minority group that actively strives for equality. This doesn't seem to be the case and I'm wondering why not. There is no real 'movement' for change. Sure there are isolated legal suits by "militant" atheists, but there is no collective political force to be reckoned with like there is for women/blacks/homosexuals. I have no doubt there will be a female president before there's an athiest president, and a black president before an atheist president, and maybe even a homosexual president before there's ever an atheist president. The polls confirm this.


I guess I'd like to ask the other non-theists here:

Do you feel as if an organized political/legal effort to end discrimination is something that is needed?

Why do you think there isn't a more visable one already?

Do you feel like you have no real social connection to other non-theists so these issues aren't a concern for you?

Do you wish atheists in America were more of a "community" than they are? Or would that turn atheists into just another organized religious group? (oxymoron, but I know some people think that)

I feel like an organized political/ legal effort to end discrimination is needed. I don't think there is a more visible one already because atheists are such a hated group. and are used to living in the closet in the areas where discrimination is more prevalent. I also think that many work on equal rights for all - supporting groups like the ACLU and HRC which also have the effect of keeping church and state separate.

I definitely feel much more comfortable with other non-theists. Most of my friends are atheists and agnostics. I'm not comfortable with most Christians, as we seem to have little in common once the "church talk" starts (nearly every gathering of mostly religious women I've been in, the conversation goes that way), and I am usually seen first as a nonbeliever, and second as a person, by them. I'm looked at as something to be studied under a microscope, but not to get close to (as though it might be contagious.)
So, the issues are important to me. Though, at this time, I surround myself with likeminded people as much as possible, and am too busy with my other activism and raising my kids to do much about anti-atheist discrimination.
I think that atheists and agnostics should probably work more as a community through groups like the Freedom From Religion Foundation.

[orangebird]

I love Richard Dawkins. I don't find him as abrasive as others do, and I like people who are to the point and don't be nice just for the sake of being nice.


He is a scientist. And I can see how he is at his wit's end with science being challenged by unscientific fantasy believers. I see where he is coming from, so it doesn't bother me.

I think he explains the "delusion" in this series, The Root of All Evil

Part 1

Part 2

But anyway, I suppose talking about him is OT, it's understandable if people don't all like him.

[boingo82]

Originally Posted by orangebird

I love Richard Dawkins. I don't find him as abrasive as others do, and I like people who are to the point and don't be nice just for the sake of being nice.


He is a scientist. And I can see how he is at his wit's end with science being challenged by unscientific fantasy believers. I see where he is coming from, so it doesn't bother me.

I think he explains the "delusion" in this series, The Root of All Evil

Part 1

Part 2

But anyway, I suppose talking about him is OT, it's understandable if people don't all like him.

I'm with you.

And ftr I am ambivalent about the existence of Gods, but not about the stuff perpetuated by religion.

[aprildawn]

Originally Posted by lotusdebi

I definitely feel much more comfortable with other non-theists. Most of my friends are atheists and agnostics. I'm not comfortable with most Christians, as we seem to have little in common once the "church talk" starts (nearly every gathering of mostly religious women I've been in, the conversation goes that way), and I am usually seen first as a nonbeliever, and second as a person, by them. I'm looked at as something to be studied under a microscope, but not to get close to (as though it might be contagious.)

I'm sorry to hear this. If someone told me they were an atheist I'd react to it the same as if they told me they like to watch American Idol. I don't personally like that show, but if you want to watch it, go for it! As our friendship grew we would likely talk about our beliefs more in depth, and I'd probably share why I disagree with them, as they would with me, but I certainly wouldn't reject someone due to their beliefs.

I hope you don't think I'm "putting you under a microscope." This is a great dialog that I don't have opportunity to have IRL. Since I no longer work outside my home I just don't have as much interaction with people who aren't a lot like me. It's something I miss about my old office job, and why I like MDC! I just like learning about other people.

[CherryBomb]

Originally Posted by attachedmamaof3

I just want to point out as an FYI...many people include Buddhists on the list of "atheist held beliefs", because they believe there is no God and no "afterlife" as christians describe it. Do you believe that Buddhists hold no belief system? Believe in "nothing"?

That isn't true (that Buddhist believe there is no God). Buddhism as a whole is inherently agnostic; it doesn't profess a belief in a creator deity, nor disbelief. Different denominations of Buddhism are also very different from another. Some Buddhists believe in some type of God. Some don't. It's also not true that they don't believe in an after life (I know that's not what you said, I'm just going off of what you said some people think). Reincarnation is a doctrine of most (if not all) Buddhist denominations, but there's a lot of variation in belief regarding what happens after death in this life. My brother practices Tibetan Gelugpa buddhism in the lineage of HH the 13th Dalai Lama, which tends to be very into hungry ghosts, hell, deities, etc. He also believes in God (as a creator, not necessarily the Christian God). Other forms of Buddhism, like Zen, bear little resemblance to that, focusing almost exclusively on meditation (but I don't know much about Zen Buddhism so I won't try to speculate).

[Meiri]

I suspect that it is difficult to build a group around a lack of something.

I know both liberal and conservative (not neo-con) atheists.

[Unagidon]

In a pluralistic society like ours I think everyone can claim to be a "discriminated against minority" about something.

[CherryBomb]

Originally Posted by orangebird

I love Richard Dawkins. I don't find him as abrasive as others do, and I like people who are to the point and don't be nice just for the sake of being nice.


He is a scientist. And I can see how he is at his wit's end with science being challenged by unscientific fantasy believers. I see where he is coming from, so it doesn't bother me.

To be fair, I'm sure fans of Falwell, Dobson, and the like, have similar excuses for their behavior.

Religious belief doesn't preclude acceptance of science. Francis S. Collins (head of the human genome project) is a staunch theistic evolutionist as well as a scientist and an evangelical Christian. I recently read his book The Language of God, which I highly recommend.