(no subject)
Sparked from a discussion on Twitter (read: Ben making a fool of himself in 140-character installments while everybody else involved says "now, be reasonable..."), here's a scattering of thoughts regarding belief, respect, and differing points of view.
First, on the subject of showing respect towards other faiths:
I will not respect your beliefs just because you believe them. PEOPLE deserve respect, not ideas. Ideas deserve criticism.
I will, however, respect your right to believe whatever you want, under the given conditions:
1. You keep it to yourself;
2. You don't go to great lengths trying to convince me of its merits;
3. You don't teach it to children as the Truth;
4. You don't legislate based on your beliefs.
Stick to those four conditions, and I will absolutely respect your right to worship whatever crazy sky fairy you want. I will not be barging into your homes or places of worship and stealing your holy texts, have no fear. The Atheism Thought Police are still just the fevered nightmares of the paranoid faithful. However, if you are the sky-fairy-worshiping type, I might make fun of you anyways, because I am a mean person and it's easy to point and laugh.
Again: respecting the right to believe? Definitely, as long as it doesn't infringe on the above conditions. Respecting believers? Usually, as long as they're not too nuts about their beliefs. Respecting belief itself? No, never, absolutely not.
__________
I am growing weary of the "militant atheists" line. I usually hear this phrase from well-meaning secular believers, New Age types, and non-theists who don't like rocking the boat, and it usually comes across as a comparison of hard-line atheists to fundamentalist believers like the Westboro Baptist Church and Taliban and the like. I guess the reasoning here is, "I detest fundamentalism in all its forms, and so I don't take Richard Dawkins any more seriously than Rush Limbaugh", or something like that.
Here's the thing: fundamentalist believers blow up Planned Parenthood clinics. They protest the funerals of soldiers who gave their lives protecting civilians. They blow up skyscrapers. They poison the drinking water, burn down villages, pillage, murder and rape in the name of their God(s). They have been indoctrinated into a kind of craziness that cannot be shaken by reason, or evidence, or compassion.
"Fundamentalist" atheists? They write books. They have blogs. They complain about stuff on the Internet. Sometimes they hold public demonstrations. (Gasp! Shock!) At their very worst, the militant atheists come across as stubborn and argumentative, but they are always, ALWAYS open to reasoned debate, assuming the person they are debating doesn't reel off tired old religious platitudes that were refuted years ago.
So please, let's put the "militant atheist" line out of its misery already.
__________
Lastly, I'd like to point out that persuasion does not equal intolerance. Atheists trying to initiate conversations with believers about their faith are often treated as if they've committed an enormous faux pas - as if there's something offensive about disagreeing, and stating why you disagree. But, at the same time, atheists are called "closed-minded" because they (supposedly) refuse to accept the possibility of any supernatural explanations. Never mind that I have never met a single atheist who doesn't carry a single sliver of uncertainty about the existence of the supernatural. And never mind that atheists generally are rational about their supernatural beliefs (that is, they can be convinced otherwise if presented with compelling evidence), while believers generally are not. Atheists are both too open to debate and too closed-minded. I smell a straw man.
__________
I'm done for now. Comments and criticisms are gladly accepted.
First, on the subject of showing respect towards other faiths:
I will not respect your beliefs just because you believe them. PEOPLE deserve respect, not ideas. Ideas deserve criticism.
I will, however, respect your right to believe whatever you want, under the given conditions:
1. You keep it to yourself;
2. You don't go to great lengths trying to convince me of its merits;
3. You don't teach it to children as the Truth;
4. You don't legislate based on your beliefs.
Stick to those four conditions, and I will absolutely respect your right to worship whatever crazy sky fairy you want. I will not be barging into your homes or places of worship and stealing your holy texts, have no fear. The Atheism Thought Police are still just the fevered nightmares of the paranoid faithful. However, if you are the sky-fairy-worshiping type, I might make fun of you anyways, because I am a mean person and it's easy to point and laugh.
Again: respecting the right to believe? Definitely, as long as it doesn't infringe on the above conditions. Respecting believers? Usually, as long as they're not too nuts about their beliefs. Respecting belief itself? No, never, absolutely not.
__________
I am growing weary of the "militant atheists" line. I usually hear this phrase from well-meaning secular believers, New Age types, and non-theists who don't like rocking the boat, and it usually comes across as a comparison of hard-line atheists to fundamentalist believers like the Westboro Baptist Church and Taliban and the like. I guess the reasoning here is, "I detest fundamentalism in all its forms, and so I don't take Richard Dawkins any more seriously than Rush Limbaugh", or something like that.
Here's the thing: fundamentalist believers blow up Planned Parenthood clinics. They protest the funerals of soldiers who gave their lives protecting civilians. They blow up skyscrapers. They poison the drinking water, burn down villages, pillage, murder and rape in the name of their God(s). They have been indoctrinated into a kind of craziness that cannot be shaken by reason, or evidence, or compassion.
"Fundamentalist" atheists? They write books. They have blogs. They complain about stuff on the Internet. Sometimes they hold public demonstrations. (Gasp! Shock!) At their very worst, the militant atheists come across as stubborn and argumentative, but they are always, ALWAYS open to reasoned debate, assuming the person they are debating doesn't reel off tired old religious platitudes that were refuted years ago.
So please, let's put the "militant atheist" line out of its misery already.
__________
Lastly, I'd like to point out that persuasion does not equal intolerance. Atheists trying to initiate conversations with believers about their faith are often treated as if they've committed an enormous faux pas - as if there's something offensive about disagreeing, and stating why you disagree. But, at the same time, atheists are called "closed-minded" because they (supposedly) refuse to accept the possibility of any supernatural explanations. Never mind that I have never met a single atheist who doesn't carry a single sliver of uncertainty about the existence of the supernatural. And never mind that atheists generally are rational about their supernatural beliefs (that is, they can be convinced otherwise if presented with compelling evidence), while believers generally are not. Atheists are both too open to debate and too closed-minded. I smell a straw man.
__________
I'm done for now. Comments and criticisms are gladly accepted.