To think the atheists on MN are a bunch of miserable whingers

[GothAnneGeddes]

Every bloody week it's a new thread whining on about how terrible it is that there is religion in the world.

A prominent feature of such threads is the intolerance and stupidity of religious folk, yet threads by believers insulting atheists are very rare.

Besides, aren't you all meant to be so happy to be freed from the shackles of religion, that you're too busy having fun to moan?

You can disagree all you like. But out of common courtesy for your fellow human-being you can put your opinion with out insults, rudeness and intolerance.

Can't you?

Absolutely Rose - like the OP did. Right....?

Should I tolerate religious people?

What about the ones who think I'm an abomination? The ones that would execute me? The ones who want to stop me marrying who I want? The one who would say I couldn't join the scouts?

We are not free from the shackles of religion and won't be until this country goes secular, then the rest of the world. Funny how nobody ever complains about buddists. They get on with it rather than trying to boss other people about.

Babyheave you have just stated you 'love' a post full of intolerance and as the OP stated: "whining on about how terrible it is that there is religion in the world.'

So I can deduce from your 'love' you are in support of the intolerant nature, yet you tell me you support tolerance only 1 post later.

Perhaps the OP should have worded her differently. But I can't blame her for her frustations, because there is a word of truth in what she says. Onagors very post supports this.

If you really feel so offended by the OP post be glad you do not have a faith, because you would have to put up with far worse.

Should I tolerate religious people?

Tiggy we should all tolerate each other. You can honestly say that is a bad idea?

Who would want to execute you though and stop you from marrying someone?

There are extremists in religion and atheisim. Does that mean we should hate an entire group of people based on a few extremists?

Is it really fair that you think society should be exactly how you want it- at the expensive of others who have to be silenced. Is there really no middle ground?

Roseflower, are you unaware that a lot of people in this country cannot get married because of the influence of people with religious beliefs?

Nope- I was asking about Tiggy personal cirucmstances I dont want make assumptions...

The thing I like about MN is that it is quite irreverent, people say what they think, argue and discuss on all kinds of things. To be honest I don't think that discussions about religion are particularly more irreverent, swearier or ruder than discussions on any other heartfelt topic.

Perhaps it is that people are so used to hearing religion talked about in gentle thought-for-the-day tones and the mushy discourse of school RE, that to hear it talked about with the same level of criticism as any other kind of idea sounds shocking.

MillyR what do you mean by "get married"?

WRT Atheism being a "faith":

1. If you accept the term "Atheist" you are acknowledging the concept of God/gods/deities and affirming a belief; the belief that they don't exist. The only other path to take would be not to acknowledge the existence of a concept in which not to believe. In which case, you couldn't label yourself an Atheist.

1. Semantics aside, Atheism becomes a faith when it becomes a crusade, such as it does at the hands of Richard Dawkins, and those on this thread who revere him and his ilk. When it becomes important to these people that others should turn from their own beliefs and accept theirs, it becomes a faith system.

Oddly, Atheism isn't a million miles away from Hinduism which is really Pantheism with polytheistic elements. There are, apparently, elements of Pantheism in Islam in the strong belief in the unitary nature of the universe, though perhaps the OP could elaborate on that better than I can? Yet Richard Dawkins describes Pantheism as a kind of "sexed up Atheism"

Frantic51 - I know it is considered disrespectful to bring unicorns and leprechauns into the discussion, but they can be helpful little critters in thinking about these things. By your definition it seems that not believing in these mythical creature also is a faith? Is that right, and if not why not?

As for Richard Dawkins, he has written some books, and made some TV programmes. So have Simon Schama and Jamie Oliver. It doesn't make a belief in history and recipes into faiths.

No worries Himalaya I am notoriously difficult to offend!

I believe I said, "Atheism becomes a faith when it becomes a crusade"? Do you wish to engage me in conversation regarding the stupidity of belief in unicorns and leprechauns? Is it of importance to you in any way that I should agree with you? If so, I am happy to argue with you. I don't happen to believe in them, though sometimes I think it would be rather nice (the unicorns at any rate, not so sure about leprechauns) This is, of course a matter of personal choice, but I will happily argue the fact that you cannot prove they don't exist if you wish!

As to your other comment, Simon Schama and Jamie Oliver are great entertainment value. There ends their similarity to Dawkins. They don't indulge in preaching to convert!

New species of animals are being discovered all the time. www.allaboutwildlife.com/posts/newly-discovered-animal-species/4162here The scientists really don't know everything yet, you know.

Sorry, www.allaboutwildlife.com/posts/newly-discovered-animal-species/4162

I really must learn how to do links properly. How do you turn them into a word like "here" for example?

Help, anyone?

I've been an atheist all my adult life and I've never read anything by Richard Dawkins, nor do I know anyone who has been 'converted' by him (and surely the correct terminology would be to say that he may/may not have led some to apostasy in any case - in effect to deconvert) It seems to me an idea that makes a lot of sense to religious people, but very little to atheists. Atheists don't really have leaders or books or communities (no icons or rituals either), so nothing really to convert to.

I have read several religious texts, sat through many services, and I've even been to an evangelical religious gathering (Billy Graham). I've had religious people tell me terribly nicely that of course I must believe because I showed moral and spiritual tendencies, I've been cornered and questioned about being born again, and I've had brimstone and hellfire preached to me too (the last being the most entertaining at least). But I've never met anyone who tried to persuade me that I didn't in fact need to worry about my soul or that I was actually quite adequate on my own.

There have been a number of studies that have shown faith schools do not have the same intake as non selective schools, most often using free school meals as a simple index of deprivation. Personally I think the model in the UK is wrong, mainly because there are far too many church affiliated schools - if only around 5% of families attend church on a regular basis then something in the region of 5% of school places could be justifiably religious, not the 25%+ at present.

I like the model we have where I live in Canada. Our district of about 100,000 has three religious schools (two Catholic, one non-conformist all primary through to secondary), both are given a significant state subsidy in return for following the provincially set curricula with the rest made up by parental fund-raising, plus a fairly low level of fees. There are also 35 secular state primary schools and 10 secular state secondary schools, all well regarded so really only those who actively choose to have a faith based education do so.

However it could be said that the practice of requiring Christianity at so many schools is actually a positive one (if you think that religion is broadly negative) as the proportion of non believers in the UK is much higher than in countries like the US where state education is by definition secular, but where no politician would ever say they were an atheist and expect to get elected.

I haven't read the whole thread because LO is asking for "beeeeebiees" so am being kicked off here now.

I am an atheist but have no problems with religion, I certainly do not moan about it. I have been stopped in town by a young lad wanting to talk about being a morman.I don't mind that either. I stopped and listened to what he had to say.

I am a little ignorant about religion because there are so many different religions and so much to know about each one. BUT i am respectful of peoples religious

"AIBU To think the atheists on MN are a bunch of miserable whingers"

YABU of course there are some atheists who are miserable whingers, some who are not. There are whingers on mumsnet and in life generally but not ALL from one particular group of people.

*religions

Roseflower - you keep repeating how dreadful it is that atheists make insulting comments about religion on a thread that's OP and title included insulting comments about atheists.

I merely pointed out the irony.

onogar's post had no intolerance and no insults in it - can you explain.

The argument that it ok to bring in "unicorns and leprechauns into the discussion" (though I give you points for not saying Santa Claus) is not correct.

For a start is just makes you sound.... childish.

Religion makes up a rich part of out history and culture. It is part of our education and academics. People study the subject all the way up to doctorate level, there are specilaist univeristies especialy for the study of university. People set up charities based on religion,people become missonaries and provide aid relief based on their beliefs. There are buildings made purely for the purpose of religion.People have a career and dedicate their life's to religion. There is beautiful art and music to celebrate religion.We have festivals and celebrations.There is religious icons and symbols. There is special dress and food. There are 6 billion publications on Christinaity alone.

People build the very foundations of their life on religion.

People will sacrifice temptations and risk ridicule for their religion.

People have sacrificed their lifes in for their belief.

Yet you cannot distinguish between all of that and a unicorn?

Babyheave
Sigh

Can you not see the irony that OP said atheists and whinge about how terrible it is religion is in the world... and that was pretty much the gist of the post?

Atheists have their own agenda - but they're fighting a losing battle because religion is alive and kicking in 2011 ( yes, still fashionable millions of years later ) re; secular schools, fine have them, but let Catholics, Muslims etc have their own schools too. Only fair.

Roseflower I don't think you understand. To an atheist, religion IS about as believable as unicorns.

"To an atheist, religion IS about as believable as unicorns."

Exactly. And the fact that some people have sacrificed their lives (and, sometimes, the lives of others) for those beliefs is desperately sad.

Please don't tell me I don't understand. I am trying get you to open your eye's and stop following the usual atheist argument and think carefully- if you honestly cannot distinguish between the two then I have nothing futher to say.

Snorbs"the fact that some people have sacrificed their lives (and, sometimes, the lives of others) for those beliefs is desperately sad."

I hope your reference here is not also to the despicable terrorist acts. Same thought about the "greatness" of God, eh?

I am definitely with John Lennon here for once: "Imagine no religion", despite being an agnostic and not an atheist.