Chris Pattern says that "atheists are "intolerant" of religion."

[ivykaty44]

Is he correct? And should atheist be tolerant of religion?

So you're damned if you do and damned if you don't.

If you don't make the point that you have no belief in some strange "other", then it is assumed that you are part of the supposed majority who "believe" - and as such are happy for society to be designed around those beliefs.

If you do make the point that you do not see any relevance of said "belief" in your life because you beleive there is no god (or fairies or Celestial teapots) and query why it should have any particular rights over "non-belief", then you are deemed to be intolerant.

Looking at the article, I don't see why an atheist shouldn't present occasionally on "Thought for the Day" - people who happen no to be religious are still capable of being moral.

I think (as in any group) there isn't any one position on tolerance of religion. I mean there's not one single way of being an atheist, it's just a person who lives without a belief in god. The essence of that is that it's a person. That person is either tolerant or intolerant as a rule.

I don't give much of a stuff about religion except that I don't like it in state schools; and obviously oppression is wrong, whether for religious reasons or other.

WRT writing books that are critical of religion: why not? It isn't immune from criticism, as anyone can see. Clearly books can be written on any subject

Ha I'd missed that this was Chris Patten.
I retract any posts on this thread as he is just incredibly not worth it.

"religious folks are generally sooooo tolerant of non believers "

"And religions are all so tolerant of each other aren't they? Never kill each other cos they believe in a different god or anything like that, no, of course not"

I think Christians in the UK probably are a jolly tolerant bunch, of non Christians and of non believers. Not even tolerant, just, I don't know, treat them the same of course. They don't seem to spend as much time abusing and mocking the people who are different from them as atheists do.

Which religions want to kill people in this day and age? Are you referring just to Islam? Isn't that a bit, I don't know, a bit something. You realise that most Msulims reject the extremists who want to murder and maim, don't you?

Chris Patten's a bright guy.

"Should atheists be tolerant of religion?"

Is this a real question?

did he define atheist ?

doesn't he have some kind of bbc role now,

I think when there is mockery, it is borne of frustration that certain things are ingrained in our political and social structure that are, well, silly and unfair.
It isn't a very nice trait but there are faults on both sides and I don't grudge Tim Minchin a couple of songs.

It's only your opinion that it's silly and unfair. Your mockery is borne not only of frustration but, therefore, of prejudice.

Let's not forget the abuse. I haven't heard a Christian in the general media either mocking or abusing atheists recently. Have you?

Intolerance is often the atheists' watchword. People of faith are stupid, silly, childish, irrational, murderers, bullshit believers, idiots, dumb, God is a sky fairy, a chocolate teapot, and so it goes on and on.

WHo said it was my mockery?
I had forgotten, I've met you on these threads before, and it's pointless discussing anything with you.
(I have a book open on your next post btw.)

It must be dreadful having to talk to people who disagree with you.

How frightfully tolerant of you.

I guess that's what you do when you have no response to a cogent train of thought. Obviously I'll never need to try it myself.

Many are.

Many refer sneeringly to "superstition" and "imaginary friends" and imply that anyone who does believe in God is a moron.

I'd call that intolerant.

It doesn't affect anyone if other people believe in God. So why sneer at them for it?

If their actions affect you - then fair enough. Object to their actions if those actions affect you or adversely affect others who have no choice in it. but to sneeringly refer to imaginary friends is totally, unforgiveably ignorant.

It works both ways. Many religious people are intolerant of non-religious people and of people who believe in a different form of religion. This is equally wrong.

Although, I don't recall from my history lessons, many wars, killings, imprisonments etc orchestrated and carried out by atheists. Seems to be those who believe in God who do most of the killing. I wonder why that is. When you consider how much love and peace and tolerace is preached, it seems odd how quickly people want to kill in the name of their religion.

Hecate: isn't it the case though that many atheists do believe their lives are hampered and confounded because the civil code of the UK is based on Christian culture.

The sad thing is (and I say this as someone who does not believe in any god) is that such wars, although done in the name of religion, are really in the pursuit of power :( and nothing to do with the true principles of those religions.

.... which could lead into a whole new debate about whether or not religion is really just a means of controlling a population

In what way, gooseberry? What is an example of such hampering and confounding?

• genuinely interested btw - I can't think of anything, nothing at all, particulary christian about this country that is detrimental to non christians. I'm really interested by that pov.

is that such wars, although done in the name of religion, are really in the pursuit of power and nothing to do with the true principles of those religions.

Amen to that!

So to speak

There are one or two people who make sometimes dubious comments aobut "imaginary friends".

The majority, when trying to explain why they would if pushed classify themselves as athiest have to try to do in terms of why they don't beleive in. That's why I don't like the term - it is defining me by what I don't beleive in. I'd much prefer to bd by what I do beleive in - which is people and a perhaps naive beleif that most people are good at heart.

So, it happens that I don't beleive in god - or any god. I am therefore an atheist.

I also don't believe in fairies. I am therefore an afairiest.

I don't beleive in the Loch Ness Monster. I am therefore am alochnessmonsterist.

..... I don't really need to go on.

Hecate: the fact that schools are still legally obliged to have a "daily act of worship that is broadly Christian in nature".

The fact that Bishops still have seats in the Houseof Lords so have an unelected say in the laws of this country (although has that changed/is that changing?)

The fact that there are separate state funded Catholic schools which help contrbute to the sectarianism that plagues where I live. Quite apart form the added cost of having schools that are not full alongside schools that are bursting at the seams.

certainly on mumsnet this statement is true, athiests seem to not tolerate the beliefs of others. i find this particularly true when it comes to christianity , bizarrely athiests seem to understand the cultural significance of certain dates and practices towards other religeons, and indeed respect it. but show no such respect towards christians.

in real life though, the opposite is true ime, athiests are astounded when they meet a real life practicing christian and although good humoured debate ensues, they are respectful towards my views - as i am to theirs.