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

[ivykaty44]

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

"I don't think there are any gangs of Christians doing that (carrying out violent acts)"

Erm are you serious? Northern Ireland ring any bells? The recently reported trouble in Scotland?

bemy I would agree, I mentioned some of those regimes earlier. The intolerance to religion was fundamentally about power though, surely?

You are right that it is an aside and we are talking about the UK.

I cannot believe that anyone would assert that there are no groups of Christians fighting in the UK. Mind boggling.

Scotland, yes, but NI I have always thought of as religion bolted onto territorialism.

Are you being fey by not acknowledging the international examples given?

Also - a little shyness in addressing the point that the original complaint is not gangs of atheists carrying out intolerant acts, but a general and rising feeling of intolerance?

Yes - thousands and thousands of Christian people murdered by Nazis and in Stalin Russia. These were atheist ideologies.

I think some people here are taking Patten's comments a bit literally. I think by 'intolerance' he means the condescension people have for religion, (like so many on mumsnet).

Gooseberry I always thought Hitler was, but admittedly I may be "ill-informed". I am very well informed about Russia and China though.

UK is actually an amazing country where all sorts of believes can exist and develop peacefully, so the scales did not tip in one direction or another at least in the past couple of centuries. Which always made me feel somewhat torn between being protective and, on other occasions, very indignant about this culture of tolerance.

X posts - however I think for the sake of your absolutist argument that atheists don't do this sort of thing, it is hardly consistent to airily wave aside regimes which do just that on a very large scale.

It is often about "power", or something other than religion. Territory, tribalism, rebellion, insecurity. Muslims say that about religious violence and extremism -- "that's not Islam".

So you can't really say, oh that's about power so it doesn't count.

Oh balls I wrote a post earlier about china and stalin and it isn't here

My comment was that these regimes were athiest but a large part of the reason for suppression of religion was power, religion is a way of exercising power over people, dictators naturally can take against it.

darthniquabi

When you post about the discussion about Muslim women's dress and the 'unpleasant' atheists, where you referring to the discussion on France banning women from covering their faces?
Are you insinuating that atheists are more likely to be racists? And that questioning religious fundamentalism is racist?

Because that's a bit annoying (as a long time anti racist)

I am saying that this comment that athiests in the UK are intolerant of religion is incorrect, I do not believe that you can lump athiests together as a group and say that as a group they are intolerant of religion.

The historical examples are appalling, obviously, but what have they to do with the situation in the UK now? Are they being used as a comparison, or what?

sorry, did not keep up very well with the 6 pages of thread, so missed the international angle

SQ it is not about power, it is about the ideology, hence my argument that this believe (communism) is a form of religion. same dogmatic mentality and a belief in the great afterlife 'bright future'

Gooseberry are you glossing over that fact that you stated that Christians do not go out in groups and attack people, when in fact they do, right now and in the UK?

You have not responded to my question about religious exemption for equalities legislation either. You brought it up. I have to say I have not understood the objections that I have read in the press, what are your objections?

believe=belief

How does the presence of a horrible communist regime scores of years ago, mean that athiests in the UK right now are guilty of practicing religious intolerance?

I am finding this thread very confusing, people keep going off at tangents.

The OP was that this man has said that athiests in the UK are intolerant of religion. Do people think this is true or not. I think it is not true. Can the people who think it is true, explain why, and give examples?

Christians voted overwhelmingly for Hitler, he appealed to them, be' campaigned on the back of Christianity( not that it's got anything to do with anything?)

As an atheist I have alot to be pissed off about - the subjugation of women, denial of contraception and abortion, female and male circumcision, the fact that my daughter will grow up dubbed a 'proddy' because of the school she went to.

But you are giving examples from the past too. Goalpost shifting? And you are demanding evidence for gangs of atheists carrying out acts of violence. Unless you aren't any more.

This insistence that unless atheists do something as a group, it doesn't count, is strange. So an individual act or expression of intolerance towards religion by an atheist doesn't count? Multiple acts thereof - if carried out by individuals who have not organised their intolerance - don't count?

If you are saying, atheists aren't a group, so you can't accuse atheists of anything, is a bit weird.

I think I am very tolerant in the face of all the religious provocation.

Darth I can't sit by and ignore what I see as the subjugation of a person because she has a vagina. The day men are in burquas too is the day I will be tolerant. And I know Muslim men who dress modestly and so fo their wives and I think that's fine. It's the inequality even inhumanity of requiring a woman to cover her face that I cannot stand. And as an atheist it seems incomprehensible.

SQ - you went off on the greatest tangent of all - saying that unless there are gangs of atheists roaming the country committing acts of violence, there is no intolerance. You've persisted in pursuing this, and with the claim that because atheists aren't an organised group, they are incapable of intolerance. These you refuse to address?

"Gooseberry are you glossing over that fact that you stated that Christians do not go out in groups and attack people, when in fact they do, right now and in the UK? You have not responded to my question about religious exemption for equalities legislation either. You brought it up. I have to say I have not understood the objections that I have read in the press, what are your objections?"

Well I did though, I said yes about Scotland and I said NI was a territorial thing with religion bolted on, much in the way you said China was about power not religion. Perhaps you didn't see it - there have been lots of posts.

Re: equalities legislation: you didn't ask how I feel, you asked what the arguments are - which I think have been well aired. But as you now ask about me - I'm not sure how I feel when equalities legislation comes up against Christian belief. But I sense a great deal of intolerance towards the Christian viewpoint when I read about such cases, or read comments that people make about them.

What examples from the past?

There was trouble in Scotland - was it last week? Is that recent enough for you?

You just won't answer any questions that I ask you.

1. The OP was that this man has said that athiests in the UK are intolerant of religion. Do people think this is true or not. I think it is not true. Can the people who think it is true, explain why, and give examples?

1. What is your argument for religious organisations being exempted from equalities legislation

Scotland is religious tribalism.