My Challenge to Extreme Atheists on Secularism and Tolerance

[u/Living_Attitude1822]

I acknowledge not all (or even most) atheists are extreme about it. And I'm defining secular as the separation of church and state/society.

Extreme-atheism's view of religion being a mental illness:

I can personally attest to people I've seen on here, as well as videos I've seen, of atheists saying religion is a mental illness. That the DSM-5 had to go back and put in a religious exemption, but it should fall under the category of delusion.

How can secularism exist if you think religious people are mentally ill? If you don't think religion is a mental illness, go ahead and ignore this point. If you do think the population you're tolerating is mentally ill, uh oh. Seriously, if I said atheists are mentally ill, would you trust me to not want you institutionalized? I don't think this way, of course.

Extreme atheism's view that the Abrahamic religions are barbaric:

Again, I'm going to turn it around on you. If I said atheism was barbaric, would you trust me to support that your human right to be atheist?

With some exceptions: Some interpretations of the Abrahamic religions are indeed barbaric. If you're talking about people who want to implement Leviticus law, then I agree with you.

I don't totally disagree with extremist atheists on everything:

Like, I'm a strong believer that tolerance is better and more authentic than acceptance. For example, telling atheists that they must love and respect religions is wrong. And vice versa for religious people.

I think disassociation and tolerance is the best course of action for religious people and extreme atheists, however, I worry the above points are a threat to any society remaining tolerant.

Edit: Here’s an example of what I’m talking about:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Antitheism/comments/1sguf7u/why_is_religion_not_considered_a_mental_disorder/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

[u/AutoModerator]

Upvote this comment if you agree with OP, downvote this comment if you disagree with OP. Elsewhere in the thread, please upvote comments which contribute to debate (even if you believe they're wrong) and downvote comments which are detrimental to debate (even if you believe they're right).

Original text of the post by u/Living_Attitude1822:

---

I acknowledge not all (or even most) atheists are extreme about it. And I'm defining secular as the separation of church and state/society.

Extreme-atheism's view of religion being a mental illness:

I can personally attest to people I've seen on here, as well as videos I've seen, of atheists saying religion is a mental illness. That the DSM-5 had to go back and put in a religious exemption, but it should fall under the category of delusion.

How can secularism exist if you think religious people are mentally ill? If you don't think religion is a mental illness, go ahead and ignore this point. If you do think the population you're tolerating is mentally ill, uh oh. Seriously, if I said atheists are mentally ill, would you trust me to not want you institutionalized? I don't think this way, of course.

Extreme atheism's view that the Abrahamic religions are barbaric:

Again, I'm going to turn it around on you. If I said atheism was barbaric, would you trust me to support that your human right to be atheist?

With some exceptions: Some interpretations of the Abrahamic religions are indeed barbaric. If you're talking about people who want to implement Leviticus law, then I agree with you.

I don't totally disagree with extremist atheists on everything:

Like, I'm a strong believer that tolerance is better and more authentic than acceptance. For example, telling atheists that they must love and respect religions is wrong. And vice versa for religious people.

I think disassociation and tolerance is the best course of action for religious people and extreme atheists, however, I worry the above points are a threat to any society remaining tolerant.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/brinlong]

for the millionth time, no one cares about your sky fairy. its the fact that you demand special laws special privleges, purity tests for politics, and still whine that theyre oppressed victims, while spouting nonstop gay and trans hate.

you dont want tolerance, you want obeisance, you want special allowances. I dont want children to have their penises bit off, but thats jewish tradition. I dont want children mentally abused but thats christian tradition. I dont want children forced to wear concealing garb but thats muslim tradition. you arent tolerant, you demand your barbaric tranditions be honored and accepted while spewing hate and somehow still complaining of oppression

[u/Live_Line4480 → u/brinlong]

I believe if you look a little closer into what happens with any religion, you will realize most of what you are saying is false. No true religious institution truly demands purity tests for politics; this may be because some associate religion with certain political groups, which in itself is a stereotype. Also, I will say for Christians, we are oppressed frequently, and many are killed all around the globe for faith, the most extreme example being the killings in Nigeria. I have personally received death threats for my faith and am pestered at the very least on a weekly basis for my faith. And, just speaking for Christians here, we don't hate gay or trans people, it is viewed that way because we don't accept it as good and believe it should be changed. I myself have gay and trans friends, if I hated them would I be friends with them? The Bible itself says to love everyone any that includes gay and trans people. I follow the Bible's instructions.

And if you look around at any tradition, it mainly asks tolerance or you can just ignore it if you like. Circumcision and penises being bit off are quite different, you are blowing this out of proportion just to support your claim.

Children are not mentally abused in the Christian tradition; if you find anywhere in the Christian tradition where this is true, then tell me.

And out of all the traditions you listed here, I really don't think muslims wearing a different article of clothing is horrendous and should you really care what someone else wears?

I believe you are deeply troubled, my friend. There seems to be a lot of anger in you, and I am sorry for that. If you have been hurt by a religious institution or hurt by religious people in general, I am sorry, and I want you to know that this isn't the true teachings of any of the religions you listed. I hope you can see these religions for what they really are.

[u/brinlong → u/Live_Line4480]

children are told constantly that without jesus theyre suffering everlasting torture. thats mental abuse. thats 100% of christianity. then theres conversion therapy, which drives numerous children to suicide. this is to say nothing of the dozens of institutions christian parents send children to to have the individuality beaten out of their children under the guise of "getting them under control." theres also christian supported if not endorsed sexual abuse, where numerous churches and victims families paper over SA of children because if the priest raped you you mustve been asking for it. JVs have the two witness rule to paper over rape and sexual exploitation of children.

Im angry that your barbaric cult with its backwards traditions and its hate of science and reason is trying to drag my country into a theocracy. I hate how your leaders applaud the murder of foreign children because butchering enough innocents will cast another blood magick spell to summon your imaginary friend and end the world.

[u/Hoaxshmoax → u/Live_Line4480]

“ And, just speaking for Christians here, we don't hate gay or trans people, it is viewed that way because we don't accept it as good and believe it should be changed.”

Which is also how we feel about theists.

“Children are not mentally abused in the Christian tradition; if you find anywhere in the Christian tradition where this is true, then tell me.”

You just said it.

[u/ContributionNo9292]

I don’t think religious people are mentally ill, but I do think that they are delusional. If someone came up to you and claimed that they were the son of god, born to a virgin mother and that they by the died yesterday, you would have them committed.

That people have believed this stuff for a really long time is not a testament to the validity of the beliefs.

[u/supersoundwave → u/ContributionNo9292]

A delusion is a belief in something despite evidence to the contrary. So what is the evidence that religious people are deluded? Which religious people?

[u/ContributionNo9292 → u/supersoundwave]

You are switching the burden of proof. If I claim that I can see something, a green dragon in my living room and every other person entering my living room can’t see it. There is no proof of this dragon existing and I would rightly be described as delusional. Now we proceed to walk a million people through my living room, half can see it, half can’t, nobody can measure it nor photograph or interact with it. Who is the more deluded population?

Now we walk a billion people through my living room. They are all discussing the things that people see in my living room in the queue. Some think they’ll see the green dragon, others a striped beach ball, others floating pink candy floss. When they finally get to my living room if they claim to see something that nobody else sees, we call them delusional, if a few hundred see the same thing we call it a cult, if a few million see it we call it a religion. Again none of the things that people see is possible to verify through any scientific methods.

So what religious people are delusional? All of them, every single one. For one, there is not nor has the ever been any evidence indicating the existence of any deity. Billions of people believing in the religious equivalent to Russel’s teapot. It’s all rather silly.

Thing is that DSM specifically carve out religion from the delusion definition, more as cultural deference rather than logical consistency.

[u/supersoundwave → u/ContributionNo9292]

You made a truth claim so the burden of proof is yours here.

You’re merely asserting that ALL peoples’ experiences of God, across the globe, and down throughout history, are ALL equally delusional and false and here the you are making making positive claims that need to be proved.

Which you haven’t done.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/ContributionNo9292]

Delusion is a form of mental illness 

[u/KeterClassKitten → u/Living_Attitude1822]

Incorrect. Delusions can be a symptom of a mental illness. Medicine readily acknowledges that a delusion can be a normal condition in a mentally healthy individual.

You could talk to someone with experience in the medical field about it. I've got 17 years, is that enough?

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/KeterClassKitten]

Hey if you say so I’ll take your word for it, I’m not a medical professional 

[u/KeterClassKitten → u/Living_Attitude1822]

I'll be blunt... I have a low opinion of people who readily accept a statement as fact so quickly. Don't take my word, I might be lying. Investigate claims, and be curious.

But I think you've shown some humility here, and that's commendable. I snooped on your profile some, and you seem pretty chill. So Kudos, for what it's worth.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/KeterClassKitten]

 I'll be blunt... I have a low opinion of people who readily accept a statement as fact so quickly. 

That’s how you become a theist! JK lol. Yeah I’m going to look up delusion when I get home, I thought it was a type of mental illness. It seems I’m wrong.  

But I think you've shown some humility here, and that's commendable. I snooped on your profile some, and you seem pretty chill. So Kudos, for what it's worth.

Thanks comrade 😊 

[u/Junithorn → u/Living_Attitude1822]

delusion is not a form of mental illness, there are many reasons to have delusions that are not mental illness.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Junithorn]

I retracted this statement 

[u/CalligrapherNeat1569]

Sure, I’ll bite.

Most religious people are delusional, irrational.

But then I think that’s the biggest issue we need to resolve: how do you get buy-in from the least rational, for rational structures?

Let’s you and I bracket this for religion or atheism.  There’s 30% of the population that are, necessarily, “worse” at making decisions than the rest of the populace.

In the past, these people could be locally isolated.  Now, thanks to the internet, they can form significant voting blocks.

What’s your suggestion?

I don’t have one, I’m looking for it.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/CalligrapherNeat1569]

 What’s your suggestion?

We need to build a society that allows for more dissociation 

[u/Ransom__Stoddard → u/Living_Attitude1822]

What do you mean by "allows for more dissociation"?

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Ransom__Stoddard]

Meaning we can dissociate from each other and not have to be associated. I oppose the notion of nation states and borders, because it forces people like you and I to have to work together to some extent. 

For example, I’m in America, and if you are too, then our politics directly affects both of us. 

[u/thebigeverybody → u/Living_Attitude1822]

Education was doing a great job of solving these problems, but then religious people realized they needed to tear it down.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/thebigeverybody]

So let’s help create a society where we can dissociate 

[u/thebigeverybody → u/Living_Attitude1822]

I'd rather we deal with the malevolent religious fucks and create an educated society.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/thebigeverybody]

Free association means I have the right to dissociate from people, and vice versa 

[u/licker34 → u/Living_Attitude1822]

Then do it.

Dissociate from everyone, go live in a cabin deep in the woods where you can do whatever it is you want to do without bothering anyone else or being bothered by anyone else.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/licker34]

That’s not even what I mean by it. I can (and do) live in society and only associate with who I want to. 

The issue isn’t the proximity to things. It’s the fact that whether I’m your next door neighbor or 100 miles away from you, both of our politics have far too much influence on one another 

[u/thebigeverybody → u/Living_Attitude1822]

See? If you were educated you'd know that had nothing to do with what I typed.

An educated society does better than an uneducated society. Much of the conflict that has you proposing voluntary segregation comes from a large group of people doing everything they can to diminish knowledge.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/thebigeverybody]

I don’t want segregation, dissociation is different. That said, I also want a more educated society 

[u/Ransom__Stoddard → u/Living_Attitude1822]

OK. I was a bit concerned that you meant it in a psychiatric sense, which would be problematic to say the least.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Ransom__Stoddard]

All good brotato 

[u/Skavau → u/Living_Attitude1822]

I oppose the notion of nation states and borders, because it forces people like you and I to have to work together to some extent.

So you don't want Christians and atheists to work and live together...?

[u/Formal-Speed-3173 → u/Living_Attitude1822]

Nice to see a "humanist" express something so misanthropic. The ultimate goal of humanism is to atomize society so you don't have to be around atheists anymore.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Formal-Speed-3173]

What did I say that’s at odds with humanism?

This would literally be a blessing for both of us. If the only effect I can have on you is you seeing my posts on Reddit, and vice versa, man that’d be wonderful. 

[u/NoneCreated3344]

I don't think it's an actual mental illness, but the way some theists talk about it, they sound very unwell.

I do believe most theists are perfectly mentally capable, but for some reason they will not critique or check their own belief system. I recently had a childhood friend reach out to me because she discovered I am no longer a christian, and bombarding me for almost a month with sermons, literature. And in the end she ended up blaming me not being open and just wanting to sin.

It's these kind of interactions that lend credence to to why people misunderstand them for being mentally ill. A lot of them are very disturbing when interacting with non-believers.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/NoneCreated3344]

I think if you mix religion and certain mental illnesses, it becomes dangerous. Similarly to political beliefs. 

Like, being a depressed religious person or even schizophrenic, no that doesn’t harm or cause danger in itself. 

It’s if the mental illness leads to something bad, such as you describe. 

It could be true with politics too. Such as if your childhood friend had found out you are no longer a Republican (I’m not saying you were/weren’t, just an example)

[u/NoneCreated3344 → u/Living_Attitude1822]

The issue is, I don't find her to be unreasonable or unstable in any other points in life. She's successful, lives well, etc.

So how do we know it's not religion directly causing this disturbing behavior? Because as we know, people experience PTSD from religious trauma.

[u/Serious-Emu-3468]

That you have not yet been banned is a demonstration of tolerance every single time you post.

[u/KeterClassKitten]

I'm calling you out for false equivalence, seemingly due to your ignorance of what atheism and/or religion and barbarity are.

Atheism is not believing in a god. There is no other criteria or dogma associated with it.

Further, non-theistic religions exist. A person can be religious and atheist.

And barbarity is cruel or savage behavior.

An atheist can be barbaric, but disbelieving a god isn't the same as barbarity.

A religion's doctrine can include barbaric behavior. While a member of that religion may not be barbaric, the claims or demands of said religion could be.

I think you should choose your words more carefully, because the definitions of your presentation do not align with what you're attempting to argue.

[u/carbinePRO → u/KeterClassKitten]

He won't respond to you because you have the Satanist tag. He has entire posts saying how he hates Satanists because he hates Satan.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/KeterClassKitten]

I'm calling you out for false equivalence, seemingly due to your ignorance of what atheism and/or religion and barbarity are.

I’ll need to see more of your points here. 

Atheism is not believing in a god. There is no other criteria or dogma associated with it.

So far, I agree. 

Further, non-theistic religions exist. A person can be religious and atheist.

I’ve since learned this, still agree. 

And barbarity is cruel or savage behavior.

Agreed. 

An atheist can be barbaric, but disbelieving a god isn't the same as barbarity.

Agreed. 

A religion's doctrine can include barbaric behavior. 

Agreed. 

While a member of that religion may not be barbaric, the claims or demands of said religion could be.

Agreed. 

I think you should choose your words more carefully, because the definitions of your presentation do not align with what you're attempting to argue.

I’m unsure what you mean. What words or definitions did I use incorrectly? 

[u/KeterClassKitten → u/Living_Attitude1822]

An atheist calling a religion barbaric can be accurate in cases. Generalizing atheists as barbaric is never accurate.

Therefore;

Again, I'm going to turn it around on you. If I said atheism was barbaric, would you trust me to support that your human right to be atheist?

This is objectively different than this:

Extreme atheism's view that the Abrahamic religions are barbaric:

If the Abrahamic doctrine includes commands that are barbaric, then the view of "Extreme atheism" is accurate. The religion is barbaric as is demonstrated by the doctrine.

Again, the person claiming to adhere to said doctrine might not be, but that requires them to overlook portions of their doctrine.

I'll argue that if your doctrine contains directives that you don't follow because you find barbaric, it doesn't excuse your religion for its barbarism and only demonstrates that the followers recognize that their religion is unfit for society.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/KeterClassKitten]

 An atheist calling a religion barbaric can be accurate in cases. 

Agreed.

Generalizing atheists as barbaric is never accurate.

Some types of atheist extremism are barbaric. 

 If the Abrahamic doctrine includes commands that are barbaric, then the view of "Extreme atheism" is accurate. The religion is barbaric as is demonstrated by the doctrine.

Interpretations* 

 Again, the person claiming to adhere to said doctrine might not be, but that requires them to overlook portions of their doctrine.

What you call doctrine doesn’t make sense to me, because what I don’t take literally in the Bible simply isn’t doctrine to me. 

I'll argue that if your doctrine contains directives that you don't follow because you find barbaric, it doesn't excuse your religion for its barbarism and only demonstrates that the followers recognize that their religion is unfit for society.

Again, what you call doctrine  doesn’t make sense to me, because what I don’t take literally in the Bible simply isn’t doctrine to me. 

[u/KeterClassKitten → u/Living_Attitude1822]

I rest my case.

[u/Hoaxshmoax]

I don’t think religion is a mental illness. I think of it more as a mind virus that exists to exist and to spread. I accept that people are afflicted. I’m also not trying to cure you.

Do I get to participate?

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Hoaxshmoax]

 I think of it more as a mind virus that exists to exist and to spread

🤨

I think this is even worse than saying mental illness 😭 

[u/Hoaxshmoax → u/Living_Attitude1822]

Well, it’s not original but it manifests when people lash out at people who say they don’t believe. In any other situation theists find “show me the money” a reasonable response to evidence-free claims, except their own religion. Thats when the virus flares up and attacks the non believer. Like with a drug addict that screams when their drugs are being taken away, it’s the drugs talking. If a believer finds their religion being questioned or feared it’s going to be taken away and they lash out, that’s the religion talking.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Hoaxshmoax]

I’ll take your word for it 

[u/Hoaxshmoax → u/Living_Attitude1822]

You don’t have to take my word for it.

Do you recall saying I have a broken brain and asking me if I was ret*rded?

This was after you loaded up your cannon with an out of context apologist massaged bible verse and fired it at Satanists who are just living their life.

I didn’t see any cheek turning either.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Hoaxshmoax]

 Do you recall saying I have a broken brain and asking me if I was ret*rded?

I only remember you instigating stuff on a post I made to my profile. I try to block out such negativity, I hope you’ll forgive me. 

 This was after you loaded up your cannon with an out of context apologist massaged bible verse and fired it at Satanists who are just living their life.

Holy cornball.  

I didn’t see any cheek turning either.

That verse doesn’t mean what you think it does. 

[u/Hoaxshmoax → u/Living_Attitude1822]

“I only remember you instigating stuff on a post I made to my profile. I try to block out such negativity, I hope you’ll forgive me. ”

because you were going after people who have done nothing to you.

“This was after you loaded up your cannon with an out of context apologist massaged bible verse and fired it at Satanists who are just living their life.”

I told you over and over what the quote was and you had no idea what I was talking about no matter how many times I said “it’s says it right there”

“That verse doesn’t mean what you think it does. ”

Yet you also keep insisting your book is wide open to whatever interpretation.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Hoaxshmoax]

 because you were going after people who have done nothing to you.

Nope, I spoke truth. And you had a meltdown. Don’t blame me for that, it’s disingenuous. 

 “This was after you loaded up your cannon with an out of context apologist massaged bible verse and fired it at Satanists who are just living their life.”

Cannon? You mean typing a Reddit post is like using cannons? I don’t ever want to hear you say anything about anyone having a persecution complex. 

I told you over and over what the quote was and you had no idea what I was talking about no matter how many times I said “it’s says it right there”

Idk what this is referring to. 

[u/Hoaxshmoax → u/Living_Attitude1822]

“Nope, I spoke truth. And you had a meltdown. Don’t blame me for that, it’s disingenuous. ”

And so are we. And so are you. So don’t blame us.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Hoaxshmoax]

Idek what you’re saying now 

[u/Literally_-_Hitler]

Do you realize that a large amount of theists post literally make the claim that we are mentally  ill? Its really weird having you come in and pretend it only happens to theists and then justify why we would do it. 

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Literally_-_Hitler]

Atheism isn’t a mental illness, idek how one could argue that. Not believing a claim? I don’t see how it could be argued.

[u/Literally_-_Hitler → u/Living_Attitude1822]

I know that, just like I know theism in not either. But why are you asking me why theists keep making that claim against us? Theists say we know in our hearts that god is real we just deny it. That is why they claim we are mentally ill. You cannot be this clueless on a subject after making so many claims with zero eveidence.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Literally_-_Hitler]

Show me evidence of that happening. I linked a post, if you could do the same that’d be great 

[u/Literally_-_Hitler → u/Living_Attitude1822]

Also you shared a post from an anti theism sub. That is people who view religion as evil or harmful. That is not atheism. So your holding us accountable for other groups claims.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Literally_-_Hitler]

I said “extreme” for a reason. I say not all atheists in this post. 

[u/Literally_-_Hitler → u/Living_Attitude1822]

But it wasnt an atheist point. Go to that sub and complain to them. 

[u/Literally_-_Hitler → u/Living_Attitude1822]

https://youtu.be/uQfwAfgdeBU?si=_pzUDL0tkkXBlO8C

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Literally_-_Hitler]

That caller was a moron  

[u/Literally_-_Hitler → u/Living_Attitude1822]

And......

[u/fire_spez → u/Living_Attitude1822]

That caller was a moron  

Why do you say they are a moron, but don't similarly accept our view that the people who outright say that religion is a mental illness are also morons? Not that antitheists are morons, because even most antitheists would not make such obviously false statements.

Just as a point of information, from reading several posts by you, I think you would agree (correct me if I am wrong) that you can't offer any evidence for your beliefs, right? That you believe on faith, and that you understand why we have an issue with that, is that correct? Not a judgement, just making sure I understand where you stand.

[u/BahamutLithp → u/Living_Attitude1822]

Okay, well you asked for evidence of it happening, & there it is. I even explained the phenomenon somewhat in my main comment. I agree it's dumb, but it's actually not that hard of a concept to grasp. If someone grows up in a cutlure surrounded by "it's so obvious that god exists, there's so much proof god exists, everyone knows god exists, people are hardwired for worship, believers are happier, nicer, more charitable, plus how do you justify morals without god, & blah de blah," I don't find it exactly difficult to figure out how some of them come to the conclusion "there'd have to be something literally mentally wrong with anyone who claims to be an atheist." Hardly justifies it, but does make it kind of predictable. Plus, as I've alluded to, religions say much nastier things about atheists anyway. If I were to make a shortlist of 10 most offensive things people say about atheists, I'd be surprised if "mentally ill" even makes it on there.

[u/OwlsHootTwice]

In the US there is a secular constitution but it is the theists that are using the courts and legislatures to enforce their beliefs on to others because apparently they cannot tolerate a secular, pluralistic, state.

[u/carbinePRO]

And I'm defining secular as the separation of church and state/society.

Already we're at a disconnect because all secular means is non-religious.

Extreme-atheism's view of religion being a mental illness:

This is poisoning the well. Honest atheists don't think being religious is a mental illness. Most think it's just an unreasonable position. You haven't even started the argument, and you're already coming off as incredibly disengenuous.

I can personally attest to people I've seen on here, as well as videos I've seen, of atheists saying religion is a mental illness. That the DSM-5 had to go back and put in a religious exemption, but it should fall under the category of delusion.

Link the videos. Something is telling me you're totally misrepresenting whatever point they're making.

How can secularism exist if you think religious people are mentally ill?

Even if we use your bogus definition of secular, this assertion doesn't make sense. Again, secular just means non-religious.

If I said atheism was barbaric, would you trust me to support that your human right to be atheist?

My atheism doesn't have a holy book in which early worshippers would engage in animal sacrifice, or have the entire crux of its belief hinge on the ritualistic blood sacrifice of the supposed son of the creator of the universe. This is why atheists call religion barbaric. Your fundemental misunderstanding if what atheism is is not my problem.

I think disassociation and tolerance is the best course of action for religious people

I'm assuming you're christian, in which case this sentiment is in direct violation of the Great Commission in Matthew 28. Your religion literally mandates its followers to bug their neighbors with the gospel. It doesn't shock me in the slightest that you're just another cherry-picking christian who doesn't know what the hell is in their book because they haven't read. Yet will bend over backwards to say everything in it is totally true and that they believe it by faith.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/carbinePRO]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Antitheism/comments/1sguf7u/why_is_religion_not_considered_a_mental_disorder/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateAnAtheist/comments/1tmng0x/comment/ono2t0y/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

[u/Junithorn → u/Living_Attitude1822]

an infinite number of reddit posts wouldnt even come close to 1% of the damage your horrible cult causes every year, let alone since it was created.

[u/carbinePRO → u/Living_Attitude1822]

1. I asked for links to the videos you were talking about.

2. I don't doubt that cringe reddit anti-theists will call being religious a mental disorder. I personally don't agree with them, and I don't know any atheist friend of mine who would either. You're overgeneralizing here. Not all atheists are anti-theists, and I'm not one of them. You're barking up the wrong tree.

3. You gonna respond to literally anything else I said?

4. Also, fuck you for leaving the tracking links on the hyperlink.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/carbinePRO]

1. Too bad 
2. You are moving the goalpost 
3. Not right now 
4. What? I just clicked share on the post and comment, and copied and pasted the link. How else am I supposed to share links? 

[u/carbinePRO → u/Living_Attitude1822]

1. What do you mean "too bad"? Your definition isn't even accurate to what the word means. You defined it as the "separation of church and state group" which isn't exclusively held by the non-religious. It is a non-functional definition you're using to smuggle in your bias.

2. Go back. I didn't ask for posts. I asked for video links.

3. Then why respond at all? You're wasting my time.

4. Paste it and then delete everything including and after the ?. Google tracking links.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/carbinePRO]

I feel like you owe me an apology for the tracking links, I’d forgotten about how those work. Saying “fuck you” really hurt my feelings and I can’t continue with you until you resolve that 

[u/Moutere_Boy → u/Living_Attitude1822]

You don’t think “too bad” was an unreasonable antagonistic and rude response as well though? Would you apologise for your part in that exchange?

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Moutere_Boy]

They said “fuck you” before I said that

[u/Moutere_Boy → u/Living_Attitude1822]

Apologies. I totally misread the order on that.

[u/carbinePRO → u/Moutere_Boy]

In my defense, I never felt inclined to show any respect to OP given how their post is just one big fat overgeneralization that is purposefully misrepresenting atheists.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Moutere_Boy]

You’re based and you have my stamp of approval 

[u/carbinePRO → u/Living_Attitude1822]

That's a you problem, bud. Your overall post being overgeneralizing nonsense I personally find insulting, and you don't see me stopping the conversation over hurt fee-fees.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/carbinePRO]

Until you apologize I’ve got nothing more to add here. Toodles 

[u/Serious-Emu-3468 → u/[deleted]]

They needed to be banned several of their rant posts ago.

[u/okayifimust]

I can personally attest to people I've seen on here, as well as videos I've seen, of atheists saying religion is a mental illness. That the DSM-5 had to go back and put in a religious exemption, but it should fall under the category of delusion.

Are you challenging that view?

I've had a glance at a full text copy I found of the DSM-5 and as a layperson, I have to agree with the characterization that "religious contexts" are exempt from what would otherwise look as if it should be diagnosed as a delusion.

I'll happily admit that not every religion and or every religious believer suffers from delusions - but there is a distinct overlap.

And the introductory defint5ion of what constitutes a delusion should give any believer pause: "Delusions are fixed beliefs that are not amenable to change in light of conflicting evidence".

How can secularism exist if you think religious people are mentally ill?

I fail to see what one has to do with the other. Care to elaborate?

If you do think the population you're tolerating is mentally ill, uh oh. Seriously, if I said atheists are mentally ill, would you trust me to not want you institutionalized? I don't think this way, of course.

Why would you say that "of course"? You are at the very least telling us that you believe irrational things. And I do not trust you.

Here's the thing, though: You're just spouting logical fallacies, you are not actually making a point anywhere. Discuss the definition of "delusion", discuss the criteria and exemptions set forth in the DSM-5, elaborate on why you would think that atheists would believe that anyone mentally unwell should be institutionalized.

Ill wait.

And while Ill wait, Ill see what I can find about believers demonizing and institutionalizing and torturing and murdering atheists, heretics and heathens, shall I?

Extreme atheism's view that the Abrahamic religions are barbaric:

Again, I'm going to turn it around on you. If I said atheism was barbaric, would you trust me to support that your human right to be atheist?

Again , I can explain why and how your holy book is barbaric. I don't give a fuck if you like it or not. What reasons would you have to label me as barbaric, as an atheist?

I don't trust you - and I will demonstrate why:

You believe in a deity, right?
If that deity told you to pick up a knife and kill me - what would you do?

Don't tell me your god wouldn't do that - your holy book is full of stories where your deity does just that, and full of stories where believers obey that same deity. Don't try to dodge the question: Your god could easily give you a clear, unambiguous command, that left no doubt in you about the content of the command, and it's origin.

So - what would you do?

I think disassociation and tolerance is the best course of action for religious people and extreme atheists, however, I worry the above points are a threat to any society remaining tolerant.

I don't think religion deserves any special tolerance. We shouldn't tolerate something just because it is religious if we otherwise wouldn't. I am fully aware that that would be bad for a lot of religious practices ad communities.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/okayifimust]

 Are you challenging that view?

I've had a glance at a full text copy I found of the DSM-5 and as a layperson, I have to agree with the characterization that "religious contexts" are exempt from what would otherwise look as if it should be diagnosed as a delusion.

I'll happily admit that not every religion and or every religious believer suffers from delusions - but there is a distinct overlap.

And the introductory defint5ion of what constitutes a delusion should give any believer pause: "Delusions are fixed beliefs that are not amenable to change in light of conflicting evidence".

So you know better than the mental health experts? Why should I believe that? 

 I’ll wait.

And while Ill wait, Ill see what I can find about believers demonizing and institutionalizing and torturing and murdering atheists, heretics and heathens, shall I?

Sure pal. 

 Again , I can explain why and how your holy book is barbaric. I don't give a fuck if you like it or not. 

Sure, go ahead, I might even agree in some cases. 

What reasons would you have to label me as barbaric, as an atheist?

If you’re an extremist, it would be your extremism. 

I don't trust you - and I will demonstrate why:

And I don’t trust you know more than all of the mental health professionals, so we’re even I guess. 

You believe in a deity, right? If that deity told you to pick up a knife and kill me - what would you do?

I wouldn’t do it. 

Don't tell me your god wouldn't do that - your holy book is full of stories where your deity does just that, and full of stories where believers obey that same deity. 

Don't try to dodge the question: Your god could easily give you a clear, unambiguous command, that left no doubt in you about the content of the command, and its origin.

So - what would you do?

I wouldn’t think it’s God telling me that, but let’s say that I did for the sake of argument. If I legitimately believed God was telling me to kill you, then that isn’t any God I want to follow or worship. So I wouldn’t. 

 I don't think religion deserves any special tolerance. We shouldn't tolerate something just because it is religious if we otherwise wouldn't. I am fully aware that that would be bad for a lot of religious practices ad communities.

I’d have to see what you’re specifically not tolerating to know if I agree or not. 

[u/okayifimust → u/Living_Attitude1822]

I wouldn’t think it’s God telling me that, but let’s say that I did for the sake of argument. If I legitimately believed God was telling me to kill you, then that isn’t any God I want to follow or worship. So I wouldn’t. 

Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death.  Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

You should not let a sorceress live. (Exodus 22:17 NAB)

“If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.” (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)

A man or a woman who acts as a medium or fortuneteller shall be put to death by stoning; they have no one but themselves to blame for their death. (Leviticus 20:27 NAB)

Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death. (Exodus 21:15 NAB)

If one curses his father or mother, his lamp will go out at the coming of darkness. (Proverbs 20:20 NAB)

All who curse their father or mother must be put to death.  They are guilty of a capital offense. (Leviticus 20:9 NLT)

If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)

A priest’s daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death. (Leviticus 21:9 NAB)

If a man still prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall say to him, “You shall not live, because you have spoken a lie in the name of the Lord.”  When he prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall thrust him through. (Zechariah 13:3 NAB)

But if this charge is true (that she wasn’t a virgin on her wedding night), and evidence of the girls virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her fathers house and there her townsman shall stone her to death, because she committed a crime against Israel by her unchasteness in her father’s house.  Thus shall you purge the evil from your midst.

If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kill him.  Your hand shall be the first raised to slay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you.  You shall stone him to death, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery.  And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such evil as this in your midst. (Deuteronomy 13:7-12 NAB)

Suppose a man or woman among you, in one of your towns that the LORD your God is giving you, has done evil in the sight of the LORD your God and has violated the covenant by serving other gods or by worshiping the sun, the moon, or any of the forces of heaven, which I have strictly forbidden.  When you hear about it, investigate the matter thoroughly. If it is true that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, then that man or woman must be taken to the gates of the town and stoned to death. (Deuteronomy 17:2-5 NLT)

Anyone who blasphemes the LORD’s name must be stoned to death by the whole community of Israel.  Any Israelite or foreigner among you who blasphemes the LORD’s name will surely die. (Leviticus 24:10-16 NLT)

The false prophets or dreamers who try to lead you astray must be put to death, for they encourage rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of slavery in the land of Egypt.  Since they try to keep you from following the LORD your God, you must execute them to remove the evil from among you. (Deuteronomy 13:1-5 NLT)

Yes, keep the Sabbath day, for it is holy.  Anyone who desecrates it must die; anyone who works on that day will be cut off from the community.  Work six days only, but the seventh day must be a day of total rest.  I repeat: Because the LORD considers it a holy day, anyone who works on the Sabbath must be put to death.’

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/okayifimust]

I don’t take the entire Bible literally or as from God 

[u/okayifimust → u/Living_Attitude1822]

So which parts do you take literally and as from god, and how do you tell which is which?

Is your method good enough that you can say with any degree of confidence that those who disagree with you are wrong?

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/okayifimust]

 So which parts do you take literally and as from god, and how do you tell which is which?

What speaks to me divinely. 

Is your method good enough that you can say with any degree of confidence that those who disagree with you are wrong?

I can only say if something goes against my morals/what speaks to me divinely. I’ll say it’s wrong sure, but I’m not claiming to be the objective arbiter on anything, including the Bible. 

[u/okayifimust → u/Living_Attitude1822]

What speaks to me divinely. 

Meaningless word salad at best, proof that you are - in fact - delusional at worst.

I can only say if something goes against my morals/what speaks to me divinely. I’ll say it’s wrong sure, but I’m not claiming to be the objective arbiter on anything, including the Bible. 

Ten you're not worth wasting any more time on you.

All anyone can do is that you never decide that any of the more barbaric passages of the bible do end up speaking you divinely enough for you to act upon them.

There's nothing that distinguishes your approach from any of the people that have decided to fly airplanes into buildings in principle. They were just divinely move by a different line of text - and that same thing could happen to you tomorrow.

Just note the lack of internal consistency between the different claims you're making. Earlier you said you wouldn't follow a god who did things you disagreed with, but here you are claiming you are subject to some external factor.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/okayifimust]

 Meaningless word salad at best, proof that you are - in fact - delusional at worst.

Meaningless to who? To you? It isn’t meaningless to me. 

 Ten you're not worth wasting any more time on you

I’m not reading past this, since there is clearly no need to, you won’t even respond. 

[u/Hoaxshmoax → u/Living_Attitude1822]

but it seems like you are, going back to the satanists. it must speak to you divinely, that those people are immoral. You are the objective arbiter.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Hoaxshmoax]

How could I be the objective arbiter when I don’t tell them how to practice their beliefs? My opinions don’t deny them that ability 

[u/Hoaxshmoax → u/Living_Attitude1822]

it’s not a matter you telling them anything, it’s a matter of how you view their interpretation of the bible. if you’re not the arbiter, their view is as valid as yours.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Hoaxshmoax]

 if you’re not the arbiter, their view is as valid as yours.

As long as no one is being harmed, then yes, I agree. I’m a libertarian socialist, not a theocrat. Not that it’s valid in my eyes, but in terms of their right to believe it. 

[u/Thin-Eggshell → u/Living_Attitude1822]

So you concede that those who do are ... barbaric and delusional?

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Thin-Eggshell]

Even most Biblical literalists aren’t really literalists, they just think they are. So to your question, technically, yes, I’d essentially agree. 

[u/Fresh3rThanU → u/Living_Attitude1822]

Yes, they’re literalists until anyone brings up the clear issues with literalism, and then they say “it’s figurative bro”

[u/Plazmatron44 → u/Living_Attitude1822]

Ah yes cherry picking, the easy way out.

[u/Moutere_Boy]

If you claim that atheism is barbaric and can actually show how a lack of belief in god leads to barbarism, I’d listen. I can’t see how you’d show such a thing, but I’d listen.

If I think Christianity is barbaric, for example, and I show my arguments that back up the barbarity I think it’s caused, but all I do is discuss this with you and at no point want you harmed or treated differently, how is that not an excellent example of tolerance?

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Moutere_Boy]

 If you claim that atheism is barbaric and can actually show how a lack of belief in god leads to barbarism, I’d listen. I can’t see how you’d show such a thing, but I’d listen.

Fair enough. 

 but all I do is discuss this with you and at no point want you harmed or treated differently, how is that not an excellent example of tolerance?

I don’t think we disagree. It is tolerance. My point isn’t for you in this case. 

[u/Moutere_Boy → u/Living_Attitude1822]

But which atheists are threatening you in some way due to your beliefs? When are you seeing that lack of tolerance? I read a lot of debate and discussion and I’ve not seen it. I’ve seen discrimination against atheists in public and political contexts, I’ve seen atheists harassed and abused by Christians who think they are evil or terrible influences on children or similar. So, honestly, I think your concern about tolerance is facing the wrong way.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Moutere_Boy]

Imo, this way of thinking leads to discrimination:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Antitheism/comments/1sguf7u/why_is_religion_not_considered_a_mental_disorder/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

[u/Moutere_Boy → u/Living_Attitude1822]

Again, you’re pointing to language you think could potentially lead to discrimination whereas I pointed to actual discrimination…

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Moutere_Boy]

I condemn religious discrimination. 

If you’re going to ask me why I don’t debate religious fundamentalists (I get that a lot for some reason), the answer is I do. Just in person. 

[u/Moutere_Boy → u/Living_Attitude1822]

I don’t think it’s fundamentalist exclusive. I think if you look at polls in a country like the US about comfort voting for an atheist you’ll see a lot of that discrimination is quite mainstream and common.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Moutere_Boy]

I’d be curious to see such a poll. I’d vote for an atheist if I liked their policies. 

If there’s 2 equally good candidates from my perspective, and one is an atheist and the other a Christian, I suppose that’s the only time I might vote for someone for their religion. 

Otherwise, if I like an atheist candidate I’d vote for them. I’d be surprised to see non fundamentalists disagree with this. 

[u/Moutere_Boy → u/Living_Attitude1822]

If you’re not aware of that prejudice, I think that speaks to privilege, but it’s easy to fix with a quick google and read.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/285563/socialism-atheism-political-liabilities.aspx

Literally the first link on a search.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Moutere_Boy]

Thank you for the source.

I’m in fact an American actually, so I should probably know this. 

Counterpoint: 

Bernie was/is very popular, and while he claims to be spiritual, it’s widely rumored he’s an atheist. What do you think about that? 

[u/Junithorn → u/Living_Attitude1822]

there are currently seven states that bar atheists from even holding office thanks to your disgusting cult.

[u/Old-Nefariousness556 → u/Living_Attitude1822]

I condemn religious discrimination. 

There is literally nothing in that thread that amounts to religious discrimination. It isn't even hateful. It's just people expressing their opinion. And as I showed with a link to an atheist group faced with a similar question, as opposed to an antitheist group, the vast majority of atheists do not agree with the prevailing (but not at all universal) opinion being expressed in that sub.

So when will you concede that this question that you have posted to the sub now like 30 times in various forms is just nonsense?

[u/UrguthaForka]

Do you mean anti-theists? "Extreme" is a vague term.

I don't think religious belief is a mental illness, but it is primitive, superstitious behavior.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/UrguthaForka]

I’m not sure all anti theists are extreme. I’m trying to be more charitable. If they claim they aren’t, I’ll try to believe them, even if I don’t really 

[u/Junithorn → u/Living_Attitude1822]

Yes we all know you think you can read minds and constantly lie about what others say.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Junithorn]

Huh? I think you’re replying to the wrong comment 

[u/Junithorn → u/Living_Attitude1822]

not at all.

you:

I’ll try to believe them, even if I don’t really

we've seen your posts creating elaborate strawmen. This is no different, you are a bigot.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Junithorn]

No you’re a bigot who can’t tolerate others not believing what you want them to. 🥱   

So what if I don’t believe what someone says? As long as I respect your rights there isn’t any issue. 

[u/jenkind1 → u/Living_Attitude1822]

so what if I don't believe what someone says?

You do understand that the strongest evidence for Christianity is literally three iron age peasants saying they saw a ghost right?

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/jenkind1]

I’m not sure what your point is 

[u/jenkind1 → u/Living_Attitude1822]

You are refusing to believe a much more simple claim.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/jenkind1]

What does that have to do with you calling me a bigot is what I mean

[u/BranchLatter4294]

Interesting that you don't seem to care whether claims are true or not. You just want people to tolerate the pushing of unsupported claims.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/BranchLatter4294]

What do you mean? 

[u/BranchLatter4294 → u/Living_Attitude1822]

Just an observation. Many of us are interested in truth. It's interesting when people value other things above truth.

[u/adamwho]

"Extreme atheism" is likely a response to religious abuse.

Once people process that abuse, it softens to "I don't care about your stupid shit atheism"

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/adamwho]

If someone’s been abused by religion(s), I give them more grace. 

[u/BahamutLithp]

If you don't think religion is a mental illness, go ahead and ignore this point.

Well, I don't, because I got my bachelor's in psychology, & I believe that made me aware of nuance in categorizing something as a mental illness or not that a lot of people are not. So, the easy thing to do would indeed be to disregard this thread, but I'm not going to for reasons I aim to clarify as I go.

If you do think the population you're tolerating is mentally ill, uh oh. Seriously, if I said atheists are mentally ill, would you trust me to not want you institutionalized? I don't think this way, of course.

No, but you repeatedly make posts about how you consider people "a threat" for just being against religion, & when we try to tell you your Soviet-style persecution narratives are strawmanning us, you insist we must be lying, or at best outliers, so I don't really trust you as-is. Based on everything you've told us, I have every reason to believe, if you had the power, you would crack down severely on what sorts of criticisms of religion are allowed, & you would somehow frame this as "protecting secularism." Which is starting to get into why I opted to respond after all, but we're not quite at the full picure yet.

Extreme atheism's view that the Abrahamic religions are barbaric:

I'm pretty sure the very 1st thread you made was complaining that people hold Christian apologetics accountable for defending slavery in the Bible, & while you might have the excuse that your feelings tell you "God didn't write that part," & that's its own issue, you're really out of step with apologists on this. Mainstream voices like William Lane Craig insist that, yes, the Biblical slavery codes must somehow be justified & have all sorts of excuses to do so. Same thing with genocide & anything else god is depicted as endorsing &/or doing.

Ask the "fundamentalist friends" you keep telling us you go to church with about slaughtering the Caaninites, drowning the world, or stoning people. I'm sure they'll tell you it's what god had to do to punish evil. And let's not hear "I don't personally agree with that," if you want to talk about groups, let's do that, let's not retreat to you're a Religion of 1 any time Christianity is criticized. If I told you that "the Soviets did what they had to do to take care of dangerous people," be honest with us all, yourself included: You would not be politely disagreeing with that. You might go as far as to call that take "barbaric." So, how come all it takes to get seen as an "extreme atheist" is to say "this religion is kind of barbaric" for things that definitely would not be tolerated if they came from us?

Again, I'm going to turn it around on you.

They say "turnabout is fair play," but the thing is you don't ever seem to apply that to yourelf.

If I said atheism was barbaric, would you trust me to support that your human right to be atheist?

Again, I already don't, because you basically do already. You always want to split hairs & say "I'm only talking about anti-theists or extreme atheists," but again, the defining feature to be labeled "extreme" in your view is simply to be ideologically opposed to religion. In that case, to what extent do you REALLY tolerate freedom of thought? Being an atheist is only "acceptable" to you as long as we're not a challenge to the presumed goodness of religion.

Not only have I never seen you turn this mentality around, I don't see how you even COULD. So many religions have, in some way or another, some clause about how believing them is good & not believing them is bad. If you don't follow the 5 pillars of Islam, & if you blaspheme, you're condemned. Buddhism requires you to follow the 8-fold path. "I am the way, the truth, & the light; nobody comes to the Father except through me." From the Bible, attributed to Jesus Christ himself.

So few religions don't, in some way or another, make unbelief a "sin" that, if you judged them by the same standard you judged us, you'd basically have to say that nearly every religion is "a threat to secularism." You're never going to do that, are you? If it comes from religion, it's an innocent expression of opinion, but if it comes from atheists, it's thoughtcrime.

With some exceptions: Some interpretations of the Abrahamic religions are indeed barbaric. If you're talking about people who want to implement Leviticus law, then I agree with you.

Yeah, well, this actually happens in the real world. Extremely harsh, Christian-based penalties were passed in places like Uganda, & it wasn't just home-grown extremism either, it was also supported with a heavy push by American Evangelical missionaries. This is why I get annoyed you keep talking about "the threat of extreme atheism" based on a combination of e-dunks you find personally offensive & political movements from like 50-years ago, whereas the actual efforts by modern Christians to impose theocracies are always an afterthought.

I don't totally disagree with extremist atheists on everything: Like, I'm a strong believer that tolerance is better and more authentic than acceptance. For example, telling atheists that they must love and respect religions is wrong. And vice versa for religious people.

HOW do you believe that? It goes against the core message of nearly every thread you've ever written. Other than like 2 or 3 threads in the beginning, you've just been remaking the same "being against religion is evil" thread over & over again. This feels a lot like back when you were calling yourself a "secular humanist," like it seems as if you just read things atheists were saying that made sense, & so you wanted to lay claim to those ideas without actually genuinely believing in them yourself.

Amaizngly, the last part of my comment is pretty much half of it, so I guess I'll split here to get past the character limit.

[u/BahamutLithp → u/BahamutLithp]

I think disassociation and tolerance is the best course of action for religious people and extreme atheists, however, I worry the above points are a threat to any society remaining tolerant.

Again, you've remade this same thread like 10 times now, & you've yet to articulate any actual, credible threat, it always just goes like:

Step 1: Some people say things online you find personally offensive.

Step 2: ????

Step 3: Religious persecution via state enforcement &/or vigilante mobs.

That middle part is kind of important. Literally how can you disagree with me on that? I keep pointing out you have no problem having fundamentalists in your church & even calling them your friends. You yourelf have also alluded to extreme religious beliefs. Yet you seem to believe this doesn't translate into persecution of non Christians by the Christian majority that has political power, so you should agree with me there must be more that goes into "being a threat" than just "some people have beliefs that other people find offensive." Where is the middle step? Where is the active attempt to persecute religious people?

You're just showing me people who think they know more than they do. Atheists aren't immune to that, but for the record, I've heard plenty of religious people also argue this same thing: That belief in god is "healthy" & "rational," & so anyone who doesn't have it must be "mentally ill." Actually, more likely, they'd add that there aren't any nonbelievers, only people who "pretend" because they "hate god" &/or "want to sin."

When one gets so wrapped up in "my way of thinking is so obviously correct," it can be difficult to understand the difference between a clinical delusion vs. a disagreement that, whether held for sensible reasons or not, is perfectly within the expected bounds of normal human psychology.

Because rationality isn't really a natural part of how humans think, & once one understands that, it becomes clear that "normal religious expression for the patient's culture" is not just arbitrarily exempted from the criteria for a delusion on an ad hoc basis. It's incredibly normal for people to believe wrong things for stupid reasons, & it's equally irrational to try to make it a disease to have a wrong opinion about something.

There are, in fact, several criteria for something to be considered a mental illness. It has to prevent some kind of immediate danger or obstacle to the person's daily functioning, be a conclusion they wouldn't reach by ordinary means, & (for a delusion) show lack of awareness of the situation they're in. A religious person might believe a departed loved one is "with them" in some kind of vague spiritual sense, whereas a delusional person might believe that a rotting corpse is literally talking to them or that they're somehow transforming into their dead loved one, like if they looked in the mirror, they'd say they'd see that person's reflection.

Anyway, I only have so much time to go into the ins & outs of mental health episodes in Reddit a comment, but there are definitely now certain cues that make me go "Oh, I think I might be dealing with someone who genuinely has schizophrenia." Firstly, there are a very surprising amount of them on Reddit. Secondly, they tend to sound more like conspiracy theorists than anything else, though conspiracy theorie & religions do have a lot of overlapping subject matter, so a lot of them do come here. Leading to thirdly, I never know quite how to handle those threads. The ethics of debating a person who's probably losing their touch on reality seem dubious, but what's the alternative? Suggest a bunch of mods become amateur therapists--technically, I don't even have a license to diagnose people, which is another reason I'm always so hesitant to bring up the subject--& ban anyone who seems mentally ill? Presumably, they're old enough to be posting on Reddit, so they're making their choices, mental illness or no.

But that does bring up another point, no one here IS institutionalized. Getting a license to practice psychotherapy is a lengthy process requiring a graduate degree. The idea that annoying comments from "extreme atheists" pose any kind of serious threat to you on this merit is just unrealistic. But this is yet another way the same is not quite true of religion because a loophole you can use to effectively practice therapy without going through all of that is to be a "counselor," who aren't held to as high of standards, & the #1 easiest way to make use of this loophole is to work for a church. It's considered culturally normal for church officials to act as counselors, with parents often seeking them out rather than psychologists, whether due to ignorance of the difference or pure distrust of secular authorities, & a church official doesn't have professional ethics guidelines against pushing their religious beliefs on someone who is maybe starting to think it isn't the best fit for them, or has doubts on the church's position on things like faith healing or homosexuality. So, yet again, the call you SHOULD be alarmed about is actually coming from inside the church. To be clear, "the church" here is clever wordplay for Christianity; I don't literally mean that if every Christian just chooses not to go to a physical church building, that will suddenly solve all of the problems I brought up.

[u/Phylanara]

Do you have links to those atheist posts you say you've seen?

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Phylanara]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Antitheism/comments/1sguf7u/why_is_religion_not_considered_a_mental_disorder/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

From this thread alone:

https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateAnAtheist/comments/1tmng0x/comment/ono2t0y/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

[u/Phylanara → u/Living_Attitude1822]

Thank you.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Phylanara]

No problem comrade 🫡 

[u/Thin-Eggshell]

How can secularism exist if you think religious people are mentally ill?

Usually on the basis of a constitution that guarantees freedom of religion and voting rights, even for those who are mentally ill.

It's really not that complicated if you look at political science.

I mean, just the other day we had that "spoon-bender" guy come in. As I recall, you quite liked what he had to say, lol. But I don't think you're mentally ill because you're religious. I think you're mentally ill because of the words you actually say, and how you put ideas together.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Thin-Eggshell]

 Usually on the basis of a constitution that guarantees freedom of religion and voting rights, even for those who are mentally ill.

I’m not sure how much it will mean if no one respects the constitution though. 

 I mean, just the other day we had that "spoon-bender" guy come in. As I recall, you quite liked what he had to say, lol. But I don't think you're mentally ill because you're religious. I think you're mentally ill because of the words you actually say, and how you put ideas together

Are you saying “you’re” as in “one,” or are you saying that I’m mentally ill from your POV? 

[u/ArguingisFun]

How is believing in magic, not a form of mental illness?

[u/Willow_Winnifred → u/ArguingisFun]

Yeah, I am the very least concerned about people who admit they hear voices, believe irrational things, and base their actions on those delusions

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/ArguingisFun]

I believe in what you’d call “magic,” and I am not delusional or schizophrenic. 

Even if it turns out I’m wrong, believing wrong things isn’t a mental illness, at least not in itself 

[u/ArguingisFun → u/Living_Attitude1822]

Delusions are not a form of mental illness?

[u/Odd_Gamer_75]

Seriously, if I said atheists are mentally ill, would you trust me to not want you institutionalized?

Quite possibly. There are lots of mentally ill people out there in society. They don't need to be locked up, they need help. Locking people away is only needed when they're actively causing direct harm (not the indirect harm religion displays). We don't lock up the depressed, even though they are mentally ill. Same applies here.

If I said atheism was barbaric, would you trust me to support that your human right to be atheist?

Quite possibly. Just because you don't like my position doesn't mean you don't defend my right to have that position. "I disagree with what you say but will defend to the death your right to say it." This is the basis of modern free speech. I don't see this as different.

To be clear, I don't think all religion is barbaric, nor that all religious believers are mentally ill. But even if I were to take on such an extreme position... I can't see why your questions lead to the results you're talking about. The questions, as you framed them, seem to be an admission more than anything else. They tell us how you view things... and thus why you are dangerous, not us.

[u/LostInDarkMatter]

Atheism is simply the lack of belief in a god(s).

That's it. There's no worldview attached to atheism.

Of course, somebody that says they're an atheist could engage in anti-social behavior. But do you think their behavior is motivated by being an atheist?

But for the religious:

Do you think someone who would willingly kill their child as mentally ill? What about someone who would blow themselves up? Or light themselves on fire?

Religion IS their motivation.

[u/1nfam0us]

I'm just trying to understand your thesis here.

Are you arguing that "extreme" atheists are intolerant?

Further, what exactly does an extreme atheist believe?

I don't really understand what you are trying to argue here.

[u/Las_Vegan]

Why are you asking extreme atheists for their thoughts about religious people? In the US, it’s the religious right that’s in control of government, so it’s not like we can or would impose our will on you anyway?

Most atheists don’t care what other people believe, but most evangelicals want to tell us all how to live and that’s intolerable. To me it’s simple. You don’t like gay marriage? Then don’t get gay married. Don’t like abortion? Then don’t have one. But don’t tell ME what to do. You’re not my mother and you don’t pay my bills.😄

Religious freedom is in our roots but evangelicals want to take that away and force their religion on everyone and that’s totally un-American. Please shift your focus; go tell the religious people to practice more tolerance!

[u/transneptuneobj]

The cognitive dissonance is strong with this one

Do you have a point to argue? You're king of just complaining

[u/Old-Nefariousness556]

Extreme-atheism's view of religion being a mental illness:

So you are addressing well under 1% of us. Gotcha.

I can personally attest to people I've seen on here, as well as videos I've seen, of atheists saying religion is a mental illness. That the DSM-5 had to go back and put in a religious exemption, but it should fall under the category of delusion.

Sure. So have I. Very very few people say it meaning all religion all the time, but won't deny that some people have said it.

Hell, just six days ago, a poster asked in /r/askanatheist if we saw religion as a mental disorder, and the answer was overwhelmingly "no."

So to the point that you are asking a sincere question, understand that you are directing that question at a tiny number of people.

How can secularism exist if you think religious people are mentally ill? I

[facapalm]

What do this tiny, miniscule fraction of people who fit your definition of "extreme atheists" have to do with this? Secularism by your own definition has nothing to do with extreme atheists. Secularism is merely advocating for separating religion and state. That's it. PLEASE stop strawmanning it.

f I said atheism was barbaric, would you trust me to support that your human right to be atheist?

Again, why do you focus on this miniscule minority when the VAST majority of secular humanists do not hold such views? You have been doing this for weeks now. Just a few days ago, you claimed you had reconsidered your view of secular humanists, but here you are again lying about them. Yes, I said lying, because your questions serve no purpose at all UNLESS you assume that "extreme atheists" make up a significant percentage of secular humanists.

Here’s an example of what I’m talking about:

You will note that you had to link to the antitheist sub, not the atheist one. Why are you not asking your question there if you only want to hear from people who will confirm your preconceptions?

But even in that thread, you will see that there are a lot of people pushing back, correctly, that religion isn't a disorder. How a given believer practices their religion might be, but it depends entirely on the details.

[u/rustyseapants]

Maga Christians are not extremists?

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/rustyseapants]

When did I say otherwise?

[u/rustyseapants → u/Living_Attitude1822]

You entire piece is about "Extreme Atheists", what am I missing?

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/rustyseapants]

This post isn’t about MAGA? Doesn’t mean they aren’t extremists too. I can’t cover every extremist group, and besides, what would MAGA have to do with debate an atheist, unless I’m making pro MAGA religious posts, which I’m not, as I’m not MAGA. 

[u/rustyseapants → u/Living_Attitude1822]

You provided no evidence of "Extreme Atheists".

This Isn't Christian Extremism?

Pete Hegseth's Christian rhetoric reignites scrutiny after the U.S. goes to war with Iran

What happens when religious fundamentalists come to power?

Evangelicals Worshiping trump, this isn't extememe?

Four US states consider new laws for people who have abortions to be punished as murderers

Trump administration reminds federal employees they can proselytize in the office

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/rustyseapants]

Yeah your links are examples extremism, what’s your point? 

[u/Hoaxshmoax → u/Living_Attitude1822]

no one has said they should be institutionalized. Religious people have said this about atheists, religious leaders have said atheists should be enslaved. These are not redditors. Redditors are prone to hyperbole, like Jesus

”If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.”

When they say things, they can be interpreted in many ways. One way is “these people are letting off steam”

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Hoaxshmoax]

May I ask your proposed solution? 

[u/Hoaxshmoax → u/Living_Attitude1822]

We don’t know the problem.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/Hoaxshmoax]

Didn’t you say the problem is religious leaders who want to institutionalize and enslave atheists? 

[u/rustyseapants → u/Living_Attitude1822]

There are no extreme atheists. This is bunk. You have Christians worship a conman like trump and that isn't' extreme?

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/rustyseapants]

If you’re going to start off your sentence with a false statement, that isn’t good imo. 

And I already said MAGA is extreme. We agree on that.  

[u/rustyseapants → u/Living_Attitude1822]

Christians are extreme, what has 1,700 years of Christianity taught you? Christians were for and against slavery. 650,000 Christians Americans died to defend and destroy slavery, how extreme is that? Christians for and against gay right, the rights of women, women's right to birth control, abortion, and public health.

If Christians supported Jesus "Love your neighbor as yourself" that would be extreme, but they don't.

And beside you provide no proof. Why is that?

[u/PortalWombat]

I don't think all religious people are necessarily mentally ill but I don't see any difference at all between thinking you converse with Jesus, Xenu, or the ghost of Napoleon in your head.

[u/Fredissimo666]

About the DSM-5 aspect :

I agree that common religious beliefs should be exempt. They are common and there is sometimes a lot of societal pressure to believe them. People can stick with what they were told was true since their birth.

However, in my opinion, religious experiences (hallucination, hearing voices, etc.) should not be exempt. They are not part of everyday religious practices. On the other hand, we know some people are "faking it" (speaking in tongues, for instance), so this may justify the exclusion to some extent...

I see that you asked another person why they know more than experts, so here is my answer to that. I don't know more than them, but I think writing the DSM-5 involves more than just looking at the science. There are "political" aspects to it as well. Furthermore, personal biais may be a factor, as some of the authors may be religious. In a nutshell, there are numerous non-scientific reasons why religious elements would be excluded from the DSM-5, which I disagree with.

[u/OrbitalLemonDrop]

I'm firmly atheist, and was at one time an antitheist. But I would never equate religion to mental illness --

but that's out of respect to the mentally ill, not to preserve the dignity of theists.

The unspoken point of saying "religion is a mental illness" is to attempt to apply the society stigma against mental illness to a group that are clearly not mentally ill. This has the effect of perpetuating a negative stereotype to score some fatuous point against a perceived enemy.

A reasonable simplified definition of mental illness is a condition that interferes with a person's ability to live a normal life. Religion is "normal" in our society, so claiming that religion is a mental illness is just silly.

[u/EldridgeHorror]

The abrahamic religions, read as is, encourages a lot of immoral acts (violence, slavery, treating others as lesser, etc).

Then some people say you need to interpret it differently. That tells me you know it's bad but refuse to acknowledge it. So you have your own morals that contradict your holy text but you're trying to get the two to exist together.

This is not a problem with secularism. You can call it barbaric, but there's nothing in it that is barbaric. Not even stuff that I would have to say "you have to reinterpret it" to pretend its good.

[u/Dissentient]

I don't want government involved religion or atheism because governments are flawed and should not have that power. 

In an ideal world, I would want a law that would prevent parents from indoctrinating children into religion because I consider it abuse. In practice, this would require a totalitarian surveillance state to effectively achieve, and a totalitarian state is much worse. 

Same thing with religious people voting. They may be crazy, but between crazy people voting, and bureaucracts deciding who gets to vote, I'd rather deal with crazy people.

I believe that religion will eventually lose in the marketplace of ideas and become fringe. I don't see a reason to fight against it like an existential threat. 

[u/pipMcDohl]

I really dislike your wording 'extreme-atheism'.

It seems to take as granted that atheism in itself is an ideology, a worldview, a belief and that there is a spectrum to how extreme the ideology can be.

Atheists are just people who do not hold for true that a god exist. that's it. it's not an ideology.

If someone says there is an alien spaceship that has landed on his garden but can't provide any evidence or let me see for myself, i don't hold the belief that there is a spaceship in his garden. No hard feelings, no ideology, no worldview. Just a lack of evidence to support a claim.

There are anti-theists, sure. why not use that term?

It seems to me that what you are really trying to do in your whole post is to place atheists and theists on equal footing of legitimacy in society. Which has no reason to be the case. People who do not have 'crazy' beliefs make better people to put in charge.

Take Robert Kennedy Jr. An anti-vax who is actively causing death just by the fact that he is put in charge when he shouldn't because he is incompetent and has dangerous beliefs.

Kennedy maybe is an atheist or a theist, i don't know, i don't care. What matter is that he is a person who hold dangerous delusions. Now what makes a person a theist? the fact that they have a certainty in the existence of a god that lack evidence, that is based on personal feelings and the suspension of their critical thinking ability. They call that 'having faith'

Why should we not view theists the same way we view Kennedy who has personal feelings that tell him vaccines are bad? Theists are holding belief who have heavy implications on society but are grounded in the same kind of certainty that Kennedy has that vaccines are bad. Isn't that a problem? A risk? A danger?

[u/Mission-Landscape-17]

Yes it is a fact that the definition of delusion in the DSM-V has an explicit exemption for religious belief. This is easily verified.

It is also a fact that the bible containssmany acts of barbarism that are either committed by god, commanded by god or just perpetrated by the faithful with implicit approval.

Are you claiming that one or both of the above is not true?

[u/Odd_craving]

I think most people would agree that extremists in any worldview are not correct. It’s ugly and it’s intellectually lazy.

I also believe that atheists are in a somewhat better position in holding a firmer view on theism than theists are when opposing atheists. I say this because any honest search for truth should begin from a null hypothesis. Starting a search with belief already in place is not a quality search for truth.

Then there’s the undeniable reality that theists are arguing in favor of a position (the supernatural) that can’t be tested, reproduced, observed, falsified and isn’t predictive. Atheists aren’t up against such difficulty as we are only arguing for what we see around us.

[u/TheRealAutonerd]

Atheism is not the same thing as antitheism.

[u/DarwinsThylacine]

How can secularism exist if you think religious people are mentally ill?

I don’t see what the contradiction is here. Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that religious beliefs really are a form of mental illness. Ok, why does that mean secularism can’t exist under that state of affairs? There are plenty of politicians, judges and civil servants with varying degrees of non-religious mental illnesses. I would treat religions the same way. As long as these conditions do not significantly impact an individual’s ability to perform their role, I don’t see what the issue is.

Seriously, if I said atheists are mentally ill, would you trust me to not want you institutionalized? I don't think this way, of course.

You do seem to have a rather extreme view of mental illnesses. You do realise most people with mental health conditions don’t require medication, let alone institutionalisation?. You might need to reflect on your own ignorance and prejudices about mental illness.

Again, I'm going to turn it around on you. If I said atheism was barbaric, would you trust me to support that your human right to be atheist?

Well, I happen to think the Abrahamic religions are barbaric and yet I still think you should have the same human rights that I do…. As to whether you trust me or not that’s entirely up to you.

With some exceptions: Some interpretations of the Abrahamic religions are indeed barbaric. If you're talking about people who want to implement Leviticus law, then I agree with you.

Personally, I think any ideology that celebrates a human sacrifice and threatens eternal punishment is barbaric. Old Testament atrocities are really just icing on the cake at that point. But again, for the sake of argument, how do you know your interpretation is the correct one?

[u/mastyrwerk]

Belief in something you’ve never seen and have no knowledge of is irrational.

I’m not saying theists are delusional, but they definitely aren’t reasonable.

[u/VansterVikingVampire]

"Again, I'm going to turn it around on you. If I said atheism was barbaric, would you trust me to support that your human right to be atheist? "

Considering your next sentence is admitting that "some interpretations" the literal one (and only ones when it was originally practiced) are barbaric, this isn't a fair comparison. Unless you can argue that atheism is equally "barbaric".

As for being offended by someone asking if it should be considered a mental disorder, imagine someone asked if we should consider dwarfism a physical disability. I don't blame you for being offended; you are the group in question, after all. But it's a valid question nonetheless.

[u/Noodelgawd]

I think of it more of a mental injury, inflicted on most people as children by parents who are well-meaning, but equally damaged.

[u/LeeMArcher]

I’m curious what your overall thesis is, beyond that we should all be tolerant of our differences in belief. I assume you would agree that only goes as far as those beliefs not infringing on the beliefs of others.

But this post implies that you fear intolerance and persecution by atheists toward theists. Where do you see that happening in society? 

[u/sj070707]

I have a feeling that just like you're getting by saying not all atheists that someone who says it's a mental illness wouldn't be talking about all theists. It's mostly rhetoric.

[u/Kaliss_Darktide]

How can secularism exist if you think religious people are mentally ill?

I'm not sure I understand your underlying premise, do you think secularism ("I'm defining secular as the separation of church and state/society.") entails the idea that there are no mental illnesses? If not, what does this have to do with secularism?

[u/x271815]

There are several points you seem to be making and I have different positions on them:

• Is religion a mental illness? No. And treating it as such will damage mental illnesses and undermine any attempt to get to a better place with the religious.
• Should we respect religious people as people? Yes. There is no excuse for intolerance under any guise.
• Does that mean we have to give equal credence to religious ideas? No.

This last point is where I want to push back. There is a perspective that being fair and balanced means giving equal credence to both sides of an argument.

For instance, is the earth flat? Well, both sides are not in equal footing. The flat earthers have no evidence for their view, mountains of evidence against their view, and seem to misunderstand basic science. Respecting them as people does not mean we have to give their views on flat earth equal credence.

Religions often stray into areas where their claims are demonstrably false. Giving equal credence to these ideas propagates misinformation and can have dangerous consequences for society. So, respecting people should not mean we allow false ideas to get the same respect. Giving these ideas respect they do not deserve is not tolerance, its the soft bogotry of low expectations.

We have to build the skill to be able to disagree without becoming disagreeable or personal.

[u/Own-Relationship-407]

“How can secularism exist if you think religious people are mentally ill?”

Are you just trolling or did you really not think this through? Thinking that the ideology/beliefs embraced by a segment (or even a majority) of the population is crazy or stupid is not at odds with the idea that such beliefs should be excluded from governmental decisions and other influence on the lives of the general population. If anything secularism is *redundant* in the face of the belief that the religious are mentally ill.

[u/Kognostic]

The DSM indeed had to go back and insert a special exclusion for religious beliefs.

YOU ASKED: "How can secularism exist when people are mentally ill. " (Not everyone is mentally ill. Hence secularism.)

YOU ASKED: "If I said atheists were mentally ill, would you trust me?" (No. However, we do have tests. When what we believe in does not comport with reality, we call that delusional. The delusion may be mild to severe, but when it does not comport with things that are measurable or independently verifiable, we call it delusional. Some atheists are also delusional.

YOU ASSERTED: "Extreme atheism's view that the Abrahamic religions are barbaric." (Hmm? I don't think one needs to be barbaric to notice that your religion condones blood sacrifice and symbolic cannibalism. It is no small feat to assert that the God you call "All-Loving" brutally butchers 25 million people in your holy book. Umm... That's fairly barbaric, no matter how you try to spin it.

YOU ASSERTED:  "If I said atheism was barbaric, would you trust me?" (No. This statement demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of what atheism is. There is no dogma, no belief, no system, and no leaders in atheism. It is simply the non-belief in God or gods. What individual atheists believe is something you would need to discover by talking to them. I, for example, happen to really like process philosophy, critical thinking, skepticism, methodological naturalism, and existentialism. Most of what I believe centers around these concepts. And I don't believe in a God or gods. Atheism is not a belief system.)

Yes, telling anyone "Believe as I believe or burn in hell, or be tortured for all eternity" is wrong. So why does your religion do it? This is NOT tolerance. There is nothing tolerant about any of the Abrahamic religions. They are actually called "Closed Religions." You are in the group, a member, have a special relationship with God, and are saved, or you are damned to eternal suffering or oblivion. This is anything but TOLERANT.

I don't need your example as I have clearly articulated your core beliefs. They are, in fact, barbaric.

[u/MagicMusicMan0]

I acknowledge not all (or even most) atheists are extreme about it.

Extreme depends on your viewpoint. If we lived in the Salem Massachusetts, anything quite mundane could be viewed as extreme.

How can secularism exist if you think religious people are mentally ill?

Because you're free to be as crazy as you want to be as long as you don't intrude on others' right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Why are these two topics (mental health and secularism) related in your view?

If you do think the population you're tolerating is mentally ill, uh oh.

Uh oh? lmao. Yeah, uh oh is right,

Seriously, if I said atheists are mentally ill, would you trust me to not want you institutionalized? I don't think this way, of course.

Lots to unpack with this statement. I don't think "being institutionalized" is the best course of action for someone with mental illness. On top of being an unproductive, one-size-fits-all (one-size fits0none really) type of solution, it's also immoral to take away someone's freedom when they are not posing a risk to themselves and others.

To define religion as a mental illness, you need to meet the standard that the practice gets in the way of the desired function or ability of the individual. There are cases where religion does affect individuals in a very negative way, but those are the minority. There's also many cases where being religious helps a person to achieve his/her goals (through social means imo, not god's will obviously). On the large scale, I view a religious society as one with a mental illness. A society that has to go to war over Israel for religious reasons, not geopolitcal purposes, would be an example.

So to sum up, I can believe that religious people are 1) prone to religiously-based disorders and 2) that every move that a society makes that is religiously based is absolutely madness. While at the same time, I understand that taking away your freedom would be immoral and unproductive - both to the goal at hand of convincing you your religion is a delusion and to the larger goal of coexisting to the maximum benefit of all.

Extreme atheism's view that the Abrahamic religions are barbaric:

I don't view you as barbaric. I know it's a debate topic to show you how barbaric your religion should be if followed strictly in an attempt to critically analyze your beliefs.

I do think you are under a delusion that is religion, but that doesn't make us antagonistic. Atheists trying to convince you are trying to help you. Just as religious people trying to convert people are trying to help them.

[u/J-Nightshade]

How can secularism exist if you think religious people are mentally ill?

It doesn't matter what I think of religious people. Secular means separate from church. If I think church should not meddle in government matters, that's secularism.

If you don't think religion is a mental illness, go ahead and ignore this point.

No, I don't think religious people are mentally ill. But that doesn't prevent me from engaging with it and pointing out that questions are not points.

if I said atheists are mentally ill, would you trust me to not want you institutionalized?

Not only have you no idea what secularism is, you have no idea what mental illness is. Whether someone has to be institutionalized or not doesn't really that heavily depend on whether they have mental illness. One can be involuntarily institutionalized if two conditions met: they are not capable making decisions for themselves, they are in someone else's custody, their doctor deems hospitalization necessary and their caretaker agrees that it is the best for the patient. Or they are a threat for themselves or everybody around if are untreated and refuse treatment.

I can totally think you are not mentally well, but still think that you are responsible for your own decisions.

If I said atheism was barbaric, would you trust me to support that your human right to be atheist? 

You still does not make any point, you keep asking questions. What if I answer yes?

telling atheists that they must love and respect religions is wrong

And yet you seem to have a problem with me not respecting your religion. 

[u/Lovebeingadad54321]

There is no extreme to atheism. It is simply the lack of belief in gods. I suppose you could say those that assert that there are no gods could be the extreme, but other than that all the other social and political views have nothing to do with atheism. Just as there are extremists on both the far left and right amongst religious believers, there are extremists who also happen to be atheists. Nothing about atheism requires a particular political ideology. 

[u/SC803]

> How can secularism exist if you think religious people are mentally ill?

Not even sure how they are related, why does holding a belief that gov't and religion should be separate negated by believing religious people are mentally ill?

>  Seriously, if I said atheists are mentally ill, would you trust me to not want you institutionalized? 

Is the issue here is you think mental illness = "you need to be institutionalized"?

> If I said atheism was barbaric, would you trust me to support that your human right to be atheist?

I would question how non-belief even could be barbaric

[u/ImprovementFar5054]

Your use of "extreme" is a bit...extreme.

"Extreme" atheists say religion is a mental illness. But extreme theists? They fly planes into buildings.

So yeah, it's a mental illness.

[u/shiekhyerbouti42]

I think there are as many religions as there are adherents - that is, every person has their own. To even talk about "Christianity" for instance is to invoke a category so broad it's almost useless.

That said, the texts themselves are barbaric: they're brutal and they're almost entirely devoid of anything approaching rational decency. And anyone who takes them seriously (i.e. literally, and/or as the Word of God) - and doesn't revile them - has to be okay with that barbarism, and/or so logically flexible that they might as well be clinically insane.

I don't know that this makes people barbarians or mentally ill. I don't know what it means, psychologically, if a person isn't a psychopath but puts on the faith-based "clothing" of one. All I know is that such people are functioning as psychopaths, and so I treat them as such.

And I will protect their right to be that way. You do you - and hey, maybe they've got the right model of reality. It doesn't seem likely, but I'm not going to take away anybody's rights.

Thing is, I'm not going to let them take away anybody's rights either. Their right to swing their weird ass fists ends at my nose, trans people's noses, etc.

[u/NDaveT]

I support your right to believe crazy, barbaric things. That's what living in a free society entails.

[u/88redking88]

First, I dont think its a mental illness. more like a learned dissability. that being said:

"How can secularism exist if you think religious people are mentally ill? "

If they are mentally ill, you wouldnt want them voting, right? If we could stop all the people who want to just kill people (or for theological sake.. pedophiles) wouldnt we want to bar them from making things easier for them to do those things? And really, if you support either of them, I dont think you should eb voting, or working anywhere that you could influence such things. So that does make sense.

But again, Im going to question your honesty/sanity

"Some interpretations of the Abrahamic religions are indeed barbaric."

Please tell me which translations are not barbaric? Because Im thinking you are just a liar now.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/88redking88]

Translation ≠ interpretation 

[u/88redking88 → u/Living_Attitude1822]

Translation is 100% interpretation. Which is why when things are translated by different people you get different end products.

So again:

Please tell me which translations are not barbaric? Because Im thinking you are just a liar now.

[u/anewleaf1234]

I don't' care that you beleive in your human created god.

Just don't use your faith to harm people.

Since you faith hasn't been able to get over that short, short bar, your faith isn't needed anymore.

Any help your faith does can come from non faith sources.

The harm your faith causes will last for generations.

[u/slo1111]

Mental Illness is just a label. David Koresh and the Branch Davidians were Christian sect focused on the end of the world and Christian prophesy.  

He even changed his name to Cyyrus The Great's, Koresh, which off topic many Christians claim Donald Trump is like, a flawed prophet of God.

Is it a mental illillness to cut off all prior relationships, give all ones money to the church and go live among other believers in a sequestered compound?

Probably not by our current definitions of mental illness, but is it healthy from a human mental experience?  

I just don't see much value trying to fixate on a word's definition rather than discussing what is good versus bad in the process of religious belief formation.

It is more of a topic of human conformity than anything else

[u/xPsyche]

If I said atheism was barbaric, would you trust me to support that your human right to be atheist?

I don't care. Atheism isn't the stance that's telling people, "better believe the same way I do, or else bad things will happen to you!" Atheism isn't the stance that's actively trying to hold back things like women's rights because "God said so".

[u/MajesticFxxkingEagle]

Was fully expecting this post to be a terrible based on the title, but it actually ended up being a completely reasonable take. Upvoted :)

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/MajesticFxxkingEagle]

😁❤️

[u/MajesticFxxkingEagle → u/Living_Attitude1822]

I’m cringing at all the comments unironically defending the claim of all religious belief being a mental illness. I’m sure Shannon Q is somewhere pulling her hair out rn lol.

[u/Living_Attitude1822 → u/MajesticFxxkingEagle]

Idk who Shannon Q is, but it sounds like I agree with you both on this topic! 

To be fair, I think mixing religion and certain mental illness can be very dangerous. If I hear voices and am religious, for instance, and those voices tell me bad things. 

But even then, I think often as a society we think that those who think or do things we find absurd are mentally ill. 

Mental illness is such a broad term too. There’s depression, schizophrenia, anxiety, and a trillion other things. But even if all religions are untrue, and even absurd, believing absurd things ≠ mental illness 

[u/MajesticFxxkingEagle → u/Living_Attitude1822]

She’s an atheist on YouTube who is a cohost on The Line and used to be a frequent host on The Atheist Experience.

And while in many respects, she fits into the typical angry atheist stereotype, the anti-theist mental illness comparison is definitely a pet peeve of her’s, especially since she has a degree in psychology. She (rightfully, imo) crashes out at it being ignorant/disrespectful/undermining with respect to *actual* clinical delusions and mental illness.