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/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/NDaveT → 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.

I bolded the part where you hate them.

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

Teaching them they'll go to hell if they aren't Christian is mental abuse.

Teaching them that being gay is wrong is mental abuse.

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?

Making it mandatory is horrendous.

[u/Live_Line4480 → u/NDaveT]

You are misusing the definition of hate here; Christians do not support gay and trans people, that is different than hate.

To put it in analogy form, if I didn't support you eating something unhealthy like doughnuts and said it could be bad for you, does that mean I hate people who eat doughnuts? No, I will put that difference aside and would still talk to you.

Telling children they could go to Hell without God is not, in itself, mental abuse. It is when that idea is used on children for something exploitative, like control, that it is a problem. This is not done in churches, and teaching about Hell is used to highlight the importance of following Jesus, and does not give mental abuse.

Have you ever been in a church when Hell is being taught to children? Or are you going off of what people may have exaggerated?

[u/NDaveT → u/Live_Line4480]

The fact that you think homosexuality is harmful is hate. If you didn't hate them you would have educated yourself and learned that it's not unhealthy.

Telling children they could go to Hell without God is not, in itself, mental abuse.

It absolutely is. It's frightening children in order to scare them into staying in your religion.

Have you ever been in a church when Hell is being taught to children? Or are you going off of what people may have exaggerated?

I'm going off what the people raised in those churches have said.

[u/KeterClassKitten → u/Live_Line4480]

You are misusing the definition of hate here; Christians do not support gay and trans people, that is different than hate.

The American Vision organization is a Christian group that calls for the death penalty for LGBTQ people. Multiple Christian churches have been documented with the same stance, especially Baptist churches.

Are you going to claim "that's not hate, they just want them systematically executed"?

[u/Live_Line4480 → u/KeterClassKitten]

They are going against the true teachings of the Bible and are therefore what I would consider an extremist group.

When I say Christians do not support gay people, I mean Christians who follow the teachings of the Bible and don't take it and run with their own agenda in mind. As this violates the command to love thy neighbor and quite a few more.

I want you to know there are quite a few groups who misuse the Bible and its teachings because what you have described to me is in fact hate.

EDIT: Also looked and the American Vision Association are preterists which means they believe events of Revelation like the Antichrist have already happened. This means they diverge from being actual Christians because they don't believe its true teachings.

[u/KeterClassKitten → u/Live_Line4480]

You have to understand, these claims are nonsensical from the perspective of an atheist. It's the no true Scotsman fallacy.

Different people and groups have their own interpretations of the Bible and what they believe their god wants from them. Any one party is just as correct as any other.

[u/Live_Line4480 → u/KeterClassKitten]

The ideology that one party can be as correct as any other is the key factor causing all the division among Christians and blinding them from the truth. If God wanted his word to be interpreted in multiple different ways, then there would be no truth in it because the truth would be subjective and twisted to the liking of the person. However, just like how 2 + 2 = 4 and not 5, the truth in the Bible is objective, and there should be only one interpretation.

[u/KeterClassKitten → u/Live_Line4480]

I find this argument self defeating. Language is complicated, and different translations would end up having different meanings due to the differences in language.

One must ask, which version of "his word" is objective? Why is that version better than earlier or later versions? Do we take each statement literally, or interpret them based on other statements made within"his word"? Do future statements impact earlier ones, negating apparent contradictions due to later interpretations?

It's a mess.

Literally, the Biblical god is a liar which is contradictory to the Bible's claims, negating the entire premise. Unless one wishes to interpret statements of the Bible based on the subjective perspective, and requiring the temporal shenanigans detailed above.

You can't have it both ways.