Which religion do you dislike most?

[RichardMNixon]

I've lurked on religious forums. The general mood is : We feel very strongly about our faith, and if you'd like to join us you're welcome, and if not, then fair enough, god bless. Virtually no arrogance.

I've lurked and also participated in atheist forums. The general mood is : We are right, we are right, prove it, prove it, otherwise you're stupid. Us, arrogant? Naah, we just think that you must be stupid if what you say seems illogical to us.

More realistically, "God bless, even though you're going to suffer for eternity and we won't because the man in the sky likes us better." Don't confuse pious conceit with respect or humility. Or as I see more commonly, "Hmm, someone disagrees with us, let's ignore it and pretend it didn't happen." Have you seen the video explaining that the flood must be true or else the human population would be too large? I can't count how many times I've explained to those youtube users that the man in the video completely falsified his numbers and that the model would also predict the world would be overrun with ants. They just shove their fingers in their ears and shout "Nuh-uh!" If people present an original thought we reply with an original answer.

Contrarily, if someone quotes this as proof that Darwin himself didn't believe evolution

To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree.

without continuing it with the rest of the paragraph

Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real. How a nerve comes to be sensitive to light, hardly concerns us more than how life itself first originated; but I may remark that several facts make me suspect that any sensitive nerve may be rendered sensitive to light, and likewise to those coarser vibrations of the air which produce sound.

ridicule is really the only response. We have answered that more times than we count.

It's not saying something illogical that upsets us: that can lead to an interesting discussion. We get upset when people say the same thing over and over and over. For instance:

I dislike what I call atheist fundamentalism the most because if the level of utter arrogance on atheist forums is anything to go by, it's a sure sign that given the chance, some, not all but a fair few atheists, would behave just as badly as (emphasis added) fundamentalist religious people.

Yes, I've already granted you that for the sake of argument. For the third or fourth time, why does A having the capacity to be equally bad as B make A worse than B?

I'm also not sure where these magical, indifferentist (indifferentism is a heresy FYI), other point of view-loving theists are. Are these the same theists who made death threats to remove a nonconfrontational atheist billboard? http://current.com/news/91446453_death-threats-force-removal-of-atheist-billboard.htm

Or the same theists who polled that atheists were the least trusted minority in America? http://atheism.about.com/od/atheistbigotryprejudice/a/AtheitsHated.htm

The theists who sent death threats over mistreatment of a cracker? http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/07/16/crackergate/

The theists who poured campaign funds (tax free since it's a church) into states they don't live in to prevent the expansion of civil rights for gays and then lied about it? http://www.examiner.com/x-52997-San-Diego-LGBT-Issues-Examiner~y2010m6d15-California-Ethics-Commission-finds-Mormons-guilty-on-13-counts-of-late-Prop-8-campaign-reporting

 

[Unwardil]

On the nerve thing, just a slight observation that every single nerve in the body is sensitive to light, there's just a specific one that is sensitive to what we refer to as the visible light spectrum.

 

[Jotto999]

Depends, really, I find them both quite barbaric and ugly. Christianity just happens to be in my face due to where I live, so I am tempted to vote on it. However, I have also seen that Christianity is being watered down more and more over time, especially in correlation with science and education. Assuming science continues to advance, I think Christianity is bleeding, and will degrade from a major religion into a small minority, with most of the world putting it out of their minds.

With Islam I am not so sure. I've always thought of many Muslim nations as trapped in time bubbles of the bronze age. I suspect that there currently is much more potential risk in Islam; that they are more like the old Christianity than today's Christianity in terms of being dangerous and destructive. It is hard to say since I don't get up close to Islam, but from what I can see so far, it is much worse.

I vote Islam.

 

[)O( Hytegia )O(]

I'm new to the forum here, so I don't know much about who's who and all that. It appears that Worldquest is the native punching bag - the token believer in a forum full of atheists. As such, I think his posts are getting a little less consideration than they deserve.

I'm a Pagan. I've been here for months, and Worldquest's acting like there's some club you get in for being here so long-
it's like this every time for everyone. I posted my first post in the thread ")O( Ask A Pagan! )O(" and from that drop of the hat my exciting stroll into the world of reasoned evidence and education, along side critical analysis and (ofcourse) plenty of lulz led me to one thing : exactly the same place I started. Simply with a broader view.
:]

Everyone here is a punching bag for each other - Worldquest is just ignoring facts, and therefore we really can't do anything else. He makes up his own definitions as he roams along, and expects everyone to respect his opinion as if it's the Encyclopedia Britannica of the thread - when we tell him that he's wrong, he whines and complains like a child in a store who doesn't get his way.

 

[ladiesman391]

my first post in like 12 months.

All i can say is thank god i'm not a christian, wait..................... THERE IS NO GOD bahaahhaaaahaaaa.

but I voted islam, it's far more successfully repressive compared to christianity these days.

 

[Commander Eagle]

Oh, yeah. I voted Islam, by the way.

 

[justsomefnguy]

I can certainly see Worldquest's point of view here, although I completely disagree with it. The religious and spiritual often will be accepting and forgiving (except when they are not) because they want you to drink the kool aid with them. Of course they are going to be go along to get along folks, because that is exactly how religion works. The trouble arises because they want their wish fulfillment fantasies to be taken at face value and find any question of it rankling. Of course atheists come off arrogant, not because we insist there is no god, but because we refuse to believe such a silly thing without even the faintest whiff of substantiation. I'm not even talking about proof or evidence, hell, I'd settle for just a good reason to engage in their make believe play time.

We come off as arrogant and condescending because we value reason, because we do not believe that pretending there is some greater being watching over us, judging our actions and punishing the unjust is anything but abhorrent. To constantly be faced with those that would have us give up our freedom of thought, to subject us to the belittling infantilization that such an idea caries with it, for no good reason, is enormously insulting. And it certainly doesn't help that so many of the religious are so smug in the idea that their beliefs are 'knowledge' and should be respected as such.

In short, I encourage all religious people to play out their fantasies in anyway they see fit. If you don't care for the derision and laughter of those that see your fictions for what they are, well then, grow up.

 

[Worldquest]

I can certainly see Worldquest's point of view here, although I completely disagree with it. The religious and spiritual often will be accepting and forgiving (except when they are not) because they want you to drink the kool aid with them. Of course they are going to be go along to get along folks, because that is exactly how religion works. The trouble arises because they want their wish fulfillment fantasies to be taken at face value and find any question of it rankling. Of course atheists come off arrogant, not because we insist there is no god, but because we refuse to believe such a silly thing without even the faintest whiff of substantiation. I'm not even talking about proof or evidence, hell, I'd settle for just a good reason to engage in their make believe play time.

We come off as arrogant and condescending because we value reason, because we do not believe that pretending there is some greater being watching over us, judging our actions and punishing the unjust is anything but abhorrent. To constantly be faced with those that would have us give up our freedom of thought, to subject us to the belittling infantilization that such an idea caries with it, for no good reason, is enormously insulting. And it certainly doesn't help that so many of the religious are so smug in the idea that their beliefs are 'knowledge' and should be respected as such.

In short, I encourage all religious people to play out their fantasies in anyway they see fit. If you don't care for the derision and laughter of those that see your fictions for what they are, well then, grow up.

In one breath you talk about derision and laughter and in the next breath you say grow up. Can you see the irony, or not? If theists continue to try and ridicule theists, I'm betting that the time will come when people of opposing views will stop talking to each other completely. Theists will refuse to engage with ridiculing atheists, and atheists will stop listening to theists. Does that sound like a good idea? It doesn't to me. I personally like to be aware of what others think.

What so many of you are missing is the value in communication in itself. By spending so much time pointing out how absurd you think my views are, how illogical you think they are, at the expense of trying to learn about how and why others have their views, and perhaps realising that you have prejudices, you're missing out on one very fundamental aspect of civilization : Communication, and awareness. Your unquenchable and desperate desire to play out the same old scenario with theists says a lot about you. Your only response to things is to repeat why you disagree, when all the time you're missing the point of the conversation.

 

[justsomefnguy]

I can certainly see Worldquest's point of view here, although I completely disagree with it. The religious and spiritual often will be accepting and forgiving (except when they are not) because they want you to drink the kool aid with them. Of course they are going to be go along to get along folks, because that is exactly how religion works. The trouble arises because they want their wish fulfillment fantasies to be taken at face value and find any question of it rankling. Of course atheists come off arrogant, not because we insist there is no god, but because we refuse to believe such a silly thing without even the faintest whiff of substantiation. I'm not even talking about proof or evidence, hell, I'd settle for just a good reason to engage in their make believe play time.

We come off as arrogant and condescending because we value reason, because we do not believe that pretending there is some greater being watching over us, judging our actions and punishing the unjust is anything but abhorrent. To constantly be faced with those that would have us give up our freedom of thought, to subject us to the belittling infantilization that such an idea caries with it, for no good reason, is enormously insulting. And it certainly doesn't help that so many of the religious are so smug in the idea that their beliefs are 'knowledge' and should be respected as such.

In short, I encourage all religious people to play out their fantasies in anyway they see fit. If you don't care for the derision and laughter of those that see your fictions for what they are, well then, grow up.

In one breath you talk about derision and laughter and in the next breath you say grow up. Can you see the irony, or not? If theists continue to try and ridicule theists, I'm betting that the time will come when people of opposing views will stop talking to each other completely. Theists will refuse to engage with ridiculing atheists, and atheists will stop listening to theists. Does that sound like a good idea? It doesn't to me. I personally like to be aware of what others think.

What so many of you are missing is the value in communication in itself. By spending so much time pointing out how absurd you think my views are, how illogical you think they are, at the expense of trying to learn about how and why others have their views, and perhaps realising that you have prejudices, you're missing out on one very fundamental aspect of civilization : Communication, and awareness. Your unquenchable and desperate desire to play out the same old scenario with theists says a lot about you. Your only response to things is to repeat why you disagree, when all the time you're missing the point of the conversation.

I don't think you are getting it. We have been talking. Patiently, reasonably, sternly, stridently until we are blue in the face. The vast majority of religiously minded people have no trouble understanding and accepting that science is indeed the best method of explaining the universe and how it works. Its that stubborn minority that I direct my ire at. Those that refuse to hear the arguments that are presented, or perhaps are just simply not able to understand them. Those that think that stubborn refusal to accept evidence and logic trump mystical mumbo jumbo, those that insist, despite all evidence otherwise that they are correct and the entirety of science is some vast conspiracy to fool people into not believing.

I'm perfectly happy to listen to reasonable religious people. Shocking, I know, but they exist. It is not we that have turned away, but the insistently stupid that have turned away from reality. The zealots, creationist, the intolerantly religious are not worth listening to, because they literally have nothing to say. It is not childish to ignore the unsubstantiated babblings of people that insist it is so, simply because they wish it to be. I'm not entirely certain I am interested in why people have these views, although I have many ideas about why it may be so. None of them particularly complinteray, and they are certainly not interested in hearing them, as they are not interested in anything that challenges their precious delusions. When I say grow up, I mean they must at least reach the level of maturity to understand that some people are simply not going to play along with their ridiculous ideas, they will not be swayed by the stamping of feet and the gnashing of teeth, the insistent cry of 'it must be so'.

Yes, of course I have prejudices. I'm prejudiced for what is real, what is verifiable, what is usefull and ultimately, for what is sane. Not to say that all religious people are insane, just those that can't accept that not buying into their fantasy is a perfectly reasonable position. This dialogue continues and repeats itself in this manner because a minority of religious people insist that exceptions be made for their positions, that the adherents of reason must give ground, that the sane must accede to the demands of the insane. I see no reason to give even an millimeter.

Again, if the religious are content to focus their lives on what is clearly not real, more power to them, have fun with that. I see no reason why anyone is under any obligation to coddle them for that choice, turning away from reality, refusing to accept the way things are is what I mean when I speak of childishness. The desire for ultimate answers, divinely inspired meaning and life for ever after is a pleasant enough goal, but it strikes me as not just a waste of a life, but an insult to all others that would endeavor to improve the human race by attempting to understand as much as we can.

I have no time or patience with those that would cast feces on the wall and call it divine.

 

[Baranduin]

Worlquest. We've read your arguments. We've thought about them. We don't agree with them.
Were we to hide our disagreement from you, you could rightfully call us dishonest.
Whenever we tell you about it, you say we are closeminded anti-theists.

No, sorry. Listening someone doesn't mean agreeing with him. And if you say foolish things, then don't be surprised that people call you a fool. That's regardless what you believe. Look at Hytegia or DeistPaladin; they are usual posters, they don't hide their beliefs, and they don't run into troubles, nor they whine and cry about how discriminated they are because of their beliefs every time someone disagrees with them.

Your only response to things is to repeat why you disagree, when all the time you're missing the point of the conversation.

If conversation was good just for the sake of conversation, you'd be doing random phone calls to random people; this way you'd be far more efficient. And your chances of finding someone that agrees with everything you tell him, no matter how stupid it be, would increase. Specially Friday or Saturday night.

 

[ladiesman391]

you're missing out on one very fundamental aspect of civilization

The fact that we live in a civilisation where the majority of the population believes in something they cannot hear, taste, touch, smell or see?

 

[monitoradiation]

In one breath you talk about derision and laughter and in the next breath you say grow up. Can you see the irony, or not? If theists continue to try and ridicule theists, I'm betting that the time will come when people of opposing views will stop talking to each other completely. Theists will refuse to engage with ridiculing atheists, and atheists will stop listening to theists. Does that sound like a good idea? It doesn't to me. I personally like to be aware of what others think.

What so many of you are missing is the value in communication in itself. By spending so much time pointing out how absurd you think my views are, how illogical you think they are, at the expense of trying to learn about how and why others have their views, and perhaps realising that you have prejudices, you're missing out on one very fundamental aspect of civilization : Communication, and awareness. Your unquenchable and desperate desire to play out the same old scenario with theists says a lot about you. Your only response to things is to repeat why you disagree, when all the time you're missing the point of the conversation.

All I heard is "Blah, blah blah blah blah". Some great communication has just occurred.

By your asinine definition, communication is only communication when I sit there and verbally fellate you for expressing your stupid opinions? Because if I understand you correctly, we're "missing out on communication" when I criticize your ridiculous notions.

Here's news for you: We're not missing out on communication. We understand you perfectly fine. Don't act like you're somehow the first person to ever try to pass the bullcrap you're passing on. I've heard similar things before. You just don't make sense, and I, for one, don't intend on staying quiet.