How do you respond to: "Are you against religion?", "Are you against Christmas?"

I was asked by an Xtian if I decorated for Christmas.

When I answered "NO" - I got the questions I have heard before.

"Are you against Religion? Are you against Christmas."

(Religion is bad - so yes I am against religion)

Any of you here get these same questions? 

How do you handle them?

Views: 4643

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I hardly give much thought to religion. I am glad to find fellow non believers

Steph, I rarely am asked anymore because anyone who has known me for the past 50 years knows I think ALL religions are bull-roar simply for the purpose of controlling large numbers of people.  And if they do ask, I tell them so.  I especially resent the fact that my property taxes are as high as they are because religious organizations pay NO taxes.  I don't think that's a bit fair.

This really goes back to the late 1950s when I was in Holiday, and ALL major holidays were 2-show days.  Working days for which our wages were taxed, of course.

We don't decorate for xmas since our Dad died in 1985; I don't think he was a believer (he never said), but he enjoyed the pagan aspects of the holidays.  It just wasn't any fun without him.  And my sister who shares this house is a JW, and they don't celebrate anything.

Good to hear you don't get asked anymore. I suppose this person didn't know me very well.

They should tax churches - I agree with you.

It's 12-28-2014 and I saw on TV today that "dispensationalism" started a view of Evangelical Christianity in the 1800's by then UK preacher John Darby. That view compartmentalizes the Bible into modern Evangelical belief and in the US alone we have 45,000 churches and 30 million members believing this tripe and even trying to get it into our schools and our laws.

This is why you should be against religion.

Up to you on Christmas, but be aware that that Christ was never "in Christmas" until almost 1000 years after his death. The Evangelicals don't even know what they fight for do they?

I'd give those answers: "I am not against religion for I am not a religious man/woman. I just don't believe religious claims". "I am not against Christmas, I just don't believe anymore in Santa Claus".

The question was "Are you against Religion?", so if you say : "I tolerate Religion", it is condescending for religionists.

You can say:"I am indifferent about Religion as long as they don't interfere with my freedom. If Religion interferes with my freedom, I definitely am against it. It is normal to be against Religion when it is forced upon you." That wold be the long answer.

The short one would be just "No".

Tolerance implies that you have ability or willingness to tolerate Religion, but the truth is that you won't tolerate Religion if it suppresses your freedom of expression. Freedom of expression and freedom of religion are two different kinds of expression. Religion was, is and will be forced on children by religious families and by totalitarian religious governments, so "freedom" of religion means to be coerced to "freely" say that there's nothing to do about being doped with Religion.

And if you are simply not interested or you are indifferent about Religion  why should one say that he/she tolerates it and not say the truth? I am not interested in Religion, but because it still exists, I am interested to freely express my opinion about Religion, that Religion is based on ignorance, but then I am considered intolerant by "Believers".

I tolerate both Christmas and moderate theism.

As I understand that we are born with an innate, evolution based propensity to believe in agency and an innate desire to be nurtured, thus the need for a mother figure or skydaddy.

So I cannot hold dislike for those who naively cling to that which feels so natural to them.

I also understand much of the reasoning behind Christianity's adoption/stealing of popular pagan ceremonies like Solstice and Egg/Moon worship (Christmas and Easter, respectively) as it is difficult to get popular following for a relatively unknown, newly worshiped entity such as Jesus Christ was at the time.

The only ones I willfully attack (with Gusto) are Fundamentalists!

Garden variety theists are simply following innate desires that we are all born with, without Critical Review.

Fundamentalism is where a person's Rational Intelligence plummets to the level of Insanity.

Thus Fundamentalists are begging for a Psychological Flogging!

:-D~

Thanks Freethinker:

Though I should explain my concept of "Fundamentalism".

As fundamentalism exists in all areas of thought.

To me, Fundamentalism: Is the idea/belief that our way of thinking is mandatory and that all other ways of thinking are completely wrong.

So you can have Fundamentalist Atheists as well.

Though it is often nice to know that others think the same way as yourself, you should never consider your own thinking as absolutely correct.

Fundamentalists consider everybody who does not think as they do, as Stupid, Uneducated or simply Wrong!

I cannot ever state that the way I think is completely right, as I so often get proven wrong, as my daughter so often shames me up. 

So another longer but more accurate term for Fundamentalists is Extremely Narcissistic Megalomaniacs.

Thus they are Psychotic and should be regarded by the world as such.

I've debated and argued in public with them for decades now.

Though, I don't really want to get rid of them all, either.

As it takes all kinds to make the world interesting.

Plus, I enjoy attacking them, it makes for some very interesting arguments/debates!

So Fundies can be fun too!

Yes, but there are some odd areas too. Let's assume that I'm watching porn and the video says it's about this girl and her step mom having sex with her ex-boyfriend. How can I believe that? How could I believe that anybody in it was even remotely related?

The Fundie, on the other hand, may not admit to watching porn but he will believe every word he is told about the video clip. OK, maybe he just "wants to believe it."

That's the difference between us and them.

So True Michael.

Though your comment reminded me of working in an adult book/video shop where we spent much of our time chasing underage Muslim boys out of the porn section, we could often hear them snickering.  Yet their parents refused to believe their children would do such a thing by themselves, it must have been an infidel who led them there to demoralize or shame them.

Absolute Myside Bias: is the other disease effecting Fundamentalists, probably the worst condition they have.  Though it stems from their belief that they are Absolutely Right, without evidence or Absolute Faith, is making Myside Bias Assertions, based on nothing more than wishful thinking.

Their belief in god is entirely based on wishful thinking, yet they cannot face this fact, instead they will strongly assert "God Is Real", in the face of overwhelming circumstantial evidence that god is not real.

Over the many years of arguing hang tooth and nail with fundamentalists, I have come to a conclusion that they should be classed as Psychopaths.

There appears to be something wrong with their prefrontal cortex.

It is normal to be a garden variety theist.

It takes a damaged prefrontal cortex (psychopathy, autism) to be a Fundamentalist.

Though the problem lies, that due to their extreme narcissism and megalomania, they would likely refuse treatment.

As they consider themselves as above normal people and professionals.

:-D~

"It is normal to be a garden variety theist."

I don't know about that. I think that any kind of theist believes that he/she has a host of special powers which allow them to rise above the status of mere mortal. That belief can be inserted in a definition of a psychopath. 

RSS

© 2019   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: The Nexus Group.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service