Poll: Religion on DU

[Snarkturian Clone]

I've noticed that there's quite a few people on DU that have no problem making assumptions and generalizations about religious people or religion in general. I'm an atheist but I respect people's beliefs and do not get offended if someone automatically assumes I'm Christian or says "Did you go to church on Sunday?" to me. Therefore, I'm putting up this poll to see if I'm just nuts and am noticing something that isn't really there or if I'm somehow correct in thinking that there is a surge of anti-religious people on DU.

[spoony]

1. Strangely, I've seen a few posters

say nasty shit about religious people and they have Obama avatars or sig lines. Incongruous to say the least.

[fasttense]

2. Atheist who aren't offended by the insanely religious

haven't been alive long enough. Given time, the religious will offend everyone.

[Ian David]

3. It neither picks my pocket, nor breaks my leg if my neighbor worships 19 gods or none. n/t

[China_cat]

4. Choice number 2.

but the word should be AFFECTED, not effected.

[papau]

8. DU (atheist) standard for "as long as I'm not Affected" is religion in a closet, hidden from public

[Richard Steele]

14. So, pretty much exactly as that Jesus fellow recommended?

Matthew 6:5-7

5 And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are:
for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners
of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you,
They have their reward.

6 But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet,
and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret;
and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.

7 But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do:
for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.

[pleah]

22. Nothing more needs to be said, except thanks for that!

:)

[Name removed]

31. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Duke Newcombe]

40. Except when He said do this:

Matthew 28:19,20

Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.

Just sayin'

Duke

[trotsky]

42. ZING!

Well played. :thumbsup:

[notfullofit]

45. Amen.

[Snarkturian Clone]

18. Darn it, I thought about that and still fucked it up! NT

[undeterred]

5. There are lots of broad-brush attacks on religion here

Even though its against the rules.

[John Gauger]

25. The "Alert" button

is located at the bottom left-hand corner of the frame of each post.

[davidinalameda]

54. I've alerted on several posts and not one of them was ever pulled

and these were blatantly anti-religious posts

even when I emailed Skinner, nothing was ever done

and people wonder why I won't give a dime to this site

[cosmik debris]

55. Example:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=171617&mesg_id=171777

[El Pinko]

6. I'm not "anti-religious", but I am offended when people assume I must be Christian.

That's an extremely rude presumption to make about someone. I could be Jewish or Wiccan or whatever - don't assume. They wouldn't like it if jews assumed they were Jewish, or if gays assumed they were gay. It's amazing how arrogant being 90% of the population makes people, and yet there are Christians who whine about being somehow "persecuted" by the non-Christian minority!

[Kali]

16. ...

[magellan]

7. Atheist, don't care what the reglious do or say

...as long as they keep their beliefs out of this country's politics. Religious freedom doesn't only work one way.

[Echo In Light]

9. I'm probably a harsher critic of what I perceive as "normal" mainstream Americans...

...than atheists are in their attitudes toward those who hold religious beliefs. In my estimation, their general indifference-coupled with unfaltering obedience to corporate culture directives does humanity just as great a dis-service as those who think the bible - or whichever "holy" book - is a blueprint for how to live one's life.

Personally, I have spiritual beliefs/views, although I'm generally against organized religions.

[Ichingcarpenter]

10. You know that these kind of posts was why DU created the Religion Forum?

I find them and your polls interesting myself, but there has been so many flame wars
that they finally moved them out of GD, just like the Israeli/Palestinian issues.

[spoony]

13. If only the broad-brushing against religion was kept there

Then polls like this in GD wouldn't be on topic. But people do not restrict their bashing to R/T.

[hyphenate]

11. I'm just anti-fundie

As long as someone doesn't shove religion down my throat, I could care less.

I haven't noticed any extra religious intolerance unless it's from people who have just had it up to their eyeballs with the radical religious right and their insistence on pushing creationism, ID, anti-choice, or whatever the complaint of the week is. All of these things are part of an intolerant group that have some influence with politicians and want to force all of us to follow their lead.

If that is what people are doing in posts, that's fine. If someone uses the general term of "christian" instead of pointing out it's someone from the religious right, that might need to be taken into account. A single post, though, from some one poster that shows intolerance otherwise is that poster's POV and one poster's prejudice, and not the atmosphere at DU.

[margotb822]

12. Fundies are hypocrites

They're the first to pass judgment on everyone else, yet their own behavior betrays their professed "christianity."

[GreenPartyVoter]

15. Sure there's some anti-religious and anti-theist people on DU. If they rudely get in my face and

lump me with the fundagelicals or tell me that I am the reason wrong with everything in the world, that's a bit much. Other than that, people are entitled to their opinions. I find I have far more in come with my agnostic, atheist, and other-religion friends than I do with the fundies.

(And I can't imagine asking someone if they went to church on Sunday. Why assume that anyone goes to church or is a Christian?)

[Goblinmonger]

27. So it is OK to make fun

of Christian fundamentalists. And from other threads in here, the Mormons are OK as well as Scientologists. Why does your religion get a pass?

[varkam]

33. Why, Goblinmonger...

because it is their religion, that's why! ;)

[GreenPartyVoter]

35. I think you meant to reply to another post.

[Goblinmonger]

36. Nope, not at all

You pointed out the fundamentalists as being bad. Why is that OK? This is another "look at the nasty atheists making fun of religion" thread and you find it OK to disparage the fundamentalists. Why? If you can do that, why is it not OK to talk about your religion? Either religion is on the table to talk about or it isn't. You can't have it both ways.

[GreenPartyVoter]

37. I didn't say they were bad, I said I was tired for being mistaken for one because we are not the

same. It's rather like when I tell people that I am a Green and am called a Communist. I might disagree with some communist principles, but I agree with others. Still, I am a Green. I am not interchangeable with Communists. (FYI, I am married to a conservative Christian and attend his conservative fundagelical charismatic church, so I am perfectly willing to set aside my differences for the sake of common ground.)

The point of my thread is that I don't like it when people jump into my face claiming wild and unfounded accusations about me, such as you are doing now. Nowhere did I make fun of anyone, and then you shouldered me with the responsibility for other people's posts about Mormons and Scientologists et al, groups I never even mentioned, and now the "nasty atheists" bit implies I had something bad to say about atheists, which I did not. Lastly, I said no such thing that my view on faith is untouchable and should therefore get a pass. My entire post was about rude people who get in my face just to get me upset, but you chose to see it as something else entirely.

[Goblinmonger]

38. So your use of the term "fundagelicals"

was said with the utmost respect for their religious beliefs? It wasn't meant as a disparaging term at all? Because you do know that isn't the name they use for themselves?

[GreenPartyVoter]

39. It may not be a mainstream term but

it is meant to be a hybrid of fundamentalist and evangelical. When people talk about fundamentalist Xians they think they are talking about Jerry Falwell and others who have similar beliefs and manifestation of those beliefs. However, Fundamentalist can also cover the Amish, for example. There is no mistaking an Amish person for a conservative televangelist. There is a subset within Fundamentalists of conservative evangelical Xians where Falwell and others like him would reside. So yes, I used "fundagelical" as shorthand for Conservative Evangelical Fundamentalists.

But if you think it would be offensive then perhaps I should stick with the longhand. Thank you for your suggestion.

[Kali]

17. I tend to go back and forth between the first and second.

The effect of being affected by fanatics.

[JDPriestly]

19. Stupid poll. Some people are very religious, some very spiritual.

DU pretty much reflects the feelings of Americans about religion -- except since things are anonymous, people are more honest about their personal religious beliefs than elsewhere.

Face it. We all think we understand religion and spirituality, but our minds are far too limited, our perception far too limited to ever understand what is really beyond ourselves. We can only experience what we are and what we project on the world around us. So even the most religious people, however sincere don't know what they are talking about. And the same goes for the atheists. Neither the religious nor the atheists actually know what they are talking about. We each have our own spiritual experiences or not. So what is the point in stirring up conflict over this issue.

Everyone is entitled to (and limited to) their own feelings and thoughts on religion, and DU pretty much respects that.

Just for the sake of full disclosure, I consider myself to be religious and spiritual, but I don't pretend to understand theology. For me, it is a feeling that I know there is a life much greater than myself -- far beyond the reality I am capable of knowing -- and so I know it is there, but I cannot define or understand it. It is beyond human comprehension in my view. Attempts to understand and define that Greatness are futile -- and merely engender skepticism in many people.

[Snarkturian Clone]

20. "Stupid Poll"

I'll remember to run future polls by you and get them approved so I can post them to your liking, oh enlightened one.

[John Gauger]

24. religion has nothing to do with god.

Religion can be perfectly understood by humans. Religion is simply the beliefs of humans about the supernatural. Religion can easily be understood in the context of the underlying causes that inform the beliefs in question. You can posit the existence of a being beyond mortal comprehension, but that has nothing to do with the formation of religious beliefs by humans. Stated another way, reality has no bearing on any given man's religious beliefs. If gods do exist, I find it humorous that you would think that they have any resemblance to anything found the clearly ill-informed beliefs of mankind.

I have no idea what you mean by the word "spiritual."

[and-justice-for-all]

29. there is no such thing as 'super natural'..

and Religion is in fact a man made concept in an attempt to understand gawd and the world.

It is also dark age nonsense, that has no bases in the modern world. It explains absolutely nothing and gives people misconceptions about how the world really works.

[notfullofit]

46. To each his own. nt.

[Evoman]

21. I make no bones about being anti-religious.

I'm straight-forward about it, and I don't really care who knows it. A lot of people may think I'm "broad-brushing" religion, and maybe I am, but at their core, every religion is an unproven, irrational mess. I don't care if it's liberal, fundie, friendly, nice, mean or conservative...it's still religion.

I, of course, tend to like liberal religious people a whole lot more that conservative religious people (though I have Christian fundie friends who ar great). But I hate their religion nonetheless.

[and-justice-for-all]

30. Cheers to that mate!

[notfullofit]

47. If that is the case,

why do you come to a religious forum?

Just askin'.

[John Gauger]

23. "anti-religious people."

Some people think that religion is a good thing. I hold the opposite view. I don't understand why that's not a legitimate opinion. I take offense at the implication that being anti-religious is somehow bad. What makes me worse than somebody who believes that religion is a good thing?

I do get offended when somebody assumes I am Christian. I don't believe your myths. I do not feel compelled to grovel before your supposed sky-lord. I think that religious believers deserve no more respect than people who believe in fairies or alien visitation. You know why? Because it's the same goddamned thing: bullshit. I am anti-religion and proudly so. If there is a "surge in anti-religious people on DU," I say good.

[varkam]

32. I understand what you're saying, and I agree with you.

I think that it is a legitimate opinion, and I don't think it's a necessarily inflammatory one either as I think there is a difference between believing that a belief system is bad and believing that a person is bad.

[notfullofit]

48. Same question,

why waste your time visiting a religious forum?

[frogmarch]

26. I'm disgusted

by Christians who automatically assume I'm one too. I find that among the various religious sects in the U.S., only Christians do this.

I don't respect people's irrational beliefs, but I accept their right to have them as long as they keep them out of my government - and my face.

[and-justice-for-all]

28. Im Anti-Theist...

The religious folk may in fact mean-well by their intentions, but the ideology is destructive and counter-productive; its a waste of time and resources.

[notfullofit]

49. So why are

you here on this forum?

Just askin'?

[cosmik debris]

52. People come to this forum to discuss religion

Not to participate in it.

There are groups for that. This is not one of them.

[TZ]

34. I'm an atheist and I'm fine with others religion

as long as they don't shove it down my throat. In fact one of my good friends on DU(and I've also met him IRL) is a pretty religious guy who teaches Sunday school. However if a believer feels free to broadbrush atheists..which happens quite frequently here..then the gloves are OFF.

[MedleyMisty]

41. I'm not really offended by religious people, but that's what I voted

Because even if religious people are mostly sane and liberal and don't try to push their beliefs on other people, just believing in myth and superstition and holding it up as some sacred reality and truth that can't be questioned enables the fundies and holds back human progress. The whole worldview and psychology behind believing in a magical dude in the sky who takes care of us has to go if the species (and most of the life on the planet) is going to survive the next few centuries.

I'm not anti-religious people. People are not their beliefs, and I can disagree and even have disdain and contempt for their beliefs and still fully respect them as human individuals.

Where does the idea that beliefs deserve special respect and consideration come from, anyway? And it's not applied consistently and fairly - if someone doesn't actively discriminate but has racist beliefs, we aren't called upon to give those beliefs special respect and not criticize them.

If you take it personally when your beliefs are criticized and think that someone is talking about you as an individual when they're talking about your beliefs, you are perhaps too attached to your beliefs. Living beings are all equally sacred and all deserve respect. There is nothing sacred about beliefs and not all beliefs are equal or deserve equal respect. Also - I don't know anyone on here personally. I don't know any religious people personally, except my brother who only got religion when his mental illness began to display itself. Anything that I say about religion is just my personal thoughts on the meme as a whole and how it affects humanity - I am not thinking about anyone in particular and definitely not thinking and talking about some random person reading my post.

To sum it all up - religion and religious people (and beliefs in general and people who believe in them) are two different things, and I feel quite fine morally with being anti-religion but I would never devalue people who are religious or think of them as less than me.

[LucyParsons]

44. what s/he said

nt

[Silent3]

51. As I always say...

"Hate the meme, love the memetic host". :)

[Zynx]

43. There are probably 30 or 40 members who are so ideologically anti-religious they border on madness.

[notfullofit]

50. Makes you wonder

which candidate is worthy of their vote seeing as how they both profess to being religious.

[uberllama42]

53. We (the non-religious) have had several discussions on this board

during the primary process, and we have usually, if not always, come to the conclusion that the only rational thing to do is vote on an issue other than religion. I am not excited about either Democrat at this point, but I suspect that either would be strongly preferable to John McCain. IIRC, there was a strong consensus in the Atheists & Agnostics forum for John Edwards before he dropped out.

I personally suspect that Barack Obama is not very religious, but far from attracting my support, the appearance that he is pandering to the religious only makes me more skeptical of him. I have long disliked Hillary Clinton, though, and I am a tepid supporter of Barack Obama. I would very much prefer to vote for someone who is not religious, because I think religiosity does reflect one's fitness to make important decisions. But since that is not an option, I must make what amounts to a clothes-pin vote.

There are numerous other criteria on which I evaluate candidates, however. At this point I take it for granted that a candidate will at least feign religiosity and I make judgments on issues, experience, personal character, and so forth.

[katherine20]

56. Barack Obama

I think it is very clear Senator Obama is a sincere Christian. He also is very good (as we all should be) of respecting everyone.

Oh, and while there are certain commentators who go overboard with so-called discrimination against Christians, it does happen. Workers and women are both a majority and both face discrimination.

[uberllama42]

59. Females and the working class are discriminated against

as part of historical patriarchal and patrician social structures. Because Christians are so powerful in American society, discrimination against them on the same scale as discrimination of either of those groups is, almost definition, not possible.

That is not to say that Christians are never discriminated against; surely they are in some cases. Catholics and Jehovah's Witnesses, in particular, have faced discrimination at various levels. Christians, or course, deserve the same protection as others when discriminated against. But I don't think that that discrimination can accurately be described as occurring for the same reasons as discrimination against women or the working class.

[HamdenRice]

57. Bingo! Insane anti-religious, atheism is a form of fundamentalism ...

that is every bit as insane as religious fundamentalism, and there are indeed about 30 DUers who suffer from this mental malady.

I'm an atheist who feels completely at ease with liberal religious people. I don't feel at ease, however, with the atheist fundamentalist crew who think that people of faith should be rounded up and put in concentration camps or mental hospitals (as they have advocated), but unfortunately, as self-appointed forum masters, they dominate this forum, driving away all thoughtful discussion of theology or progressive faith-agnostic-atheist dialogue.

Interestingly enough, several of them have admitted having Christian fundie upbringings, and it is clear that the habits of thought beat into them as Christian fundamentalists basically control the way they understand atheism.

[uberllama42]

58. Why are you still trying to bait us?

Aren't the two "fundie atheist" threads that have dominated this board for the last four days enough for you? If the other atheists here are so rabidly ideological, why are you provoking us?

[frogmarch]

60. Not Bingo, Bullshit!

Atheists are NOT fundamentalists. To call us that is to say that we share a non-belief in deities based upon ancient writings telling us to accept on faith that deities don't exist.

If someone came up with irrefutable scientific evidence proving that deities exist, atheists would accept the evidence. FAITH would have nothing to do with it. EVIDENCE is what counts to us.

You say that atheism is every bit as insane as religious fundamentalism. Oh, yeah? How many atheists were in command of the planes that demolished the WTC? How many atheists took part in the maniacally brutal Christian Crusades? How many atheist parents torture their children to drive out evil spirits? Don't say atheism is every bit as insane as religious fundamentalism unless you can back it up with EVIDENCE.

[HamdenRice]

61. Answer:

How many Buddhist monks were killed by the fanatical atheists of the Khmer Rouge? How many temples have been destroyed by the atheists in charge of China?

How many orthodox priests were murdered to enforce atheism in Stanlist Soviet Union?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=214x150141

Only a whacked out fundamentalist atheist ideology can fail to acknowledge that militant atheism can be as brutal as militant religion. That's why as an atheist, I want nothing to do with that kind of thinking, which is the dominant form of atheism on this board.

[TZ]

62. once again YOU MISS THE DAMN POINT

THEY WERE NOT KILLED IN THE NAME OF ATHEISM!!
Where as how many people in the world right now are being killed in the name of God (HINT Afghanistan and Iraq are BIG examples)
When are you gonna get this through your thick skull?
Dominant atheism on this board BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT.
Man you are by FAR worse than the most dogmatic believer on this board. Project much?

[HamdenRice]

63. Not believing demonstrable facts that the entire world agrees are true ...

is itself a symptom of fundamentalism.

Religious fundamentalists, for example, refuse to accept evolution. The rest of the world accepts evolution as fact.

Atheist fundamentalists, for example, refuse to accept that atheist regimes have murdered millions of religious people in the name of atheism. The rest of the world accepts that as fact. You can read the rationales of those atheist regimes for murdering millions of religious people in their own documents -- namely to stamp out relgion, because they had the "scientific truth."

The fact that you cannot accept facts, like the religious fundies who cannot accept evolution or that the earth travels around the sun, shows you are an atheist fundamentalist yourself. You continue to demonstrate your own fundamentalism.

Throwing around insults and curses does not convince anyone of your counterfactual world view.

Tantrums are counterproductive as well and convince no one of your bizarre assertions. The following is not a rational historical argument:

[uberllama42]

64. How long are you going to slander the rest of us as murderous fanatics?

Can you demonstrate that any of us have ever advocated the violent extermination of the religious? You claim that there are 30 people on this board who want the religious to be incarcerated. I challenge you to produce five examples of that.

If there's one criticism of atheists that I buy, it is that many of us show a need to feel morally superior to others. You are demonstrating that beautifully.

[HamdenRice]

65. How am I slandering you as murderous fanatics

I am pointing out that there have been atheist murderous fanatics. Aren't the fundie atheists on this board always saying that there is no atheist dogma that unites atheists?

So pointing out that Pol Pot was a murderous fanatical atheist should not be taken as a reflection on you -- unless you believe that all atheists belong to the same "church."

[uberllama42]

66. You listed atrocities committed by atheists

in China, Cambodia, and the Soviet Union and then said that most of the atheists on this board are apologists for that kind of behavior. You're right that pointing out that Pol Pot was a murderous fanatic should not reflect on people here, but have also explicitly made that connection yourself. You accuse us of fanaticism and then say that by responding to the accusation we are making your point.

Don't pretend that you're better than anyone else. Some atheists make unfair accusations against religious people. You make unfair accusations against your fellow atheists. You have no grounds to act holier-than-thou.

[HamdenRice]

67. Your fundamentalism is getting the better of you

Because of your preconceived notions of what anyone who is not "your kind" of atheist must be thinking, you are reading messages into my post that aren't there.

Here is exactly what I wrote:

"Only a whacked out fundamentalist atheist ideology can fail to acknowledge that militant atheism can be as brutal as militant religion. That's why as an atheist, I want nothing to do with that kind of thinking, which is the dominant form of atheism on this board."

This refers to two kinds of atheism -- (1) the Khmer Rouge kind and (2) the fundamentalist atheism that refuses to acknowledge that the first kind exists.

I said I want nothing to do with (2) which is the dominant form of atheism on this board. The (2) form of atheism is not apologetics; it's refusing to acknowledge the existence of historical fact as a result of a fundamentalist construct in which murderous atheism simply cannot exist.

If you don't think (2) exists, read posts 60 and 62:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=171160&mesg_id=172431

That person simply cannot accomodate to his world view that atheists can commit murder in the name of atheism. That's fundamentalism, and I want no part of it.