Borderline contempt for the religious?

[AoErat]

Hi folks,

I haven't posted much here, but I have read a lot of threads. Anyway, hello to everyone.

Now:

I'm posting this issue because I'm not sure whether I'm wrong, right, or on the wrong track completely. My problem is, whenever I find out someone is religious (moreso if they are outspoken about it), I automatically think less of them. Sort of unconciously, I classify them as weakminded, and thus a "lesser". It's like I loose a bit of respect for them. This doesn't affect my relationships with these folks, at least I don't think, but it's something that is always there between us. These feelings aren't particularly strong or dominating, but they are definately there.

I'm scared that this attitude I have is something akin to racism, sexism, etc. ie, intolerant of others due to one of their traits.

Help? :confused:

Mike.

[Secular Elation]

My problem is, whenever I find out someone is religious (moreso if they are outspoken about it), I automatically think less of them.

I hate to break it to you, but a lot of people around you are going to be "lesser" people if that is the case.

We're all human, so I don't think religious people are lesser. Just misguided.

[Crouton]

What you are going through is more common than you might think. It is a confusing topic that requires clarity. I'll try my best to provide some. First off, sexism and racism differ from discrimination based on a person's beliefs in that they are predicated on a person's physical characteristics over which that person has little or no control.

Second, when someone claims to be a member of a religion, it is a reasonable assumption that the person believes in and adheres to at least some of the tenets set forth by that religion. Even in the case that the person doesn't subscribe to a particular organized religion, if the person claims to have belief in god/s or other supernatural beings or phenomena, then that person has faith. Contrary to supernatural belief, faith is not a valid means by which to acquire knowledge.

If you knew of a group of people who based their important life decisions on dice rolls, you would be correct to dismiss their method as, not only unsophisticated, but irrational. There is no epistemological difference between that group and a group of theists.

There have been people for whom I have lost some respect based on their claims of faith. Those who have professed belief with fervor often drop more in my esteem than those who say they simply inherited the beliefs of their parents. The former choose to forgo the use of their ability to reason. The latter are unreflective or just intellectually lazy.

Crouton

[Gothic_J]

its gotten to the point where longtime friends who are religious dont talk to me cuz of my virulency.

Im not intending to be cruel, either, I just find the entire thing repugnant. giving your a conscience a blank check, indeed, making a massive systemized effort towards the same just disgusts me.

[tensorproduct]

Originally posted by AoErat
It's like I loose a bit of respect for them.

This doesn't affect my relationships with these folks

I don't see how you could automatically lose respect for people, but not think that it would affect your relationship in some way.

[Yangja Isuko]

hey, i experience the same thing, and let's face it. people aren't equal to one another. and running the risk of sounding like an elitist bastard, we few, are the elite.

[Division By Zero]

I hate to admit it, but I do the same thing. The concept of Christianity is so completely bizarre and irrational that when someone tells me they believe it, my respect for their thought processes takes a hit. I don't treat them any differently for it (at least I don't think I do), but that shadow of superstitious nonsensical dogma is darkens my perception of them just a bit.

A bigger problem, though, is with creationists. Many people around here buy into a literal Genesis. If I find this out about someone, that fact always works its way to the surface of my mind whenever I deal with them, and I sometimes have a hard time seeing past it. Creationism is total idiocy, and I can't help but judge the people who believe it. Again, I don't think I treat people any differently in day-to-day life for being creationists, though I wouldn't be surprised if I subtly and subconsciously did, but it's always there- "This person actually believes in special creation."

The more dogma someone subscribes to, the bigger the rift that begins to open between myself and them.

[demoninho]

I think it would depend where they were coming from. Somebody living in an evangelical YEC society probably doesn't know any better, somebody here at home in Holland, well they are generally not held in very high esteem but this usually stems from their other bigoted narrow-minded worldviews which are hard to seperate from their religion.

[andy_d]

Originally posted by Gothic_J
its gotten to the point where longtime friends who are religious dont talk to me cuz of my virulency.


Doesn't that bother you?

[Barcode]

I certainly see no reason to " think less " of them; I do however become curious as to *why* they believe, and 99% of the time it's because they were raised that way.

Which is why I'm trying to be understanding of my Catholic girlfriend ... she was raised in a Catholic household, went to a Catholic university, socializes with Catholic friends. If anybody in this country *isn't* Catholic, then I have yet to meet them.

The peculiar thing I've noticed is that people often don't think there is a link between their upbringing and current attitudes.

I would only " think less " if they dismissed anything that challenges their beliefs, or lack understanding of fundamental truths. I'm sorry, but there *are* some limits -- and stating creationism is true, that Noah's flood happened, the resurrection is an indisputable fact ... those kind of things *do* lead me to question an individuals capacity for reasoned thought.

It wouldn't make me treat them any differently. No doubt I can learn things from the religious too ... well, sometimes.

[King Rat]

I do the same thing but I try really hard to curb it.

I was at a wine tasting with my wife and we met a really nice couple and we invited them over to our table for dinner. We all hit it off and between the wine a good food were becoming friends. Then the female of the couple mentioned some of the seperation of church and state issues our country is currently experiencing. She said "this really wouldn't be a problem if people would just get to know Jesus." Both my wife and I looked sideways at each other. We both knew in that instant that the new friendship was doomed. They would never integrate into our circle of friends nor we in theirs.

It's not as simple as bigotry, it's much more complex. How can you have a meaningful relationship with someone that you cannot connect with on an intellectual level? It taints everything.

We run into them and their friends occassionally and I always think "oh great it's the GodFella's." I can't help myself.

I've heard others compare it to politics, but I think it's worse. At least politics has some relevancy to modern life, faith is so archaic and irrational. How can you respect someone who claims to have seen angels? My first thought is that they have forgotten to take their medication. My second is wondering what wrong thing that we think is enough for them to snap and burn my wife and I at the stake, for our own good of course...

[Aravnah Ornan]

Hi, AoErat.

I don't automatically think of religious people as weak-minded or "lesser," even though there are some religious people who seem to fit that description. I've noticed that many highly rational people have blind spots in their rationality and that for some of those people, theism is riding in their blind spots.

Since I know that I'm not a being of pure logic, I try to reserve judgment until I get to know people better. In particular, since I was a true believer for so long, I hesitate to cast the first stone.

[Hopeful Monsters]

Good topic AoErat. I find Crouton makes some useful distinctions.

I am not so much contemptuous of believers as just plain bewildered - and this can make me quite guarded with people who tend to assert their beliefs.

I would react just like King Rat to someone who suddenly came out with a bit of Jesus talk – I mean what can you do if someone answers complex problems in society and the State with talk of ‘finding Jesus’ or ‘letting Jesus into your heart’ – I would just feel so guarded, frustrated and to be honest, downright annoyed with such conversational nonsense.

Maybe I’d stop just short of contempt though. Contempt is mostly born out of unrealistic perceptions of ones own superiority and one has to control tendencies of contempt!!!

But I can really understand how it would become a social block of the kind King Rat describes.

[DigitalChicken]

Originally posted by AoErat

I'm scared that this attitude I have is something akin to racism, sexism, etc. ie, intolerant of others due to one of their traits.


It could be. I congratulate you for having the self insight to see this.

You will find some atheists and non-believers who are essentially religious bigots of sorts. In fact you will find some of the people who post here are like that.

DC

[Samnell]

I'll confess I hold religiosity of any kind in basic contempt. I find it archaic, irrational, and really wish it were gone from the world. This sometimes does effect my view of the adherents. I generally get along with and don't think much less of (beyond their being wrong and irrational about their theism) various liberal religionists. I even find I give a little more room to people who hold to what are presently in my area minority faiths.

But when someone tells me they seriously believe in virgin birth, salvation, resurrection, water into wine, and that other nonsense it basically destroys their credibility. It's the same reaction I have to people who insist on geocentrism, theories of racial superiority, and other such nonsense. I do not grant exemptions to people simply because they were raised to believe in racist ideals, so I do not grant them because a person was raised to believe theistic ideals.

I don't, as a general practice, think religionists of any kind are entitled to any fewer rights than I or any of that, though. Would that this were reciprocated.

[Ab_Normal]

I was struggling with this when I first came here, and wildernesse and HelenM politely (politely being a relative term ;) ) schooled me out of painting all religious people with the "stupid idiot fundy" brush.

I have the benefit of having religious family members who are eminently logical - my sister the engineer, for instance.

[andy_d]

Tolerance is important, I think. Even if you think they're wrong, that's no reason to not treat them as well as any other human being.

Basically, we're all going to meet an awful lot of folks in our journey through life that we just don't agree with. If we spend a lot of time getting bent out shape by the fact that people differ, then we're going to make it much harder for ourselves to be happy.

I don't see any excuse for being intolerant of another's beliefs.

I say: judge them on their behaviour, not their beliefs.

[butswana]

It all depends. My brother-in-law is a xtian, but he acknowledges that there is no evidence to back it up. Perplexing but not damning. I had to straighten out some misconceptions he had about evolution, then all was good.
On the other hand, this stupid bastard I work with got into a bible study group at his church and enrolled in an ethics class at a local community college. He is suddenly an expert on all things biblical and ethical. Even though I have read the bible from cover to cover at least twice, I don't understand it because if I did I would be a xtian. This jack ass deserves contempt. He wears this rank stink ass perfume too and he lies about his connections in the music and sports industries.

[Dreaming Skin]

I try not to have contempt for others when I can avoid it. I take people on a case by case basis. The only ones that really trigger my contempt are the ones who make their contempt for other groups(races, gays, non-xtians, etc) rudely evident as if they're superior to everyone else on the planet.

The ones who behave themselves in public and don't bother anyone are alright, even though I don't agree with their beliefs. The ones who gotta talk Jesus 24x7 and wear religious sweaters/T-shirts are annoying and funny at the same time. I believe in free speech and expression and as long as they're not infringing on others' rights, I don't care. Besides, I say let people make buffoons out of themselves if they want. I remember these weirdos at a mall a while back, singing hymnals as they strolled amongst the stores. To me, that's just flaky.

I must confess, however, when I meet new people and discover them to be xtian, whether they say it, wear it, or suggest it with scriptures on their cubicle, a little red flag goes up. I don't immediately think of them as less or anything, but my mind starts wondering what kind of person they really are and will I fit into their sphere of an acceptable human being? Maybe it's wrong to think that way automatically, but I was exposed to enough hypocritical, prejudice, homophobic xtians as a kid for a lifetime.

[geniph]

I don't necessarily think less of a person for having faith in something without evidence (that being the very definition of faith - belief without evidence), but I DO think less of people who are of a fundamentalist mindset. I consider that a child's worldview, very digital - black-white, on-off, right-wrong. It's part of normal progression to adulthood to start seeing shades of grey. Some people don't make that progression.

It is very possible for me to respect a religious person. It is not possible for me to respect someone who says, "Jesus said it, I believe it, that settles it." That is stating, in essence, "I already have made up my mind on everything and no amount of evidence will ever alter it in the slightest."

Besides, think about the Latin roots of "fundamentalist" - fundus - posterior, mentis - head. Butthead.

[Viti]

I too do this to an extent. Benign theists, those which occasionally say "Thank God", or "I am praying for you", or mention some hope for an afterlife in Heaven or are comforted in troubled times by the thought of a Divine Plan, but for the most part live and act rationally within reality are fine...I have no issues with them and don't think twice about it.

Now, the creationists, homophobes, demon spotters, pro-life extremists etc I have a huge problem with.

[Carlos]

Religious belief varies from person to person. I don't mean just the specifics of a particular faith, but the extent to which a person lets those beliefs affect the rest of their lives. For some it is a full-time affair; anything that happens, at any time, is a candidate for interpretation through religion. For others it is an occasional thing.

Given that I've rejected religion, it can be difficult not to reject those who still embrace it. This is especially true for those in that first group I mentioned; you wonder where the religious template ends and where the individual begins. Would there be anything left of them if you took away their religion?

As for thinking less of them - hmm, that's not something I would categorically say. I remind myself that not that long ago I held similar beliefs.

[Buddrow_Wilson]

Yes, I do feel contempt towards religion and the religious to varying degrees. I do try to have sympathy in that faith is a coping mechanism for this human condition, but I do think less of anyone who is openly superstitious.

Someone throws salt of their shoulder, knocks on wood, etc...these are minor superstitions that I don't really have contempt for but I find them silly and perplexing, so even this affects my opinion of the person.

Someone condeming me to hell because I don't believe what they do...this I am extremely prejudiced against. I view fundamentalist/bible literalists as delusion and dangerous. I feel no guilt in discriminating against them on a personal level.

[wildernesse]

Originally posted by Yangja Isuko
hey, i experience the same thing, and let's face it. people aren't equal to one another. and running the risk of sounding like an elitist bastard, we few, are the elite.

What was all that talk I've heard over and over again about atheists not being arrogant bastards? And yet in one thread I get an announcement of atheists being the elite, and also learn that people who disagree with their worldview are lesser beings.

The EAC must be falling down on the job--although I see a few hardy members putting a positive spin on the atheist image in this thread. It must be difficult when the truth is so persistant.

I'd put a winking smilie at the end of that last sentence, but I'm tired and I don't really want to anyway. (Ab_normal, your post makes me feel like I should have something interesting to say! Hope you and your family are doing fine.)

--tibac

[Autonemesis]

Originally posted by Gothic_J
its gotten to the point where longtime friends who are religious dont talk to me cuz of my virulency.

I find that religious people perceive dissent as virulent, no matter how politely it is phrased. They take offense when I do not offer any support for their beliefs, or when I state that I do not adhere to them. My mannerism seems unimportant in determining whether they will take offense. So I generally avoid the subject unless they are beligerent first.

[Gothic_J]

Originally posted by andy_d
Doesn't that bother you?

yes, it does.

[Roland98]

Originally posted by wildernesse
What was all that talk I've heard over and over again about atheists not being arrogant bastards? And yet in one thread I get an announcement of atheists being the elite, and also learn that people who disagree with their worldview are lesser beings.

The EAC must be falling down on the job--although I see a few hardy members putting a positive spin on the atheist image in this thread. It must be difficult when the truth is so persistant.


We can't be perfect all the time. ;) And even though I don't agree with some of their generalizations of Christians, at least they're being honest. I've been on some Christian sites where they'll say out one side of their mouth they respect atheists even though they disagree, and out the other they'll say how stupid we are for not accepting The Truth.

I know many Christians who are quite intelligent, and well-versed in Biblical history. Some are liberal, some are conservative. However, spending time on a few online Christian BBS did distort my view for awhile (and honestly, I still find it hard to believe that some of them cling to their 19th-century ideals). I think that I do, whether I try to or not, put some of these more "rabid" fundamentalists into a category where I do think somewhat less of them, even though it's a bias I really don't like. Hopefully along the line I'll meet some more that fit the "fundamentalist" description that will change my views; but so far, I've been (mostly) unsuccessful in that area.

[AoErat]

Hi all, thanks for the replies. I really do appreciate it.

I do feel the need to clarify slightly though. Some of the folks who agree to some extent with me and/or experience a related feeling have expressed with words how I feel far better than I did in my original post. The terms I used were probably too harsh. I don't actively think of religious people as "lesser", but obviously there is some sort of underlying feeling that comes up sometimes.

To clarify, I don't alter my behavior toward those of religious inclination - I don't treat them differently or anything. It's just in the mind.

A few direct replies to comments/questions:

Secular Elation:
I hate to break it to you, but a lot of people around you are going to be "lesser" people if that is the case.

Yes, I realize that. Such is the way of things.

Crouton: Thanks for your comments. Your comparison makes sense.

tensorproduct:I don't see how you could automatically lose respect for people, but not think that it would affect your relationship in some way.

I thought about that when I wrote the original post. Allow me to clarify: It's not so much a total lack of respect, but more of an underlying feeling that this person is "not all there". I may be deceiving myself here, but I really do think my "bia" against those of religious leaning gets in the way of my relationships. If religion doesn't come up, there really isn't a problem.

Division By Zero, you put it well. The more fundy someone is, the less I feel that they are rational. Someone who says "I guess I believe in God, but I don't go to church much or anything" moves higher in my opinion of them, rather than the zealot.

TruthIsTold: Like I said at the beginning of my post, I probably used too harsh a word - "contempt". You use a good description - "guarded". I definately agree.

wildernesse: [...] ... and also learn that people who disagree with their worldview are lesser beings.
Please don't mis-interpret me. I don't automatically view religious people as "lesser-beings" in the sense that a racist would view those he is against, or anything like that. It is much more subtle, with, really, no malice meant.

Anyway, I see a lot of folks who experience the same thing, to an extent. Now, the real question is: Is it justified? I understand that obviously, hate, deep contempt, etc are all unjustified actions, but the query here is whether vague negative feelings are acceptable or not. I guess it is sort of a moral problem.

Again, thank you for all your responses, it is great to hear the views of others on this subject.

Mike.

[Virgil Tibbs]

I view supernaturalism as a mental illness. Therefore I don't think it's appropriate to look down on supernaturalists for their beliefs alone: would you look down on someone for being schizophrenic? For that matter, Churchill suffered from depression.

I also don't necessarily think supernaturalism is going to hinder someone in any meaningful way. Usually the failure in reasoning is limited to the specific subject of indoctrination. I don't see supernaturalism as reflecting on intelligence either: intelligence does not protect a person from mental illness. Clever theists can simply think up a greater number of specious arguments to fool themselves with.

However, IMO mental illness can not go very far in excusing actions (unless someone is so out of touch as to not be observing reality). A lot of (not all) fundamentalist theists do a lot of immoral things for their beliefs, and then after trampling the rights of others have the nerve to claim the moral high ground. These types have earned my contempt, because even they despite their illness are able to recognize when they are hurting other people: they just don't care about the well being of nontheists.

In order to preempt the more obvious strawman attacks: No, this does not mean I feel theists cannot function in society, and no, I am not suggesting that the rights of theists should be hindered in any way. Seperation of church and state is an imperative of morality and intellectual integrity, IMO. Theists have as much right to their beliefs as anyone, although they don't deserve special treatment: their views are subject to be critized as anyone else's are.

The problem with all this for me is that, while I try to be tolerant of theists, the I'm still left with a knee jerk reaction to blame supernaturalists in general for all the problems some of them cause. It can be tough to supress.

And stilling my tongue can be a test of will. Seeing above where wildernesse simultaneously generalizes about all atheists and complains about atheists generalizing about theists in the same breath... Well, the least insulting way I can put it is that that level of cognitive dissonance is alarming.

Tibbs

[wildernesse]

Originally posted by AoErat

Please don't mis-interpret me. I don't automatically view religious people as "lesser-beings". . .

whenever I find out someone is religious (moreso if they are outspoken about it), I automatically think less of them. Sort of unconciously, I classify them as weakminded, and thus a "lesser".

The second quote is from your OP. I don't think I misinterpreted you at all. Maybe you were trying to say something different, but no interpretation was needed.

(BTW: If you say that your contempt for people is subtle and with no malice, which is unlike how a racist views people they are against. . . How are your feelings different from people who feel that black people (to pick a group) are wonderful people, but just aren't "qualified" to teach their children/represent them/be their neighbors or friends? There's no malice in these thoughts, just "facts" that black people are lesser people, due to the negative characteristic of the color of their skin. Most racism is much more like this (and therefore more insidious and difficult to be rid of) than the out and out hate of those people who would burn a cross in someone's yard.)

--tibac

[AoErat]

wildernesse: Like I stated before, I probably used the wrong term in the OP. I don't walk around all day think "arr, it's another crazy christian" whenever I see someone I know is religious. I'm still struggling with my own feelings, and they are very hard to put into words.

Regarding your second comment - yes, that is the problem I have here, which is why I posted. I'm trying to figure out whether it is wrong or not.

However, in your example, racism is based on nothing substantial, no fact. Therein lies the difference, I think.

Mike

[Angrillori]

Heh,

I know just how the OP feels. Sometimes I have to bite my tongue and count to ten when people whom I might otherwise respect start to spout creationist and fundy drivel.

On the same token, I sell cars for a living. Once, when a fundy told me she prayed to find out how much to offer for a car, my only response was:

Out of all those people praying for world peace, an end to suffering, and cures for cancer, God decided to tell you how much to pay for a car? AND he got his figures wrong?
:confused:

Obviously being a good xian does nothing in and of itself for your thought processes.

[southernhybrid]

I don't find theists to be any less valuable than I am. Many of them are far more intelligent, more productive, more compassionate, more generous, more well adjusted and more interesting than many atheists I've met. I try and judge people by their behavior, the way they treat me and those around them, and not by the beliefs that they have about the unexplainable. Some people find positive things from their theistic beliefs regardless of how difficult that may be for us to understand.


I think it's probably a good thing to recognize that you have a problem with bigotry regarding theists. I would just hope that you would work on becoming more tolerant and more open minded when you have relationships with people who have different beliefs than your own. It's natural to want close friends that share many of our values and world view but it saddens me to see how some atheists may complain about being treated like sterotypes turn around and do the same thing to others. It just goes to show that perhaps we're not as enlightened as we claim to be, doesn't it?

[Virgil Tibbs]

Originally posted by southernhybrid
I think it's probably a good thing to recognize that you have a problem with bigotry regarding theists. I would just hope that you would work on becoming more tolerant and more open minded when you have relationships with people who have different beliefs than your own.

I don't think the OP shows any problem with bigotry, and for that matter the upbeat tone of your post doesn't really capture the situation. An awful lot of theists have in fact been indoctrinated to hate/mistrust atheists. For example in the US, half the country would not vote for a canditate who was atheist based on that lack of belief alone. Of those of us living in the US, I'd venture most of us have to hide their atheism the majority of the time for fear of being alienated. Kind of flys in the face of the whole freedom of religion thing.

In that environment it's only normal to feel mistrust. I do agree that actually acting on that mistrust would be wrong, I just don't see anything wrong with the feeling itself. In fact, it shows one has been paying attention. :p

Tibbs

[wildernesse]

Originally posted by AoErat
wildernesse: Like I stated before, I probably used the wrong term in the OP. I don't walk around all day think "arr, it's another crazy christian" whenever I see someone I know is religious. I'm still struggling with my own feelings, and they are very hard to put into words.

Regarding your second comment - yes, that is the problem I have here, which is why I posted. I'm trying to figure out whether it is wrong or not.

However, in your example, racism is based on nothing substantial, no fact. Therein lies the difference, I think.

Mike

The racism is based on the color of their skin--that's the fact that the negative thoughts are based on. Your negative thoughts are based on the fact that other people believe differently from you.

In both cases, there is no objective reason for the negative thoughts. There is no objective reason to consider yourself a superior person based on your thoughts about the unexplainable (as so-hy put it).

If you think you have some objective reasons for your negative thoughts against theists, I would like to hear them.

--tibac

[midnight]

I can sympathize with losing respect for someone once you find out they are christian. I have no respect for christianity. It took so little effort to learn about the violent and unpious history of christianity that I tend to be irritated that people choose not research something that affects so many aspects of their life. Its not just that its one person that belongs to some religion. Its the lack of ability to be able to think and act independently not like a brainless drone.

[Corona688]

Originally posted by wildernesse
The racism is based on the color of their skin--that's the fact that the negative thoughts are based on. That's not a valid comparison to dislike of people with religion. Black people didn't choose to black, and being black doesn't mean they chose to believe something you see as not just wrong, but utterly irrational. ( Not saying a black person couldn't have religious beliefs of course, but the two are of course unrelated. )

[DigitalChicken]

Originally posted by Corona688
That's not a valid comparison to dislike of people with religion. Black people didn't choose to black,

I didn't choose to be an atheist.

DC

[Buddrow_Wilson]

This is a good discussion. However, let's make sure we don't get hostile or into a heated debate. [SL] is a place to express yourself with little fear of having the expressions attacked. A discussion debating the morality of religious prejudice would be better served in [MF&P].

[scigirl]

Originally posted by midnight
It took so little effort to learn about the violent and unpious history of christianity that I tend to be irritated that people choose not research something that affects so many aspects of their life.
I know - isn't it strange? I often meet christians who don't know the first thing about how their bible was organized by the early church. Very strange,

scigirl

[Gurdur]

Originally posted by Autonemesis

I find that religious people perceive dissent as virulent,
True, but that can go just as easily sometimes for internet atheists.

In fact, apart from one period on the 711 board, I avoid Christian Bulletin boards, so most of my experiences are with fellow atheists.
I've been personally abused by atheists for not rar-ra-ing the home-team enough, or for objecting when ad hominem's were used upon theist posters here in lieu of actual good arguments; and since I've been an atheist for quite a while, I see often an over-reaction here on this board -- quite a few posters have expressed their wish that this board was totally theist-free, thus turning it into a self-imposed ghetto, at the same time as trumpeting superiority over the theists:
Something there just does not match.

I very much dislike dogmatism; yet I see a lot floating around here too, sometimes.

[HelenM]

Originally posted by AoErat
My problem is, whenever I find out someone is religious (moreso if they are outspoken about it), I automatically think less of them.

I think I'm happier when I aim to enjoy people rather than evaluating them.

(Thanks, Ab_Normal. I hope I was at least somewhat poilte to you!)

Helen

[Vorkosigan]

In both cases, there is no objective reason for the negative thoughts. In both cases, there is no objective reason for the negative thoughts. There is no objective reason to consider yourself a superior person based on your thoughts about the unexplainable (as so-hy put it).

If you think you have some objective reasons for your negative thoughts against theists, I would like to hear them.

Wilder, I just can't agree. When you hear that someone is a card-carrying member of the KKK, a flaming, no-good, dyed-in-the-wool African-American hating racist, you think less of them. Why? Because they believe something that has no rational foundation in facts and logic. We both agree on that.

The theist is in exactly the same position as the card-carrying racist. The theist believes in something that profoundly affects all of her relationships with others, yet there is no more evidence for her beliefs than for those of the KKK nut. Both have erected the same elaborate network of psychological defenses, rhetoric, and selective interpretations of history, embracing modes of thinking that are largely destructive and evil. So why isn't the OP's response a rational one? I'll bet the OP also feels sadness that theists have separated themselves from him in some not-very-definable way, and sadness that they are perpetuating this nonsense. I don't think 'superiority' is the right description of the feeling that so many of us have in the presence of theism; more like, satisfaction at having made the right choice.

Vorkosigan

[Gurdur]

Originally posted by Vorkosigan
.....
The theist is in exactly the same position as the card-carrying racist. ....
Possibly this thread should be moved to another forum where debates are allowed. It would seem certain sentiments expressed demand debate.

[jafosei]

Anyway, I see a lot of folks who experience the same thing, to an extent. Now, the real question is: Is it justified? I understand that obviously, hate, deep contempt, etc are all unjustified actions, but the query here is whether vague negative feelings are acceptable or not. I guess it is sort of a moral problem.

I've worked with the public for around 15 years, and you meet a wide variety of people. Like many people, I get really annoyed when I have to answer a lot of stupid questions from people who lack the intelligence to understand relatively simple things, or who don't even bother trying to understand.

I also deal with many people who suffer from diagnosable mental illnesses or developmental disabilities. I tend to be very patient with someone like this, because after all, it's certainly not their fault that they find things difficult, right?

Sometimes I can't immediately tell whether a person is developmentally disabled or is just an ignorant jerk. I have found myself annoyed with an individual for their stupidity, only to realize that they actually have a medical reason for their responses. Suddenly my attitude changes. It's quite a perspective-twister.

One day, in the midst of such an attitude change, I realized that I was playing a game of degrees with people. One person's inability to understand was okay, another person's wasn't. One person was entitled to my patience while another was just a jerk.

Essentially, I was defining what annoyed me and what didn't annoy me about the people I was dealing with. I decided that I was being pretty arbitrary, and have since largely changed my attitude toward most of the people I interact with. I tend to be more patient and forgiving with nearly everyone now. It doesn't always work: sometimes I still get ticked when a person seems particularly obtuse for no good reason, but I'm human, and that happens.

I guess the point of my rambling comment is this: we're all fallible, so I figure it's a good idea to cut other people some slack. Everyone screws up, and rare is the person who doesn't have some faulty beliefs or ideas in their head at one time or another, so I try not to hold it against them when I think they're wrong. I'm often wrong too.

Also, don't worry too much if you sense those negative feelings arising. We're human, and we get annoyed with each other. Recognize it for what it is and move on. :)

[The Other Michael]

Generally, theists baffle me (except when they are being annoying, but then you don't have to be a theist to be annoying) in re their beliefs.

I'm sure some theists have the same reaction ("God is so obvious, how can you not believe????"). But I have serious problems with the arguments they often use to justify their belief which often seem to be made of the flimsiest tissue, and full of gaping holes at that.

In my limited experience, atheists/agnostics seem to spend a bit more time arriving at their position, instead of often just "going with the flow" from childhood on.

I don't understand how the cognative dissonance doesn't drive theists up the wall.

But I'll make an attempt to be polite to everyone who is polite, though sometimes it is a struggle. It would sure help if more people would keep their missionary zeal to themselves.

cheers,
Michael

[HelenM]

Originally posted by Vorkosigan
I don't think 'superiority' is the right description of the feeling that so many of us have in the presence of theism; more like, satisfaction at having made the right choice.

But this thread is not about satisfaction at having made the right choice. I think it's possible to have that satisfaction without thinking less of others who disagree with your choice. I don't see why the two must go together and I don't think they always do go together. I believe some people have the satisfaction without the thinking less, or the borderline contempt, as the OP put it.

Helen

[Gurdur]

Originally posted by The Other Michael
.....
. It would sure help if more people would keep their missionary zeal to themselves.

But then this board wouldn't exist, would it ? Surely a pity.

;)

[Malagasy Rain]

I confess that I do tend to look at theists and Christians in a someone negative light for reasons many of you have stated as I've said in my own topic similar to this.

[Anonymous Bosch]

i have to concede that i too feel somewhat superior when told about other people's faith. i wish it weren't so. but for me, it's not just christians, although they seem to be the weakest in my instinctive judgement...any one who accepts omnipotence or fate or luck or divine justice or bloody tarot cards is a very sad sad person.

[Captain Howdy]

I don't think theists are totally irrational, they have just perfected what George Orwell called "doublethink" This means that they can be believe totally idiotic and irrational things like 2+2=5 and still understand concepts of physics.

If I tell you something happens, and it happens in your mind, it may as well have happened. Theists can not help this. They have trained themselves to be rational and irrational at the same time. They have trained each other to be that way. It has been done both forcefully and voluntarily. It works better voluntarily, and even better if it is a combination of both. An example of this is when someone starves himself and sees a god or angels or whatever.

I hope this information has been helpful.

[Aethari]

I think I agree with what you're saying, AoErat-- upon learning that someone is religious, in whatever degree, I have a subtle and fundamental shift in the way I think about them. I had become good friends with the other trip assistant on my overseas study program this summer, only to find out halfway through that she was a pretty hardcore Catholic.

I don't know how to express my thoughts then as anything other than an "Oh...." It isn't contempt or disgust, but I suppose my heart just drops to find out that someone I know buys into that stuff. As much as I don't want to stress this analogy, I react much the same way when I find out that someone is religious than I would react if I found out that someone has an incurable disease-- a lurking sadness, some anger at the circumstances ("Why did it have to happen to them ?"), and the realization that I'll never be able to look at the person the same again.

~Aethari

[The Other Michael]

Originally posted by Gurdur
But then this board wouldn't exist, would it ? Surely a pity.

;)

Hi Gurdur,

I don't think that applies. I had to stumble across IIDB on the web - no members of the BoD came knocking at my door at dinnertime to invite me to "hear the Truth".

Theists are welcome to all the websites they have the resources to establish - but they don't have to come nattering at me about it (or fill my email inbox with ads for Christian dating and debt-management services).

cheers,
Michael

[seebs]

I've seen similar discussions on Christian BBS's about how to deal with friends who turn out to be atheists.

My general impression is that every set of religious beliefs, including the empty set, contains some members who are kooks, and some who are pretty stable. I have found that it is unsafe to generalize much; some of the most rational people I know are theists. So, instead of finding out what people believe, and forming an opinion then, I try to find out how they got there. Often, I find that their paths are at least as coherent as mine, even though they have come to very different conclusions. Fine by me. If we all thought the same, we wouldn't have anything to discuss.

So, yeah, I think the instinctive "theists must not be as smart as atheists" response is the same kind of prejudice and bigotry we see in "atheists must not be as moral as theists" rants.

[4th Generation Atheist]

I quit worrying about whether or not I was prejudiced when I saw how many Xns are just plain insulted when you don't believe. If the very fact of my being an atheist is going to piss them off, how can I avoid it? I don't tend to feel "superior" to those Xns who don't take this sort of view (any more than I feel "superior" to those who voted for the other guy in an election) but when I see this sort of attitude it is a little that way. I also think like that when I encounter people who believe in, say, literal creation (much like I do around people who believe in alien abductions and such) but I don't see too many of those (or they're not sharing their beliefs with me).

I sometimes think it a little sad that some people, otherwise rational and intelligent, seem unable to divorce emotionally from the notion that their father lives in the sky. Is that what you're talking about?

[dettus]

Religious folk scare me. Simply because if they are capable of beliving in gods, devils, angels, etc, what else are they capable of believing? Hmmm maybe that if they kill a doctor they will go to heaven? That if they crash a plane into a building they are assured a plce in heaven? Sad.

And yes I do think lesser of people who are religious. Being religious tells me that you are gullible and naive.

-debaser71 (can't get rid of dettus, wife's account name)

[Vorkosigan]

Originally posted by Gurdur
Possibly this thread should be moved to another forum where debates are allowed. It would seem certain sentiments expressed demand debate.

It would seem, Gurdur, that when you snip quotes, it would be best to snip the whole quote. It is disingenuous to do otherwise. The theist, as I said, is in the same position as the racist, because the grounds for each belief are equally irrational. Your trollish attempt at inciting a riot notwithstanding, nothing was said about the content or behavior of theists here. So no grounds for debate.

Vorkosigan

[Gothic_J]

Originally posted by Captain Howdy
I don't think theists are totally irrational, they have just perfected what George Orwell called "doublethink" This means that they can be believe totally idiotic and irrational things like 2+2=5 and still understand concepts of physics.

If I tell you something happens, and it happens in your mind, it may as well have happened. Theists can not help this. They have trained themselves to be rational and irrational at the same time. They have trained each other to be that way. It has been done both forcefully and voluntarily. It works better voluntarily, and even better if it is a combination of both. An example of this is when someone starves himself and sees a god or angels or whatever.

I hope this information has been helpful.

http://www.kgivler.com/teens/tboard/viewtopic.php?t=5859

I commented on that exact concept on another board. :D

[Gurdur]

Originally posted by Vorkosigan
It would seem, Gurdur, that when you snip quotes, it would be best to snip the whole quote. It is disingenuous to do otherwise. The theist, as I said, is in the same position as the racist, because the grounds for each belief are equally irrational. Your trollish attempt at inciting a riot notwithstanding, nothing was said about the content or behavior of theists here. So no grounds for debate.

Vorkosigan
It was obvious, Vorkosigan, that I was objecting to your inflammatory pharsing, as well as to your argument.

I would be very happy to debate this thoroughly, so your personal abuse in calling my objection "trollish" is not only inappropriate to this forum, it is also an untruth.

Merely that I followed the rules of this forum in not debating your entire weak argument, does not mean I would not be happy to do so elsewhere in a more appropriate forum.

Moreover, in your second inflammatory pots, you make a logical error. According to you, a theist is in the same position as a card-carrying racist; that is a most debatable proposition, but it is also an implicit judgment of yours as to the behaviour of theists as influenced by their ideology.
So definitely grounds for debate.
:)

Your statement "trollish attempt at inciting a riot" is simply an untruth as well as being personal abuse,
since I notified mods here of your post immediately at that time, and kept my own words to a minimum.

And I will notify mods here of your personal abuse now too.
:)

[DixieNurse]

from andy_d:....Tolerance is important, I think. Even if you think they're wrong, that's no reason to not treat them as well as any other human being....If we spend a lot of time getting bent out shape by the fact that people differ, then we're going to make it much harder for ourselves to be happy.

Hi andy!,

You're absolutely right, and what you said about "even if you think they're wrong.."--reminded me of the adage, "if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all"! ;)

It seems to me (well, I know it's this way) that most Christians I know forget this in their zeal to "live as Christ did", ;p and the non-theists who visit a forum such as this have usually had more than their share of that form of terrorism---nobody wants to hear all of that over here! Here's the flipside: *sigh* It seems to me as if few will even consider anything else the Christian has to say either...argh! :banghead: :boohoo:


One of the first rules of etiquette is that when you are a guest in someone else's home, you aren't to make an ASS of yourself! :) Besides being rude, this makes it hard for the REST of us, and (around here), you can quickly wear out your welcome! :mad:

again from andy_d:...I don't see any excuse for being intolerant of another's beliefs....I say: judge them on their behaviour, not their beliefs.

Right again--there is no excuse for it..(and I say don't even judge their behavior--unless asked to..:D...it's hard enough to keep one's own house in order, without bringing on somebody else's crap to piss yourself off...)


Dixie:cool:

[AspenMama]

Originally posted by Gurdur
I would be very happy to debate this thoroughly, so [b]your personal abuse in calling my objection "trollish" is not only inappropriate to this forum, it is also an untruth.


Vorkosigan and all:
Let's keep the sniping out of this forum. Discussions are fine in this forum, by the way. But please keep to the topic at hand, or start a new one in the appropriate forum. Also, those of you who do not feel you can offer secular advice or support please consider posting in another forum.

--- AspenMama, Secular Lifestyle Moderator

[abe smith]

Well; tellya, Folks: when yez get older, & feel less vulnerable, more secure, and don't-give-a-damnity, you'll become mellower and more able to loosen-up; after all, life is short, and in a hundred years what any of us thinks isn't going to make too much difference. We Narcissists doin't get too much bin-outa-shape about what Other People do, eh?

[brighid]

I do my very best to evaluate people on an individual basis, but I am very aware that certain types of theists really aggrevate me to the bone. I would say the same thing about people of different political persuasions as well. However, I really try very hard to live by the ideal that I should be the change I want to see in the world (and some days I fall miserably short.) I do not want to be treated with hostility and contempt because I do not believe in someone’s god, therefore I will not treat others with hostility and contempt simply because they do believe in a God.

I do not think the vast majority of theists are mentally ill or deranged. I think most have been provided with limited information, were taught poor critical thinking skills and most have deeply rooted emotional and social reasons to retain their faith, therefore they don’t find a need to question the things I need to question. I do not believe MOST people actually chose their faith given that the vast majority of people I encounter have been indoctrinated into their religion since birth. I find few people stray from their cultural upbringing.

I don’t think that embracing atheism is some magical cure all that suddenly lifts all of us previous theists from mental illness. I think searching and questioning has brought us to different answers. Although I do think those answers are truer then those who rely more on faith, I am not so certain that I am absolutely correct about everything I know. This is why I am a strong atheist when it comes to Gods fashioned for man’s bidding, and agnostic when it comes to something that may be defined as a God(s).

Some religious beliefs perplex me, but I try and remember what it was like to believe, what my intentions were and what motivated me. I think this allows me to have empathy for those who aren’t on my same path, who haven’t experienced the same knowledge, and who haven’t begun (or who may never begin) questioning.

I think the best way of bridging the gap, improving relations between believers and non-believers, and making a positive impact is by setting a good example. I don’t want a theists sole, real life experience, with an atheist to be that of an arrogant, mean-spirited, individual who casts aside all that individual has to offer as a human being SIMPLY because he/she believes in a God.

I also think certain religious beliefs and practices should be challenged, and even others should be fought. I don’t think religious people, are by design, lesser, incompetent fools, or deranged. I think most are no different from you and I, and should be treated with the same respect we all desire.

Brighid

[Virgil Tibbs]

Originally posted by brighid
I do not think the vast majority of theists are mentally ill or deranged. I think most have been provided with limited information, were taught poor critical thinking skills and most have deeply rooted emotional and social reasons to retain their faith, therefore they don’t find a need to question the things I need to question.

I find a bit of a contradiction here, in that you say theism is not a mental illness, but admit they usually have a deeply rooted emotional need for their irrational belief (I'm assuming here that as an atheist toward "gods fashioned to man's bidding" you find that sort of theism irrational). Doesn't sound healthy IMO.

There's something of a double standards among most atheists in judging religions. If an adult believed in the existence of Santa Claus, I don't think anyone would hesitate to call this mental illness, despite the fact that Santa cannot be proved not to exist. However, because theism is more wide-spread and therefore seems more normal, we don't hold it to the same standard as Santa or tiny cults.

For that matter, nearly every theist I know would probably say that suicide bombers are insane. Yet religious suicide bombers have just as much "evidence" that their own position is correct (that is, as hateful as it is it cannot be proven false).

I do agree that the vast majority of theists are not mentally ill of the padded room variety, but then most people with mental illnesses function normally in society. I suffer from avoidant personality disorder myself, but the difference between me and a theist is I do not think my problem is a good thing and would certainly never try to inflict it on any children I might have!

I don’t think that embracing atheism is some magical cure all that suddenly lifts all of us previous theists from mental illness.

I totally agree here, in fact I think few people ever manage to totally shake every aspect of their indoctrination. The emotional effects will tend to linger as far as I can tell.

I don’t want a theists sole, real life experience, with an atheist to be that of an arrogant, mean-spirited, individual who casts aside all that individual has to offer as a human being SIMPLY because he/she believes in a God.

Also agree here. You don't help people by insulting them. But getting back to the OP, it can be damn hard not to want to insult them sometimes. ;)

Of the stuff in your post I did not comment on, I didn't have anything to add but I am in agreement.

Tibbs

[AoErat]

Thanks for all the well-thought-out replies. :) I've read them all and I'd say I've learned a thing or two.

Thanks again.

Mike

[Godless Wonder]

Originally posted by Virgil Tibbs
[...].There's something of a double standards among most atheists in judging religions. If an adult believed in the existence of Santa Claus, I don't think anyone would hesitate to call this mental illness, despite the fact that Santa cannot be proved not to exist. However, because theism is more wide-spread and therefore seems more normal, we don't hold it to the same standard as Santa or tiny cults. Perhaps this is because, by virtue of sheer numbers, theism is normal, it is the norm. Atheists are the statistical outliers, the abnormal. (I am an atheist, BTW, in case my name doesn't give it away.) What I'm getting at, in case it isn't obvious, is that what is normal is (can be) defined not arbitrarily, but statistically, by looking at how most people behave. By definition, that is "normal" If everyone is crazy in the same way, then nobody is crazy.

[Virgil Tibbs]

Originally posted by Godless Wonder
Perhaps this is because, by virtue of sheer numbers, theism is normal, it is the norm. Atheists are the statistical outliers, the abnormal. (I am an atheist, BTW, in case my name doesn't give it away.) What I'm getting at, in case it isn't obvious, is that what is normal is (can be) defined not arbitrarily, but statistically, by looking at how most people behave. By definition, that is "normal" If everyone is crazy in the same way, then nobody is crazy.

Hmm... Assuming I understand your meaning, I agree with you up until the last sentence. I don't think what is "crazy" (although that's too strong a word for our purposes here, IMO) changes based on what is normal for the population at the present time. If that were true than monotheism would have been crazy in areas where polytheism dominated, only to become not crazy after polytheism died out.

It's my opinion that atheism (I don't see anything irrational in agnosticism or even deism, for that matter) has always been the "not crazy" option, even though its never been normal. Of course, it's possible I'm crazy, in which case disregard everything I say. ;)

But in my post above, I'd say "seems normal" should have been "is normal," because you are right about what is normal being defined statistically... Of course, with so many different religions and none having a majority, we can't really point to a normal religion. After all, theism is just a blanket term for a bunch of mutually exclusive religions, and not an actual religion itself.

Tibbs

[Barcode]

think most have been provided with limited information, were taught poor critical thinking skills and most have deeply rooted emotional and social reasons to retain their faith, therefore they don’t find a need to question the things I need to question. I do not believe MOST people actually chose their faith given that the vast majority of people I encounter have been indoctrinated into their religion since birth. I find few people stray from their cultural upbringing.

I couldn't have said it better.

When you start being taught that things such as ... say ... the resurrection, virgin births and God's that control the entire Universe are *facts* from the time you can learn to think, it's easy to see how critical thinking skills become severely impaired.

These people often grow up with no idea how to weigh up objective facts and apply reasoning to their *own* beliefs, because as far as they are concerned, it must be true.

Goodness, if I was a child and my Dad had told me Jesus died to save us then I'd probably end up believing too -- because adults are supposed to be trustworthy and not tell lies. At least that's how I'd see it.

You don't see many Christian parents teaching their children *all* sides of an argument when it comes to religion. Why should they if they are convinced what they believe in is the truth? Of course there is no need to go into depth.

How many people would find religion of their own accord if they hadn't been brought up with it? I've yet to find any reliable statistics on this.

[abe smith]

Hence, might clear the air for this discussion, & for all of us all the time, if we remember that "normal" means only, not-more-nor-less -than, what more/most persons ALLEGEDLY do. A whole lot of alleged statistics and other alleged data are unsubstantiated because nobody knows what the real numbers/occurrences are.
Hence, Don't let 'em snow ya!

[brighid]

find a bit of a contradiction here, in that you say theism is not a mental illness, but admit they usually have a deeply rooted emotional need for their irrational belief (I'm assuming here that as an atheist toward "gods fashioned to man's bidding" you find that sort of theism irrational). Doesn't sound healthy IMO.

I don't see any contradiction. Mental illness is a biological factor that must be addressed with medication and/or therapy to alter the chemistry in the brain. A belief or lack of belief in something doesn't appear to have any significant effect on that biochemical environment. Even atheists hold irrational beliefs and a lack of belief in Gods does not insulate ones from coming to less then rational conclusions on any subject. It is also debatable whether or not a belief in a God is always unhealthy.

Most people have deeply rooted emotional needs, are those needs unhealthy because they are deeply rooted? I have a deeply rooted emotional need to be loved and love my husband and son, is this unhealthy? Others have more need then others to be a part of a community, is this always unhealthy?

I understand why people believe in Gods. I also understand that youthful indoctrination is something difficult to overcome and I find a belief in God to be silly. I don't judge people on whether or not they believe in a God, but rather by their actions. I know plenty of people on both sides of the fence that unpleasant, irrational, jerks whom I don't care to have friendships with. I also know many, many very good people who share nearly identical values with me who also happen to believe in a God.


It's my opinion that atheism (I don't see anything irrational in agnosticism or even deism, for that matter) has always been the "not crazy" option, even though its never been normal. Of course, it's possible I'm crazy, in which case disregard everything I say

I guess that depends. You could say that from a survival standpoint that holding a hated, minority view that may jepordize ones job, destroy familial and friendly relationships, and in some case cause serious and negative social consequences is the "crazy" choice. I don't think we should go around viewing theists are "crazy" simply because they happen to have some sort of God-belief. Now, there are some brands of theism and many practices within certain brands of theism that can be individually labelled as crazy. However, lumping all theists together with the extremists, fundamentalists and those who are actually crazy is simply morally wrong. Each individual deserves to be judged seperate from the whole, just as atheists aren't evil because they disbelieve in Gods, or Satanists perform human sacrifices, or that all homosexuals are pedophiles, etc.



But in my post above, I'd say "seems normal" should have been "is normal," because you are right about what is normal being defined statistically... Of course, with so many different religions and none having a majority, we can't really point to a normal religion. After all, theism is just a blanket term for a bunch of mutually exclusive religions, and not an actual religion itself.

Very well said. I think normal could be defined by what most people believe. It is normal in America to believe in Jesus (even if all Christians don't believe the same.) In India it is normal to believe in many Gods and abnormal to be a Christian or atheist ... It can then be argued that abnormal is somehow defective, couldn't it? That would put us in a pretty precarious position I would think.

Brighid

[brighid]

How many people would find religion of their own accord if they hadn't been brought up with it? I've yet to find any reliable statistics on this.

I don't think too many, depending on the cultural and social pressures of a given society.

If I could change things I would develop a society where no child was indoctrinated into any faith. I would want every child to be properly educated in language, art, math, science, music, etc. I would also want every child to be taught accurate and unbiased information about all religions, with a focus on the major religions. Upon the age of consent (say 18) a child could then chose whatever path he/she desired without infringement from society or the government (as long as it wasn't destructive to the rights of others.) To paraphrase (I think) one of our founding fathers: it neither picks my pocket, nor breaks my bones if my neighbor believes in one god, many gods or none at all. Frankly, it is none of my business and if an individual is law-abiding, and does not infringe upon the rights of others I see no reason why he/she should be unable to hold any belief, rational or irrational, healthy or unhealthy.

I know I cannot elicit those changes in the world, but I hope to have a positive impact in my small piece of the world. Who knows, maybe someday millenia from now some advanced human species will have instituted something like this and the future for our great, great ..... grand children will be better. It certainly won't begin to happen if we treat eachother as "us" and "them" like some ridiculous axis of evil, and proclaim a superior, self-righteous moral high-ground because of nothing more then a lack of belief in Gods ... now that is irrational and unhealthy.

Brighid

[No Quarter]

Though I know it is a character flaw, I cannot help but immediately ratchet down my opinion of someone once they make it known they are actively religious. I truly do not understand how you could not think of them as "lesser" after discovering the fact! Note that I mean that they openly and actively profess their beliefs in everyday interactions with people.
These are the types I can hold no truck with.

You basically are confronted with a person that will not use reason to interact with the world around them. You cannot have a meaningful conversation about anything other than "Boy! that was a good game last night huh?". Even those kinds of conversations usually turn into "The lord has really blessed them with ability" or other such nonsense - all of which makes my skin crawl.

So, I suppose if you want to keep conversation to nothing more interesting that cocktail party tripe and you do not want to ever have to discuss things of any substance, you can tolerate it all you like. Not to mention you will never glean a useful bit of advice or insight from them since everything comes from the head bliss ninny in the sky and the only insight you will ever get is anecdotes about how prayer helped them get over this or that or how prayer could help you to! Their entire world view and all of their opinions are not founded in rational thought! Nothing they say can be taken as anything more than regurgitated bible pablum.

I steer clear of them whenever I get the chance if it is strictly social interaction. Unfortunately, doing business in Dallas Texas, you have to stomach quite a bit of religious nonsense in the course of trying to do some work! I know better than to open my mouth in those circumstances - I wish they would return the courtesy.

I just know immediately how far the relationship is going to go right off the bat once they start up with the religious stuff.

In all honesty, I think we all subconsciously judge and categorize folks right off the bat anyway. Everyone just has different triggers for how they categorize people. For some it is color or dress, or hair length, accents, race, religion, financial status, etc. etc. etc.

How do you interact with people WITHOUT assessing and judging them based upon available data anyway? I don't believe you can meet people without drawing conclusions under the best of circumstances. The very way we comprehend our environment is based upon prossessing data and drawing a conclusion. People are just other elements of our surroundings that we have to assess and judge in order for us to figure out how to deal with them.


My apologies in advance for sounding rather close minded on the subject. I meet a lot of people and have basically drawn my current mind set from experience.

NQ

[Buddrow_Wilson]

Originally posted by brighid
If I could change things I would develop a society where no child was indoctrinated into any faith. I would want every child to be properly educated in language, art, math, science, music, etc. I would also want every child to be taught accurate and unbiased information about all religions, with a focus on the major religions. Upon the age of consent (say 18) a child could then chose whatever path he/she desired without infringement from society or the government (as long as it wasn't destructive to the rights of others.)

The problem here is that it would be unreasonable/unrealistic to expect a religious person to withhold from indocrinating their children until the age of 18. I view the indoctrination (brainwashing) of children as a form of child abuse. Thus, IMO, a perfect government would actively discourage its people from participating in superstition-based religions because they will invariably lead to the abuse. I can't imagine a society that is benevolent/accepting towards religion and somehow able to enforce/propogate a policy against the indoctrination of children.

[Virgil Tibbs]

Originally posted by brighid
I don't see any contradiction. Mental illness is a biological factor that must be addressed with medication and/or therapy to alter the chemistry in the brain.

That does describe some mental illnesses, but not all. They can also come about through simple conditioning. For example, if a parent tells his child every day that the child won't ever amount to anything, that is likely to cause pyschological problems. Tell the child he is going to burn in hell for eternity if he has covetous thoughts, and... well, that would only apply to fundies, of course.

A belief or lack of belief in something doesn't appear to have any significant effect on that biochemical environment.

Actually, I wonder if anyone has ever thought to conduct research in this area? Maybe dogmatic thought might trigger some sort of noticable effect? I couldn't say of course.

Even atheists hold irrational beliefs and a lack of belief in Gods does not insulate ones from coming to less then rational conclusions on any subject. It is also debatable whether or not a belief in a God is always unhealthy.

I certainly never said atheists can't be nuts in other areas. :) I'll agree that in most cases theism is not significantly unhealthy, but then mild mental illnesses usually aren't any big deal.

Most people have deeply rooted emotional needs, are those needs unhealthy because they are deeply rooted? I have a deeply rooted emotional need to be loved and love my husband and son, is this unhealthy? Others have more need then others to be a part of a community, is this always unhealthy?

Personally, I see a world of difference between depending on real people and depending on imaginary people, but that's just me. ;) Generally, in pyschology it seems that not depending on people enough is as unhealthy as depending too much.

I understand why people believe in Gods. I also understand that youthful indoctrination is something difficult to overcome and I find a belief in God to be silly. I don't judge people on whether or not they believe in a God, but rather by their actions.

I agee.

I don't think we should go around viewing theists are "crazy" simply because they happen to have some sort of God-belief. Now, there are some brands of theism and many practices within certain brands of theism that can be individually labelled as crazy. However, lumping all theists together with the extremists, fundamentalists and those who are actually crazy is simply morally wrong. Each individual deserves to be judged seperate from the whole, just as atheists aren't evil because they disbelieve in Gods, or Satanists perform human sacrifices, or that all homosexuals are pedophiles, etc.

I'm certanly not lumping in liberal theists with fundies. As an anology, that would be like lumping in people who were mildly depressed with a person on 24-hour suicide watch.

There's really a continuous spectrum in mental illness, IMO. It can be hard to tell where the blues ends and where mild depression sets in, and where mild depression becomes more serious, etc. So to with supernaturalism, IMHO. The human mind is a very complicated thing.

Tibbs

[Bright Life]

I didn't choose to be an atheist.

Me neither, DC, and it sure did cause me some troubles growing up. Never did get that "suspension of disbelief" down for longer than it took to watch a fun movie.

How many people would find religion of their own accord if they hadn't been brought up with it?

Anecdotally speaking, the only people I've known who "found religion" as adults went through some personal crisis and found support and strength in church/temple. They found comfort in knowing that God would never let them down (he'd just "work in mysterious ways")and he would forgive them for their sins (the xian ones, anyway) and accept them, even though they were "wretched."

I always thought these situations were sad and desperate, possibly self-delusional--but not a mental illness.

I've yet to find any reliable statistics on this.

I'd say a good place to look for these #'s is in a prison population.

[reprise]

Why do so many of us feel "bad" about judging someone on the basis of their religious beliefs but not on the basis of other beliefs they might hold?

Unchallenged belief systems have the potential to do enormous harm and yet even those of us who maintain a high awareness of that fact often see belief systems as being someone's "private business" and don't see it as our place to challenge those beliefs - until such time as we must endure the bad laws or bad governments which often reflect the very beliefs we thought were a "private" issue.

[xxthe_leewitxx]

This thread hits a nerve with me... and has caused me to think a lot about how I approach dealing with people with strong religious convictions (particularly those of the Christian faith).

My mother works with a woman who holds fairly fundamental Christian beliefs. You usually will hear 'God bless you' or 'Have a blessed day' from her, and she injects her belief into most subjects you discuss with her, but somehow Ms. Lena's loving attitude shines through, and you can't help but like her, even if you don't share any of her beliefs. You never get the feeling that she's trying to make you believe the same thing she does. I have respect for her and her beliefs because she doesn't take it to the realm that I consider 'crazy'.

My fiancee's parents are far easier to dismiss as nutcases, however. Despite attending what is a fairly liberal Christian church, they espouse some interestingly fundamental beliefs, and they seem totally oblivious to how ignorant they sound when they start talking about religion. His mother tries to 'heal' my health problems by laying on hands and praying. His father keeps trying to coerce us to attend services with them, despite our repeated demurrals. They are not bad people in the least, merely misguided, I think... but unfortunately these are the kind of Christians that I have a hard time respecting.

Overall I guess it doesn't come down to just their beliefs. I think the kind of people they are and how they 'wear' their religion has an awful lot to do with how I deal with them. If I was faced with feeling less respect for someone based on their religious leanings (and I am), I would try to look to their other qualities, see the bright side of things as it were. You can't blind yourself to their religion, but if it's a relationship that's worth maintaining for other reasons, I've always been the kind of person who will 'nod and smile' when divisive subjects are at hand, if I see that I'm not being hurt by doing so, and that argument won't get me anywhere at any rate. Perhaps this is hypocritical, but it saves me a lot of anguish and energy that otherwise is spent being angry or annoyed. You can still deal with people politely and kindly on an individual basis, even if you have very little respect for them, as long as they are willing to be polite and kind as well.

[brighid]

The problem here is that it would be unreasonable/unrealistic to expect a religious person to withhold from indocrinating their children until the age of 18. I view the indoctrination (brainwashing) of children as a form of child abuse. Thus, IMO, a perfect government would actively discourage its people from participating in superstition-based religions because they will invariably lead to the abuse. I can't imagine a society that is benevolent/accepting towards religion and somehow able to enforce/propogate a policy against the indoctrination of children.

I am not sure, if having started over those in this new society were taught the value of freethought over religious indoctrination. It is my theory that few people would chose religion and even fewer would chose fundamentalist religions, but prefer more liberal strains of theism that seem to be less innocuous.

I think there a balance can be struck, but it has to be a priority. I don't think it is possible on a large scale, such as nationwide or global. I think it is possible in small communities that would hopefully one day grow to large communities.

I can imagine that society. Religion is an adult choice, one for mature minds just like many other things that are not encouraged in society - underaged drinking, sex, etc. Responsible adults don't include their children in sex acts, in drinking alcohol, doing drugs, there is a legal age limit for marriage, voting and other things that require mature thought. I don't see why it shouldn't or couldn't be different in a community developed for that purpose. I do think a society could be created that supported the position that religion is such an important choice that one must be properly informed and mature. How can a 10 year old possibly understand the implications of eternally dedicating his soul to a deity? He can't.

In a society that values freethought and works to protect speach, expression, thought, etc. it certainly can discourage the indoctrination of children while respecting the religious beliefs of adults.

Obviously, this would require adults willing to accept such principles first and the value of freedom and adult responsibility would grow as the community grew.

People who are raised with the idea that it is no one's business what his neighbor believes about Gods or no Gods, that such choices are only made by adults, and each individual is properly educated in critical thinking, neutral religious information, etc. I cannot see why that wouldn't work.

We aren't going to change those already lost to fundamentalism and fanatical behavior, but there are plenty of new generations not yet realized. This is also one reason I find it so sad that more non-theists and atheists chose not to have children.

I actually think you see much of this in European, secular societies. Although I am unsure about the neutral religious teachings. Those who aren't force fed religion as children, but have been exposed to many modes of thought are unlikely to become religious fundamentalists. They may believe in a God in some form, but I just don't see the problem with that.

Brighid

[Barcode]

Bright Life: I've found something on the prison statistics here (http://holysmoke.org/icr-pri.htm).

It's quite telling since a lot of Christians claim to live by a strict moral code, and yet are over represented in the crime statistics.

Now to me, this seems partly explainable by the fact the majority of the population are Christians -- I'm simply suggesting that it throws a rather large spanner into their claims of being Godly and " moral."

And if a number of conversions happen in prison, it would obviously suggest religious beliefs arise (in these instances) as a result of a being placed in a situation that upsets one's psychological balance.

[brighid]

That does describe some mental illnesses, but not all. They can also come about through simple conditioning. For example, if a parent tells his child every day that the child won't ever amount to anything, that is likely to cause pyschological problems. Tell the child he is going to burn in hell for eternity if he has covetous thoughts, and... well, that would only apply to fundies, of course.

Virgil, I then think we are mentally ill to some degree as I doubt there is a single individual alive who has not been psychological harmed in some way, shape or form by another human being. Some of us have been severly emotional, physically, sexually and or mentally abused in our lives and others to lesser degrees. Many of us have even been abused by religious zealots. Wouldn't that bring into question our own decisions and conclusions about religion, etc.?

That is why it is dangerous to say that "theists"? (as a collective group) are some how mentally defective, deranged, or ill because they hold a God-belief. Especially since theist is such a broad term and the only thing they have in common is a God-belief.

I am not even sure we can say that people who suffer from actual mental illnesses, but who have those diseases under control, are somehow incapable of making rational choices. The spectrum of possibilities is simply too great to make general statements about millions, rather billions of people. How unfair and inaccurate.

Actually, I wonder if anyone has ever thought to conduct research in this area? Maybe dogmatic thought might trigger some sort of noticable effect? I couldn't say of course.

That would be interesting. I don't doubt strict dogmatic thoughts trigger some biochemical response, but then again not all theists are dogmatic or fundamentalists.

I think, for the most part, we are barely different then the average theist in our desires and goals for life. I think we approach things differently.

I am VERY uncomfortable assigning some sort of mental inferiority or defectiveness to theists, except those that who actually exhibit behavior that is harmful to others. Frankly, if it is harmful to the individual I feel it is none of my business (the adult individual anyway.) It's harmful to smoke, drink excessively, having unprotected sex with multiple partners, to drive too fast in unsafe conditions, to walk alone in a bad neighborhood at night ... and honestly can't all these things be argued to be irrational and only those with some sort of mental defect would undertake such obviously harmful behaviors? The whole world is pretty fucked then and perhaps some degree of mental illness is inherent in our human nature.

Personally, I see a world of difference between depending on real people and depending on imaginary people, but that's just me. Generally, in pyschology it seems that not depending on people enough is as unhealthy as depending too much.

I agree and I see the world similarly, but I can also understand why a God belief is important to others. Especially if their brain has been pre-programmed to believe such a thing.


I'm certanly not lumping in liberal theists with fundies. As an anology, that would be like lumping in people who were mildly depressed with a person on 24-hour suicide watch.

I am glad to you realize the difference. Unfortunately, there are those who feel any theist is defective or mentally deranged, and deserving of our contempt and ridicule for nothing more then believing in a God.

There is a spectrum, as you say. Each individual deserves to be judged on his/her own merits.

B

[Barcode]

I actually think you see much of this in European, secular societies. Although I am unsure about the neutral religious teachings. Those who aren't force fed religion as children, but have been exposed to many modes of thought are unlikely to become religious fundamentalists. They may believe in a God in some form, but I just don't see the problem with that.

Speaking purely from personal experience :)

In England, I grew up loosely believing Christianity (specifically, the Church of England) was the " correct " way. Many of our religious education classes focused on this and The Bible and I don't recall ever being told it was anything less than a fact.

So by the age of 12 or 13 I honestly thought stories such as the crucifixion and resurrection were wholly accurate because nobody had bothered to suggest otherwise.

We were taught about other religions, but not in as much depth as Christianity. There was also prayer in school assembly and it was assumed we would participate in religious events on the main holidays (Christmas/Easter).

Whilst it's not as overt as many places in America I've been too -- it's most definitely *there.* Few people I knew at school went to Church or did the whole kaboodle -- it's more the underlying *assumption* that you're a member of the C of E unless you bother to correct someone should the issue arise.

I'm thankful I grew up in a society which doesn't value religion as much as some other places I've been -- here in Portugal is one; but there is still progress to be made.

[demoninho]

Originally posted by brighid

....
People who are raised with the idea that it is no one's business what his neighbor believes about Gods or no Gods, that such choices are only made by adults, and each individual is properly educated in critical thinking, neutral religious information, etc. I cannot see why that wouldn't work.

....

I actually think you see much of this in European, secular societies. Although I am unsure about the neutral religious teachings. Those who aren't force fed religion as children, but have been exposed to many modes of thought are unlikely to become religious fundamentalists. They may believe in a God in some form, but I just don't see the problem with that.


Hm, just realized we were taught this the real hard way. I guess WWII finally made us think and change our ways. The US never had a full scale war in their backyard. Any thinking that could hint at fascism, racism and intolerance is strictly prohibited by society here in Holland. Don't know how this is the rest of Europe but here we get to see at least once a week a documentary about WWII and what intolerance leads to.

edit to add: actually funny the US forced us to co-operate and set aside our differences, be tollerant with the Marshall plan

[brighid]

Hm, just realized we were taught this the real hard way. I guess WWII finally made us think and change our ways. The US never had a full scale war in their backyard. Any thinking that could hint at fascism, racism and intolerance is strictly prohibited by society here in Holland. Don't know how this is the rest of Europe but here we get to see at least once a week a documentary about WWII and what intolerance leads to.

Hopefully it won't take something as devastating as WWII to teach American society the value of TRUE freedom of thought, tolerance and that racism and fascism are horrible, destructive modes of thought. Sadly, our present administration seems to champion fascism and racism more subtley.

Many times I have thought that if the opportunity presented itself I would stronly consider moving to Holland or another secular country.

Brighid

[demoninho]

Originally posted by brighid


Many times I have thought that if the opportunity presented itself I would stronly consider moving to Holland or another secular country.



Then the US will lose ....

Hopefully it won't take something as devastating as WWII to teach American society the value of TRUE freedom of thought, tolerance and that racism and fascism are horrible, destructive modes of thought. Sadly, our present administration seems to champion fascism and racism more subtley.

Maybe atheists in the States should focus more on history education instead of biology in particular Europe's bloody history, there's plenty of stuff to learn from there unfortunately. We also had to change our view of the world from the brave seafares dominating the world's ocean to slave traders and cruel colonizers. Personally I don't think the latter is completely true but learning about it sort of puts things into perspective.

Ultimately what makes a freethinker is some one who can and is willing to look critically to oneself.

[brighid]

Then the US will lose ....

Thank you very kindly.

Maybe atheists in the States should focus more on history education instead of biology in particular Europe's bloody history, there's plenty of stuff to learn from there unfortunately. We also had to change our view of the world from the brave seafares dominating the world's ocean to slave traders and cruel colonizers. Personally I don't think the latter is completely true but learning about it sort of puts things into perspective.

I think that is an excellent idea! Maybe our focus needs to be broadened, or concentrated in different areas (while not neglecting the importance of science.)

Ultimately what makes a freethinker is some one who can and is willing to look critically to oneself.

I agree, and even a theist can be a freethinker in this respect.

Brighid

[CBJ]

Originally posted by xxthe_leewitxx
You can still deal with people politely and kindly on an individual basis, even if you have very little respect for them, as long as they are willing to be polite and kind as well.


Bottom line!


CBJ

[Virgil Tibbs]

Originally posted by brighid
Virgil, I then think we are mentally ill to some degree as I doubt there is a single individual alive who has not been psychological harmed in some way, shape or form by another human being. Some of us have been severly emotional, physically, sexually and or mentally abused in our lives and others to lesser degrees. Many of us have even been abused by religious zealots. Wouldn't that bring into question our own decisions and conclusions about religion, etc.?

The difference between theism and most other mild mental illnesses is that peole recognize when they have them and that they are undesirable. I can recognize when I feel depressed, I can recognize that I have avoidant personality disorder, and thus I can try to work around them. The theist actively embarces his problem as a good thing because he has been indoctrinated to do so.

Imagine a world where we raised our children to not wish to speak to others (if you've read Asimov, think Solaria). Everyone would then suffer from being severely disconnected to their fellows. But at the same time, since this behavior would be normal, more well adjusted people would be abnormal and likely distrusted.

That is why it is dangerous to say that "theists"? (as a collective group) are some how mentally defective, deranged, or ill because they hold a God-belief. Especially since theist is such a broad term and the only thing they have in common is a God-belief.

Yes, I'm saying that the God-belief, in and of itself, is not a healthy thing, anymore than belief in the Invisible Pink Unicorn would be. However, for most people it does not have a significant effect on their lives. Btw, I disagree on your choice of words, but I'll get to that below.

I am not even sure we can say that people who suffer from actual mental illnesses, but who have those diseases under control, are somehow incapable of making rational choices. The spectrum of possibilities is simply too great to make general statements about millions, rather billions of people. How unfair and inaccurate.

You seem to be ascribing to me a circa nineteenth century attitude toward mental illness. :( I of course recognize that people with mild mental illnesses are rational the majority of the time. For that matter, I tend to doubt their is anyone who doesn't have some odd little problems here and there. Again, in most other cases besides theism, people aren't indoctrinated to think their problems are desirable.

Furthermore, if one thinks the mental illness is a good thing, is the illness really properly under control?


That would be interesting. I don't doubt strict dogmatic thoughts trigger some biochemical response, but then again not all theists are dogmatic or fundamentalists.

All theists are dogmatic on the specific subject of god's existence and ability to manipulate events, or else they would not be theists but deists or agnostics. To be a true theist one has to believe that god must by necessity exist. Any less I'd consider agnostic leaning theist (granted, most of these people call themselves some variety of theist since they don't stop to question).

I agree that most theists are not dogmatic on subjects outside their religion (again excepting fundamentalists).

I am VERY uncomfortable assigning some sort of mental inferiority or defectiveness to theists, except those that who actually exhibit behavior that is harmful to others.

I don't think people who are mentally ill are "inferior" or "defective" or "deranged" from above (indeed, I hope you do not either!). Mental illness is simply unhealthy (ranging from very mildly to severely) and undesirable to suffer from. Much as a physical illness (say, a cold).

Frankly, if it is harmful to the individual I feel it is none of my business (the adult individual anyway.) It's harmful to smoke, drink excessively, having unprotected sex with multiple partners, to drive too fast in unsafe conditions, to walk alone in a bad neighborhood at night ...

Not to nitpick, but unsafe driving is unsafe to a lot more people than the driver. Otherwise I agree. I certainly wouldn't condone singling out theists in any way.

and honestly can't all these things be argued to be irrational and only those with some sort of mental defect would undertake such obviously harmful behaviors? The whole world is pretty fucked then and perhaps some degree of mental illness is inherent in our human nature.

No disagreement here.


I agree and I see the world similarly, but I can also understand why a God belief is important to others. Especially if their brain has been pre-programmed to believe such a thing.


Not to belabor the point, but if someone had been pre-programmed with a different unfalsifiable belief (Santa, IPU) I don't think to many people would have a problem considering this mental illness.


I am glad to you realize the difference. Unfortunately, there are those who feel any theist is defective or mentally deranged, and deserving of our contempt and ridicule for nothing more then believing in a God.

There is a spectrum, as you say. Each individual deserves to be judged on his/her own merits.


I also agree completely here, and am very much against people who treat those with mental illnesses badly (I certainly did not appreciate being picked on constantly in middle school because I was overly shy!). I understand sometimes people need to vent, but nevertheless I wish there were a lot less insults toward theists around here. (Although I think people can be insulted for immoral actions, as mental illness does excuse that IMO.)

Anyway, just like to say this discussion is very interesting! It's really helped me get my thoughts in order.

Tibbs

[demoninho]

A delusion is defined as, a false personal belief based on incorrect inference about external reality and firmly sustained despite of what everyone else believes and despite what constitutes incontrovertible and obvious proof or evidence to the contrary (from dsm-iv can't find the indexing number though:()

Shared Psycotic Disorder: Someone who is closely associated with a delusional person also develops a delusion. The content of this new delusion is similar to that of the first person's delusion. The disorder is not explained better by another psychotic disorder, such as Schizophrenia or Mood Disorder with Psychotic Features. This disorder is not directly caused by a general medical condition or the use of substances, including prescription medications.
(from dsm-iv can't find the indexing number though :()

The above definitions are the oficial psychiatric definitions of delusion and shared psychotic disorder. The dividing line between mental illness and religion is a real thin one.

[Angrillori]

Hey,

Back to the OP, I just realized an important corollary:

When I learn someone is an atheist, I do, immediately, think much MUCH more highly of them.

I think there's a certain amount of credit due anyone willing to:
A) think critically about an important part of their life
B) take a position so obviously against the flow of society
C) accept the personal responsibility and liability that atheism entails.

Do you know what I mean?

Plus, there seems to be a high correlation between education, rationality, good naturedness, and atheism. I value the first three and use the fourth as an indicator.

[Carrie]

I look at it this way: There are lots of religious people out there, and they all vary. From your super-fundy to very liberal barely religious at all types. What's important to me is, do they think? Do they use their brains, are they open to discussion, are they honest about their own doubts, etc?

A person can be a fundamentalist Christian, like I was, but still be a thinker, and it doesn't mean they are stupid for being a believer. They might just be afraid to look into their doubts, or not have much time to get around to seriously looking into their religion, etc. That's how I was. I always doubted and questioned, but I was afraid so I didn't look into it too deeply, and I was very busy. Once I got fed up, and I had time, I committed myself to studying the Bible to see what's wrong with it. Many Christians will never do this because they don't want to question anything. Ignorance is bliss or whatever.

If someone had come along, a nice well informed atheist, and talked some sense into me, I could have been deconverted a long time ago. I was always open to talking to people. But the only non-believers that ever tried to convince me I was wrong were poorly educated about the Bible, had never been believers,
and didn't say the kinds of things that would have convinced me they were right. Right now, I am very much able to explain what's wrong with the Bible and why, and if I met a questioning Christian, I would probably be able to plant some serious doubt in their head and maybe get them to come to their senses.

So, I don't really care for the types of believers who are set in their ways that they never think about anything. I have friends like this, but that's only because I've been friends with them for a long time, from back when I was a believer too. I don't want to be friends with new people like this.

It's normal for most people to sorta look down on those that are different from you. Christians look down on Atheists and think of us as "those poor ignorant sinners." I look down on the fundamentalist Christians, because I can't help it. Their beliefs are so repulsive to me. But I try not to focus on it. That's how I stay friends with my fundy buddies. I just try to ignore the whole issue. They aren't willing to discuss with me why I'm an Atheist, so we just leave it alone. They ignore that I'm an Atheist, and I ignore that they are Christian, and we focus on other things we have in common.

Like I said, the only reason I'm friends with fundy Christians is because we go way back, but I don't want to make any new fundy friends. I'd rather hang out with like minded people, people I prefer, people I see as "better."

I do see believers as somewhat lesser, I don't know if I can help it, but I don't think it neccessarily effects my current relationships. It effects future relationships. If someone is religious, especially very religious, I may not want to be friends with them, and there's nothing wrong with that. I can't choose who I want in my family, but I can pick who I want as friends.