NOTICE:

[xenologer]

LGBT activism isn't about creating more gay people; it's about supporting and advocating for the ones who're here. Still, atheist activism is framed (by people who aren't doing it) as evangelism. We don't care about converting you; we're just... out. Get over it.

Jeez.

Comments

Re: I wish this was true, because it's very well stated.

[virginia-fell.livejournal.com]

RE: Dawkins. Just because some people will get irrationally upset no matter how politely somebody says that they fervently believe things which are patently untrue, doesn't mean the person who said it wasn't polite or civil enough. Dawkins would get called an asshole, and so would anybody who cited him, no matter how courteous he was. I mean, to an American the man is preternaturally soft-spoken because he's not just American-courteous, he's British-courteous. I don't think there's any tone of criticism of religion that is satisfactorily obsequious.

I mean, if you can find a way to tell a devoutly religious person, "You know. If there weren't so many Christians, we would classify your beliefs as a mental illness. In fact, we already institutionalize people who clearly actually believe what most Christians only say they do," in a way that is so polite and gentle that you are immune to the tone argument while doing so, you are magic and need to be doing all the talking for all the rest of us.

Re: I wish this was true, because it's very well stated.

[count-fenring.livejournal.com]

I mean, if you can find a way to tell a devoutly religious person, "You know. If there weren't so many Christians, we would classify your beliefs as a mental illness. In fact, we already institutionalize people who clearly actually believe what most Christians only say they do," in a way that is so polite and gentle that you are immune to the tone argument while doing so, you are magic and need to be doing all the talking for all the rest of us.

That's kind of my point - people are upset about that because, from a non-atheist perspective, it's inherently offensive as hell. It doesn't matter how many layers of indirection you cloak "You're stupid and also crazy" in, it's STILL not polite. It's like saying "Excuse me, but your mother regularly enjoys the coitus of dogs and cattle, beg my pardon." Or, to bring it back to atheism, it's like saying "With the greatest of respect, the only source of morality is religion - any Atheist who seemingly behaves morally is just going through the motions."

And, frankly, the argument "The majority of people through out history are mentally ill" is a bad argument. You can argue that the religious impulse is incorrect, unfounded in evidence, and has a problematic history, but if you argue that the religious impulse is a mental illness, I'm sorry, but you're not arguing in good faith, and you don't have a chance in hell of converting anyone no matter how nicely you say it, because you just said that the normal condition of humanity is a mental disease. It doesn't even matter if you're right, because that dog just won't hunt.

It sucks for atheists (and often for everyone) that they have to coexist with religious persons, impulses, and institutions. It's also a fact, and not one amenable to change.

Re: I wish this was true, because it's very well stated.

[virginia-fell.livejournal.com]

That's kind of my point - people are upset about that because, from a non-atheist perspective, it's inherently offensive as hell. It doesn't matter how many layers of indirection you cloak "You're stupid and also crazy" in, it's STILL not polite.

This is why the tone argument is bullshit. If there's no right way to say something, stop dismissing the people who say it "wrong," just because they didn't say it in the completely nonexistent correct fashion.

It sucks for atheists (and often for everyone) that they have to coexist with religious persons, impulses, and institutions. It's also a fact, and not one amenable to change.

No, actually, it doesn't. You misunderstand my problem and the goal of being "out" as an atheist, and it's showing all throughout this comment thread. I don't care that there are religious people and I'm not on some kind of eliminationist mission to make sure that their ideas disappear. I don't need them all to convert. I just want them to stop treating atheists like evil fundamentalist sociopaths just because we can't convince ourselves of unbelievable things.

That's the problem here. I do not give a single blue slippery fuck whether there are religious people; I care about how people treat each other, and specifically (when it comes to activism by atheists for other atheists) I care about how atheists get treated when they're "out" as atheists.

Unfortunately there is no conversation about atheists or atheism that someone will not come in and totally derail into a discussion of the ethics of "deconverting" people to the cause. See also: You. Here.