• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Persecution: Christian on atheist or atheist on Christian?

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/29/why-are-americans-still-uncomfortable-with-atheism

Daniel Seeger was twenty-one when he wrote to his local draft board to say, “I have concluded that war, from the practical standpoint, is futile and self-defeating, and from the more important moral standpoint, it is unethical.” Some time later, he received the United States Selective Service System’s Form 150, asking him to detail his objections to military service. It took him a few days to reply, because he had no answer for the form’s first question: “Do you believe in a Supreme Being?”

Unsatisfied with the two available options—“Yes” and “No”—Seeger finally decided to draw and check a third box: “See attached pages.” There were eight of those pages, and in them he described reading Plato, Aristotle, and Spinoza, all of whom “evolved comprehensive ethical systems of intellectual and moral integrity without belief in God,” and concluded that “the existence of God cannot be proven or disproven, and the essence of His nature cannot be determined.” For good measure, Seeger also used scare quotes and strike-throughs to doctor the printed statement he was required to sign, so that it read, “I am, by reason of my ‘religious’ training and belief, conscientiously opposed to participation in war in any form.”



By the time Seeger submitted his form, in the late nineteen-fifties, thousands of conscientious objectors in the U.S. had refused to fight in the two World Wars. Those who belonged to pacifist religious traditions, such as Mennonites and Quakers, were sent to war as noncombatants or to work as farmers or firefighters on the home front through the Civilian Public Service; eventually, so were those who could prove their own independent, religiously motivated pacifism. Those who could not were sent to prison or to labor camps. But while Selective Service laws had been revised again and again to clarify the criteria for conscientious objection, they still did not account for young men who, like Seeger, refused to say that their opposition to war came from belief in a Supreme Being.

Over time, draft boards came to resemble freshman philosophy seminars in their attempts to decide who did and did not qualify for C.O. status. A Jewish socialist who ran an engraving business did not, but a pulp artist and atheist who appealed to the idea of secular humanism did; some members of the Ethical Culture Society qualified, but not others; Jehovah’s Witnesses initially did not, on the theory that someone willing to fight the Devil during Armageddon ought to be willing to fight America’s enemies during a war; a writer turned financial consultant who belonged to no church but had read “philosophers, historians, and poets from Plato to Shaw” was granted C.O. status after two contradictory close readings of his antiwar play. Different boards reached very different conclusions, various appeal boards upheld and reversed those decisions without much consistency, and, inevitably, some of those appeals ended up before federal courts. When Seeger’s local board was unmoved by his argument, he took it all the way to the Supreme Court, where, in 1965, the Justices found unanimously that a draftee did not need to believe in God in order to have a conscience that could object.

Seeger’s victory helped mark a turning point for a minority that had once been denied so much as the right to testify in court, even in their own defense.

Atheists, long discriminated against by civil authorities and derided by their fellow-citizens, were suddenly eligible for some of the exemptions and protections that had previously been restricted to believers. But, in the decades since U.S. v. Seeger, despite an increase in the number of people who identify as nonbelievers, their standing before the courts and in the public sphere has been slow to improve. Americans, in large numbers, still do not want atheists teaching their children, or marrying them. They would, according to surveys, prefer a female, gay, Mormon, or Muslim President to having an atheist in the White House, and some of them do not object to attempts to keep nonbelievers from holding other offices, even when the office is that of notary public. Atheists are not welcome in the Masonic Lodge, and while the Boy Scouts of America has opened its organization to gays and to girls, it continues to bar any participant who will not pledge “to do my duty to God.”

Such discrimination is both a cause and an effect of the crude way in which we parse belief, which has barely changed since Daniel Seeger completed his C.O. application: check “Yes” and endless questions follow; check “No” and the questioning ends. Lack of belief in God is still too often taken to mean the absence of any other meaningful moral beliefs, and that has made atheists an easy minority to revile.

Enough said. I think Atheists win the who is more persecuted argument. :p

Seriously though: Was there ever any doubt? And, the question was only about Christians persecuting atheists. There are about 13 majority Muslim countries that can give the death penalty to an atheist, just for being an atheist. I would not be surprised if the White National Christian MAGAs would love to be added to the list. 💢
 
Unless they're vegetarians. Hitler was a vegetarian, so clearly vegetarianism leads directly to genocide.

;)
I'm vegetarian AND atheist. You don't want to know what goes on in my basement. Mwah - hah - hah - HAH. No. Really.
There's a "basement" computer somewhere close (bluetooth) nearby. Yet I watched every house within range being built--none have basements. FBI, NSA or Jihadists? :)
 
Enough said. I think Atheists win the who is more persecuted argument. :p

Seriously though: Was there ever any doubt? And, the question was only about Christians persecuting atheists. There are about 13 majority Muslim countries that can give the death penalty to an atheist, just for being an atheist. I would not be surprised if the White National Christian MAGAs would love to be added to the list. 💢
I'll stick with the Jews in the most persecuted category.

Concerning where being a believer can lead to jail or death Death to Christians
It is a multi-horse race about who is persecuted where and why.
 
Unless they're vegetarians. Hitler was a vegetarian, so clearly vegetarianism leads directly to genocide.

;)
I'm vegetarian AND atheist. You don't want to know what goes on in my basement. Mwah - hah - hah - HAH. No. Really.
There's a "basement" computer somewhere close (bluetooth) nearby. Yet I watched every house within range being built--none have basements. FBI, NSA or Jihadists? :)
People like to have fun with their SSIDs

My phone is called "TellMyWiFiLoveHer"

I have seen quite a few variations on the theme of "Police Surveillence Van 5" or "StopStealingMyWiFI".

Not sure if it was on here, but I seem to recall someone whose neighbour couldn't afford an Internet service but was too proud to ask for charity, who set up an open WiFi access point with the SSID "City Council Free WiFi" (or similar) , and told the neighbour it was 'available in their area'.
 
US, you consider atheists worse. What is your metric. Show your work.

Show 1) how they are worse; and 2) how that is because they are atheist.
I wonder what difference that would make.
Well, there's one easy way to find out...
So far I've seen that evidence that does not support beliefs is just discarded here.
Sure, but that's true everywhere. It happens less here than most other places, at least in my experience. But humans gonna human.
 
There's a "basement" computer somewhere close (bluetooth) nearby. Yet I watched every house within range being built--none have basements. FBI, NSA or Jihadists? :)

Our wifi doesn’t have a password. We figure the range of the wifi is shorter than the range of the rifle, and anyone using the wif would have to be sitting exposed in an open field, so we leave it open in order to let the UPS and other delivery persons update their gps without having to drive two miles to a cell phone hot spot.
 
US, you consider atheists worse. What is your metric. Show your work.

Show 1) how they are worse; and 2) how that is because they are atheist.
I wonder what difference that would make. So far I've seen that evidence that does not support beliefs is just discarded here.
Tell you got nuthin without telling me you got nuthin.
 
So you advocate persecuting Christians.
Well it isn't like I'm trying to send them to hell.
In real life, If someone hits you, 'turning the other cheek', will most likely get you hit again whenever they feel like it.
Bullies don't respect timidity, or mercy. They see it as weakness to be exploited.
At the very least yell "OW" as loud as you can. Or even hit back. To let them know you are mad, and ain't gonna take it.
infants and small children, or should we get them too?
I wouldn't tell a child that there is no Santa. But if they haven't figured it out by adulthood, then they are fair game.
Can anybody else see the irony of alleging a "dumbing down" in a sentence full of spelling and capitalization errors?
I blame spellcheck. It was supposed to protect me from your scorn.
I do not capitalize christianity, is-lame, jesus, god, or trump.
 
Unless they're vegetarians. Hitler was a vegetarian, so clearly vegetarianism leads directly to genocide.

;)
I'm vegetarian AND atheist. You don't want to know what goes on in my basement. Mwah - hah - hah - HAH. No. Really.
There's a "basement" computer somewhere close (bluetooth) nearby. Yet I watched every house within range being built--none have basements. FBI, NSA or Jihadists? :)
People like to have fun with their SSIDs
This is bluetooth, though. I normally don't see creative bluetooth IDs. It's gone for now, though, the only alien I see is a TV.
 
I see u.s. has abandoned this thread. I suspect in his head, he 'won' because he thinks we were all mean to him for *re-reads thread* asking him to actually provide evidence for his assertions.
 
I see u.s. has abandoned this thread. I suspect in his head, he 'won' because he thinks we were all mean to him for *re-reads thread* asking him to actually provide evidence for his assertions.
More the thread (and forums) cut US off entirely. See the announcements forum...
 
I see u.s. has abandoned this thread. I suspect in his head, he 'won' because he thinks we were all mean to him for *re-reads thread* asking him to actually provide evidence for his assertions.
More the thread (and forums) cut US off entirely. See the announcements forum...
Yeah, I saw. But when I posted that, he was happily spewing his bullshit in another thread.
 
I see u.s. has abandoned this thread. I suspect in his head, he 'won' because he thinks we were all mean to him for *re-reads thread* asking him to actually provide evidence for his assertions.
More the thread (and forums) cut US off entirely. See the announcements forum...
I'm not sure that's accurate.
But I am not staff so it's got nothing to do with me.
Tom
 
Wow, I just realized as an atheist I am a member of a persecuted minority.
 
I know that Unknown Soldier annoyed many people here; I am among them. After our first interaction I refrained from any future activity on their comments. Annoying activity can be easily avoided so it is not really a bannable offense.

But "promoting self harm" is far more than just annoying so I support the actions of the moderating team wholeheartedly in the ban. Your job is never easy and we owe you thanks for persevering.

That being said, my personal view is that Unknown Soldier just seemed to be a very unhappy person. To me, it is very sad that someone is so miserable that they can only make themselves feel better by inflicting their own pain onto others. I pity them and hope that they can somehow grow out of the mindset that can cause so much damage to both themselves and others.

Ruth
 
I know that Unknown Soldier annoyed many people here; I am among them. After our first interaction I refrained from any future activity on their comments. Annoying activity can be easily avoided so it is not really a bannable offense.
Soldier's annoying activity included several dozens accusations of lying, from his first days at IIDB to his last -- across 2 years, before the most attention-grabbing single event finally happened.

That being said, my personal view is that Unknown Soldier just seemed to be a very unhappy person. To me, it is very sad that someone is so miserable that they can only make themselves feel better by inflicting their own pain onto others. I pity them and hope that they can somehow grow out of the mindset that can cause so much damage to both themselves and others.

Yes I agree. It's his strategy to resolve his unhappiness that is so mindless and inept that it only increases the unhappiness.

Soldier whined about how "bullied" he felt because he has a fake self-image as a highly competent arguer (his "Truth Seeker" persona) that he cannot endure any doubts about. He doesn't want to be the mind-blind and severely confused person that he actually is, so he needs to replace the genuine-but-challenged self with a fake-but-competent self. Then he tries to prove that he's really the fake self and not his real self by "winning" arguments.

But he can only "win" an argument in the same way he can be a fake-but-competent self... by lying to himself.

Inevitably it's the confused Soldier that we see since we're not taking part in his self-delusion. THAT was the basic dilemma for him at IIDB -- other people didn't share his self-delusion. Instead of treating him as brilliant, we addressed the confused Soldier instead. He kept rejecting evidence and reason to protect his arguments, so people inevitably started pointing at the confusion itself and asked him to recognize it so he could learn to think and to communicate. But in doing that, even just to be helpful to him, we were pointing at the very thing he was trying to eradicate from awareness. So he moralized and complained at the IIDB atheists because 1) he came here wanting to be one of them but 2) he couldn't deal with other POVs than his own because 3) he cannot rethink his own POV without admitting error which 4) threatens self-awareness of his rejected real self.
 
Back
Top Bottom