Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Before we turn this topic inside out aand crucify me let me get this out of the way. I dont have anything against atheists, My belief is that gods greatest gift to us is our free choice. if he wanted blind followers he would have made us like that. I have met Atheists who are more deserving of heaven then some religious folks.
But i was going around and looking at jokes from atheists towards Religion...Cruel ones, not well intentioned ones. And i noticed somethings. Itsnearly all God, Jesus, Ala and the jewish god.
Making fun of those people who believe in those. Never once saying, Deity, Higher power, force bigger then yourself. Just mainly those and those who believe in it .
So this got me wondering. Is most atheism actually just against Abrahamic gods. Or in some more cases, Christian god.
I never see them mocking, Hinduism for example. Just those 3.
Why is that?

Christians make up the vast majority of 1st World countries, and you don't see many Hindus pushing for atheists, gays, etc. to be made 2nd class citizens.

Speaking for myself, while growing up in a Western country, I only really saw evidence of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. They're the ones in the news, the ones with obvious buildings in the cities that I see.S

Then I feel that many people misinterpret other faiths as belonging to the above three when seen at random on the street anyway.

I'd have to agree with the posts above - most jokes will be aimed at the "big three" western religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam) as those are the most commonly encountered religions most atheists will come into contact with.

not too many Hindus in the USA.... BUT then we also don't go after Zoroastrians, Daoists, Confusionists, the gods of Hawaiian indians... (Kū, Kāne, Lono, Kanaloa), or basically anything else that is in small number

To be fair, Daoism and Confucianism are both fairly atheistic when taken by themselves. I'm personally a fan of both.

I think atheism is the rejection of any god. I think you are confusing atheists with the anti religion types like Richard Dawkins, who crusade against religion under the title of atheism and in turn become just the kind of obnoxious self righteous donkey-caves which people associate with religion.

While I'm not one myself I'm sure there are plenty of atheists who don't like being associated with donkey-caves like Richard Dawkins.

Atheism is just the belief that there isn't a god. Just because a few atheists really hate Christians doesn't mean that atheism is against a Christianity.

Laughing Man wrote:Christians make up the vast majority of 1st World countries, and you don't see many Hindus pushing for atheists, gays, etc. to be made 2nd class citizens.

Don't forget, however the caste system that regulated people to be untouchable.

Atheism isn't a rejection or stance against any god or religion, it's simply a lack of belief in any deity (hell, there are some religions out there, like Buddhism which are also atheistic).

Most jokes about religion are centered around the big Abrahamic three just because that's what most people in Western society grow up with. I could make a joke about Shiva or Brahman, but no one would get it. Furthermore, the big Abrahamic three tend to be the most vocal about how oppressive or intolerant that they or their members can be towards outside views. I'm not saying that all theists, or all Christians/Jews/Muslims are oppressive or intolerant people, but when you consider what the loudest and most widespread religious persecution has been lately, it tends to fall within that group.

For example, I grew up with a bible-thumping grandfather who likes to make a point that all atheists are violent, drunken, irresponsible and irrational pigs. Because of this, I tend to have quite a bit of animosity towards Christian fanatics (emphasis on fanatics, there are many Christians that I know and respect deeply), mainly because what I was exposed with was mostly within that vein. If I grew up in a Hindu or Pastafarian family with similar views, I'd feel similarly about those religions.

My biggest problem with organized Atheism is that there there are atheist organizations with the basic goal of "converting" people who believe in a deity and who spend a lot of time attacking "organized religion".

And maybe it is just me, but to me it feels that once you start trying to "educate" or "convert" people into following what you believe you have turned Atheism into its own religion.

If that makes any sense.

Depends which type of atheism you are referring to.
'Weak' atheists simply do not believe in the existence of deities.
'Strong' atheists not only don't beleive in the existence of deities but entirely refute their existence.
Most atheists come from the wetern world where the Abrahamic religions have a strong presence, meaning their knowledge of such religions is greater than religions that are more obscure in the western world, such as Wicca, Odinism, Paganism and so on.

Laughing Man wrote:Christians make up the vast majority of 1st World countries, and you don't see many Hindus pushing for atheists, gays, etc. to be made 2nd class citizens.

They dont need to subdivide, they alrready have plenty of second class citizens built into Hinduism. Look up the caste system, which is alive and kicking in India.


Actually as far as the pushing is concerned its normally the other way. Most political atheist agendas have specifically anti-Christian rhetoric, with some anti-Islamic. This is true within the UK at least, and the particular targeting of the churches is politically motivated.

Church not employing a gay, thats made out as an equal opportunities scandal, wheras if you look at most Islamic views of homosexuality it makes even the hard line churches seem very mild indeed, but no critique is raised.

Political atheism differs heavily though from the average atheist on the street, who doesn't necessarily have a particular partisan agenda, as many atheists here on Dakka have demonstrated.

d-usa wrote:My biggest problem with organized Atheism is that there there are atheist organizations with the basic goal of "converting" people who believe in a deity and who spend a lot of time attacking "organized religion".

And maybe it is just me, but to me it feels that once you start trying to "educate" or "convert" people into following what you believe you have turned Atheism into its own religion.

If that makes any sense.

The problem is that organizations like that are in some ways necessary. Even the fact that a group of people with a similar mindset exists helps when people get ostracized from their communities and families for coming out as an atheist.

Orlanth wrote:

Church not employing a gay, thats made out as an equal opportunities scandal, wheras if you look at most Islamic views of homosexuality it makes even the hard line churches seem very mild indeed, but no critique is raised.

Yep, that's right folks - he actually said it.

Albatross wrote:

Orlanth wrote:

Church not employing a gay, thats made out as an equal opportunities scandal, wheras if you look at most Islamic views of homosexuality it makes even the hard line churches seem very mild indeed, but no critique is raised.

Yep, that's right folks - he actually said it.

Surely not... no-one is that silly.

I am an ardent atheist.
There are "no" gods.
There is only the untold wonder that is the universe and the truth and light that only science can bring.
If anyone eles says anything diffrent then they are ill...

That is not going to go down well, Fox.

MrDwhitey wrote:That is not going to go down well, Fox.

Agreed with you there Mr.Dwhitey
Last thing we need is a political and religious war on dakkadakka.

Why may I ask?
I didn't say what and the serveraty of the illness.

People will find it offensive to be told that their believing in a religion is an "illness".

Ribon Fox wrote:I am an ardent atheist.
There are "no" gods.
There is only the untold wonder that is the universe and the truth and light that only science can bring.

This is lovely and an appropriate contribution to the thread.

Ribon Fox wrote:If anyone eles says anything diffrent then they are ill...

This kind of broad insult toward an entire class or category of people is not acceptable on Dakka. Do not post this sort of thing again, please. It's a violation of rule #1.

I've read (can't remember where before you ask) that the side of the brain in those that are devot (all religons by the way) have the same neuron clusters firing as someone with a mild case of psychosis. That is an illness.

hotsauceman1 wrote: Never once saying, Deity, Higher power, force bigger then yourself. Just mainly those and those who believe in it .
So this got me wondering. Is most atheism actually just against Abrahamic gods. Or in some more cases, Christian god.
I never see them mocking, Hinduism for example. Just those 3.
Why is that?

Its complicated. Fundamentally, atheism is the absence of the belief in God/gods, but there are issues.

First, defining what is, and is not, a god is difficult. Broadly speaking, the Abrahamic faiths are the only prevalent monotheistic religions in the world, and there is a reasonable argument to be made that a god is only a god if its God (ie. omnipotent). You can go past this, of course, but then you're getting into the territory where anything more powerful than man, and supernatural, is a god.

Second, Hinduism, and really just Eastern religions, place less emphasis on deities than Western religions do.

Third, as has been said, most religious people in the West, where modern atheism is most prevalent, are Christian, Jewish, Muslim, or Mormon.

Douglas Adams wrote:Religion doesn't seem to work like that. It has certain ideas at the heart of it, which we call 'sacred' or 'holy.' What it means is: here is an idea or a notion that you're not allowed to say anything bad about. You're just not. Why not? Because you're not. Why should it be that it's perfectly legitimate to support the Republicans or Democrats, this model of economics versus that, Macintosh instead of Windows, but to have an opinion about how the universe began, about who created the universe -- no, that's holy. So, we're used to not challenging religious ideas and it's very interesting how much of a furor Richard [Dawkins] creates when he does it. Everybody gets absolutely frantic about it, because you're not allowed to say these things, yet when you look at it rationally, there is no reason why those ideas shouldn't be as open to debate as any other, except that we've agreed somehow between us that they shouldn't be.

I think good old Doug was rather missing the point that you can question these things without being a dick about it, as Dawkins frequently was. And that while certainly many religious people are intolerant of even polite and rational critique, you certainly stir up more furor by being a jerk about it.

Ribon Fox wrote:I've read (can't remember where before you ask) that the side of the brain in those that are devot (all religons by the way) have the same neuron clusters firing as someone with a mild case of psychosis. That is an illness.

No, not really. Feel free to cite your source and expand on the concept if you can. As it stands it sounds like a misremembered or misconstrued detail from something you half-remember reading.

Ribon Fox wrote:I've read (can't remember where before you ask) that the side of the brain in those that are devot (all religons by the way) have the same neuron clusters firing as someone with a mild case of psychosis. That is an illness.

I can't believe what I'm reading... and I'm not even religious.

MrDwhitey wrote:People will find it offensive to be told that their believing in a religion is an "illness".

I wouldn't describe my feelings as "offended."

I think "bemused" would be a better word.

Fafnir wrote:

d-usa wrote:My biggest problem with organized Atheism is that there there are atheist organizations with the basic goal of "converting" people who believe in a deity and who spend a lot of time attacking "organized religion".

And maybe it is just me, but to me it feels that once you start trying to "educate" or "convert" people into following what you believe you have turned Atheism into its own religion.

If that makes any sense.

The problem is that organizations like that are in some ways necessary. Even the fact that a group of people with a similar mindset exists helps when people get ostracized from their communities and families for coming out as an atheist.

And I don't have a problem with atheists organizations, or having an atheist support organization for people who "came out" and are being bullied or attacked because of it.

But that is different than actively trying to attack people of faith while thing to proof to people that they are wrong for believing in God. Radical evangelism is wrong from both sides.

I know its wiki but when you read the Psychosis entery and then the Jerusalem syndrome entery.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychosis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem_syndrome
I also belive I read it in "God is not greate" as well as other things (memory is shot to hell).
We all have our own illneses mine is GDS