No one is free from criticism. Harmful ideas should be condemned, when they are demonstrably harmful. But theist beliefs are such a vast range and diversity of ideas, some harmful, some useful, some healing, some vivifying, and still others having served as potent drivers of movements for justice; that to lump all theist religious belief into one category and attack the whole of it, only demonstrates your ignorance of theology, and is in fact bigotry.

By saying that religious and superstitious beliefs should be disrespected, or otherwise belittling, or stigmatizing religion and supernatural beliefs as a whole, you have already established the first level on the “Pyramid of Hate”, as well as the first of the “10 Stages of Genocide.”

If your religion is atheism, that’s perfectly valid. If someone is doing something harmful with a religious belief as justification, that specific belief should be challenged. But if you’re crossing the line into bigotry, you’re as bad as the very people you’re condemning.

Antitheism is a form of supremacy in and of itself.

"In other words, it is quite clear from the writings of the “four horsemen” that “new atheism” has little to do with atheism or any serious intellectual examination of the belief in God and everything to do with hatred and power.

Indeed, “new atheism” is the ideological foregrounding of liberal imperialism whose fanatical secularism extends the racist logic of white supremacy. It purports to be areligious, but it is not. It is, in fact, the twin brother of the rabid Christian conservatism which currently feeds the Trump administration’s destructive policies at home and abroad – minus all the biblical references."

https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2019/5/4/the-resurrection-of-new-atheism/

https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2020/2/21/can-atheists-make-their-case-without-devolving-into-bigotry/

  • blazera
    link
    fedilink
    39 months ago

    religion is just the opposite of science. Science is evidence based beliefs, religion is faith, or rather belief with lack of evidence.

    It’s just in an awkward phase right now where science has proven itself as correct and religious people warp their beliefs to try and fit it. Liiiike, folks shaving their beards. Science says it’s fine, people have shaved plenty of times, with no ill effects. Religion says it’s bad, it will anger God. People still call themselves religious while shaving their beards, despite the singular source of their religious belief explicitly saying otherwise. Bible praises the efficacy of prayer to quite an extent, turns out that’s a testable hypothesis. How many religious people do you know that would bet money on prayer affecting the outcome of a study? People in developed countries stopped believing we should be stoning homosexuals to death, but the books never changed, all those words are still there, they’re just ignored now. Oh but it’s still the infallible word of God.

      • Bizarroland
        link
        fedilink
        49 months ago

        And religion is not the opposite of science.

        Science is the formalized study of nature.

        The supernatural is the opposite of science.

        Gods are by choice or by default supernatural in nature.

        Religion itself is the organized practice by which worshipers converge to worship a god or to study and practice the supernatural.

        We know religion exists whereas whether or not a God exists of any type whatsoever is up for debate and not scientifically provable.

        • @ttmrichter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          29 months ago

          Religion itself is the organized practice by which worshipers converge to worship a god or to study and practice the supernatural.

          Man is 儒教 going to fuck with your head.

          • Bizarroland
            link
            fedilink
            09 months ago

            If there was no need for a debate about it then why are you debating me about it?