Can atheists be religious?

[Phi for All]

WHAT! You don't believe in hobbies! Just wait till my flying fish/piranha cross is finished... where did you say you lived btw?

 

If I tell you how I feel about your hobby, I risk talking too much about it, which would make me some kind of hobbyist, apparently.

[Arete]

Person A: "So what sport do you watch?"

Person B: "I don't watch sport".

Person A: "Well not watching a sport is watching a sport, really".

Person B: "Umm I'm not sure that's true".

Person A: "Sure it is! By actively not watching a sport, you're watching a sport."

Person B: "I just told you, I don't watch sport. That's it."

Person A: "Listen to you bang on about not watching sports! You're practically a football hooligan!"

Person B: "I'm a apathetic towards sport. That kind of places me outside the realm of sports fans. Sorry"

Person A: "Oh nonsense. You get together with your other non-sports watching pals and totally don't watch sport together. I mean, you all probably talk about not sports all day. Just like football fans."

Person B: "Not really. I just don't watch sports."

Person A" "There you said it - you're a not-sports fan!"

 

etc.

[John Cuthber]

I may not be religious, but I can make predictions.

...

Atheism clearly isn't a religion because plenty of us are not religious (unless you torture the meaning of that word to include us- in which case it includes everyone so it's meaningless).

"an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group".

 

So, eating is a religion. Sex is a religion among most 16 year olds (They may not be having any sex, but they are sure as hell interested in it."

Politics is a religion and so on.

That definition covers essentially the whole of human behaviour and defines everybody (and probably most social animals) as religious.

It thereby renders the word pretty much useless.

[overtone]

The atheists that I have come across are very adamant in their disbelief, mirroring the zealots of many religious groups. I'm not saying this is true of all atheists, but it still gives a good feel of how a portion of that community acts.

So? In the first place, there is no such "community" - lumping atheistic people into one common and separable community is an error of analytical approach. Second, the confusion of zealotry with religion would make religions of everything from political factions to fly fishing.

 

You seem to find the non-adamant atheists of your acquaintance invisible, which is easy to understand in a community so pervasively hostile to all belief systems of that description. But if the only atheistic folks you ever see sign of as such are adamant and zealous ones, you might ask why the others have been so careful in your presence, eh?

 

Meanwhile, the very large number of atheistic Buddhist, Taoist, Animist, Ancestor Worshipping, whatever you want to call the Navajo spirituality, and similar adherents of various deity-free religions around the planet and down through the centuries are not adherents of a religion in common with each other. And we have even stranger categories - such as the 1-4% of Catholic priests who, given anonymity, agree that they have no personal God of their own: what religion are they?

 

There is no religion one can name "atheism", just as there is no religion one can name "theism". There are atheistic and theistic religions, atheistic and theistic non-religious individuals, and wide variety in all those categories. That is physical, repeatable, objective observation. The intellectually honest adjust their definitions accordingly. In particular, this:

 

 

 

re·li·gion noun \ri-ˈli-jən\

: the belief in a god or in a group of gods

: an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods

: an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group

is evidence that the Merriam Webster dictionary (like all merely "descriptive" dictionaries) sucks, especially in its online incarnations. It is "descriptive" to the point of folly, in that even the people who use "religion" metaphorically to indicate a degree of fervor or involvement in some activity (figure skating, Texas high school football, anything) usually know very well that these activities ther refer to are not religions - and if they don't they go to the dictionary for correction, not reinforcement of error.

 

People sometimes use "dance" to refer to any mutually agreed and frame defined coordinated physical activity, but that does not make boxing matches or wielding torch manipulations while braising actually forms of dance. With "Merriam-Webster" dictionaries, the unwary or inexperienced language learners are left to fend for themselves.

Edited November 6, 2013 by overtone

[WWLabRat]

So? In the first place, there is no such "community" - lumping atheistic people into one common and separable community is an error of analytical approach. Second, the confusion of zealotry with religion would make religions of everything from political factions to fly fishing.

 

You seem to find the non-adamant atheists of your acquaintance invisible, which is easy to understand in a community so pervasively hostile to all belief systems of that description. But if the only atheistic folks you ever see sign of as such are adamant and zealous ones, you might ask why the others have been so careful in your presence, eh?

 

Meanwhile, the very large number of atheistic Buddhist, Taoist, Animist, Ancestor Worshipping, whatever you want to call the Navajo spirituality, and similar adherents of various deity-free religions around the planet and down through the centuries are not adherents of a religion in common with each other. And we have even stranger categories - such as the 1-4% of Catholic priests who, given anonymity, agree that they have no personal God of their own: what religion are they?

 

There is no religion one can name "atheism", just as there is no religion one can name "theism". There are atheistic and theistic religions, atheistic and theistic non-religious individuals, and wide variety in all those categories.

 

In the first place, I use the term community in the sense that there is a commonality among them, not that they are a group that meets for any particular reason. Second, I specifically state the zealots of many religious groups, not zealots in general.

 

I never said that I don't come across passive atheists, in fact it's quite the opposite. My two closest friends are atheists but don't try to force this disbelief on me or others that they encounter. I was merely stating that the majority of atheists I come across are very ardent in their defense and proclamation of atheism. And it's not that others are careful in my presence, its that I don't run into many new people in my day to day encounters. I live a very structured and scheduled life that rarely deviates for there to be enough exposure to other people, whether theistic or atheistic. And those that I do see on a regular basis I already know their thoughts on religion and deities.

 

Buddhists aren't adherent to their own religion? Nor are Taoist among Taoists? Not sure you're making much of any sense there... And the 1-4% you mentioned, as indicated by the small percentage, are a minority of the church officials. It's not a secret that many people, whether clergy or laymen, have times of spiritual crises and doubt their faith while looking for something to renew their faith. That doesn't make them non religious, it just means that they have doubts.

 

Um, by its very definition, any religion with a deity is a theism (not to be confused with atheism)... That includes polytheism (many gods), monotheism (one god/goddess), pantheism (physical world is god), and deism (one deity exists who created the world, but doesn't intervene).

[John Cuthber]

In the first place, I use the term community in the sense that there is a commonality among them"

A bit like the "left handed people" community. Are they a religious group?

" I was merely stating that the majority of atheists I come across are very ardent in their defense and proclamation of atheism."

How do you know?

Was the bus-driver who politely took your money and gave you a ticket an atheist?

The guy ahead of you in the sandwich shop?

The obvious fact is that you only recognise the vocal atheists as such.

 

 

How can you rule out the idea that most of the atheists you meet are quiet about the fact- so you just can't know they are atheists?

Even I turn up at church for funerals so some people might think I'm part of the God squad if that's the only place they see me.

[overtone]

 

 

In the first place, I use the term community in the sense that there is a commonality among them

Sure. And you were wrong, as illustrated with numerous counterexamples.

 

 

 

I never said that I don't come across passive atheists, in fact it's quite the opposite.

You said this:

 

 

The atheists that I have come across are very adamant in their disbelief,

So did you mean to say that, or not?

 

 

 

My two closest friends are atheists but don't try to force this disbelief on me or others that they encounter. I was merely stating that the majority of atheists I come across are very ardent in their defense and proclamation of atheism. And it's not that others are careful in my presence, its that I don't run into many new people in my day to day encounters.

Your inability to recognize atheism in strangers is becoming obvious. I am merely suggesting that it is due to the standard circumspection common among atheistic people in a hostile community - other possibilities of course exist.

 

 

Buddhists aren't adherent to their own religion? Nor are Taoist among Taoists? Not sure you're making much of any sense there...

? Those other possibilities are moving up the likelihood ladder.

 

And the 1-4% you mentioned, as indicated by the small percentage, are a minority of the church officials. It's not a secret that many people, whether clergy or laymen, have times of spiritual crises and doubt their faith while looking for something to renew their faith. That doesn't make them non religious, it just means that they have doubts.

Your presumption that they are in crisis or have doubts is unwarranted. Meanwhile, the question was what religion they had in the meantime - if atheism wre a religion, than of course that would be their religion, but they remain Catholic priests , so - - - -

 

 

 

Second, I specifically state the zealots of many religious groups, not zealots in general.

You offered zealotry as evidence of religious belief.

[WWLabRat]

In the first place, I use the term community in the sense that there is a commonality among them"

A bit like the "left handed people" community. Are they a religious group?

" I was merely stating that the majority of atheists I come across are very ardent in their defense and proclamation of atheism."

How do you know?

Was the bus-driver who politely took your money and gave you a ticket an atheist?

The guy ahead of you in the sandwich shop?

The obvious fact is that you only recognise the vocal atheists as such.

 

 

How can you rule out the idea that most of the atheists you meet are quiet about the fact- so you just can't know they are atheists?

Even I turn up at church for funerals so some people might think I'm part of the God squad if that's the only place they see me.

When did I ever state that community=religious group? I'm fairly certain that I never said that. Please don't twist my words.

 

I know that most of those atheists whom I have met are that way because I've actually talked to them. That's how most people find out information about each other. They communicate. They talk. They debate.

 

I don't take a bus, I own my vehicle. That I know of, no bus is going to travel 30+ miles each day one way without it being for interstate travel.

 

I don't eat out. Gets to be too expensive.

 

Again, I know the views of those I talk to regularly because I talk to them. I don't make assumptions about the people I meet.

 

I can rule out the fact that people I talk to are or are not atheist because I have had conversations with them. I see them in my day to day experiences and ask them questions about themselves while they do the same with me. And I don't think funerals are the place to go to debate topics, especially one that people find as sensitive as religion and the afterlife. But even still, funerals are innately a private, intimate thing (with the exception of celebrities, public officials, etc) and as such, these are commonly people whom I have already met previously. No sense rehashing old topics if I already know the response.

 

Sure. And you were wrong, as illustrated with numerous counterexamples.

 

 

 

You said this:

 

 

So did you mean to say that, or not?

 

 

 

Your inability to recognize atheism in strangers is becoming obvious. I am merely suggesting that it is due to the standard circumspection common among atheistic people in a hostile community - other possibilities of course exist.

 

 

? Those other possibilities are moving up the likelihood ladder.

 

Your presumption that they are in crisis or have doubts is unwarranted. Meanwhile, the question was what religion they had in the meantime - if atheism wre a religion, than of course that would be their religion, but they remain Catholic priests , so - - - -

 

 

 

You offered zealotry as evidence of religious belief.

 

Um... There's only one counter-example to my use of community, and it wasn't even a complete counter-example. I don't think that counts as many.

 

I'm sorry that I wasn't articulate enough in my previous post. Forgive me for not living up to your standards.

 

I don't think it's an "inability to recognize atheism in strangers". More accurately it's that I don't meet many strangers so it's not something that comes up as often as other topics. And I think you have used circumspection incorrectly here... What hostile community is there for atheists to fear? I don't live in the deep south nor the "bible belt" so there's not a church on every street corner. So what other possibilities are there to exist? If there are some, please enlighten all of us as to what they are.

 

How is my saying that they have doubts unwarranted? When someone becomes clergy, they are affirming their belief, their faith, in front of the entirety of that religious group. They are declaring that they believe, unwavering, in their religious doctrine. So of course its probable that those 1-4% would remain silent about their lack of faith. Why would they choose to become clergy if they didn't believe in their religion? And not having a personal deity is not the same as not believing in a deity at all.

 

I never said that zealotry is evidence of religious belief. Not all religious persons are zealous. I was indicating that the atheists who are adamant about being atheist are tend to be just as enthusiastic and passionate as the religious zealots who try to push their religion onto others. Hence "mirroring".

[ralfy]

 

Right.

 

Actually, the full quote isn't "Honey, half the jews I know are atheists."

 

It's...

 

"Honey, half the jews I know are atheists. It’s about community”

 

That's what she said on the show. You hit that nail right on the head. Religion has been reduced to community. It used to be about truth and power, and any more it's about holding on to the things that bind us. I'd personally rather be bound by other things... and religion just needs to dry up in the desert sun and die already! We don't need it for culture. We can find culture all on our own, thanks.

 

Actually, it takes on one form or another, based on various circumstances.

[Ringer]

I've gotten lost in all this fluff. Is the argument that SOME atheist are religious or is it atheism ITSELF is a religion?

[Phi for All]

I've gotten lost in all this fluff. Is the argument that SOME atheist are religious or is it atheism ITSELF is a religion?

 

Currently it's being advanced that atheism is a religion only if the atheist mentions it to anyone. At that point, they're showing organized thoughts on the matter and that makes it a religion.

 

But don't tell anyone else. Shhh.

[Greg H.]

re·li·gion

: an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group

By this definition, I am member of multiple religions, including the Church of HO Scale Railroading, The First Assembly of Lego, and The Friends Who Do Woodworking Gathering.

 

[overtone]

 

 

What hostile community is there for atheists to fear? I don't live in the deep south nor the "bible belt" so there's not a church on every street corner. So what other possibilities are there to exist? If there are some, please enlighten all of us as to what they are.

The community in which half the businesses and activities must obey special Sunday rules, in which child custody and divorce arrangements and criminal sentencing and other treatment by various authorities is strongly affected by Church allegiances and religious reputation, in which an acknowledged atheistic person has much less chance of election to public office, employment as a schoolteacher, appointment to postiions of public trust, et al, and much more chance of having their children made wards of the State, parole or release on recognizance denied them, slander published regarding them, etc.

 

 

 

How is my saying that they have doubts unwarranted?

Because it is based on assumptions not met.

 

- - - - Why would they choose to become clergy if they didn't believe in their religion?

In most cases, apparently, their atheism dates to after they became clergy.and was a consequence of their learning and experience as clergy. That does not mean they have the kinds of doubts you suppose - even about the value of the religion they espouse. Belief in the value of a given religion and belief in the existence of its deities whatever they may be are not the same beliefs.

 

And not having a personal deity is not the same as not believing in a deity at all.

Sure it is. In the Catholic priesthood, it's elaborate and formal doctrine.

 

 

 

I never said that zealotry is evidence of religious belief.

Your entire argument rests on the claim.

 

Not all religious persons are zealous.

And neither are atheistic persons, religious or otherwise. In fact, the atheistic religious persons tend to be among the least zealous of all religious persons - haven't you noticed that?

 

I was indicating that the atheists who are adamant about being atheist are tend to be just as enthusiastic and passionate as the religious zealots who try to push their religion onto others.

You claimed to have met no other kind of atheist - they all tend to be adamant and zealous, in your experience.

 

Hence "mirroring".

There is no "hence", unless you are claiming a mirrored religious belief in addition to the observation of similar zealotry.

 

We all agree that zealous, adamant, and even obnoxious atheistic people exist. So?

[Moontanman]

What hostile community is there for atheists to fear? I don't live in the deep south nor the "bible belt" so there's not a church on every street corner. So what other possibilities are there to exist? If there are some, please enlighten all of us as to what they are.

 

 

 

I do live in the deep south and churches vary from store fronts in strip malls to huge mega churches with tens of thousands of members. Atheists have lots to fear, from conservative news shows that advocate atheists having no civil rights to religions wanting to indoctrinate your children in their particular religious perversion in the guise of education. The perversion that is religion permeates every part of our society espousing lies and bigotry as part of gods plan and insisting they have the right to bully and even pass laws that strip citizens of their rights based on bronze age mythology. The separation of church and state is the only thing that protects us from religious wars and civil unrest based on "my god is better than yours" Religious is in a constant state of war against the rights of anyone who disagrees with them and claim persecution just because they can't persecute people who hold different supernatural beliefs or hold no supernatural beliefs at all. Atheism is not religion any more than a lack of belief in fairies is a religion...

[Arete]

What hostile community is there for atheists to fear?

 

 

The scientific study cited below conducted at the University of British Columbia showed that the level of distrust for rapists and athiests was not significantly different, and to quote it:

 

"Recent polls indicate that atheists are among the least liked people in areas with religious majorities (i.e., in most of the world)"

 

http://www2.psych.ubc.ca/~will/Gervais%20et%20al-%20Atheist%20Distrust.pdf

[WWLabRat]

 

 

The scientific study cited below conducted at the University of British Columbia showed that the level of distrust for rapists and athiests was not significantly different, and to quote it:

 

"Recent polls indicate that atheists are among the least liked people in areas with religious majorities (i.e., in most of the world)"

 

http://www2.psych.ubc.ca/~will/Gervais%20et%20al-%20Atheist%20Distrust.pdf

 

 

 

 

I do live in the deep south and churches vary from store fronts in strip malls to huge mega churches with tens of thousands of members. Atheists have lots to fear, from conservative news shows that advocate atheists having no civil rights to religions wanting to indoctrinate your children in their particular religious perversion in the guise of education. The perversion that is religion permeates every part of our society espousing lies and bigotry as part of gods plan and insisting they have the right to bully and even pass laws that strip citizens of their rights based on bronze age mythology. The separation of church and state is the only thing that protects us from religious wars and civil unrest based on "my god is better than yours" Religious is in a constant state of war against the rights of anyone who disagrees with them and claim persecution just because they can't persecute people who hold different supernatural beliefs or hold no supernatural beliefs at all. Atheism is not religion any more than a lack of belief in fairies is a religion...

 

 

The community in which half the businesses and activities must obey special Sunday rules, in which child custody and divorce arrangements and criminal sentencing and other treatment by various authorities is strongly affected by Church allegiances and religious reputation, in which an acknowledged atheistic person has much less chance of election to public office, employment as a schoolteacher, appointment to postiions of public trust, et al, and much more chance of having their children made wards of the State, parole or release on recognizance denied them, slander published regarding them, etc.

 

 

 

Because it is based on assumptions not met.

 

In most cases, apparently, their atheism dates to after they became clergy.and was a consequence of their learning and experience as clergy. That does not mean they have the kinds of doubts you suppose - even about the value of the religion they espouse. Belief in the value of a given religion and belief in the existence of its deities whatever they may be are not the same beliefs.

 

Sure it is. In the Catholic priesthood, it's elaborate and formal doctrine.

 

 

 

Your entire argument rests on the claim.

 

And neither are atheistic persons, religious or otherwise. In fact, the atheistic religious persons tend to be among the least zealous of all religious persons - haven't you noticed that?

 

You claimed to have met no other kind of atheist - they all tend to be adamant and zealous, in your experience.

 

There is no "hence", unless you are claiming a mirrored religious belief in addition to the observation of similar zealotry.

 

We all agree that zealous, adamant, and even obnoxious atheistic people exist. So?

 

 

All I've seen from each of your arguments, in regards to hostility towards atheists, is that Atheism persecution is more about locale rather than the population as a whole. But how is this different from any other group that's persecuted? Scientology, of course, being an exception because it seems like the entire world persecutes them. Judaism was persecuted in Nazi Germany, and is now (and always has been) persecuted in Islamic nations of the Middle East. Christianity is persecuted in the Middle East. Islam is persecuted in many areas of the US, and AFAIK, parts of the UK.

 

 

 

Courtesy dailymail.co.uk (link)

 

As you can see, there are plenty of areas marked in green and blue which shows that a large portion of even the US falls outside the dense religious communities.

 

Overtone, it's up to individual businesses to decide what days and hours they are going to be open. If a store wishes to be open on Sundays then so be it. My mother, a Catholic, owned an ice cream shop and had the shop open on Sundays. She'd open it up right after Mass. Chick-Fil-A chooses to have it's stores closed on Sundays. Government offices are closed on Sundays. That's outside of the private sector and outside of the community. It's not something that affects only the atheists of a region. Can it be pointed out with absolute certainty that the reason atheistic politicians aren't elected is due to their lack of a belief in deities? I'm sure they still receive votes but, as is the case with democracy, the majority wins out. If they can't appeal to a religious area, they may want to think about moving and trying to run their campaign elsewhere. I don't know where you get off saying that atheists have difficulty becoming school teachers... I went to a Catholic school up until my sophomore year of high school. All through my junior high years, I had the same science teacher who was atheist. Now if an atheist can work at a religious school, what does that tell you?

 

What assumptions aren't met? If a man, or woman, joins the clergy with absolute faith in what they preach and later finds that they lack that same faith, they are able to renounce their position and no longer be a priest, or nun. It happens a lot. A guy I grew up with, his mother was a nun for some time and later left the church. She married his father, they had him, three years later they got a divorce and years after that, she still participates in the church choir. Also, do you realize how long a priest has to study and train in order to be Ordained? They have to study for a minimum of 6 years, plus serving at least 6 months as a deacon. I think that's plenty of time for a person to decide that they no longer have the faith they did prior to starting.

 

No, it isn't. The ten commandments state, the first one in fact "You shall have no other gods before me", This doesn't say that there are no other gods, only that none should hold a position higher to you than God. So it is entirely plausible for a catholic priest to believe in other gods.

 

How does my entire argument rest on the claim that zealotry equates religiousness? Please state so explicitly as you have yet to do the last few times you've said that. Elaborate.

 

The reason religious atheists tend to not be zealous about it is likely because to the general populace they would seem hypocritical. Most don't see atheism as having the potential to also be religious and as such would have no religious beliefs. So for an atheist to preach a religion would, for most, deem that atheist as no longer atheist.

 

In case you missed my previous posts, I amended what I said in regards to the atheists I've met. Please read back through them.

[iNow]

Regardless of these several loquacious and verbose posts above, atheism is not a religion while buddhism is. These two facts were shared and have since been defended in rebuttal to fallacious assertions made to the contrary. That is all.

 

The rest of the last several pages of posts is little more than hand waving and red herring from that core point, really.

 

Buddhism IS a religion.

Atheism is NOT a religion.

 

Can we move on now, please?

[ralfy]

This might help:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion#Secularism_and_irreligion

The terms "atheist" (lack of belief in any gods) and "agnostic" (belief in the unknowability of the existence of gods), though specifically contrary to theistic (e.g. Christian, Jewish, and Muslim) religious teachings, do not by definition mean the opposite of "religious". There are religions (including Buddhism and Taoism), in fact, that classify some of their followers as agnostic, atheistic, or nontheistic. The true opposite of "religious" is the word "irreligious". Irreligion describes an absence of any religion; antireligion describes an active opposition or aversion toward religions in general.

 

 

[john5746]

In regards to definition.

re·li·gion noun \ri-'li-j?n\
: the belief in a god or in a group of gods

: an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods

: an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group

The third option is just in terms of common usage as below.

Hockey is a religion in Canada.
Politics are a religion to him.
Where I live, high school football is religion.
Food is religion in this house.
Atheism is religion to Dawkins.

Basically, religion is a metaphor for passion in that context, we are discussing the literal meaning.

 

This site gives a good analogy to the issue, IMO

 

 

 

 

 

so, just as a tomato may blur the lines between fruit and vegetable, Buddhists do the same with Theism and Atheism.

[Bill Angel]

 

Overtone, it's up to individual businesses to decide what days and hours they are going to be open. If a store wishes to be open on Sundays then so be it. My mother, a Catholic, owned an ice cream shop and had the shop open on Sundays. She'd open it up right after Mass. Chick-Fil-A chooses to have it's stores closed on Sundays. Government offices are closed on Sundays. That's outside of the private sector and outside of the community.

 

I grew up in Connecticut, which at that time still had "blue laws" on the books that resricted businesses from being open on Sundays. Until 2012 Connecticut still had laws on its books that restricted the sales of alcoholic beverages on Sundays. Those restrictions were lifted on May 20th, 2012.

[Arete]

 

All I've seen from each of your arguments, in regards to hostility towards atheists, is that Atheism persecution is more about locale rather than the population as a whole. But how is this different from any other group that's persecuted?

 

 

That's a rather huge shift of the goalposts. Your instal question was:

 

What hostile community is there for atheists to fear?

 

To which I presented a scientific study demonstrating discrimination.

 

Here's more btw:

 

http://www.secularismandnonreligion.org/article/view/snr.ad

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13537903.2012.642741#.Un0fdOKTVk8

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/spc3.12035/full

 

 

Here's one conducted in New England:

 

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0276562413000413

[WWLabRat]

 

I grew up in Connecticut, which at that time still had "blue laws" on the books that resricted businesses from being open on Sundays. Until 2012 Connecticut still had laws on its books that restricted the sales of alcoholic beverages on Sundays. Those restrictions were lifted on May 20th, 2012.

Have you checked to see when those Blue Laws were put into effect? The laws regulating what can be done on Sundays are outdated at best. I mean, hell, they even outdate the signing of the Declaration of Independence by a little more than a century! And that's just for Connecticut. In other states car dealerships are/were forced to be closed, etc. However the trend is that these laws are being amended or removed entirely as their significance reduces. These laws were generally put into place prior to an official separation of church and state.

 

 

 

That's a rather huge shift of the goalposts. Your instal question was:

 

 

To which I presented a scientific study demonstrating discrimination.

 

Here's more btw:

 

http://www.secularismandnonreligion.org/article/view/snr.ad

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13537903.2012.642741#.Un0fdOKTVk8

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/spc3.12035/full

 

 

Here's one conducted in New England:

 

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0276562413000413

 

*Unable to access third link. It's not loading at all for some reason. Study done in New England requires credentials and/or a fee.

 

First study doesn't present data on how strongly the subjects identify with atheism. Without knowing how strongly they feel about and believe themselves to be atheist, how can anyone know whether they are or if it's something that they still are deciding for themselves. People's reactions can be different based on on this. This study also shows that these atheists weren't completely out about their disbelief (on average). Out of the ten possible relations that they could be out about their atheism to, the average was just below 6. It's possible that the perceived discrimination was due to an ignorance on the discriminator's part for not knowing the person was actually atheist.

 

On page 54 it gives a table of the types of perceived discrimination experienced by atheists in the study separated into groups of Social Ostracism, Coercion, Slander, Denial of Opportunities, Hate Crimes, and Other. Under Social Ostracism, it seems to be the extreme minority of the atheists who feel outcast because of their being atheist. Of these, the most they have felt discriminated is because of classmates or coworkers. Even then, less than 30% felt they were discriminated on more than one occasion.

 

For Coercion, the highest amount of perceived discrimination is under "Being expected to participate in religious prayers against my will" with "Being asked to attend religious services or participate in religious activities (besides prayer) against my will". In regards to the prayer, isn't it possible that they are being asked to say grace with the rest of their family at dinner or during the holidays? And as for participation in religious activities, it's likely that they have been asked during the holiday seasons that are big within the religious community (ie Christmas and Easter). These are also the times when you see a large rise in the number of people filling the churches.

 

Under Slander is where you find the largest amount of perceived discrimination. Of this, the majority is under "Witnessing anti-atheist comments in newspapers or on television". My problem with this is that television makes fun of all religions, beliefs, actions, etc. Atheism isn't the only thing that is shown in a negative light on the tube.

 

Almost no one said that they were denied opportunities based on their atheism and of those who did, it was generally between 1 and 3 times that it happened with a few outliers in the 4+.

 

Again, little to no hate crimes because of their atheism.

 

In the Other category, I can understand the "Being unfairly stereotyped because of my Atheism" and Being treated differently because of my Atheism" sections. Many people do both of these. However, as with actual religions, or other dividing things like race, gender, age, etc, people are going to stereotype and treat people differently based on those stereotypes. It's just a fact of the world.

 

The second study doesn't correlate the levels of discrimination that those who are religious (in the national sample) experience discrimination. It would have been a bit more productive for them to relate how many of the atheists or non-religious are discriminated against those who hold religious beliefs or belief in a deity/deities. What I do like about this survey, though, is that it makes a distinction between non-religious and atheists. Despite the arguments I've been putting in this thread, I don't believe atheists to be religious, merely that the definition we use to describe religion would make atheism included.

[John Cuthber]

The first one says

"Survey found that 41% of self-identified atheists reported experiencing discrimination in the last 5 years due to their lack of religious identification. "

Identifying yourself as an atheists isn't complicated.

Do you believe there's a God any more than you believe that, for example, there are unicorns?

Nope, then you're an atheist.

 

 

So this "First study doesn't present data on how strongly the subjects identify with atheism. Without knowing how strongly they feel about and believe themselves to be atheist, how can anyone know whether they are or if it's something that they still are deciding for themselves. " is nonsense.

 

The figures don't really matter very much. If one person is discriminated against because of their atheism then there is a problem.

 

"Despite the arguments I've been putting in this thread, I don't believe atheists to be religious, merely that the definition we use to describe religion would make atheism included"

So you say you are using the wrong definition?

[Amanbir Singh Grewal]

okay.

[WWLabRat]

The first one says

"Survey found that 41% of self-identified atheists reported experiencing discrimination in the last 5 years due to their lack of religious identification. "

Identifying yourself as an atheists isn't complicated.

Do you believe there's a God any more than you believe that, for example, there are unicorns?

Nope, then you're an atheist.

 

 

So this "First study doesn't present data on how strongly the subjects identify with atheism. Without knowing how strongly they feel about and believe themselves to be atheist, how can anyone know whether they are or if it's something that they still are deciding for themselves. " is nonsense.

 

The figures don't really matter very much. If one person is discriminated against because of their atheism then there is a problem.

 

"Despite the arguments I've been putting in this thread, I don't believe atheists to be religious, merely that the definition we use to describe religion would make atheism included"

So you say you are using the wrong definition?

It's not a matter of whether or not they are atheist when identifying themselves. What the degree is indicating is how much they identify as an atheist. As in how important is it to you that you are atheist? For example, when someone asks me about being Catholic, I'd have to rate it at a 1. I was born and raised Catholic, but I don't identify myself as a Catholic. I identify myself as someone who is spiritual (in that I try to do good when possible) but not religious (I don't believe I'm going to Hell if I don't follow strictly to ten laws that were made long before I can even trace back my heritage). And to answer you about the unicorns, I subscribe to the view Robot Chicken put forth: That if mythological creatures were real, Noah must have let them drown during the flood.

 

And I see discrimination as a problem, but as I stated in this last post, everyone is discriminated in some way or another. Should they be? No. Do I do my best to ignore stereotypes and judge a person on their present actions? Yes. Do I always? No. But I agree with your statement " If one person is discriminated against because of their atheism then there is a problem." How many people are discriminated and how many times shouldn't matter, but that's what the study had been about, so that's what I commented on.

 

 

You could say that. You could also say that definition of "religion", as a whole, is ill defined and leaves much room to interpretation. Unfortunately, I don't have a better definition than has already been published.