Myth:
It's rude and intolerant for atheists to publicly or unapologetically challenge religious believers about their beliefs, like in the existence or about the nature of God.
Response:
One complaint which some religious theists keep raising is how allegedly "militant" atheists are "rude" because of the ways in which they publicly, unapologetically, and pointedly challenge religious believers. Such atheists ask that believers actually defend and support the claims they publicly make. Such atheists criticize those beliefs, pointing out the flaws in them and argue that they are mistaken, wrong, or even dangerous. Some religious theists find this intolerable.
The first mistake religious theists tend to make when promoting this myth is in using the concept of "rude" too broadly. They don't limit themselves to describing atheists as "rude" for being uncivil, for treating people disrespectfully, or for jumping into places and conversations where they were not invited. Some atheists have done this and such behavior might be described as inappropriately rude, at least in some cases.
Instead of sticking with just cases like this, though, some religious theists will reach further and describe as "rude" broader criticism of religion. Apparently, some believe that any criticism â€" or at least any very pointed and strong criticism â€" of deeply-held beliefs is "rude" because people should be left alone with their religious beliefs. It's as if religion and theism should be immune to the same sorts of criticism and critical scrutiny which every other belief and belief system is commonly subjected to.
This leads directly into the second major problem religious theists who complain about atheists being "rude" don't offer similar complaints about other religious theists who are equally "rude." Richard Dawkins, for example, is often singled out for the accusation of rudeness because he traveled around to different religious communities and offered commentary on what he thought was wrong with their religious beliefs. Evangelists who go around to various communities to promote their religious beliefs and also criticize common lifestyles are not, however, called rude or intolerant.
Some religious believers go much further than this â€" there are a number of groups which go door-to-door promoting their beliefs and telling people that they should change because their current beliefs are wrong or even dangerous. There are "street preachers" who are even more aggressive and direct in their proselytization. I don't see them being criticized for being "rude" and "intolerant," nor do you see atheists doing anything remotely similar.
Then of course there are the little things that atheists have to put up with. Most atheists have received religious spam from relatives who pass around chain emails calling for prayer or attacking church/state separation. Most atheists have received emails from religious friends and relatives that contain religious quotes or Bible verses at the end. Most atheists have been told that they are being prayed for.
How often do atheists do anything similar in return? In fact, atheists rarely if ever do such things and if they did, they'd be accused of rudeness and intolerance. At the same time, religious theists keep up such behavior without a second thought. Why does this double standard exist?
The answer, I believe, is that it's not "rudeness" which people are so much objecting to as it is atheism itself. If religious theists were truly concerned about rudeness and civility, they would apply their standards consistently â€" and they would be much more concerned with the far greater and more widespread instances of so-called "rudeness" on the part of religious theists themselves. Unfortunately, they are unable to perceive such behavior as genuinely rude because they are convinced that they are acting on behalf of Truth.
Christians are right and atheists are wrong, therefore it's OK for Christians to do things that atheists would be castigated for doing. Christians, being right, are entitled to behave in ways that they tell others is rude, intolerant, and uncivil for them to imitate. In fact, whenever anyone objects that's just a sign that they should do it even more often and more forcefully â€" resistance to the Truth is a sign that the Truth is needed even more.
Thus we must conclude that it's not the case that atheists are especially rude in what they are saying and doing, but that they are treated as not being entitled to same social privileges and behaviors as Christians. Attacks on atheists for being rude, intolerant, disrespectful, and militant are just part of a long string of attempts to enforce or promote Christian privilege in society.
Atheists' criticisms and actions would be despised regardless of the manner in which atheists acted. An atheist who is politely critical wouldn’t really be accepted because open, unapologetic atheism itself it the target: such atheism communicates unambiguously the idea that neither religion nor theism are necessary for a good, moral, productive, fulfilling life. Because atheism is "wrong," atheists aren't entitled to openly promote such things on the same basis and in the same ways as religious theists are allowed to do.
When a person is insecure in their beliefs, the mere existence of atheists like this may be perceived as a direct threat and challenge to who they are. Some just can't handle this, but even if they recognize their reaction for what it is, they are unlikely to acknowledge it openly. All that's left is to attack atheists themselves â€" for example, by describing them as "rude" to encourage others to dismiss atheists' critiques on account of their allegedly poor moral character.
No comments:
Post a Comment