Reply #244: No , and the fact that no-one is admitting they think it is sickening.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

The only possible explanation for the degree of support for such sickening and obviously indefensible behaviour is the not-sufficiently-rarely-held-on-DU (note: not "widely held") belief that because Christianity is the dominant religion in America, offending or angering Christians is standing up to oppression.

No-one is saying that they don't think the family's feelings matter. A lot of people are advocating acting as though they don't. In some ways, that's even more contemptible than coming out and admitting it.

The wishes of a family who have just tragically lost a loved one to mourn for her matter far more to me than the legal right of a property owner not to have a cross on his front lawn. I fully support his right not to do so if he doesn't wish to (in the same way that I support the right to promote racial hatred or protest outside abortion clinics with disgusting signs) but I think that exercising that right is unbelievably selfish and petty, and anyone who does so is despicable.

There are a non-trivial number of atheists on DU who are more hostile to Christianity and Christians than can be justified by the behaviour of the same (some degree of such is perfectly acceptable; I certainly feel some, although I do my best not to show it), and that's a "bias" I actively try to confirm, yes. To stop me doing so, you would have to convince me that it's not the case, and as long as there are non-trivial numbers of people defending behaviour like this that is not going to happen, I'm afraid.

If you're referring to any other particular biases, please detail them and I'll hapily give you my views on them.

Incidentally, I suspect that the atheists trying to defend this sort of behaviour are fostering a whole lot more anti-atheist feeling than I am.

Please note that it's "some, not all, atheists who post as such on DU", not "atheists" that I'm "bashing" (is that worse than "criticising"?).