Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

rug

(82,333 posts)
Fri May 26, 2017, 10:46 PM May 2017

We Cant Ignore the Racism of the Most Famous Humanists in American History

May 15, 2017
by Hemant Mehta

Is there a connection between Humanism and race? There are no doubt atheists who believe the question of God marks the end of what we all have in common, but Dr. Anthony Pinn argues that the two subjects must go hand in hand. If we’re committed to making this life as good as it can be, we must be active in fighting for racial justice, especially when religion has been used to justify oppression and discrimination.

In his powerful new book When Colorblindness Isn’t the Answer: Humanism and the Challenge of Race (Pitchstone Publishing, 2017), Pinn makes the case for why Humanists have failed to “provide a more compelling alternative to theism” for various minority groups and how we can change that.



In the excerpt below, Pinn points out how some of the Founding Fathers atheists point to in admiration can’t be separated from their own racist behavior.

"Celebration of humanists across the centuries often fails to acknowledge the underbelly of humanism, or the ways in which it is similar to theism: both have a long legacy of problematic stances toward race.

"According to Susan Jacoby, only two freethinkers, or humanists, have received appropriate attention — Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. I am not in a position to advance nor deny that argument. And for the purposes of this text such an exploration isn’t necessary. Suffice it to say, they are important figures within the history of the United States and within humanist circles. And, the relationship between freethought and race presented by such figures is instructive. Both were men of great intellect and profound importance for the establishment of the United States as a secular nation, and both at least passively endorsed (e.g., inherited slave estates) the system of slavery.

"What I offer here isn’t a history lesson on the philosophy of these two figures, but rather something about them and humanists’ appreciation for them speaks to challenges regarding race worthy of addressing. I’m not especially concerned with the details of their secular thinking, the degrees to which they were definable as humanists based on contemporary understandings of the terminology. The fact that humanists claim them and do so with significant energy, for my purposes, is sufficient. They, as some might put it, are case studies of a sort that point to some incorrect assumptions made by some humanists. Secular government was and remained intimately linked to the problem of race acted out as racism. What are contemporary humanists to say about this?

"For instance, again take Thomas Jefferson and his undeniable importance with respect to the articulation of the principles, values, and ideals that shape democracy in the United States, as well as his significance regarding public, higher education vis-à-vis the University of Virginia. Jefferson was also a slaveholder, whose wealth and influence was dependent upon a system of brutality that held in inhumane bondage peoples of African descent — beings whose humanity was questioned and who were without will to determine their own life options. He framed the workings of democracy as the political system of the new United States, but he supported the system of slavery through his direct participation in it. I’ve not heard much made of this latter point. Yet, isn’t it important? Doesn’t it provide a warrant for humility, and for a more balanced presentation of humanism, warts and all?

"Theists assume the plausibility of perfection and as a consequence demand its significant figures be without flaws or at least — like the biblical figure King David — have notable signs of God’s favor that blur out the messiness of life or at least point beyond it. Paradox and tension are difficult for theists, certainly when the paradox isn’t resolved or the tension eased. For theists, history is purpose driven; the universe is concerned with and about humanity. And, situations and topics that challenge the pleasantries of this assumption trouble theists. On the other hand, humanists, with a more mature sense of humanity, shouldn’t hold to the same demand for a stain-free existence. But yet, there appears to be at least a passive effort to remove the taint of racism from humanist legends such as Jefferson. Yes, Jefferson feared slavery would destroy the nation in that it was a plague with dire consequences. He believed ending slavery in Virginia and elsewhere also held the potential to flood the nation with a population it could not absorb and that couldn’t integrate in a significant manner because of its inherent and undeniable inferiority.

"Here we have it in brief: a significant humanist figure with significance to the United States from its initial formation to the present is also a prime example of the status quo in the form of race-based oppression. In a word, Jefferson represents both humanism and racism. One might argue Jefferson and those like him were “men” of their age — trapped in the workings of their time period and shaped by the sociocultural codes of that historical moment. This is true and this is why I would never suggest we ignore, for instance, Jefferson’s contributions to our particular structuring of democracy and our resulting best practices of collective life. However, recognizing this doesn’t free humanists from also recognizing the manner in which he represents some of the most troubling practices of race-based violence witnessed in the modern period. The former is to be celebrated and the latter acknowledged with every effort to learn from bad policy and behavior, and not repeat it. Will such an admission — despite the fact that plenty of Christians bought and traded in slaves, disregarded American Indians, and abused Latinos/as — fuel hostility toward humanists and prove for the general U.S. population that humanism is immortal and flawed? Can humanists acknowledge participation in racism and maintain their critique of theistically fueled injustice?

"It’s a delicate balance to be sure: a problem and solution wrapped in one and tied together nicely with a bow of energetic prophecy that screams accept these proclamations or experience eternal damnation… because God loves you to death. Within Christianity, the dominant tradition in the United States, this tension is in part a consequence of a really low opinion of humans and human nature. Based on a rather bizarre creation story, humans start out behind the curve, with a warped nature — the stories go — marked by a tendency toward immorality, disobedience, and questionable values. Left to their own devices, this demented story continues, humans will do no good. And so Christians spend so much time trying to correct for this original flaw, while also thinking of their condition as an opportunity for God to prove God’s goodness.

"Those who are despised take every opportunity to demonstrate that actually they are beyond reproach — upstanding people, with integrity, values, and an important role to play in the life of the nation. A type of respectability guides this thinking: if we can prove ourselves acceptable — whatever that means at the time — we will gain the status and' the position we merit. As I see it, some version of that thinking is in play in many humanist circles concerning a variety of topics. Still, to claim figures such as Thomas Jefferson and in this way lodge humanism in the workings of the United States is also to tie humanism to various modalities of racial injustice. What to do?

"Humanists embrace this respectability position with issues such as racism; and, racial minorities such as African Americans have been forced to do it with respect to virtually every social ill. Any crime implicates all; any social slip implicates all, and so on. Will theists use this information (as well known as it is) against humanists? And, would such a strategy harm the effort of humanists to make the United States a more secular nation? And so there is in some quarters a tendency to hide the unpleasant dimensions of life lived by some humanists, to downplay any significance. This is an understandable approach, but it does raise a point worth consideration.

"Still, to embrace Jefferson, then, is to acknowledge at least a subtle connection to both a legacy of profound humanist thought and a legacy of profound humanist racism. This does not mean humanism and humanists are inherently racist; but it does do damage to a too popular assumption that humanism doesn’t bend to the social construction of race in ways that would make it a significant part of the racism problem."

When Colorblindness Isn’t the Answer: Humanism and the Challenge of Race is available now online and in bookstores.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2017/05/15/we-cant-ignore-the-racism-of-the-most-famous-humanists-in-american-history/

135 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
We Cant Ignore the Racism of the Most Famous Humanists in American History (Original Post) rug May 2017 OP
interesting heaven05 May 2017 #1
Here's some author info. rug May 2017 #2
thank you heaven05 May 2017 #3
It's the flip side of ad hominem. Igel May 2017 #4
Are you in the Alt Right? Bretton Garcia Jun 2017 #124
No, we can't. Was someone saying we should? trotsky May 2017 #5
There is a lot of attention being paid to it Lordquinton May 2017 #6
And have you actually done so? guillaumeb May 2017 #8
More often than the inverse Lordquinton May 2017 #12
I actually directed the question to another. guillaumeb May 2017 #17
My mistake, I thought this was an open forum Lordquinton May 2017 #20
Numerous times. Simply look at my recent posts for examples. guillaumeb May 2017 #21
You posted a middle of the line article Lordquinton May 2017 #26
Keep searching, if you really wish to. I have posted a few. guillaumeb May 2017 #29
Ok, lets look at them Lordquinton Jun 2017 #68
Each time I present a critical post, you are resetting the bar a bit higher. guillaumeb Jun 2017 #70
You still have yet to answer why posts at DU are required to please you. trotsky Jun 2017 #76
Still looking for those posts pointing out negative actions taken by non-theists. guillaumeb Jun 2017 #78
Good. trotsky Jun 2017 #79
I don't think those posts exist. hrmjustin Jun 2017 #80
I cannot say that they exist or not, guillaumeb Jun 2017 #81
lol that is the religion room for you. hrmjustin Jun 2017 #82
Amusing and revealing. guillaumeb Jun 2017 #83
Yes and I have my own hypocrisies here. hrmjustin Jun 2017 #84
As do we all. guillaumeb Jun 2017 #85
very true. hrmjustin Jun 2017 #86
Probably hard to see it Lordquinton Jun 2017 #89
Ah yes, the quick change of subject to avoid the actual point. guillaumeb Jun 2017 #93
That is a common tactic used by theists Lordquinton Jun 2017 #103
What an interesting way to attempt to frame and control discussion. guillaumeb Jun 2017 #106
And you avoid what I said and post an ad-hom Lordquinton Jun 2017 #108
Much that happens here is quite typical. guillaumeb Jun 2017 #116
Be the change you want to see. Lordquinton Jun 2017 #119
What would this group be like if everyone followed that suggestion? guillaumeb Jun 2017 #120
I am doing exactly what I intend to Lordquinton Jun 2017 #121
If someone frames a question in such a way as to permit only a negative guillaumeb Jun 2017 #122
Interesting that you view the questions I ask as only having negative answers Lordquinton Jun 2017 #123
I do not agree with the ruling, guillaumeb Jun 2017 #125
Took you long enough to get that out! Lordquinton Jun 2017 #126
I had no idea there was a time limit. guillaumeb Jun 2017 #127
I have yet to see a unequivocally critical post Lordquinton Jun 2017 #87
You set a very high bar for your perceived opponents. guillaumeb Jun 2017 #94
Here you go. trotsky Jun 2017 #95
A failure. guillaumeb Jun 2017 #96
WTF??? trotsky Jun 2017 #97
Mildly critical of the politics of one person, guillaumeb Jun 2017 #98
OK, about what I figured. trotsky Jun 2017 #99
One. guillaumeb Jun 2017 #100
Yes, one. trotsky Jun 2017 #101
You are blinded by privilege Lordquinton Jun 2017 #105
So the numerous coments about the stupidity of believers guillaumeb Jun 2017 #107
Example? Lordquinton Jun 2017 #109
Please. guillaumeb Jun 2017 #117
Ok Lordquinton Jun 2017 #118
A reminder for anyone who isn't familiar with your favorite example of "atheistic intolerance": trotsky Jun 2017 #45
Yes, and only one side of that story is presented. Mariana Jun 2017 #47
LOL, exactly. trotsky Jun 2017 #48
I think the answer is a no on that one. hrmjustin May 2017 #22
Well, as a relatively new member, guillaumeb May 2017 #23
Since I have been here I have not seen it happen. hrmjustin May 2017 #24
Interesting! guillaumeb May 2017 #25
Sigh. trotsky May 2017 #31
That did not answer his question. hrmjustin May 2017 #32
What did you really expect? guillaumeb May 2017 #33
This room is usually amusing and frustrating. hrmjustin May 2017 #34
I would say far more of the latter. guillaumeb May 2017 #36
Maybe they're hard to find Cartoonist Jun 2017 #46
Blaming your upbringing? guillaumeb Jun 2017 #53
Brainwashing is no joke Cartoonist Jun 2017 #56
Brainwashing is the pejorative term for socialization. guillaumeb Jun 2017 #57
Could be Cartoonist Jun 2017 #58
You MIGHT think that, (referring to your projection regarding atheist parents), guillaumeb Jun 2017 #64
It's the case for me. EvilAL Jun 2017 #128
Living a good life is the ultimate goal. guillaumeb Jun 2017 #129
What you wrote: guillaumeb May 2017 #35
Koresh almighty. trotsky May 2017 #37
I understand your answer, and expected it to take the form that it did. guillaumeb May 2017 #38
No, you don't understand my answer. trotsky May 2017 #39
A double standard? guillaumeb May 2017 #40
You just keep on doing what you're doing. trotsky Jun 2017 #43
Do you not realize that you are also setting an example? guillaumeb Jun 2017 #49
Well, as you've made clear in the past, you think I'm quite stupid. trotsky Jun 2017 #59
I am one of those "few people"? hrmjustin May 2017 #41
Well, considering you have received no response........... guillaumeb Jun 2017 #50
Oh I already knew and I am fine with it. hrmjustin Jun 2017 #55
Interesting! hrmjustin May 2017 #10
The same can be said edhopper May 2017 #7
Perhaps Rug is attempting to provide some perspective. guillaumeb May 2017 #9
As if edhopper May 2017 #11
We see more anti-religion posts in this room. hrmjustin May 2017 #13
what​ happened? edhopper May 2017 #14
I will pm you. hrmjustin May 2017 #15
What wish is that? Lordquinton May 2017 #27
if you say so. hrmjustin May 2017 #28
I have not personally seen any, quite the opposite in fact, guillaumeb May 2017 #16
I don't think edhopper May 2017 #18
Intolerance can be expressed in many ways. guillaumeb May 2017 #19
I include edhopper Jun 2017 #42
Any belief can be used to excuse doing harm to another. guillaumeb Jun 2017 #51
That's a completely and utterly false statement. trotsky Jun 2017 #61
And once again, since you're in the RELIGION group... trotsky Jun 2017 #44
I keep looking in the atheists group. guillaumeb Jun 2017 #52
So...? trotsky Jun 2017 #60
Keep checking the religious groups for negative posts about theists Lordquinton Jun 2017 #62
Ha! trotsky Jun 2017 #63
I personally have found many. guillaumeb Jun 2017 #65
Sure you have. n/t trotsky Jun 2017 #66
Astounding response. guillaumeb Jun 2017 #71
Yours deserved another. n/t trotsky Jun 2017 #74
Like the one you posted before? Lordquinton Jun 2017 #67
Or the one about the lawyer for the American Family Association. trotsky Jun 2017 #75
As you have seen believers here have no problem talking about the problems of religion. hrmjustin Jun 2017 #69
True. And "rug" is an example of a believer who constantly posts guillaumeb Jun 2017 #72
The room is not the same without him. hrmjustin Jun 2017 #73
Couldn't agree more Lordquinton Jun 2017 #88
Yes I know how you feel. hrmjustin Jun 2017 #90
I don't want to get into it for obvious reasons Lordquinton Jun 2017 #91
Yet here you are rubbing it in my face that my friend is flagged. hrmjustin Jun 2017 #92
That doesn't change the posters behavior Lordquinton Jun 2017 #102
. hrmjustin Jun 2017 #104
This is getting too deep into meta Lordquinton Jun 2017 #112
Just because you consider him a friend doesn't mean EvolveOrConvolve Jun 2017 #114
No one is without faults, but if you think he hated atheists than you weren't paying attention. hrmjustin Jun 2017 #115
Why is he flagged? AtheistCrusader Jun 2017 #110
I can't see his posts. hrmjustin Jun 2017 #111
Because Lordquinton Jun 2017 #113
Nor should we. Eko May 2017 #30
"We" do not Freethinker65 Jun 2017 #54
Applying modern day standards to the world of 200 years ago is a beachbum bob Jun 2017 #77
And of the most famous non-humanists too LeftishBrit Jul 2017 #130
Religions may have bigotry codified in their holy texts Bradical79 Jul 2017 #131
But that's the key problem when religion is in the mix. trotsky Jul 2017 #132
Absolutely Bradical79 Jul 2017 #133
We shouldn't ignore the racism of Jesus, either. Gore1FL Jul 2017 #134
Has anyone violated Godwin's law yet? beam me up scottie Jul 2017 #135
 

rug

(82,333 posts)
2. Here's some author info.
Fri May 26, 2017, 10:53 PM
May 2017

"Anthony B. Pinn is the Agnes Cullen Arnold Professor of Humanities, professor of religious studies, and founding director of the Center for Engaged Research and Collaborative Learning at Rice University. He is the first African American full professor to hold an endowed chair in the history of Rice University. He is also director of research for the Institute for Humanist Studies and is a member of the Board of Directors for the American Humanist Association. He is the author of The End of God-Talk and Writing God's Obituary, and he lives in Houston, Texas."

https://www.amazon.com/When-Colorblindness-Isnt-Answer-Challenge/dp/1634311221/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&qid=1491836302&sr=8-3&keywords=anthony+pinn&linkCode=sl1&tag=wwwfriendlyat-20&linkId=b0d0bf8aec717f84a14be93eb84251cf

Igel

(35,197 posts)
4. It's the flip side of ad hominem.
Sat May 27, 2017, 11:21 AM
May 2017

An appeal to authority.

In this case a kind of moral authority rooted in the marginal. For many, race, class or ethnicity must be correct before we hear facts or logic.

Proletariat engineers and academics, often less well trained than those with incorrect backgrounds, were often more highly valued. This was an economic, not just an intellectual or moral disaster.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
5. No, we can't. Was someone saying we should?
Sun May 28, 2017, 11:49 AM
May 2017

Kinda like some say we shouldn't talk about the coverup of pedophilia in the Catholic Church?

I don't recall seeing any atheists or humanists saying we can't talk about the bad behavior of other atheists or humanists.

Lordquinton

(7,886 posts)
6. There is a lot of attention being paid to it
Sun May 28, 2017, 07:24 PM
May 2017

I wonder why someone would think otherwise. Have they not heard of Hamilton?

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
8. And have you actually done so?
Tue May 30, 2017, 05:16 PM
May 2017

Have you talked about the very human bad behavior of atheists and humanists?

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
17. I actually directed the question to another.
Tue May 30, 2017, 08:15 PM
May 2017

But given the huge number of negative posts about religion, I will eagerly await these posts highlighting negative behavior of non-theists.

Lordquinton

(7,886 posts)
20. My mistake, I thought this was an open forum
Tue May 30, 2017, 08:38 PM
May 2017

Perhaps you can answer your own question:


Have you talked about the very human bad behavior of theists and Christians?

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
21. Numerous times. Simply look at my recent posts for examples.
Tue May 30, 2017, 08:40 PM
May 2017

But at one point, when I posted about intolerant Boston atheists, the uproar from certain non-theists was deafening. Apparently some have a very different standard.

One example:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1218250715

Lordquinton

(7,886 posts)
26. You posted a middle of the line article
Tue May 30, 2017, 08:52 PM
May 2017

About a horrible person. By the end I almost thought maybe he isn't such a bad guy. Then I remembered who the subject was. If that's your idea of calling out theists, then no, you haven't.

And yea, your article about the Boston atheist did cause a stir, and you conveniently forgot why that hit piece from a trump troll was objected to (because it was a hit piece from a trump troll)

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
29. Keep searching, if you really wish to. I have posted a few.
Tue May 30, 2017, 08:57 PM
May 2017

And your mischaracterization of the intolerant Boston atheists post is not supported by the facts of the post. To refresh your memory, the Boston atheist group was not set up as a political group. It was only when the victim, a long time member, defined himself as a Trump supporter that he was banned. Classic example of intolerance in action.

By the way, I am still waiting for the examples from the other poster. I have patience.

Allow me to help you:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1218250716

And another:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1218250131 Only one page in.

If you wish, you also can reply with posts of your own that are critical of non-theists. I will wait patiently.

Lordquinton

(7,886 posts)
68. Ok, lets look at them
Mon Jun 5, 2017, 02:45 PM
Jun 2017

The first article is about a racist professor resigning because the school is moving to address the issues of systemic racism. The second a) makes it seem like it's a problem among evangelicals (and not, say, the dogma of the RCC) and b) doesn't paint it as the oppressive culture that it is, rather and college hijinks "The LGBTQ students are being trouble for the Dean, tune in next week!"

You are equating an article which flat out calls humanists racist with some milquetoast articles where evangelical christians are being tut-tutted for being actual monsters.

Any more false equivalencies?

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
70. Each time I present a critical post, you are resetting the bar a bit higher.
Mon Jun 5, 2017, 03:15 PM
Jun 2017

Making you of course the "decider" as to how critical a critical post must be. And I am still patiently waiting for reciprocal posts wherein non-theists criticize other non-theists.

It is always easier to remove the speck from another's eye rather than remove the beam from one's own eye.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
78. Still looking for those posts pointing out negative actions taken by non-theists.
Mon Jun 5, 2017, 04:55 PM
Jun 2017

I will wait patiently.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
79. Good.
Mon Jun 5, 2017, 05:25 PM
Jun 2017

You'll be waiting a long time for people to simply fulfill your arbitrary requests.

The Internet must be a very frustrating place for you.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
81. I cannot say that they exist or not,
Mon Jun 5, 2017, 07:59 PM
Jun 2017

but if one can only search for (and find) negativity when looking at the actions of theists, what does that say?

 

hrmjustin

(71,265 posts)
82. lol that is the religion room for you.
Mon Jun 5, 2017, 08:05 PM
Jun 2017

I have to admit several years ago it bothered me but after several years of posting in the religion room I accept it for what it is. But I always did find it amusing how several here have certain posts bookmarked for future use.



guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
83. Amusing and revealing.
Mon Jun 5, 2017, 08:09 PM
Jun 2017

Or, as Jesus said:

"remove the beam from your own eye before removing the speck from your brother's eye".

Lordquinton

(7,886 posts)
103. That is a common tactic used by theists
Thu Jun 8, 2017, 04:29 PM
Jun 2017

The thing is that while there may be some Atheists who behave badly, they aren't doing it because of atheism. The theists that behave badly are doing it either because of, or claiming they aren't bad because of their beliefs.

So really there is nothing negative that can be said about atheism, and comments about atheists are pretty much ad homs.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
120. What would this group be like if everyone followed that suggestion?
Sat Jun 10, 2017, 12:43 PM
Jun 2017

Something to consider for all of us.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
122. If someone frames a question in such a way as to permit only a negative
Sun Jun 11, 2017, 05:37 PM
Jun 2017

answer, those questions might be dismissed as non-productive and provocative.

Lordquinton

(7,886 posts)
123. Interesting that you view the questions I ask as only having negative answers
Mon Jun 12, 2017, 04:47 PM
Jun 2017

Says way more about what I'm asking about than the questions.

For example, I asked you if you supported the courts ruling on the religious right to discriminate, if there is only a negative answer to that, then is it my question that's the issue?

Lordquinton

(7,886 posts)
87. I have yet to see a unequivocally critical post
Mon Jun 5, 2017, 10:01 PM
Jun 2017

"racist professor resigns over University'science' diversity program" is much different from "Christian University has diversity issues"

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
94. You set a very high bar for your perceived opponents.
Tue Jun 6, 2017, 05:09 PM
Jun 2017

Please do not trip over the very low bar I have set. All that is needed is one single critical post.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
97. WTF???
Tue Jun 6, 2017, 05:18 PM
Jun 2017

I just gave you a link to a post (and thread) that's CRITICAL of an atheist, IN the atheist group.

Your challenge has been met. Enjoy the crow.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
98. Mildly critical of the politics of one person,
Tue Jun 6, 2017, 05:21 PM
Jun 2017

balanced(?) against the constant stream of attacks on religion and believers?

Perhaps Bill Mahar should be the subject of a post? I believe he is a non-theist.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
99. OK, about what I figured.
Tue Jun 6, 2017, 05:24 PM
Jun 2017

Moving the goalposts when you lose. Again. You asked for ONE POST. I gave you a whole thread.

I'll gladly let anyone else still reading this thread judge for themselves.

That crow will be waiting for you.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
100. One.
Tue Jun 6, 2017, 05:52 PM
Jun 2017

And many of the posts critical of religion are posted by self-described people of faith. As opposed to the 1 single post by a non-theist that criticizes another non-theist because of political differences, but in that mild, singular instance of criticism, the non-theist manages to include gratuitous insults against people of faith.

Balance? Equivalence?

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
101. Yes, one.
Wed Jun 7, 2017, 09:24 AM
Jun 2017

You asked for one.

I gave you one.

But now you're moving the goalposts, as you always do.

And once again, I'll remind you: no one has to satisfy your arbitrary needs for "balance" or "equivalence" on an anonymous message board on the Internet. Quite honestly, you are humiliating yourself with this behavior. I, of course, am all too happy to assist you in that effort. It's truly a delight.

Lordquinton

(7,886 posts)
105. You are blinded by privilege
Thu Jun 8, 2017, 04:34 PM
Jun 2017

Light tut-tuttings don't stand to blanket statements about atheists.

Btw, most criticism about theists is actually about the religion, not the person while most criticism about atheism is directed at Atheists. Why is that do you think?

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
107. So the numerous coments about the stupidity of believers
Thu Jun 8, 2017, 06:11 PM
Jun 2017

are actually directed at faith?

Again, an interesting attempt at framing but the posts here can be read by all.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
45. A reminder for anyone who isn't familiar with your favorite example of "atheistic intolerance":
Thu Jun 1, 2017, 10:19 AM
Jun 2017

The "intolerant Boston atheists" tossed out a Trump supporter.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1218242092

That is all.

Mariana

(14,849 posts)
47. Yes, and only one side of that story is presented.
Thu Jun 1, 2017, 02:13 PM
Jun 2017

That of the disgruntled Trump supporter. As we all know, Trump supporters are paragons of honesty and trustworthiness. If the Trump supporter SAYS he was tossed for being a Trump supporter, and that there was no other reason, there's just no need to investigate any further, is there?

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
48. LOL, exactly.
Thu Jun 1, 2017, 03:20 PM
Jun 2017

What I find most hilarious is, THAT is the most horrific supposed example of atheists being intolerant that he could find.

Kicking a Trump supporter out of an atheist group.

Really.

THAT is supposed to prove that "everybody is intolerant and religion has nothing to do with it" when we point out the role religion plays in intolerance against the LGBT community, or women, or other races, etc.

WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THAT POOR TRUMP SUPPORTER!!!

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
23. Well, as a relatively new member,
Tue May 30, 2017, 08:43 PM
May 2017

I cannot speak to posts prior to becoming active here. But based solely on my experience as an active member, I cannot recall any such posts either.

But I am willing to be enlightened.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
31. Sigh.
Wed May 31, 2017, 09:54 AM
May 2017

For the umpteenth time, please let me remind you what forum we're in.

The RELIGION forum.

Atheism and humanism certainly come up as related topics from time to time, however they are not the primary focus of this forum.

I understand that it really, really bothers you when negative aspects of religion and religious people are discussed here. But you're just gonna have to deal with it.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
33. What did you really expect?
Wed May 31, 2017, 03:00 PM
May 2017

I have seen what I expected to see as responses to my question. And in response to another's question, I posted 2 of my own posts outlining negative behavior by theists. Better to follow Jesus' admonition to "remove the beam from your own eye......" but far too many apparently only see negative behavior by theists.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
36. I would say far more of the latter.
Wed May 31, 2017, 03:04 PM
May 2017

But I will wait patiently for the posts about negative behavior by non-theists.

Cartoonist

(7,298 posts)
46. Maybe they're hard to find
Thu Jun 1, 2017, 10:26 AM
Jun 2017

Even harder to find a connection between their bad behavior and their atheism.

We all have our faults. Mine have nothing to do with my atheism. In fact, some of them can probably be traced back to my strict Catholic upbringing.

Cartoonist

(7,298 posts)
56. Brainwashing is no joke
Thu Jun 1, 2017, 06:25 PM
Jun 2017

Tell me, is your religious belief the same as your parents? Then you may be a victim of brainwashing as well.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
57. Brainwashing is the pejorative term for socialization.
Thu Jun 1, 2017, 10:12 PM
Jun 2017

Are all members of the armed forces brainwashed into believing what they are told about US history?

If children are born into an atheistic household, and if these children are also atheists, were they brainwashed?

Cartoonist

(7,298 posts)
58. Could be
Thu Jun 1, 2017, 10:24 PM
Jun 2017

Only if their parents told them that atheism is the only true way. I doubt it though. I would think that atheist parents would expose their children to many philosophies instead of only letting them attend one church.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
64. You MIGHT think that, (referring to your projection regarding atheist parents),
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 05:51 PM
Jun 2017

but that might not be the case at all.

EvilAL

(1,437 posts)
128. It's the case for me.
Mon Jun 26, 2017, 08:19 AM
Jun 2017

I allowed my children to decide what they wanted to do.
I didn't tell tthem religion was stupid or that religious people were stupid or anything bad about religions at all.
Just that in didn't believe in any of it.
If they asked why I told them I'd explain it when they were old enough to understand.
They played on Sunday, relaxed and had fun while their friends were in church, never thinking about religion or worrying about burning in hell like their friends were told would happen. I explained it all to them when they were old enough to understand.
They are atheists. They have no belief in a deity. They do not have a belief that there is no deity, like so any claim atheism is, they never knew god or jesus growing up other than what others told them and the day my daughter came home from her friends house and was laughing, at age 9, that her friends parents thought 2 of every animal could live on a boat for a year and couldn't explain how, it made my day. I knew I did it right, allowed her to figure it out on her own. Like Santa Claus, leprechauns or the tooth fairy.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
129. Living a good life is the ultimate goal.
Mon Jun 26, 2017, 11:20 AM
Jun 2017

If your children live with respect for the choices of others, I would say that they are living a good life.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
35. What you wrote:
Wed May 31, 2017, 03:03 PM
May 2017

"No, we can't. Was someone saying we should?
Kinda like some say we shouldn't talk about the coverup of pedophilia in the Catholic Church?
I don't recall seeing any atheists or humanists saying we can't talk about the bad behavior of other atheists or humanists. "

SO I asked if you had ever written one article pointing out negative behavior by atheists or humanists. And to date you have not given an answer. So, if one can assume that you have never written one post about negative behavior by non-theists, either in this group or in the relatively closed non-theist group, one might wonder why that is so.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
37. Koresh almighty.
Wed May 31, 2017, 03:14 PM
May 2017

Given an answer to what? Have I been critical of other atheists or humanists? Hell fucking yes. ARE YOU HAPPY NOW?

Have I done it in this forum? Pretty sure I have, but I don't have my entire posting history cataloged in my head to provide specific citations for you. So given the "gotcha" logic you have readily employed to date, you can therefore claim it's never happened because I have no proof.

So yay, you win!

But here's the thing: I don't write posts to please you. And given your demonstrated behavior here, I highly doubt I'm going to start doing that anytime soon.

Perhaps if you apologized for your repeated false accusations against me, and your mischaracterization of atheism as a "belief system," you would help convince me of your sincerity.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
38. I understand your answer, and expected it to take the form that it did.
Wed May 31, 2017, 03:16 PM
May 2017

And apologies apply to both sides.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
39. No, you don't understand my answer.
Wed May 31, 2017, 03:22 PM
May 2017

It is patently obvious you don't.

I'm going to continue to post items critical of religion in the Religion group, and you're just gonna have to deal with it. Continue to try and shame me, or pretend like I have some kind of double standard, if that's what you feel you need to do. If you continue to make it personal, as others have done in this group, I will eventually put you on ignore, as I have done with a few people. I only removed rug from that list once I learned he got himself flagged for review.

But I have observed what kind of Christian you are, and I am glad you are around to provide a perfect example of why I post what I do.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
40. A double standard?
Wed May 31, 2017, 08:53 PM
May 2017

Why would you assume that?

I also have observed the various types of non-theists who post here. And both types are examples.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
43. You just keep on doing what you're doing.
Thu Jun 1, 2017, 09:28 AM
Jun 2017

I am glad you are around to show people what Christian behavior is all about.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
59. Well, as you've made clear in the past, you think I'm quite stupid.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 09:17 AM
Jun 2017

So that must mean I never thought of that.

edhopper

(33,208 posts)
7. The same can be said
Mon May 29, 2017, 09:11 AM
May 2017

for Civil Rights and America in general. Both our Democracy and Humanism have evolved over the past 200+ years.

To put this as a sleight against Humanism is absurd.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
9. Perhaps Rug is attempting to provide some perspective.
Tue May 30, 2017, 05:20 PM
May 2017

Considering the constant stream of posts that just happen to focus solely on the faults of believers and various faith organizations, a stream of posts that can make one assume that the "Religion" group is intended solely for negative news, perhaps Rug is attempting to remind non-theists that perfection eludes us all. Even the scientifically literate.

One might wish to consider this point.

Or not.

 

hrmjustin

(71,265 posts)
13. We see more anti-religion posts in this room.
Tue May 30, 2017, 07:58 PM
May 2017

And now that some people got their wish her(not you) I suspect we will see even more anti-religion posts.


guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
16. I have not personally seen any, quite the opposite in fact,
Tue May 30, 2017, 08:13 PM
May 2017

but I cannot speak to prior iterations of DU.

But does that excuse the intolerant behavior?

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
19. Intolerance can be expressed in many ways.
Tue May 30, 2017, 08:36 PM
May 2017

And it is. But criticism of any bad behavior is of course needed.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
61. That's a completely and utterly false statement.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 11:52 AM
Jun 2017

How about this belief: "I believe that no one should ever harm anyone else."

Thank you for making it so easy to disprove - by making such a ridiculous universal claim, I only need one counterexample to prove you wrong.

Now can we talk about the elements of religion that truly do enable people to harm each other, and not just "excuse" it?

Like, oh I dunno, "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live"?

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
44. And once again, since you're in the RELIGION group...
Thu Jun 1, 2017, 09:37 AM
Jun 2017

you're going to see primarily religion-inspired and religion-based intolerance expressed.

You have two choices: Deal with it, or don't.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
52. I keep looking in the atheists group.
Thu Jun 1, 2017, 06:04 PM
Jun 2017

I am looking for similar posts but so far I can find none. It could be proof of my inferior search skills, or............

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
60. So...?
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 09:22 AM
Jun 2017

Who made you the topic police of DU? People are allowed to talk about anything they want to. And you can't stop it.

Here's another DU lesson for you. The Religion forum is open to all viewpoints. Groups like the Atheists group are focused on a non-believer POV. There exist a shit-ton of religious groups that don't allow negative posts about religion - your dream groups! Of course, they are as dead as can be. Maybe you can go liven them up?

But if you post in this forum, you're gonna have to deal with negative news about religion. You can get over that, or don't. The more you protest though, the sillier you look. That's fine by me, of course.

Lordquinton

(7,886 posts)
67. Like the one you posted before?
Mon Jun 5, 2017, 02:34 PM
Jun 2017

The article about Franklin Graham that left me actually admiring the man, until I remembered who it was actually about? Many like that?

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
75. Or the one about the lawyer for the American Family Association.
Mon Jun 5, 2017, 04:07 PM
Jun 2017

Or the "devotionals" that were lifted from a religious hate site, preaching bigotry against the LGBT community. Thankfully he finally deleted those and stopped posting new ones.

 

hrmjustin

(71,265 posts)
69. As you have seen believers here have no problem talking about the problems of religion.
Mon Jun 5, 2017, 02:49 PM
Jun 2017

We get accused of making excuses for religion sometimes, but the reality is for me I as a gay man have experienced bigotry based on religious views and I have no problem telling them off.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
72. True. And "rug" is an example of a believer who constantly posts
Mon Jun 5, 2017, 03:18 PM
Jun 2017

articles that criticize religion and believers. If only this willingness were reciprocated.

 

hrmjustin

(71,265 posts)
90. Yes I know how you feel.
Mon Jun 5, 2017, 10:14 PM
Jun 2017

I saw the joy in the other room over it. I expected no different.

But you did not see me jumping for joy when several of your friends were no longer able to post here.

I even made a case for one of them to return because despite our differences on religion l like him.

You got what you want and now want to rub it into my face. I expected no different.



Lordquinton

(7,886 posts)
91. I don't want to get into it for obvious reasons
Mon Jun 5, 2017, 10:19 PM
Jun 2017

But the poster in question was actively hostile to me and several others. I can't control what other people do and post.

EvolveOrConvolve

(6,452 posts)
114. Just because you consider him a friend doesn't mean
Fri Jun 9, 2017, 06:57 PM
Jun 2017

his behavior isn't atrocious towards atheists. He has a deep and unbending hatred of atheists and agnostics and spends thousands of posts being unpleasantly denigrating towards non-believers.

There are lots of believers that are here interacting with atheists, debating/discussing, even getting into heated arguments where feelings are hurt, but we all move on to the next topic or argument. But none of those believers sunk to the level of sheer, seething hatred that your friend did. He did not comport himself well.

 

hrmjustin

(71,265 posts)
115. No one is without faults, but if you think he hated atheists than you weren't paying attention.
Fri Jun 9, 2017, 07:15 PM
Jun 2017

And you and your friends can celebrate his absence all you want but leave me out of it. I didn't gloat when your friends were flagged. Several of them who made clear they personally disliked me, but I didn't gloat.

I understand you didn't get along and have your complaints but please don't include me in it.

Your friend has a thread in the other room you host celebrating his flag so enjoy.

Eko

(7,170 posts)
30. Nor should we.
Tue May 30, 2017, 09:15 PM
May 2017

Slavery is and was a horrible practice. We should also address the numerous times the Old Testament and New Testament promote and condone slavery.

Freethinker65

(9,934 posts)
54. "We" do not
Thu Jun 1, 2017, 06:08 PM
Jun 2017

Like most critical thinking humans, Humanists believe history is something you can learn from.

 

beachbum bob

(10,437 posts)
77. Applying modern day standards to the world of 200 years ago is a
Mon Jun 5, 2017, 04:48 PM
Jun 2017

Disengenuois exercise. True meaning of Monday morning quarterbacking

LeftishBrit

(41,192 posts)
130. And of the most famous non-humanists too
Sun Jul 9, 2017, 05:29 PM
Jul 2017

Racism was the accepted norm in most circles until quite recently.

 

Bradical79

(4,490 posts)
131. Religions may have bigotry codified in their holy texts
Sun Jul 16, 2017, 03:49 PM
Jul 2017

but it's always good to remember that bigotry is a human flaw first and foremost. Man created religion after all, so it's only natural that both religious and non-religious sources have some things like this in common. Especially in the days where people had even less knowlege of the sciences than they do today.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
132. But that's the key problem when religion is in the mix.
Mon Jul 17, 2017, 09:00 AM
Jul 2017

The bigotry is not only codified, but placed into the category of "sanctified by god." It becomes protected against the facts, it becomes an article of faith which even moderate believers will staunchly defend as legitimate.

Gore1FL

(21,034 posts)
134. We shouldn't ignore the racism of Jesus, either.
Tue Jul 18, 2017, 11:26 PM
Jul 2017

Matthew 15:21-28 he compares non-Jews to dogs and only reluctantly helps the woman when she traps him in logic.

Even what is commonly translated as "Love your neighbor as yourself" Matthew 22:36-40 uses the word "reyacha" really translates to "fellow Jew."


beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
135. Has anyone violated Godwin's law yet?
Wed Jul 19, 2017, 12:55 AM
Jul 2017

Because I can do that, I mean as long as we're discussing the history of racism and which faiths are more culpable.

Then we can move onto Christian participation in the slave trade.

And then we can discuss Dominionism and how it was used to wipe out Native Americans.

Oh and if you're interested in more recent events we can dicuss white supremacist hate groups and which religious ideology they're affiliated with (hint: it's not Humanism).

Sure, let's compare!

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»We Cant Ignore the Racism...