Why do Americans still dislike atheists?

Why do Americans still dislike atheists?

There are 38613 comments on the www.washingtonpost.com story from Apr 30, 2011, titled Why do Americans still dislike atheists?. In it, www.washingtonpost.com reports that:

Long after blacks and Jews have made great strides, and even as homosexuals gain respect, acceptance and new rights, there is still a group that lots of Americans just don't like much: atheists.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.washingtonpost.com.

jaimie

Madison, WI

#41 May 2, 2011
cpeter1313 wrote:
Honey, sweetie, chickie-babe, I was raised catholic. I have 14 years of religious education under my belt. And I am an atheist. You could even say that I am an atheist BECAUSE of it.
It's always quaint when someone sys atheists don't understand religion or faith. Most of us were raised on one faith or another. We understand it just fine; we just reject it as not credible.
<quoted text>
You host no creditbility in a persons life to have a opinion. You have no facts or knowledge of their life and upbringing.

But you want to credit yourself a expert to fame online that holds no revenue. You dont know my life you are ignorent to even type after me on my topics of life experience and knowledge.

You slander and misclassify others as crazy or on drugs and you are nutts YOU ARE NOT a part of my life, nor ever were. But you want people to see you popular ONLINE and follow your lead. That shows ignorence of statement or opinion at all.

You were Catholic then you knew to keep your mouth shut. Not your life to have a stance unless you can put new clothes or finance a house shut the f up you knew better then that.
jaimie

Madison, WI

#42 May 2, 2011
the serpent was right wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for the post.
I showed it to my son so he better understands the devastating impact that LSD can have on someone. He laughed and said that you weren't really being serious, and that you had to be joking.
Why do you hate your son so much?

Neurological disorders from exposure to computer lightening and what he reads online. medicaid and Medicare are not covering neurosurgical procedures to fix peoples online exposure to brain and retina and nerve damage.

To expose him to online forum or chat, when he could have had entitlements to his own research and grants to fund his life intead of recieving your brain washing instillation. Leaving co-dependent on yoru biases and stupidity and slander and harmed in society there after your death. What a ignorent parent.

Kid stay off line get a encyclopedia... it is the only LEGAL book outsid eof mind space and beyond series. anything they do not have in them, you can do research on and those facts and findigns will go in their next edition with a huge dollar moubnt for you doing a back yard search for a cell or bug that was not discussed or photod in the book prior.

Your mom in on drug relapse from 60s and fried her brain or was a drug birthed baby herself.
What the

Lima, OH

#43 May 2, 2011
jaimie wrote:
<quoted text>
were you one of the smaller cities that was gased to instill a brainwashing technique for personal prejudices ignited AS PER COMMENT?
Other religions hold a role ordinence. You recieve it the first time you enter a church after your 4th birthday. if you hold no knowlegde common sense says dont talk in public if you host no knowledge or income contributions in that persons life.
My children had their salvation as a result of my ordinence. i am the property owner in my ordinence and have a spouse and children. But they are not spoken of in the bible. All those in the CITY had no property or rights to be there at all, I was the only person that had papers to their land from the real owners of the land, and they came in to remove everyone from the city.
athiests beliefs were no differnt then tabboo or occultism a jerk FORCING their belief system on others trying to get people to see THEIR life and contribute to THEIR climb, and to move people away from law security family and their own mind conditioning that keeps them safe, so you can rape, or harm them.
Common Sense NOT hate... not a active part of my life, you obstruct me go to prison I dont harrass or obstrcut your life and finance. Nor do I forsee you a active part of my life and contributions or recreation.
Not hurting my feel;ings one bit, i share my life yoiu just plain talk shit. Go vomit elsewhere.
Not getting got any ramble you are going to there be is. Totally out there whacked is your post lunacy. You whack a do talk nutty no sense. Tin hat foil too much tight in sun have you has had. Not should pyschiatric let patients keyboard on computer jabber crazy.
jaimie

Madison, WI

#44 May 2, 2011
What the wrote:
<quoted text>
Not getting got any ramble you are going to there be is. Totally out there whacked is your post lunacy. You whack a do talk nutty no sense. Tin hat foil too much tight in sun have you has had. Not should pyschiatric let patients keyboard on computer jabber crazy.
Not to give you victory on your babble.
Understanding you are ignorent......If you have no knowlegde what church ordinenece is and hae a inability to keep your mouth shut to people that do, because of your ignorence you chose to slander, hoping to bait out a argument of rage that hosts misspelled words or terms you can go off of.
Ask the church how to be sensitive and legal where Human Rights are concerned with peoples belief system. YOu defect I swear to God I will see you in prison for eachperson that you harmed and caused brain death too. Consecutive life sentence per person you exposed to harm.
If you have questions ask a Attorney of religon and the people's rights that you'll go to prison for, and why or ask the local Bishop he will fill you in on yoru rights as well.
In the meantime keep your mouth shut.
What the

Lima, OH

#45 May 2, 2011
jaimie wrote:
<quoted text>
Not to give you victory on your babble.
Understanding you are ignorent......If you have no knowlegde what church ordinenece is and hae a inability to keep your mouth shut to people that do, because of your ignorence you chose to slander, hoping to bait out a argument of rage that hosts misspelled words or terms you can go off of.
Ask the church how to be sensitive and legal where Human Rights are concerned with peoples belief system. YOu defect I swear to God I will see you in prison for eachperson that you harmed and caused brain death too. Consecutive life sentence per person you exposed to harm.
If you have questions ask a Attorney of religon and the people's rights that you'll go to prison for, and why or ask the local Bishop he will fill you in on yoru rights as well.
In the meantime keep your mouth shut.
Still tooney lunes no sense making jibber jabber off medication dimple butt goofiness is are am was were that. Head smack wall against much too much too much helmut maybe were should perhaps.
amused

Acton, MA

#46 May 2, 2011
nina wrote:
<quoted text>
they are trying to pack as many beleivers together as they can
it takes fewer longbuses than short buses for the same number of people
Perhaps, but here in the states,special ed students are usually transported in short busses.
the serpent was right

Orefield, PA

#47 May 2, 2011
jaimie wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you hate your son so much?
Neurological disorders from exposure to computer lightening and what he reads online. medicaid and Medicare are not covering neurosurgical procedures to fix peoples online exposure to brain and retina and nerve damage.
To expose him to online forum or chat, when he could have had entitlements to his own research and grants to fund his life intead of recieving your brain washing instillation. Leaving co-dependent on yoru biases and stupidity and slander and harmed in society there after your death. What a ignorent parent.
Kid stay off line get a encyclopedia... it is the only LEGAL book outsid eof mind space and beyond series. anything they do not have in them, you can do research on and those facts and findigns will go in their next edition with a huge dollar moubnt for you doing a back yard search for a cell or bug that was not discussed or photod in the book prior.
Your mom in on drug relapse from 60s and fried her brain or was a drug birthed baby herself.
I wish I knew how to read and understand burn-out.

Seriously dude, get to rehab, than elementary school.
the serpent was right

Orefield, PA

#48 May 2, 2011
jaimie wrote:
<quoted text>
Not to give you victory on your babble.
Understanding you are ignorent......If you have no knowlegde what church ordinenece is and hae a inability to keep your mouth shut to people that do, because of your ignorence you chose to slander, hoping to bait out a argument of rage that hosts misspelled words or terms you can go off of.
Ask the church how to be sensitive and legal where Human Rights are concerned with peoples belief system. YOu defect I swear to God I will see you in prison for eachperson that you harmed and caused brain death too. Consecutive life sentence per person you exposed to harm.
If you have questions ask a Attorney of religon and the people's rights that you'll go to prison for, and why or ask the local Bishop he will fill you in on yoru rights as well.
In the meantime keep your mouth shut.
Come on now. Tell us. What fourth world country are you from?
the serpent was right

Orefield, PA

#49 May 2, 2011
What the wrote:
<quoted text>
Still tooney lunes no sense making jibber jabber off medication dimple butt goofiness is are am was were that. Head smack wall against much too much too much helmut maybe were should perhaps.
I think you have said it as well as it can be said.

“Post-religious”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

#50 May 2, 2011
jaimie wrote:
<quoted text>
Not to give you victory on your babble.
Understanding you are ignorent......If you have no knowlegde what church ordinenece is and hae a inability to keep your mouth shut to people that do, because of your ignorence you chose to slander, hoping to bait out a argument of rage that hosts misspelled words or terms you can go off of.
Ask the church how to be sensitive and legal where Human Rights are concerned with peoples belief system. YOu defect I swear to God I will see you in prison for eachperson that you harmed and caused brain death too. Consecutive life sentence per person you exposed to harm.
If you have questions ask a Attorney of religon and the people's rights that you'll go to prison for, and why or ask the local Bishop he will fill you in on yoru rights as well.
In the meantime keep your mouth shut.
I get it. It's like English translated into Japanese, then into Russian, and back into English again, all through Babelfish.
Right Wing Conspiracy

Nottingham, MD

#51 May 2, 2011
3 Words describe this article which is typical of Atheist rhetoric. Bigoted, biased, and hypocritical. For instance, they knock the Boy Scouts for what they exclude, while ignoring the fact that the groups they try to tout as victim do the same thing to discriminate against people w/ different ideological ideas in their orgs.

Their point regarding marriage is indicative of someone who would view a mate as property that are only supposed to submit to what they want rather than being an equal partner in a relationship. No one owes anyone their heart.

As far as getting elected. They are represented by organizations who attack religion (ie. use revisionist history to act as if the Constitution supports any efforts they would make to suppress religion and even misuse the original intent of Separation in efforts to establish their beliefs as the State's position on religion), and it's not like there are Atheist groups speaking out against that. So the lack of trust in electing them is pretty much something they bring on themselves.

Oh, and Atheism is based on blind faith. No one has ever proven, nor are we capable of proving God doesn't exist. Christianity is actually based on the testimony of what has been observed during the time Christ walked the events witnessed such as the resurrection. Yet, they misrepresent this view to attack others and somehow these authors wonder why people aren't interested in being represented by them. Makes you wonder about their "intellect" claims.

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

#52 May 2, 2011
Right Wing Conspiracy wrote:
3 Words describe this article which is typical of Atheist rhetoric. Bigoted, biased, and hypocritical. For instance, they knock the Boy Scouts for what they exclude, while ignoring the fact that the groups they try to tout as victim do the same thing to discriminate against people w/ different ideological ideas in their orgs.
Their point regarding marriage is indicative of someone who would view a mate as property that are only supposed to submit to what they want rather than being an equal partner in a relationship. No one owes anyone their heart.
As far as getting elected. They are represented by organizations who attack religion (ie. use revisionist history to act as if the Constitution supports any efforts they would make to suppress religion and even misuse the original intent of Separation in efforts to establish their beliefs as the State's position on religion), and it's not like there are Atheist groups speaking out against that. So the lack of trust in electing them is pretty much something they bring on themselves.
Oh, and Atheism is based on blind faith. No one has ever proven, nor are we capable of proving God doesn't exist.
Of course we are.
There are testable claims made for the Christian god made in the buybull. When tested, they turn out to be false.
"No matter how many people pray, no matter how often they pray, no matter how sincere they are, no matter how much they believe, no matter how deserving the amputee, what we know is that prayers do not inspire God to regenerate amputated legs. This happens despite what Jesus promises us in Matthew 21:21, John 14:14, Mark 11:24, etc. "

http://www.whywontgodhealamputees.com/god5.ht...
Right Wing Conspiracy wrote:
Christianity is actually based on the testimony of what has been observed during the time Christ walked the events witnessed such as the resurrection. Yet, they misrepresent this view to attack others and somehow these authors wonder why people aren't interested in being represented by them. Makes you wonder about their "intellect" claims.
So, were is Jesus now?

BTW, Atheism doesn't require any faith.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#53 May 2, 2011
I didn't say a frigging thing about your life or you being on drugs--although this idiotic attack on those grounds does nothing to dispel the idea.
jaimie wrote:
<quoted text>
You host no creditbility in a persons life to have a opinion. You have no facts or knowledge of their life and upbringing.
But you want to credit yourself a expert to fame online that holds no revenue. You dont know my life you are ignorent to even type after me on my topics of life experience and knowledge.
You slander and misclassify others as crazy or on drugs and you are nutts YOU ARE NOT a part of my life, nor ever were. But you want people to see you popular ONLINE and follow your lead. That shows ignorence of statement or opinion at all.
You were Catholic then you knew to keep your mouth shut. Not your life to have a stance unless you can put new clothes or finance a house shut the f up you knew better then that.
McCarthy was right

Plantsville, CT

#54 May 2, 2011
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think he was attacking ALL religion. Just Christianity.
He said:
"Now we have a voice. I for one am very happy to return the favor. I consider THAT (emphasis mine) religion filth and a plague, and don't mine disparaging it at any opportunity."
From the context THAT religion seemed to be Christianity.
If you read that sentence within the context of the rest of the post, he (?) makes it clear that he’s talking about religion in general. He said “the religious are hemorrhaging in numbers and clout. They're on the defensive. They're now being shown to be immoral and unfit, and a sickness on society. That's right. That's the language many of us use. And hypocrite. And throwback. And pedophile. And anti-intellectual.”

But for the sake of argument, say he was specifically talking about Christianity, does that make it any better? It wouldn’t change anything I said. As this thread clearly suggests, the poster is exhibiting a mean, ugly aggression that seems to be becoming more common among atheists.

So my response to the question asked at the top of the thread stands: you don't have to be Christian or even religious to "dislike" the person who wrote that post.
:^)
Right Wing Conspiracy

Nottingham, MD

#55 May 2, 2011
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course we are.
There are testable claims made for the Christian god made in the buybull. When tested, they turn out to be false.
"No matter how many people pray, no matter how often they pray, no matter how sincere they are, no matter how much they believe, no matter how deserving the amputee, what we know is that prayers do not inspire God to regenerate amputated legs. This happens despite what Jesus promises us in Matthew 21:21, John 14:14, Mark 11:24, etc. "
http://www.whywontgodhealamputees.com/god5.ht...
<quoted text>
So, were is Jesus now?
BTW, Atheism doesn't require any faith.
Wrong, Atheism requires faith of God not existing and that claim does nothing to prove God doesn't exist. Man is incapable of proving that.

It is more indicative of people not understanding what Jesus was actually meaning or promising. I'm not a Bible literalist BTW, but I am a believer that Christ revealed God (and believe now he is w/ him in Heaven) the events of his time here such as the resurrection.

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

#56 May 2, 2011
McCarthy was right wrote:
<quoted text>
If you read that sentence within the context of the rest of the post, he (?) makes it clear that he’s talking about religion in general. He said “the religious are hemorrhaging in numbers and clout. They're on the defensive. They're now being shown to be immoral and unfit, and a sickness on society. That's right. That's the language many of us use. And hypocrite. And throwback. And pedophile. And anti-intellectual.”
But for the sake of argument, say he was specifically talking about Christianity, does that make it any better? It wouldn’t change anything I said. As this thread clearly suggests, the poster is exhibiting a mean, ugly aggression that seems to be becoming more common among atheists.
So my response to the question asked at the top of the thread stands: you don't have to be Christian or even religious to "dislike" the person who wrote that post.
:^)
He said, "I consider THAT (emphasis mine) religion filth and a plague," as opposed to "I consider religion filth and a plague"
But we can only guess, unless he says something.
"McCarthy was right" LOL.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#57 May 2, 2011
My, SOMEONE'S defensive here...wonder why?

The BSA can exclude whomever they wish since they are a private organization. That doesn't mean others can't criticize them for a policy that concludes that good citizenship and morals are based in belief of a higher power. History clearly shows that nothing of the kind is true.

What atheist organizations are you banned from? I know there are a few, but I don't belong to any of them, and most atheists do not.

There is no faith involved in atheism at all. You want us to prove something doesn't exist--which is a logical impossibility. You try proving there isn't an invisible dragon on your roof, waiting to eat the next german-asian child in a red jacket that it sees.

The bible, especially the new testament, is not a contemporary account of anything; none of it was written at the time the events supposedly took place. It has as much evidence behind it as the paul bunyan tales. It is folklore, just like the Brothers Grim, but not a well written.
Right Wing Conspiracy wrote:
3 Words describe this article which is typical of Atheist rhetoric. Bigoted, biased, and hypocritical. For instance, they knock the Boy Scouts for what they exclude, while ignoring the fact that the groups they try to tout as victim do the same thing to discriminate against people w/ different ideological ideas in their orgs.
Their point regarding marriage is indicative of someone who would view a mate as property that are only supposed to submit to what they want rather than being an equal partner in a relationship. No one owes anyone their heart.
As far as getting elected. They are represented by organizations who attack religion (ie. use revisionist history to act as if the Constitution supports any efforts they would make to suppress religion and even misuse the original intent of Separation in efforts to establish their beliefs as the State's position on religion), and it's not like there are Atheist groups speaking out against that. So the lack of trust in electing them is pretty much something they bring on themselves.
Oh, and Atheism is based on blind faith. No one has ever proven, nor are we capable of proving God doesn't exist. Christianity is actually based on the testimony of what has been observed during the time Christ walked the events witnessed such as the resurrection. Yet, they misrepresent this view to attack others and somehow these authors wonder why people aren't interested in being represented by them. Makes you wonder about their "intellect" claims.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#58 May 2, 2011
Churches have had free reign to do everything they can to control the lives of people other than their adherents. If you don't think that makes some people eager for a little payback, you have little understanding of humanity. The more onerous of the various sects--mormons, catholics, baptists, the WBC, etc--certainly should receive a bit of a comeuppance.
McCarthy was right wrote:
<quoted text>
If you read that sentence within the context of the rest of the post, he (?) makes it clear that he’s talking about religion in general. He said “the religious are hemorrhaging in numbers and clout. They're on the defensive. They're now being shown to be immoral and unfit, and a sickness on society. That's right. That's the language many of us use. And hypocrite. And throwback. And pedophile. And anti-intellectual.”
But for the sake of argument, say he was specifically talking about Christianity, does that make it any better? It wouldn’t change anything I said. As this thread clearly suggests, the poster is exhibiting a mean, ugly aggression that seems to be becoming more common among atheists.
So my response to the question asked at the top of the thread stands: you don't have to be Christian or even religious to "dislike" the person who wrote that post.
:^)

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

#59 May 2, 2011
Right Wing Conspiracy wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong, Atheism requires faith of God not existing and that claim does nothing to prove God doesn't exist. Man is incapable of proving that.
You are just playing word games.
If the Christian god existed, there would be evidence of his existence.
Right Wing Conspiracy wrote:
It is more indicative of people not understanding what Jesus was actually meaning or promising. I'm not a Bible literalist BTW, but I am a believer that Christ revealed God (and believe now he is w/ him in Heaven) the events of his time here such as the resurrection.
He flew up to heaven?

“Post-religious”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

#60 May 2, 2011
Right Wing Conspiracy wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong, Atheism requires faith of God not existing and that claim does nothing to prove God doesn't exist. Man is incapable of proving that.
It is more indicative of people not understanding what Jesus was actually meaning or promising. I'm not a Bible literalist BTW, but I am a believer that Christ revealed God (and believe now he is w/ him in Heaven) the events of his time here such as the resurrection.
Atheism is the absense of belief in any gods, by definition.(A- "without"; theism "belief in gods"). Atheism in and of itself is without any faith belief and makes no positive claim.

Theists makes a positive claim: the belief in the existence a god or gods. Any "proof" or evidence to demonstrate the veracity of such a claim lies with the individual making the positive claim.

Atheists need not "prove" anything, since they've made no positive claim.

Without any evidence to support the claim of the existence of any gods, there is no rational basis to believe such a claim.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 57 min Uncle Sam 11,303
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 1 hr Eagle 12 9,585
News In America, atheists are still in the closet (Apr '12) 1 hr ChristineM 50,929
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 2 hr ChristineM 254,893
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 4 hr READMORE 29,424
News Revered Artist Was an Atheist Who Rejected God.... 4 hr nanoanomaly 40
News Richard Dawkins - God is evil, pedophilesa not ... (Sep '13) 6 hr nanoanomaly 3,153
More from around the web