Persecution

[Zzyzx]

.
In a recent thread someone said:

Then, please make sure you apply those rules to everybody and not just the Catholics here.

Various groups claim to be persecuted at times, particularly when they do not fare well in debate and/or when they are caught being uncivil. To excuse one's failing, it is very common (seemingly invariable) to blame others or Forum Rules – rather than admit having a poor argument or poor debate ability.

No one gets special treatment (positive or negative) by virtue of being Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, Hindu, Atheist, Agnostic, etc. The 'playing field is very level'. Those who claim it is slanted against them may accustomed to chatting with like minded people where opposition voices are not permitted.

Some religions and/or religious people glorify persecution and martyrdom or use such things as evidence of 'faith'.

[Purple Knight]

I have to disagree. People who claim persecution may have a point, but only if they are religious.

There is no law or moral principle that prohibits persecuting atheists, nor should there be.

Technically arguing against a person's religion may be persecution and in fact hate speech, and it's only being atheist that warps our minds in the direction of laws against mere arguments being ridiculous.

Atheist culture is about being rational - nothing is sacred. Nothing is above Reason. Anyone can ask why. This is how my brain works, and I can't change it.

But in the real world, things are sacred, and respectful people understand that. Sometimes it means tolerating things you don't like, such as the so-called abuse of women, flat contradictions, and biggest of all, institutionalised inequality.

Recognising rationality as my personal preference, and recognising that people do have a right not to have their religion questioned or insulted has been one of the biggest hurdles in my life... and I wouldn't be here if I didn't still have that impulse to question.

I am very grateful to every religious person here for the waiving of that right, which they all have and ought to have. They don't need to let down that justified legal shield and allow debate, but they do. They should be commended.

And perhaps, they should be protected just a little more, even here.

[Divine Insight]

There is no law or moral principle that prohibits persecuting atheists, nor should there be.

It should be considered unlawful and even immoral to persecute anyone without justification.

Technically arguing against a person's religion may be persecution and in fact hate speech.

I would agree if a religious person was approached out of the blue and someone started to argue or bully them for believing in their religion. But there's no excuse for anyone to come onto a religious debating site and cry foul because there are people here prepared to debate why they reason that various religions are obviously false.

Atheist culture is about being rational - nothing is sacred. Nothing is above Reason. Anyone can ask why. This is how my brain works, and I can't change it.

I don't accept your blanket accusation against an imagined "Atheist Culture". In fact, I would argue that there is no such thing as an "Atheist Culture" save for perhaps very specific organized atheist clubs. But how should that be viewed any different from all the disagreeing religious clubs?

Let's not forget that while Atheists argue against ALL religions, religious people also argue against ALL religions EXCEPT their favorite one. So theists are pretty much the same as atheists when it comes to arguing AGAINST other people's religions.

Theists are quick to renounce the religions of those who don't buy into their specific religious faction. Even within specific religions theists do this to each other. There are even Christian preachers who put down other Christians for supposedly believing the wrong things. If you don't believe me try tuning in some religious radio stations once in a while.

people do have a right not to have their religion questioned

Again, this is a religious DEBATE site. Not a Bible Study group.

If a religious person can't handle debating their religion then they shouldn't have joined a debate forum.

They don't need to let down that justified legal shield and allow debate.

If they are an apologist or an evangelist then they absolutely must allow their religion to be questioned. They should have compelling answers to those questions, but they don't.

In fact, I'm pretty sure that the Bible even says that religious devotes should be prepared to give answers to any questions that are asked of them.

The problem is that their answers aren't compelling. And no one should need to have to humor them and pretend that they are compelling when they aren't. In fact, to do so would be quite dishonest.

Do you think we should be dishonest with apologists and evangelists who are trying to proselytize their religions to us?

If they give me absurd answers I'm going to tell them precisely why I see their answer as being absurd. If they are offended by that, that's just too bad.

They need to come up with better answers if they expect to be apologists or evangelists.

Otherwise, they'd be better off just keeping their beliefs to themselves.

You can't proselytize to me and claim foul when I tell you why I'm not buying your baloney. That doesn't make any sense.

[Purple Knight]

It should be considered unlawful and even immoral to persecute anyone without justification.

Why? As of now, atheists are the only unprotected group. I like it this way, since no one in their right mind pretends to be atheist.

Let the religious people have all the scum-sucking roaches clamouring to get in for the immunity blankets because they want to rape children or beat their wives.

As long as this is true, only people who tend to be genuine and honest will survey as atheist, and thus statistics will always back us up as the least evil group, and honestly we need those points, as we're the most distrusted group.

I would agree if a religious person was approached out of the blue and someone started to argue or bully them for believing in their religion. But there's no excuse for anyone to come onto a religious debating site and cry foul because there are people here prepared to debate why they reason that various religions are obviously false.

The excuse is that they are used to all of reality moving aside for their beliefs, because that is the law. They come here to lower a shield they have every right to, come down to our level, and expose their beliefs to questions they have every right to be above. I'm just pointing that out.

I don't accept your blanket accusation against an imagined "Atheist Culture".

I don't either, to be honest with you. I wish I'd have found a better word to explain it. But do you disagree that atheists tend to be rational and be all about permitting questioning? And even that when atheists get together, that gets reinforced?

So theists are pretty much the same as atheists when it comes to arguing AGAINST other people's religions.

Yes, if they're different enough. Christians might think Hindus are wrong or that Paganism is a bunch of make-believe spells, fairy dust, and naked middle-aged women in the forest, but I don't see any of the Abrahamic monotheists having much of a problem with any of the other guys' gods turning out to be the real one. They might infight a little but they know they're all basically on the same team.

If a religious person can't handle debating their religion then they shouldn't have joined a debate forum.

Yes, and if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. But it's a hard jolt from absolute zero (no questioning religion allowed, that = hate speech) to being instantly burnt to a crisp at the centre of a star.

There's a bloody case for protecting them a little.