"Atheists are just as intolerant, if not more so, than most religious" - discuss

darkman2

First of all - Happy Christmas!:D


Just wondering do you agree with the title statement that Atheists are, far from being of a new more informed age, in fact more intolerant of others beliefs then among the religious faithful? i.e that atheists are condescending and dismissive of people with whatever religious belief be it Christian, Muslim, Jewish etc. FWIW I regard myself, like most, as Catholic with a small "c" so don't have any particular axe to grind. I do see the merit in the observation though.

Ellis Dee

Yes indeed, remember the 30 Years War between the Swedish and the German atheists and their respective allies, just one example of all the wars that have been fought between atheists of different stripes in an effort to make the other accept their way of not believing anything ... It got pretty nasty between those Green and Orange atheists in the Six Counties for a while there, too. And only today some Afghan atheists set off a bomb that killed at least twenty people who did not disbelieve in the same way as themselves. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

darkman2

hmmm could it be Atheism is not popular enough yet to attract the nuts? TBH I CAN see Atheist terrorism in the future too. Religious followers don't have a monopoly on that minority I assure you.

J C

darkman2 wrote: »

First of all - Happy Christmas!:D


Just wondering do you agree with the title statement that Atheists are, far from being of a new more informed age, in fact more intolerant of others beliefs then among the religious faithful? i.e that atheists are condescending and dismissive of people with whatever religious belief be it Christian, Muslim, Jewish etc. FWIW I regard myself, like most, as Catholic with a small "c" so don't have any particular axe to grind. I do see the merit in the observation though.

Atheists are Human Beings ... and, like all other Humans, they are capable all of the vices and virtues of Humanity.
Many Atheists are open-minded highly intelligent people ... and some are closed-minded, with a stereotypical view of Theists ... as people of blind faith.
The reality is that both Theists and Atheists are people of faith (in God ... and in the non-existence of God respectively) ... and the only ultimate difference between them is the letter 'A' !!!!:)

Zombrex

darkman2 wrote: »

First of all - Happy Christmas!:D


Just wondering do you agree with the title statement that Atheists are, far from being of a new more informed age, in fact more intolerant of others beliefs then among the religious faithful? i.e that atheists are condescending and dismissive of people with whatever religious belief be it Christian, Muslim, Jewish etc. FWIW I regard myself, like most, as Catholic with a small "c" so don't have any particular axe to grind. I do see the merit in the observation though.

Well there are a number of points to address.

The first obvious one is that being condescending and dismissive of religious beliefs is not in of itself intolerance. You can tolerate the existence of something while at the same time being dismissive of it. Respecting a persons right to hold a belief is not the same as respecting the belief.

Secondly I think a lot of atheists, including myself, are very dismissive and condescending to religious beliefs, particularly the irrational nonsensical loops religious followers use to justify their religious beliefs.

In this PC post modern new-Labour don't offend anyone world this notion that we have no method to judge if a belief is stupid or not has developed, so we must be mindful not to respect all beliefs. This is nonsense. Some beliefs are stupid and can be demonstrated to be stupid.

So no, I don't think atheists are as (or more) intolerant than most religions but yes they are certainly happy to call a spade a spade and say that religious beliefs are stupid and irrational.

They are also though more than happy to explain why to any theist brave and open minded enough to go ask them.

then most religious what

J C

Zombrex wrote: »

Well there are a number of points to address.

The first obvious one is that being condescending and dismissive of religious beliefs is not in of itself intolerance. You can tolerate the existence of something while at the same time being dismissive of it. Respecting a persons right to hold a belief is not the same as respecting the belief.

Secondly I think a lot of atheists, including myself, are very dismissive and condescending to religious beliefs, particularly the irrational nonsensical loops religious followers use to justify their religious beliefs.

In this PC post modern new-Labour don't offend anyone world this notion that we have no method to judge if a belief is stupid or not has developed, so we must be mindful not to respect all beliefs. This is nonsense. Some beliefs are stupid and can be demonstrated to be stupid.

So no, I don't think atheists are as (or more) intolerant than most religions but yes they are certainly happy to call a spade a spade and say that religious beliefs are stupid and irrational.

They are also though more than happy to explain why to any theist brave and open minded enough to go ask them.

I too share your belief in a bit of frank talking ... but I have found that, in general, Atheists react to frank opinions on their beliefs ... in the same way that theists do!!!

... some gang-up and go into denial, with the best of them!!!

... while others open-mindedly examine the evidence ... and some have even become Christians as a result!!!!:)

J C

bluewolf wrote: »

then most religious what

... than most religious anything you're having yourself!!!!:)

I have yet to find a religion that is entirely free of either virtue or vice!!!!

MagicMarker

darkman2 wrote: »

I do see the merit in the observation though.

Can you share it with the rest of us?

amacachi

Tolerance really has had its meaning raped over the last 20 or so years.

J C

wrote:

Originally Posted by darkman2
I do see the merit in the observation though.

MagicMarker
Can you share it with the rest of us?

It was:-
"Atheists are just as intolerant, if not more so, then most religious"

J C

amacachi wrote: »

Tolerance really has had its meaning raped over the last 20 or so years.

Tolerance has become more important over the past 20 years as people of different worldviews increasingly interact with each other.
Indeed, it has become a necessity in our increasingly multi-cultural society.

Tolerance cuts both ways ... and we therefore should all respect and love one another as the amazing sovereign Human Beings that we all are!!!:)

ShooterSF

I'd strongly disagree. Most (all I have met anyway) Atheists are hugely in favour of individual freedoms as long as those freedoms do not impact other's freedoms. That is why I'll happily leave someone to believe any crazy idea as long as they leave everyone else alone.
Religion on the other hand demands judgement. These things are wrong, these things are right and it's not debatable because god decided. That's not to say all religious are less tolerant just that the underlying foundation of religion should make it more likely.

RichieC

I have never heard an athiest say anyone will spend eternity burning for not agreeing with them.

18AD

It's too true. Atheists tend to be more intolerant towards intolerance than the intolerance they tolerate.

J C

ShooterSF wrote: »

I'd strongly disagree. Most (all I have met anyway) Atheists are hugely in favour of individual freedoms as long as those freedoms do not impact other's freedoms.

The exercise of all freedoms impact to some degree on other people's freedoms. The question becomes what degree of tolerance should be shown to others to exercise their freedoms to do things / express opinions that I disagree with.
Being a liberal, I would argue that the maximum degree of freedom should be granted.

ShooterSF wrote: »

That is why I'll happily leave someone to believe any crazy idea as long as they leave everyone else alone.

Even the most opressive and fascist societies allow people to believe whatever they want to believe ... the oppression only shows itself ... when people start publishing their ideas ... or otherwise 'going into the streets and frightening the horses'!!!!:eek:

Your test, on individual freedom and tolerance, would make a Medieval Pope very happy indeed!!

Sonics2k

I'm only intolerant of bullshít and nonsensical fairy tales being spread as a religion and "Truth".

J C

RichieC wrote: »

I have never heard an athiest say anyone will spend eternity burning for not agreeing with them.

You are free to believe it ... or not.

What is wrong with simply telling you this?

I have no problem with an Atheist telling me that I will cease to exist when I die ... and I don't break out in a cold sweat about such Nihilism!!!!:)

18AD

J C wrote: »

You are free to believe it ... or not.

What is wrong with simply telling you this?

Because thinking it isn't a freedom at all?

J C

Sonics2k wrote: »

I'm only intolerant of bullshít and nonsensical fairy tales being spread as a religion and "Truth".

One man's 'Bovine excreta' and fairytales is often another man's worldview.

I have heard my fair share of 'Bovine excreta' being promulgated by both Theists and Atheists ... but I listen patiently and respectfully to it all ... and I make my own mind up about where the truth lies.

... I would commend such a strategy to you as well.
... you might even learn something that you didn't know already with such an open-minded and tolerant approach.:)

J C

18AD wrote: »

Because thinking it isn't a freedom at all?

Our sovereign will ... and our ability to think for ourselves ... is one of our greatest freedoms!!!!

... indeed it the only freedom that cannot be taken from us by man or demon!!!:)

18AD

J C wrote: »

Our sovereign will ... and our ability to think for ourselves ... is one of our greatest freedoms!!!!

... indeed it the only freedom that cannot be taken from us by man or demon!!!:)

I whole-heartedly disagree. Where do your ideas come from? Where do thoughts come from? They're not free.

J C

18AD wrote: »

I whole-heartedly disagree. Where do your ideas come from? Where do thoughts come from? They're not free.

My ideas come from many external sources (as well as a few of my own) ... and my thoughts come from the sovereign exercise of my free will and my critical faculties.

Many aspects of my existence are circumscribed by my circumstances ... but my thoughts are free!!!!

I could freely surrender my thoughts to accept whatever 'brainwashing' comes my way ... but this is a voluntary thing that I have chosen not to do!!:)

18AD

J C wrote: »

My ideas come from many external sources (as well as a few of my own) ... and my thoughts come from the sovereign exercise of my free will and my critical faculties.

Many aspects of my existence are circumscribed by my circumstances ... but my thoughts are free!!!!

I could freely surrender my thoughts to accept whatever 'brainwashing' comes my way ... but this is a voluntary thing that I have chosen not to do!!:)

How are your thoughts free? You can't simply think whatever you want. At least what you want to think is within certain existential parameters. The desire of which is not your freedom to decide. (I'm pushing it :P)

Dudess

The statement is utter nonsense in my opinion - of course there are going to be some intolerant atheists, just like there are some intolerant religious folks... because there are some intolerant people.
But this notion that atheists on the whole are more intolerant than religious people on the whole... is just something thrown out there by people who have a problem with atheism in general.

yawha

darkman2 wrote: »

First of all - Happy Christmas!:D


Just wondering do you agree with the title statement that Atheists are, far from being of a new more informed age, in fact more intolerant of others beliefs then among the religious faithful? i.e that atheists are condescending and dismissive of people with whatever religious belief be it Christian, Muslim, Jewish etc. FWIW I regard myself, like most, as Catholic with a small "c" so don't have any particular axe to grind. I do see the merit in the observation though.

No, it's just a fallacy that some people like to promote in order to appear like they're much more tolerant, agreeable and open minded than others. It is also occasionally proposed by ignorant people who don't know the difference between an antitheist and an atheist, or who think that any kind of questioning or challenging of religions is for some reason the same as intolerance of people's right to believe in whatever they want to.

I've posted this xkcd comic many time, but it just makes the point so superbly:


In reality, it's extremely rare to find an atheist that promotes discrimination against the religious, who is for forbidding them from believing in or performing activities pertaining to believing in a particular religion (as long as these activities are hurting no one). Can you give any examples of this intolerance of which you speak?

ShooterSF

J C wrote: »

The exercise of all freedoms impact to some degree on other people's freedoms.

Explain please. How does me having the freedom to drink beer today impact on others or my freedom not to have seconds in turkey or not go to church or not believe in god or not work on the Sabbath or eat meat on "good" friday as long as I don't demand that you do any of these things?

J C

18AD wrote: »

How are your thoughts free? You can't simply think whatever you want. At least what you want to think is within certain existential parameters. The desire of which is not your freedom to decide. (I'm pushing it :P)

I can literally think anything that I want.

There are no limits to Human thought and ingenuity!!!!

... and this single fact scares the hell out of every tin-pot dictator (and many of the gold-plated ones) down through history!!!:)

Ellis Dee

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

J C

Dudess wrote: »

The statement is utter nonsense in my opinion - of course there are going to be some intolerant atheists, just like there are some intolerant religious folks... because there are some intolerant people.
But this notion that atheists on the whole are more intolerant than religious people on the whole... is just something thrown out there by people who have a problem with atheism in general.

I don't think that such allegations are all 'muck-raking'.

I think that as Atheism grows in stature and confidence within society that the age-old Human weaknesses of arrogance and intolerance are more likely to show themselves.

... and there is prima face evidence that Atheists (no more than any other faith) aren't immune to such weaknesses.:)

Nollog

I agree with the thread title completely.
Every single atheist I've spoken with, or been around has always been a complete tool, and completely intolerant of other's beliefs.

The ones who don't call themselves atheists but just say "I don't believe in God/Religion" are the ones that are tolerant, and I can respect.
In my experience, calling yourself an athiest = announcing your intent for asshattery.

Seriously, when you can't leave well enough alone, you have a problem.

robindch

darkman2 wrote: »

Just wondering do you agree with the title statement that Atheists are, far from being of a new more informed age, in fact more intolerant of others beliefs then among the religious faithful?

I completely disagree.

Until relatively recently, religions had acquired sufficient civil power in most societies that they could enforce their totalitarianisms on all citizens. They still do in many parts of the world, helping to produce massively inequitable societies, huge social problems and personal, familial and polity-level unhappiness on a grand scale.

What's different now is that people in many countries are no longer afraid of the social or civil power of religions and because of that, they're no longer prepared to grant the religious the free hand they had, and no doubt, still wish they had.

The biggest change is that people are now speaking up against religious nuttiness and the religious are having a very hard time dealing with that. It does not help that many religious believe ideas, or at least their ideas, should be respected.

18AD

J C wrote: »

I can literally think anything that I want.

There are no limits to Human thought and ingenuity!!!!

There are huge limits! What is the freest thought you've ever had? What are the conditions that lead to that thought?

I don't think you can actually think anything you want. What would make you think you could?

robindch

/\/ollog wrote: »

Every single atheist I've spoken with, or been around has always been a complete tool, and completely intolerant of other's beliefs.

I rest my case.

Nollog

robindch wrote: »

I rest my case.

To be clear, I'm calling them tools BECAUSE of their lack of understanding, and tolerance for other people, not for any reason you seem to want to corrupt my statement to mean.

You have just illustrated a lot of what I meant.

J C

ShooterSF wrote: »

Explain please. How does me having the freedom to drink beer today impact on others ...

All countries impose restrictions on alcohol (including beer) consumption because of its various impacts on other people. Some countries go as far as banning it completely.
I share Jesus Christs endorsement of alcohol ... His first miracle created alcohol out of water ... and one of His last acts was to ask his people to share alcohol in solemn memory of Him.
... so I think that I'll now crack open a can and join you!!!
Like I have said, I'm a liberal ... and tolerant when it comes to other people's rights to drink ... or not to drink, as they see fit!!!!!

ShooterSF wrote: »

... or my freedom not to have seconds in turkey or not go to church or not believe in god or not work on the Sabbath or eat meat on "good" friday as long as I don't demand that you do any of these things?

I have no problem with any of these freedoms for you ... as long as you don't start discriminating against me if I choose to do the opposite ... for myself and my children!!!

yawha

/\/ollog wrote: »

The ones who don't call themselves atheists but just say "I don't believe in God/Religion" are the ones that are tolerant, and I can respect.
In my experience, calling yourself an athiest = announcing your intent for asshattery.

Whether you call yourself an atheist or not doesn't have anything to do with whether you are in fact an atheist or not. This thread isn't about "people who call themselves atheists", it's about atheists.

I don't go around announcing to everyone that I'm an atheist. I am, however, completely comfortable with the term and happy to identify with it. I do tend to opt for "I'm not religious" when asked, not for any reason really. What category do I fall into?

Can you give some examples of the types of discrimination against religious people these people you know who call themselves atheists are promoting? I've never really heard much about atheists who promote discrimination like this.

MagicMarker

/\/ollog wrote: »

Every single atheist I've spoken with, or been around has always been a complete tool, and completely intolerant of other's beliefs.

....

/\/ollog wrote: »

The ones who don't call themselves atheists but just say "I don't believe in God/Religion" are the ones that are tolerant, and I can respect.

So to sum up, every single atheist you've spoken to is a complete tool and intolerant of other's beliefs, except for the atheists who aren't complete tools and intolerant of other's beliefs.

18AD

MagicMarker wrote: »

So to sum up, every single atheist you've spoken to is a complete tool and intolerant of other's beliefs, except for the atheists who aren't complete tools and intolerant of other's beliefs.

Well done. You figured it out.

J C

robindch wrote: »

I completely disagree.

Until relatively recently, religions had acquired sufficient civil power in most societies that they could enforce their totalitarianisms on all citizens. They still do in many parts of the world, helping to produce massively inequitable societies, huge social problems and personal, familial and polity-level unhappiness on a grand scale.

What's different now is that people in many countries are no longer afraid of the social or civil power of religions and because of that, they're no longer prepared to grant the religious the free hand they had, and no doubt, still wish they had.

The biggest change is that people are now speaking up against religious nuttiness and the religious are having a very hard time dealing with that. It does not help that many religious believe ideas, or at least their ideas, should be respected.

Some religions may be having a hard time ...

... but there is no reason to believe that somebody who doesn't believe in God will behave any better than somebody who does ... and the lesson of history vindicates the truism that power corrupts ...

... so, as Atheists and Atheism gains power in society, the same checks and balances, that apply to Theists and Theology, also need to apply to Atheists and Atheism.

Nollog

yawha wrote: »

What category do I fall into?

Can you give some examples of the types of discrimination against religious people these people you know who call themselves atheists are promoting? I've never really heard much about atheists who promote discrimination like this.

The first group, tend to try to "convert" religious people to nothingness.
The latter, are fine to be themselves and won't try to "convert" others.

What I'm saying is, my experience has shown people who are outward in their support of atheism tend to try to convert others, and show absolutely zero respect for others beliefs, while those who aren't as vocal about their own beliefs tend to leave well enough alone when others say they believe in a God or whatever.

MagicMarker wrote: »

So to sum up, every single atheist you've spoken to is a complete tool and intolerant of other's beliefs, except for the atheists who aren't complete tools and intolerant of other's beliefs.

Oh look at you, arguing like an atheist.

I've explained in more detail above for you, if you need me to simplify it even more, let me know.

Of course, this is all just my own experience, it's far from anything like "proof".
In the end, everything comes down to the individual rather than what group they claim an affinity to/for.

Yahew

robindch wrote: »

I completely disagree.

Until relatively recently, religions had acquired sufficient civil power in most societies that they could enforce their totalitarianisms on all citizens. They still do in many parts of the world, helping to produce massively inequitable societies, huge social problems and personal, familial and polity-level unhappiness on a grand scale.

What's different now is that people in many countries are no longer afraid of the social or civil power of religions and because of that, they're no longer prepared to grant the religious the free hand they had, and no doubt, still wish they had.

The biggest change is that people are now speaking up against religious nuttiness and the religious are having a very hard time dealing with that. It does not help that many religious believe ideas, or at least their ideas, should be respected.

The other problem with New Atheists is that they know nothing of history. All totalitarian systems have been atheist, and most authoritarian systems have been secular to boot. When the State bans religion, thats when you know you are in a totalitarian or authoritarian space. The history of the last century tells us that. Nor was the middle ages "totalitarian", nor was the Catholic church as anti-scientific as it's detractors claim. Most democracies which faced the communists or fascist had religious established Churches. etc. etc. etc.

Dudess

/\/ollog wrote: »

Oh look at you, arguing like an atheist.

All non believers are atheists. "Atheist" isn't a term that's just applied to those non believers whom you don't like.

Paarthurnax

J C wrote: »

One man's 'Bovine excreta' and fairytales is often another man's worldview.

As an atheist I agree completely with that statement! Everyone is entitled to the own worldview but I would respect the individual more if they had come to there own conclusions no matter how bizzare. What I dont agree with is that some non individuals believe in other generalised Bovine Excreta and Fairytales by default before being objective or making their own descisions.

MagicMarker

/\/ollog wrote: »

The first group, tend to try to "convert" religious people to nothingness.
The latter, are fine to be themselves and won't try to "convert" others.

What I'm saying is, my experience has shown people who are outward in their support of atheism tend to try to convert others, and show absolutely zero respect for others beliefs, while those who aren't as vocal about their own beliefs tend to leave well enough alone when others say they believe in a God or whatever.

How do the villainous atheists try and convert others to nothingness?

Nollog

MagicMarker wrote: »

How do the villainous atheists try and convert others to nothingness?

See below, and thanks for throwing words into my mouth/post.
Makes the turkey easier to swallow with that "villainous" taste.

Dudess wrote: »

All non believers are atheists. "Atheist" isn't a term that's just applied to those non believers whom you don't like.

Hi, re-read my words.
I said they labeled themselves atheist.
Also, like is a simile if that's what you meant.

I don't "don't like" people who don't believe in a religion or a God, or gods.
I don't care what anyone else believes, I have my own set and it's not my place to preach to others in my opinion.
I don't like people who do, however.
Religious conversion is one thing, they're coming from a point of "this is what we think", atheists start from "your religious views are flawed because of..."
A negative approach isn't as welcomed by myself (because if infers lack of respect for a person's current beliefs(intolerance)), but I don't particularly mind it.

Nobody likes Jehovah's, so why are you more welcoming of Atheists doing the exact same thing?

J C

Paarthurnax wrote: »

As an atheist I agree completely with that statement! Everyone is entitled to the own worldview but I would respect the individual more if they had come to there own conclusions no matter how bizzare. What I dont agree with is that some non individuals believe in other generalised Bovine Excreta and Fairytales by default before being objective or making their own descisions.

Most people (of all persuasions) put some effort into establishing (and evaluating) their worldview.
Many people put a lot of effort into it!!!

I respect your right to have your own worldview ... and to have it freely challenged by other people.:)

I don't think that it is helpful to start calling other people, or their worldviews, disparaging names ... it is far better to make cogent arguments that invalidate their worldview ... and/or validate your own one!!

yawha

/\/ollog wrote: »

The first group, tend to try to "convert" religious people to nothingness.
The latter, are fine to be themselves and won't try to "convert" others.

What I'm saying is, my experience has shown people who are outward in their support of atheism tend to try to convert others, and show absolutely zero respect for others beliefs, while those who aren't as vocal about their own beliefs tend to leave well enough alone when others say they believe in a God or whatever.

Hmmm, what do you mean by "respect for [others'] beliefs"?

Generally, the consensus among atheists I've spoken to tends to be we completely and fully, 100% respect the right for people to believe in whatever they like, but don't feel that we should actually respect the belief itself. I think this is quite reasonable. Otherwise, we'd have to respect anything anyone happened to believe, even if it were detestable to us, which is a little absurd.

As for what you have to say about atheists trying to convert people. I personally haven't found that. Like, I've never been approached in the street by someone spreading the word of atheism, for example. And I haven't personally encountered anyone who would bring up their atheism unless it was relevant to a subject that happened to come up (since I was like 16/17 anyway).

I feel that ultimately all you're saying is that you know some atheists who are assholes and some that are not. Which isn't really much of a revelation. Just because you're an atheist doesn't exclude you from being an asshole. It's a little intolerant of you to brand anyone who identifies as an atheist an asshole merely because you know a couple of people who do and are assholes.

Also, nothingness is inaccurate. That would be nihilism.

MagicMarker

/\/ollog wrote: »

See below, and thanks for throwing words into my mouth/post.
Makes the turkey easier to swallow with that "villainous" taste.


I don't "don't like" people who don't believe in a religion or a God, or gods.
I don't care what anyone else believes, I have my own set and it's not my place to preach to others in my opinion.
I don't like people who do, however.
Religious conversion is one thing, they're coming from a point of "this is what we think", atheists start from "your religious views are flawed because of..."
A negative approach isn't as welcomed by myself (because if infers lack of respect for a person's current beliefs(intolerance)), but I don't particularly mind it.

Nobody likes Jehovah's, so why are you more welcoming of Atheists doing the exact same thing?

I don't see any attempted conversion here, can you expand? Or are you mixing up the word 'convert' with 'question'?

Nollog

yawha wrote: »

As for what you have to say about atheists trying to convert people. I personally haven't found that. Like, I've never been approached in the street by someone spreading the word of atheism, for example. And I haven't personally encountered anyone who would bring up their atheism unless it was relevant to a subject that happened to come up (since I was like 16/17 anyway).

I feel that ultimately all you're saying is that you know some atheists who are assholes and some that are not. Which isn't really much of a revelation. Just because you're an atheist doesn't exclude you from being an asshole. It's a little intolerant of you to brand anyone who identifies as an atheist an asshole merely because you know a couple of people who do and are assholes.

Also, nothingness is inaccurate. That would be nihilism.

Yupp, as I said it's nothing like "proof" or anything, just my personal experience.

"nothingness" is an overstatement.
I do it a lot.

MagicMarker wrote: »

I don't see any attempted conversion here, can you expand? Or are you mixing up the word 'convert' with 'question'?

I don't get what you want me to expand on.
The people what try to "convert" others would ask others their current beliefs, and then attack those beliefs, with the intent of "converting" then to atheism.
I've seen it happen a great many times, and usually it works since people are sheep and go from believing in a flying spaghetti monster to nothing when someone questions the type of spaghetti it is.

yawha

/\/ollog wrote: »

Nobody likes Jehovah's

I personally have no problem with them if they are decent people. I personally don't let someone's beliefs influence what I think of them without having met them, and don't like to generalize the dislike of large groups of people.

/\/ollog wrote: »

why are you more welcoming of Atheists doing the exact same thing?

What do you mean by this?

If you're referring to the practice of knocking on strangers' doors and trying to get them to convert to their beliefs, I must assure you that I personally would have huge issue with Atheists doing this. Do you find Atheists come to your door often?