Discrimination against Atheists in American culture - this is why we seem so angry!

I am troubled to know that you have faced discrimination for being an atheist. I empathize in a way, because where I am living right now, I am commonly discriminated against for being a Christian. While it might not be on exactly the same level, I think the anti-Christian sentiment in America is rapidly growing. Ideally, neither Christians nor atheists would feel the need to attack anyone for their beliefs as long as nobody was being harmed.

It is possible to exist in harmony. Of my best friends, all but a few are atheists, and of those who are not atheists, I think one might be a Satanist. My being a Christian is something they all tolerate, just as I tolerate their freedom to make their own spiritual choices. With mutual respect, we maintain our loving connections, and while we may engage in debates sometimes, these are always undertaken with an attitude of placing the friendship first.

However, despite my certainty that religious freedom is important in order for peace to exist, many people assume that being a Christian means having a huge list of negative qualities that make a person deserve disrespect, including but not limited to the following:

1. We are accused of irrationality. It is often assumed that all Christians are opposed to science/logic/truth. The religion vs. science conflict is based on a false dichotomy. Because of it, some atheists stop taking my ideas seriously as soon as they find out I am a Christian, even if they considered me intelligent and rational before knowing. Admitting that I am a Christian somehow removes some of my credibility if I ever end up discussing matters involving facts.

2. We are suspected of bigotry. Because some religious fundamentalists have aligned themselves with radical conservatives, some of whom have views opposed to those expressed by Christ, we all tend to get lumped into that category, regardless of our political leanings or our actual personal opinions about human rights issues. We are stereotyped as greedy, insensitive materialists even when we, as individuals, might care very deeply about being charitable to the unfortunate. There are some people out there who think we would still be slave-holding, wife-beating, gay-stoning, child-bullying assholes if we had our way. Instead of recognizing that closed-minded people, regardless of their imagined reasons, are the true cause of social inequality, some seem to believe that Christianity itself has been detrimental to worthwhile causes such as equality and freedom. It is unfortunate that Christianity has been the chosen excuse that certain very vocal bigots like to hide behind.

3. We are seen as trying to justify historical atrocities, or of trivializing them. People acting wrongly, taking the name of Christ in vain, have committed atrocities because of misunderstanding God's will, and whenever Christianity is discussed, it is nearly impossible to avoid having to defend it against people who associate it with the inquisition, witch hunts, mass torture, and various other crimes against humanity. Such people tend to ignore holocausts waged by atheists against a variety of religions worldwide. Perhaps this difference is because atheists do not pretend to be unified in their purpose. Even so, if a pack of wolves were to call themselves butterflies and were to go about devouring, it would make no sense to hate all butterflies for the crimes of that wolf pack. All Christians are to be distinguished by our love, according to the bible.

1 John 4:20 If someone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, how can he love God whom he has not seen?

1 John 2:9 He who says he is in the light, and hates his brother, is in darkness until now.

John 13:34 A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. 35 By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.”

4. We are accused of indirectly supporting child sexual abuse by Catholic priests. This is a similar case, where people of a specific religious branch are treated as though they represented all Christians, and where only the worst of the members of that specific branch are considered. If one is actually living according to Christ's teachings, that person is against harming children.

5. We are stereotyped as being against contraception, against abortion, and therefore also against women's reproductive freedom. Again, only specific branches are against contraception in general, while others are only against forms of birth control that kill a child who has already been conceived. As for those of us who are against abortion, our reasons have nothing to do with keeping women enslaved. In fact, many of the earliest feminists were anti-abortion. If anything, those of us who oppose it could say that those who promote it are the ones who are doing a disservice to women, because female babies are more likely to be killed by abortion than males, and because (regardless of how often the word "choice" is thrown around) abortion is often something extremely traumatic that women are stuck with as a last resort, in overwhelmingly negative circumstances; because a chauvinistic work system makes them choose between their career and their family; because an unjust court system is unreliable in cases of domestic abuse, making it nearly impossible to ensure that the child would be safe if a woman eventually divorced her abuser; being poor; being young and unmarried in a conservative family; being pressured by a partner who doesn't want to pay child support; being raped by men who have been trained to lack respect for women's boundaries; or being influenced by fear because of some underlying awareness that there will be a lack of societal support. The problem is much bigger than deciding whether we should be allowed to kill our unborn babies. I am against abortion because allowing babies to be killed does nothing to remedy the real issues that keep women oppressed. My reasons have nothing to do with my religion. Even so, if a person knows my religion, all of my arguments are generally treated dismissively, and are assumed to be because of my Christianity.

6. We are accused of insanity. Those of us who have had actual supernatural encounters are mostly thought to be hallucinating or delusional, because those who do not believe in anything miraculous often try to come up with alternative explanations for our experiences, however improbable those explanations may be, or how contrary to our actual perceptions. They do so in order to protect themselves from having to consider our perspective valid, since doing so would involve an uncomfortable paradigm shift.

While I acknowledge that being an atheist in America can make a person a target, especially if one lives in an area where Christians form the overwhelming majority, I find that being a Christian can also make a person a target. Perhaps this is more often the case online, since the internet seems to be mostly inhabited by atheists. Anyhow, I am very sorry you have been made to suffer from any kind of discrimination. Nobody should disown family members over such things, because one's spirituality should always be each individual's own decision, not something forced or coerced by threat of abandonment.

I sometimes tell people I'm a Satanist just to keep away the religious zealots.

Originally Posted by snail

I am against abortion because allowing babies to be killed does nothing to remedy the real issues that keep women oppressed. My reasons have nothing to do with my religion.

Thanks for your post, I enjoyed reading it. Sorry you face discrimination. Although I'm an anti-theist, I only voice my opinions on internet forums (where voicing opinions is encouraged) or if I'm challenged by a religous person offline (or if the say something really crazy).

But I had to take issue with the bolded. The majority of people who are pro-choice don't consider fetuses children - you're using biased language that doesn't recongize a differing perspective. To reitrate; you have a different perspective on fetuses, to the majority of people who are pro-choice, so I hope you can understand why they don't consider the legalization of abortion synonymous with genocide.

Originally Posted by strangestdude

Thanks for your post, I enjoyed reading it. Sorry you face discrimination. Although I'm an anti-theist, I only voice my opinions on internet forums (where voicing opinions is encouraged) or if I'm challenged by a religous person offline (or if the say something really crazy).

But I had to take issue with the bolded. The majority of people who are pro-choice don't consider fetuses children - you're using biased language that doesn't recongize a differing perspective. To reitrate; you have a different perspective on fetuses, to the majority of people who are pro-choice, so I hope you can understand why they don't consider the legalization of abortion synonymous with genocide.

I know there are a lot of people who don't consider the unborn to be actual babies, or even living beings, and I was merely explaining my own position, which is based on the belief that they are. My intention wasn't to argue about abortion, but rather, to point out how the causes for my beliefs, when those beliefs are not inconsistent with the Christian stereotype, are sometimes assumed to be related to that stereotype, regardless of all other possible reasons I may think as I do about a specific topic.

This is the reason why no one in real life knows I'm agnostic.

Well, you're bound to face some intolerance for your beliefs, especially in here. Hiding your beliefs is not the solution; one should not force their beliefs on others, but they should not hide them when asked either. Doing that is only helping the anti-Group X sentiment. Honestly, Christianity, or religion of any kind, is not the problem, nor has it ever been. The problem is when zealots start forcing their beliefs on others and making them submit to a set of laws based around a specific faith.

I wonder what it's like to attend a high school that doesn't pray before games, functions, and graduation.

I wonder what it's like to have politicians pandering in ways other than how super Christian they are.

I wonder what it's like if the space used for a church on every street was used for other community services.

I wonder what it's like if concepts like charity, forgiveness, or whichever "Godly" trait were more secular. Things like free counselling not telling you to believe in a god, or charities that make you join their church to be helped.

I wonder what it's like to not have to deal with Creationists trying to legislate their religion into secular schools as if it were science.

I wonder what it's like to not have to explain how keeping religion out of something is not the same as being anti-a specific religion. (Really, there is no war on Christmas and no, you can't have your religion icons in government buildings just like everyone else).

There's a reason atheists can be a little angry. Sorry to those not crazy Christians who get caught in the crossfire.

Chances are, we would find another way to divide ourselves. Humans are so good at separating ourselves arbitrarily. I'm feeling a little pessimistic.

Originally Posted by BiPedalP314

The problem we face is that the United States wasn't a Christian nation. In fact, many of the founding fathers were Deist - including Thomas Jefferson who wrote the Declaration of Independence. Christian politicians often rewrite American history to suit their agenda.

America was meant to be a place where people of all religions, or non-religions, could come together and live in peace. I am deeply saddened that people have forgotten or have abandoned those ideals.

Wrong.

Thomas Jefferson's religion cannot be painted as a deist, an atheist, a christian or whatnot. For the sake of argument, many historians have stated that Thomas Jefferson is in fact an Unitarian; this conclusion was made in one of many quotes which clearly state such:

Originally Posted by Letter to Dr. Benjamen Waterhouse

I am anxious to see the doctrine of one god commenced in our state. But the population of my neighborhood is too slender, and is too much divided into other sects to maintain any one preacher well. I must therefore be contented to be an Unitarian by myself, altho I know there are many around me who would become so, if once they could hear the questions fairly stated

But I admit, the answer is complicated. There is no black or white picture on whether the Founding Fathers were predominantly Christian or "rogue" Christian:

Originally Posted by James Watkins, on the Founding Fathers

True or False: The Founding Fathers of The United States were Christians who formed a government based on godly principles.

• 
  That's a more complex answer. The "revisionist left" would like to make them secular and the "religious right" would like to make them saintly. Let's take a look at some of the more prominent Founding Father's beliefs . . . in their own words.

But first, for the sake of argument, let's use the Apostle' Creed as a common description of orthodox Christian doctrine:

• 
  I believe in God, the Father almighty,
  creator of heaven and earth.
  I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord.
  He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit
  and born of the virgin Mary.
  He suffered under Pontius Pilate,
  was crucified, died, and was buried.
  He descended into hell.
  On the third day he rose again.
  He ascended into heaven,
  and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
  He will come again to judge the living and the dead.
  I believe in the Holy Spirit,
  the holy catholic Church,
  the communion of saints,
  the forgiveness of sins,
  the resurrection of the body,
  and the life everlasting. Amen.
  

John Adams




The second President (or tenth if you consider John Hanson the first) wrote to Thomas Jefferson on June 28, 1813:

• 
  The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were. . . . the general principles of Christianity. . . . I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God; and that those principles of liberty are as unalterable as human nature.

However, Adams is often quoted as saying, "This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it!" However, here's the complete quotation in an April 19, 1817, letter to Thomas Jefferson:

• 
  Twenty times in the course of my late reading have I been on the point of breaking out, "This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion at all!!!" But in this exclamation I would have been as fanatical as Bryant or Cleverly. Without religion, this world would be something not fit to be mentioned in polite company, I mean hell.

As a Unitarian, Adams flatly denied the doctrine of eternal punishment believing all would eventually enter heaven. (Many Unitarians reject the Trinity and most accept all religions as valid expressions of faith.) But being a good Unitarian, he was certainly open to the teachings of Christ

• 
  Jesus is benevolence personified, an example for all men. . . . The Christian religion, in its primitive purity and simplicity, I have entertained for more than sixty years. It is the religion of reason, equity, and love; it is the religion of the head and the heart (Letter to F.A. Van Der Kemp, December 27, 1816).

During Adam's administration the Senate ratified the 1797 Treaty of Peace and Friendship with Tripoli, which states in Article XI that "the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion." Some view this as "a smoking gun" that America was not founded as a Christian nation, while others argue that it was simply a concession to the Muslim nation (when the treaty was renegotiated eight years later, Article XI was dropped).

Samuel Adams

Samuel Adams organized the Boston Tea Party, and served as Governor of Massachusetts, a delegate to the Continental congress, and a signer of the Declaration of Independence.




In his 1772 work, The Rights of the Colonists, Adams wrote:

• 
  II. The Rights of the Colonists as Christians.
  The right to freedom being the gift of the Almighty...The rights of the colonists as Christians...may be best understood by reading and carefully studying the institutions of The Great Law Giver and Head of the Christian Church, which are to be found clearly written and promulgated in the New Testament.

In his Last Will and Testament he wrote:

• 
  Principally, and first of all, I resign my soul to the Almighty Being who gave it, and my body I commit to the dust, relying on the merits of Jesus Christ for the pardon of my sins.

Benjamin Franklin

In his autobiography, Franklin describes himself as "a thorough Deist." "I began to be regarded, by pious souls, with horror, either as an apostate or an Atheist."

According to a Deist publication, a Deist is "One who believes in the existence of a God or supreme being but denies revealed religion, basing his belief on the light of nature and reason." Deists reject the Judeo-Christian accounts of God as well as the Bible. They do believe that God is eternal and good, but flatly reject having a relationship with Him through Christ.




Franklin certainly believed in the providence of God. In his famous speech to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia on June 28, 1787:

• 
  I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth•that God governs in the affairs of men... If a sparrow cannot fall to the ground unseen by him, is it probable an empire could arise without his aid? I firmly believe this, and I also believe that without his concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building not better than the builders of Babel.

Just five months before his death, he wrote to Dr. Stiles, the President of Yale, who had questioned Franklin about his faith:

• 
  I believe in one God, the Creator of the universe; that he governs it by his Providence; that be ought to be worshipped; that the. most acceptable service we can render to him is doing good to his other children; that the soul of man is immortal, and will be treated with justice in another life respecting its conduct in this. These I take to be the fundamental points of all sound religion, and I regard them as you do, in whatever sect I meet with them. As to Jesus of Nazareth, my opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think his system of morals and his religion, as be left them to us, the best the world ever saw, or is like to see; but I apprehend it has received various corrupting changes, and I have, with most of the present Dissenters in England, some doubts as to his divinity; though it is a question I do not dogmatize upon, having never studied it.

Alexander Hamilton




The Episcopalian authored many of the Federalist Papers, signed the Constitution, and became the first Secretary of the Treasury. In an April 1802 letter to James A. Bayard, Hamilton proposed The Christian Constitutional Society:

• 
  In my opinion, the present constitution is the standard to which we are to cling. Under its banner bona fide must we combat our political foes, rejecting all changes but through the channel itself provided for amendments. By these general views of the subject have my reflections been guided. I now offer you the outline of the plan they have suggested. Let an association be formed to be denominated "The Christian Constitutional Society," its object to be first: The support of the Christian religion. second: The support of the United States.

Hamilton was shot and killed by Aaron Burr in a duel on July 12, 1804. His last dying words reportedly were:

• 
  I have a tender reliance on the mercy of the Almighty, through the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ. I am a sinner. I look to Him for mercy; pray for me.

Patrick Henry

Best known for his "give me liberty or give me death" speech on March 23, 1775, he became the first governor of Virginia.



One of his most famous quotations, cannot be verified, although it's used by many Christian ministers: "It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions but on the gospel of Jesus Christ!" It's not found anywhere in his recorded writings or speeches.




However, here's a verified quotation from a letter to his daughter dated August 20, 1796:

• 
  Amongst other strange things said of me, I hear it is said by the deists that I am one of the number; and indeed, that some good people think I am no Christian. This thought gives me much more pain than the appellation of Tory; because I think religion of infinitely higher importance than politics; and I find much cause to reproach myself that I have lived so long, and have given no decided and public proofs of my being a Christian. But, indeed, my dear child, this is a character which I prize far above all this world has, or can boast.

And in his will

• 
  This is all the inheritance I give to my dear family. The religion of Christ will give them one which will make them rich indeed.

John Jay




One of the authors of the Federalist Papers and first Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, Jay wrote to Rev. Uzal Ogden, on February 14, 1796:

• 
  I have long been of opinion that the evidence of the truth of Christianity requires only to be carefully examined to produce conviction in candid minds. . . .

And in an April 23, 1811, letter to John Bristed, April 23, 1811, he wrote:

• 
  While in France . . . I do not recollect to have had more than two conversations with atheists about their tenents. The first was this: I was at a large party, of which were several of that description. They spoke freely and contemptuously of religion. I took no part in the conversation. In the course of it, one of them asked me if I believed in Christ? I answered that I did, and that I thanked God that I did.
  
  
  George Washington
  
  The first President's faith is a bit harder to pin down.
  
  
  
  
  Many Christian writers and commentators point to Washington's twenty-four page manuscript book, titled, Daily Sacrifice. It was found in April 1891 among a collection of Washington's papers in his confirmed handwriting when he was about the age of twenty. In it he prays:
  
  • 
    Bless my family, kindred, friends and country, be our God & guide this day and for ever for his sake, who lay down in the Grave and arose again for us, Jesus Christ our Lord, Amen.
    . . . in and for the sacrifice of Jesus Christ offered upon the cross for me; for his sake, ease me of the burden of my sins, and give me grace that by the call of the Gospel I may rise from the slumber of sin into the newness of life.
    Let me live according to those holy rules which thou hast this day prescribed in thy holy word; make me to know what is acceptable in thy holy word; make me to know what is acceptable in thy sight, and therein to delight, open the eyes of my understanding, and help me thoroughly to examine myself concerning my knowledge, faith and repentance, increase my faith, and direct me to the true object Jesus Christ the way, the truth and the life, bless O Lord, all the people of this land, from the highest to the lowest, particularly those whom thou has appointed to rule over us in church & state. continue thy goodness to me this night. These weak petitions I humbly implore thee to hear accept and ans. for the sake of thy Dear Son Jesus Christ our Lord, Amen.
  
  
  
  
  In his Speech to Delaware Indian Chiefs on May 12, 1779, Washington said:
  
  • 
    You do well to wish to learn our arts and our ways of life and above all, the religion of Jesus Christ. These will make you a greater and happier people than you are. Congress will do everything they can to assist you in this wise intention.
  
  However, during his presidency (1789-1797) and in his later life, Washington is not recorded referring to Jesus Christ and rarely to God. He preferred titles such as "the Divine Author of our blessed Religion," "Almighty Being," "Providence" and "Grand Designer" (all terms from Deist beliefs).
  
  Washington also used the title "Supreme Architect" (a Freemasonary term of which he became a devout member, served as the head of the original Alexandria Lodge No. 22, and presided over the laying of the U.S. Capitol in a Mason apron).
  
  According to Bishop White, Washington's pastor for nearly 25 years at the Protestant Episcopal Church of America, as well as Washington's adopted daughter Nelly Custis-Lewis, the President would leave the service before communion was served. (The Eucharist or Holy Communion is considered an essential part of salvation for Catholics and for many members of litergical churches.)
  
  
  
  
  Lewis however defended her step-father's faith in a letter:
  
  • 
    I never witnessed his private devotions. I never inquired about them. I should have thought it the greatest heresy to doubt his firm belief in Christianity. His life, his writings, prove that he was a Christian. He was not one of those who act or pray, "that they may be seen of men" [Matthew 6:5]. He communed with his God in secret [Matthew 6:6].
  
  
  
  
  Thomas Jefferson was less charitable:
  
  • 
    [Washington] had never, on any occasion, said a word to the public which showed a belief in the Christian religion, and they thought they should so pen their address as to force him at length to disclose publicly whether he was a Christian or not. However, he observed, the old fox was too cunning for them. He answered every article of their address particularly, except that, which he passed over without notice" (Jefferson's Works, Vol. iv., p. 572).
  
  So, were the Founding Fathers Christians?
  
  They were certainly godly men who believed in a supreme being, but not everyone would subscribe to the Apostles' Creed.
  
  Three things do seem clear to me:
  
  First, we must always check our sources before making any claim•or passing one on.
  
  Both revisionists and the religious right have tried to make the Founding Fathers fit their ideology. It gives neither side of the debate any credibility when quotations are found to be fictitious or grossly out of context.
  
  For instance, I've seen articles proclaiming that Jefferson claimed to be "a real Christian" while conveniently avoiding his opinion that belief in Christ's divinity was "dung" (see contexts above).
  
  Second, we must be careful with labels, especially "Christian."
  
  One author claims that 51 of the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence held a "Christian worldview." He doesn't go on, however, to define what he means by Christian worldview. Would Jefferson and Franklin, who admired Christ's teachings, be included in the 51?
  
  
  
  
  And third, we should be grateful that the Founding Fathers•whatever they believed•were so intent on making religious liberty a right for those of us who do subscribe to the Apostles' Creed and those who don't.
  
  • 
    Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity in exclusion of all other religions may establish, with the same ease, any particular sect of Christians in exclusion of all other sects? That the same authority which can force a citizen to contribute threepence only of his property for the support of any one establishment may force him to conform to any other establishment in all cases whatsoever?
    
    James Madison, A Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments, June 20, 1785
    

Originally Posted by Psilo

I wonder what it's like to attend a high school that doesn't pray before games, functions, and graduation.

I wonder what it's like to have politicians pandering in ways other than how super Christian they are.

I wonder what it's like if the space used for a church on every street was used for other community services.

I wonder what it's like if concepts like charity, forgiveness, or whichever "Godly" trait were more secular. Things like free counselling not telling you to believe in a god, or charities that make you join their church to be helped.

I wonder what it's like to not have to deal with Creationists trying to legislate their religion into secular schools as if it were science.

I wonder what it's like to not have to explain how keeping religion out of something is not the same as being anti-a specific religion. (Really, there is no war on Christmas and no, you can't have your religion icons in government buildings just like everyone else).

There's a reason atheists can be a little angry. Sorry to those not crazy Christians who get caught in the crossfire.

Chances are, we would find another way to divide ourselves. Humans are so good at separating ourselves arbitrarily. I'm feeling a little pessimistic.

Here's a video I found related to that...


(The Glenn Beck jokes are more than worth it. XD)

@snail

You made a good post and I agree with it except for 6 - nobody has to consider someone else's perspective to be valid. You are invalidating other people's perspective by this very point itself. This is on the same ground as someone else calling you delusional.

You can surely believe what you think you saw but there's no reason for anyone else to believe what you think you saw. If you discredit them for not believing it then you discredit yourself in much the same way by not considering the possibility of their view.