Why Atheists Annoy Me
First of all - lets not forget - I’m an atheist.
1. Lectures - secularist groups (at least here in Canada) have three kinds of events. FSM Dinners, movies nights and lectures. I used to love the lectures. I would be super excited for them, and would attend every single one, even if it meant dropping money on the bus for Toronto. But now I’ve been involved with the groups for a few years and it’s all starting to get a little redundant. Especially the ones that are like “SCIENCE RULES! SUCK IT RELIGION”… they’re getting a little tiring. I think part of that is because I’m not as militant in my atheism as I used to be. (My thoughts are still the same, but not my actions. I’ve exacerbated [edit: thats the wrong word I wanted - I’ve tired out my energy toward many things and am focusing on more central ones.) The couple of lectures that I’ve seen where people break out of that comfort zone of atheists (think Wodek and Kauffman) the crowd goes wild, and not in a good way. “People” get rude and abrupt and angry because the lecturers aren’t feeling sorry for atheists and talking about how awesome science is.*
Dare I say - it’s like church - when a minister comes in with new ideas, the congregation goes ape shit because they’re so stuck in their ways.
2. Conferences - There are always SO MANY. …Why does this annoy me? Because I can’t go to all of them and not enough of them are near Toronto. The student leadership conference will be tres beans. But I wish I could go to TAM, SSA’s conference, all the Skepchick shit that goes on, the NYC conference last year… etc. However - at all of these conferences… lectures. See #1.
3. Dawkins - I think I’ve made it pretty clear in the past that I don’t like Dawkins. I really don’t want Dawkins, Harris and Hitchens to be the voice of my atheism. Because it’s not the voice of many people’s atheism, and it gives people a dangerous path to follow in their atheism. It makes them intolerant, gives them a reason not even try to understand and makes it impossible to have conversations with them. It’s like a hardcore theist - their theism leads them to dangerous places (mentally and physically), their beliefs give them reason to not listen to anyone else and they’re almost always impossible to talk to. The person I want to speak for my atheism is willing to listen, understands if you choose to be religious (and respects that) and attempts to have conversations (where they’re not shoving things down the other person’s throat).
4. Level of Seriousness - Almost all of the atheists I know really need to have a bit more fun. Fo’ realz guyz. Sometimes I see myself slipping into this, and then crack a joke to make everything all better again.
5. Intelligence - Yes, we knoooow you’re a scientist. We knooooow you’ve read a million books and written 4. We knoooooow that you know Richard Dawkins. We knooooow that you know the REAL definition of evolution. We KNOW that you know everything about religions. And we KNNNOOOOWW that you know God isn’t real. So shut up, and talk to me about philosophy like… morals, animal rights, the environment or politics or something else when we’re at a bar. Or when we’ve known each other for more than 3 years. Talk to me about something else besides how smart you are and how you absolutely know everything there is to know about everything that is worth knowing about.
6. Closed minded - This stands for most of my “liberal” friends as well. They can’t see things from the other side. A good example is something going on at a blog I was reading where people just can’t wrap their head around the fact that people can be spiritual, and not be religious. Religion implies some sort of formality, and doesn’t always include a really deep connection to things. I know a lot of people who are religious. They go to church, and they go through the motions but they have no connection to it. Then I know a lot of people who never go to church, who don’t claim to believe in God or even know what God is - but they have this deep connection to what they usually call “something” and they feel like it strengthens their spirit. And gives them a deeper connection to things and whatever that “something” is. And I respect that. They’re not religious. They’re not following any sort of religious dogma, or religious traditions, or even claiming belief in God. They’re developing what they call their spirituality. And I think there is a fine line between spirituality and religion - but a line nonetheless.
7. Positive Outlook - Many lack it. And I guess saying why atheists annoy me isn’t all that positive, but… I need to rant once in a while. I really dislike that so often so many atheists are always looking at the negative. They focus on what’s wrong and when ever they’re shown something that’s fantastic, they find something wrong with it. When they’re told they’re not being victimized for once, the go up in arms because they NEED to be victimized or they can’t be pissed off at the world anymore. I find that especially the old people just like to grumble about things. The younger people just like to fight with other people. It’s like environmentalists (yes, I always have to compare) they were SO doom and gloom! Finally someone came out with that book Good News For A Change and it was SO refreshing to read because environmentalists were for once looking at what was accomplished and what good was coming out of their initiatives and things to look forward to in the future. What do we have to look forward to in the secularist front? We should talk more about that. (maybe I will… later.)
8. Spirituality - I made the list before I wrote the comments in each one. I guess I sort of already covered this. See #6.
9. The Number Of Organizations - There’s a lot. And too many of them do not work together on anything. I won’t get into specifics, but the more I get into these groups the more I see the schisms between different ones and the more I think “this is just silly”. When I was getting the CFI job, I had to look at things from a different perspective, … I had to see that that grassroots way of thinking had to be put aside to maintain an organization. But now, I’m back to grassroots and I can go back to claiming that we all need to work together - despite our differences.
10. I think that’s it. At least for now. I was hoping to come up with 10, just to make it a more… ordinary number to stop at… but, alas, I didn’t! I should however mention…
Things I love?
1. Feminists - almost all atheist boys are feminists too. my next boyfriend needs to be a feminist. (not the loud and annoying kinds though…just the feministy kind.)
2. Philosophy - we talk about it ALL the time. and that’s really cool. and hot. same with talking about science. and i love it that my friends are a group of people who appreciate the fact that i do mathematical logic in my spare time, they don’t think it’s weird.
3. Intelligence - i know it was something that annoyed me, but I love it too. all my atheist friendies are so smart. and its super cute.
4. Understand Me - a lot of people who don’t take a firm stance on being an atheist and who aren’t involved with the secularist movement don’t understand my time commitment. I spend a LOT of time (and money and energy and thought) on secularism. It’s what I do in my spare time. A lot of my friends who I had pre-CFI times now don’t get why I need to spend SO much time at CFI. Allen and I have a LOT of conversations about the point of CFI, what we do, and why we need to do it. …They’re constructive conversations, but at the end he still walks away not knowing why I’m involved and I still walk away not knowing how he couldn’t be involved. (Actually, he’s a friend of the center. I made him sign up.)
5. Fun - yeah, this contradicts “seriousness” … but they are fun … when they’re nto being too serious about things. Some of the best times I’ve had this year have been with CFI folks. We have a good time.
*Don’t get me wrong… science is awesome but I was trying to make a point.
Sorry for the lame, “me, too” to Geoff Arnold’s comment, but, yeah. There really isn’t any movement, per se. But what you do have is akin to the “Stonewall Riots” that brought gays and lesbians to the media’s attention. A vocal group of people saying, “No, you can’t do that!” rather than pulling the covers over their head and hoping nobody realizes they’re atheist. If religious nutjobs had been content to let me live my life the way I see fit, I wouldn’t have a problem with them. When the President of the US feels it’s not only okay, but in his best political interest, to tell me I’m not a citizen in order to pander to the religious right, I’m sorry. I’m going to yell my fool head off. You don’t want to, Katie? Fine by me–it’s your right after all. But, please, don’t decry the people trying to help protect your rights, ‘kay?
“Lance - how about instead talking to them about philosophies in life, morals/ethics, indoctinating children, the movie jesus camp… etc. just having CONVERSATIONS with them. Not trying to play who is wrong and who is right all the time. just talking. trying to understand their faith and what it does for them instead of flat out telling them that what they base their life on is nonsense.”
The conversations between Dawkins, Hitchens, etc. and believers I’ve seen are replete with the believers talking about their faith and what it does for them. I also think that the atheists try not only to understand, they DO understand. Some of them have been there themselves. Yet they still realize that it’s nonsense and are not too timid to call it such.
What would you have unbelievers do? Just have warm, fuzzy conversations with believers in which those believers talk about their faith and what it means to them, with no rebuttal from the point of view of the atheist?
By the way, I’d love to see a ‘Ted Haggard’ just have a CONVERSATION with an atheist in which they don’t try to play “who is wrong and who is right all the time. just talking.” Trying to understand their unbelief and what it does for them instead of flat out telling them that their atheism is nonsense.
Yet the atheists who dare engage in such conversations are always labeled as shrill, strident and militant simply for not agreeing with the believer. Isn’t it funny how that happens? It’s almost as if what the believers want is for atheists–if they can’t at least agree–to just shut up and give silent assent.
“but they have this deep connection to what they usually call “something” and they feel like it strengthens their spirit.”
“And I think there is a fine line between spirituality and religion - but a line nonetheless.”
Please rethink this anti-science opinion. Woo is woo is woo. Little woo versus big woo? Irrational strengthening of “spirit”? Wishful thinking.
Katie writes:
3. Dawkins - I think I’ve made it pretty clear in the past that I don’t like Dawkins. I really don’t want Dawkins, Harris and Hitchens to be the voice of my atheism. Because it’s not the voice of many people’s atheism, and it gives people a dangerous path to follow in their atheism.
What younger atheists may not appreciate is just how oppressive the environment was before DDHH stepped out of the closet and began to vigorously clear away the hateful aspects of organized religion. Frankly I expected books like theirs to start appearing by October 1, 2001, which is about the time I became a militant atheist. I was so naive at that point that I expected there to be billions of people around the world demonstrating and burning churchs, mosques and synagogues. Instead they all went inside and prayed. Maybe Katie if the Canadian Parliament building had been destroyed….
…. you would feel differently. Before 9/11 atheists knew how many leaders in the scientific community were atheists. Pretty much all of them — right? These scientists kept their mouths firmly clamped shut though because they realized their grant money and academic status would disappear if they made any critical public comments about organized religions. The prevailing attitude was why try to oppose organized religion? Nothing will come of it and I’ll only lose in the long run. Let education spread the enlightenment message and religions will all disappear like a bad dream.
I’m going to go way out on a limb here, but I think Richard Dawkins by stepping forward and saying the obvious, totally changed the dynamic. He certainly earned my undying gratitude.
JJ Ramsey:
I wasn’t posting a false dichotomy that one is either a meanie or a pushover. I was saying that telling all atheists to be nice all the time is unproductive. I’m sick to death of hearing that an oppressed group (and we are) always have to be nice, that people who speak out are soooooo horrible.
You read more into my post than was intended.
That is your failure.
And now for atheist meanness and rudeness: Piss off.
Katie, I agree with you completely, especially in your disdain for inarticulate advocates of atheism (which, at least for me, extends to advocates of most anything), and in your insistence that people be open-minded. No idea or philosophy should be shot down before it can be taken into serious consideration. It also angers me to see someone argue against a belief they don’t understand, especially when they try to convert someone from that belief. Unfortunately, that is the case far too often. It might be crude to reference a youtube video, but this video, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpxhKFmG_qI, perfectly illustrates this contemptible type of narrow-minded behavior. It’s actually very interesting to analyze the psychology that leads people to favor one delusion over another and refuse to see that they are the same. At the same time, we have to concede that our beliefs are not an absolute right either. If we don’t, we’re as bad as they are. I came to this conclusion grudgingly, and I am still trying to find a logical distinction between the our views and theirs. Ironically, both groups have the same haughty disdain for the beliefs of the other group.
I am a catholic and i dont mean to ‘convert’anyone however i am genuinely curious as to the behaviour of some athiests. Increasingly and annoyingly so i meet athiests who challenge my belief in god and yes they might have experienced the same from my religion but their behaviour
If things go according to plan for SOME athiests they claim that oh well see things are going really good for me, so who needs god?
And if they go bad, they get upset and say oh well see there is no god, why would god let this happen?
Im not trying to accuse the vast majority but why does every event in their life have to be related to proving to me or any other believer that god doesnt exist. Any clue?