we get an atheists and agnostics group

[leftofthedial]

and religious war breaks out in GD!

Coincidence?

[fshrink]

1. I posted something sort of flame-like

the other day because I wanted to (try to) underlie my departure from this useless mess. Haven't returned since and won't until so-called democrats get their shit together and start talking about reasonable and useful stuff. It has now even extended to LBN... What's the use for us in pouring more of the same?

[leftofthedial]

2. I think religion is one of the fault lines in our culture

I used to think it was primarily miscommunication. Now i believe it is a true divide and that some of our fellow citizens have become incapable of rational thought, preferring to live in a fantasy land in which they pretend that "reality" is different. This is a very dangerous place and time. Our nation, our culture and even our species might not survive this.

Finding a way to resolve that or to deal with it politically is matter of urgency.

[fshrink]

3. 10000000000000000000% agreement.

[BlueHandDuo]

13. Mental health professionals, too...

...lots of 'em, claim that "spiritual health" is an essential component of mental health. Gotta have a persistent, intractable irrational belief in something to keep from being diagnosed as nuts.

[fshrink]

15. Tell me about it!!

I work as a clinical psychologist (10 years training) in a community mental health center and I have to out up with that crap every single day from people who, at best, have a 3 to 4 years training, who have never set foot in a state hospital and who keep on preaching about what you say.

[leftofthedial]

18. mental health is not the issue, it seems

as much as "being normal" is.

[politicat]

22. I've been cautioned unofficially for suggesting clients stop attending

church even when church was a big part of the problem. I've also been told to work with the psychiatrist to change meds on a client who found zer belief in deity waning in the face of meds (and was okay with it).

It's not normal to have this temporal lobe abnormality that doesn't let us hear our brain talking to us, apparently.

The mental health field is full of touchy-feeley woo-woos who won't read their journals and can't think. *sigh*

Pcat

[Philostopher]

4. There are several posters who keep me out of those threads.

A couple of them I've had to put on 'ignore' for varying periods of time, because once they get their teeth into something, they can't let it go -- and if you disagree with them in a general sense, they will drive you down to the specific like a terrier chasing a ferret.

I think, though, that many of them are undergoing a profound state of cognitive dissonance; I think though they don't admit it, they feel guilty and betrayed by the manipulation of religion by the right wing. They can't do anything about it -- it's been done, Gawd has become a sales pitch, and the right wingers who are using religion to bludgeon us all have tainted liberals' religion.

So who do they kick? The non-religious. We're here, most of us have 'outed' ourselves in some way or other in previous threads about religion, so we're an easy target. I don't think that it's actually that they believe we're intolerant -- I really think they're 'acting out' against our nonbelief because they're grieved by what they see happening to religion, but they have no traction with right-wingers who are corrupting their faith.

I've just had to school myself to stay out of those threads. I had a harrowing experience once where somebody practically wanted name, rank and serial number of the church I left years ago -- because they wanted to prove that something I thought was fairly disingenuous that I said about evangelical churches wasn't true of many or most evangelical churches, simply because it wasn't true of that person's particular evangelical church. I finally hid the thread and put the person on ignore for a while, because I just don't need the BS. Walking away from it, and failing to believe what I'd believed all my life, was harrowing enough for me two decades ago -- I didn't need to be put through all that crap again because I'd generalized something that I still believe is generally true of evangelical churches.

They're hurt because even though they haven't 'copped to it' yet, there are some things we're right about, and eventually those things are going to drive some of them to a crisis with their faiths. I don't mean that they're going to choose between faith and agnosticism or atheism; they may, however, ultimately have to choose between conservative Christianity and their liberal beliefs, and either become conservatives or bail on their churches. I'm sure that's a very painful psychological circumstance, and though I worry about becoming a target of Talibornagains as an agnostic myself, at least I won't be going through that, since I already went through it.

[fshrink]

5. I agree with you on the main

But I think you under-estimate the depth of their need to believe. It's not just a cognitive problem, a "glitch in the software". There are powerful and complex unconscious fantasies at work, and those are not easy to unravel and work-through. As you probably know, given your personal experience. I have a cousin, a physicist, very bright man, who almost went crazy at around age 15, when he suddenly realized the extent of the lie that he had been buying all through his childhood. It took him a whole year to come to terms with it.
The only way that I see would be to isolate beliefs from any progressive discussion. We managed to do that some until, as you nicely describe, the reactionaries came out of the woodwork and bet all their tokens on that number. It seems to me that the admin here should endorse a *separation* between politics and "spirituality". If we can't do that here, where it's only about discussion, how can we even think about claiming and implementing an actual *separation* of church and state?
Personally, I don't feel like returning to GD or even LBN now, not because of all the provocation but mainly because of the important topics sliding down the list at the speed of sound as soon as some jerk finds a new way to reformulate the same crap, which attracts hundreds of lost souls. It's like trying to hold a decent conversation with a bunch of problematic 4 year-olds running around screaming and asking for this and that. You can't ignore them. They have to go to their room!

[Philostopher]

7. What I don't understand,

and you may be right about powerful subconscious motivations, is the apparent need for some of the theists to bait non-theists in GD over issues like tolerance, when they really would be more appropriate discussions in forums set aside for religious or church/state issues, and then claim they're being oppressed when non-theists come into those threads and disagree with them. It reminds me of the peasant scene in Monty Python's Holy Grail.

I believe there's now a church & state forum, and I'd think that would be the place such issues were debated, not in the general discussion and news forums. There's no real need for the same arguments to continually be aired in the main forums, now -- I kind of get the impression that was part of the purpose of making those(these) groups in the first place -- to provide a place for those discussions (and the ones we have here) so those who didn't want to run into that over and over again wouldn't have to. So much for that, I guess.

To be fair, both sides do it -- I think you're right that at least right now, those discussions probably shouldn't be had where they're being had, especially since for the most part the usual suspects from both sides of the discussion hop in and it becomes the same flame war or circular argument that's always gone on, around here. I'd be ignoring the truth if I said the skeptics/atheists didn't sometimes 'stir up shit' intentionally with the 'true believers' too, especially back in the days when the only forum for discussion of spiritual subjects was the Meeting Room -- it happened on both sides, and has since I found this place in June of '01.

I think it's probably quite jarring to Christians who frequent DU that the population of non-theists, pantheists and people of other than Christian faiths comprises a much greater percentage of the DU population than in the general population. I'd have to give a rough estimate of 25-30% here on DU, and maybe more (depending on whether you consider non-practicing Christians to be theists, I guess, since I suspect there are a great many of them here who don't get involved in the discussion either way).

And I'm not really trying to give anybody a pass by saying it seems likely that it's to come down to a difficult decision for them -- it's just my explanation for otherwise somewhat inexplicable behavior. As you say, I've been through it. I know how difficult it was to shift my whole frame of reference; I wouldn't expect anybody to do it, and no matter what they say, the non-theists of the world aren't going to be the ones who ultimately pressure them to piss or get off the pot.

Someone (possibly you) has posted in threads before that children probably aren't born with any particular drive to believe in a higher power, and any monotheistic religion we have we're taught somehow. I got both with my bottle -- Protestant Christianity and moderately liberal politics. But for me, as an adult, the rationality of progressivism is much easier to find than the rationality of the religion I got growing up, and I think I went through a phase where I questioned all of it, kept the politics and decided the religion wasn't necessarily the only answer.

I can't understand how many people choose the irrationality of religion and right-wing politics, but they make great bedfellows when you look at it that way. Liberal politics and religion, especially mainstream to fundamentalist Christianity, don't from my perspective, though clearly there are some people who manage to hold both in their heads at the same time or we wouldn't be having this discussion.

I don't necessarily feel superior to someone who still believes whatever they've been taught vis a vis religion ... but I know how much I was having to fool myself, at the end, and how difficult it was psychologically to 'break training' I'd had for over twenty years. There are plenty of atheists and agnostics who didn't arrive there by a rational process, I guess, but I'd wager most who started out as Christians and ended up non-theists did.

But coming from the standpoint of a non-believer attempting to discuss religion with people who believe it by using rational arguments generally doesn't have a good result. Not that I'm saying anything that hasn't already been concluded it probably most of the threads in this forum right now. None of it surprises me, and like you, I just avoid it by frequenting the groups and forums here that aren't going to disintegrate into discussions that amount to 'you believe in a fairy tale' -- 'you need to get with the program because you're in the minority.' They're pointless, and they're not going to amount to anything here.

[fshrink]

8. But that pisses me off!

These stupid issues should not be even in GD, let alone in LBN. *We* have to hide in some small group while they can splash around their inarticulate desires to come out as, well, reactionaries and their dispair at this predicament. That should be just the opposite! That would be, like I said, the reflection at the level of a forum of the separation of spirituality and the affairs of the City.

[Philostopher]

9. Not disagreeing with you --

I think you're absolutely right, it would make GD and LBN more productive and habitable if flameworthy threads about any subject were moved to the individual groups where they really belonged. I'd imagine there will be some time required for things to shake out; maybe this will, ultimately, be the result. Your'e right that, right now, it just seems like every other thread in those forums is flamebait -- and moving the posts to a forum where they might be more appropriate would solve that. Maybe that will eventually happen, I don't know.

[JNelson6563]

20. Perfect summary

I don't necessarily feel superior to someone who still believes whatever they've been taught vis a vis religion ... but I know how much I was having to fool myself, at the end, and how difficult it was psychologically to 'break training' I'd had for over twenty years. There are plenty of atheists and agnostics who didn't arrive there by a rational process, I guess, but I'd wager most who started out as Christians and ended up non-theists did.

I couldn't agree with this more. The part of how difficult it was to "psychologically break training" is especially applicable to me. That was so hard for me to overcome. It tooks some serious disciplined thinking over a span of a couple of years. I beleive there are countless people who are completely unable to do this.

It sure is nice to have this forum where I can mix with people who have been down the same path and understand perfectly what sort of effort went into my quest for enlightenment.

Julie

[trotsky]

12. You make a great point.

Especially about them kicking us.

They are incredibly frustrated that their liberal faith is losing people to the right wing, or at least not having any success winning them over. Blaming their faith or the way they practice or preach it is anathema, so they have to lash out and say it's us nasty atheists who insult people of faith and chase them away.

Much easier to blame others than yourself - that's just human nature.

[Imperialism Inc.]

16. What they are forgetting is that rationality doesn't work

in this area. We are talking about beliefs with no basis in evidence and facts. How on Earth can one expect to have a rational discussion about irrational beliefs? If people's ideas in this area were subject to logical arguments then the believers on DU would be turning to atheism in droves.

[politicat]

23. I think they also have a frustration as they see their children leaving

their faith for our side, too. We're looking at 35-40% of people under 35 claim no religion. That means that the mainstream, liberal churches are looking at a financial crunch coming up, as well as a current, chronic lack of volunteers.

They probably can't articulate it, but they see us, who are far more available to them than the fundies, as competition for bodies and dollars. Thus, since we are the available target, we get kicked for it.

Finally, I'd guess that most of them have never been exposed to great numbers of the non-religious, and so, since we do articulate our positions well, there's the threat of "they might be right", which sets up a tidy little case of cognitive dissonance. Thus, they perceive threats coming at their way of life from us on multiple fronts.

I handle it by hitting alert when they're proselytizing and letting the mods deal with it.

Pcat

[nickgutierrez]

6. I avoid those for the same reason I duck the gender wars

People like the 'broad brush' tactic, as dishonest and offensive as it may be.

[PassingFair]

17. What do you mean "Broad" brush, Buster?!

Just kidding....

[immoderate]

10. There is little fighting here.

Because most in this forum are in agreement. I imagine that the folks in the religion group have the same experience. Maybe one day I'll lurk there and check it out.

What's GD supposed to be about? Maybe discussions of democratic principle? What do you get? A couple of me-toos.

I think it's in the nature of posts where there are opposing sides to keep going one more round, to get the last word. Then to start another about the same thing.

It's kind of like the saying, "Everything worth saying has already been said, but not everybody has taken their turn to say it."--Dunno

I've been to those wars, but my interest is waning. But there are always new people to take up the cudgel. Perhaps there should be a forum where the endless debate goes on, amidst the flames of hell, if there were a hell.

--IMM

[fshrink]

11. Back in 2003

when "we" colonized Iraq I remember we had roughly 3 categories of long threads, those about the "Greens", ending up in little wars, those about the LIHOP/MIHOP (acronyms that I still have no clue what they mean) dealing with conspiracy stuff but there were also lots of threads about what to do, how and why. There were long threads about the constitution, about information/communication and a number of other things. There was plenty of disagreement, but there was also a sort of will to understand and oppose what was going on. People seemed more focused. Frankly, it looks like GD/LBN has been hijacked by fundies. This evening, there was a post "When did we lose Jesus"... Is that general discussion? Hell no. I wouldn't post a "The Bible is sack of crap". Because that's not GD.

[Philostopher]

14. You're right about it being overwhelmed with religious stuff.

Maybe it should be renamed 'God Discussion Forum' instead.

And also, half the posts still are 'why are non-theists like Hitler/Stalin/Lenin/Attila The Hun' which strikes me as flamebait. Well, it would be flamebait if we bit the worm, but most of us don't. A couple of DUers who are non-theists who don't post in here much do jump into those discussions -- and if they want to do it, more power to them, I think if enough of those threads degenerate into the same useless namecalling, eventually there'll be a diktat about it and either the threads will be shuttled to Meeting Room or one of the religion-specific or church-state specific forums.

Also, as you've noted, there are more of them than there are of us, so they're most likely going to get their way. Avoiding the GD seems to be the only option.

[really annoyed]

19. Happy To Be Here!

I left DU for a couple of weeks because I got so upset about the discussions that were going on in GD.

People were going on about how non-theists had destroyed the election.

I think I blew my top at some people and ran.

Then I came back, and found a discussion group specifically for atheists and agnostics.

I'm happy about it. But do you know what really upsets me?

You would think DU would be a place where tolerance of different opinions (on religion) would be accepted, right?

Where is the tolerance that liberalism is suppose to uphold?

Oh yeah, that's right, we are ANTI-RELIGION! But wait... I'm not! I respect religion, and I'm even interested in studying all aspects of it.

I guess generalizations of groups of people are easier to deal with.

I hope I didn't sound rude in my post. Totally happy to be here. Looking forward to all the discussions here.

[Philostopher]

21. Well, for a long time on DU, 'freedom of religion'

also included 'freedom from religion.' There's nothing like losing an election (whether honestly or not) and having the SCLM (so-called liberal media) trumpet that Kerry lost on 'values' and that Christians were the dominant cultural force in the country because they were manipulated into coming out in larger percentages to vote for gay hate amendments in 11 states. Further investigation into these claims, of course, has revealed that the issue was much more complex than simply religion, but that was, as always, softpedaled.

And so for the past few weeks, 'freedom of religion' apparently means (at least to some significant portion of believers here) that non-theists are supposed to shut up and let the liberal Christians tell themselves and each other that Christianity in general -- and, consequently, some of the things they believe -- isn't being corrupted by people who don't respect it, and used as a bludgeon against them and those of us who don't believe in it anyway.

As I noted farther upthread, I think they're disgusted and scared of what's happening, too, but most of them have believed this stuff all their lives. When somebody criticizes what's happening, I think they internalize the criticism to be personal when it isn't intended to be. But because our language isn't a 'language of faith' -- maybe we say things that they can't comprehend other than as attacks on their faith, I don't know. I haven't considered myself Christian for a couple of decades, so I don't know anymore what would have offended me or struck me as a 'broad brush' statement.

There have always been those here who take any criticism of religion personally. In some cases, they have every right -- I will say that back when it started coming out that some Catholic churches had covered up molestations by priests, some people were pretty hard on the rank-and-file Catholics here, which wasn't fair at all, since they didn't make the decisions to cover the molestations up themselves, and were as disgusted by it as the rest of us. But I don't think it was all agnostics and atheists who said those things about the Catholic church -- I think there were some Protestants here who were pretty willing to kick the Catholics when they were down, too.

[Biased Liberal Media]

24. Here's another reason why I avoid GD like the plague

I have seen so many inflammatory things said about all kinds of groups. I love DU dearly, but that place angers me like no other.

[leftofthedial]

25. there are two kinds of people in this world, BLM

those who hate GD and those who don't.

Are you with us or against us?

:-)

[Biased Liberal Media]

26. Define HATE

that's a pretty strong word in my vocabulary. I wouldn't say hate. I just dislike the negativity, and the attacks that happen in that forum.

edited because DEFINE is NOT spelled with a T