Are all religious people bad?

13 posts / 0 new
Last post
Lionmark23's picture
Are all religious people bad?

I tend to find people in this website who have this bias against people who believe in God. Why?
Well, I know some of the reasons. Atheists think that belief in God is stupid, ridiculous, and illogical.

So are basic human senses, thoughts, and beliefs illogical? What is logical anyways?

I have a friend from discord who gets saying how much I think all people who believe in God are selfish, or idiots.
Because I would talk about how much I dislike religion and the horrible things it has brought.

I did apologize since most of the time I come across as too mean. I don't want people to see me as this hateful person.
I dislike religious values and beliefs, yet I don't blame the people for it. Some religious people can be very progressive. Not the beliefs, just the people.

For many years, non-religious people have been crucified for not believing in the same ideas and beliefs as the religious. Please, let's not become the enemies we were against.

Sometimes something like feeling emotions is seen as illogical. I don't know why. I guess we can't be intelligent if we feel emotions?
Please, I wonder if there is a way for both religious and non-religious people to find a some sort of compromise and maybe both of us can work together to create a better world. If all we do is fight one another, nothing will get done.

Subscription Note: 

Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.

Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.

Peurii's picture
I used to think religious

I used to think religious people were just utter morons and butt-buckets, but of late, I've felt more and more that thought as distasteful and self-righteous. We all have our little religions.

I don't think religious people are bad or evil. They just value community over criticism. Religion is a form of community building, and we as social animals are primes to do just that. Rituals, norms, clothing, rules etc. are all forms of extending the natural family unit into a larger unit compromised of unrelated (or not very related) people in order to foster group action, adherence to rules and solidarity with the in-group. You can do this with little children with such small things as making them wear the same colour shirt. They will think more positively of the people who wear their coloured shirts, and more negatively of the different coloured shirt kids.

It's not a coincidence, I think, that all the major early civilizations were based around religions, and politics were intimately tied to religion: think of ziggurats and pyramids. As agriculture developed the traditional hunter-gatherer family-troupe-tribe division was eradicated, and we needed something to bind these new enlargened communities together. Religion was a convenient way to do so. Usually these early religions were nationalist, or ethnic, in origin too, emphesizing the nature of religion as extended family. Our species opened to a strange world of natural internal sensations and external confusion of the functioning of the world and a capacity to categorize and understand other minds. We used those powers to gradually invent religions for group coherence, that gradually evolved to all sorts of things. Universal religions, like Christianity and Islam, being the more interesting development, because they severed the tie that religions used to have to ethnicity.

I don't blame religious people for holding some more unsavoury opinions. Most of the time people don't really think and talk, more like they sing like birds. By singing a song of religious indignation for example, they signify their belonging into a group that is important and meaningfull for them. Much like the SJWs do when they shriek their dogmas, or when fascists march in lockstep under a national banner. They are all manifestations of the same groupish phenomenon: people act out the ritual of belonging into a group. Think as an example the way Americans say "how do you do", to one another. On the face of it, it is a question. But the proper answer is not a description of your health status or day routine, but "how do you do". What is happening here is a song, not a conversation. They both signify that they know the lyrics of this song, and that they thus belong to the same group, because they know what to sing next. Religious dogma, symbolism and rituals are like that too.

As to why emotions are seen as illogical. That's a feature of western thought going all the way back to Plato. For Plato, and many of ancient Greek philosophers, rationality was the pinnacle of humanness, because supposedly that was closest to godliness because of it's abstract nature. Emotions on the other hand were tied to our bodies, which some, like Plato, saw as degenerate and basically just prisons of the soul. This was an undercurrent in European though for millenia, until in the enlightenment period it finally burst into full blossom, when all was seen as subordinate to reason alone. So if you want to hold overvaluing of rationality as a bad thing, just toss that into the basket of "white heteropatriarchy done it". :)

Lionmark23's picture
I do love your response.

I do love your response.
It does make a lot of sense. Humanity has grown over the years, forming different cultures and ideas. But yet in the end, no one is really that different. We all follow a particular belief, or lack thereof. We see what we think is best for society.

It seems like no matter how toxic people can be, there's always people who are willing to seek out the truth and try to make the world a better place.

I may not have much faith in God, but I do have faith in humanity.

Nyarlathotep's picture
Mikey - Please, I wonder if

Mikey - Please, I wonder if there is a way for both religious and non-religious people to find a some sort of compromise and maybe both of us can work together to create a better world.

It is hard to compromise with someone who thinks the supernatural creator of the universe and the source of morality: doesn't want you to wear clothes woven from wool and linen; just as an example.

Lionmark23's picture
While it is true that some

While it is true that some people can't be reasoned with, it's usually best to keep a open mind. I'm not saying you should just follow their beliefs, however, it's usually best to give them the benefit of the doubt and if they can't reason with you or just flat out refused to listen to others, then it's their loss and they need to take responsibility and not rely on "God" for everything.

Sapporo's picture
"Good" and "Bad" are

"Good" and "Bad" are subjective concepts.

Ideally, the energy spent on a thing should be proportionate to the evidence.

Cognostic's picture
@Mikey: Bias against people

@Mikey: Bias against people.

I for one will tell you that you are 90% wrong. How do I know that. I am one of the biggest asses on the site and when I mess up and say something bad about a person, instead of the religion or the idea, I get a little message from one of the moderators in my personal mail that tells me to "back the hell off." Okay, admittedly the mods can't catch everything. So I will give you your 10%. You will be hard pressed to find quotes against people who are actively posting on the site. The rule around here is to treat them with respect but ideas need not be respected. I really don't think there is an atheist on the site who gets away with as much as I do and I still have to watch my toes so they do not cross that line.

"Well, I know some of the reasons. Atheists think that belief in God is stupid, ridiculous, and illogical." Is this a new topic? Remember we were talking about people? Are you confusing the fact that belief in god or Gods is completely unjustifiable with the idea that Atheists don't like religious people? You are not your stupid ideas so why take it personal. If your ideas are stupid, like a belief in god, change them.

RE: "So are basic human senses, thoughts, and beliefs illogical? What is logical anyways?"
Here you are muddying the water by throwing the concept of belief into the group of senses, and thoughts.
Senses are the emergent properties of our sense organs and they are in fact incorrect at times. Logically, we can generally figure out why they are incorrect. Noses for smell. Eyes for seeing. etc.... We have over 20 different senses so there is no point in going into all of them here. Thoughts are the emergent properties of brains. Typically we use our thoughts and senses to make sense out of the world around us. We recognize the color blue, if something is near of far, and the intricacies of quantum mechanics. When we "believe" something, our level of belief is allocated to the degree of the evidence (reliable sensory input). Very few things are believed to the nth degree (100% accuracy). This is because we all know the senses can be fooled. That's why we have science. Science is a method of taking away the thoughts and the senses and actually testing things outside the body and then building models to explain facts. This is the the best way we know of to understand the world around us unless of course you are religious and assert 100% accuracy with faith that bullshit is true. This assertion is .... well.... moronic at best. There is nothing I can not believe based on faith and so faith is not a path to truth. All the atheist does is ask the faithful what reasons they have for their belief. So far, none of the faithful has come up with a logical or realistic response. Have you got one?? Love to hear it.

RE: "I have a friend from discord who gets saying how much I think all people who believe in God are selfish, or idiots."

Again I would personally stay away from the 100% mark. Think about it though. Why are people religious? Well, one of their favorite apologetics is Pascal's Wager. How many times have you heard, "If you do not accept Jesus, you will burn in hell? Now ask yourself, what percent of Christians are Christian because they are afraid of burning in hell. They want to avoid hell and get to heaven. (That is in fact a selfish motive.) If I tell you not to hit your little brother and I will buy you an ice cream, and then you do not hit your little brother, you are not acting out of an understanding of morality. You are greedily seeking ice cream. THAT'S SELFISH.
Indeed the Christian faith is based on being selfish. That does not imply everyone is selfish but the faith itself encourages selfishness.

RE: For many years, non-religious people have been crucified for not believing in the same ideas and beliefs as the religious. Please, let's not become the enemies we were against.

Please understand that you were born a second class citizen worthy of eternal damnation in the pits of the Christian hell. Fire will burn the flesh off your bones for all eternity. Please understand that this is your fate unless you believe as I believe. You are born a sinner and you can have no morality except through the grace of the God I believe in. You are worthy of death. But I love you and don't want to be your enemy. (Seriously, only a complete fucktard of an atheist would be unaware of the Christian view of the non-Christian.) (Notice how I get away with that..... I did not call you a fucktard but only asserted it would take a real fucktard atheist not to understand Christian dogma. I am sure you have heard the Christians assert this and are aware of the fact that you are going to justifiably burn in hell no matter how great of a person you are. You will burn for your non-belief because Jesus loves you and gave you a chance to love him back.

RE: We can't be intelligent if we feel emotions. Complete rubbish. I can go to a movie and cry my eyes out and at the end, I know it was just a movie. The whole point of the movie was to get me to cry when I did. Have all the emotion you want, just remember to engage the critical thinking once in a while.

I can think of two movies where I engaged my critical thinking during the movies and nearly got into fights. One was about a group of boys who wound up being molested in an orphanage and getting revenge. The scene opened with them robbing a hot dog cart. One boy stole a hot dog. As the vendor chased him down, the other boys stole the cart. The vendor noticed the cart being stolen and gave chase. The boys, knowing they could not outrun the vendor, push the cart into a subway entrance. As the cart began sliding down the stairs the vendor got to it and instead of chasing the boy grabbed the cart and tried to save it from going down the stairs. Then you get a picture of the vendor pulling the cart, a man walking up the stairs, a vendor pulling the cart, a man walking up the stairs, the vendor unable to hold onto the cart and his hands slipping, the man turning the corner in the stairs to get run over by the hot dog cart. I laughed my ass off. The man got run over by a hot dog cart in the subway. I laughed so hard I had to leave the theater. I was the only one laughing. I kept imagining the police telling the man's wife. "Sorry, but your husband was hit by a runaway hot dog cart in a subway stair well. (Sometimes you have to stop thinking and just go with the emotions.)

Song of the South was the other one. Boy running across a field where lived a bull. Camera looks at the boy who looks at the bull. Bull looks at the boy. Boy looks across the field. Bull looks and the boy and stomps his foot. Boy takes off running. Bull stomps his foot and takes off running. Boy running, Bull Running and snorting. Boy Running. Bull huffing and running. Boy running. Bull running.... cut to the scene of the boy laying in the grass, face down, one outstretched arm about three inches from the fence. I blurted out "Awww, he almost made it." And then I broke into laughter. I laughed so hard I had to exit the theater. The pure manipulation attempt of the movie was just so blatant that I found it ludicrous. Had I been like the rest of the people I would have left the theater with tears in my eyes. Nothing wrong with emotions, just use a little common sense along with them.

RE: Compromise. You are a filthy sinner, born into a state of sin. You are going to burn in hell if you do not believe as I believe. (WHERE IN THE HELL DO YOU SEE COMPROMISE HERE?). Our compromise is to not attack the fucking moronic Christian as a person and focus on their idiotic beliefs instead.

Lionmark23's picture
I think you don't exactly

I think you don't exactly understand where I'm getting at. I am simply addressing a certain issue some people have.
I do agree, feeling emotions has nothing to do with intelligence. It's that there have been some people who see those who feel emotions as intellectually inferior.

I am not asking for people to follow Christian beliefs. I do 100% agree that most religious beliefs are really stupid. I also agree that if you're just doing something to get some sort of special reward, then it's indeed selfish. But yet here's the thing:

A friend of mine believes that any act can be considered a selfish one. We do things usually out of instinct, out of habit, or sometimes it just makes us feel good. Does it make it correct? No.

I do agree with a lot of what you're saying. I am simply addressing a certain issue I have with certain people lately. I'm not saying you are attacking or bullying others.

And no, I'm not a Christian. I'm not trying to make people believe in God. That's not why I am here. I am simply asking if people would learn to be more open minded. No, that doesn't mean "Just believe what they say." I mean be more kind towards others. If they don't want to listen, then that's their fault. I don't know you personally and I don't mean to attack you, or anyone else here.

I do believe people can be intelligent if they feel emotions. It's that I come across some people who say feeling emotions are "illogical".

If you think all the things I listed are what I believe, then you should go back and check. I am simply listing things I have seen other people say and act.

algebe's picture
This video sums up why I view

This video sums up why I view religious people with caution. About 3:40 seconds in Tim Minchin starts singing a simple catchy song called "I love Jesus". It just repeats over and over. He gets the audience to sing along. And then he suddenly slips in the line "I hate faggots".

That's how religion works. It lulls people into a feeling of community and belonging with songs and prayer and then slyly steals their power of independent thought, along with their money. Religion can make otherwise decent and sensible people act like utter prats. Beware.

Tin-Man's picture
Re: OP - "Are all religious

Re: OP - "Are all religious people bad?"

Uhhhhh.... Not sure what the problem is. What is so complicated about this? The bad religious people are bad, and the good religious people are good. Pretty dang simple if you ask me.... *shrugging shoulders*...

LogicFTW's picture
@OP by Mikey

@OP by Mikey

I don't mind religious people that keep it strictly to themselves. (No brainwashing young vulnerable impressionable children eithir!!)

Unfortunately this rarely the case. The rare religion that does not press it's beliefs on others usually dies out pretty quick, where the religions that press really hard to spread their ideals are typically the dominant ones. Even powerful dominant religions can fall victim to this, just see the spread of islam slowly but surely pressuring christianity. And see christianity's fear response to this!

Actually this pressure and change is happening quite quickly when we consider the time scales of these religions, (christianity and islam.)



I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.

MinutiaeAccreted's picture
I think we should foster

I think we should foster beneficial and productive modes of thinking in all people, and discourage anything that has been proven time and time again to thwart progress.

No, not "all religious people" are "bad." But religion itself is a tool that had time and time again proven that it leads to poor modes of thinking. Even if not all adherents of a religion have these poor modes of thinking, the religion as a whole grants people all sorts of stupidity as "warranted." There's not really a way around this, unfortunately. All religions will foster belief in some people that they've got all the answers, for example, and that they need look no further, nor be open to any other opinions -even evidenced ones. There will be people who blindly accept anything their religion tells them is "true" - even to the detriment of those around them - for example, doctrine like that of the JWs that calls for ostracization of family members if they no longer believe. These things are just blatantly idiotic and abject failures of critical thinking by those that practice them. The people that fall into those "traps" are poor souls who can't even see how horrid they are being. Tell them all you want, and they will still think they have it "right," because they have the words of a deity "on their side."

Religion is just plain bad. And it breeds bad people. Not all people sucked into it will be "bad", but from my experience a large portion of them will. Their personality alone would come up against people telling them off, or letting them know their ideas are dumb and unwarranted. But their personality plus God and God's advocacy of 2,000 + year old ideas? Just bad.

Calilasseia's picture
One of the bodies of

One of the bodies of observational data that can be readily inspected at length here, is that all too often, supernaturalists are discoursively duplicitous. They abuse the proper rules of discourse to an extent that would leave a proper academic philosopher and logician such as Quine reaching for his flamethrower.

The problem being, of course, is that discoursive duplicity is endemic to supernaturalism, courtesy of the fact that it has nothing even remotely approaching a proper evidential standard against which to measure its assertions. Its primary "methodology", assuming one can dignify the process in operation by that term, is provided by apologetics, which at bottom consists of "make up whatever shit you need in order to persuade yourself that you've propped up your favourite mythology". The typical supernaturalist, once steeped in this perverse ersatz for a genuine methodology, would blow an artery if asked to meet the standards present in, say, physics, or even worse, pure mathematics. The duplicity inherent in supernaturalism, eventually grafts itself onto its adherents and corrupts them. Indeed, if there were no other reason to object to supernaturalism, this one alone would be sufficient to warrant its extirpation from the world of human endeavour and human thought.

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.