8.09.2012

Atheist 'Tolerance' Revealed

It began innocently enough: a little unscientific sociological experiment born out of a coffee chat with a friend. How are Christians viewed in today’s ‘modern’ society?

The question was stored in the back of my mind for quite a while, waiting for the right moment to be revealed. Social media presented the opportunity to get the ball rolling, and roll it did.

A Twitter re-tweet from an atheist telling a person of faith “…your God isn’t real.” The arrogance of the statement was obvious. A mortal human believed she possessed the knowledge to single-handedly discount the possibility of a ‘higher power’. What struck me more was the sheer hypocrisy of the statement, made (unsurprisingly) from someone who identified with the progressive Left.

My simple interjection pointed out the intolerance. Telling someone that their entire belief system was fraudulent, followed by imbecilic judgmental rhetoric. Here we go, I thought.

I decided to engage with a strategy of restraint. I identified as someone who believes Jesus is who He said He was, but I made the point not to do the expected. I never quoted scripture, didn’t attempt to ‘witness’ to anyone. In fact, perhaps to the chagrin of fellow Christians, I stayed true to my meme of ‘live and let live’. If you don’t believe, cool, if you do, great. I wasn’t there to ‘save’ anyone.

That didn’t seem to matter in the 14 or so atheists who quickly swarmed. As I expected, responses ranged from the ultra-juvenile to the shamefully stereotypical. Also as expected, the questions, allegations, and other statements thrown my way somehow suggested that I should be defending my beliefs.

I’ve never felt compelled to explain or ‘defend’ my personal beliefs to anyone, religious or otherwise. This perplexed my audience to the point of frustration. The name-calling and categorizing began swiftly, as the atheist mob mistook my confidence in my beliefs as ‘arrogance’. Some pulled out ancient nuggets of information in the quest to discredit Christianity while others resorted to playing the ‘let’s see if we can piss off the Bible-thumper’ game (I much prefer ‘Jesus freak’ myself).

Still, I didn’t bite. My retorts stayed consistent: you don’t believe what I believe? That’s nice. To each their own. You walk your path, I’ll walk mine. I won’t push my beliefs on you, and I expect you to repay in kind.

That, apparently, was too much for the non-believers. With each failed attempt to draw me into their circular logic, their frustration morphed a little more into anger. The ‘evidence’ from the other side actually started logically, with historical writings quoted. However, that soon devolved into the adolescent comparisons of Jesus Christ to such other ‘mythical entities’ as Santa Claus and the tooth fairy.

By this point, the entire project had a mind of its own. Others joined in, each one slightly more condescending than the last.

By my own admission, I would lead the debate in a different direction from time to time. Like fuel on a fire, it never failed to catch. A big issue for the other sides was ‘minded’, as in I was close-minded for believing. When I countered with my claim that to believe completely in something one cannot see, touch, smell, or feel – in other words, to leave your mind open to the possibility that there are things we cannot comprehend (see: faith), that was enough to push a few over the edge of sanity.

The allegations from the religious-deficient were actually quite comical. It was alleged that I was ‘indoctrinated’ into the church ‘as a child’, which is why I believed what I did. Um, no. I grew up in a family that was nowhere near a church, save for weddings and funerals. Strike one.

Another gold ring was the idea that I was a sheep who ‘followed the words of my Priest’ and therefore, was close-minded and prone to suggestion. Again, way off. I’ve never had a priest, due mostly to the fact that I am not a Catholic. Never mind the truth that I haven’t been to a Sunday church service approximately two decades. Strike two.

By this point, straw seemed to be the atheist mob’s favorite tool - grasping for it, as well as creating strawman arguments out of it. Naturally by this point in the fun, the personal attacks were fast and furious. I can only imagine this was due to my refusal to fit the typical Christian stereotype. No Bible passages, no great quotes from the Lord. As a matter of fact, I agreed with some criticisms of Christianity. When one made the stunning revelation that those who follow the Lord were ‘hypocrites’, I whole-heartedly agreed. Of course we are. To a degree, everyone is. We are all flawed.

Ironically, it was an atheist who pulled Biblical scripture in the ham-handed attempt to argue. With a Tweet-back highlighting the fact that she was trying to use words from a book she doesn’t believe in from a religion she considers ‘fake’ in order to win a debate, her head damn-near exploded.

By this time, I was sitting back and watching the entire thread unfold. A few fellow Christians jumped in, perhaps unaware of the vitriol spewed earlier on. They caught on fairly quickly.

The end result could be summed up by the last tweet of one specific atheist who couldn’t sway my opinion which, for some reason, self-proclaimed ‘tolerant’ atheists feel the deep-seeded need to do. Frustrated by his lack of success, he proceeded to Twitter-threaten me (which is comedy in and of itself), threw the expected expletive my way, then ran and hid behind a ‘block’ click. Pure gold.

In the final analysis, I’ve realized that it is the ‘evangelical atheists’ who are the least tolerant. They cannot abide a different opinion or belief in something. Even without ‘pushing’ my beliefs on them – which I habitually never do to anyone – they felt compelled to push theirs onto me. When I turn down their offer of enlightenment, they become sour to the point of having a face that resembles a cat’s ass.

The intention was to gain an idea of how Christians are seen in today’s modern society. The result was the exposure of a societal group so bitter, so judgmental that they cannot engage a Christian without the reflex to condemn and discredit.

I ended with a simple response to someone who felt proud to proclaim her non-belief in God: don’t worry. He believes in you. And another head explodes.

9 comments :

Luke said...

It's rather hard to form an opinion of what happened when all you write is your own summary of the Twitter exchange. What was your original Tweet that that led to the retweet of "your God isn't real"? How do we know that the "person of faith" didn't write something equally condescending and arrogant trying to speak for God? How do we know your retorts we are all the model of civility while the atheists were foaming at the mouth? Maybe you should spend some time on Twitchy and learn how to post actual Twitter exchanges rather than your own (probably biased) summary of them.

Godless Spellchecker said...

I have blogged a response. http://gspellchecker.wordpress.com/2012/08/11/the-truth-about-atheist-tolerance-and-other-self-delusion/

Kind Regards

GS

mrtomblake said...

"Life lessons from a Scots man, classic " Your piece on tolerance fails to mention the moment, when someone made a point, you mocked him for no reason other than his nationality. Please answer these questions. Do you think it's okay to laugh at, and mock Scottish people? Do you have objections to Scottish people having freedom of expression? Do you see yourself as superior to Scottish people?

Connor Alexander said...

What Luke said.

Rob Low said...

I think Twitter and other forms of social media make such interactions worse than if they were in person. I see and hear this kind of banter between atheists and Christians in the social and tradition media as well but face to face I rarely have such fiery exchanges. Most people (though not all) I encounter face to face in these types of discussions show a little more respect and tolerance for the one with the opposing view because at least there's a face and voice attached, though some can be very offensive face to face too (on both sides). But you're right, Leigh, some hard-care atheists can be every bit as pushy, closed-minded, rude and intolerant of Christians as the other way around around. What bothers me the most is when people are ignorant/uninformed on either side and just talk out of their ass. If the person is well-informed and well thought out I usually respect them even if I disagree with their conclusions.

By the way, I find Michael Coren brilliant at countering the usual attacks from the left (religious, atheist, political and otherwise). Many of the anti-Christian arguments people throw at Christians about the Bible and Church history and so on are not as well-founded as people think. Though, as you said, Christians and certainly Church history are anything but perfect and have certainly earned criticism over the centuries. But the leader Himself was pretty damn great, though of course some try to throw into question His very existence which Michael Coren is also good at defending.

Mikr2006 said...

I have to agree with you guys. I am not Christian however I did look at both sides of the argument and I prefer to stay in the middle. I my search for my own truth I look at all the circumstances (Science, religion, history) and I came to the conclusion of what I believe. Am I correct? Don't know for sure but this neo atheist movement has become what they profess against in religion. Intolerance, hate, and ignorance. Simple fact, because I don't believe in what you believe in doesn't not make either of us wrong and dumb or going to hell, or idiotic. No it makes us human. Both sides are guilty of this but I prefer those in the middle. I accept you for what believe in, you accept me. Science or any religious text has no place in personal attacks and anger. Any argument falters even with proof if either party can't put themselves in the others shoes.

Good to see moderate Christians like yourself sir!

Hobken said...

All I see is someone who didn't bother actually reading or trying to have a civil debate. You look like you had decided you would "show up" this god-hating heretic in any way you could. Not only is this very poor form, but makes you look like and ass and puts tolerant religious people on the defensive.
You didn't show how "aggressive" this atheist was, just how closed minded you are. No wonder the secular community is growing. They see this type of argument and assume all people who believe in god are idiots.

Leigh Patrick Sullivan said...

Really, Hobken? Here's what I see: a just-created profile with 1 bio view - me. I see someone claiming to know/represent 'tolerant religious people'. I see someone complaining about lack of specifics by not being specific. Finally, I see someone who is probably nothing more than a sockpuppet account from a self-proclaimed 'atheist' who is, like many of those I mentioned and have debated since, just anti-Christian.

But we all have our POVs.

Chevis Ryder said...

It's "deep seated". And good on you for allowing opposing viewpoints to be published.