On Minority Rights and on Beliefs | 546 comments (546 topical, editorial, 0 hidden)

I just spotted a clue... (none / 0)

Beliefs are a private matter; that is the beginning and end of it for me.
[Katrin] But not for me. But, since you claim atheist privilege, that won't interest you.

So, "atheist privilege" is the right not to be interested in other people's beliefs? Is that it? And this is what I am alleged to claim for myself?

It doesn't sound right to me, because this attitude is by no means confined to atheists. To put it mildly.

And concerning me personally, I am always intensely interested in other people's beliefs. (but that is not the same thing as respecting them, or accomodating them.)

However, I do claim the right not to have my liberties restricted by other people's beliefs. And because I care a lot about other people's liberties, I don't like to see them restricted by other people's beliefs, either.

_{It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue
- Queen Elizabeth II}

by eurogreen on Mon Feb 3rd, 2014 at 10:18:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I just spotted a clue... (none / 0)

eurogreen:

I do claim the right not to have my liberties restricted by other people's beliefs.

Who is trying that? The only liberty at risk is that of Muslim women who want to wear veils. YOU want to restrict it.

by Katrin on Mon Feb 3rd, 2014 at 11:25:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I just spotted a clue... (none / 0)

See the article I posted below. There's a war on in France. An [unholy] alliance of the religious against the government's socially progressive agenda.

Sorry if the facts offend you, but in this struggle, the only audible religious voices are on the wrong side.

_{It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue
- Queen Elizabeth II}

by eurogreen on Mon Feb 3rd, 2014 at 12:08:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I just spotted a clue... (none / 0)

I have often thought of leaving ET because of the aggression against even mentioning religion without condemning it. Very off-putting indeed. And now you wonder where audible voices are, who might argue religion and progressive politics. Funny!

by Katrin on Mon Feb 3rd, 2014 at 12:29:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I just spotted a clue... (none / 0)

But "atheist privilege?". <sigh>

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Mon Feb 3rd, 2014 at 12:59:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

<shrug> (none / 0)

I am open to suggestions of a better term.

by Katrin on Mon Feb 3rd, 2014 at 02:03:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Atheist privilege (none / 1)

So you want to claim religious people are socially disadvantaged and nonreligious people are unaware of it?

Which planet do you live on, again?

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Feb 4th, 2014 at 09:00:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Atheist privilege (none / 0)

Which precise place on the planet are we talking about just now?

by Katrin on Tue Feb 4th, 2014 at 09:42:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Atheist privilege (none / 1)

Anywhere. Where do you see "atheist privilege"? I still see public religiosity correlated with social status in much of Europe.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Feb 4th, 2014 at 09:47:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Atheist privilege (none / 0)

In Sweden, I would say that the corelation between professing religious beliefs and status is mostly negative. Of course there are exceptions, but in the main taking religion seriously is at best a bit goofy. Having a high position within church of Sweden hierarchy is of course high status, but then the ones that make it to the top are the ones who make sure to leave God out of their public appearances, or at least make it a rather vague divinity. I think the last arch bishop is on record that the god he beliefs in is not external, making it an aspect of the human condition instead of a heavenly father.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Tue Feb 4th, 2014 at 01:14:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Atheist privilege (none / 0)

Clearly Lutheran Europe is different. But then again, according to Wikipedia Lutherans are less than 10% of the people of Europe.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Feb 4th, 2014 at 02:57:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Atheist privilege (none / 0)

I am not saying that in the society I am discriminated against. That would be nonsense. There are a few places where any mention of religion gets an aggressive reaction and is stereotyped. ET is such a place. Hey, I am an individual, not responsible for all the bad experiences some here seem to have made with religion.

And that is the parallel with the women who are banned from wearing scarves and veils: all sorts of things are projected on them, and their persons disappear completely from the debate.

by Katrin on Tue Feb 4th, 2014 at 04:57:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Atheist privilege (none / 1)

Hey, I am an individual, not responsible for all the bad experiences some here seem to have made with religion.

The bad experiences weren't made, they were inflicted. And of course believers do their best to wilfully ignore them - which is why, for example, it's taken the best part of fifty years of activism to finally begin making the Catholic Church responsible for its utterly shameful treatment of the victims of priestly paedophilia, and of the physical and emotional abuse that was considered 'normal' among monks and nuns who were teachers in Ireland, the UK, the US, and Canada - among others.

To dismiss these experiences as irrelevant to this thread when they happened, and continue to happen, in the communities of interest you consider 'oppressed', is simple intellectual dishonesty.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Tue Feb 4th, 2014 at 05:52:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Atheist privilege (none / 0)

ThatBritGuy:

The bad experiences weren't made, they were inflicted.

Thanks for the language note.

ThatBritGuy:

To dismiss these experiences as irrelevant to this thread when they happened, and continue to happen, in the communities of interest you consider 'oppressed', is simple intellectual dishonesty

Hm, I am wondering about standards for dispassionate replies. It is possible that I missed some valid argument between the diatribes, but I think you have only raised two valid arguments on this thread: you complained about a policy of the state UK that includes religion in the curriculum of state schools upthread. And you complain about the sexual and other abuse of children that was enabled by the structure (mainly the hierarchical nature) of the (Catholic) church, and again (as in the case of the curriculum) the interlocking of the institutions of state and church. Your complaints are about structures exercising power. I completely share this criticism. Structures of institutions of state and church must be separated, everything else is damaging for both sides.

My topic here is human rights. I am talking about attempts to empty the public space of references to religion, which seriously narrows down the debate of ethical questions. And, related, the attempts to blame some minorities for our social and political problems and to take their human rights away. And what happens to human rights when you exclude one group of humans from enjoying them? They are no longer human rights.

by Katrin on Wed Feb 5th, 2014 at 08:18:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Atheist privilege (none / 0)

My topic here is human rights.

No, your topic here is religious rights. Only you believe the two are synonymous.

You also seem to believe that of all the various human rights that could be discussed, religious rights trump all the others, including the right of atheists not to have to deal with religious politics at all, except as a freely-made informed and consenting adult choice.

This is such a poorly supported right that it's not particularly possible in most European countries, and completely impossible elsewhere - including in the US.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Wed Feb 5th, 2014 at 08:39:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Atheist privilege (none / 0)

You are putting words into my mouth again.

by Katrin on Wed Feb 5th, 2014 at 11:28:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Atheist privilege (4.00 / 2)

So you see "atheist privilege" on ET but not in society at large, where the situation is more one of "(mainstream) religious privilege".

That's not "atheist privilege" on ET, that would be ET being a "safe space" for secularists since society at large exhibits "religious privilege".

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Feb 5th, 2014 at 04:53:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Atheist privilege (none / 0)

An exclusionary space for atheist sectarianism only.

by Katrin on Wed Feb 5th, 2014 at 08:45:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Atheist privilege (none / 1)

You know, when you in Germany have an atheist Chancellor or a President who's not a Lutheran Pastor you can stop claiming that the German Lutheran Church is some little ghetto that does not enjoy "privilege".

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Feb 5th, 2014 at 09:02:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Atheist privilege (none / 0)

So religions don't enjoy special privilege in Israel (Ben-Gurion, Meir, Rabin were all atheists) or India (Nehru)? Italy even has an atheist President right now.

by gk (gk (gk quattro due due sette @gmail.com)) on Wed Feb 5th, 2014 at 09:07:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Atheist privilege (none / 0)

I'm just taking on Katrin's victim complex right now.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Feb 5th, 2014 at 09:12:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Atheist privilege (none / 0)

Religious freedom of belief = basic human rights.
Atheist freedom of belief = shamefully oppressive and exclusive sectarian privilege.

Are we done here yet? I think the unintentional performance art started a while back.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Wed Feb 5th, 2014 at 10:27:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I just spotted a clue... (none / 1)

No, the liberty at risk is that of atheists not having to waste time debating clothing choices with people who think being religious means that their clothing choices are Somehow Very Very Important.

Which is so obviously special pleading and a claim on privilege it's not even funny.

You realise that in reality no one gets a free pass with clothing? If I think it's too hot to wear clothes in public - which does happen, even in England, albeit only about twice a decade - I don't get to decide that I can go shopping in the nude.

Nor do naturists, some of whom have spiritual justifications for not wearing clothes (and apparently a much greater tolerance for cold than I have.)

But this does not concern you. You are exclusively concerned by the 'right' of the religious to:

Persuade themselves that their clothing choices are infinitely more important than anyone else's, because religion.
To indoctrinate their children in the same wacky beliefs, no matter what damage it does them. (And as I've said before, I'm speaking from experience - but this doesn't interest you, because someone who disagrees with you cannot possibly be correct, even though they were once one of those children you so bravely argue should be 'saved' from the evils of secularisation through your pretended interest in personal freedom.)
Never expose their children to competing beliefs, ditto.
To waste everyone else's time on this nonsense when there are more important topics to worry about. Like human extinction.

A hundred years from now most of the ecosystem will be trashed. But at least a few women will still be able to wear a burqa.

Is that really what you want?

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Mon Feb 3rd, 2014 at 12:14:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I just spotted a clue... (none / 0)

This sounds as if you think a burqa ban rescues the ecosystem. What has the list in your post to do with me? Why are you saying I was "exclusively concerned by the 'right' of the religious to:"?

by Katrin on Mon Feb 3rd, 2014 at 06:33:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

On Minority Rights and on Beliefs | 546 comments (546 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Top Diaries

Of Childless Cat Ladies and other matters...

Lest we forget: How extreme violence and division have been...

A blog policeman's lot is not a happy one

The Amazing thing that's happening in the US Presidential...

Hoover's FBI: Patriotism, Nationalism, MAGA, Fascism

Net Zero Energy - August 24, 2024

Recent Diaries

Post WWII: Building a Terror State Inside Europe

Tampered AP-900 Pagers Explode Across Lebanon

Of Childless Cat Ladies and other matters...

Hasbara Content U.S. State Dep't Briefing

Trump's Loomer Agent Provocateur

Dominique De Villepin Se Rend Immortel

Al Jazeera Documentary Egyptian Icon Inji

Jewish Terror and Genocide - Israel Firster

Impunity the New Judeo-Evangelical Coalition

Lest we forget: How extreme violence and division have been...

The EU In Inevitable Economic Backslide

Incoherent On Morals and Law & Order

Dutch Cabinet and Israeli Threats to ICC Prosecutors

Alan Dershowitz the Closet Republican

Israel Murders Peace Activists

GS: MAGA Policy Hits EU Economy Hard

Hoover's FBI: Patriotism, Nationalism, MAGA, Fascism

Trump Victory, Communism, Divine Intervention

City Agriculture - September 4, 2024

President Sees US NATO Policy Succeed in UA

Occasional Series