Atheism And Anger

[debrand]

I hesitated to ask this question. Several times I wrote out this thread only to erase my post.

 

On the thread about the former fundie pastor, it was mentioned that he was angry. I didn't see the anger in his writings. It is possible that I have a blind spot.

 

Here is my question.

 

What makes an atheist sound angry to you? Is it criticizing Christainity in any way or something specific? Could you provide links? The reason that I'd perfer links instead of quotes is because I want to read the statements in context. Although if you only have a quote, that is fine too.

 

I've put off reading Dawkins because I've been told that he is angry.

[Guest Anonymous]

I didn't particularly view the ex-Pastor as angry either; I think the main issue that was being raised was that he was telling his life story without any significant explanation of why he lost his faith.

I identify as an atheist and don't particularly see a causal link between atheism and anger.

I'm not sure why you would avoid a writer on other people's say so, but would suggest You Tube as a way in to becoming more familiar with Dawkins (who I often find to be very amusing):

Sj-TDgvbbnk

[Doomed Harlottt]

Any one who is unrelentingly critical of something will get accused of being "an angry person." Feminists and atheists get this all the to time. Calling someone "angry" is a way of discrediting that person's opinion, the implication being that the person is motivated by an irrational emotionalism. It also implies that the person has a generally unpleasant character.

In the case of atheists, there is an implication that the person has spiritual problems and is just lashing out against God.

That said, I think Hitchens and Dawkins ARE genuinely angry about certain things, like children growing up with the fear of eternal hellfire, or women and the poor being deliberately deprived of adequate contraception, or efforts to undermine science education in the name of religion. I don't think there is anything wrong with expressing anger in appropriate circumstances.

[Doomed Harlottt]

AnnieC, ha ha ha ha!!!!!

[CynicMom]

If you are concerned about "angry atheists" I recommend starting out with the writings of Sam Harris. His book The End of Faith is as soft on religion as you can find, and his argument (agreeing that religious people have deeply-felt spiritual experiences that are as yet unexplained by science) can be seen as more friendly. If you can read his book without problem then go ahead and read Dawkins, as many of Dawkins arguments can be read in Harris in "softer" form.

[Tanaqui]

I tend to get quite worked up and angry during some Christian discussions in real life. I feel much my anger comes from the years of stupid questions, harassment, ostracism, judgment, and suspicion I've been subject to due to being a Heathen. That and being bombarded by Christian propaganda through various forms of media not limited to billboards, commercials, and pamphlets. After a while, anytime someone brings up the subject, even in a nice way, you just want to scream, "FOR FUCK'S SAKE, CAN'T YOU JUST LEAVE ME THE HELL ALONE?!".

[latraviata]

Any one who is unrelentingly critical of something will get accused of being "an angry person." Feminists and atheists get this all the to time. Calling someone "angry" is a way of discrediting that person's opinion, the implication being that the person is motivated by an irrational emotionalism. It also implies that the person has a generally unpleasant character.

In the case of atheists, there is an implication that the person has spiritual problems and is just lashing out against God.

That said, I think Hitchens and Dawkins ARE genuinely angry about certain things, like children growing up with the fear of eternal hellfire, or women and the poor being deliberately deprived of adequate contraception, or efforts to undermine science education in the name of religion. I don't think there is anything wrong with expressing anger in appropriate circumstances.

I absolutely agree!

[latraviata]

I didn't particularly view the ex-Pastor as angry either; I think the main issue that was being raised was that he was telling his life story without any significant explanation of why he lost his faith.

I identify as an atheist and don't particularly see a causal link between atheism and anger.

I'm not sure why you would avoid a writer on other people's say so, but would suggest You Tube as a way in to becoming more familiar with Dawkins (who I often find to be very amusing):

Sj-TDgvbbnk

Some friend got me this absolutely priceless 'Richard Dawkins reading his hatemail' I particularly like the cosy settings, the roaring fire, soft atmospheric lighting, Dawkins with his feet up :D :D

[debrand]

If you are concerned about "angry atheists" I recommend starting out with the writings of Sam Harris. His book The End of Faith is as soft on religion as you can find, and his argument (agreeing that religious people have deeply-felt spiritual experiences that are as yet unexplained by science) can be seen as more friendly. If you can read his book without problem then go ahead and read Dawkins, as many of Dawkins arguments can be read in Harris in "softer" form.

Because Harris books were the only ones of the sort found in my library(among a large religious/Christian section) I have read him.

I am coming to the conclusion that angry is used to describe anyone who isn't silent about their lack of faith.

[valsa]

I am coming to the conclusion that angry is used to describe anyone who isn't silent about their lack of faith.

"Angry" is used to describe anyone who isn't silent about the priviledges and abuses of the majority, whether "angry atheists", "angry women", "angry homosexuals", or "angry minorities" depending on the issue.

[Alecto]

There are some atheists who can't pass up the chance to provoke an argument with someone who is religious. When I hear "angry atheist" that is what comes to mind. They are, in mindset, not that different than many fundies who want to provoke an argument with folks who don't believe as they do. It's nothing to do with their beliefs and more to do with personality traits and immaturity.

TL:DR Every group has their assholes.

[goldennotebook]

I wouldn't necessarily call Dawkins "angry", but I do think he's kind of a tool after the brouhaha when he told the feminist skeptic that she shouldn't complain about being hit on in an elevator late at night, because women are mutilated in other parts of the world: http://www.science20.com/countering_tac ... g_it-80712

[FaustianSlip]

I think for me it's mostly tone- that goes for anyone, not just atheists. I have plenty of friends who are atheist or agnostic; someone not believing in God and being open about that lack of belief doesn't bother me at all. Giving me the, "You're a gullible moron" treatment for believing in God does bother me, but then, I wouldn't take a proverbial dump on an atheist for not believing in a higher power, either, so to me, that's just good manners. It's like with the "Merry Christmas" thing. If someone just randomly says, "Hey, merry Christmas!" I don't take offense at all; they're just wishing me a happy holiday and assuming I celebrate. No biggie. However, if someone gets up in my face after I say "Happy holidays" or something and goes, "Yeah? Well Merry Christmas," I know they're just being a douche. I'd like to think that I've met enough assholes in my life to be able to differentiate between someone who's being one and someone who's just going about their business.

All of that said, I'd say atheists have reason to be angry. I just read an article about how hard it is to come out of the atheism closet, they're routinely villified, especially by the religious right, and there's very little public tolerance for their beliefs (or lack thereof). I mean, I get a little frustrated and pissed sometimes over the attitude that of course you're Christian- who isn't? But at least I'm represented somewhere- at least I can say, "No, actually, I'm Jewish," and probably not get a ration of shit over it, if only because people are fully aware that that kind of crap is not on these days. A lot of atheists can't say the same. The doesn't mean I'm going to put up with someone getting up in my grill, but I can completely understand why some atheists are fed the fuck up. Hell, I believe in God, and I'm fed the fuck up with a lot of the bullshit of the religious right.

Also, I agree with Alecto. Mostly because I'm a firm believer that assholery occurs regardless of religious denomination (or lack thereof), and most of the fundie douchebags we snark would probably be just as douchey if they were Jewish, Muslim, atheist or anything else. Fundamentalism may attract asshats, but I don't think it solely creates them- I'm starting to think that that part's genetic.

[Avalondaughter]

Any one who is unrelentingly critical of something will get accused of being "an angry person." Feminists and atheists get this all the to time. Calling someone "angry" is a way of discrediting that person's opinion, the implication being that the person is motivated by an irrational emotionalism. It also implies that the person has a generally unpleasant character.

In the case of atheists, there is an implication that the person has spiritual problems and is just lashing out against God.

That said, I think Hitchens and Dawkins ARE genuinely angry about certain things, like children growing up with the fear of eternal hellfire, or women and the poor being deliberately deprived of adequate contraception, or efforts to undermine science education in the name of religion. I don't think there is anything wrong with expressing anger in appropriate circumstances.

I read The God Delusion and while I agree with DH that he is definitely angry (and rightfully so) about the way science is undermined and children are indoctrinated, I found him to be full of admiration and appreciation for the natural world. Much of the book is an homage to nature, science and the natural order of things. It can be quite beautiful really.

I think the issues that anger them make them no angrier than a fundie worried about the country being taken over by godless, liberal, science loving, evolution-touting, global-warming-believing, communists.

[latraviata]

I hesitated to ask this question. Several times I wrote out this thread only to erase my post.

On the thread about the former fundie pastor, it was mentioned that he was angry. I didn't see the anger in his writings. It is possible that I have a blind spot.

Here is my question.

What makes an atheist sound angry to you? Is it criticizing Christainity in any way or something specific? Could you provide links? The reason that I'd perfer links instead of quotes is because I want to read the statements in context. Although if you only have a quote, that is fine too.

I've put off reading Dawkins because I've been told that he is angry.

Is he angry??f8U_JveHS8E

[LynnKaboom]

I was laughing so hard at that Dawkins video. There's something about seeing this grandfatherly British man reading these profane emails with a straight face that just cracks me up.

[Swamptribe]

I was recently told I was an angry atheist by a poster on these very forums. It ends up being a fall back position for many Christians when they really don't know how to deal with non-believers. There are some good explanations as to why posted above. (y'all are so smart)

It's funny, but many non-believers do become angry not with god, or Christianity, but with Christians. Because some of them can be so annoying. (and yes, some atheists can too) I've tried to explain the difference, but sadly, it's frequently futile; see paragraph above.

I have much more respect for Christians who can honestly debate with a non-believer without falling into the judgmental mindset that is so common. Over the years I've learned much from those who can, or at least try, to honestly address my questions and issues with their religious beliefs.

[kb2]

If you want more Dawkins in youtube form, I would suggest watching all the "Root of All Evil" videos.

He doesn't strike me as angry in those videos, more polite but firm. At most of his talks and whatnot (that I've seen) he usually maintains the polite but firm way of speaking, but doesn't really get angry. But I haven't taken the time to actually read any of this books, so maybe when you're not looking at this polite grandfatherly gentleman (as LynnKaboom said) what he says seems angrier.

I am so, so, so, so disappointed in him for his part in Elevatorgate. So disappointed.

[0KidsAndHappy]

Dawkins and Neil deGrasse Tyson are two of my favorite people to watch on YouTube. They can come off as condescending, in a way. I can understand it though. I couldn't imagine being that smart and having people tell me something I could easily disprove, like "The world is only 6000 years old!"

[Bookworm]

a few months ago a friend of mine showed me this video that has some good ideas about why Christians are always accusing atheists of anger (as well as so many insults). Don't know how to imbed, sorry.

LOL so much at the Maher one!

[Austin]

There are some atheists who can't pass up the chance to provoke an argument with someone who is religious. When I hear "angry atheist" that is what comes to mind. They are, in mindset, not that different than many fundies who want to provoke an argument with folks who don't believe as they do. It's nothing to do with their beliefs and more to do with personality traits and immaturity.

TL:DR Every group has their assholes.

I agree with this. I think some atheists become frustrated (and reasonably so to an extent) with the constant references to God in our society. I am not an atheist (agnostic at the moment), but I imagine it would be like people standing around talking about Santa Claus for me. After a bit of that, I'm sure I would want to scream, "Listen you idiots, there IS NO Santa Claus". Not a perfect analogy, but hopefully conveys my point. Even as an agnostic, the constant injection of faith into discourse at every level is off-putting.

As much as mutual respect is a good thing, I think it's very hard for some atheists to respect the faith of others, which is how Dawkins came across to me (and Bill Maher is like this, too). Kind of like, "If you're so intellectually challenged that you believe in a deity in the sky, how can I even take you seriously on anything else?"

This is not one-sided, as we all know. Many if not most religious people are intolerant of atheists, obviously.

[Shoobydoo]

I also think that a large number of people don't know the difference between Atheism and Antitheism. There is a huge difference, but a lot of people lump us together into one group. I've encountered pressure in some corners of the internet (on Deviant Art, of all places!) pushing that in order to be a "Good" Atheist you have to be Antitheist and hate everything that has to do with religion. Kind of the godless equivalent of being a fundie, I guess. It's completely ridiculous, and I can only assume that person had some kind of ax to grind. Luckily none of the other Atheists I know in person are infected with Teh Crayzee.

Attention world at large! Most Atheists are not Antitheists! Most of us just want to be left alone!

Of course, there's also the good old "why are you so angry at God?" question... :roll:

[emmiedahl]

As a person who is neither an atheist nor a Christian, I find that Christians are infinitely ruder in general. More proselytizing, more likely to belittle my beliefs. I have only had a few issues with atheists in my daily life, but it is almost impossible and very rare for me to have a close friendship with a Christian. Maybe other members of minority religions can weigh in, but I find the atheists anecdotally to be more respectful as a whole.

Disclaimer: This is a broad, broad generalization not meant to be applied to anyone here.

[StarrieEyedKat]

I think some atheists become frustrated (and reasonably so to an extent) with the constant references to God in our society. I am not an atheist (agnostic at the moment), but I imagine it would be like people standing around talking about Santa Claus for me. After a bit of that, I'm sure I would want to scream, "Listen you idiots, there IS NO Santa Claus". Not a perfect analogy, but hopefully conveys my point. Even as an agnostic, the constant injection of faith into discourse at every level is off-putting.

That's a very apt explanation, at least for me. It's very frustrating to constantly be surrounded by Christianity and references to God, then when someone finds out you're an athiest (even family members) they act all astonished. "You don't believe in God?! But how do you explain ___________? (insert random "fact" from the Bible.) How can you not believe in Jesus?!" It's rude and condescending, and it makes it even more annoying when you're confronted with it on a daily basis, even on a smaller scale.

And don't get me started about facebook statuses thanking God for a big sports win or something. :snooty:

[Sola]

I don't consider Dawkins to be an angry person. Of course fundies like to portray him as an angry person. If anything at all he can come across as pitying slightly. But not angry.

Now if I had a £1 for each time I had been told on Ray Comforts blog by his sheeple that I am angry at 'god' I would be a very rich woman indeed!