Religious followers and defenders often assert atheists to be the ones who are inflicting their disbelief on others; that atheists purposely attack the idea of a god to convert others with full intention. This is an extremely hypocritical accusation for the religious to consider. Why? Let us think about the longevity of religious imposition, obtrusion and infliction.
For centuries to millenniums, organised religion has been enforced on decent human beings whom prevailed to survive – decent human beings that were our ancestors, widespread across every family tree. The dark ages, full of primitive ideas in correspondence with lust for power, was an epoch we have now overcome, yet beliefs that dominated this era still strive with obstinacy. Powerful leaders, monarchs and authoritarians ordered classes below their hierarchy to forfeit the very ideas of freedom, equality and free will; forcing them to tolerate and obey the rules of the leaders that are of higher status.
As a frequent user of social networking websites, among my acquaintances and friends, I unceasingly witness social media shares, statuses, videos and images displaying their thanks for God; wishing God will heal a poor injured child; wishing God will prevent the killings of innocents in wars that are mostly and ironically motivated by religious nonsense itself; thanking God for allegedly allowing them to wake up the next morning. It is at a constant and it is endless. But, here is the irony: Christians tend to post a lot about how much they love God and how non-believers are devil-worshippers, yet when an atheist shares an image with a caption that argues their belief, then the atheist is attacked for being so offensive, imposing and loud. The hypocrisy is tremendous. I was contacted by a family friend through a social networking platform who said it personally offended her that I shared an image representing secularism, yet she allows herself to share media regarding angels and Jesus! I have also received comments stating that I haven’t a free right to post against religious harm. Would, what I label, the religion-defender, express this view if they had lived in the 1950s during the civil rights movement? Would a person state assertively, “you haven’t a right to express the harm of inequality” This is a huge fallacy; a major one that is worthy of ridicule and to mention its contradiction.
It would be safe for the religion-defender to think thoroughly before they assert such crude statements that relate to atheists being the imposers. Since the religion-defender is sensitive on the subject of religious doctrine, only then they will become defensive about a topic they have little rudimentary knowledge. But, that is never the case. Although the non-religious population is increasing so immensely, secularists will still be accused of imposition until we reach generations that do not tolerate the harm caused by organised religion. Metaphorically speaking, secularists are the well-guarded fence of protection whilst the striving religious are the attackers. The religious who attempt to convert populations are trying their hardest to knock down the fence by throwing all kinds of negativity at the wall of secularism but it stands strong and tall. The secular fence is just trying to protect the innocents whom are victims of religious indoctrination and oppression. Most secularists advocate the practising of religion privately but it is only a problem when you try to lob God at others. Keep your God, keep your superstition. Don’t throw bibles or Quran’s in the laps of your children whom do not wholly understand the difference between fact or fiction and how it is measured – just don’t try to incorporate it into society otherwise one will be confronted in an intellectual, friendly manner that strives for peace and not religious harm. - Daniel C. Mees (The Blog of Sincerity) |
Daniel C. MeesThe Blog of Sincerity, featuring contrarian, polemical and critical writings on politics, religion, social philosophy, left-right spectrum, books, sociopolitical concerns, secularism and such - by Daniel C. Mees.
Facebook FeedArchives
January 2017
Featured Posts |