[Despanan]

Church does not equal theist. There are atheist religions and churches. I bring up Raelians a lot because they're actually militant atheists and responsible for some of those infamous atheist bus ads in the US.

I don't see how this is relevant. If theists form a church they have a much easier time getting tax exempt status than atheists who form similar organizations. That's an example religious privilege.

Wait, so you're showing me a video of a guy who isn't using the oath, and Maddow is saying critics are THREATENING to get him out of office, but they don't have a leg to stand on, so he stayed in office.

Which is what I said to begin with, these old laws are often used in attempts to remove people from office. You doubted that it happened, I gave you evidence.

Dude belongs to a church (which is apparently equal to theist?) and doesn't even describe himself as an atheist. And never lost office. And was very popular getting into office.

And that is relevant HOW? It's one example of these old discriminatory laws being used against those who profess no faith.

The study this links to is pretty faulty. For example, when it says that people say they'd rather their kids marry a black person than an atheist. I really recommend the book Racism Without Racists that points out the problem with such surveys, in that white people like to give what they think the right answers are to appear not racist. Like they'll say they're okay with interracial marriage, BUT....you probably shouldn't...because the kids might be beat up or something. And its funny because I remember two different teachers in two different schools actually told us all in school not to marry Muslims because they'll convert your kids to Islam and kidnap them to Saudi Arabia and you'll never see them again.

...So then it would follow that if they're uncomfortable answering in a manner that makes them seem racist, but comfortable redirecting their hate at atheists we have a serious problem on our hands.

Atheists do not exist alone as a group away from sex, race, class, etc. They can be heterosexual white middle class men and escape prejudice altogether. There isn't a special oppression for them. This survey didn't include new religions or aboriginal religions or surviving African religions like Voodoo or Santeria, can we honestly say people mistrust atheists more than witch doctors? I find this misconception about atheists interesting: "threaten common values from above -- the ostentatiously wealthy who make a lifestyle out of consumption or the cultural elites who think they know better than everyone else." They assume all atheists are white elites like Richard Dawkins. Considering how many militant atheists worship racist, misogynistic men like Dawkins and Hitchens, or how Muslims in France are being brutalized by secularists, I don't wonder where that stereotype comes from; atheists can be extremely oppressive when they belong to oppressive groups. Its almost like religious identities gain privilege from the members of that religious identity, weird.

I like how you used the word "worship". I'd actually say Sam Harris is worse than both Dawkins and Hitchens.

In any case, none of this is really relevant unless we want to play the oppression Olympics. No one exists independent of their race/social class/etc.

Outspoken atheists come from the cultural elite because they have less to lose by being outspoken. If they're oppressive it's because they come from the cultural elite, not because they're atheists, so I'm not exactly sure what you're getting at here.

You know I'm a Buddhist and I don't recall ever receiving such courtesy. When I was atheist I just got uncomfortable silences, never any confrontations, it was when I converted that people got argumentative. My Wiccan friends probably got the most shit. One had the cops called on her for reading a spell book in public. And the police actually took it seriously and confronted her mother about it.

Different situation. I'm a dude - young men tend to be more willing to verbally/violently confront other young men at that age. My read on it was that the Guy had to back down because otherwise it would've lead to a fistfight and he wasn't ready to take it that far in the middle of class.

Also, you're in Canada, I'm in America. At the time I was in the Bible belt in rural Kentucky. This was a town which forced you to say the Lord's Prayer in Public school and posted the ten commandments and articles about secret satanists in the courthouse didn't give two shits if it was illegal.

You're being extremely ignorant. My reality is that 50% of bisexual women are *****, 75% sexually assaulted. I have to live with the notion that I have a really good chance of being ***** and possibly murdered, more than heterosexual women, less than trans* and people of colour.

They don't care about a closet or being polite and not mentioning it. They care about curing us, about killing us, shit even supposed allies just want us queers to assimilate and act more heteroseuxal and normal and proper, because heterosexuality should always remain the norm even if its between two people of the same gender. Its trendy now to say you're all for gay rights but forget anyone who doesn't fit perfectly in a heteronormative mold. And with internalized hatred they give you the rope and you hang yourself with it.

Nothing I've experienced as a queer was ever comparable to my being atheist. I wish being atheist was all I ever had to worry about.

The comparison I made has nothing to do with that - it has to do with the demand to remain in the closet, which IS a problem in the gay community.

My comparison would be wrong if I said that the gay experience was the same as the atheist experience. I didn't say that.

I just told you that my professor (nor could many religious people like Muhammad Ali. Again, atheists could actually get out of military service before Muslims could because Nation of Islam wasn't recognized as a religion, so they couldn't use that as their religious reasoning) couldn't get out of military service that way at the time. And you do get out of military service that way now. Ask MoC how being trans is working out for her in the military. Its still grounds for dishonorable discharge to be trans and in the military, same with drug use.

Saya, none of this is relevant to what I'm talking about. I'm not saying that there isn't oppression targeted at minority religions, LGBTQ, etc. I'm saying that there IS also oppression targeted at atheists and you're saying there isn't.

I would never dismiss your experience with oppression as a woman, or a buddhist or anything else, but you seem dead set on dismissing mine.

That's messed up. You should probably stop doing that.

If you're a member of the War Resistor's League or other pacifist organization, you could easily prove your membership. That pretty much shows that you're a pacifist and didn't just decide that you don't feel like taking the oath. its a problem when you don't belong to any group or organization at all, true, but its equally hard when you don't belong to a church; if I never go to Sangha, how can they write a letter saying that I'm a long time member and totally they know I'm a pacifist? An atheist in the WWL would have an easier time than me.

You've got a point here, but again it's not a point that eliminates religious privilege - it simply points out that the way of proving your status hinges on being a member of a RECOGNIZED group that opposes war, and again - that's a much easier sell when that group opposes it for religious reasons.

Because you're a white cishet middle class dude, people tend to like you and not want you dead. Faith in humanity isn't so much a problem for you like it is for me. Some days I feel like faith in a higher being is more realistic than faith that people are ever going to change in my life time.

While I sympathize, that doesn't make it the same thing as religious faith.

Look Saya, if you want me to say that you're more oppressed than me I'll say it - YOU ARE. DO you want me to say that I'm more privileged than you? I am. Do you want me to say that it's to a very large degree? Sure, yes, you're right It is.

That still doesn't invalidate my experience and the experience of people like me who are faithless, and it is inappropriate for you to try to do that. Again, I would never say something like that about you or your experience - and if I did in the past make a mistake like that I'd apologize for it now because I recognize that that's wrong, and that's not who I am anymore.

But none of that, and nothing that you have brought to the table gives you the right to dismiss someone like you have been. It's just wrong, and I would hope you give it some consideration in the future.