10 Scariest States to Be An Atheist

AtheistsInteresting article from Greta Christina on Alternet last year. How many people agree with the list?

Let’s be clear. It’s not like it’s easy to be an atheist anywhere in the U.S. Atheists are the most distrusted and disliked of all minority groups — more than blacks, Hispanics, Jews, Muslims, immigrants, and gays and lesbians — and polls show that Americans are less likely to vote for an atheist than they are for a person in any other minority or marginalized category. And this hostility can have serious consequences, in the form of harassment, bullying, ostracism, vandalism, alienation from family, loss of jobs, and more.

But to be honest, there are parts of the country where being an atheist really isn’t all that awful. Heck, I live in one of them. There’s some bigotry, some discrimination, a fair amount of misunderstanding and even hostility … but all things considered, it’s pretty okay. And then, there are some parts of the country where being an atheist sucks.

Let’s talk about a few of those, shall we?

More from Greta Christina on Alternet

56 Comments on "10 Scariest States to Be An Atheist"

  1. Hadrian999 | Feb 21, 2012 at 2:19 am |

    My guess would be the great white american redoubt  that preppers/survivalists are trying to build http://www.survivalblog.com/redoubt.html

    • eyeoftheaxis | Feb 21, 2012 at 1:12 pm |

      When I tell city people that an old school mate has an M-16, stockpiles food, and is praying for the end of the world so Jesus will return, they think I’m crazy. I see a huge difference from urban to rural areas. I live in the city, but do a lot of work for weeks and months at a time in the heart of Hobunk USA. In the city they think I’m crazy, talking out my ass, as if I’m repeating some urban myth. / In the hobunks they think I’m an idiot for NOT believing that Obama is the Antichrist, or that Jesus is coming soon so you better have a shitload of firepower because the zombie socialists are coming first. With them all the trials and tribulations that lead up to the return of Jesus. Thinking of the future or for others is reason enough to run you out of town. ( socialist & atheist ) It is like they realize that if Jesus is not returning like they think, they are really fkin up… so “don’t even suggest he is not returning any moment now” is the default setting. Xtianity lets them avoid any responsibility for the future or for about half of the shit they do. — On the other hand some of my city peeps could not survive without shopping. Personally I think prepping is not such a bad idea, but take a big pass on the Jesus stuff.

      • Hadrian999 | Feb 21, 2012 at 5:29 pm |

         prepping is great but good luck finding a group that isn’t full of people that wanna cram the dogma down your throat

        • eyeoftheaxis | Feb 22, 2012 at 9:45 pm |

          No doubt! I avoid them now, and can only imagine how crazed they will be if / when SHTF.

  2. Dammit! Mississippi’s always supposed to be worse than Louisiana. I suppose it’s not the easiest state to be an atheist in though. 

  3. *Makes note not to settle in any of those states*

    • I’ll just wear a crucifix and praise whoever the nuts I’m trying to ingratiate myself with are praising.

  4. i am so glad i am not an american. this religious stuff is just stupid, period. it is a form of idiocy, a mental deficiency. why nobody tell those guys they are primitive cavemen with their heavenly father? no wonder your country is ruled by a bunch of thugs. majority voting for them are just mentally retarded.

    • UnionJackJamesBond | Feb 22, 2012 at 3:12 pm |

      Once again, my voice is going hoarse from this, can you actually provide an argument with even unsubstantiated evidence? I mean, even if your argument fell through, I would at least like for you, or someone else, to TRY and create an actual argument, not just some childish, emotionally based insult that really means nothing in the grand scheme of things. Seriously, it is more an insult that you won’t try and use reason to attack religion than anything.

      • graytiger | Feb 24, 2012 at 5:28 pm |

        as atheists we believe in what science shows to be justified. So its more the other way around. As a believer its up to you to try to show that a believe in such beings as God and his angels is justified.

        • UnionJackJamesBond | Feb 24, 2012 at 5:34 pm |

          And our beliefs have been justified. To us. That’s where the idea of “make your own decision” comes in. There is no science on Earth to disprove religion, just things that create more debate around religion, but that sometimes helps us to understand our gods better. Another issue as well is this; science is a fickle thing to believe in, as it changes every single day. What once was a common rule in the scientific community can be destroyed in a matter of seconds, depending on the discovery and how quickly it was made. And please, I have heard that pathetic argument of “you need to prove your God” used before. The truth is I, and no one else, can. But, I shouldn’t worry to much about that, because if you need me to try and “prove” my God before you can disprove him, that proves that you lack the ability to actually disprove him, just attack the statments I make. Funny, sounds a lot like American politics.

          • UnionJackJamesBond | Feb 24, 2012 at 5:37 pm |

            PS. Neither you nor the person I first replied to provided sound reason for an argument. Actually, I retract that. Neither of you provided an argument. How can you say science proves anything when you can’t even make a valid statement or argument?

          • graytiger | Feb 24, 2012 at 5:56 pm |

            On the ‘lack the ability to disprove’: I also can’t disprove on factual grounds the existence of elves, unicorns, ghosts, … Does that imply they all exist? Or does that imply any reason to believe in these beings? If you are a christian, then you accept the definition of God as being all good and all powerfull. Then you run into the well known contradiction posed by the problem of evil.  So on logical grounds your belief is unjustified. Except if you imply by ‘to us’ that you believe that for you the usual rules of logic and justification do not apply.

          • UnionJackJamesBond | Feb 24, 2012 at 6:05 pm |

            “On the ‘lack the ability to disprove’: I also can’t disprove on factual grounds the existence of elves, unicorns, ghosts, … Does that imply they all exist?” No, it implies that you cannot prove or disprove their existence. I have had no experiences with those creatures, so I do not believe they exist (although the unicorn thing I am iffy on, being that they were in the Bible).  “If you are a christian, then you accept the definition of God as being all good and all powerfull. Then you run into the well known contradiction posed by the problem of evil.” Um, since when did the existence of God mean that there should be no evil? If there is light, there should be dark, if day there should be night, black for white, East for West, Satan for God, Evil for Good. The existence of evil is a side effect of free choice. Humans have free choice, therefore they can be evil. God (by Christian standards) gave us free will so that we could have true love for him, but to have true love there must also be the ability of choice, which allows us to either truly love God or to not.

          • UnionJackJamesBond | Feb 24, 2012 at 6:15 pm |

            Of course, all of that last part is taking into consideration that you believe in God. Listen, I wouldn’t even bother debating this if I were you. It has been beaten with a stick and always comes out the same; no side is proven or disproven and no one will walk away from their beliefs. You are beating a sack of water hoping it will come out as dirt, and it isn’t going to happen.

          • graytiger | Feb 24, 2012 at 6:36 pm |

            Our replies got mixed up. I replied in the post beginning with: If God is ‘all good’
            And I was once a christian but I became an atheist when I realized that christianity and other religions were unjustified. Not because I lack an experience of God. 

          • UnionJackJamesBond | Feb 24, 2012 at 7:04 pm |

            Sorry, I just posted mine too, a reply to your last one lol! You know, it’s ironic because (and I’m not trying to be dramatic by saying this, this is the truth) I used to be a bit of an atheist. Well, actually I was more of a theist for a while (believing in all gods), but I was atheist for a period. And you know what? I really had no reason to be. Then, I had a very important thing happen in my life, and it just seemed like it had to be God. Of course, I didn’t believe in him right away either, I still clung to my many gods in hopes of covering all of my bases. But, after going to a church for a while, I basically just floated away from my theism. It wasn’t some great realization when I came to believe in God, I don’t think I actually ever did realize it until I had already been Christian for a few months. More recently though, I’ve had a bit of a falling out with that church, not because of God, but because of religion, internal politics and men. Just wondering though, were you raised Christian?

          • graytiger | Feb 24, 2012 at 8:35 pm |

            – opposites: the existence of some opposites doesn’t imply a law of opposites. If God couldn’t readicate all evil because some kind of law would dictate that if good exists evil would also have to exist, then this law would supersede the power of God. That si again in contradiction with the christian definition of God as all powerfull. But even so, it is not even necessary that God eradicates all evil. He could very well eradicate just the evil that is not caused by our fee will. Such as the suffering of children. He doesn’t. So your law, is not necessary or sufficient as an argument. The rest of your argument against point 1) is answered by my point 2) on free will. – As to your reply on my 2):   Your answer, if I read it correctly, seems to come down to the fact that you don’t know. But in fact you do know. God is infinitely good, and maybe not a superman, but much more, he is infinitely powerfull. So he has an unimaginable (to us at least) desire to do good, and he can do it. Even if I concede to you your point on free will, there is still an enormeous amount of evil left that God could eradicate. Besides the bible is full with God’s so called interventions. Or do you suppose he stopped for some kind of reason : ).                – It seems to me that in the end your faith is based on a ‘I don’t know’ position. Which is kind of weak to base your whole life upon. And yes, I was raised as a christian. A catholic in fact. 
            This reply space is getting narrower and narrower. Seemingly not really equipped for deep going discussions : )       

          • UnionJackJamesBond | Feb 27, 2012 at 1:27 pm |

            Yes, it does seem the space is getting a little to narrow. XD Well, I suppose I’ll leave my last thoughts then. You are correct in saying some opposites do not make a law (and thank you for actually seeing that as inductive reasoning, which tends to have flaws) however, from a faith or religious standpoint, it seems only logical that the existence of good means that evil would likely follow. Many have proposed that because God is all good, the thinks he does not like are evil, or perhaps that because he has knowledge of what is good, he also has knowledge of what is evil. That doesn’t make him evil, it just means he knows what is, and, religiously speaking, it seems that Satan had that same knowledge as well or at least had free will. Now, another point, you claim that God could eliminate some evil without taking away free will, and I will play “devil’s advocate” and say you may be right. However, coming from the semi-neutral stand point I’m going to say that I don’t know if that is true. Yes, God is all powerful, but Satan still has some influence. He can take a bad situation and make it worse, while God can take that situation and find some good. Also, a question from myself, with all the technology and intelligence man has, why haven’t we done what we can to put a stop to some evil? Clearly we haven’t done all we can because while America was swimming in luxury for the past century, and Europe centuries before that, Africa was still a giant slum. We could have fixed that YEARS ago, but we didn’t bother. Now, why does God need to be the one to fix it when we easily can? I’m not trying to take the focus off of God here, but saying “why doesn’t God help” just sounds like a cop out argument, like something you turn to when nothing else is on your side. On the note of God’s interventions in the Bible, and how it seems to have stopped, some people do feel that God “intervenes” in their lives, but in all honesty, do we really need to have our lives fixed? The whole point of the New Testament is about how our souls have been saved and how we can go to heavan, which is constantly mentioned to be better than our lives on Earth. Now, that isn’t to say our lives are meaningless, just that heavan is better. Whether this has anything to do with why evil still happens on Earth I can’t say, but most can’t. I pray I make it to heavan and I can be a better person to get there, and I also hope that God is willing to answer that question for me, but I guess we’ll see. You were raised Catholic? Forgive me for saying this, but it does explain a lot. Young Catholic people tend to walk away from Catholicism after they get older (and wiser) for multitudes of reasons. I’m not trying to judge Catholics, but they don’t have a good reputation, and there had to be something about it that made you stop liking it pretty quickly on. I suppose most religions are based on “I don’t knows”, but so is science. Religion and Faith are a good metaphore for life itself, much like school in fact. You are always learning new things, making new discoveries, and I don’t think that will stop until the day the Earth ends. I don’t have much else to say, I don’t really like debating the topic of religion using religion, because it is such a grey area with lots of missing answers, quite like philosophy I suppose, but I will admit that I enjoyed this because you actually brought up an EXCELLENT argument. Granted, I have heard this reason before, but nobody has really used it in a debate. They tend to try “disproving” religion with “science”, and sometimes even the reverse, but this got down to the basics I suppose, and I really liked that. Like I said, there isn’t anything else I can say but thank you for this opporotunity to learn, I hope that it was as much so for you as it was for me, but I have no expectations. I wish you the best of luck in future debates and the most fullfilling life possible! 🙂 PS. I pretty much already said this, but I just once more want to say thank you for bringing a reasonable argument to the table and using your logic, because I have had the misfortune of debating with some “atheists”  that are extremely bigoted and can’t seem to understand the concept of rational arguments. XD

          • graytiger | Feb 27, 2012 at 7:53 pm |

            As human beings we are limited in many ways. So our knowledge is also never absolute. But as knowledge goes there is knowledge that is more justified than other knowledge. And some ways of justifying are much more reliable than others. The subject we are debating is important and central to life. Logic and the methods of science have proved to be the most reliable ways of justifying. Based on this it seems to me that atheism is much more justified than religion. It also seems to me that anyone who bases his view of life on such a basis should strive to debate in the same free, rational and critical way, or otherwise run the risk of being inconsequent. I also liked debating this with you. Maybe we’ll meet again on another forum or another debate. Take care.  

          • graytiger | Feb 27, 2012 at 8:13 pm |

            Just a little addition. Yes, science also says ‘I don’t know’. But only as a starting point. From there on it builds a construction of reliable knowledge based on tested and tried methods. Moreover it constantly investigates itself in a critical way.While religion is based on intuition, authority, mysticism and other very unreliable methods. A very fundamental difference. But on to my post below.

          • graytiger | Feb 26, 2012 at 8:47 am |

            replied, see above or below : ) if you are still interested in discussion

          • UnionJackJamesBond | Feb 24, 2012 at 6:22 pm |

            One more thing;  “Except if you imply by ‘to us’ that you believe that for you the usual rules of logic and justification do not apply.” No, the same rules apply to us. 🙂 We believe in what we experience. Some people “experience” strange things (many things we doubt their credibility on) and of course many religious people have experienced gods of a sort. The same applies to you; you have experience a lack of God, and therefore you do not believe he exists. Part of your experience is also based upon “science” I suppose, but I still feel it is fickle when I have seen many Christian science movies that pose numerous arguments. Now, that isn’t to say the arguments are true, just that they exist.

          • graytiger | Feb 24, 2012 at 6:28 pm |

            If God is ‘all good’ then he would eraddicate all evil. The fact that he doen’t implies that he is or, not all good, or not all powerfull. In both cases the God as defined by christiantity doesn’t exist. I don’t know how acquinted you are with this ancient philosophical problem but until now no christian has been able to reject it. You seem to try to give two counter arguments: 1) positioning some kind of law of the obligatory existence of opposites. This is easily rejected: before the so called fall of the angels there was no Satan, and no evil. If there was no sun, there would be no day. And so on, and so on, … Such a law of opposites just doesn’t exist. 2) An argument on free will. This is also no valid argument because  there exists  lot of evil (for example newborn innocent children that die of horrible diseases) that has nothing to do with free will, and which could very well be eradicated by God while leaving our free will intact. Suppose your neighbour would see that your little child would run unatteded towards your swimmingpool, and would, if not rescued, drown. If your neighbour then would remain inactive. Would he not be responsible for the childs death?  Just replace ‘neighbour’ with ‘God’. If God is supposed to be infinitely good and infinitely powerfull, is then his negiligence not infinitely more criminal?

          • UnionJackJamesBond | Feb 24, 2012 at 6:56 pm |

            “positioning some kind of law of the obligatory existence of opposites. This is easily rejected: before the so called fall of the angels there was no Satan, and no evil. If there was no sun, there would be no day. And so on, and so on, … Such a law of opposites just doesn’t exist.” If such a law does not exist, then why are there so many opposites I wonder? Perhaps it is not a law with all things, but the existence of pure good meant that something opposite had to exist, and at any rate there was evil before the fall of the angles. How do you think Satan fell in the first place? And that evil existed, as many have said, because of the knowledge of good and evil, hence the name of the tree Adam and Eve ate from. Also, God could easily eradicate all evil, here is how; Kill all of mankind or turn them into robots without minds of their own. I’m sorry, but there is just as much logic behind spirituality as there is behind the workings of the universe. God can’t eliminate evil without us losing our free will, and if we lose that we can no longer love him truly. “2) An argument on free will. This is also no valid argument because  there exists  lot of evil (for example newborn innocent children that die of horrible diseases) that has nothing to do with free will, and which could very well be eradicated by God while leaving our free will intact.” Perhaps God could do that, he could also shoot down control the weather so it is always exactly as we need it. We could live in a perfect world, but we don’t. Why? Once more, you can trace this back to Adam and Eve. God punished them. A child dying, however, isn’t punishment, it is something else God did; he created nature. Why is it that we are the only planet that can sustain life for millions of lightyears? Because of nature and logic. No other planets can survive because nature dictates what conditions we need to survive. I’m sorry, maybe you think that God controls everything, but that would be a misconception, just like thinking the President of the US controls everything. Clearly the President does not, and God is the same. So why doesn’t God control everything? Maybe because that would make it impossible for us to truly have a choice in believing in him or not, or maybe because he wants this universe to run scientifically. I don’t really know, because the Bible doesn’t really say. Is it man’s fault, or God’s? I suppose you, once more, must decide for yourself. “Suppose your neighbour would see that your little child would run unatteded towards your swimmingpool, and would, if not rescued, drown. If your neighbour then would remain inactive. Would he not be responsible for the childs death?  Just replace ‘neighbour’ with ‘God’. If God is supposed to be infinitely good and infinitely powerfull, is then his negiligence not infinitely more criminal?” The difference is that my neighbor let my child drown, not God. I’m sorry, but I honestly don’t expect him to come down and grab my child out of the pool like superman. You think God is superman, or perhaps that we think he is superman. Quite the contrary. We believe that once we have died, there is a better life waiting in heaven and that he provided the key for us. This isn’t about living or dying my friend, this is about your soul. All of the problems you hate WILL go away, but not until all the suffering on Earth is over with. Then, life will be perfect. But, this is still only my opinion. I cannot prove anything to you, only you can. You’ve brought up some good points, so I thank you for this chance to learn a few new things. Keep this in mind though, nobody, religious or not, has all the answers, so maybe you can ask me a question I don’t have the answer to (you already did to a degree), but that does not mean I am wrong for having no answer. If that were the case, then would you be wrong for not knowing why particles have mass? Sure, it could be the Higgs Boson, but do they know yet?

    •  its not just america who has religious problems! lol Look at the middle east, and Egypt to only name 2…. come on now. The whole world has different problems and nobody’s come up with a perfect system yet…

      •  Um…Swayla…Egypt is in the middle east. That makes only one reference. Egypt and Syria would be an example of TWO separate things. OK?

    • That’s fine, keep telling yourself you’re fine in the UK. More cool American shit for me.

      –Atheist American

    • Anti_Secret_Squirrel | May 13, 2012 at 11:46 am |

       They just like to use religion or lack of religion against you.  I know that being agnostic and atheist is not really acceptable in the South.  I do think that it is stupid.  If someone wants to practice their religion do it where you are not interfering with the other people who do not want to do that.  I don’t understand why being atheist makes you less trust able.  I agree it is stupid and going back to the “dark ages’ or times of the cave man. I do not need a “GOD” or “religion” standing over me for me to make the right decision.  I make the right decision because I have ethics and the biggest thing I use is “would I like that done to me” and what are the consequences of the action.

  5. Gregory Wyrdmaven | Feb 21, 2012 at 9:18 am |

    OMG…atheists are now considering themselves a minority which is being discriminated against?

    Well, I believe idiots should be discriminated against as a whole.  I just wish idiots were in the minority.

    • Atheists ARE a minority that is being discriminated against. 15% of the population – that’s a minority. The fact that you can be fired, not hired, and even barred from seeking office in this country – that’s discrimination.

      • You don’t understand… He doesn’t like atheists, therefore they cannot be victims of prejudice.  Q.E.D.

      • Theodorustheatheist | Feb 21, 2012 at 1:01 pm |

         Cause you know, as the article says they are the most hated discriminated against group… so they must regularly fear for their own life and safety while walking home from school and work? While they’re at school and work? There must be some harmful term such as f***ot or n***er loaded with hundreds of years of history and abuse behind it. They must be segregated into ghettos and regularly depicted in almost all major media forms as prejudiced clichés.

        Atheists do receive discrimination but to quantify them on the level of other minority groups is absurd and downright offensive. This is not oppression olympics. Atheists and journalists don’t need to play up yellow journalism to feel entitled and for sensationalist ends. I’m sorry but at the end of the day, women, LGBT, people of color, animals and the environment are literally entities that are being faced with extreme oppression and destruction. Atheism, not so much. Get a grip. Sometimes certain atheists tactics are no different than the fundamentalist christians they claim to despise.

        • Butter Knife | Feb 21, 2012 at 1:07 pm |

           Largely agreed. Though I do have to point out that atheists probably do qualify for “regularly depicted in almost all major media forms as prejudiced clichés.” That’s easily the least severe item on the list.

        • Catsnbanjos | Feb 21, 2012 at 1:26 pm |

          You didn’t actually read the article, did you?

    • Catsnbanjos | Feb 21, 2012 at 1:25 pm |

      You didn’t actually read the article, did you?

  6. Monkey See Monkey Do | Feb 21, 2012 at 10:25 am |

    One of the best places to be an atheist: China.

  7. Sethbnewell | Feb 21, 2012 at 11:45 am |

    Well as an atheist living in Texas I can tell you I’m surprised we aren’t #1 on the list. Its not easy, but what can ya do….

  8. Being from the UK, I can’t imagine what it’s like to have atheism as a minority (despite Cameron claiming us to still be a ‘Christian country’, even though our population is probably one of the most multi-cultural in the world). In my school, atheism is certainly the majority – and I’m glad!

    • UnionJackJamesBond | Feb 21, 2012 at 3:22 pm |

      Not that I oppose atheism (Christian myself), but I’d like to take a look back through Britain’s history a bit. Less than 100 years ago, Britain was the BIGGEST empire in the world, was also the RICHEST, and also the most technologically advanced. Now, children are being bribed to have sex with booze and drugs, the eating habits are some of the worst in the world, and students can sue their teachers on a whim. Now, I’m not saying that atheism did that, not at all, but a lack of morals and not trying to teach children about ALL religions so that all people could actually exercise their right to religious beliefs seems to have had more negative effects than positive. It’s good to have freedom of beliefs, but sometimes a little more moral restraint can go a long way.

      • Jin The Ninja | Feb 21, 2012 at 3:45 pm |

         Empire,Imperialism and the British legacy of colonialism have a largely negative connotation, and in some instances verged on genocidal. Ethics and morality can be seperate from religion, and a secular society (where everyone can practice their beliefs in the private sphere) is infinitely preferable to the support the `Church of England` recieves from the state now. Although i do agree that comparitive religion should be taught and as ecumenical, inclusive and diverse as possible.

        • UnionJackJamesBond | Feb 21, 2012 at 3:57 pm |

          I beg to differ on the genocide point, unless your talking about Spain. Britain wasn’t always the best empire, but it still respected human rights to at least some degree, but not completely I admit. Also, I recognize that morals are not restricted to religious groups, but there is very little to keep people following those morals. Now, granted, we can all recognize the issues of drinking and “philandering”, but I have talked to some teens about these issues and, surprise surprise, they don’t care. Now, people can still “sin” in religion and can even walk away from it, but when you truly believe in a religion, I would bet you are less likely to do some commit some of these self-harmful acts.

          • Jin The Ninja | Feb 21, 2012 at 4:57 pm |

            Are you aware of the last 50 years of post-colonial theory? It would beg to differ your opinion of Britain’s “ethical colonial standard.” Colonialism is when you invade a sovereign nation or people for control over them, and Imperialism is when you extend colonialism into an economic and foreign policy goal with the intent to steal resources from another. Nothing ethical or defensible about it.

          • UnionJackJamesBond | Feb 22, 2012 at 3:09 pm |

            True, but they still did not treat the people as the dutch or Spanish did. True, the people of those countries were mostly servants, but once more were not treated as badly by the British as they were by the Dutch. Also note that Britain was the FIRST country to ban slavery in Britain (I don’t know if that included their other territory though).

        • UnionJackJamesBond | Feb 22, 2012 at 3:03 pm |

          I’d love to watch that, unfortunately I don’t have access to youtube currently.

      • Mysophobe | Feb 22, 2012 at 12:07 am |

        The teaching (or preaching) of morals and values only go so far. Leading by example is what we’re lacking. Look at the US: 80% Christian with half of the political system constantly telling kids not to have sex before marriage and not to catch the gay, yet we have similar problems. Not to mention that all the atheists I know have very strong morals and integrity, you just don’t hear it because they’re not all showy about it. Their children do to. Good thoughtful kids that look you in the eye when they talk to you. I think what western capitalist countries are witnessing is our youth emulating the ugliness that they see in our own cultures. The greed and exploitation. The dehumanizing of other cultures. The raping of the environment. The stark inequality of our economic systems. Worst of all, the false morality and values of hypocritical, do as I say not as I do religious zealots. Who wouldn’t want to rebel against that? They’re very perceptive like that.

  9. DeepCough | Feb 21, 2012 at 4:30 pm |

    Irony: Virginia, the commonwealth renowned for its titular Statute of Religious Freedom, which denounces religious indoctrination, especially when it’s committed by the state, is also home to Liberty University, established by the late Rev. Jerry “Fat Fuck” Falwell.

  10. Apathesis | Feb 21, 2012 at 8:27 pm |

    Religion is for idiots.  Plain and simple.

    • UnionJackJamesBond | Feb 22, 2012 at 3:06 pm |

      And baseless statements are too. Is there anyone on this planet that can actually use the brain in their head to come up with an argument? Is it really so much to ask for? Also, I hope you realize that both Charles Darwin and Albert Einstein believed there was a greater power, right? Granted, they weren’t religious, but they still believed a higher power existed. Do you presume that they were idiots too?

      • Monkey See Monkey Do | Feb 23, 2012 at 1:20 am |

        Charles Darwin labelled himself religious to escape persecution from religious authorities. You also have to consider the zeitgeist of the times.
        Albert Einstein was too smart to ignore the impact of consciousness on matter. He probably looked so far down the rabbit hole he came out the other end…
        To conclude, religiosity and atheism as doctrines or dogma are both idiotic.

        • UnionJackJamesBond | Feb 24, 2012 at 6:32 pm |

          ? Um, if Charles Darwin wanted to escape persecution, he wouldn’t have come right out and said he was agnostic. And what religious authorities? Do you even know when Darwin was living? It was the 1800’s during a new age of “enlightenment” where people were dabbling in all sorts of new ideas. Yet you talk as if there was some church Gestapo that went around killing non-believers. You really need to check your history.

    • Monkey See Monkey Do | Feb 23, 2012 at 1:11 am |

      So is Atheism.

  11. Eric_D_Read | Feb 22, 2012 at 11:20 am |

    Interesting point within the article is how atheism are more likely to be widespread in urban areas while religion tends to have more influence the more rural an area is.

    As an atheist who has spent most of his life living in the sticks (relatively speaking); I still don’t get exactly why that is.

  12. Interesting read. Finland, from where I’m from, is quite secular. And the religious people here are quite liberal and “harmless”. The more extreme religious sects here are too small to make a difference.  What’s worse here is racism and an unfriendly attitude to all that isn’t finnish culture…

  13. I wonder if Atheists are more disliked than Wiccans? 

Comments are closed.