Yes, I was being a bit hyperbolic. I was referring, though, not to how people view me, but how they view atheists and agnostics in general. The picture ain't pretty (http://www.religioustolerance.org/atheist8.htm):
In her book, "The Last Taboo," Author Wendy Kaminer referred to an unidentified survey published in the 1980's. It showed that almost 70% of Americans agreed that freedom of religion applies "to all religious groups, regardless of how extreme their ideas are." But only 26% agreed that Atheists should be given freedom of speech to ridicule religion and God, "no matter who might be offended." 71% believed that Atheists "who preach against God and religion" should not be permitted to rent or otherwise use civic auditoriums i.e. lecture halls supported by general taxation.
(I emphasized.)
And that was from a religious website after a quicky Googling.
I see this as an echo chamber effect. People gather together and discuss. Those who aren't in the gathering don't get a place at the discussion, and are therefore absent to defend their position when topics pertaining to them arise. The more people chat within their groups, the less dissenting voices even enter their worldview. This is how demonization starts, IMNSHO.
That's why I speak up, not to be a prick, but to represent views many have never considered. That's also why the current kerfuffle over the New Atheists is largely missing the point: Yes, they're vocal and abrasive, dismissive and the like. But their points need to be considered whether or not others feel they need to consider them.
no subject
And that was from a religious website after a quicky Googling.
I see this as an echo chamber effect. People gather together and discuss. Those who aren't in the gathering don't get a place at the discussion, and are therefore absent to defend their position when topics pertaining to them arise. The more people chat within their groups, the less dissenting voices even enter their worldview. This is how demonization starts, IMNSHO.
That's why I speak up, not to be a prick, but to represent views many have never considered. That's also why the current kerfuffle over the New Atheists is largely missing the point: Yes, they're vocal and abrasive, dismissive and the like. But their points need to be considered whether or not others feel they need to consider them.