<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
</head>
<body>
On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 4:08 AM Giulio Prisco via extropy-chat <<a
href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>>
wrote:
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:mailman.74.1583416254.23370.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">I'm equating people who are violent, coercive, etc., and happen to be
atheists, with with people who are violent, coercive, etc., and happen
to be believers.
If you insist on adding "because of their religion" to the second
part, then I will insist on adding "because of their atheism" to the
first part, because I really don't see any difference between these
two totally symmetric cases.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Then you are refusing to see it. The difference is blindingly
obvlous. Religions have rules of behaviour, whole tomes explaining
what kind of behaviour, dress, food, sexual practices, rituals,
etc., are required or allowed (and which ones are 'sinful' and to be
discouraged, in oneself and in others), and often horrifically
graphic descriptions of what punishments await those who break the
rules.<br>
<br>
Atheism has none of that. Religions give people <i>reasons</i> for
being horrible to others. Atheism doesn't.<br>
Nobody is violent, coercive, etc., <i>because</i> they are
atheists, because there is a complete absence of those rules of
behaviour, no prescriptions, no concept of 'sin' etc.<br>
<br>
How can you possibly regard them as symmetric cases? They're as
asymmetric as you can get!<br>
<br>
Who will regard gay people as misguided, sinful and in need of
correction, if not outright punishment?<br>
Who will have reasons to do that? Where do those reasons come from?<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Ben Zaiboc</pre>
</body>
</html>