Is the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) intolerant of religion?

Asked by: SegBeg
  • Freedom from religion is forced atheism.

    The final solution, and the apparent end game, of the Freedom From Religion group is the banning of any acknowledgment of religion. Bit by bit, if allowed their argument to win, it would become a violation of their tender feelings for anyone to even acknowledge the mere presence of a religion. This is just another group of haters of civilized people. Their way is for all of us to lose the dignity that comes from belief in God and have us live as if we are nothing more than really smart apes.

  • Yes. A LOT!

    Simply their name Freedom FROM Religion makes them seem intolerant. Look I get that some of you don't want to be religious and that is fine. I have no problem with atheists. But I mean come on, Freedom From Religion Foundation? Just the name is a insult to religion. How would theists feel if religious people started a Freedom From Atheism Foundation? FFRF got so cracked up that there were Bibles in hotel rooms. I mean really? They're just Bibles. No one's forcing you to read them. If you don't want to read it, DON'T and put it to one side. If they put the Quran in hotels I'm pretty sure most would not have a problem as Islam is "a religion of peace." But a Bible is "NO ABSOLUTELY NOT!" sigh. Look, I may be a Christian but if I found a Quran in my hotel room drawer, I would simply not read it. Simple as that. Liberals need to remember that America has Christian roots. Christianity is part of the culture and a majority of the American population identify as Christian. No matter how much the Liberals try to rid religion from the public sphere, they will NEVER succeed. Christianity is part of America's culture. If you were in a predominantly Muslim country, you would be more likely to find Qurans in hotels than Bibles but would that offend you just because you're not religious? No. If you don't want to read that Bible in your hotel room, DON'T. No one's forcing you!

  • No more than theists.

    If you were of one religion, would you want your children to be instructed in the practices of another religion? Say for instance if your Christian, would you want your kids to become involved with the teaching of another religion? Of course not. Would you want your tax money to pay for religious symbols or practices that you would be subject to? Of course not. So why should atheist not have the same right? Hey, if the law states that you can't be forced to be subject to a religion you don't believe in, then why should it be any different for atheists.
    See, one thing that theists tend to forget or not know is that they are almost atheists. You see, both atheists and theists deny the existence of hundreds of god. A theist only denies one less.

  • No, not by a long shot. Nothing about it says it is intolerant.

    If the FFRF is considered intolerable of religion for demanding that the overbearingly omnipresent religiously saturated culture be toned down and also possibly consider that maybe certain places, things, or times have no place for religion, then the one accusing the FFRF of being intolerable of religion is in fact intolerable of atheist rights and reasonable requests. I should have a reasonable expectation as an atheist to not have MY government endorse a specific religion, just as a religious person should not have THEIR government endorse a specific religion. If you can't respect my reasonable rights then you are just as guilty of the whining and complaining that you accuse us atheists for.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.