1. Comment #98341 by Robert Maynard on December 13, 2007 at 1:44 pm

It's asinine to suggest that our beliefs do not have consequences - that they don't explicitly inform (if not form) our actions. Our cognitions manifest in real, physical behaviour.
So you're asking "Why would you be concerned about people acting on a proposition you reject?"

Because your suffering is my suffering, or our suffering.

If I think your belief(s) are false, then from my point of view the actions that follow from them are probably foolhardy at best (believing crop circles are made by aliens, and holding lonely midnight vigils in paddocks), and life-threatening at worst (thinking you can cure cancer with the power of your mind, and charging gullible people for the service).
Our concern for your beliefs should scale smoothly from head-patting to cuff-slapping, based on the level of vicarious outrage we experience at the effects of your actions, on yourself and others.

Other Comments by Robert Maynard

2. Comment #98359 by Corylus on December 13, 2007 at 2:06 pm

Anyone really interested in this question might like to check out the essay linked below.

(William Clifford's, Ethics of Belief)

http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/w_k_clifford/ethics_of_belief.html

If anyone wants to believe any proposition without evidence, then that is, of course, their perogative.

However, they need to be aware that their beliefs inform their actions.

The more that people seek to restrict the freedoms of others; or to cause them harm; then the more that evidence for the rationale behind this needs to be demanded. (N.B. This relates to all forms of dogma)

This is not about policing the thoughts of others: it is about protecting the freedoms of all of us.

Other Comments by Corylus

3. Comment #98452 by Blue Lithium on December 13, 2007 at 3:57 pm

Because it does affect me. Who are the people trying to take away my rights? The religious. Who are the people saying I shouldn't get married and adopt children? The religious. Who are the ones trying to get ID taught in schools? The religious. Who are the ones who think I should be chained up to some patriarch and pop out babies at his command? The religious.

The list goes on.

Other Comments by Blue Lithium

4. Comment #98485 by clementine on December 13, 2007 at 6:31 pm

Religions encourage geo- and anthropocentric worldviews; i.e. they encourage the view that humans are pre-eminent creatures, basically allowed to rule the earth. This can and probably will be disastrous for the biosphere, as the delusions of the religious render the environment and the lives of other animals completely secondary to humanity.

P.S. I'm thinking in particular of the dominant, monotheistic religions.

Other Comments by clementine

5. Comment #98570 by Doug Indeap on December 13, 2007 at 9:53 pm

Here are some reasons atheists care about religion:

1. Because the constitutions of seven states--Arkansas, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Texas--contain provisions prohibiting atheists from holding public office or testifying in court.

2. Atheist boys cannot be members of the Boy Scouts even though the Boy Scouts commonly receive public funds and special consideration in the use of public lands.

3. Politicians like President Bush Sr. feel free to say: "No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God."

4. "Blue laws" in many states restrict what can be sold on Sundays based on religious considerations.

5. The phrase "under God" was added to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954.

6. The phrase "In god we trust" was added to U.S. coins in 1864 and to dollar bills in 1957.

7. The U.S. was not founded as a Christian nation, yet I see some Christians seriously attempting to make it so.

8. Those professing religious beliefs are attempting to control what is taught in public schools so as to conform to, or at least not conflict with, their dogma. They seek, for instance, to have creationism or intelligent design passed off as science in public schools.

9. National, state, and local policy decisions are being decided based not on rational thought and discourse, but religious belief and fervor.

10. Fanatics are killing people in the name of religion.

11. Atheists are the least trusted minority in the U.S. simply because they have no belief in god(s).

These are drawn from a YouTube video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4fQA9mt-Mg

Other Comments by Doug Indeap

6. Comment #98649 by f0xfree on December 14, 2007 at 1:37 am

Altruistic genes. We care for others because we want them to care about us. The gene survives. Idiologies attempt to change, alter or manipulate that human feature.

Other Comments by f0xfree

7. Comment #98694 by Strappado on December 14, 2007 at 4:18 am

Is anyone suggesting that Atheists inside WTC escaped 911 alive, that circumcision (or FGM) is impossible on Atheists, that creationist drivel does not affect education of atheists etc.?

Believers do not live in a vacuum, unfortunately, so their unfounded beliefs affects people around them.

Other Comments by Strappado

8. Comment #101812 by Jake Atkisson on December 21, 2007 at 2:13 am

"Hey, why do you care if we defecate in the well; it isn't affecting -your- glass of water, is it?"

...this platform of questioning is too stupid to merit reasonable response. I'd make llama noises at the inquirer, or turn the above question on them.

Other Comments by Jake Atkisson

9. Comment #104054 by notsobad on December 27, 2007 at 5:39 pm

I do not care about beliefs that don't affect me or any other people against their freedom and will.

Organized religions do affect me...

Other Comments by notsobad

10. Comment #117274 by decster on January 28, 2008 at 1:26 pm

Irrational people affect everybody.
Its quite possible scientology will be a major religion in ten thousand years.
This is not progress for the evolving mind.
As long as people like atheists preach for common sense theres always hope.
I see the world for what it really is and its beautiful.

Other Comments by decster

11. Comment #133262 by Corey Hill on February 26, 2008 at 1:51 am

Athisem and religeon are prety closly linked we have preachers we atempt to organise ourself and look there even a donation page.So mayby were as mad as religon.

Its Fun to argue

Other Comments by Corey Hill

12. Comment #141958 by prospero811 on March 11, 2008 at 1:17 pm

First, why does anyone care what others think? Because we like to debate and persuade others that we are correct. We are also interested in the truth, so talking to people and listening to their arguments is part of learning about what others believe and whether it makes sense. People like me are more than happy to change their opinions when confronted with good reason to do so.

Second,and this is a more confrontational response, how DARE a religious person imply that atheists shouldn't care what others believe. I can't think of anyone who is more judgmental and condemning of the ideas in the heads of another person than devoutly religious person.

Other Comments by prospero811

13. Comment #173672 by dadamo on May 1, 2008 at 5:17 am

"Why do atheists care about what others believe when it doesn't affect atheists?"

I put a clip on YouTube where R.D. answers this question.

http://www.youtube.com/v/TW5NIfZodEk

Other Comments by dadamo

14. Comment #176087 by powerboy on May 6, 2008 at 2:14 pm

Beliefs have consequences for everyone. The people massacred during the Christian Crusades, or Islamic Jihads, would beg to differ with your opinion that peoples beliefs don't affect others.

Other Comments by powerboy

15. Comment #205554 by LateBloomer on July 7, 2008 at 12:52 pm

Why do religionists care to convert other people to their faiths if they are not affected by the "wrongness" of the other faith?

Other Comments by LateBloomer

16. Comment #208701 by DrAlbertHofmann on July 11, 2008 at 6:52 am

It's the question that drives us Neo. It's the question that brought you here. You know the question, just as I did.

Other Comments by DrAlbertHofmann

17. Comment #215727 by 4ofN on July 22, 2008 at 9:29 am

One issue that seems to have been missed is the issue of tax breaks. Every time a religious organization gets a tax break it means that my portion of the tax burden increases.

This applies twice for every dollar - donors receive income tax breaks on the money given and religious organization don't pay taxes on the money received.

In almost all transactions where services are purchased, the purchaser uses after tax money and the supplier pays tax on their profits.

Other Comments by 4ofN

18. Comment #221088 by old dusty on July 29, 2008 at 10:29 am

with the two major religions of the world (Islam and Roman Catholicism) obsessed with opposing every form of non-reproductive sexual activity, including heterosexual activity using birth control, there is no way that the population explosion can be slowed down, let alone reversed. The major religions have combined to lead a global Jonesville!

Other Comments by old dusty

19. Comment #237635 by accelerant on August 26, 2008 at 9:19 pm

I have no problem with the spiritual aspect of religion. I have a problem with the moralising aspect of religion.

When in a democracy, a majority of the electorate is fooled into believing in a faith-based moral code, then that *will* affect the candidates they support, which will effect the laws that are passed, which will ultimately affect me.

Laws based on faith rather than reason are, at best, silly and, at worst, unethical and detrimental to society and personal liberties.

If the government tells me that I cannot use contraception not because contraception was proven to be harmful, but because of its "faith" that contraception is wrong, then my rights have been restricted for no good reason whatsoever. In other words, we have suboptimal utility.

I would myself not try to infringe on another person's rights unless they allowed that other person to harm me. In return, I expect others not to infringe on my rights, as long as I cause no harm to them. If somebody infringes on my rights regardless, for no other reason than their faith, then I am forced to defend my rights and their faith has become my problem.

Ethics should not be based on whims and superstitions. Not even those of a majority. That would be mob rule.

Other Comments by accelerant