Quote:
|
How should Atheists and Religous people treat each other?
|
In such a manner that the principle of state's and society's secularism stays guaranteed and the public space and state's institutions as well as public education structures stay neutral and non-influenced by religious sects' ideologies. If believers and non-believers would stay away from wanting to missionize the other, and relgious people would not try to turn society into a non-secular culture, then there would be no targets and victims of such missionizing efforts and thus there would be nobody needing to defend himself against an ideologically motivated aggression. Where there is no attack, there is no need to defend. But this only on the basis of secularism and freedom first, religion second, please.
Keep thy religion to thyself. Keep society free of it. Spare others from needing to always take note of what precious idols you have chosen to take for real - it'S your idols and your choice, not theirs, so why would you expect them to care for your stuff? Staying passive, so that society can be an open place for everybody to be in. What colours you paint your flat's walls in, is nothing strangers usually take interest in. And why should they? Your flat is not that important, you know.
Its good to recall this old law from physics: every action has reaction. So keep your radio silent enough that not all the neighbourhood needs to listen to your sound. Play your radio loud, and don't be surprised if neighbours turn against you.
They want to listen to their own radios maybe, you know, without being disturbed by your noise. And you are no disc-jockey for the district.
You want to tell others of your precious beliefs, theistic or atheistic? Then wait until you get asked and then answer to their questions. That's diplomatic, and good style. Missionizing is not diplomatic.
It's an aggression.
In case of conflict arising: decide on basis of freedom goes first, religion only second.
Always.