Since you asked, here goes...

In my experience of almost 70 years I 've found agnostics and atheists much more intelligent than Christians

We are More tolerant, kinder, less judgemental, more fun to hang out with, generous, great love of children and animals. They (us) make great neighbors, less likely to gossip, spread vicious rumors about others, enjoyable to work with, more polite, just more stable, less fearful, respectful of privacy and personal space and all around good characters.

We tend to not bring drama into our lives and the lives of others. We tend to not be jealous and resentful of others. Or put others down to make ourselves look or feel better.

We have a tendency to not mind the business of others. Have a live and let live attitude. And when we are generous it's because we want to help, do not expect to be rewarded in the "hereafter" we just give without conditions and acknowledgements either.

I avoid strict over-zealous, judgement Christians like the plague!!! Each time I've allowed those folks into my life I ALWAYS LIVE TO REGRET IT.

I think the world would be a better and more peaceful planet if most people were atheists/agnostics!!!

Overall my experience with most Christians has been a dismal failure.

When we reach a certain age; our patience lessens, so does our tolerance and our BULL SHIT detectors are on overdrive.

I have, myself, been accused of being 'negative' towards religious faith.

"Why can't you just say what tou believe without having to always trash the beliefs of the religious?"

The problem is that atheism is DEFINED in negative terms - a theist is someone who believes in (at least one) god, and an atheist is someone who is not a theist, so the only way to really discuss atheism is to say 'here is theism, and this is why I assess it to be bollocks'.

But the bottom line is that many theists are QUITE happy to wallow in hatred, bigotry, sexual judgementalism and intollerance - and have been doing so for hundreds and thousands of years - so if a theist is relaxed enough to keep HIS/HER mouth shut and not 'push' their beliefs and judgements on others, then I'm very happy to leave them in peace. However, if a theist chooses to 'open the debate and arguement' then he/she has no right to expect me not to respond.

I will respond as civilly as I can - but RESPOND I WILL.

As you will find on this site, there are some people that are mad at god and others that just don't believe it exists. You'll also find that if some disagree with you some will call you names because they don't have any better argument. I'm pretty sure everyone has the same right to look at anything negative they want. Should they do it in a civil manner, of course.

It has nothing to do with proselytizing. Here's why I don't support and actively boycott the Red Cross: [npr.org] and [propublica.org]

And here's why I don't support and actively boycott The Salvation Army: [huffpost.com] and [lgbtqnation.com]

So, yes, being that they are using religion as reasons to do the things that they do against humanity, I will judge them exactly as I, in my well-reasoned, moral, and logical experience-based wisdom, see fit, and I won't lose a wink of sleep over it, as I feel, since I've never done such horrible things to others, that I am morally superior to those that have, as apparently my moral compass and conscience works as it is supposed to, and their's doesn't.

I don't dislike religious people - I dislike religion. It's meant to manipulate people - usually to it's own ends and for profit.

Many of the organizations you cite are working hand in hand with the Government a flagrant violation of the separation of Church and State.

The Red Cross: "How much does the Red Cross keep from donations?
In recent years, the Red Cross' fundraising expenses alone have been as high as 26 cents of every donated dollar, nearly three times the nine cents in overhead claimed by McGovern. In the past five years, fundraising expenses have averaged 17 cents per donated dollar.Dec 4, 2014*
See links here: [google.com]

No I don't think all the people are bad. But I don't think those organizations are good either.

Some are - and the people participating have the best intent.

I'd be a lot happier with religious folk if they didn't keep trying to foist their beliefs on me. I don't try to foist mine on them. (Unless they ask).

@theatreskill It could be as simple as to say that you are in the wrong place, at least for now. You have to keep working on your own account to climb to a higher level. That will help you accomolish two things (not limited to): a) You will develop a thick skin, very much need now that everyone in general have an opinion and no one is shy about it anymore, and b) You will differenciate the postings where people want to contribute and have a conversation, as opposed to some troll trashing whatever and we all get a bap rap for it. Keep up the good work. Cheers.

We keep the worst of religious extremes in check some(not enough) religious organizations do real good work helping the poor and sick actual praiseworthy work . I am helping one in october delivering healthcare to poor in Haiti . No religion involved .

Pffft. What a load of drivel.

Boy, this post spooked people out of the bushes who claim to know ALL christians...or ALL atheists enough so that they can generalize. One is more unkind, arrogant and 'stupid'. The other is more intelligent, analytical, logical. These comments not only surpise me, but disappoint to an extent, too. What foolishness! Whether I agree or not with these responses, I expect them at least to be plausible. I believe here, at least, I am not in the best of company.

Very little that can be said on this question of religious morality will be absolutely true. There are too many shades of gray. Certainly we agnostics and/or atheists can be angry and certainly can make overly broad, judgmental statements. BUT, your posted defense of organized religiously based charity works is full of holes.

Speaking purely of Christian-based charities, which represent the religious backround I was raised in, certainly individuals will want to help others out of a simple desire to be kind, out of simple humanity. But that is NOT, I repeat NOT the main motivating force for Christian charity work. You completely ignored that fact. Charities, whether the Red Cross, Salvation Army, Christian adoption agencies, Christian hospitals, Christian battered women shelters, or what have you, are first and foremost serving their religion's capital directive to proslytize and convert people to Christianity. Anything they can do to give that mission social or political leverage is to that end. That is not altruism. That is not selfless love of fellow human beings. That is tactical. That is a reflection of Christian teaching that converting others to Christianity will be rewarded by God.

When you white-wash this fact, you ignore the insidious danger of this religion. Where was that charity in the dark ages when the church wielded ultimate political power and literally executed people for heresy? Non-existant is where. It's only because the church now lacks that power and has to answer to secular push-back that they have adopted a "kinder, gentler" approach of public service.

Do Christian adoption agencies serve the greater need of children? I argue not. I personally know good people repeatedly denied the "privilege" to adopt a child in need only because the would-be parents are not Christian. The mere existance of so many Church based adoption centers has lulled the general public into a false sense that the adoption need is being met. It is not. Controlled, yes; met, no.

Similarly, the Salvation Army, which receives privileged regard from many local court systems, puts great pressure on addicts directed to their "treatment" programs, pressure to accept religious practices of prayers and services participation that the participants, many of them coerced by courts into being there, to accept the Christian proslytizing being shoved down their throats.

Many LGBTQ people who find themselves dealing with various Christian organizations face subtle and/or blatant discrimination, tolerated or ignored by governments because of the culturally privileged historical reputations these church based organizations enjoy.

There is ample reason to rail against the Christian status quo for any of us millions who have found ouselves on the receiving end of discrimination fueled by Christian values of "sin."

Where I can agree with you is in the value of freethinkers making a strong effort to articulate our criticisms of faith-based organizations as being separate from our regard for the possible motivations and hearts of individuals who identify as religious. Clearly, not all religious individuals who seek to help others through organizex charity work understand the underlying schemes and control tactics at work.

I agree with you. We are all just different, different beliefs based on different circumstances called life. We should never belittle someone just because he/she believes differently than you...to include politics. Name calling, crap throwing, etc, these things are done on the playground in third grade.

As to atheism and intelligence, I know a lot of educated, intelligent, believers in a god of some kind. Professors, world travelers, writers of books, doers of good deeds... look at Father Desmond Tutu and Mother Theresa.

Ummm, no, those things would be My prerogatives, thankyuvurry much.

As much as they do us..

The Red Cross is a bad example. There is a great deal of profitability going on there for a non profit.

Your questions you pose are too general to truly answer.
The answers are both yes and no.
There are good and evils of all organizations.

If you’ve ever fallen victim to something then yes you have the ‘privilege.’
Even if you haven’t you still have the privilege.
We are after all just people and we are all different and we all have whatever rights we each feel entitled to.

If you were a little boy raped by clergy then you certainly have the privilege.

You examples are one side of a coin that has two faces.

I have always found it perfectly easy to disdain an idea without disdaining those who hold it. ( Perhaps you have to be on the autistic spectrum to manage that, I don't know if none autistic people find it difficult. ) Indeed have always regarded those who are caught by religion as victims worthy of sympathy if anything.

But I think you do a little wrong however to present all active charity as religious by nature, though that may not be your intention, it may be that it is true of the US, but here in Europe there are certainly many very active charities which are completely secular, and they are often among the most effective and active. Indeed several Christian charities have over the years been involved in scandals in which they have been found to be so ineffective, that their charitable status and its tax benefits ( Not automatic in the UK. ) have been taken away.

[advocate.com]
The Salvation Army and the LGBT Community: A Complicated Relationship

I remember Christopher Hitchens' comments regarding Mother Theresa which reminded me of the treatment I received in a catholic hospital as a non-Catholic. BTW this hospital was state-funded and treatment for all patients should have been the same regardless of their creed … alas it wasn't.

I certainly wouldn't deny some great work performed by faith-based organisations ... and I try not to think of the inquistions as the most defining actions of the catholic church ...

No not better and IMO not all that different either. "People are people" no matter what they do or do not believe in.

So do we ... own the privilege to disdain others? What exactly to you mean?

Not better, different.

well, we wouldn't be judgmental if it were not for posts like this, and the believers i have encountered, whom i have never ONCE attacked or lashed out at, don't want to be my friend; they want to convert me, or damn me to hell, or (worst of all) bless me and pray for me. you're being awfully judgmental of atheists et al, without knowing us very well, as friends, aren't you? you are lashing out at us, are you not, making this accusation? your accusation is a blanket one, just the kind of thing you are supposedly warning us against. maybe we are not the ones who need to grow up.

g

The alleged gawd does nothing no mercy no love just nothing.....some of my best friends are Quakers Catholic Workers who know other xians are terrorizing health clinics stalking women who want abortions passing laws forcing gynecologists into incompetence protecting the genocidal zionists murdering Palestinians murdering muslims for their oil......religion is a big umbrella and let's very little truth underneath....religions sexually mutilate baby boys and young girls......Vatican rapist priests are mostly protected by coverups bribes to victims for silence AND ABORTIONS to kill the evidence
.....religion in USA has been racist and genocidal since 1492.....Salvation Army has reduced their shaming of gays in exchange for taxpayer funding of their expanding programs and tax exempt properties....worst is the complete takeover ove Education by Michigan monster Betsy deVos with Erikkk Prince....we should as you state be nice to our do gooding religious neighbors but here in Atheist land we should continue to blow off steam and read aloud all the genocidal misogynistic pro-violent abortion passages from their bibles because only Atheists read their books they merely fondle a few fetish pages

If people believe in a god, don't you expect that there should be evidence that a god exists?

I have come across a few not so desirable comments, but I think that most contributors here try to be fair and reasonable.

Boy, this post spooked people out of the bushes who claim to know ALL christians...or ALL atheists enough so that they can generalize. One is more unkind, arrogant and 'stupid'. The other is more intelligent, analytical, logical. These comments not only surpise me, but disappoint to an extent, too. What foolishness! Whether I agree or not with these responses, I expect them at least to be plausible. I believe here, at least, I am not in the best of company.