RAMAKRISHNAN. A wrote:

Nobody is an atheist or theist. Everyone is a believer. Their beliefs vary but beliefs exist.  When a devastating natural calamity occurs, like an earthquake or cyclone, every person, irrespective of theist or atheist, will depend on an Invisible Power, which he has never seen or believed, and cry for help.  Theists, who believe in a personal God, call that invisible power as God and for their convenience they give it a name and form. Those who believe in an impersonal God believe it as the Universal Consciousness or the Absolute. I don’t know by which name the atheists address that invisible power. 

Each one of us have beliefs and around which our opinions form. A belief is an opinion. It hardly matters what and how it is called.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Believers and atheists are part of the same society. We all solve our day to day issue in same way- whatever be religious belief.  Healthy discussion is okay. But all should refrain from personal attack or insult. Expression of throughts and insulting differ. I may also add that atheism is not alien to Hindu religion. There are some philosophies including 'Sankhya' which are atheist.  Vir Savarkar called himself 'Hindu atheist'. 

I agree with you. Let there be healthy discussion without friction and personal abusal.

Rationalists are a threatened species in almost all countries. They are seen as non confirmists and this provokes the large number of confirmists who see them as challenging their dearly held beliefs. As they cannot reason it out so they brazen them to the extent of killing them. Rationalists have to pay a heavy price for their well reasoned arguements. Sad but real.

Rationalists are no threatened species everywhere. I already said that Rationalists if they express their views without throwing challenge and provoking ,Rationalists very much a respected species. I'm a member in one of the famous Rationalist groups of AP. I quoted here my experience. My wife is a believer. But we never had any conflicts, Because we live with our beliefs without obstructing the ways of other.

The quantum of threat varies with the effectivity of the rationalists ability to challenge and disturb set beliefs. You and your wife are bound by a holy union and thus tolerate each other amicably. But outsiders do not have such constraints. Rationalists are seen as dangerous only when they dabble in religion otherwise they are seen as harmless. What area is your group involved in.

The reasons for compatibility be it with or people depends on Rationality to use Rationality in a befitting manner.

I am confused with your above post. Kindly clarify pl.

Rationality and people's beliefs on religious beliefs should not clash with each other. Each is a belief. No interference.

So, in effect the rationalist has not been rational enough to judge the mood of the believer which goes to show that there is little difference between believers who can be easily swayed and the so called rationalist who makes rash or unsound judgment . They go overboard with their own belief and go to any length to prove they are right  which makes them equally intolerant , that's where the clash comes between them and the hard core believers who are intolerant anyway ..