Ask New Question
Sign In
Quora uses cookies to improve your experience. Read more
Answer Wiki
21 Answers
Anonymous
Anon to avoid persecution for taking an unpopular stand.
Israel-no contest.
In half the other countries in the ME, I would be treated very shabbily. Perhaps as a terrorist (yes, Saudi Arabia had the gall to do just that), or maybe arrested/stoned to death under some blasphemy law or the other. Turkey (and perhaps pre-Brotherhood Egypt) would be the only exceptions. And I know all Arabs are not Muslims (there are Christians, Druze etc etc amongst them) but fact remains, the ME is mostly a backwards shithole, and would have been the same with or without Israel. Current situation in Syria, the ISIL catastrophe etc. stand as my evidence. Regressives and Fundamentalists call the shots in most places, with or without Israel. Odds of an Arab Palestine being a much better place is absolutely zero. There would be another dictator gassing the people, taxing a poor and backward population to death while building ski resorts, while another bunch of fundamentalists try to topple him based on old tribal alliances and sectarian divisions. With or without Israel, the common people are fucked - except they now have someone else to blame.
Israel cannot afford to act the same way, principally because of the large fraction of secular Jews in the global diaspora. Yes, they have fundamentalists too (which country doesn't?) but I never felt like there was a risk of me being stoned to death for being an atheist (or for any other reason) the time I was there. And no, I am not white by any stretch of that word, and do not have any Jewish blood in multiple (>6, if ever) generations ( that I know of, mater semper certa est). My only regret is that a lot of old Roman and Persian Archaeological sites elsewhere are now inaccessible on account of the Israeli visa on my passport. Still, I would like to visit Israel again, irrespective of the cost. Israel has its troubles - every country does, but it is not a deal-breaker for me, especially considering the alternative.
Also, as a straight person who is an LGBT ally-the answer is again obvious (and corroborated by my friends who are LGTB).
Final points: That does not mean I am pro-civilian deaths. I want that to stop, but the history of the Middle East gives me little reason to hope that it will be a reality. I would not want to live my life in a bunker either.
And I do not want to say Islam itself is somehow intrinsically backwards- I would have taken Abbasid Baghdad to Byzantine Constantinople. But the ground realities today are different. Tel Aviv comes lightyears ahead of Baghdad now. The Arabs need an Ataturk, and they need one fast. Else, they would have people laughing on the floor as Saudi Arabia tries to educate the world on Human Rights.
Israel-no contest.
In half the other countries in the ME, I would be treated very shabbily. Perhaps as a terrorist (yes, Saudi Arabia had the gall to do just that), or maybe arrested/stoned to death under some blasphemy law or the other. Turkey (and perhaps pre-Brotherhood Egypt) would be the only exceptions. And I know all Arabs are not Muslims (there are Christians, Druze etc etc amongst them) but fact remains, the ME is mostly a backwards shithole, and would have been the same with or without Israel. Current situation in Syria, the ISIL catastrophe etc. stand as my evidence. Regressives and Fundamentalists call the shots in most places, with or without Israel. Odds of an Arab Palestine being a much better place is absolutely zero. There would be another dictator gassing the people, taxing a poor and backward population to death while building ski resorts, while another bunch of fundamentalists try to topple him based on old tribal alliances and sectarian divisions. With or without Israel, the common people are fucked - except they now have someone else to blame.
Israel cannot afford to act the same way, principally because of the large fraction of secular Jews in the global diaspora. Yes, they have fundamentalists too (which country doesn't?) but I never felt like there was a risk of me being stoned to death for being an atheist (or for any other reason) the time I was there. And no, I am not white by any stretch of that word, and do not have any Jewish blood in multiple (>6, if ever) generations ( that I know of, mater semper certa est). My only regret is that a lot of old Roman and Persian Archaeological sites elsewhere are now inaccessible on account of the Israeli visa on my passport. Still, I would like to visit Israel again, irrespective of the cost. Israel has its troubles - every country does, but it is not a deal-breaker for me, especially considering the alternative.
Also, as a straight person who is an LGBT ally-the answer is again obvious (and corroborated by my friends who are LGTB).
Final points: That does not mean I am pro-civilian deaths. I want that to stop, but the history of the Middle East gives me little reason to hope that it will be a reality. I would not want to live my life in a bunker either.
And I do not want to say Islam itself is somehow intrinsically backwards- I would have taken Abbasid Baghdad to Byzantine Constantinople. But the ground realities today are different. Tel Aviv comes lightyears ahead of Baghdad now. The Arabs need an Ataturk, and they need one fast. Else, they would have people laughing on the floor as Saudi Arabia tries to educate the world on Human Rights.
Related QuestionsMore Answers Below
Quickly, some assumptions one must be careful to avoid:
That said...
I don't think that self-identification as an atheist is likely to have much of an impact on a person's political opinions regarding anything other than the relationship between religion and the law. Both the government of Israel and Hamas are guilty—to some extent—of using religious justifications to perpetuate the fighting, so there are reasons for many particular actions taken by many of the parties involved to be frowned upon by atheists. There are also reasons for sympathy on both sides of the border. It's a profoundly complicated issue, and I wouldn't be surprised if there weren't much of a strong trend at all as to how atheists feel about it. Atheists are far too diverse a group with too many different opinions.
- That atheists are a cohesive group with similar opinions regarding anything other than the existence of deities, and
- That the conflict in question is a bilateral one between two teams, one of which must be supported in hopes of eventual victory and one of which must be opposed in hopes of eventual defeat. There are far more than two entities involved in this conflict, and everyone involved has their own set of interests and goals.
That said...
I don't think that self-identification as an atheist is likely to have much of an impact on a person's political opinions regarding anything other than the relationship between religion and the law. Both the government of Israel and Hamas are guilty—to some extent—of using religious justifications to perpetuate the fighting, so there are reasons for many particular actions taken by many of the parties involved to be frowned upon by atheists. There are also reasons for sympathy on both sides of the border. It's a profoundly complicated issue, and I wouldn't be surprised if there weren't much of a strong trend at all as to how atheists feel about it. Atheists are far too diverse a group with too many different opinions.
I can really only speak for myself, but I think atheists may lean toward whichever side will offer the best chance at peace, through reason, logic, practicality, and realism.
Although I have immense sympathy for the people of Gaza, and I understand their point of view; as such that it has been misguided by the poison and brainwashing of Hamas, and the false promises of 'victory over the Jews' in 'end-times' as stated in one of their prophecies, it appears their demands are self-defeating, unrealistic, and void of reason.
Beyond the Palestinians 'wanting' the Jews to vacate the land, and not caring how such a thing would even be possible, and beyond them feeling honored at the idea of sacrificing their own children as martyrs for the cause, they should instead ask themselves, 'If we lived in a house on that part of the land instead of this part of the land, what would we want, next?'
If the answer is 'a better life' and freedom, they need to then ask themselves how, exactly, they would define those terms. Once they establish exactly what they want for their lives, perhaps better schools, better job opportunities, the freedom to move around as they please without being hassled at checkpoints, and so on, they can then begin to think what would have happened if Hamas would have used the hundred million dollars they wasted on building tunnels and buying missiles, and instead poured that money into the Palestinian economy, and actually used it for good instead of evil.
If they want freedom, they need to stop blowing people up, which would be the first step in the right direction of joining and finally being recognized as part of the civilized world. They will need to come to terms with the reality that Israel is here to stay, and proceed from that point forward - with calm negotiations, and the ultimate goal of living peacefully side by side.
Israel, on the other hand, is caught between a rock and a hard place. Part of why they are being targeted by suicide bombers is because of the built up hostilities and frustrations that the Palestinians have to suffer on a daily basis when they pass through the checkpoints. Yet, if the checkpoints were eliminated, there would undoubtedly be more suicide bombers blowing up civilians in Israel. But if the need for the checkpoints (suicide bombers) were eliminated, the checkpoints would eventually be eliminated, as well.
From what I see, not just currently, but from the beginning of Zionism, both sides have enough hatred-with-good-cause for the other side to last a trillion earth-lifetimes. But we can't change the past, and like it or not, we need to share this world, and that means living next to each other on the same land.
I see and believe wholeheartedly that Israel is willing to do that - they want peace, and they can be reasoned with. Palestine, however, I see as a desperate, screaming, unorganized, spiteful and unrealistic 'kill kill kill' mob-mentality religiously fanatical people, who would rather see their own children being blown up than to sit down at a table and ask for reasonable and realistic terms as part of a peace negotiation.
I am on the side of peace.
Although I have immense sympathy for the people of Gaza, and I understand their point of view; as such that it has been misguided by the poison and brainwashing of Hamas, and the false promises of 'victory over the Jews' in 'end-times' as stated in one of their prophecies, it appears their demands are self-defeating, unrealistic, and void of reason.
Beyond the Palestinians 'wanting' the Jews to vacate the land, and not caring how such a thing would even be possible, and beyond them feeling honored at the idea of sacrificing their own children as martyrs for the cause, they should instead ask themselves, 'If we lived in a house on that part of the land instead of this part of the land, what would we want, next?'
If the answer is 'a better life' and freedom, they need to then ask themselves how, exactly, they would define those terms. Once they establish exactly what they want for their lives, perhaps better schools, better job opportunities, the freedom to move around as they please without being hassled at checkpoints, and so on, they can then begin to think what would have happened if Hamas would have used the hundred million dollars they wasted on building tunnels and buying missiles, and instead poured that money into the Palestinian economy, and actually used it for good instead of evil.
If they want freedom, they need to stop blowing people up, which would be the first step in the right direction of joining and finally being recognized as part of the civilized world. They will need to come to terms with the reality that Israel is here to stay, and proceed from that point forward - with calm negotiations, and the ultimate goal of living peacefully side by side.
Israel, on the other hand, is caught between a rock and a hard place. Part of why they are being targeted by suicide bombers is because of the built up hostilities and frustrations that the Palestinians have to suffer on a daily basis when they pass through the checkpoints. Yet, if the checkpoints were eliminated, there would undoubtedly be more suicide bombers blowing up civilians in Israel. But if the need for the checkpoints (suicide bombers) were eliminated, the checkpoints would eventually be eliminated, as well.
From what I see, not just currently, but from the beginning of Zionism, both sides have enough hatred-with-good-cause for the other side to last a trillion earth-lifetimes. But we can't change the past, and like it or not, we need to share this world, and that means living next to each other on the same land.
I see and believe wholeheartedly that Israel is willing to do that - they want peace, and they can be reasoned with. Palestine, however, I see as a desperate, screaming, unorganized, spiteful and unrealistic 'kill kill kill' mob-mentality religiously fanatical people, who would rather see their own children being blown up than to sit down at a table and ask for reasonable and realistic terms as part of a peace negotiation.
I am on the side of peace.
I think most atheists would agree both sides deserve a swift kick in the nads. But we don't get to decide such things.
Trying to answer your question: "More Likely"? I would say that depends on whether they know someone on either side personally (including themselves - tons of atheists in Israel, possibly Gaza too). Atheists can be swayed by a personal connection as much as the next person.
But ignoring the personal involvement factor, while both sides have done horrific and evil things, I would say Atheists are every-so-slightly more likely to support Israel. Atheists tend to be more objective, looking at facts & being skeptical. An on-balance view of this decades (some would say centuries, but I disagree) long conflict tends to favor Israel.
Before people start yelling at me, I am neither jewish nor arab/muslim/palestinian/whatever. I'm just an un-interested observer looking at the facts. And to be clear, if we weren't grading on a curve, they would both fail. This is more "which side is slightly less evil" than "which side is good and the other is bad". IMHO.
Let me list out a few reasons I think Israel is slightly less bad - all of which are generalities, with lots of specific exceptions on both sides:
Some of that is clearly for comparison only - again, grading on a curve. Dropping leaflets saying I plan to destroy your house does not absolve me of destroying your house. But it is clearly morally superior to telling you to stay there and die so I can claim the other side hurt innocent people.
Some may claim things like the settlements are "shooting first", but I see a qualitative difference between taking property (very, very bad) and firing high explosives at population centers (even worse). Call me silly, but that's how I see it.
Finally, we should note that "Palestine" is not "Hamas". But Hamas the duly elected government of Gaza, so the "Palestinians" have to take some account for Hamas' actions.
Perhaps the most important point is:
Can't we all just get along?
Jesus! (I can say that as an atheist, plus Jews & Muslims don't believe he was ghod either.)
Trying to answer your question: "More Likely"? I would say that depends on whether they know someone on either side personally (including themselves - tons of atheists in Israel, possibly Gaza too). Atheists can be swayed by a personal connection as much as the next person.
But ignoring the personal involvement factor, while both sides have done horrific and evil things, I would say Atheists are every-so-slightly more likely to support Israel. Atheists tend to be more objective, looking at facts & being skeptical. An on-balance view of this decades (some would say centuries, but I disagree) long conflict tends to favor Israel.
Before people start yelling at me, I am neither jewish nor arab/muslim/palestinian/whatever. I'm just an un-interested observer looking at the facts. And to be clear, if we weren't grading on a curve, they would both fail. This is more "which side is slightly less evil" than "which side is good and the other is bad". IMHO.
Let me list out a few reasons I think Israel is slightly less bad - all of which are generalities, with lots of specific exceptions on both sides:
- Israel typically shoots back, Hamas tries to shoot first. This is probably the deciding factor for me.
- Israel drops leaflets saying "get out, we are bombing here tomorrow", Hamas says "do not leave your homes" to those same people. (And some say use the dead as a political statement.)
- Israel lets Arabs live in Israel with the rights of citizens, Hamas' founding documents and current leaders actively campaign for the killing of every Jew on the planet.
- Israel agrees to cease fires and holds its mortars for hours while Hamas continues to shoot rockets into Israel - on multiple occasions.
Some of that is clearly for comparison only - again, grading on a curve. Dropping leaflets saying I plan to destroy your house does not absolve me of destroying your house. But it is clearly morally superior to telling you to stay there and die so I can claim the other side hurt innocent people.
Some may claim things like the settlements are "shooting first", but I see a qualitative difference between taking property (very, very bad) and firing high explosives at population centers (even worse). Call me silly, but that's how I see it.
Finally, we should note that "Palestine" is not "Hamas". But Hamas the duly elected government of Gaza, so the "Palestinians" have to take some account for Hamas' actions.
Perhaps the most important point is:
Can't we all just get along?
Jesus! (I can say that as an atheist, plus Jews & Muslims don't believe he was ghod either.)
I support Palestine because I believe its the responsibility of the people who move to a country for refuge to fit in with the people already living there not murder them and steal their homes and impose a theocratic racist state instead of their own.
I also believe that its racism to replace the natives with people of a chosen race or tribe based on false notions of secularism or democracy or victimhood or advanced civilisation.
In case you don't realise it, killing or evicting people and moving into their homes then attacking them for defending themselves is neither secular nor democratic. In polite terms its ethnic cleansing. When accompanied by attempts to wipe out national character [there is no such thing as a Palestinian] and physically and mentally injure members of the group over a long period [see the concentration camp that is Gaza] while bombing kids playing football and wiping out entire families [extermination] not to mention encouraging racism where people are chanting death to Arabs in the streets and burning teens and babies alive - with no accountability for the criminals - all the while denying that its taking place, then it fulfills all the steps of what we call genocide.
International law overwhelmingly backs the Palestinian posiiton and the only reason that the conflict continues is because other powerful nations, based on the similar actions of ethnic cleansing and imposing race and religion on natives, support Israel.
I also believe that its racism to replace the natives with people of a chosen race or tribe based on false notions of secularism or democracy or victimhood or advanced civilisation.
In case you don't realise it, killing or evicting people and moving into their homes then attacking them for defending themselves is neither secular nor democratic. In polite terms its ethnic cleansing. When accompanied by attempts to wipe out national character [there is no such thing as a Palestinian] and physically and mentally injure members of the group over a long period [see the concentration camp that is Gaza] while bombing kids playing football and wiping out entire families [extermination] not to mention encouraging racism where people are chanting death to Arabs in the streets and burning teens and babies alive - with no accountability for the criminals - all the while denying that its taking place, then it fulfills all the steps of what we call genocide.
International law overwhelmingly backs the Palestinian posiiton and the only reason that the conflict continues is because other powerful nations, based on the similar actions of ethnic cleansing and imposing race and religion on natives, support Israel.
Speaking personally, I support neither.
Both have a right to exist. And ideally their respective leaderships would cooperate to divide territory equitably, so that both communities could live in peace.
Does not sound like that is going to happen. Not ever.
It appears that both states see any form of cooperation as surrender. And so increasingly belligerent actions are applauded.
Were the two states symmetrical, the enthusiasm for war would probably decline over time.
But the bizarre asymmetry combined with the religious notions which infect the region prevents that from happening.
I do have immense sympathy for the children in Gaza, who through no fault of their own, are seeing stuff they should not see.
Both have a right to exist. And ideally their respective leaderships would cooperate to divide territory equitably, so that both communities could live in peace.
Does not sound like that is going to happen. Not ever.
It appears that both states see any form of cooperation as surrender. And so increasingly belligerent actions are applauded.
Were the two states symmetrical, the enthusiasm for war would probably decline over time.
But the bizarre asymmetry combined with the religious notions which infect the region prevents that from happening.
I do have immense sympathy for the children in Gaza, who through no fault of their own, are seeing stuff they should not see.
I'm sorry, world, but I side with the Palestinians on this one and on the past several. They are being treated like animals in a pen. I dismiss the theological claim that Israel has to that country to begin with; it seems contrived at best, and since I hold absolutely zero supernatural concentration in that area, I don't see it worth fighting over.
Israel is fighting for peace, with the handful of Hamas fighters. The so-called men will use women and children as human a shield; they hide their weapons in children's schools and in other low profile target zones around civilians. In doing so, they are conducting a terror campaign against their own people: They are trying to force those who survive into the Hamas military wing, or to at least actively support their cause. Palestinians have the biggest say in all this: They can rise up as one and throw off the radical Muslim leadership. It wouldn't be easy, but it would be easier to get Israeli backing.
Israel is fighting for peace, with the handful of Hamas fighters. The so-called men will use women and children as human a shield; they hide their weapons in children's schools and in other low profile target zones around civilians. In doing so, they are conducting a terror campaign against their own people: They are trying to force those who survive into the Hamas military wing, or to at least actively support their cause. Palestinians have the biggest say in all this: They can rise up as one and throw off the radical Muslim leadership. It wouldn't be easy, but it would be easier to get Israeli backing.
Atheists in the US are individuals and not some hive mind. There is the general reality that Atheists here are more likely to be incredibly skeptical of all things because that very skepticism is what brought them out of faith. That skepticism will likely make them -- you guessed it! -- skeptical of both parties. That doesn't mean that someone like me can't make a value judgement and say, "Okay, I side with X slightly more than Y", it just means that we're going to look at it more closely.
Exceptions abound. Atheists aren't a hive group.
Israel isn't bad, despite my skepticism of any nation based on ancient religious claims. Despite those claims, it's the MOST secular nation in the Mideast with the most freedom of religion and gender equality. Palestine isn't bad, despite my skepticism over the claims of being "noble freedom fighters" and the frequent agitations of Israel.
I used to be very anti-Israel and a lot of dispassionate examination of as many reliable sources of information over the past year has made me soften my view of that nation. I used to be pro-Palestine, and the same information has forced me to admit that the Palestinians aren't the noble good guys. They're flawed -- both sides. I know enough to keep my distance from the debate and focus on what I consider immutable facts.
Those basic truths are:
When Israel attacks, I don't immediately jump on the "It's Palestine's fault" or the "Israel is bad" bandwagon. This recent invasion of Gaza has been a massive blunder from the beginning, but if you think Israel's actions came out of nowhere a la, "Whaaat! The Gazans were just sitting there, minding their own business!" then you take me and Israel for a fool.
That about sums it up.
Exceptions abound. Atheists aren't a hive group.
Israel isn't bad, despite my skepticism of any nation based on ancient religious claims. Despite those claims, it's the MOST secular nation in the Mideast with the most freedom of religion and gender equality. Palestine isn't bad, despite my skepticism over the claims of being "noble freedom fighters" and the frequent agitations of Israel.
I used to be very anti-Israel and a lot of dispassionate examination of as many reliable sources of information over the past year has made me soften my view of that nation. I used to be pro-Palestine, and the same information has forced me to admit that the Palestinians aren't the noble good guys. They're flawed -- both sides. I know enough to keep my distance from the debate and focus on what I consider immutable facts.
Those basic truths are:
- Israel has the right to exist -- it's existence is a fait accompli and any denial of its existence immediately ends my discussion with that individual.
- Israel -- as a nation -- has the same right to defend itself from attacks.
- Palestine has the right to exist as a separate nation.
- Settlements in the West Bank are bad and absolutely need to stop.
- Hamas is not "good" and likely closer to "bad" for its blatant tactic of intentionally provoking Israel in the hopes of using the body-bags as a publicity stunt.
- Any group or person that supports or defends the Khartoum Resolution, is not someone/something I can identify with.
- Using humans as weapons, and provocation of Israel is evil.
When Israel attacks, I don't immediately jump on the "It's Palestine's fault" or the "Israel is bad" bandwagon. This recent invasion of Gaza has been a massive blunder from the beginning, but if you think Israel's actions came out of nowhere a la, "Whaaat! The Gazans were just sitting there, minding their own business!" then you take me and Israel for a fool.
That about sums it up.
View More
Related Questions
Still have a question? Ask your own!