Myth:
It’s in an atheist’s best interests not to try to cause anyone to lose their faith, because if there is a god, it would reflect badly on that person in the next world. Atheistic doubt is very destructive and atheists don't want that on their conscience, do they?
Response:
One of the most popular arguments which religious theists, and especially Christians, try to use is some form of Pascal's Wager: being an atheist is a bad "bet" because if you're wrong, you'll suffer for all eternity when God punishes you. The gross immorality of punishing a person for eternity merely for disbelieving in a god never seems to occur to these theists, but then they also never seem to offer anything but the most simplistic versions of it. Here, however, we get a nifty twist.
Not only are irreligious atheists being told that their disbelief and doubts will cause them problems in the afterlife, but they are also receiving another message which is becoming increasingly popular with religious theists: sit down and shut up. The fact that atheists are more and more willing to speak out about what they believe is causing theists to react with serious concern. They don't seem to like being confronted with so much criticism, doubt, and skepticism about fundamental religious or theistic beliefs and a popular response is to express, in some form, the idea that atheists should simply be quiet.
Sometimes this message is expressed indirectly, by saying for example that open, unapologetic atheism and religious skepticism is really a form of disrespectful intolerance towards theists. Occasionally this message is expressed directly, as we find in this myth: atheists shouldn't seek to change anyone's mind because if they do, then they'll suffer even more in the afterlife than they would have if they had simply kept all their annoying doubts, questions, and skepticism to themselves.
Rebutting this is fairly straightforward and easy. The idea that atheists should or do have anything to fear about the afterlife is addressed multiple times and in greater detail elsewhere, so it should suffice to say here that without good reason to think that any gods exist — much less a punitive god — telling atheists that they are making a "bad bet" is a waste of time. It assumes the truth of exactly the proposition that is at question, making this an example of the logical fallacy known as Begging the Question.
The second aspect to the myth, which is the message that atheists should sit down and shut up, doesn't need to be rebutted so much as emphasized and remembered. No one would even think to send such a message unless they were concerned that the atheistic perspective might actually attract a larger following and that atheistic doubt might become more widespread. The increasingly common efforts to get atheists to self-censor is a sign that religious theists are concerned at the very least, and perhaps even afraid.
It's something that we should only expect to see on the part of those who don't have much confidence in their religion or in the ability of their religious message to compete against criticism and skepticism. People who have confidence in their beliefs don't mind critique, questions, or competition. People who lack confidence in their beliefs seek to suppress critique, questions, and competition. Thus this new twist on Pascal's Wager indicates that theists really are growing more worried and that their fears are being integrated broadly into otherwise unrelated responses to atheists and atheism.
