Kevin Marshall's America
A recent comment from a reader reminded me that I was an Atheist.
Humorist & pundit Bill Maher, whose arguments against religion largely consist of "Really?" and "OH, REALLY...."
There’s no typo, and you read that right: it reminded me that I was an Atheist, not WHY I was an Atheist. Truth is, I had almost completely forgotten that there was a label that was put on my lack of faith and belief in a higher power.
I’ve spent the better part of the last few years avoiding that term and almost going out of my way not to tell too many people about it. Part of the reason is because I continue to examine and re-examine my stance on faith. I don’t want my lack of faith to be due to any lack of trying. It’s just that there isn’t anything in this world (despite the best efforts of many of my closest friends and family) that I see as having some divine hand involved and I believe everything can (not is but CAN) be explained through scientific principles.
But, mostly, I avoid telling people I’m an Atheist because most other Atheists are total a**holes about it.
To me, being an Atheist is about not having a belief in a God or some greater spiritual power. It’s about the lack of a belief in any sort of organized religion or spirituality. Unfortunately, there’s no small number of people like commenter Donna H. and I who only identify themselves as Atheists with the caveat that they’re not to be confused with “anti-theists.”
What she means are those that go beyond identifying as Atheist and actually rally against religious and spiritual beliefs of any kind. Bill Maher, while not exactly cut from the same cloth as these folks, has become a prime example with his campaign against religious belief and practices. Though I see the need for Atheists to develop something resembling a community to find like-minded people with which to share their experiences and hash out their beliefs (or lack thereof), I think the whole idea of an Atheist is that you don’t join an organized religion. And yet, for all the behavior and rhetoric of many Atheists, they might as well join a fundamentalist religious sect.
My problem has always been that I find many Atheists are Atheists for one of two reasons: they’re angry at the God they used to(?) believe in for some wrong or ill, or they simply want to feel intellectually superior and throw themselves on a pedestal. That’s not me. I’m an Atheist because, at the moment, I don’t believe in God. That means I don’t have a belief, I don’t belong to any organization of belief, and I have no desire to treat my situation as a placeholder for religion.
It’s not because I’m bothered by people who believe in a God. I don’t think I’m smarter simply because of a lack of belief, nor do I feel any animosity towards someone that doesn’t subscribe to the same line of beliefs that I do. Unfortunately, a lot of people who openly espouse anti-theism aren’t willing or able to be that tolerant. In fact, it’s sort of interesting to hear the venom some of them spew towards those of a religious faith whilst in the same conversation accusing any and all faiths of only encouraging negativity, discrimination and hate. You’ll often hear talk of religion being the root of all society’s ills and conflicts, and yet also speak of the need to abolish belief in a higher power and especially organized religion. To me, it comes down to a need to disseminate and destroy anything that is “other,” which is something that is inherent in many people regardless of whether or not they adopt a faith.
In fairness, I avoid telling people I know about my lack of faith because I have, in the past, made that revelation and had that person clumsily and awkwardly try to convert me. Some have good intentions in doing so, but others seem to just get upset at the concept of an set of ideas so different from their own. In my mind, them and Atheists are two different girls who show up to prom wearing the same dress. They see each other across the room, have a tense exchange in which they acknowledge everything but the dress, then spend the rest of the night cursing out the other chick.
Me, I’ll just wear my ugly powder-blue party tux, and if someone else shows up wearing the same tux, then no big. Making people be, wear, or do something they aren’t just isn’t my bag.
Share it!
98 Responses to Why I Am (not telling many people I’m) an Atheist
Leave a Reply
STALK ME
“being an Atheist is about not having a belief in a God or some greater spiritual power. It’s about the lack of a belief in any sort of organized religion or spirituality”
Then maybe you’re not atheist. It’s not an ugly word, it’s just what you tell people when you’re absolutely positive that there is no higher being. If you constantly reevaluate or you’re not so sure, you’re agnostic.
Again, it’s not an ugly label or me trying to be like, “ZOMG I AM PURE ATHEIST HEAR ME ROAR,” it’s just how it is. I’d go into why I’m atheist, but it would invariably lead to a nasty argument and I’m so over those.
Be proud of who you are, what you believe and that’s all there is to it.
I agree with you that the MEANNESS of much of the modern atheism movement is very, very offputting . . . regardless of my own beliefs, having been raised in an evangelical household, I don’t need someone who doesn’t believe telling me that my parents and other relatives were/are stupid or evil or blood-hungry or fanatics or all of the above. They’re not. They’re good people, and they receive strength and comfort from their beliefs, and do good works for others as a result of them.
A good friend of mine, Amy Frushour Kelly, is one of the rare exceptions to the MEANNESS that runs deep in this movement . . . her blog is here: http://amyfrushourkelly.blogspot.com/ . . . I think you might find it, and her work with Center for Inquiry, to be of interest as you wrestle with these questions, and try to do it without being an as*hole to other people in the process.
I, too, am not particularly fond of this type of labeling & grouping. My thoughts on “god” are complicated, so I do not consider myself “atheist.” I’ve just never felt that I needed to belong to a religious group. So, I prefer “non-religious.” It’s more accurate and it doesn’t come with all the baggage of “atheist.”
Awesome job. This is going to be my post of the year.
I have had things in my life happen where I question God’s decisions, why He did what He did and why He did it? Sometimes I struggle with how I feel about God, but I do believe there is something up there beyond our existense. For me, it’s God.
That being said, I never really bother myself with what other people believe in or don’t believe in. I figure I wouldn’t want someone preaching to me or telling me why I am wrong for believing in what I believe in, so who am I to tell someone else what to believe in?
How often does stuff like that come up anyway? By the way, have you come out of the closet yet? Haven’t checked your other blog posts for that information. I’m assuming your family knows of your religious affiliation, that you were comfortable divulging that information. So, what about the other information? Have you shared that yet? I mean, your mannerisms in the photographs speak volumes; unless that was someone else suggesting you pose in those ways?
Your idiocy and childishness knows no bounds.
It’s nice to read an honest, personal blog post in the morning… I see, and can relate to, people being turned off by the term of “atheist” by itself. The connotation is often dismissed as negative, something that I don’t quite understand. I’m personally not an atheist but I’ve always been open to discussion about religion. People should all talk, listen and therefore expand perspectives and not dismiss them. Ya know!
I follow my own faith. To me, it’s myself I have to answer to at the end of the day and I’m a fairly harsh critic. If I had to answer to a God as well, my brain would explode.
“S.J” (#6)… Classy buddy, your cool now. ugh.
Anyways, so funny you post this a day after your friend Matt’s story about becoming a priest! I think its good that you don’t let religous views come in the way of your relationships. There is nothing better than having a diverse group of friends- it definitely spices up life :)
Keith, I believe what Kevin is describing is Agnostic-Atheism. Which is, not surprisingly, a form of atheism in which an individual isn’t sure if God exists but doesn’t believe in a God, ie you don’t believe in God but think that there is no way of being certain you are correct. Whereas, an agnostic doesn’t lean one way or the other in terms of God’s existence or his belief. Richard Dawkins, for example, is an agnostic-atheist.
Kevin, if I put an inaccurate label on you I’m sorry… You’re way better looking than Richard Dawkins.
I really don’t feel that atheists are any more prone to snobbery than theists. The problem is that when you tell people you are an atheist people always want to know why. The simple answer is that you don’t believe in God because of X, Y, and Z. Unfortunately, X, Y, and Z are refutations of the person your talking to’s most heartfelt beliefs. Arguments usually ensue as a consequence because many people feel like X, Y, and Z are offensive.
As a consequence, I don’t go out of my way to out myself to strangers or coworkers. And in the North East it is rarely an issue. In the South and Midwest on the otherhand…
Oh boy, lots to say, but I have a life to lead outside this blog’s comment section, so I’ll keep it short. “Atheist” just means that I lack the belief in a deity (I’m not a theist). It’s a definition of what I don’t believe, rather than what I do believe. The burden of proof is hardly on me in terms of miracles, an immortal soul, the divinity of certain figures, etc. I think Kevin can attest to the fact that I’m not a nasty atheist, and that if I go on the attack it’s not without good cause. I wouldn’t, for example, go after his recently ordained friend (despite my feelings about religion in general or the Catholic Church specifically, that guy’s a really nice guy and I’m glad he’s doing what he wants to do). For atheists and believers both, I would suggest looking up the TED Talk by Richard Dawkins, in which he makes some of the same points as Bill Maher did in “Religulous,” but does so in a much nicer way.
#6 (S.J.)…really? I mean…really?
I’m not so much of an atheist as I am more of an agnostic. If God does exist, in whatever form He takes, I just haven’t seen enough empirical evidence to prove or disprove the concept.
I started out as an atheist, but now I’m firmly in the agnostic camp. My philosophy is that we are here to live life, and we can worry, or not, about the forever after when it arrives.
The whole study of near death experiences is what really shifted me into the agnostic camp.
I am an atheist, and I’m also repulsed by the general reaction of atheists- and even agnostics- towards religion. Sometimes it feels like the other atheists I know are simply attempting to spread hatred against religion, and frankly, I don’t care what someone chooses to believe in as long as they don’t press it on me- that’s not to say that I don’t enjoy discussing religion (I read tons and tons about Islam, for example), merely that I don’t want someone to waste their time or mine trying to convert me.
It’s sad though. We as atheists want to be tolerated, yet so many of atheists hardline their stance as being *against* religion, it’s hard for atheists as a collective group to be taken seriously. I believe this is where the importance of secular groups come in that have atheists working along with churchgoers, but the day most atheists participate in something that radical- well, let’s just so I don’t think we’ll see it anytime soon.
I love how people can leave nasty comments but arent man enough to leave there real name.
To begin, I’m not particularly comfortable in church and did not get married in one. I’ve never been baptized and have no religious affiliation. I do however believe in God. I have always believed that I can be connected with God without attending church and giving 15% of my paycheck to them every week. I don’t think there is anything wrong with not believing either, it’s a personal choice and everyone has their reasons. Personally, I like feeling that there is something bigger than myself out there, and that when my time here ends, there will be something better waiting for me.
I know that there has been a lot of talk recently about the power and responsibilities of bloggers here. And, while I’m all for bloggers having a loose hand, I have to say that if #6 never made it to the screen, I would not have felt the loss even a little.
Bill – I agree. I’ve disallowed similar comments in the past.
However, this week being what it is and these topics being what they are, I feel it’s important we have that reminder. Think of SJ as Goofus in the old “Goofus and Gallant” bits from Highlights magazine (does that still exist?).
I guess. But I’m pretty sure that I always wanted to punch Gallant.
It’s not that I don’t believe in God, it’s that I don’t believe in Man. I just can’t throw all my faith into say Christianity just because the Bible told me to because if I don’t I’m going to Hell. The Bible was written by Man, it has been edited, altered and interpreted to fit the agenda of the Christian Man.
With all the different religions of the world I just can’t pick one and say they are absolutely right in what they believe and I will follow it blindly. Doesn’t the fact that there are different religions with completely different ideologies make people want to question their religious belief system? They can’t all be right and for me that means that they are all wrong and I can’t put my faith into any of them.
So what do I believe? I believe in the Spirit of the Universe or Light, you can call that God but to me the word God seams terrestrial. There is a higher power out there that made all this happen but I don’t think Man has a clue on what it is, how to explain it and certainly not on how it wants us to live our life.
Atheism does not mean a belief that there is no god. The vast majority of atheists (which includes most of those who call themselves agnostic), do not hold such a belief.
Funny how even atheists, by definition, are mistaken on this.
To the original article: “…most other Atheists are total a**holes about it.”
Really? Are you sure you’re not exaggerating for effect? Where on earth do you hang out?
I’m involved with a local freethought group, and these people are kind and friendly. If they’re hostile, it’s toward beliefs that cause harm, not religious people. There’s a big difference.
I think religion is wonderful if it encourages you to be a thoughtful, kind person. Unfortunately far too much is done in the name of religion that I can’t get behind, and I’ll never understand people saying they’re, “Christian,” out of one side of their mouth and then preaching hate and inequality from the other side. The Jesus of the Bible wouldn’t like that very much.
I don’t know if there’s a god. I don’t know and I probably never will, and there’s a certain comfort in that just like some people take comfort in having faith in God. I have faith in the fact that everything will be OK, and I’m not going to burn for eternity. :)
I’ve always figured myself a pretty laid-back Catholic, going so far to consider myself a philosophical Catholic – one that supports the message of Jesus, the logic of Augustine and Aquinas, but one who shuns the modern day politics of the Church. (And the hierarchy.) There was a time though that I felt I had to hide my faith, because Albany at large seemed to be full of mean atheists. One even went so far as to have his friends attack me quite personally on blogs and in person.
It wasn’t until I met another atheist we’re both acquainted with that I recognized there are three sorts of atheists: the jerks, the ones concerned they’ll spark conversion attempts, and the ones who support the charities of religious people. Let’s be honest here, may Catholic charities go into urban areas that are literally war zones to bring food and shelter to those without. They work to help people move away from gangs. And while their idea of health care might be skewed, they offer the basics to those who can’t get it.
Isherwood – I won’t just point you to the running widget of #atheism Tweets that show up on the website you linked to, since that’s the internet and wholly unfair.
Nor is it fair for me to paint all atheists as a**holes. Yes, I was exaggerating for effect, but that’s not really much of an excuse for pigeon-holing an entire belief.
We cannot quantify personable statements like that with anything other than personal experience. Yours and mine differ. I have a handful of friends that are atheists and not a**holes about it. I’ve known and encountered a lot more that I’m not friends with, specifically because they’re a**holes about it (and a lot of other things). I’m glad you did and continue to find groups that are supportive and embrace other beliefs, and wish there were more of those around the Atheist and Anti-Theist community.
I see this a little differently. My takeaway from what Bill Maher says (and his compatriots like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens) is that atheists need to organize to counterpoint the strong social movement generated by the religious right and evangelism. The polls I’ve seen peg the percentage of atheists in the US at anywhere from 10%-30%. But you wouldn’t know that because atheists are commonly depicted as a morally-depraved fringe sect. How many openly atheists are serving in Congress compared to born-again Christians? If atheists organized in the same fashion as the evangelics (which make up the same or a smaller proportion of the population) then perhaps they would have more of an influential say in public policy, media and the greater dialogue.
I think we can all be decent human beings, helping out the unfortunate (people, animals), believing there’s someone better than ourselves, etc. As far as picking and choosing, don’t know how necessary that is, and what exactly would it mean, anyway.
Kevin, I’m sure you realize that mockery of foolish, unfounded belief is an effective tactic for opening eyes. Point to Twitter all you like. If telling someone that what they believe is stupid, and that they should evaluate it more closely before it harms someone, makes me an asshole, then I’m an asshole.
Ellie, Catholic charities do some good work. However, 1) most of those people would still be doing good work without superstition, and 2) the Catholic Church does a hell of a lot of harm. In my opinion, the harm outweighs the good. Such is the case with most religion.
If an atheist wants to make a statement to effect change, there are few options that won’t result in chastising over tone or style. It’s the nature of faith to turn nonbelief into negativity. From my perspective, we’re left with little choice aside from forthright attacks on harmful belief and mockery of those who cling to it irrationally against all good judgment. Carl Sagan and Daniel Dennet are two of the sweet souls of atheism, but their approach doesn’t reach very far at all. Some goals, such as the limitation of religion in US politics, call for more.
I don’t have anything against people who believe or don’t believe. But really, who has the right to tell another person that they should or shouldn’t or that what they do believe is stupid? That, whether it comes from a fanatic (i.e.ahole) on either side is so incredibly arrogant and offensive.
I guess I do believe. I believe that people have the right to make their own decisions and think, feel, believe, and for the most part, act, in tune with their own personal choosing. Everyone else should mind their own business.
Isherwood – Pointing out the stupidity of others’ beliefs has never been a constructive tactic. It may make you feel better, but if your true goal is to ask people to reconsider their beliefs, then it will fail.
BL, to tell someone that what they believe is wrong (or stupid) is to do them a favor, in many cases. It speaks to the nature of humanity that you don’t see this.
Truth isn’t a matter of opinion or belief. It’s discovered as a result of honest inquiry and investigation, and any intellectually honest person is happy to have someone point out his folly. To avoid being corrected is dogmatism, and there’s nothing good in that.
Isherwood – you went from admonishing me for what you perceived to be a blanket statement to then exemplifying so many of the qualities that make me hesitant to identify myself as Atheist (snideness, false sense of superiority, ad hominem attacks, judgemental attitudes, etcetera). It has me wondering if you’re just doing this on purpose to make a point.
Also, I think you might be confusing truth with Truth – the former being logic and facts, the latter being an abstract philosophical construct. In other words, I think there is a very clearly defined line between someone saying the sky is purple when it’s actually blue, and someone saying there was a higher being who may have contributed to the creation of everything including that sky.
It’s a discussion that’s really not new, though with the internet and increased levels of acceptance, we’re able to voice it more freely. But being able to voice it more freely doesn’t mean we necessarily have to voice it with such bitter cynicism. For all the bad that’s occurred in and in response to actions taken by the Catholic Church, they’ve also done just as much good. To ignore and avoid those facts and people who make the world a better place through or by motivation derived from their faith – THAT, my friend, is dogmatism. And it’s ugly. And intellectually dishonest.
Teri – I assume you mean it’s all that SHOULD matter. I agree. I just wish more people did.
My goodness that got complicated. Is it anyone’s business? I think if everyone tries to be the best person they can be, and own up when they’re wrong…well, that’s all that matters.
I have nothing but complete respect for all of you soulless heathens.
I’m going to comment before reading the rest of the comments so I appear stupid. Yes, I said it.
I wonder how many people will tell you that you are going to hell, when in fact hell is a Christian belief & how many will prosthelytize and URGE you to “find God.”
I whole-heartedly agree with you about this. I was raised a Protestant Christian, began to ask questions after I lost my grandfather to cancer, and became an atheist. Since then I have done so much research on different religions and theistic belief systems, that there is absolutely NO WAY that I would fit into one organized religion. I do believe in a higher power, but I’m more spiritual than I am religious. Most would call that athiest because I don’t believe in The God, but the correct term for my particular brand is technically agnostic. Do I have faith? Yes. Do I accept everyone? Yes. Do I condemn? Only if someone wrongs me, but otherwise live & let live.
I try to live by the many rules of common courtesy. Do what ye will, but harm none. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Karma’s a bitch, I know her personally. And other such cliches. It’s kept me sane over the years. No matter how much my dear sister wants to convert me back to Christianity, she will most likely have to chalk that one up to me going to the Big BBQ, as she believes. To me, there is no such thing as hell. When we die we become from whence we came. Ashes to ashes.
@KeeHawNuh
“Pointing out the stupidity of others’ beliefs has never been a constructive tactic. It may make you feel better, but if your true goal is to ask people to reconsider their beliefs, then it will fail.”
You can’t possibly be serious. Have you ever been to school? The entire intent of an education is to teach you how to evaluate your beliefs. Showing others how to do so effectively is among the greatest gifts you can give!
Please, whenever you can, point out a stupid belief of mine. I’ll thank you for opening my eyes.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. For posting this.
I am a very out Atheist as you probably noticed. (And thanks for the shout out too.) But this all too often gets mixed-up with anti-theist, that breed you mention that wants to quash all religion as zealously as the Religious Reich wants to quash all disbelief. I have a sort of agreement with my theistic friends to just not go there. I think they’re mistaken and they think I am and we respect each other’s right to hold opinions. We are friends because we have so much else in common and, at heart, hold some intrinsic values as important, treating others with respect, valuing freedom (not least of all freedom of religion), and basically just trying to be a good, decent people while realizing we all fall sort of this goal on occassion being that we are, after all, only human. (Believe me, I can be an out and out crab.)
I think the anti-theists are a backlash of the Religious Right (or Reich as I like to call them; no, I didn’t come up with that and I forget who I first picked it up from) that wants to repress opposing points of view by rewriting American history (America was definitely not founded as a Christian nation, google Treaty of Tripoli or letter to the Danbury Baptists if you don’t believe me) and making Christian commandments law.
However, I think they very largely become the enemy they fear and I call them out on it whenever I see its ugly head reared. What I like to point out is trying to legally force your (ir)religious views on people is also a threat to religious freedom and threatening religious freedom is just plain dumb if you’re a religious minority albeit a growing one. For example, there are anti-theists out there actively campaigning (started by Dawkins who writes some brilliant things, some insane things and who I often find just plain snobby) that kids not be labelled Christian, Jewish, etc. and calling raising a child in faith child abuse. These same anti-theists would be very upset — and should be — at Creationism being taught in their kids’ public school. As for myself, I had to defend my right to raise my child Atheist and it makes me all the more conscious that something so close to the heart to should be left to the parent and only interfered with if it reaches fanatical points of actual physical, mental or sexual abuse (which is not most theist parents and, indeed, there is more wrong than belief when it does happen). Regardless of what the parent teaches or doesn’t teach, kids will find their own way as adults. I was raised in a very repressively religious atmosphere that did reach the level of physical abuse; Madalyn O’Hair’s son converted to Christianity.
All that said, let me just mention that demanding government neutralitiy is neither anti-theism or persecution of Christians (the Religious Right’s latest rallying cry). The government (here in the US anyway) is supposed to be neutral on religious matters. It doesn’t always remain so and to protest when it doesn’t isn’t anti-theist. Removing the “under God” that wasn’t there originally but added during McCartyism isn’t endorsing Atheism; to endorse Atheism, this would have to be changed to “under no God” which I’d protest just as adamantly. Even though I agreed with most of his statements, Jesse Ventura ticked me off as much as Dubya because he said things in office that he should not have used his office to say. It annoys me when Atheists applaud him for doing so then grumble about other politicians god blesses. Both are wrong when they are representing the governmental office they were elected to rather than just acting as a private citizen.
Only one extremely small quibble. So small it’s not even really that. More like a personal hangup of mine since you use the popular phrasing. I refuse to refer to my Atheism as a lack of belief. I call it an absence of belief. Lack, to me, implies something missing; nothing missing. Nothing there to miss.
And I have plenty of faith and belief in other things (I fully believe the sun will come up tomorrow and have faith my grandson will still love his Grammy 10 years from now for starters). I just don’t have faith and belief in this one thing that the majority of my friends and neighbors do.
Now I’m going to go read everyone else’s comments.
Kevin, I was raised Catholic. I still involve myself with their charities and good deeds. You’re making some seriously flawed assumptions about me and my agenda (inasmuch as I actually have one). Your list of insults only applies from your perspective, which seems absurdly apologetic.
As for truth vs. Truth, that’s always seemed a lame copout to me. To capitalize the T is to proclaim an idea beyond scrutiny.
“2) the Catholic Church does a hell of a lot of harm. In my opinion, the harm outweighs the good. Such is the case with most religion.”
Apologies, you didn’t say all aspects of Catholicism are evil and heartless and cruel and damaging. Just that, you know, most of them are, as is most religion. I’d disagree; I don’t think Buddhists, Taoists, and so on and so forth have made the world a worse place for their existence. You grant some exceptions, but I’m saying that 1. there are far more than you’re willing to admit and 2. you’re operating under religion rather than human misdeeds and power struggle as root causes for all the bad you’re alluding to.
It’s not apologetic. It’s just that we’re coming at it from two completely different angles. You view religion as exerting control over events and policy, whereas I view religion and faith as something that people will use as a tool/excuse/method for executing their wants and desires. You can say there’s no difference, but there is; if not religion, that same person would have used a steadfast socio-economic belief system to exert control or commit a misdeed. On that same token, they can do the same with good.
And to capitalize the T is to proclaim a difference between hard reality and an abstract concept. It’s not a cop-out to acknowledge the difference between the practical and the philosophical.
@Isherwood, Given your posts, the irony concerning Kevin’s purported insults is dripping.
I a do wonder if Kevin is correct. maybe I am participating in a farce by responding. No matter; it’s apparent that you are not open to dialogue anyway, so this is likely fruitless.
I will just point out, that you are not educating, rather, you are condescending. You are assuming that your belief is the correct one and then foisting it by demeaning the beliefs of others. However, what you have is a believe of no more or less validity than any other. I’m sure that is pretty evident to most. I just wanted to ask you why you feel compelled to make sure that everyone thinks as you do. What damage to you would be such loss of control?
Some interesting comments you’ve generated here and, for the most part, productive (with one glaring exception).
Keith, have you heard the terms hard and soft Atheist. Soft Atheists are what you describe and usually also consider themself Agnostic. (You can, of course, be both.) I’m a hard Atheist. I firmly believe there is no god. Some like to say that puts the burden of proof on me. I say the heck it does. I’m not the one making the phenominal claim. Saying there is no god does not mean you have to prove anything any more than saying there is no Easter Bunny.
Ellie, I admit I disparage the Catholic Church quite a bit, especially since the abuse scandal began. That said, yes, I’ll admit they’ve done some good though I agree with Isherwood that the harm they’ve done rather outweighs the good; however, I wouldn’t actively prevent their existence. I think they are their own worse enemy in that regard and more and more are getting fed up with them because of their abuses. Just prosecute when they abuse children, etc., for Pete’s sake. I can’t hold anything against a Catholic like you. My daughter, openly Atheist when hired, works part-time for Catholic Charities and gets a lot of personal satisfaction out of helping people.
Teri, you do know I’m applauding you again, don’t you?
Kevin, you’ve a good audience. By and large, these were thoughtful comments.
Isherwood – It’s a matter of psychology. You, and various others, may not have a problem with being called stupid and then “magnanimously” shown the truth. But for most people, this is a poor tactic.
This is not to say that these people wouldn’t have an open mind to new ideas, but come on, nobody responds well when the very beliefs that shape their existence are summarily dismissed as stupid.
And that’s not even to mention that by definition, faith is largely immune to arguments of logic, tactless though they may be.
But, in the interest of your request…. Isherwood, your belief that calling people’s beliefs stupid will have any positive effect is, well, stupid.
Good points in #40 too, btw.
Isherwood, you have to admit that the Pope, if he wasn’t the Pope, still wouldn’t be some average Joe on the street. And the preists that did bad things to kids still would have and those that covered it up would still look the other way at that sort of thing.
There are good preists and nuns who are suffering for this image.
You can’t deny that MLK was a good person, can you? Dickens is still one of my favorite authors despite some presumptions about Atheists. I cut him some slack for the time he comes from, I admit, but we get on because we share a hatred for hypocrites and robber barons.
And, btw, any one whose faith is threatened by my absence thereof, doesn’t really have any.
[My problem has always been that I find many Atheists are Atheists for one of two reasons: they’re angry at the God they used to(?) believe in for some wrong or ill, or they simply want to feel intellectually superior]
I’m an atheist, and I’ve met many atheists, and I’m completely baffled by this assertion.
Most atheists are know are atheists because there’s no convincing evidence for belief in the supernatural. That is actually the most common reason.
Being angry at a god is like being angry at the Easter bunny or at Santa Claus. It doesn’t make any sense, and I’ve met NO ONE that even implicitly is angry at any god.
If there is anger among us, it is towards the flesh and bone believers in gods that are so noisy, so intrusive, and so presumptous to try to force their beliefs on the entire population. Look at the creationist movement, the anti-gay movement, etc. Check this out for a more exhaustive list of why we MUST be angry:
http://gretachristina.typepad.com/greta_christinas_weblog/2007/10/atheists-and-an.html
It’s a sad but true fact that when one who believes they are right talks to those he believes are mislead, it will always come across as condescension. It works both ways, too–not only have I caught myself doing it as the atheist, but all too often I get it from those on the other side.
As far as ridiculing believers, yeah, guilty as charged. I mean, it’s hard not to laugh at the folks behind the Creation Museum. Bwahahaha.
I like Kevin Marshall a lot more after reading this and all his comments. Just wanted to add this.
“My problem has always been that I find many Atheists are Atheists for one of two reasons: they’re angry at the God they used to(?) believe in for some wrong or ill, or they simply want to feel intellectually superior and throw themselves on a pedestal.”
I’ve never met one of the latter. How could someone possibly decide ‘I want to feel intellectually superior and therefore I will dis-believe there is a God’? I can’t do that for my next door neighbor or my wife or anyone else that I already believe exists. I also can’t do the opposite for Harry Potter or Spiderman or anyone else that I already believe don’t exist.
“To me, it comes down to a need to disseminate and destroy anything that is “other,” which is something that is inherent in many people regardless of whether or not they adopt a faith.”
It couldn’t possibly be because having incorrect beliefs can cause harm, like the actual atheists say when you’re not ignoring their arguments, right? When doctors disagree with people who believe that arsenic is healthy, and want to abolish belief that arsenic / plutonium / neurotoxins are healthy to consume, they’re clearly being intolerant and wanting to destroy anything that is ‘other.’ Never mind what the doctors themselves say – those mean ol’ doctors are being too fundamentalist.
As a free-market capitalist, I can have a frank, calm discussion with a socialist, espousing my views and listening to theirs. I can claim their views are flawed, and explain why I think they are. Nobody calls me mean for doing so.
Yet when someone professes a belief in God / Krishna / Thor / whatever, with no proof whatsoever, and in discussion I point out the fact that there is no proof to support their belief, and that therefore their logic is flawed, suddenly I’m being “mean”. Why? What’s the difference? Why are religious ideas afforded this level of protection from frank discussion and critique?
When people criticize the so-called “New Atheists” for being mean, they’re buying into the age-old double standard. I think it’s that double standard, that taboo, that is the real root cause of religious-inspired violence and conflict, rather than religion itself. If people would stop being so darn touchy about having their beliefs critiqued, we’d all be better off.
I like when i meet an atheist and they tell me they are an atheist within the first ten minutes of meeting them, while we are nowhere near the topic of religion and religious beliefs. The best combo i ever met was an atheist Jedi. He didnt believe in god b/c he thought it was retarded too, instead he believed in a dogmatic set of rules that was a plot of a sci fi movie from the 70’s.
Daily news folks tend to be a real skeptical bunch. So I was surprised when a young woman I worked with asked me one day, “So, G, do you believe in God?”
And I just blurted out “Well, to me the important thing is to keep asking the questions, not finding the answers.”
I am simply not smart enough to say with certainty that I will ever be cocky enough to KNOW x or y about the nature of the universe, or creation, or afterlife. I truly hope my last words will be “Ah-ha!” as I go to the next phase having made a profound discovery, but with my luck it’ll be something senile like “They used to sell those vuvuzelas at Yankee Stadium, but they called them noisemakers, but had to stop because people were beating each other up with them!”
In the meantime I’ll try to do one good deed a day, even though I’ve been out of Boy Scouts for 40 years. It doesn’t kill me, and small deposits in the karma bank compound, I hear tell.
Nice post, Kevin.
KM, you are contradicting yourself. You say Catholicism is responsible for as much good as it is bad and then you say that Catholicism isn’t responsible for anything because people just use it as an excuse for actions they take for other reasons. Which is it?
The problem I see with the perception of atheists in our society is one of unwarranted categorization. There are very likely no “angry atheists” at all, only atheists who happen to be angry. To be an angry atheist, you would have to be angry at something you don’t believe in, which is circularly illogical.
I have no statistics to prove it, but I’d be willing to bet that the percentage of atheists who are actually angry people is about equal to the percentage of believers who are angry people. The reason that folks perceive there to be brigades of angry atheists, is because the only atheist voices being heard over the cacophony of modern media are the loud ones. The vast majority of atheists are peaceable, and therefore *don’t* go around shouting at others, so no one notices them.
Likewise, the vast majority of supernaturalists (theists, deists, animists, superstitionists, etc) don’t make hateful speeches on TV, shoot doctors, or fly planes into buildings, but those sure seem to be the ones in the media all the time. Don’t you think that someone who had never experienced a religion-heavy society like ours seeing our news might come away suspecting that all believers were really angry, scary people?
Interesting and thought- provoking post, Kevin.
Where have you identified “meanness” of the atheist movement (other than Bill Maher) as mention by J. Eric Smith and you?
As someone who is surrounded by atheist/agnostic/humanist friends and family, I have to disagree your assumptions about the reasons for lacking belief in a higher being. In my experience, the lack of belief is based on science and lack of proof of a higher being. It is not motivated by anger or arrogance. I don’t know many atheists/agnostics/humanists who spend much time worrying about the religious beliefs of others unless their own religious (or lack of) freedom is challenged.
“You’ll often hear talk of religion being the root of all society’s ills and conflicts, and yet also speak of the need to abolish belief in a higher power and especially organized religion. To me, it comes down to a need to disseminate and destroy anything that is “other,” which is something that is inherent in many people regardless of whether or not they adopt a faith.”
I don’t think it’s a matter of destroying the “other” for most non-believers. I believe it’s usually a reaction to negative aspects of religion. Religious beliefs are used to limit the civil liberties of Americans (same-sex marriage, for example). Religious beliefs were used to support segregation in our country. If organized religions did not attempt to interfere with the lives of those who don’t follow their teachings, I don’t think you would hear many negative statements about particular religions.
“But, mostly, I avoid telling people I’m an Atheist because most other Atheists are total a**holes about it.”
Sadly, I sometimes feel the same way about telling people I’m a Christian.
Re: Ben Dreidel
Ben Dreidel:
“It couldn’t possibly be because having incorrect beliefs can cause harm, like the actual atheists say when you’re not ignoring their arguments, right? When doctors disagree with people who believe that arsenic is healthy, and want to abolish belief that arsenic / plutonium / neurotoxins are healthy to consume, they’re clearly being intolerant and wanting to destroy anything that is ‘other.’ Never mind what the doctors themselves say – those mean ol’ doctors are being too fundamentalist.”
…
“You say Catholicism is responsible for as much good as it is bad and then you say that Catholicism isn’t responsible for anything because people just use it as an excuse for actions they take for other reasons. Which is it?”
1. You’re working off an assumption that belief in a God causes harm in a debate over whether or not belief in a God causes harm. That’s circular reasoning, and very similar to the same logical fallacy behind St. Thomas Aquinas’s Five Proofs that work off assuming the conclusion from the outset.
2. Comparing faith to health; philosophical versus practical. That’s a false dichotomy. It’s not that I’m ignoring yours and others’ arguments (a baffling insertion since I’ve been engaged in a discussion with Isherton and others), it’s that they’re trying to convince me apples are delicious by comparing them to oranges. Am I supposed to pretend there’s a point made when there isn’t? Isn’t that what you’re accusing me of doing?
3. The “more harm than good” was in reference to the Catholic Church (an actual institution) not Catholicism (the belief system).
I’m not trying to be wholly dismissive of you or rude, but you’re so eager to find holes in my argument you’re creating false scenarios and presenting abstract concepts as hard facts. I can’t and won’t argue with it, because it’s illogical and we’ll be running around in circles all day chasing our own tails.
Bill (#49): I see your point, but when someone employs a snarky attitude and refers to people of faith as “stupid,” that’s not being constructive. In the example you provide, you’re simply stating facts. That’s not being “mean;” and if you’re accused of such, it’s incorrect. However, if you say “you’re stupid and a bad person for believing that,” THEN it’s mean.
I don’t think that critiquing or questioning a faith or one’s own faith is unwarranted or should be discouraged. Quite the contrary; if I didn’t believe that, I wouldn’t have posted this in the first place and encouraged discussion and exploration of the subject. But there is a manner to go about it which is more desirable in its civility and tone, particularly considering (in response to your question as to why religion is such a touchy subject) the level of emotional attachment those of faith have to their beliefs.
Blaise: Solid points, all.
G-Man: Thanks again for the compliment.
“You’re working off an assumption that belief in a God causes harm in a debate over whether or not belief in a God causes harm.”
No, I’m not making that assumption. I’m saying that the reason many atheists become so anti-religion is because that is our conclusion – not because we’re out to destroy the ‘other’ as you claimed. I have plenty of ‘others’ – Asians, females, theists, teenagers, millionaires, etc. I’m not out to destroy any of them. Well, in a few years, I might be pretty anti-teenager… (grin)
“Comparing faith to health; philosophical versus practical.”
I’m still completely baffled by the distinction you’re trying to make here (and several times earlier.) I have no idea what a non-practical belief is.
“I’m not trying to be wholly dismissive of you or rude”
I don’t perceive you as such in your response.
“The “more harm than good” was in reference to the Catholic Church (an actual institution) not Catholicism (the belief system).”
Clearly, actual institutions can do more harm than good and vice versa. So I guess you’re saying that belief systems can’t? Or only belief systems without ‘practical’ beliefs?
I used to be a fundamentalist Christian. Trust me, the rhetoric you hear from the “New Atheists” doesn’t even come close to being fundamentalist. I hear that critique a lot. But honestly, it’s pretty tame compared to religious fundamentalists. Mostly they’re just criticizing religious dogma (mostly fairly in my opinion) without the automatic level of respect that seems to be afforded it in our society.
When I first read books by Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens, et. al., I was mostly just shocked at how often I found myself reading things that echoed my own opinions. Their books seem, to me, more like an effort at raising consciousness than anything else – a way to say to atheists that no, you’re not weird for disbelieving, and that it’s okay to admit it. But I can see how they might come off quite differently for people whose experiences with religion were more moderate than mine.
By the way, if you’d like to meet some (mostly) non-a**hole atheists and agnostics, we do have a local Meetup group. It’s a nice, laid back bunch of folks who get together for coffee or happy hour, and we just chat about whatever comes to mind. It’s a good way to let off steam and talk without the usual “don’t talk about religion or politics” filter. Check it out here: http://www.meetup.com/atheists-531/
Thanks for pointing that out, Kevin. Woooo. Still complicated, or I’m too simple.
Ben – Maybe a poor choice of words. I mean the difference between something you can prove with solid science and hard facts – eg. ingesting arsenic is bad for you – and something that’s more of an abstract concept, eg. the existence of a God or human nature or whether religious beliefs or man is the source of certain wrongs.
The difference between the church as an institution and Catholicism as a faith structure – again, there’s the organization that exists in the real world versus a set of beliefs that certain folks adhere to. They’re tied together, but one is tangible and one isn’t.
Mike – Thanks for the link. I’ll check it out!
There actually is a science maxim that you can’t prove a negative.
I find that taking the time for spirituality has a positive effect on my life. It’s not a coincidence that human beings have been building religious belief systems for all of recorded history. Whether it’s meditation, yoga, temple, or church, I think people can benefit from pausing to remember that there’s more to the universe than just themselves.
There was a time when I was less religious. Do you know what I did back then? I went onto the internet and tried to prove to people that my view of the world is right and theirs is wrong.
What a tragic life that was.
Kevin, thanks for speaking out about this part of who you are on such a public forum.
I am constantly evaluating and re-evaluating faith, and with much certainty will declare myself currently as an agnostic.
In my heart, I do respect that other people have beliefs different from me, and I do my best to show people that respect. The only time I get frustrated, or even angry is when I perceive that people are trying to cement their beliefs into laws that will affect EVERYONE.
There is a new blog on the TU (you can probably figure out which one I mean), that I think I will try to stay away from for my own sanity.
But thank you, again, for making your atheism so public, and I would encourage you to write about more non-theist issues whenever they occur to you. There needs to be more positive representation of that aspect of society.
I was an atheist for over half of my life. During that time, I never felt the need to ram my beliefs down anyone else’s throat as do the atheists of today. It never bothered me to see “In God We Trust” on currency, or to hear of a Christmas tree referred to as such (as opposed to a “holiday tree”). There is one man in Southern California who goes so far as to have makeshift roadside memorials (the type families put up when a loved one dies in a wreck) removed because they are religious in nature. If there is no God, why is a tiny memorial such a threat? Sorry, but I agree with Kevin. Atheists today are total a**—er, anti-religious fanatics.
Isherwood, imposing your opinion in a disdainful manner is not the same as schooling someone in facts. BL and KeeNawHuh have your number.
Kevin you do have faith it is just in the science so therefor you do believe in something. some food for thought
It may have been said in the previous comments, but a lot of anti-theism may stem from anti-atheism.
I am sometimes that anti-theist and I am sometimes an atheist who would rather stay out of those conversations, but mostly I don’t label myself. The atheist label is usually thrown at you by others.
But I find it hard sometimes when you are made to feel that you are either not a good person because you don’t believe, or people make you feel that you just haven’t found god yet and you will.
Kevin, you sparked some interesting conversation here. Keep up the good work.
Mike, I don’t think he’s calling it fundamentalist in that sense (correct me if I’m wrong, Kevin) but in the sense that of the anti-theist culture has some rigidity and nonacceptance of being anything but constantly judgmental of religion and we should all evangelize to theists about how wrong they are. At least, that’s the way I took it as opposed to that critic quoted on The Friendly Athiest blog.
Check your e-mail from the meetup group to see what I mean. I was going to recommend them to Kevin then cringed for some of the comments about this blog but, Kevin, I think I still will because it was really only a few and other comments were very nice and praised this blog for being thought-provoking. I even got one reminding how much harsher we all sound on-line and in e-mail. Point well taken and I hope I will eventually make it to a meetup. (Haven’t yet due to babysitting my grandson while my daughter works or goes to school nights.)
Blaise and Momto1, well said, except Momto1, I do find Mahar rather mean about it and Hitchens and Dawkins can come off rather snobby and as if they are trying to squelch religion all together at times. However, on the other hand, I’ve had many moments like Mike when reading them that they are writing what I’m thinking so I run hot and cold with them. Mahar just basically rubs me the wrong way and always did long before he took such an anti-religion stanch. Maybe he just needs to rid himself of that permanent sneer and learn some tact.
Kevin, I’ll second the suggestion that you occassionally blog about non-theistic topics because it would be good to hear such a balanced non-anti-theisic (whew) view on them. And you write well.
Teri, you are not simple. You are uncomplicated and down-to-earth. There’s a world of difference between that and simple.
Re: Where have you identified “meanness” of the atheist movement (other than Bill Maher) as mention by J. Eric Smith and you?
Certainly in Maher’s “Religulous,” which was designed to make religious people look stupid. I could only get through about 20 minutes of it before giving up . . . because in addition to the anti-religion element, there was also the kind of anti-Southern/anti-blue collar element in the scene in the trucker’ chapel that drives me crazy when delivered by too-clever-by-half folks like Maher. I identify more with those truckers than I do with Maher, honestly . . . they’re hard-working dudes who are just trying to make sense of the world around them in a way that gives them comfort and a sense of community. Don’t make fun of them, liberal elite snobs.
Also, many of the popular works of the neo-atheist movement equally treat people of faith as if they were idiots . . . “The God Delusion” is as mean and provocative a statement to a Christian as, say, “The Obama Regime” is to a Democrat. “God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything” is equally mean . . .
You can agree with Hitchens and Dawkins positions without having to treat those who don’t as thought they are fools (at best) or knaves (at worst) . . . I dislike the ugly tone in Atheist world every bit as much as I dislike the ugly tone over in Tea Party world.
Re #65: “In God We Trust” was made the National Motto in the 1950s because to convey that ‘an atheistic American is a contradiction in terms.’ The motto says that the We of the United States is defined by Trust In God; those who do not believe there are any Gods to trust are They and not American. It is a very, very ugly phrase and sentiment.
Let’s be honest here!!! Religion is very dangerous!!!
When idiots try to blow up planes with their exploding underwear, fly planes into buildings, etc., it’s as clear as can be. And how about the father who prays over his sick daughter instead of taking her to the hospital? The billions of dollars tithed by the poor every year to an already rich church? The list goes on. I proudly wear the title Atheist and can say unequivocally that this behavior is a few points below my IQ. I refuse to apologize for acting sane!!!
If the zealots could keep their superstitions in the church where they belong, I could be extremely tolerant. Until then, I will keep shouting from the roof-tops.
I think Bill should sit down and watch his own movie for a refresher course of how insane religion is!!!!!!!
I am sorry that you have had a problem with people who refer to themselves as Atheists. What is amazing to me is that you have been able based on no scientific research determine that there are only 2 reasons that people become Atheists. You are correct when you say this is your problem. I must disagree with your conclusion.
All people are born Atheists and remain so until either their parents or other people of influence lead them into believing in a superior power when they are young and impressionable. Your conclusion is based on no supportive evidence just like the brainwashing of young children into a religious belief.
Based on many of your comments it appears that you have a great deal of confusion regarding your belief system. Why be ashamed of something that you know to be true? There is nothing wrong with knowing that you are right about the fact their is no God. There is nothing wrong with feeling smarter than an individual who believes in an imaginary being that is factually unsupported. If you know your history than you would embrace the fact that Religion has been responsible for much of the hate and horror in the world since its inception. It is a fact and must be made apparent to all when discussing why religion must come to an end.
I don’t care what I am called or what group people place me in, all that matters are my convictions and the fact that I help educate those who live in a delusional world of wizards, witches, dragons, afterlife and imaginary beings. Lets understand that we are all Atheists until our parents brainwash us with information that they believe true based on their own brainwashing.
Be a freethinker and come to your own conclusions based on what you see, hear, and read as well as challenging everything including what you read on Atheist sites. You should never need anyone or anything to remind you that you are an Atheist. It is impossible to spend more than 5 minutes of a day without there being deluged with some sort of Religious injection. You have been rejecting your belief system for some reason, get some help and find out why.
I reject that it’s a “belief system.” How is not believing a “belief system?” See, that’s my problem, Mark: I don’t want a belief system, and I don’t want a label. And you say you don’t want one either, but you’re taking me to task for having different ideas than you when it comes to the nature of religion and whether it nor religion itself causes harm.
And you tell me to observe, read, and form my own conclusions. Thing is, I did; if you read the comments stuff like what J. Eric Smith pointed out is exactly the sort of thing that turns me off about anti-theists (that and some of the comments and attitude I got from atheist advocates). Granted, it was unfair for me to label all as such, but I’m basing it on as much exposure and observation as you’re suggesting I do.
As for not being able to spend more than five minutes a day without being deluged with some sort of religious injection? It’s such a ridiculous statement it hardly warrants a response, but I actually went through my entire day without a “religious injection.”
Actually, that’s not true. It came up today in a very pleasant conversation with J. Eric Smith over lunch. Other than that, the only time religion came up was…well, in the comments section of this blog post.
Here’s my main problem with your reply, though: it demands logic and empirical evidence and accuses me of being unfair and not being able to support my points, then makes wild claims and accusations. Then you infer I’m confused and have a problem. Well, in that sense you’re right: I’m confused as to how so many people can argue in favor of logic and reasoning while using none of it in support of their own arguments (which is frustrating since I agree with some of them), and I have a problem with people who tell me I need help simply because I said something that doesn’t jive with their make-pretend “belief system.” I also have a problem with the fact that you paint us as being ashamed because we don’t believe, but then you shame me because I don’t subscribe to ALL of your edicts.
I think what it comes down it is you want me to observe, read, and form YOUR conclusions.
How religion came up at lunch today: I wrestled Kevin to the floor after plying him with Chicken Iskender and put the God Helmet on him, so now he’s a dangerous weapon of destruction.
Seriously, in re, #72 “Let’s be honest here!!! Religion is very dangerous!!! When idiots try to blow up planes with their exploding underwear, fly planes into buildings, etc., it’s as clear as can be,” I say: nonsense, because 99.999999999% of religious people in the world do NOT blow up airplanes with exploding underwear. Religion is but one of many social, economic and political tools that may be used to manipulate people into acts of terrorism. Look at the anarchist movement of the late 19th century and early 20th century, which was an avowedly atheistic and secular movement, and was just as damaging and terrifying in its day as Islamofascism or Christian vigilateism are today. Idiots will find ideologies that allow them to act idiotically . . . and not all of them are based on religion.
While I don’t eschew a rationalist view of the world, I believe that we have evolved to have an innate desire for transcendence and/or altered states of belief . . . that’s part of being a human being, as evidenced by the fact that every culture in the world has some mythology or ideology that seeks to assign meaning to the lives of its members, and bind community through rituals and shared beliefs. A rationalist seeking a higher state of understanding through dialog over a bottle of wine or a bowl of weed is no different, chemically and biologically, than a group of worshippers seeking higher understanding through the rite of Eucharist.
I’m a big fan of molecular biologist and author Ursula Goodenough (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ursula_Goodenough) and brought her to RPI to speak at the Chapel + Cultural Center when I worked there. Her canon of work is dedicated, in part, to trying to understand how we have evolved as a species to have a need and ability to seek divinity . . . I may be over-simplifying, but she sees it as a next evolutionary step beyond our acquisition of self-awareness. Her work is rooted in her scientific research, and in some ways could be seen to mirror concepts inherent in “The God Delusion,” but coming at it from the perspective this acquired evolutionary trait is intrinsic to our species, and not something to be slapped away as an affectation or rejection of rationality.
I highly recommend her book “The Sacred Depths of Nature,” http://www.amazon.com/dp/0195136292/ . . . I share her awe at the universe around us, and I practice my own faith by marveling daily at the wonders of physics, biology, chemistry and astronomy, and trying to embrace and comprehend as much of it as I can during my brief stay here on this planet. The physiological reaction I get from sitting out late at night watching the stars and planets is every bit as real as the reaction a celebrant in the Catholic church receives in the worship experiences of their choosing, and neither of those experiences, nor the experiences of the vast majority of religious believers on the planet, should be dismissed as “idiotic,” so long as they don’t result in secular anarchist bombings (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1919_United_States_anarchist_bombings) or religiously inspired plane hijackings.
Let me even make this a bit more personal . . . I was raised in an evangelical Christian household. The last conversation I had with my father was over the phone, as he lay mortally wounded in a hospital bed after an automobile accident not of his own causing, morphine numbing the dreadful injuries he had sustained, that would kill him soon thereafter. His primary emotional and psychological comfort in his final lucid moments was a belief that he and I, and my sister and mother, would be reunited someday in a place free of narcotics and pain. Should I have taken the opportunity to lecture him at that moment on the irrationality and social danger of his beliefs at that moment, and tell him that, no, actually he was going to be going into the ground later that day, where his remains would be wither before being consumed by insects and microbes? And that, someday, I would follow him? An intellectual system that would have denied him his belief and the comfort it gave him is PRECISELY what I refer to when I reference the MEANNESS of the modern atheism movement. He was a great man, who used his life to serve his family, his country, and countless fellow believers who benefited from his faith and testimony as an elder of his church. I simply can’t accept, nor even comprehend, an intellectual or political position that brands him an “idiot” because of that faith that sustained and comforted him . . . I sincerely hope you are never faced with a situation like that in your life, but if you are, I hope you would find the charity in your heart to understand that you have no more of the answers to the mystery of life than he did . . .
Just for clarification in case anyone’s confused by what J. Eric Smith wrote: the “God helmet” doesn’t actually make me a God, it makes me an instrument of (a) God’s wrath.
Really, though, why should anyone listen to any of us here, when the The LORD and Charles Darwin have already slugged all of this out over at the Upstate Ether blog: http://upstateether.wordpress.com/2010/02/02/the-watchmaker-charles-darwin-vs-the-lord/
Thanks for the clarification. I had thought it was something you put on so that you don’t have a baby Jesus.
(looks up for lightning coming down)
That’s it, Eric, I now have to read your blog. I so loved your comments here. I’ll do it over the weekend. I’m escaping for now to the climes of a non-TU blog I’ve read for years (after maybe getting a quick fix at Teri Conroy’s blog for need of peace and non-judmentality and adorable animals that make you go ah just to look at them) to take shelter from a storm.
Sadly, Kevin, I take back my recommendation of the meetup group and, am, in fact, dropping out of it myself and blocking the address from my e-mail. I’m doing this because I defended you and this blog (silly me, I thought we were encouraging Atheists to be out) and have been really ripped to shreds for it and for daring to blasphme against Dawkins. There were some who were very kind and very nice but most really tore into me for saying Kevin is not attacking us all and then when I criticised Mr. Dawkins for labelling raising a child in one’s faith child abuse, well…
First I was given the prove it taunt. When a quick google gave me a quote from Dawkins that basically said childhood indoctrination into a religion is worse than child molestation (!) and sent it on remarking that I was so disgusted by that remark, I am basically done with Dawkins, well, you don’t even want to know the hate flung my way…
Which only leaves me wondering why people who scorn worshipping Jesus Christ just about want to burn anyone at the stake who doesn’t worship Richard Dawkins.
They condemned you for your opening remarks about the total a**holes then proceded to prove you right as far as I’m concerned.
Also sadly, I’ve been an out Atheist for 24 years and was an out Agnostic for 4 years before that and, after all that time of being loud and proud about it, I’m ready to slip back into a my cave. For the first time in my life, I am considering being cautious as hell in saying I disbelieve and it isn’t the believers making me feel that way. :(
And I should clarify that I didn’t say they were total a**holes, just that they were total a**holes ABOUT it. There’s a difference.
Like, I’m sure the people you encountered on that e-mail list aren’t a**holes in real life, they’re just a**holes about being Atheist, particularly when they’re on a computer.
It really is a shame, because I was looking forward to meeting them and exchanging some ideas. Apparently that isn’t a desirable outcome for their group. Which is really, really sad.
I should note, by the way, that you hit the nail on the head about the hero worship of Dawkins. Again, I actually agree with some of what he has to say, but there’s a very strong tendency towards deification of Dawkins and other individuals, to the point where they’re beyond reproach or criticism for ANY statements they make.
In fairness, it’s not just an Atheist thing. You see in political discussions all the time. But – and I hate to beat a dead horse but it bears repeating in advance of comments and reactions I know I’ll get from the most recent batch of statements – there’s a great amount of holier-than-thou hypocrisy in condemning religion for its beliefs and blind faiths, then referring to Atheism as a “belief system” and jumping down anyone’s throat who disagrees with one or any other aspect of their arguments as it pertains to philosophical matters. Not to mention, again, all the logical fallacies many of them present in an attempt to bury the entire concept of spirituality and religion.
Just like fundamentalist Christians, fundamentalist anti-theists are often their own worst enemy.
Maybe you should be open about being an atheist though. Of course you don’t have to shout it from the rooftops, or dare I say evangelize about it, but don’t be so afraid to acknowledge it to others if the opportunity arises.
Like you said, there are people who are “a**holes about it” in any kind of group.
If you remain open about your atheism, then maybe people will get the idea that there are different kinds of atheists, and that a person’s character is a totally separate thing.
Isn’t this post doing that, though?
Of course, but in your daily life too.
Ah, gotcha.
Thing is, I come at it from a perspective of there not really being a line between the blog and the day to day life. Partially because everybody I know personally (friends, family) reads it already, but also because it’s on the TU website, which is the main news and information hub for locals.
Found this on the Tea Party Blog under a blog titled, “God Bless America…”
“you are just like every other atheists i have encountered on the internet. you lie in that you never mention that your true motive for being a GOD-DENIER is that you are a homosexual. you are trying to kill God in order to escape judgement for your sexual perversions.
You know God is there , seeing what you do, but foolish enough to think you can lie him away with silly inane remarks and questions.
Stop the sexual perversion and God won’t scare you so much. all the rest of your baloney is just smokescreen. being sexually normal is your first lie.”
And this is why atheist become anti-theists….I know its just one example…..but its the same stuff I hear all the time.
Makes sense. Have you gotten any new reactions from people you know personally since this post?
I’m surprised that the Times Union resident atheist blogger “iknowtruthismine” hasn’t weighed in yet. Your 4th paragraph probably scared him off.
“It really is a shame, because I was looking forward to meeting them and exchanging some ideas. Apparently that isn’t a desirable outcome for their group. Which is really, really sad.”
You could always meet up with us anyway and make up your own mind. I disagree with most of Donna’s characterizations, but there’s no point arguing about it more.
Craig: That’s a poor excuse. To coin a cliche, two wrongs don’t make a right.
Victoria: Yes. But it’s not telling of how they’d treat me in other contexts, since the whole point of the post is that I’m NOT like those that would attack them and call them stupid. Universally, the reaction from both religious and non-religious folks has been shock at the hostility I received from other atheists.
Ben D: I appreciate the offer, Ben, but I have to rescind my interest. The hostility I’ve received on here, things I’ve been told were said, and general tone I’ve gotten from the group is not a great one. I would never participate or endorse a group that encourages such counter-productive vitriol. Besides, like I’ve said before: I’m an Atheist. I don’t believe in God, I don’t subscribe to a religion, and I have no desire to have any group – no matter what color they paint their wagon – try to indoctrinate me,
Kevin, you really should keep an open mind and attend a meetup or two to decide for yourself. Donna H has presented an unfortunately skewed view of her foray into our group, and I’d hate to think anyone missed out on a real opportunity to experience something new because three or four people decided to have a catfight on an email list.
Donna, you should come too. As I tried to point out earlier, a couple of people overreacting to misperceived attitudes in emails is hardly a reason to condemn hundreds of people, and anyway, you were hardly without blame in that exchange. Why don’t you come and meet some of us in person, before you decide to isolate yourself from a whole community of like-minded folks?
Really, we don’t eat babies, I promise…
Sigh, Blaise, how exactly did I skew getting called effed up and a moron for first defending Kevin’s right to speak freely (or have you forgotten that the whole e-mail chain started with an e-mail labelling him a self-hating Atheist for this blog post) and then for daring to criticize the great god Richard Dawkins’ messed up sense of priorities. (I seriously want nothing to do with anyone who thinks childhood indoctrination is worse than child molestation. Absolutely nothing.)
I was so aggravated that I was going to drop out of the group but was saved the trouble. Someone sent an e-mail saying can we remove this moron? Not five minutes later, with no input, no chance to defend myself, not even asked what’s going on, Donna, I got an e-mail telling me I was removed.
Kevin’s a big boy and he handles himself quite well. What he does is his choice but, as for me, no, I don’t think I need any involvement with people that hateful. I don’t hang out with Klan and I don’t hang out with anti-theists.
For the record, I did in my last e-mail saying I was done with the nonsense invite anyone who wished to to e-mail me. Several have (and, no, I am not going to name names, no effing way) and as I said there were several who were nice and respectful to begin with. To them, I apologize though I really don’t feel as if I’m the one who should be. I didn’t cause the mess. What seriously did I do wrong? Disagree?
Can you really blame anyone who doesn’t want to check out the group following this fiasco? If you’re that worried about members, you ought to reconsider how you treat the ones you have.
I’m not *blaming* anyone, Donna, but you definitely have presented a one-sided view of the exchange. You claim to be upset about free speech being denied, but you yourself are the one who joined into a reasonable discussion, where folks were expressing their personal opinions quietly and cogently, then cherry-picked out a couple of comments that you disliked, and started screaming at the top of your lungs. I believe your very first message began with something to the effect of “OMG,I can’t believe the HATRED and VITRIOL in this group!”
You could as easily have addressed your perceived targets with private emails, or a single reasoned response directed only at the specific authors of those comments (we’re talking about, what, three people in the group you had this nasty little catfight with?), but you chose instead to spam hundreds with dozens of angry emails full of the hatred and vitriol you claimed to decry.
I’m not saying you shouldn’t have your opinions, or that you shouldn’t express them, but attacking and annoying hundreds because you disagree with a couple is hardly a rational attitude. And even assuming you were 100% correct in your arguments, making public statements about a group with hundreds of people in it based on your interactions with less than five of its members *via email* is hardly fair or reasonable, is it?
You still haven’t even met any of us, but you somehow know we’re bad, bad people. And somehow WE are the ones “being a**holes about it”?
Come to an event or two. Have an open mind. Call me a a**hole *after* you get to know me, at least…
Oh and Donna, I looked into the removal your membership in the meetup group just a bit. I suspect that since your last email to the group said “you’ll all be relieved to hear I am so done with this conversation — and this group …. So just f**k off and die!”, the administrators simply assumed you wanted to leave the group. I’m sure they would allow you to join again if you requested it…
Hey, guys, no more on this. Take it to private e-mail.
Ok, I know it’s pretty late to continue commenting here, but I found this funny and it reminded me of some of the conversations that went on here.
http://xkcd.com/774/#