8.20.2008

You Might be a Militant Atheist if...

Richard DawkinsThe slur du jour aimed at atheists appears to be that of "militant atheism." While we in the atheist community know full well that there is no such thing as a militant atheist, the Christians who use this phrase remain willfully ignorant or are simply so used to distorting reality that it no longer bothers them. Make no mistake - this is a form of anti-atheist bigotry and should be treated as such. Atheists need to have a plan for responding to the charge of militancy. To do so, we must understand the accusation, why we are seeing it, and what it reveals about those making it.

Applications of the "Militant" Label

Richard Dawkins was greeted with accusations of "militant atheism" when he published The God Delusion. Based on the book's title, even many Christians who never read the book could assume that it was an attack on their god-belief. That was all it took. Dawkins dared to criticize their religious beliefs; this made him "militant." For those who did actually read the book, it was clear that Dawkins had committed an even worse offense than criticizing religion - he encouraged others to do so. Yep, he was militant alright. Militant for writing a book.

And now we have PZ Myers, widely accused of "militant atheism" for mocking Catholicism in the Crackergate incident. What exactly was Myers' offense? He criticized religion on his blog, encouraged others to do the same, spoke out against religion in various interviews, and destroyed a wafer obtained from a Communion ritual. This makes him militant? Really?

These may have been two of the most prominent examples, but there have been countless others accused of "militant atheism." The pattern which emerges is quite clear: a militant atheist is an atheist who does not keep his or her feelings about religion hidden. That is, you might be a militant atheist if you express yourself on the subject of religion. Exercising your freedom of speech makes you militant.

The Myth of Militant Atheism

In a previous post on the subject of militant atheism, I wrote,
Since atheism refers to the lack of theistic belief, militant atheism must be something like an aggressive or impassioned lack of theism. Confused yet? Yeah, me too. Once we understand what atheism is, it becomes evident that "militant atheism" is meaningless, at least in this context.
In all other contexts in which the word "militant" is applied, it refers to behavior rather than one's viewpoint. Moreover, the "militant" descriptor is typically reserved for violent behavior. According to State of Protest, "Real militant atheism is literally taking up a weapon and fighting those who support religion, and in some cases those who merely don’t support real militant atheism." For example, when The Uncredible Hallq searched Google for "militant Christian" and "militant Muslim," he found that they were used to depict persons or groups committing acts of violence. Catholics issuing death threats to PZ Myers seems to fit the bill; criticizing religion does not.

So what is really going on when a Christian uses the "militant atheism" accusation? According to Russell Cole of the Midwest Populist Party,
Consequentially, the terminology, militant atheists, should be understood not as an expression that refers to the elements in society who possess the intellectual tenacity to hold to scrutiny the mythology that continues to dominant the worldviews possessed by the religious; the flocks of mindless followers. To the contrary, the unfortunate phrase is best understood as the projection upon the reasoned and rational, by those who lack such lucid deliberations, of the very shortcomings that impede the intellectual maturation of the faithful.
Rather than acknowledging that those trying to improve society might have legitimate reasons to seeking change, it is easier for those in power to demonize them. We saw this with the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s, and we are seeing it now as atheists seek equality.

Future posts will explain how accusations of "militant atheism" are a form of anti-atheist bigotry and will explore how atheists should respond to such accusations. For now, I highly recommend this video. If you have written on these subjects, please feel free to leave links to your content in the comments.

8.08.2008

God: The Failed Hypothesis

I read quite a bit on the subjects of atheism, Christian extremism, and politics. I suppose I should write more book reviews here, but I can't say I'm usually interested in doing so. The problem is that writing an effective book review is quite a bit of work and reminds me far too much of the sort of writing I do at my job. If I started doing that, this blog would no longer feel like something I do in my limited free time and would become an extension of a job to which I already devote way too much of my life. And so, you'll have to make do with brief recommendations and mini-reviews like this one.

One easy recommendation is for Victor J. Stenger's God: The Failed Hypothesis. I believe it is the sort of book that most atheists who are interested in science would enjoy. Although it is not particularly science-heavy, I'd be less inclined to recommend it to atheists who had negative attitudes toward science or simply weren't interested in it.

In introducing his book Stenger writes,
In the present book, I will go much further and argue that by this moment in time science has advanced sufficiently to be able to make a definitive statement on the existence or nonexistence of a God having the attributes that are traditionally associated with the Judeo-Christian-Islamic God.

8.03.2008

Defending Christianity From the Buddhists

Some Christians expend considerable energy defending their faith from real or imagined attacks from atheists and other secular persons. However, we atheists are certainly not the only threat such Christians face. They must be prepared to defend their particular dogma against practitioners of the other religions. After all, they can't all be right.

The Dalai Lama's visit to the U.S. last Spring was evidently perceived as just such a threat. According to a media advisory on Christian Newswire dated January 22, 2007, Christians needed to be prepared to "defend and share Christianity with Buddhists" and those who might find Buddhism appealing.

It seems that some Christians are threatened simply by the knowledge that other religious traditions exist. And we wonder why attitudes toward atheists are so hostile!

Referring to the Dalai Lama’s visit, David Housholder, a Christian missionary with Interserve USA, said,

It will be a perfect time to defend and share the Christian faith with recent immigrants, high school and college students strongly influenced by Buddhism, and everyday Americans who have woven the Eastern religion into their personal philosophy and world view. But to do that, Christians need an understanding of Buddhism and its Western variations, and how to best present the Gospel to followers and adherents.

But why? These same Christians expect others to respect their particular set of beliefs, but they seem unwilling to extend the same courtesy to others. This is pure hypocrisy.

Interserve USA was so terrified at the possibility of losing converts to Buddhism that they actually planned advance seminars at locations the Dalai Lama was expected to visit in order to inoculate people against his message. So much for free choice or respecting others' religious beliefs.

Interserve USA's director, Rev. Douglas Van Bronkhorst, went so far as to say, "...Tibetan Buddhists and Americans influenced by the religion need Jesus!" I would hope that all Christians would be embarrassed to hear something like this and would be quick to condemn it. But since this seems to be a futile wish on my part, I'm happy to do it for them.

Christianity is no better than Buddhism, Judaism, Islam, or even Scientology. There is not a shred of evidence to support any of these faiths. Fear by the adherents of any of them that their followers might be exposed to the others simply highlights their fragile absurdity.

8.01.2008

Ending Anti-Atheist Bigotry: What You Can Do

hatred thrives when bigotry is toleratedI have been reflecting lately on what I want to do with this blog in the future. I think it would be useful to have something like a platform for which I would develop a set of objectives to pursue via Atheist Revolution. This would not force me to rigidly adhere to these objectives but could serve as a guide for letting readers know what to expect. This is not something I am going to rush. Instead, I plan to roll out various objectives gradually as they occur to me. This post signals the first such objective: ending anti-atheist bigotry.

No, I'm not suffering from the fantasy that I can single-handedly end anti-atheist bigotry. Far from it. However, I am convinced that I can and should help. I would like to outline some of my strategy, but before I do so, some background is necessary.