What does atheist activism mean to you? Greta Christina recently defined atheist activism as "trying to persuade people that atheism is correct and working to change the world into one without religion." Does that capture what you think of when you encounter the term? This isn't what I usually mean by atheist activism, at least not completely.

Could someone be an atheist activist if this person does not try to persuade others than atheism is correct? Yes. This part of Greta Christina's definition does not strike me as essential for atheist activism. One could be an atheist activist without attempting to de-convert others.

Similarly, if asked whether someone could be an atheist activist without "working to change the world into one without religion," I'd likely say yes. While most people I would consider atheist activists certainly work to reduce the political influence of religion, I do not think that they necessarily must seek the abolition of religion.

In addition, I suggest that one of the ways I often use the term "atheist activist" is not captured by the above definition at all - one who works to promote atheist equality. However, while I consider this an important form of atheist activism, I do not view it as an essential part of the definition.

So what is an atheist activist, and what is atheist activism? I'd like to suggest something along these lines:

Atheist activism refers to the process of promoting atheism through activities such as promoting a worldview free from gods, reducing the privileged status of religion in society, and promoting atheist civil rights.

Use of the "such as" phrase reminds us that these are merely examples of how an atheist activist might promote atheism, none of which is a necessary condition. The essential feature would be the promotion of atheism (i.e., I cannot think of a form of atheist activism that in no way involves the promotion of atheism).

Subscribe to Atheist Revolution

Technorati Tags: atheist, activism

I am somewhat ashamed to admit that I have a crush on a woman I work with, and although I know full well that nothing is ever going to materialize, I feel powerless to turn off the feelings. She has no idea how I feel, and this is how it needs to stay. I know that getting involved with someone at work would be a disaster on multiple levels. I also know that she's in a long-term relationship and seems perfectly content to remain there. I even know that while we seem compatible in many areas, there are at least as many where we'd really clash. And yet, the fantasy that something could happen someday is so much better than the reality.

I suppose you could say that situations like this let me empathize with religious believers at least a little bit. They have crafted what they consider to be a perfect god, and while what is left of the rational part of their minds may experience doubt at times, who wouldn't want such a god? Forget about all the reasons it cannot be true. Isn't it more exciting to ponder the possibility that it might be?

Sometimes I wonder if the feelings of excitement the religious believer reports while considering their god are any different than those I experience when fantasizing about what might (but won't) be in my situation? Do they not sometimes worry about losing themselves in the face of their passion just as I sometimes have to exert self-control not to do or say something I'd instantly regret?

I have encountered many religious people who respond to my objections with some variation of, "I don't care whether it is true or not; it makes me feel better to believe it." Fair enough. If they wouldn't have to take the next step of meddling in everyone else's lives, maybe we could all just allow each other our fantasies.

Maybe the difference is that I recognize my fantasy as such. That doesn't mean I enjoy doing so. I don't. I want to believe that she'll eventually come to her senses, toss her partner aside, and that we'd live happily ever after. Daydreaming about this feels so much better than facing the reality that it will never happen, but I realize that the fantasy is not real. I can't live my life as if it were true, and I see that to do so would be delusion.

Subscribe to Atheist Revolution

Tags: religion, fantasy

I have not written an Idiot of the Week post in awhile, but that doesn't mean that there has not been plenty of idiocy. I'm back this week with another "winner" from a crowded field.

Props to Obama's inauguration speaker, Christian extremist Pastor Rick Warren, for picking up this week's honor. Pastor Warren sparked outrage from almost everyone outside his extremist circle when he refused to condemn Ugandan legislation that would make certain homosexual acts punishable by death. As if that wasn't bad enough, Warren could do worse (and soon did).

According to Think Progress, Warren recently tweeted the following in a desperate attempt to change the subject:

Clearly, Pastor Warren recognizes the difficult spot in which he now finds himself. On one hand, he risks alienating most moderate Christians by refusing to condemn Uganda's human rights abuses. On the other hand, he probably feels that he cannot do so because his Christian extremist supporters would quickly turn on him.

Doing the right thing isn't supposed to be easy, Pastor. Do you hate homosexuals so much that you cannot speak out against those who would simply kill them?

H/T to Pam's House Blend

Subscribe to Atheist Revolution

Technorati Tags: Rick Warren, gay, Uganda

I think putting more troops in Afghanistan is a mistake. I understand that President Obama indicated that he would do this during his campaign, and I am not surprised that he sent additional troops shortly after taking office. Nor am I surprised that his generals want still more troops now and that he is inclined to send them. Whether I like it or not, he has now taken full ownership of this war, a war my country has been waging for the past 8 years. It no longer matters why this war started or the many mistakes made by the previous administration. This is now Obama's war.

The first thing that bothers me about the war in Afghanistan is that we cannot afford it. The U.S. economy is not doing well, and expanded domestic programs are desperately needed at home. Health care costs continue to rise, and state after state is crippling higher education because of budget shortfalls. We should have learned something from what happened to the former Soviet Union, but we appear to be making a similar blunder.

Beyond the cost and all which must be sacrificed to meet it, I have a very difficult time believing that the situation in Afghanistan is resolvable without a real U.S. military presence in Pakistan and perhaps even other neighboring countries. Of course, this is not going to happen, making the effort in Afghanistan increasingly futile. I am simply not convinced that the nature of the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan allows us to make much progress without forces on both sides.

An additional concern springs from the widespread corruption within the Afghan government. It is not that I am trying to point fingers here, for a freely acknowledge that corruption is a serious problem in the U.S. government as well. Still, I am not sure how U.S. efforts to prop up a corrupt Afghan government are going to be productive.

It is difficult to take stock of the fact that we have been at war, fighting multiple wars even, for the past 8 years without reprieve. As we approach a season in which many claim to celebrate the notion of peace, I feel that it is time to take a hard look at ourselves.

Subscribe to Atheist Revolution

Technorati Tags: Afghanistan, Obama

Of all the assorted religious dogma I have encountered in my life, karma has always been the most appealing. If only it were true that one would be rewarded for good deeds and punished for bad ones. If only we had future lives to look forward to such that our status in each would be sort of a divine accounting of what we had contributed in our current lives. I find that notion so much more appealing than any of the Christian garbage about salvation through Jesus. Sadly, finding it more appealing doesn't make it any more true.

With the idea of karma, there is a certain inevitability of justice. If one screws up enough in life, there is no forgiveness and no absolution of "sin" gained by repeated hail Mary's. No deathbed confessions will save your ass. Your fate will be determined by your own behavior, just as it should be. The various Christian denominations seem determined to offer short-cuts - ways to get away with sin.

In a karma-based system, there are no short-cuts. However, there are plenty of second chances. One has an eternity to get it right, but one must change one's behavior in order to do so. No amount of belief is going to cut it.

It is no surprise that Christianity is so big in America. We're all about short-cuts, get-out-of-jail-free cards, and escaping responsibility for our actions. The Eastern religions of which karma plays a part could never endure here. They violate too many parts of our culture.

There are many problems with Christian morality, but the idea that one can escape bad behavior through belief seems to be one of those we do not hear enough about.

Subscribe to Atheist Revolution

Technorati Tags: morality, karma, religion, Christianity

While perusing Atheist Nexus recently, I encountered quite a bit of discussion around the fact that men greatly outnumber women in nearly every atheist community. There was even a thread on the subject of "how to meet attractive intelligent women." You know, if someone were to create a blog focusing on helping heterosexual male atheists improve their chances of finding desirable atheist women, I bet it would be very successful. Of course, the author would have to know something about the subject matter. Unfortunately, that rules me out!

Subscribe to Atheist Revolution

Let me say at the outset that this post is inspired by the recent Florida - Florida State game and a great post at Blag Hag. I was delighted to find Blag Hag's post because I have been meaning to write one like it for a long time.

If you have ever had the misfortune of watching a University of Florida football game, you have undoubtedly heard the commentators fawning all over Florida quarterback Tim Tebow like he just cured cancer. It seems that as soon as Tebow takes the field, any pretense of neutrality is dropped. The guys who call the game actually seem to be rooting for him each and every game. I'm not sure I've seen anything quite like it.

Undoubtedly, Tebow is an amazing player who will be missed at Florida as he graduates and presumably enters the NFL. By beef, aside from the embarrassing behavior of the announcers, is that he feels the need to promote his silly Christian bible by affixing scriptural references to his face during every game.

As Blag Hag points out, Tebow's rabid evangelical Christianity is well known. It has been covered extensively (and uncritically I might add) by the sports press. And yet, I am dumbstruck each time I watch him play that the NCAA, his coach, and the state university he represents allow him to plaster his face with references to the Christian bible.

I have many of the same questions Blag Hag raises. Would a Muslim player be permitted to do this? An atheist? I have other questions as well. How can a publicly-funded university condone this practice? What would happen if he decided to plaster cigarette ads on his face? Is it simply that Tebow's good enough that he's allowed to do anything he pleases.

Blag Hag is right that this seems to be yet another example of Christian privilege. I applaud her for calling attention to it.

Subscribe to Atheist Revolution

Technorati Tags: Christian privilege, Tebow, football, Florida