12.27.2009

Why Atheists Shouldn't Eat at Chick-fil-A

S. Truett Cathy
I suspect that most atheists already know that Chick-fil-A is one restaurant to avoid. Then again, I am often wrong in making assumptions about what others know. Let's face it, in this complex and rapidly-changing world, it is easy to miss relevant information. So if you have no idea why I would think it is a bad idea for atheists to eat at Chick-fil-A, don't worry. You're about to find out.

Chick-fil-A was founded by S. Truett Cathy, a Christian whose influence on his company is undeniable. In fact, the company's mission statement notes that the business seeks "to glorify God by being a faithful steward of all that is entrusted to us and to have a positive influence on all who come in contact with Chick-fil-A." Is this a cause you want to support?

12.24.2009

The Evolution of Christmas

Darwin santa hatMusician Michael Feinstein wrote an interesting op-ed in the New York Times last week titled, "Whose Christmas Is It?" In the article, he described an experience some years ago in which he was performing Christmas concerts and was told by a member of the orchestra with which he was playing that his music program was "too Jewish." Feinstein went on to note that one can find evidence for the evolution of Christmas in how holiday music has changed over the years, becoming increasingly secular.

This notion of Christmas evolving and becoming increasingly secular over time was interesting; however, the part of Feinstein's article that really caught my attention was the following:
Many Christians feel that the true essence of Christmas has been lost, and I respect that opinion. It must be difficult to see religious tradition eroded in the name of commerce and further dissipated by others’ embrace of a holiday without a sense of what it truly means to the faithful.
This may come as a surprise, but I can respect this particular Christian opinion too. Even though I personally welcome the continued erosion of religious tradition, I recognize that this must be both disappointing and frustrating for those who see Christmas primarily as a religious holiday.

Of course, I also recognize that many Christians - probably the overwhelming majority of Christians living in the U.S. - are complicit in the commercialization of Christmas. Contrary to the whining that one often hears this time of year, Christmas is the way it is largely because Christians have wholeheartedly embraced the materialism which pervades our culture of consumerism.

I disagree with Feinstein's suggestion that there is anything "universal" about "the spirit of the holiday," but he is certainly right that traditions are going to be diluted as a result of our increasingly multicultural society. That is inevitable. Even more dilution will occur so long as the majority of Christians focus more on the materialistic aspects of their holiday than the religious.

12.23.2009

Photography is Not a Crime

photography is not a crime

Ever since 9/11, those of us who enjoy photography have had to think about something that never would have crossed most of our minds previously: Am I going to get in trouble for taking this photo? We have to ask this question even when we are talking about photographing public spaces. In the U.S., this strikes me as a particularly absurd question that no photographer should have to ask. This is supposed to be a "free country," and if something is out in public, I should damn well be able to photograph it! Photography is not a crime. Hearing stories like this (and there are plenty of them) really pisses me off.

One of the things I have always admired about Mojoey (Deep Thoughts) is that he actually does what I am always kicking myself for not doing - he brings his camera with him wherever he goes and actually uses it. It is rare that I remember mine and rarer still that I remember I have it when I do have it.

What does this have to do with the subject of photography not being a crime? Short of someone trespassing on private property to photograph something, the phrase "you can't take pictures here" is one that should not exist. Not in the United States.

What does it matter what I shoot with my camera? Why do people care? What is everybody afraid of? I am not going to concern myself with why people care. But the idea that someone might call the police to complain about someone taking photos and that this would require explaining oneself to them...that's just too much for me.

I have no artistic talent whatsoever, but that doesn't stop me from taking a camera in hand and trying. I may fail miserably 99% of the time, but that doesn't matter because I enjoy trying.

12.20.2009

Hillary Clinton and Al Gore Linked to "The Family"

Hillary ClintonThe December 2009 issue of Church & State, the monthly newsletter I receive from Americans United for Separation of Church and State, arrived recently. I rarely read it cover-to-cover but skim it for content that looks interesting. This edition of the newsletter contained a brief article about the recent decision to partially revoke the tax exempt status of the infamous "C Street" house owned by the Christian extremist group known as "The Family." It is difficult to comprehend how a group like this ever could have received tax exempt status!

Although I was already familiar this the news that efforts were in progress to review and at least partially revoke the group's tax exempt status, there was one sentence in the article that was a bit of an unexpected bombshell. 
Over the years, former attorneys general John Ashcroft and Edwin Meese, U.S. Sens. James Inhofe, Charles Grassley and Sam Brownback, several members of the House of Representatives and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and former Vice President Al Gore have been affiliated with the Family.

12.19.2009

Atheism 210: An Intermediate Reading List

The_Portable_Atheist_Essential_Readings_for_the_Nonbeliever-119187672369907.jpgYou've finished most of the books on my Atheism 101 reading list, and you are ready for more. You have already learned quite a bit about atheism and the dangers of religion in the modern world, but many questions remain. How is it that people come to believe all this religious nonsense in the first place? Can someone really be good without gods? In this post, I'll provide another reading list, this time to help you explore some of the excellent intermediate work in this area.

12.18.2009

Aggressive vs. Friendly Atheism: Misleading Labels Get Us Nowhere

On the subject of "aggressive" vs. "friendly" atheism, Hemant Mehta (Friendly Atheist) argues that there are more similarities than differences. For example, he notes that both types of atheists "want to both increase the respectability of the atheist viewpoint while at the same time persuading others that it’s the most rational point of view." That sounds reasonable to me. But I have to part ways with Mehta in his description of "aggressive" atheists:

The difference is that the “aggressive” types don’t care who they offend. They’ll go after religion in all its forms — it doesn’t matter if they criticize the Vatican or the local church down the street or your sweet neighbor who happens to be religious.

12.17.2009

Businesses Offering Discounts to Christians

Grains of exclusion.jpg

What are your thoughts on the subject of businesses that offer discounts to Christian customers? Is this practice no different from the even more common practice of granting discounts to seniors, or is there an important enough difference that one should be permitted but not the other? Would you spend money at such a business, knowing that you were paying more than those patrons who professed Christianity?

I bring up this subject after a recent post at Mississippi Atheists in which one of my co-authors, Steve, encountered just such a business near his home in Biloxi, MS. Grains of Montana, a restaurant and bakery, proudly advertises a 10% discount to anyone who brings in a church bulletin. According to the Freedom From Religion Foundation, this practice violates the federal Civil Rights Act. In fact, they helped to resolve a similar case in North Carolina not too long ago.

Steve and a friend plan to visit the establishment and inquire about the size of the discount offered to atheist customers. I can't wait to hear how that goes. In the meantime, we are trying to get a letter-writing (and/or email) campaign going.

I think it is quite obvious that businesses like this resort to such tactics in an effort to attract the post-church crowd. Here in Mississippi, that is a massive crowd indeed. I learned long ago that Sunday was a bad time to go out to eat because of these crowds. Attracting such crowds means considerable revenue.

It is equally obvious, to me at least, that I would never support such a business if at all possible. Businesses who engage in such practices probably do so without realizing that they are violating the law. I hope that the combination of pointing this out and letting them know that they are losing customers over this may help.

12.14.2009

What Atheists Could Learn From Satanists

Baphomet

Enough procrastinating! It is time for the third part of my series on atheism and Satanism. In the first part, I tried to clarify some of the more common misconceptions about Satanism, making sure we could start with a common reference point. The second part dealt with the relationship of Satanism to atheism and also to anti-theism. In this part, I'll examine the question of whether Satanism offers any lessons for atheists.

I suppose I already tipped my hand in one of the previous posts in this series by stating that I would "even make the shocking suggestion that we atheists could learn something from the Satanists." While this remains true, I am by no means suggesting that atheists should embrace Satanism.

In a way, it makes sense to think of a (LeVeyan) Satanist as an atheist who is intensely anti-theistic and has embraced the power of confrontational imagery and ritual (Note: Again, I am referring to the Church of Satan variety of Satanism in this series). The Satanist has embraced the power of symbolism, aesthetics, confrontational imagery, and ritual. While many atheists bristle at the very idea of ritual, the Satanist has recognized that many people seek the community and ritualism offered by organized religion. Rather than encouraging people to simply ignore these needs, Satanists provide an alternative. Could there be lessons here for atheists?

12.11.2009

Religion Should Be Like Your Genitals

Darth Jesus
Photo by phi zeroth (CC BY 2.0)

I am fortunate (but not blessed) to receive many excellent comments here at Atheist Revolution. One of my all-time favorites, left by Personal Failure a long time ago on a post about Christians "witnessing" to atheists, deserves to be shared because it makes me smile every time I read it.

The post had prompted a comment from a Christian visitor about how he could not help spreading the "good news" door-to-door. In fact, this made such an impression on me, that I asked whether others suffered from this compulsion (assuming it was a compulsion). I must admit that I had never heard a Christian claim he could not stop himself from engaging in door-to-door evangelism. Since then, I have heard this claim from a few others.

12.08.2009

The Rapture Ready Christians Worried About Leaving Their Pets Behind

pets

I found a real gem in a post on USAToday's website pointing to an article in the Union Leader. The brief post dealt with Eternal Earth-Bound Pets, with which I suspect you are already familiar. New Hampshire atheist, Bart Centre, co-owns this company, offering to care for the pets of fundamentalist Christians after they are raptured away. They are very clear that this is a money-making venture, that there will be no refunds when the rapture doesn't happen, etc. No harm in that. In fact, I think it is an outstanding idea. I wish I had thought of it first!

Eternal Earth-Bound Pets has set up a network of atheists in 22 states who have agreed to look after any pets "left behind" by their owners. A one-time fee of $110 entitles the Christian to something akin to a 10-year insurance policy. That is, they are covered in the event that the rapture occurs within 10 years from their policy date. That should be fine since we all know it will happen any day, right?

12.07.2009

Defining "Atheist Activism"

b574638q.jpgWhat 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).

12.05.2009

Idiot of the Week: Rick Warren

I have not written an Idiot of the Week post in a while, 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:

rickwarrentweet.gif

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?

12.03.2009

Karma and Christian Morality

karma boat

Of all the assorted religious dogma I have encountered in my life, the concept of karma has always been among 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 to the world in our current lives. I find that notion so much more appealing than any of the Christian garbage about salvation through Jesus, spending eternity in heaven with Christians, etc. Sadly, this is yet another case where finding something appealing doesn't make it true. Just because it would be much cooler if you had that joint doesn't mean you have it!