Redditgate and How it Has Been Handled

I had somehow missed the latest controversy to hit the atheist blogosphere until yesterday: Redditgate. What happened? A 15 year-old girl posted a picture of herself holding Carl Sagan's The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark in the r/atheism section with a brief message about how her religious mother bought it for her as a Christmas present (see the Reddit thread). This was very cool of her mom, and most of the people who commented on her post said so or shared accounts of how Sagan's wonderful book inspired them. Unfortunately, a few decided to make inappropriate comments about the sexual acts they'd like to perform on the girl. She initially joked back with them, and some seemed to take that as an invitation to become increasingly graphic in their descriptions. And then Rebecca Watson of Elevatorgate fame (Skepchick) blogged about it. Rebecca says that she has since been subjected to all manner of attacks on Reddit (including threats of rape and death).

'War on Christmas' Generates Money for Conservative Organizations

You and I both know that there is no war on Christmas. Encouraging people to be respectful of one another (e.g., saying "happy holidays" rather than presuming to know which holidays someone celebrates) is not a war. Reminding government that it is not legal for them to promote one religion via sectarian holiday displays without allowing displays from other belief systems is also not a war. Nobody is trying to ban Christmas, not even those of us who are proud members of the evil atheist horde.

But if that's the case and there really is no war on Christmas, why must we hear about it every year? The answer is money. Scaring people about an imagined war on Christmas has proven to be an effective way for conservative organizations with Christian extremist leanings to raise money. In the United States, conservative politics comes wrapped not only in an American flag but in a Christian flag. Cleverly designed propaganda that exploits one's fear of change, sense of patriotism, and love of the Jesus concept translates into donations.

Why I Focus on Christianity

With all the world religions, why do I focus on Christianity instead of devoting equal time to them all? I have addressed this question more extensively in previous posts, but it continues to be the single most common question I receive. I thought it was time for an updated response that I could include in the FAQ I'm working on.

My reasons for focusing on Christianity in general and Christian extremism in particular are as follows:

• I started this blog to address Christian extremism in the U.S. because I grew tired of hearing my Christian neighbors and the national media obsess about Islamic extremism abroad while ignoring or embracing Christian extremism here at home. Today, this hypocrisy is as great as it ever was.
• Christian extremism influences U.S. politics in a way no other form of religious extremism can claim.
• I was raised in the Christian religion, and I am surrounded by it. I know more than enough about it to be effective in addressing it. This simply isn't the case for every other religion. I have seen what Christianity does to others about whom I care. I might encounter a Muslim once a year; I encounter Christian proselytizing and condemnation at least a few times a week.
• In the U.S., Christians are the primary culprits of bigotry and discrimination against atheists.
• In general, I believe that we need to resolve some of the fundamental problems we have at home (i.e., Christian extremism) before we are on solid ground trying to influence problems with other religions in other nations. It seems hypocritical for one of the most religious countries in the world to push the idea of secular democracy in Muslim nations when we seem so uncomfortable with doing it right here.

Of course, none of this means that I have positive feelings toward other religions. Many of them also cause harm, and so I recognize that it would be a mistake to focus exclusively on Christianity. I hope that helps.

Atheists Do Not Need to Be Defensive About Christmas

Some atheists really enjoy Christmas. I think it is great that they enjoy the holiday, but I am somewhat puzzled by the defensiveness that often seems to surround it. If celebrating Christmas is something you enjoy, I hope you have a blast celebrating it. There is no need to be so defensive about doing so. After all, you deserve to celebrate whatever you'd like to celebrate.

Some of us choose not celebrate Christmas - not because we think other atheists should do the same - but because we do not enjoy the holiday or do not find it worth celebrating. I have seen very little effort on the part of those of us who do not celebrate the holiday to convince the celebrating atheists that they are wrong. This leads me to speculate that the defensiveness with which some atheists approach their personal decision to celebrate Christmas might be more about their own discomfort and less about the reactions they receive from others.

Hitchens and the Christian Reactions to His Death

I had not planned on writing the seemingly obligatory post about Hitchens that nearly every other atheist blogger has written. I never met Christopher Hitchens, and I won't pretend that he influenced me in some meaningful way simply because he's dead. What could I possibly say about him that hadn't already been said many times over. That being the case, I'm writing this post in response to a couple questions I've received. I hope to accomplish two things by writing it. First, I'm sharing the main lesson I take away from Hitchens. Second, I am explaining why I have not been surprised by many of the venomous reactions to his death by some Christians.

Improving the Accuracy of Identifying Atheists in Survey Research

Austin Cline (About.com Agnosticism/Atheism) recently compared Gallup survey data over several decades to show that increasing numbers of Americans are walking away from religion (update: link no longer active). Good news indeed, but that isn't what I want to address here. In his post, Austin brought up the reluctance of many Americans to identify themselves as atheists, even though some undoubtedly are atheists. This is a problem plaguing this sort of research, one I've recently been considering.

Maybe Christmas Should be Time to Reconsider Consumer Culture

Some people want to tie the annual Black Friday tragedies and other bad behavior committed by holiday shoppers to the dismal economy. They have a point in suggesting that dire economic circumstances can make people more desperate, increasing the chances of bad behavior. When the act of shopping begins to feel like a competitive high-stakes venture, we should expect higher levels of aggression. But most of the articles I've read on the subject seem to be missing something important.

We are not automatons without the ability to examine how we got in this mess and how it might be time to consider some radical changes. Frankly, I'm not sure we have been well served by our consumer culture. Perhaps the holiday season is an appropriate time to ask ourselves whether we might be better off by making some changes.

Only 38% of Americans Think Some God is Behind Natural Disasters

I was reading a post from Austin Cline this morning about a 2011 poll from the Public Religion Research Institute and the Religion News Service showing that 38% of Americans believe that natural disasters are signs from some sort of god. While I was encouraged to see that a majority (still only 51%) disagreed with the suggestion that a god uses disasters to communicate with humanity, I found myself focusing on the 38% who agreed.

In survey after survey, approximately 30% of Americans believe the most absurd things! And then an image flashed through my mind that looked much like this one:

Leave the Nativity Scenes Alone: Objections From Atheists

Most atheists understand why it is inappropriate for public school officials to lead children in prayer during school hours. Most atheists understand why it is inappropriate for local or state government officials to erect a Ten Commandments monument on the grounds of a courthouse. And so, I have to admit being somewhat surprised by the number of atheists I've heard from who do not seem to understand why it is problematic for local or state government officials to allow religious Christmas decorations in public buildings this time of year.

Socrates Was Right About the Unexamined Life

In Apology, Plato quotes Socrates as saying, "The unexamined life is not worth living for a human being." I couldn't agree more. That is not to say that one cannot be happy living an unexamined life; many people manage to do it every day. But for the freethinkers among us, it is unimaginable to trade reasoned inquiry for happiness. It is not simply that we enjoy thinking, although some of us certainly do. Rather, it is that we cannot imagine living our lives in any other way. It is in our nature to question things which others seem to take for granted. We are freethinkers.

Why It Makes People Uncomfortable When You Talk About Your Religious Beliefs

I have heard many religious believers, mostly Christians, ask why it makes other people uncomfortable when they talk about their religious beliefs. It is a fair question, and as you might expect, different people are going to have many different answers. I'll highlight a few of the reasons it makes me uncomfortable. Please recognize that my reasons may be a bit different from those of other atheists based on differences in our experiences.

Let me acknowledge at the outset that it does indeed make me a bit uncomfortable when someone begins to talk about their religious beliefs, especially when I do not know the person very well. The primary reasons for this are as follows:

1. I was raised in an environment where religion was a private matter, and it was considered rude to talk about it with people one didn't know fairly well. This leaves me reacting in a visceral way with something like "I don't know you that well" or "we don't have that kind of relationship" when a casual acquaintance or stranger approaches me to talk about their religious beliefs or ask about mine. For me, a complete stranger asking where I attend church is comparable to how you might feel if a complete stranger were to ask you when you last had sex. It is an intrusive violation of privacy.
2. I worry that I might laugh in your face. I don't say this to be mean, but I find religious beliefs so absurd that my immediate reaction tends to be very similar to how I would react if you told me that you can fly like Superman. Because I generally try to be polite in social situations, the amount of self-censorship required of me when you bring up your religious beliefs can be taxing.
3. I have little use for one-way conversations. I have found that most of the time people bring up their religious beliefs, they are interested in having them confirmed by others and not critically evaluated. I am not only not going to do this, but I might criticize your beliefs. Since this is typically met with hostility, these one-way conversations quickly become uncomfortable. If you've ever been in a conversation where you felt like the other party didn't want to hear what you thought, you know what I mean.

I cannot speak for other atheists, but these are the main reasons it makes me uncomfortable when you approach me to talk about your religious beliefs. I do support your right to your religious beliefs; I do not support your right to involve me in your religious beliefs against my will.

How to Get Rid of Nativity Scenes on Government Property

This may be an unfair generalization, but I'll assume that most atheists would prefer not to see religious displays (e.g., nativity scenes) in government buildings. There are many ways to pursue the goal of eliminating them. One can contact officials and educate them about separation of church and state, threaten lawsuits, or one can adopt what has become one of the most effective strategies yet and join them by adding an atheist display. That's right, simply adding an atheist display is an excellent way to accomplish the goal of getting rid of future religious displays.

Viewers of Fox News are Misinformed

Replication is a fundamental part of scientific research. Supporting a hypothesis once is not enough; the findings must be replicated before scientists will be satisfied. In this arena, having seven studies that support a particular claim may or may not be impressive. It would depend on the context. For example, seven studies supporting the efficacy of prayer would not be worth much if several times that many failed to support it. But what if seven studies yielded the same or highly similar results in the absence of any evidence to the contrary? That would be enough to make us sit up and take note.

Catholic Sex Abuse Investigator Convicted of Child Porn

Just when I think the legacy of Catholic child molestation cannot get any worse, it somehow manages to do so. It seems that a child safety coordinator employed by the Catholic Church and tasked with investigating various child abuse allegations was convicted of child pornography. According to the Daily Mail, Christopher Jarvis was responsible for investigating allegations of child sexual abuse over an area that included 120 churches. Jarvis was sentenced to 12 months for possessing over 4,000 pornographic images of children on the computer supplied to him by his employer, the Catholic Church.

The Other Christian Holiday Traditions

I've noticed that there are a parallel set of holiday traditions practiced by some Christians that accompany the mainstream holiday traditions practiced by many Americans. What is remarkable about these parallel traditions is that they often seem to involve atheists and other non-Christians. Take Thanksgiving as an example. The mainstream tradition involves gluttony and spending time with extended family one might not get to see regularly. Nothing religious about that whatsoever. However, the parallel tradition some Christians seem to love involves incessantly pointing out that those who don't share their god-belief have nothing to be thankful for.

Community Service is Not the Answer in Combating Prejudice Against Atheists

In recent post summarizing some of the findings from an article about anti-atheist prejudice published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Hemant Mehta (Friendly Atheist) wrote that there are two ways atheists should work to counter our negative image:

First, we have to continue doing community service — serving at food banks, donating to charity, giving blood, etc. Show people that we can be good without god.

Second, we have to let people we trust know that we’re atheists. People think poorly of atheists because they don’t think they know any. It’s a shock to their system when they find out someone close to them doesn’t believe in a god… so shock them! Let them know that someone they already trust is an atheist.

The scientist in me wants to point out that this is an empirical question. That is, either or both of these two strategies might work and should be framed as hypotheses until they can be adequately tested. Setting that aside, I'd like to explain why I think Hemant may be right about his second recommendation and wrong about the first.

Delighting in Hell

I suspect that some Christians experience a sense of sadness from their conviction that the vast majority of the world's people are destined for the hell they imagine. But there is another group of Christians who does not seem to feel this way at all. This group of Christians, a group which I have repeatedly encountered throughout my life, actually seems to delight in the thought of people suffering in their hell. I am sure you have seen the gleam in their eyes when they talk of their hell. You may have even noticed the joy they seem to experience at the prospect of others who do not agree with them suffering for eternity.

Pull of Misanthropy is Difficult For This Atheist to Resist

Do you ever feel like you are teetering on the edge, tempted to give into frustration and just quit? Maybe it is when you are given the illusory choice between voting for the conservative candidate who is bought and paid for by corporate interests or for the slightly less conservative candidate who is also thoroughly beholden to corporate interests. Or maybe it is when you realize that the majority of your neighbors still believe in angels or that evolution remains "controversial" among many of those with power over how your child is educated. The problem is that this list of things many of us find demoralizing could go on for several pages and still would barely scratch the surface. On so many important metrics, we simply aren't close to where we should be.

I Did Not Choose to Be an Atheist

I never chose to be an atheist, and I hardly think I'm unique among atheists in this regard. I suspect that most atheists did not chose to be atheists. So when a Christian asks me some version of their "what if you're wrong" question, I often point out that this question assumes I have a choice in what I believe about their "god." I do not accept this assumption.

I could not simply start believing something I do not believe because I thought there might be something in it for me. Belief does not work this way.

U.S. Motto Inaccurate: American Atheists Do Not Trust in God

"In god we trust" has been the national motto of the United States since 1956. It appears on our currency, in our courthouses, and in several government buildings. Some consider it purely ceremonial, void of any religious meaning. Others believe it reflects our status as a "Christian nation." And among secular Americans, only a small minority seem to think it is worthy of our attention. I happen to disagree with this position.

Happy Scare a Christian Day!

While some Christians agonize over what to do each year when Halloween rolls around, I have found that many atheists consider it one of their favorite holidays. I am happy to count myself among them. Halloween is one of the few holidays I still enjoy. In fact, it might be the only one. And yes, I suppose that part of the enjoyment might come from seeing how terrified some Christians are of Halloween.

A few years ago, you could walk around my neighborhood this time of year and never realize that Halloween was off limits to many of the neighborhood children. Houses were proudly decorated in such a manner that I questioned whether my neighbors had temporarily set their absurd religious beliefs aside.

Christian Hell vs. Muslim Hell

I know full well what I'm getting when I turn on the History Channel for anything related to religion: pro-Christian propaganda. I guess I shouldn't be too hard on them. After all, they are in the business of entertaining people, the majority of whom do not particularly like to think. Historical accuracy is not going to be their primary concern. If you doubt this, just remember that much of what they show has nothing whatsoever to do with history (or even reality). They are in the entertainment business and are not some sort of public service concerned with reality-based education.

I do not trust most of what I see on the History Channel to be an accurate depiction of anything historic. After all, they seem determined to treat the open question of whether Jesus ever lived as completely settled and beyond doubt. But something caught my ear while watching part of one of the many shows about hell they like to replay this time of year.

Idiot of the Week: Noelle Nikpour

I was initially hesitant to select Noelle Nikpour for Idiot of the Week "honors" because I thought she had to be joking in this video. Now that I've watched it again and realized that she is a Republican strategist who has made a number of appearances on Fox "News" I think she may be serious. And if there is even a remote chance that she's serious about any part of this, she certainly deserves to be named Idiot of the Week.

Update: Jerry Coyne (Why Evolution is True) has posted a brief transcript of at least one of the highlights of the video.

The Confrontational Nature of Coming Out Atheist

Greta Christina has written one of the most thought-provoking posts about coming out as an atheist that I've read in a while. Her central point is that coming out as an atheist (i.e., disclosing one's atheism to others) can be regarded as an inherently oppositional act because it communicates to religious believers that they are wrong on the god question.

For all of us who have been wondering why our very existence seems to agitate many religious believers, I think we may have our answer. Few people like to realize they might be wrong, particularly when it comes to beliefs they have not critically examined. Perhaps this is a case of blaming the messenger even when our only message is that we do not believe in their gods.

The Silent Atheist Majority

What is the silent atheist majority? Some are atheists who do not see atheism as worth discussing at all. They may look down on their more outspoken colleagues for what they perceive as proselytizing atheism. Even though they may acknowledge the existence of bigotry and discrimination against atheists, they have not experienced it themselves. It is unfortunate that others have confronted it, they say, but it really isn't their concern. Others remain silent out of fear. They worry that they might face consequences for disclosing atheism, and they'd rather play it safe. Collectively, these people and others like them make up the vast majority of the atheist community, even as many of them deny that there is any sort of atheist community. They are the silent atheist majority.

Among the more outspoken atheists, some are quick to disparage the silent atheists. They may be viewed as apathetic or accused of cowardice. Although nobody would argue that some atheists are indeed apathetic or fearful, such accusations probably do little to attract people to a more active style of atheism. Moreover, this silent atheist majority is the greatest ally outspoken atheists could have. They are the sleeping giant that atheists who are not happy with how they are treated by the religious majority should be desperate to awaken.

Idiot of the Week: Albert Mohler

Al Mohler, President of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Nothing goes with idiocy quite as well as Christian extremism, and I have finally found a worthy "winner" from somewhere other than politics. You may be less familiar with him than many others, but his is a name you should know.

Albert Mohler is the president of the Southern Baptist Convention. I know, you're probably thinking that this is sufficient to make him an idiot. That might be true, but I'd raster focus on the contradiction between Mohler's stated beliefs and his recent tribute to Steve Jobs.

Mohler wants to extract lessons for Christians from the death of Jobs.

God has invested massive creative abilities in his human creatures. These are often used for good, and sometimes deployed to evil ends. Steve Jobs devoted his life to a technological dream that he thought would empower humanity. He led creative teams that developed technological wonders, and then he made them seemingly necessary for life in the digital age.

What Are We to Make of Parents Who Lie to Their Children?

The creativity and imagination of a child is thrilling to witness. It is great to see how the mind works when unfettered by social convention, something only the most creative among us seem able to carry into adulthood. Nobody has to tell a child to "think outside the box;" that is the only way they know how to think.

And yet, it is difficult to imagine that lying to our children simply because we find it entertaining is ethically sound. And yes, this includes the socially acceptable Santa Claus lies. A child is supposed to be able to trust his or her parent, and we are right to object when a parent violates that trust. I suppose an argument can be made that it may be beneficial to lie in situations where doing so helps to protect one's feelings (i.e., "white lies"), but that is not what we're talking about here. Adopting the Santa charade is not about protecting the child's feelings; parents who do this usually do it because they enjoyed it as children and now enjoy providing their children with a similar experience.

Is This Christianity?

Craig James (The Religion Virus) brought us another great post last week that ought to raise some interesting questions. He reprinted a guest post on the dangers of Halloween by Kimberly Daniels that appeared in Charisma, which he described as "a serious Christian news site with a large following." I'm not familiar with Charisma, but if he's right in describing it this way, it might explain the disclaimer they added to Daniels' post. Still, they did post it, and that suggests that the views she expresses cannot be that far out of the mainstream. This leads me to ask: can this possibly be Christianity in 2011?

Empathizing With Christians

Imagine that you are driving to work one morning and pass a billboard that boasts "leeches cure headaches" or some equally absurd bit of quackery. You might initially be surprised to see such a message or even point and laugh. With some reflection, you'd probably be at least a bit irritated by the promotion of a blatant lie. Why? Perhaps you would realize that many others passing this billboard every day are morons who might actually be persuaded by the message. You know better, but they might not. And so you might find yourself worrying about the potential influence of such a message.

Atheist or Agnostic? I'm Both

Atheism and agnosticism remain poorly understood, and confusion continues even among some who call themselves atheists or agnostics. This diagram (source unknown) puts all the pieces together and illustrates that the agnostic-gnostic dimension deals with certainty while the atheist-theist dimension focuses on belief and has nothing to do with certainty.

I am an atheist in that I lack belief in god(s). This doesn't have anything to do with certainty, as atheism does not require certainty. I usually identify myself as an agnostic atheist, but that depends on how "god" or "gods" is defined. If a theist defines these terms in such an absurd way that they describe contradictory or incoherent notions, then I might be a gnostic atheist with respect to that god(s) because I'd know that an entity with logically incoherent properties does not exist because such a thing could not exist. Most of the time, however, agnostic atheism fits me better. I don't believe in gods but make no claims about whether they could exist.

What is Your Argument Against God?

How many times have you been asked by a religious believer about your argument against the existence some sort of god? Yeah, me too. What many religious believers seem unable to grasp is that no arguments are necessary on the part of the atheist. The atheist position is simply that those who believe in gods have not provided sufficient evidence to support the belief claim they are making (i.e., some sort of god or gods exist). For most of us, atheism is the rational consequence of the theist not meeting his or her burden of proof. It really isn't any more complicated than that.

When someone tells you about something that sounds so implausible that it is unlikely to be true, you ask for evidence. If the person provides you with sufficient evidence, you may begin to suspect that their claim is valid. You may begin to believe what they believe on the basis of this evidence. In essence, you scale your belief in a manner proportional to the evidence provided. On the other hand, if they do not provide sufficient evidence, you remain skeptical of the claim(s).

Idiot of the Week: Pat Robertson (Yet Again)

After deciding that this week's idiot could not be another Republican presidential candidate (it is getting too easy), I settled on Pat Robertson. By my count, this is the third time he's been "honored" here. Last time, he suggested that his god was causing the suffering in Haiti because the people their had made a pact with his devil. This time, Robertson said that the cracks in the Washington Monument following this week's earthquake were a sign from his god.

Ladies and gentlemen I don’t want to get weird on this so please take it for what it’s worth. But it seems to me the Washington Monument is a symbol of America’s power, it has been the symbol of our great nation, we look at that monument and say this is one nation under God. Now there’s a crack in it, there’s a crack in it and it’s closed up. Is that a sign from the Lord? Is that something that has significance or is it just result of an earthquake? You judge, but I just want to bring that to your attention. It seems to me symbolic. When Jesus was crucified and when he died the curtain in the Temple was rent from top to bottom and there was a tear and it was extremely symbolic, is this symbolic? You judge.

Okay Pat, I'll judge. You are an idiot, and it is way too late to worry about getting weird now.

Religious Stupidity vs. Other Forms of Stupidity

One experience that is probably universal, shared by nearly everyone regardless of their thoughts on religion, is that of hearing someone else say something incredibly stupid. Haven't we all had this experience many times? We do not always react the same way when we hear someone say something stupid. Our reaction is influenced by things like the nature of our relationship with the person and the context in which the statement occurs. For example, I will react differently when my best friend says something stupid than when my boss does. Still, I think it would be fair to characterize our reactions as typically involving some mixture of surprise, laughter, and disdain or pity.

Christians Mailing Bible Verses to Grieving Strangers

I received an email from a reader with a sad but fascinating tale about the lengths to which some Christians will go to spread their "good news." I am sharing it with his permission because I am very interested in learning whether you have encountered anything like this.

Shortly after the recent death of his father, this reader received a letter in the mail from a complete stranger. The letter contained a newspaper clipping of his father's obituary and several verses from a Christian bible. Evidently, the sender thought that the bible verses would be comforting.

Letting Go of Religious Privilege

There is nothing quite like reading atheist blogs to provoke thought. While reading a recent post by Mark (No Godz) about some of the things atheists are not required to do, one in particular caught my attention:

Godless people are not required to respect superstition, prophets or religious acts performed or directed at them. If you say “I’ll pray for you” to me, I may laugh in your face... Don’t expect me to bow my head during a prayer, public or private. It’s your fallacy, not mine.

Of course, a big part of the reason that some of us get grief or even feel guilty for failing to show respect for these sort of socially sanctioned superstitions is religious privilege. We have had the need to respect this stuff instilled in us for most of our lives.

A Commitment to Reason

Atheists are more rational than religious believers, right? Wrong! Have you seen how irrational some atheists are? Atheism is no guarantee of rationality. Even if we restrict ourselves to claiming that atheists are more rational than religious believers on the question of gods, we have to be careful. While many atheists do indeed arrive at atheism through the application of reason, this is certainly not true for all atheists. And even those of us who place great value on reason behave irrationally far more than we'd care to admit or than we might realize.

An Atheist Manifesto

For those who claim that there is something even remotely new about "new atheism," the argument is almost always about the level of vitriol directed at religious belief. The so-called new atheists are supposed to be much harsher and more direct in their criticism of religion than the authors of prior generations. It does not seem to matter that this claim is utter bullshit; many continue to assert it.

I've just finished reading a book that may finally reveal the falsehood of this claim. An Atheist Manifesto was first published by Joseph Lewis in 1954 and blows anything I've read from Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens, or Dennett out out the water in terms of the antagonism leveled against god belief.

We Can Make Being Identified as an Atheist a More Positive Experience

Many of us, including some fairly open atheists, are less than thrilled with the prospect of being publicly identified as atheists in some contexts. Suppose you are quoted in a newspaper article about the importance of separation of church and state and the reporter writes something like, "John, who claims to be an atheist, thinks that..." You know that this will almost guarantee that those you were hoping might be reached by the article are going to tune you out and dismiss whatever point you might have been making. This needs to change, and I have some thoughts on at least some options for how we might change it.

Nature of the Problem

"Atheist" has extremely negative connotations, and there are many reasons for this that are going to be difficult to change because of their long historical basis. One of the most common and important sources of the negative associations with atheism - which should also be the easiest to modify - is due to the widespread misunderstanding of what atheism means.

Atheists as the Ultimate Outsiders: A Link Between Atheism and Nonconformity?

What is it that enables some people to discard the religious traditions in which they were raised and be comfortable with atheism in a culture that demonizes it? I don't have the answer to that intriguing question, but it seems to me that a part of it must involve having a certain level of comfort with nonconformity and a willingness to adopt the role of the outsider. I have seen a connection between the two in my own life, and I wonder if this has been important to others. Are atheists living in predominately religious countries more likely to be nonconformists in other ways?

Understanding Terrorism Will Be Harder if We Ignore Christians

It seems that there is more than enough Christian hate to go around. It is no surprise that some Christians act on their hateful and sometimes violent impulses. After reminding us about some of the prior acts of Christian terrorism, William Hamby (Secular News Daily) notes:

In total, there have been 17 attempted murders, 383 death threats, 153 incidents of assault or battery, and 3 kidnappings in America committed by Christian terrorists over the issue of abortion alone.

More Christian Email: Hell is Waiting For You

Sharing Christian hate mail I receive is still rather new for me. It isn't that I haven't been receiving it for some time; I just wasn't sure it would be interesting since I figured everyone else was getting it too. I'm glad I decided to start sharing it. After all, much of it really is too good to waste.

I'm not sure if the author of this particular one thinks that this is a team blog or is trying to address all atheists, but I believe it is probably the latter. That is good news because that means you can consider this directed at you too. Here it is in all its unedited glory:

Subject: Hell is waiting for you!

You fools are as crazy as anything I have ever seen. We have the damn right to include Christianity, as you do not to. You only want it one way - your way. Your rights end when it steps on my rights you stupid demon garbage. Your kind of people is what's wrong in America. Decaying the very fabric of our society. The time is quickly coming for us to take back America from people like you, the ACLU, the queers, lesbians, pedophiles and illegals. You all are grouped together for elimination from our society soon. It's coming....and we will be coming for fools like you....you demon crap.

My favorite part? I think that would have to be that this clown actually seems to believe in demons. The odd bit about "the damn right to include Christianity" might be good if I had any idea what it was referring to. But taken just as gibberish, I've seen better.

Churches Perform Vital Functions in Many Communities

Most atheists seem to agree that we would all be better off if religion were to gradually become obsolete. And yet, there are services currently being provided by churches in some communities that would be difficult to accomplish without them. In this post, I'd like to address the subject of religious people doing good works in the context of religious organizations. If we really want to see the demise of religion, we are going to need to figure out creative ways to do some of what they are currently doing.

Positive Aspects of My Childhood Religion

As a child, I was indoctrinated in a mainstream Protestant denomination of the Christian religion. One of the most positive things I can say about this experience is that we were encouraged to think about helping our neighbors and giving back to our communities in some way. I found this appealing, and I still do.

Atheists Do Not Choose to Be Atheists

Most atheists will eventually be told by a religious believer that we are choosing not to believe in their preferred god(s) and are somehow to blame for doing so. It is almost as if they think we could simply flip a switch and have god-belief like they do. Never mind that this is not how belief works.

I have written previously about whether atheism is a choice and why I think this is important for atheists to address. It is good to see other atheist bloggers I respect asking the same question.

Before You Dismiss Breivik as Crazy...

I would like to caution my fellow atheist bloggers against jumping to the conclusion that Anders Behring Breivik, who has now confessed to the mass-murder in Norway, must be mentally ill. I was disappointed to see some prominent atheist bloggers making this mistake. As I will explain here, there are at least four good reasons to avoid making such claims at this point in time.

First, we do not yet know enough about Breivik, his history, or his mental state at the time of his terrorist act to draw conclusions about his mental health. Seeing people who hold themselves up as rational scientists already making up their mind that Breivik is "delusional and insane" is disappointing to say the least.

Apathetic Atheism

The most prominent example of a self-identified "apatheist" (i.e., apathetic atheist) appears to be Bill Maher. He clearly identifies himself as an atheist, and that's certainly nice to see. I'm not completely convinced, however, by his claim of being apathetic on the subject of religion. He spends far more time talking about religion than I would expect for someone who does not care about it at all.

If "apatheist" means an atheist who does not think much about religion, as CNN says, then I'm not sure the term is even worth using. Defined this way, it does not convey much of import.

How Many Christians Have Read Their Bible?

I cannot help wondering what percentage of self-identified Christians in the United States have read their bible from cover to cover. I suspect that if more had read it, there would be fewer Christians. Once one realizes what the book contains, it becomes considerably more difficult to insist that it is "holy." No, this isn't a post about religious literacy, although that is certainly relevant. And it is not a post about how most Christians do not appear to believe much of what their bible says. Instead, I am suggesting that most of what many Christians think they know of their bible comes from sources other than reading it for themselves.

Defending the Original Pledge By Removing Any Mention of Gods

Some evangelical fundamentalist Christians and many conservative politicians are fond of talking about how they want to return us to an overly idealized version of the past, a version that never actually happened. Many seem to focus on the 1950s (prior to the Civil Rights movement). Others want to go back much further (e.g., teabaggers wrapping themselves in revisionist history involving American independence). The fascinating thing for observers in the reality-based community is how much distortion is involved in these efforts. I'm not sure anything illustrates that better than the Pledge of Allegiance.

Dealing With Bigotry

I received a thought-provoking email from a reader in the Southern U.S. about her struggle around coming out as an atheist/agnostic and her understandable fears about how others will respond. I do not have any easy answers for her, but I want to share portions of her struggle and offer what little I can. I'll call her Rachel to help conceal her identity.

Rachel identifies herself as Hispanic and says that she was raised in one of those traditional Catholic families where questioning faith is simply not done. She describes herself as agnostic, but like most people who claim to be agnostic, I suspect that she is actually an agnostic atheist (see Understanding Atheism and Agnosticism).

Liars for Jesus: Exposing David Barton and Other Revisionists

Even though we may not agree on how best to improve the quality of public education, I suspect that most atheists would agree that reality-based education is preferable to that based on myth, superstition, or political ideology. One of the biggest challenges we face in this regard is the revisionist history being pushed by Christian extremists and right-wing politicians to support the outlandish claim that America was designed to be a Christian theocracy. I believe that it is vital for us to inform ourselves about the nature of this revisionist history and the truth it hides. Fortunately, there are resources like Liars For Jesus: The Religious Right's Alternate Version of American History to assist us.

In Liars for Jesus, Chris Rodda tackles many of the most popular revisionist myths concerning early American history. Drawing on an exhaustive collection of original source material, Rodda demonstrates how authors like David Barton and D. James Kennedy operate. By quoting at length from the books written by these men and others with their agenda and then comparing what they have written with the source material, Rodda shows that there is far more than sloppy scholarship at work here. Again and again, outright lies are exposed. Quotes are taken out of context, intentionally altered, or in some cases, made up. In case after case, the revisionist historians do not even look at the source material, citing each other instead.

All Religions Are Silly Except Mine

I found this cartoon on Tumblr. I do not know its source, but I have decided that it is too perfect not to share. Wouldn't it be great on a t-shirt? No caption is necessary; it speaks for itself.

I am sure some Christians would decide to be offended by it, but what it depicts is firmly rooted in reality. Early Christians did seek to replace native religions with their own (often violently) and were largely successful in doing so. Many modern Christians continue to mock other religions are being more primitive, silly, or cult-like than their own. They might not recognize the hypocrisy, but we atheists certainly do.

Update: A reader has suggested that the source of the cartoon is Maurice Sinet.

The Price of Hero Worship in the Atheist Movement

I haven't had a good rant in a long time. Hell, I can't even remember the last one. Brace yourselves because I may end up insulting almost everyone before I'm done with this one.

I am getting extremely tired of atheist celebrities. I'm not talking about celebrities who happen to be atheists; I am referring to people who seem to have gained an inexplicable sort of celebrity simply for being outspoken atheists. And it isn't even their fault! It is the rest of us who are so damned determined to turn them into celebrities.

Is Online Dating for Atheists a Good Idea?

Dating is a daunting process, especially for those of us who do not have the luxury of being in a setting designed to facilitate it (e.g., high school, college, etc.). The appeal of short cuts is understandable. Wouldn't it be great to have an efficient way of sifting through eligible partners to maximize one's chances of finding a good match? This is why online dating sites are constantly promoting their personality questionnaires, compatibility algorithms, and the like. This is also why some online dating services have decided to specialize by catering only to a particular niche market. In fact, this practice is becoming so common that it no longer seems controversial. I'm not sure that's a good thing.

Mormons Reminded About Separation of Church and State

I know that several of you know far more about Mormonism than I do. Some of you are ex-Mormons, and you probably have much that you could teach the rest of us about this strange religion. I will defer to you to make sense out of this for those of us with less information about Mormonism, but I found it interesting to read that the Mormon church recently reminded its leaders not to endorse political candidates.