3.30.2011

Former Atheist Warns About Dangers of Atheist Pride

atheist pride

This isn't an Idiot of the Week post, but it certainly could be. Jennifer Fulwiler, a self-described atheist turned Catholic, wrote a piece in the National Catholic Register that manages to get so many things wrong that it is difficult to know where to start.

Her article initially appears to be a criticism of "A Week," but rapidly reveals itself to be little more than the sort of anti-atheist hit piece to which we've become accustomed. Fulwiler announces that atheists publicly proclaiming their atheism is "unhealthy." Her rationale, and I use the term loosely, relies primarily on the claim that atheists did not used to do this.

Back in my day, atheists didn’t walk around with signs that said “I am an atheist.” They didn’t put atheist pride stickers on their two-pound cell phones or replace their grainy yearbook photos with a red “A.”

3.24.2011

An Unpleasant Task Ahead for Atheists

Consider the following question for a moment:

If the atheist movement succeeds, what should replace religion?

My gut-level response to this is "Nothing." Why must religion be replaced with anything? Isn't reality sufficient? However, I am starting to wonder if I might be wrong about this. Just because I do not personally have a need for anything to replace religion in my life does not mean that others do not have such a need. I am beginning to think that we atheists may have an unpleasant task ahead of us in wrestling with this very question.


Atheism outlives all gods

3.20.2011

Interfaith Groups are Another Way to Exclude Atheists

Interfaith symbols

It is great that religious people occasionally make efforts to get along instead of killing each other. By coming together in various "interfaith coalitions," they may be able to overcome some of their long-standing differences, reduce conflict, and learn from one another. There is very little not to like about that, except that such efforts often exclude those of us in the reality-based community.

Responding to news that the Obama White House had created an Interfaith and Community Service Campus Challenge through their Interfaith Office, here's how Ophelia Benson (Butterflies & Wheels) recently put it:

An Interfaith Challenge offered by an Interfaith Office can’t be fully open to and inclusive of atheists. It rejects atheists in the very language it uses. We shouldn’t be pretending it doesn’t. We shouldn’t be pretending there is nothing exclusive or particularist or antisecular about faith-based offices and faith-based challenges in and from a branch of government. I don’t feel included in Obama’s challenge. On the contrary; I feel very pointedly and explicitly not included.

I agree. No branch of government has any business promoting religion - whether it is a particular religion or simply religion in general.

Efforts like this send a clear message to atheists: you are not a part of this. We are used to being outsiders in many aspects of our lives, but it is unacceptable to keep receiving this message from our own government.

For more on a closely-related topic, see Atheists and Interfaith Dialogue.

3.17.2011

Religion + Power = Danger

Behead those who insult islam

When I see Muslim extremists calling for violence against whoever drew the latest "offensive" cartoon or wrote the latest book they didn't like, I initially marvel at how incredibly violent this "religion of peace" seems to be. Not only is their treatment of women and LGBT persons abhorrent, but they seem to leap to violence at the slightest provocation. All it takes is someone criticizing their silly religion, and they are out in the streets demanding blood.

While I understand that not all Muslims advocate violence against people who offend their religious sensibilities, it seems that there are quite a few who are willing to do so and that their numbers are concentrated in places where Islam and government are blurred together. My initial thought about the violent nature of Islam is almost always followed by another, one that helps put Islam into a context with which I am much more familiar:

Given the same state power, Christian extremists would behave every bit as badly. That is, Christian extremists would be doing most of the same things in the name of their preferred form of Christianity as these Muslim extremists are doing in the name of their preferred form of Islam.

3.14.2011

Being the Best Ambassadors of Atheism We Can

standing in awe of the universe

Whether we want to accept the role or not, you and I are ambassadors of atheism. When we disclose our lack of god belief to others, we may be the first person our audience has encountered to do so. Like it or not, we represent atheism. How, you may ask, can someone be an ambassador for a lack of belief in something? I'll consider that question, but most of all, I want you to think seriously about how to be the best ambassador you can be.

Representing Atheism

Since atheism is not a philosophy, worldview, religion, or belief system of any kind, it may initially seem pointless to talk of representing it. And yet, this difficulty entails part of how to represent atheism effectively.

3.11.2011

Mockery vs. Personal Attacks

JesusWhen it comes to atheists mocking religious belief - something I have long advocated here - a couple of crucial distinctions must be made. First, mocking someone's religious beliefs is not the same thing as attacking them personally. The distinction is not always easy to spot, but I think it is an important one. Second, not all forms of mockery are equally effective. In fact, forms of mockery that might be perfect for certain believers will fall flat or make the situation worse with others.

The goal of mocking religious belief is simple: provoke thought among all who encounter it. I seriously doubt that one experience of having one's religious beliefs mocked is going to lead any believer to de-convert. The best we can hope for is to provoke thought, and we should probably view effective mockery as having a small, cumulative impact. This is part of why even fairly subtle forms of mockery can be effective.

3.09.2011

Atheists Do Not Spend Time on Gods Because They are Popular

La RendiciĆ³n de Granada - Pradilla

Bernard Schweizer, Associate Professor of English at Long Island University, wrote an odd piece for CNN's Belief Blog about theists who hate "God." He deserves credit for correctly pointing out that atheists do not hate god(s); however, he omits the main reason that atheists spend time on the god construct at all.

For atheists, God is in the same category as these fictional villains. Except that since God is the most popular of all fictional villains, New Atheists – those evangelizing ones such as Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins - spend a considerable amount of energy enumerating his flaws.

3.03.2011

When Mockery is Effective

I have grown tired of hearing about how the so-called "new atheists" are too mean, too assertive, or are simply being "dicks." Atheists have been accused of being militant and told to keep quiet for at least as long as there have been atheists. There is nothing new about any of this, and the real question is whether religious beliefs should be treated differently from any other absurd beliefs. Don't mock the religious, they say, you are simply making atheists look bad. I've got news for anyone who still clings to this tired argument: there is little atheists can do to make public perceptions of us more negative than they already are. It is about time we realize that outright mockery, at least in certain circumstances, can be effective.

crucifix against vampires