Link (Archive)
First, it’s useful to recall that for most of human history, being an atheist almost anywhere in the world was dangerous, both socially and physically. In many places it still is, including in the United States. Being a member of a loathed and vilified community based solely on a lack of religious faith can easily breed anger and contempt—especially when anyone can look about and see the harm that many religious institutions are doing. And it doesn’t help that our culture remains suffused with religion—it’s everywhere and there is no escaping it, even within our so-called secular public institutions.
But atheists are generally expected to accept this state of affairs with either appreciation or silence. There is a long-standing notion that religious beliefs should be “respected”, which I have always understood to mean never questioned, criticized, or mocked. Regardless of how frequently atheism is maligned and misrepresented, we are to treat religion as honorable and faith as a virtue—and if we don’t, that is merely further evidence of our depravity and bitter character.
Of course, there are many good Christians—I honestly understand the impulse behind the #NotAllChristians response. [Note: I’m singling out Christianity because it is the majority religion in the US, but this is all relevant to religion in general.] But sometimes this fact is used to shame atheists back into silence with some version of the “few bad apples” argument.
However, from an atheistic perspective, this is a trite and arbitrary defense. Since we generally don’t accept the Bible as authoritative (and certainly not divinely inspired), we don’t believe that there is a “true” interpretation of scripture. Many atheists argue that the fundamental problem lies in exactly this illusion. Since the Abrahamic religions rely on faith (as opposed to, say, empiricism), any given interpretation is as “good” as another. The Bible is large and incongruous enough to justify almost any opinion one might have about it’s teachings.
Which is all to say, many atheists aren’t convinced that religion, nor religious people, deserve the protection from questions, criticism, or mockery that they have enjoyed for so long. The relative safety of the Internet now makes it impossible to hold back that tide. And as atheism grows (especially amongst the younger generations), our voice will inevitably grow with it. But don’t forget, atheists remain greatly outnumbered for now; we have little to no real power outside of the influence of our words. The last thing we’re going to do is be quiet.
A FEW WORDS TO LIBERAL CHRISTIANS AND PEOPLE OF FAITH
A few more words from an atheist
I know there’s been a number of stories about this, but I wanted to add another perspective from a nonbeliever. The friction between faith traditions and non-believers is bound to grow in America, especially if the Christian population continues to contract and the “unaffiliated” grows. I honestly believe that this friction is healthy for the most part—it is long past time for atheists to have the right to safely express their thoughts while the faithful need to have their sense of “religion as default” challenged. With this in mind, I wanted to say a few things mostly to my religious DKos brothers and sisters.First, it’s useful to recall that for most of human history, being an atheist almost anywhere in the world was dangerous, both socially and physically. In many places it still is, including in the United States. Being a member of a loathed and vilified community based solely on a lack of religious faith can easily breed anger and contempt—especially when anyone can look about and see the harm that many religious institutions are doing. And it doesn’t help that our culture remains suffused with religion—it’s everywhere and there is no escaping it, even within our so-called secular public institutions.
But atheists are generally expected to accept this state of affairs with either appreciation or silence. There is a long-standing notion that religious beliefs should be “respected”, which I have always understood to mean never questioned, criticized, or mocked. Regardless of how frequently atheism is maligned and misrepresented, we are to treat religion as honorable and faith as a virtue—and if we don’t, that is merely further evidence of our depravity and bitter character.
Of course, there are many good Christians—I honestly understand the impulse behind the #NotAllChristians response. [Note: I’m singling out Christianity because it is the majority religion in the US, but this is all relevant to religion in general.] But sometimes this fact is used to shame atheists back into silence with some version of the “few bad apples” argument.
However, from an atheistic perspective, this is a trite and arbitrary defense. Since we generally don’t accept the Bible as authoritative (and certainly not divinely inspired), we don’t believe that there is a “true” interpretation of scripture. Many atheists argue that the fundamental problem lies in exactly this illusion. Since the Abrahamic religions rely on faith (as opposed to, say, empiricism), any given interpretation is as “good” as another. The Bible is large and incongruous enough to justify almost any opinion one might have about it’s teachings.
Which is all to say, many atheists aren’t convinced that religion, nor religious people, deserve the protection from questions, criticism, or mockery that they have enjoyed for so long. The relative safety of the Internet now makes it impossible to hold back that tide. And as atheism grows (especially amongst the younger generations), our voice will inevitably grow with it. But don’t forget, atheists remain greatly outnumbered for now; we have little to no real power outside of the influence of our words. The last thing we’re going to do is be quiet.
A FEW WORDS TO LIBERAL CHRISTIANS AND PEOPLE OF FAITH
- Many atheists do not speak out against religion from a place of bitterness, but from a place of aspiration—a desire to see a better world that religion prevents.
- The large majority of atheists don’t hate you and are not trying to destroy your religion or outlaw your right to worship. Some of us, however, are trying to persuade you to question your faith or religion itself, and that’s not the same thing.
- Many people have a natural impulse to want religion to stay private, and on an individual level I live by this principle myself. But religion itself is not private. It’s deeply embedded in American culture—in our movies and television shows, political speeches and public board meetings, streets lined with churches, billboards, school performances, water cooler conversations, asks for donations to religious charities, magazine interviews, sponsors of kid’s sports teams, dangling on necklaces, and on and on. Religion gets to “speak” constantly. It’s the “default”. And because of this, it can be uncomfortable to hear atheists voicing an alternative point of view, which can result in efforts to silence us with accusations of arrogance, intolerance, bigotry, ignorance, sinfulness, and all other manner of horrible traits (just read some of the comments below). But we are not on an even playing field and there is no escape from religion in America. Please try to remember this when you are inspired to convince an atheist to be quiet.
- Religion is neither necessary for nor indicative of moral character. Faith gives no one an ethical advantage. There is no good thing a religious person can do that an atheist cannot. That which is morally good within religion can be had outside of that religion.
- Voicing criticism and mockery of beliefs that you hold is not the same as attacking or oppressing you personally. You do not have a right to be free of offense based on religion. For those who are easily upset at religious criticism, you would be well served by thickening your skin a bit and remembering that if any given critique or disparagement by an atheist doesn’t apply to you, then it doesn’t apply to you.
- The problems with religion will not be solved with sectarianism. There will never be a “victory” of the true, good expression of religious scripture. As many atheists see it, the fundamental problem is with the concept of faith in scripture itself. As long as people believe that scripture holds the keys to divine truth and salvation, there will be dogma, fundamentalism, and hurtful religious ideology in the name of any given exegesis. This is what many of us ultimately are fighting against, and this is bound to cause friction.
- The last thing I would do is ask you to be silent or censure yourself. But I would ask that you contemplate what you are trying to accomplish with any given communication. If you are trying to persuade, then there are well-known methods of doing that, and using language that your target audience would likely take offense to generally reinforces their pre-existing positions. Yes, there are times when provocative language is called for, and I know how to sling it myself. I would merely encourage you to develop a full rhetorical toolbox rather than limit yourself to just a hammer.
- It can be very useful rhetorically to differentiate between the belief and the believer. No one wants to be told they are stupid, irrational, childish, or unethical, either directly or by implication. And doing so within the context of DailyKos is certainly counterproductive. However, it is possible to be critical of religion without being critical of believers. Two fantastic examples of this is Drew McCoy (better known as Genetically Modified Skeptic on YouTube) and Hemant Mehta (the Friendly Atheist). Again, I’m not saying anyone “should” speak like them, only that their approach is often effective. Even someone as fiery as Matt Dillahunty can change it up depending on the context (here’s a great example).
- There is something to the argument about inviting unnecessary strife within the Democratic coalition. For instance, as much as I support the aspirations of BLM, I believe their attacks on Bernie Sanders and other Democrats played a role in our 2016 defeat. In no way does that mean I’m arguing that atheists shouldn’t critique religion on DailyKos. I actually think we should. But I also think we can do it here without using such a large brush that we create hard dividing lines. Yes, we should debate, but we all belong in the tent, and disagreement does not have to impair solidarity.
