Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Atheists Split Over Message
The Las Vegas Sun ^ | March 30,2007 | JAY LINDSAY

Posted on 03/30/2007 6:20:58 PM PDT by buccaneer81

Atheists Split Over Message By JAY LINDSAY

BOSTON -

Atheists are under attack these days for being too militant, for not just disbelieving in religious faith but for trying to eradicate it. And who's leveling these accusations? Other atheists, it turns out.

Among the millions of Americans who don't believe God exists, there's a split between people such as Greg Epstein, who holds the partially endowed post of humanist chaplain at Harvard University, and so-called "New Atheists."

Epstein and other humanists feel their movement is on the verge of explosive growth, but are concerned it will be dragged down by what they see as the militancy of New Atheism.

The most pre-eminent New Atheists include best-selling authors Richard Dawkins, who has called the God of the Old Testament "a psychotic delinquent," and Sam Harris, who foresees global catastrophe unless faith is renounced. They say religious belief is so harmful it must be defeated and replaced by science and reason.

Epstein calls them "atheist fundamentalists." He sees them as rigid in their dogma, and as intolerant as some of the faith leaders with whom atheists share the most obvious differences.

Next month, as Harvard celebrates the 30th anniversary of its humanist chaplaincy - part of the school's chaplaincy corps - Epstein will use the occasion to provide a counterpoint to the New Atheists.

"Humanism is not about erasing religion," he said. "It's an embracing philosophy."

In general, humanism rejects supernaturalism, while stressing principles such as dignity of the individual, equality and social justice. If there's no God to help humanity, it holds, people better do the work.

The celebration of a "New Humanism" will emphasize inclusion and diversity within the movement, and will include Pulitzer Prize-winning scientist E.O. Wilson, a humanist who has made well-chronicled efforts to team with evangelical Christians to fight global warming.

Part of the New Humanism, Wilson said, is "an invitation to a common search for morally based action in areas agreement can be reached in."

The tone of the New Atheists will only alienate important faith groups whose help is needed to solve the world's problems, Wilson said.

"I would suggest possibly that while there is use in the critiques by Dawkins and Harris, that they've overdone it," he said.

Harris, author of "Letter to a Christian Nation," sees the disagreement as overblown. He thinks there's room for multiple arguments in the debate between scientific rationalism and religious dogmatism. "I don't think everyone needs to take as uncompromising a stance as I have against faith," he said.

But, he added, an intellectual intolerance of people who strongly believe things on bad evidence is just "basic human sanity."

"We do not jail people for being stupid, but we do stop listening to them after a while," he said in e-mailed comments.

Harris also rejected the term "atheist fundamentalist," calling it "a silly play upon words." He noted that, when it comes to the ancient Greek gods, everyone is an atheist and no one is asked to justify that to pagans who want to believe in Zeus.

"Likewise with the God of Abraham," he said. "There is nothing 'fundamentalist' about finding the claims of religious demagogues implausible."

Some of the participants in Harvard's celebration of its humanist chaplaincy have no problem with the New Atheists' tone.

Harvard psychologist and author Steven Pinker said the forcefulness of their criticism is standard in scientific and political debate, and "far milder than what we accept in book and movie reviews."

"It's only the sense that religion deserves special respect - the exact taboo that Dawkins and Harris are arguing against - that people feel that those guys are being meanies when applying ordinary standards of evaluation to religion," Pinker said in e-mailed comments.

Dawkins did not respond to requests for comment. He has questioned whether teaching children they could go to hell is worse in the long term than sexually abusing them, and compares the evidence of God to evidence for unicorns, fairies and a "Flying Spaghetti Monster." His attempt to win converts is clear in "The God Delusion," when he writes of his hope that "religious readers who open it will be atheists when they put it down."

A 2006 Baylor University survey estimates about 15 million atheists in the United States.

Not all nonbelievers identify as humanists or atheists, with some calling themselves agnostics, freethinkers or skeptics. But humanists see the potential for unifying the groups under their banner, creating a large, powerful minority that can't be ignored or disdained by mainstream political and social thinkers.

Lori Lipman Brown, director of the Secular Coalition of America, sees a growing public acceptance of people who don't believe in God, pointing to California U.S. Rep. Pete Stark's statement this month that he doesn't believe in a supreme being. Stark is the first congressman to acknowledge being an atheist.

As more prominent people such as Stark publicly acknowledge they don't believe in God, "I think it will make it more palatable," Brown said.

But Epstein worries the attacks on religion by the New Atheists will keep converts away.

"The philosophy of the future is not going to be one that tries to erase its enemies," he said. "The future is going to be people coming together from what motivates them."

--


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: atheism; athiest; dopes; humanist; moralabsolutes; secular
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-191 next last
To: mnehrling
Ditto. If God is so obviously non-existent, why make such a fuss? To a real atheist, being a militant atheist would be like defining your life in terms of one's non-belief in the Easter Bunny.

Of course the real answer is that deep down, everybody knows (or at least suspects) that God exists. Le coeur á ses raisons que la raison ne connait point — Pascal

41 posted on 03/30/2007 7:47:31 PM PDT by B-Chan (Catholic. Monarchist. Texan. Any questions?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: sourcery
By the way, I happen to be an atheist,...

So am I.

1. There is no such thing as an ecumenical atheist.
2. There is no such thing as an orthodox atheist.

As for myself:


- I do not like the sex perverts. (homosexuality is not an anatomical function)
- I do not like the illegal immigrants. (this is not a welfare plantation)
- I do not like the gun grabbers. (obvious)
- I do not like the baby killers. (no trial by a jury of their peers)

And for these few political opinions, I have logical, secular reasons most so-called atheists will run away from.

I also think evolutionists are on educational welfare.

42 posted on 03/30/2007 7:51:03 PM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: B-Chan
If God is so obviously non-existent, why make such a fuss? To a real atheist, being a militant atheist would be like defining your life in terms of one's non-belief in the Easter Bunny.

Strong agreement. And I may steal that turn of phrase...

Of course the real answer is that deep down, everybody knows (or at least suspects) that God exists.

Strong disagreement. I no more suspect that God exists than I do that the Easter Bunny actually exists. Either could be true, but so far I have seen about as much evidence for the one as the other--which is asymptotically close to no evidence at all.

43 posted on 03/30/2007 7:54:08 PM PDT by sourcery (Government Warning: The Attorney General has determined that Federal Regulation is a health hazard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: sourcery
Both science and atheism are subdomains of an epistemelogical paradigm where there are no absolute beliefs.< P>So then atheism that says there is no god of any sort is not scientific by definition.

By definition, a scientific theory (belief) must be falsifiable.

And again, that makes atheism not scientific, because it's not falsifiable.

44 posted on 03/30/2007 7:56:47 PM PDT by highlander_UW (I don't know what my future holds, but I know Who holds my future)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Calvin Locke
Which group is likely to prevail, the United Atheist Alliance (UAA), United Atheist League (UAL), and the Allied Atheist Allegiance (AAA)?

There is no such thing as an ecumenical atheist.

45 posted on 03/30/2007 7:57:13 PM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

Militant atheism is itself a religion, with No-God as God.


46 posted on 03/30/2007 8:00:48 PM PDT by El Conservador ("The world needs to be reminded that all human ills are not curable by legislation" - Warren Harding)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: highlander_UW
And again, that makes atheism not scientific, because it's not falsifiable.

Of course atheism is falsifiable. Although I'd agree that any atheist who won't admit to that is a "believer" following a religion.

47 posted on 03/30/2007 8:01:21 PM PDT by sourcery (Government Warning: The Attorney General has determined that Federal Regulation is a health hazard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: sourcery
Morality and all of its associated ideals are rooted entirely in the presupposition some higher power defines what is correct for human behavior.

Today, "morals" are a religious pagan philosophy of esoteric hobgoblins. Transfiguration is a pantheon of fantasies as the medium of infinitization. Others get derision for having an unwavering Judaic belief in Yahweh or Yeshua, although their critics and enemies will evangelize insertion of phantasmagoric fetishisms into secular law.

Excuse this bit of sarcasm...

But, since we are all properly obeying the * modern interpretation * of the First Amendment, good & evil isn't the question... Good & bad, right & wrong, etc., etc., ad nausea; are all inherently religious ideals.

The modern interpretation of the First Amendment (according to the liberal-tarians) says government must exorcise all traces of religion and theism from itself. Therefore, government must never consider issues of morality and right and wrong...

So, it becomes a question of benefits versus costs. Fetus killing has its benefits to society, especially if you like to sleep late on Saturdays. But it also has its costs as well. Society (by which I mean, whoever manages to seize power) needs to evaluate these costs and decide accordingly.

The mythical rights of men and women are also meaningless. The very concept of rights is also founded in religion. Since the enlightened person is freed from any superstitions about some "God," they are free from having to worry about "rights." Only raw power counts and humans are just meat puppets for the powerful...

48 posted on 03/30/2007 8:02:19 PM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood
I participated in a very lengthy thread on this very topic on FR a few years ago: Morality Requires God...Or Does It?

I highly recommend it.

49 posted on 03/30/2007 8:07:31 PM PDT by sourcery (Government Warning: The Attorney General has determined that Federal Regulation is a health hazard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited
I deep down inside believ[e] there really [is] not a God.

I feel the same way about the Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus. None of these entities have been seen (at least in the past 2000 years) and none have done anything to prove they exist-- like performing the impossible (not just merely the improbable).

There isn't even any verifiable value to strongly believing God. Matthew 21:21, John 14:14, Matthew 7:7, Matthew 17:20, and Mark 11:24 didn't ring very true for Jessica Lunsford in this life, regardless of what castle in the clouds she gets in the afterlife.

Belief in God is just another anti-depressant, like Paxil, Prozac, or Zoloft. People are scared that there isn't some magical place to go to when they die and they are scared that there isn't a magical invisible man who can rescue them like a safety net when they need rescuing.

I think it's generally as harmless as people taking anti-depressants in pill form. It helps people to function when they would have difficulty doing so. Whatever. It doesn't really affect me.

50 posted on 03/30/2007 8:10:22 PM PDT by GraniteStateConservative (...He had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here...-- Worst.President.Ever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood
The religion is Secular Humanism, with atheism as the underlying tenet needed to raise humans to godhood.
51 posted on 03/30/2007 8:12:21 PM PDT by MHGinTN (If you've had life support. Promote life support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited

Why, don't you plan to be there? We'll miss you.... ;)
susie


52 posted on 03/30/2007 8:14:59 PM PDT by brytlea (amnesty--an act of clemency by an authority by which pardon is granted esp. to a group of individual)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: sourcery
I participated in a very lengthy thread on this very topic on FR a few years ago: Morality Requires God...Or Does It?

LOGIC is all I need...

Morality and all of its associated ideals are rooted entirely in the presupposition some higher power defines what is correct for human behavior.

That is a bullet proof syllogism and it can be tested with truth tables in prepositional logic or with Venn diagrams in categorical (Aristole's) logic.

53 posted on 03/30/2007 8:19:26 PM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood
I bet the Rev. John Harvard is spinning in his grave at what his Christian college has become.

He probably started spinning when they dropped "in Christ and his Church" from its motto.

54 posted on 03/30/2007 8:21:30 PM PDT by Calvin Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

A quote I read long ago and have forgotten the attribution:
"Sir, I am not an athiest, I'm an agnostic. I don't pretend to know what many ignorant people are sure of."


55 posted on 03/30/2007 8:27:52 PM PDT by common tater (Tighten yer cinches folks, it's gonna be a rough ride.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood

You are free to define words as you will. And using your definitions of choice, you can emit an unlimited number of statements that are true by definition.


56 posted on 03/30/2007 8:29:29 PM PDT by sourcery (Government Warning: The Attorney General has determined that Federal Regulation is a health hazard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Prov3456

Selfping for later


57 posted on 03/30/2007 8:31:24 PM PDT by Prov3456
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Calvin Locke

It is no coincidence Islamic pagans hate Israel, Jews, Christians and Western Civilization. The entire basis of Western Civilization is Mosaic Law, something both the Neo-Pagan Left and the pagan Islamic thugs cannot abide and wish to destroy.

The very idea that human beings have individual rights not subject to the whims of an earthly monarch, but subject to the laws of Yahweh, is directly from Moses.

Historically, this is proven over and over again with the successive conflicts between the forces of paganism and the Judaic culture. (This includes the idolatry of cultural Marxist paganism.)

A greater number of "atheists" and "pagans" adopt the same hackneyed tenets of a faux Judaic-Christian ideal (golden calf). They also subscribe to the Judaic fetishism of "sin," but will fight to their death in denial of it.

Most of them are so wrapped up in their own polemics that they have become nothing more than pathetic anti-Christians with the same false hypocritical philosophy. They just slap a new label on it hoping nobody will notice - - they replace the idea of "avoiding sin" with "morals."

Morality and all of its associated ideals are rooted entirely in the presupposition some higher power defines what is correct in human behavior.

Today, "morals" are a religious pagan philosophy of esoteric hobgoblins. Transfiguration is a pantheon of fantasies as the medium of infinitization. Others get derision for having an unwavering Judaic belief in Yahweh or Yeshua, although their critics and enemies will evangelize insertion of phantasmagoric fetishisms into secular law.

Mosaic Law (of which the Ten Commandments is just a part) is the foundation of Western Civilization. Genesis is the primary focus of the Declaration of Independence, from where our Constitutional rights are derived. The Ten Commandments are the foundation of our judicial system.

Moses wrote Genesis. This is why such people will jump up and down screaming when the Ten Commandments are displayed or the Creationist idea of monogamy from the book of Genesis is introduced.

The latter (Genesis) also ruins the illogical and non-biological arguments of homosexual monogamy. In a secular sense, homosexuality is an idolatry of perversion. It is in no way an anatomical function of the human organism, but a phantasmagoric creation from within the mentally disturbed human mind, a social psychosis, naked and on full exhibitionist display.

This is the whole crux (pun intended) of their attack on creationism - - they are really frustrated by Genesis, but cannot destroy the axiomatic state of procreant human biology, it does not fit their religious agenda.

Homosexual monogamy advocates seek ceremonious sanctification of their anatomical perversions and esoteric absolution for their guilt-ridden, impoverished egos.

Neither of those will satisfy their universal dissatisfaction with mortality or connect them to something eternal. With pantheons of fantasies as their medium of infinitization, they still have nothing in them of reality, any more than there is in the things that seem to stand before us in a dream.

Homosexual deviancy is really a pagan practice (and a self-induced social psychosis) at war with the Judaic culture over what is written in the book of Genesis (1:27, 2:18).

This is exactly what the National Socialists were at war with... so, when someone uses the term "Gaystapo," they might not realize how close to the truth they really are, especially if you consider their eugenic breeding programs.

Many will seek ceremonious sanctification and esoteric absolution in some type of marriage rite, but that still fails to give them a connection to the eternal in both a religious and temporal, procreant sense - - the union does not produce offspring.

Dissatisfaction with inevitable mortality only feeds the impoverishment of the ego further. Homosexuals really hate human life; their whole desire is rooted in the destruction of it...

Abortion is akin to slavery... life to be bought and sold...

Contemplate the religious fervor associated with the pro-abortion advocacy. The societal practice of abortion is ritual mass murder upon the altars of conceit dedicated to idolatrous vanities, a collective human sacrifice before pagan idols.

It has a similitude to the Teutonic paganism of Adolph Hitler (whose idolatry was the idea of a "master race," among other things). In effect, these genocides are a mass human sacrifice to those pagan idols. The abortionists, like the National Socialists, incinerate the remains of their victims.

Aleister Crowley, who openly supported the National Socialists, was affiliated with Ordo Templi Orientis, A.A. (Order of the Silver Star) and other such occult lodges all across Germany. Crowley engaged in all manner of deviancy, homoeroticism, sadomasochism and murder. Much of the occultism in National Socialism is derived directly from there.

Crowley envisioned himself as the Great Beast (To Mega Therion), just as der Fuhrer made himself in that image. Hitler's life as a struggling, inept artist was where that association blossomed.

Crowley's creed, "Do what thou wilt, shall be the whole of the Law," (which is actually from Francois Rabelais) and used by Neo-Pagan nutcases without attribution for obvious politically correct reasons, is with certainty no different than the National Socialist "will to power," or their ubermensch mentality.

It is also no accident Nietzsche's "over-man" and nihilist philosophy and resulting insanity from venereal disease closely mirrors the insanity of der Fuhrer.

These occult orders, sex and drug cults still survive today, as do the Neo-pagan, Neo-Nazi groups, black supremacist Rastafarian potheads, prison gangs and other related filth.

Crowley occultism is also from where L. Ron Hubbard emerges with Scientology. Note the NAZI symbolism of that kooky cult of weirdoes and their deviant adherents. Hollywood Cultural Marxists love Scientology.

Ah, Hollywood! The fountain of fantastical images, perverts and hypocrisies! It is by no accident the Cultural Marxists of Hollywood are flaming haters of America, Israel and Christendom, and who advocate the most bizarre and psychotic.

Germany cracked down hard on the Scientologists for that reason and because they are using similar mind control techniques...


58 posted on 03/30/2007 8:31:53 PM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: sourcery
You are free to define words as you will. And using your definitions of choice, you can emit an unlimited number of statements that are true by definition.

The axiomatic truth of procreant mammalian biology requires no words.

We are defined by nature. Civilization only gives the weakest man the ability to kill the strongest.

59 posted on 03/30/2007 8:34:35 PM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: narses

My brother is an athiest. But he never would deny any kind of public acceptance of religion, including mangers, angels, etc. Maybe there is hope for him.....he was raised a Catholic.


60 posted on 03/30/2007 8:35:26 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker ( Hunter/Thompson in 08! Or Rudy/Hillary, if you want America finished off!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-191 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson