It was a typical, unreasonably hot day when I was sitting outside on my college campus. Then, out of nowhere, an older gentleman steps onto a platform and starts preaching from what appeared to be the Bible. He preached loud in a southern drawl as large masses of college students walked by. Can you smell what’s cooking? It’s a recipe for disaster. Among some minor mocking jabs at the man, it couldn’t have been longer than 5 minutes before the stereotypical “badass rebel” Atheist walks along, and arrogantly shouts over him:
“GOD DOESN’T EXIST. IT’S ALL A VOICE IN HIS HEAD. FREE YOUR MINDS”
To which people around me laughed heartily as if loudly proclaiming such a thing required any balls in today’s society. If anything, the guy choosing to preach loudly to a bunch of disinterested, cynical college students is the ballsy one. Yet the irony appeared to be lost on one individual student, for while he mocked the older gentleman claiming he needed to free his mind, this kid used the very same tactics, to preach his own very close-minded doctrine.
Now look, I’m not a fan of Bible-thumping myself but everyone is entitled to his/her beliefs. I believe in God, but I see it more as a personal thing than something I need to be shouting at people, or constantly trying to justify to every person in the world. If you truly believe something, you don’t need to seek justification or trivialize the beliefs of others.
That being said though, if anybody fits the bill of “shouting at people” or “trying to justify their views to everyone” it’s Atheists by a HUGE landslide. It also doesn’t help that Atheism is constantly framed as the only “intelligent” view, as if people who believe in God are incapable of being intelligent individuals.
This doesn’t apply to ALL Atheists mind you, as I know there are many who are respectful and there’s nothing wrong with that. It’s just the obnoxious arrogant ones who like to marginalize every religious person, trivialize every religious belief and get offended by every mention of “God” ever uttered. The unfortunate thing is that these hateful and spiteful Atheists, in particular, constantly seem to make up the majority.
Atheists will claim that very same thing about believers as justification for their behavior, but I simply don’t see it. In fact, I’m almost convinced that these Atheists are more obsessive about other people’s religious views than many religious people themselves. I know many people who have their beliefs, but it seems like Atheists are the only ones who are basically a hardware tool away from literally trying to hammer their views into my head.
One of the more recent tales, that I’m sure will appear in the modern day Atheist’s Bible (amongst otherwise blank pages) is the story of 16 year-old Jessica Ahlquist. Jessica is a young girl who was so offended by a prayer banner at her school, that she filed a suit to get it taken down, and succeeded. She takes Atheism so seriously, that she got “offended” by words that really have no bearing on her life. Oh, but don’t worry- she has no issue celebrating Christmas.
After she succeeded in getting the prayer banner taken down, she received quite a lot of hate… to the point of needing to switch schools. While this has been framed as “look at how hypocritical Christians are,” I’m fairly certain many, if not every Christian I know would denounce the hate sent her way. Generalizing doesn’t get us anywhere. I’ll admit that it’s horrible, but while this kind of behavior is unquestionably vile, are we all going to just disregard that there are Atheists that say similar things to marginalize and bully people of faith on a daily basis?
On top of it all, at the moment of this writing, $34,194 has been collected in contributions by supporters of Ahlquist’s “bravery” to pay for a college scholarship. I’m sorry, what? Not only is there nothing courageous about filing a lawsuit after getting butthurt over something that effects your life significantly less than Christmas, but she won, and got her way. There’s nothing “unpopular” about what she did as being an Atheist has more or less become a “badge of honor” in society today by the “intelligent” community. It’s only courageous and “ballsy” when you take a stand that’s often looked down upon, not constantly put on a pedestal. Rosa Parks’ actions were courageous. Jessica Ahlquists’ were not.
While I’m sure this discussion could easily turn to the separation of church and state, or a more general religious debate, that’s not the point I’m focusing on here. Perhaps our own personal experiences shape our perceptions, but mine has always been that Atheism, while not in the majority, is the more vocally “accepted” view in our society. Religious views seem to be constantly marginalized, and while I’m sure it happens in reverse against Atheists, it’s nowhere near the capacity.
Either way, the point is, whether you worship God, worship science, or love them both: Why does anyone care?
Just enjoy your life, treat people with respect and be happy.
“Jessica is a young girl who was so offended by a prayer banner at her school, that she filed a suit to get it taken down, and succeeded.”
No, she was ‘offended’ by the school breaking the law. Do you have a problem with public schools obeying the law?
And somehow you manage to note all the threats she’s received, yet you’re baffled as to why people call her brave? You have a very distorted view of reality.
This has nothing to do with the argument of separation of church and state and everything to do with the mindset. If I walk around school and see a sign saying “God doesn’t exist” It doesn’t effect my life personally. I have my beliefs, and the last thing that would ever come to my mind is taking any sort of action and filing a lawsuit against the school. It just seems like these Atheists in particular are being outspoken about every single religious mention just to make a point. I don’t have a problem with the law here, I have a problem with the mentality. You’re missing the main focus.
I included the hatred because I don’t let either side get away with a free pass. You also claim I have a distorted view of reality, yet you claim someone is brave based on the actions of other people. Once again, you’re missing my point. The bravery is implied in her actions, not in the reaction. That’s how it’s constantly framed. If it were purely based on the reaction of hatred and bullying she received, where was the 3 million dollar donation for Rebecca Black’s bravery when she released Friday?
Either way, thank you for missing the bigger point of this article.
It only referred to God in the first line. So why not take that line out and leave the rest of it up there. It was written by a former student and the message was a good one. Now the school has to bow down to ONE (as usual) unhappy person. She didn’t have to look at it. No one forced her to read it.
The point of Jessica’s lawsuit was not that she was offended. It was that the banner was unconstitutional. Have you read the judge’s decision? It’s not long–about 40 pages–and it very clearly lays out the reasons that the banner must come down. In Jessica’s case, she is an atheist, but similar cases over the decades have more often been brought by other religious groups. In those cases, it might be easier for a religious person to see that it is the rights of religious individuals that are being defended from the tyranny of the majority.
And yes, many (if not most) atheists celebrate christmas. It is, after all, a secular holiday as well as a religious one. If it were still the religious holiday it was in the early days of our nation, then (for instance) congress would be in session on Christmas day, as it was through the early 1800′s. Only because Christmas became commercialized and secularized is it a national, rather than a Christian, holiday.
If there is nothing unpopular about what Ms. Ahlquist has done, why has she been threatened? Why does she need police protection at school? Why have local politicians spoken out against her? Local radio personalities? Why has she received credible threats of physical violence? Why have (to their credit) the local clergy seen the need to come together to denounce the behavior of those who have written and spoken these
deplorable things?
You see that atheism is more accepted, that religion is more marginalized. It is perfectly understandable that you feel this way, although you are quite wrong on both accounts. From your perspective, you feel you are losing something. You are, but it is not your rights, but your privilege. Christians (in particular, and religious believers in general) have enjoyed protection and privilege for centuries in the US and globally. Let me leave you with the words of Jon Stewart:
“Yes, the long war on Christianity. I pray that one day we may live in an America where Christians can worship freely! In broad daylight! Openly wearing the symbols of their religion… perhaps around their necks? And maybe — dare I dream it? — maybe one day there can be an openly Christian President. Or, perhaps, 43 of them. Consecutively.”
Again, not arguing the legality, arguing the mentality.
I don’t quite understand what makes Christmas a secular holiday. It says Christ in the name, it’s intended to celebrate the birth of Jesus. I don’t care who celebrates it, but my point is if you feel so strongly about your Atheism to make a case over religion being in your school, it’s a bit hypocritical to go celebrate Christmas. Even if it is “secular” in your interpretation of it, that’s really just justifying having your cake and eating it too.
As for the rest, you say that it’s understandable for me to feel that way but I am wrong. In what way? How is religion NOT marginalized? I’m not talking about a prayer banner in school, I’m talking in media, in conversation, in society in general. If I talk to any random person, it constantly seems like I’m more likely to be “accepted” if I talk about how God doesn’t exist as opposed to saying anything positive about God.
The rest of your comment is one long completely wrong generalization of me and a Jon Stewart quote. I’m not losing anything, I don’t feel any sort of privilege, and if you’re quoting Jon Stewart, there’s really no point to saying anything more. Thanks for completely missing my point though and just lumping me into some predefined phenotype.
I don’t think you understand bravery, Mr. Crudo. Ahlquist IS brave because she voiced her beliefs. She is much like President Barack Obama. Obama is brave for being black and president, not necessarily because he is a black president. She is furthering progress in this country that Christians set back. I wish miss Ahlquist the best.
SO BRAVE
i like the article. i figure i should let you know because it looks like you are getting a lot of hate mail.
Hmm. I think the ladies doth protest too much. You struck a nerve, Mr. Crudo. You’re on the right track.
Cherrynimbus, not only are you wrong, but you butchered a Shakespeare quote. No points for you.
Ah, you got the reference! Congratulations. Maybe you’re smarter than others here are giving you credit for. It’s called “paraphrasing.”
It’s called “Iambic pentameter”. The pinheads doth protest too much, methinks.
Hmm. Weren’t you saying something about “ad hominem fallacies?”
Your outrageous outrage warms my heart. If this was just untrue, it would be easily ignored, but since it challenges your worldview, you have to be up in everyone’s face about it.
Hmm… kind of like the buzzkill in the story. It’s a sad tale of a girl with few friends and a need for attention.
Since I cannot reply to your reply…
What mentality are you after, that you argue against the law? Cranston schools were in the wrong–do you agree or disagree?
Christmas–the tree, the yule log, the holly, the mistletoe, the date itself… all these are not in the bible, nor are they consistent with the bible. May I assume that you, celebrating your christmas, don’t use any of these? Recall that Massachusetts made the celebration of christmas illegal in the early history of our nation–it was considered a pagan excess–and that true christians did not “celebrate”, but “observed” christmas. If you are a christian, isn’t “celebrating” christmas a bit like having your cake and eating it too?
How is religion marginalized? Look at the crosses by the side of every highway–it seems that everyone who ever crashed and died was a christian. Pennsylvania, just this week, officially declared 2012 “the year of the bible”(House resolution 535). A California representative (again, just this week) sponsored a bill that just passed the House (H.R. 290) which authorizes the inclusion of religious symbols, not on individual tombstones, but on national war memorial monuments (to protect the Mount Soledad cross). The republican candidates are outdoing each other to be the christian candidate. A recent poll shows atheists are less likely than evangelical christians, than jews, than muslims, to be voted for for national office. It would be impossible to look at the actual evidence and believe that atheists are privileged. But of course, we cannot expect you to look at the actual evidence. You have written, not about the facts, but about what you feel. And what you feel is a factor of your perceived loss of privilege, not about your actual loss of power.
Frankly, I am very happy that you think you would be more accepted by “any random person” as an atheist. You know what? Go find the evidence to support that notion, and I will be ecstatic. I don’t think you can. Your post was written based on your feelings, not based on the objective evidence. Privilege is invisible like that, to the people with privilege.
I’m sure you think I missed the point again. Here’s a challenge, then: don’t tell me what you feel, what you think, what you believe. Tell me what the evidence shows. Bring the data. Your group is privileged, and it influences your perception of your world. Take a step back; look at the data. Be prepared to see things a bit differently.
We get it. You’re not an atheist.
Brother, you are so right. These Christians all think that they can understand what atheist life is like for some reason. They don’t understand us at all but yet they persecute us and act as if we have no freedom of speech. I’m glad that we’re destroying their establishment and their ignorant regime. I’m glad that you’re progressing to a point where their mythical “sky father” will be just viewed as a delusion and not a fact. I’ll only be completely happy when men like Mr. Crudo all admit that we are right though. Someday they’ll give up their delusions. Someday.
I’m glad that men like you and I can see objectively and are not blinded by subjectivity such as Mr. Crudo is.
Whether I agree or disagree is irrelevant to the point I’m making, yet in the process, you further prove my point. I can literally sense you itching for me to say “disagree” just to turn this into another separation of church and state discussion. That’s NOT the focus of this article.
Neither is the Christmas thing. I’m really not trying to debate the points you’re making and it further illustrates how you’re mind is rooted in this one way of thinking. Even if you are right. Not the point.
Again, you can cite all those bills. Fine. Not the argument I’m making here. This IS a piece about feeling. I specifically said it was my perception. I specifically said Atheists are not in the majority. I’m well aware of the statistical facts.
You ask how it’s marginalized in that framework, it’s because whenever I turn on a TV show I like, or go to a website I like, I’m constantly subjected to an Atheist point of view, and more often than not, it’s arrogant, condescending or hateful. If I hang out with peers, even if statistically more people believe, there’s more likely to be one loud person who has to declare that they’re an Atheist as if that makes them a superior human being. Rarely aside from the one instance I mentioned in this article are people shouting at me about God, and when they do, it irks me just as much.
It has nothing to do with anyone’s “privilege” or loss thereof. Again, you’re pulling a card that doesn’t have any relevance with me. You’re trying to fit an Italian square peg into a circular hole and it’s not working. My religious views are personal to me and anything beyond that has no real bearing on it. I don’t see any privilege or power that comes with it and you’re only bringing it up to try and classify me as someone who does see it as such.
As I’ve said, this is my perception, but there’s no sort of “privilege” that is influencing that. That is merely YOUR perception of this situation, and it really has no basis in reality here. I’m just normally living my life and noticing these things through daily activities. I also didn’t address the actual point in the Jon Stewart thing because it wasn’t addressing any of my points. It was posted as a part of your narrative, and really, Jon Stewart should never be cited in any sort of serious discussion.
The fact of the matter is, my personal belief has no bearing on this article I just wrote. Even if I were an atheist myself, my analysis of this situation would be identical and the criticism would still stand.
“if you’re quoting Jon Stewart, there’s really no point to saying anything more.” Please look up “ad hominem fallacy”, then address the actual point. I sincerely doubt that you can.
Apparently by the rationale of certain people arguing about your stance/opinion Mr. Crudo, you’re a hero!
He’s a filthy monster. Don’t support his kind of thinking. It’s infectious and dangerous.
i knew this lovely little topic is gonna spur a FLAMING TORNADO of people in the comment section.kind of defeats the purpose of this article doesn’t it? XD
yup it very sad that so called adults can’t stand eachother people’s beliefs in God. which was i believe Crudo point was to begin with. leave it to the bigots to lose the message and bring their talking points out like good zombies.
I’ve noticed Crudo is a great fisherman in that regard. He knows how to press buttons.
I really love how the people who disagree with this article dove right on in to prove it right. Cuttlefish leapt in and wrote a novel about how Christians are hypocritical after Crudo denounced the actions of the Christians who threatened Ahlquist. Despite Ahlquist falsely portraying herself as some kind of hero in her quotes, the Christians admittedly involved in the backlash did a good job of portraying themselves as the villains.
Crudo displayed obvious bias to his Christian beliefs but went on to encourage that we live and let live, but the atheists HAD to go on and prove Crudo’s point. “BookOfLies” went on to prove Crudo right in every regard and pretty much ruined every argument “Cuttlefish” was trying to make by being laughably bigoted to the point where it actually became comedic. Cuttle also ruined his own argument by condescendingly correcting someone after they paraphrased Shakespeare when they came to Crudo’s defense but that’s not the worst point.
Cuttle found it poignant to write on how Christians are the bad guys and how we tend to force ourselves on the atheists, YET damn near every story on the news I hear about atheists lately is about them making progress in bringing down more and more Christian symbols from the public view or trying to shut down Christian programs that have nothing to do with them or interferes in their lives in any way. TV shows can’t seem to find out how to talk about God anymore without making it seem awkward for the characters OR in many cases a silly thing to be laughed about.
In fact, I just googled atheism right now and every website or forum I went to calls for the shutting down or denouncing of some Christian something or another. I find it funny that for a people who don’t believe in God sure are obsessed with him. I mean they certainly want to shut Him out of things or just outright get Christians to shut up about Him.
History has also proved that atheism doesn’t work for nations. Stalin’s Russia being a great example. He set himself up as the only god to be worshiped and his country fell to pieces through the lack of moral guideposts that God and his son set forward. A more recent example is North Korea where the only god there is a Kim, and that place is hell on Earth. So I get real confused by atheists want to shut down Christianity so badly when it’s done so much for this nation and the lack of it has done so much harm for others.
It’s unclear to me how atheism can do so much wrong against the world then claim to have the moral high ground and call themselves “free thinkers” when in truth I don’t see the freedom anywhere in your mentality. Your professed “free thinking” involves the same subject as the Christians…God – and what you can and can’t believe about him. Your thinking is about as “free” as you think ours is not. My best friend is an atheist and we have this discussion all the time, and by the way, it took him a few good years before he stopped being a complete ass about my faith and starting arguing with me without the condescension which I have yet to witness all but one atheist do.
I’m all for live and let live. You leave me alone and I’ll leave you alone, but that doesn’t seem to be something atheists are willing to do. Ahlquist said “I wouldn’t say that I go shoving atheism down anyone else’s throat. I just feel passionate about activism and specifically activism for atheism.” Basically saying “I don’t force my atheism on anyone but I actively force atheism where I can.” Activists are only capable of that because activism is by nature a changing force and it seems there are more and more of you coming out of the woodwork all the time that wanna stop the “Christian menace.” You can’t seem to do it without proclaiming victimhood during your attacks either. Take Ahlquist again. She said she felt “ostracized and our of place.” If that’s what she was really feeling then why did she go and do something that made her feel VERY ostracized and out of place to point of being a complete outcast? She obviously didn’t care about feeling a part of things at all. In fact she further proves my point by saying she’d do it again.
My point is this: You don’t like Christianity, fine, ignore it, don’t participate in it, but shut up and leave me alone because I happen to love Jesus Christ and my heavenly Father above and I frankly I could give a rats ass if you don’t like it. It’s not your business, and to be honest if everyone around is Christian and seems to like Christian things around them and you’re the only one with a problem with it then I think your wanting it gone matters very little don’t you? “Tyrannous majority” I think is the word Cuttle used? That tyrannous majority has done more than you’ll ever dream to help this world and those in it who are downtrodden. I don’t see atheists doing that to nearly as great an extent, but hey, they’re the free thinking nice people who just want to have a good and fair society.
In a nutshell, you choose christianity over constitutionality.
Where is that church and state thing you love so much in the Constitution Cuttle?
Stated PERFECTLY, Brandon!!!!
Still waiting on Cuttle’s response to ‘Constitutionality’……
Brandon your my hero. do you mind if i copy this down alot of good stuff in their. your statement also reminds me one of many reasons i am not an atheist any more or on the left.
I love how Cuttlefish disregarded everything you said Brandon just to turn it back into a separation of church and state thing.
They want us to open our minds, but they can’t see this discussion being anything other than outside of their framed perspective.
Unrelated but relevant. Why do you think Tim Tebow gets such broad support from fans and broad disdain from the media? It is because of the attempts to marginalize his accomplishments. Instead of focusing on the very positive aspects of Tebow and the way he leads his life OFF of the field of play, they point to his poor mechanics, accuracy, etc as a way to marginalize him. Nothing about how tough he is, how fearless he is, or how he never quits trying to become better.
True Christian leaders cause problems for the minority that believes freedom of religion includes freedom from religion. There is nothing in Constituion that says anyone has the right to find religion oppressive, it is only activist judges that interpret it that way. I can cite several examples of other religions beigin celebrated and taught in our public schools while the Christians are blocked and banned at every turn.
As someone that is older, I remember starting each school day with the Pledge of Alligence with “Under God”, followed by a short prayer. I don’t think that anyone was harmed by that. I could go on forever but won’t. Everyone here has missed George’s point, and that is a shame.
Can’t remember who it was that said this, but I’d just like to paraphrase a Christian argument in a debate about the existence of God:
“If you are right, and there is no God, we will never know; If I am right, and there IS a God, you will know forever and ever.”
Great article. I whole-heartedly agree. I am condescendingly smirked at at any sincere mention of God among most of my friends.
Bailey, one of my favorite quotes actually comes from The Silver Chair from the Narnia series where a witch queen was trying to convince the protagonists that there was no such thing as the things they believed in. In response one of the characters answers: “Suppose we have only dreamed, or made up, all of those things—trees and grass and sun and moon and stars and Aslan himself. Suppose we have. Then all I can say is that, in that case, the made-up things seem a good deal more important than the real ones.”
Well done, Crudo. Well done.
Real atheists don’t believe. Self-loathers seeking to fill the void in their lives proselytize atheism as if it is a religion in itself. How can anyone worship what doesn’t exist and if they truly believe there is nothing to worship than what right do they have to determine how others spend their leisure time.
As to the Constitutional argument it guarantees freedom ‘of religion’ not freedom ‘from religion. So upon what basis does an atheist demand standing? An atheist has no religion to defend.
If I walk through a park and am distracted by a hate-spewing Marxist preaching the dogmatic violence of envy we would all agree he has a right to idiotic free speech. Does a Christian preaching on a soapbox in that same park have fewer rights or a more specific protection?
So whether you think either, or both, of said preachers are foolish, the only right you may exert is to climb upon your own soapbox and join them in pissing into the wind.
What has been ignored in this discussion is that atheism is itself a religion. Think about it- What more profound religious statement can be made than to say “There is no God.” There is no evidence to establish such a claim. It is a leap of faith, much as my own declaration that He exists is a leap of faith.
I can tell you that I see God every day in the way He affects the world, the same way you “see” the wind. The atheist can tell me I’m trying to impose order on random chance in order to make myself more comfortable. (The argument that it’s all “natural law” just pushes the argument back a step. Where did the natural laws come from? Either they arose through random chance, or they were designed. To use an old analogy, the existence of a watch argues for the existence of a watchmaker.)
Each of us knows we are right. Neither can prove it, nor can any outside third party (except God Himself) prove it within the limits of this lifetime in a way that will satisfy both of us. My religious faith tells me God exists. The atheist’s religious faith tells him God does not exist.
I understand that the courts have used the 14th amendment to extend the Bill of Rights to the states (despite the fact that individual states had established churches at the time the constitution was ratified, and none of them were done away with by the constitution at that time.) So I understand that as the law is now understood, we can’t establish Christianity. What I don’t understand is why it so often seems to be all right to establish a competing religion, Atheism.
As a Christian I have a few comments.
George, you pick 2 stories on 2 completely separate issues. The first story makes your case for the mentality argument; however the second story is a separation of Church and State issue.
The soap box Preacher was practicing his first amendment rights as was the Atheist. The Atheist did have less to loose, as he was among friends and had the mentality of a heckler, he in fact was the less brave of the two.
The Atheist in the school however, no matter the reason, was standing up for the Constitution, her mentality was that of a Patriot, she was not among friends, and she was the braver of the 2.
Jessica had the same Constitutional Right to be offended by the prayer banner in her Government ran school, as a Christian would be if there was a banner praising Allah, or a banner giving glory to the unknown aliens that the Atheist claim created the Universe.
Now, if Jessica had been upset and took the school to court because there were kids wearing WWJD t-shirts in class, or praying with each other on the play ground, you would have a point.
You are absolutely right! We need to stop poking our noses into everyone else’s business! But challenging a public speaker on their views, or demanding we uphold the Constitution is fair game.
Atheism is a religion like any other; it relies on faith in its own beliefs, and just like Christianity points at the Universe as justification for those beliefs. So unless a Religion is scientifically proven to be truth, it has no business injecting its opinions as fact or symbolism into Government ran schools.
On Christmas: it is both a Secular and Christian holiday, it was developed that way on purpose.
The Ahlquist story is mentioned in the context of the mentality as well. It’s irrelevant to the the framing of it as a separation of church and state issue. I’m not trying to stick my head into that debate.
She can be offended by it, and just for the sake of making my point, let’s say she is 100% correct in all this it’s unconstitutional and it should have been removed. It’s still the notion that hearing yet another story about an Atheist fighting to remove a religious element, legal or not, plays into this mentality where they’re ironically on a holy crusade.
The story is also used to illustrate how her actions are considered “brave” when in reality, while it’s not statistical, one could argue she has a fairly significant societal wind at her back. Even checking the source, $1,526 has been additionally raised for her since I wrote this article. It’s all used to showcase the mentality of justification used for this behavior.
Even if this exact situation played out in an identical way in a location where the prayer banner was constitutional, I guarantee nothing would really be any different.
You are all so brave. Upboats for all!
wooohooo!
Atheists are a lot like vegans. No need to guess who is one as they’re quickest to tell you their BELIEFS.
Personally, I hate theists and atheists equally. They spend an extravagant amount of time pondering a question that we’ll all know the answer to once we die. Why not enjoy life while you’re living it, fucktards?
Meh, the important thing is that I’ve found a way to feel superior to both.
Perhaps the athiests commenting can answer me this : why only attack Christians? You always go after every last hint of Christianity, yet when something like that mosque near the 9/11 site tries to get built, it’s total silence.
Re: “Even if this exact situation played out in an identical way in a location where the prayer banner was constitutional, I guarantee nothing would really be any different.” – George
I agree with you. Anyone who has a strong belief in their faith, including Atheists will act out or speak out against anything that offends them!
Atheism is a religion!
My point was, I would have chosen a story that could have bypassed the whole circular argument.
Once again, the Church of Atheism is using their tired old mind-trick of magically turning a non-prohibitive stance into an endorsement.
The constitutionality argument is void once one realizes that tolerance of a belief is not a direct promotion or an intentional furtherance of said belief.
One can tolerate a Romneybot rant on a chat page and allow it to stand without fear that someone just might get the super stupid idea that it is some sort of site-wide endorsement for Romney.
Demanding all Romneybot posts be stricken from view using this sort of argument would be taken as remarkably daft on a universal level.
(If you manage to get upset about this particular example, please, feel free to substitute “Newtist” or “Santorian” in the appropriate place.)
But, this brand of mental midgetry is all a minority of rabid atheists have to stand on while defending their unmistakeable bigotry toward a widely represented group of people.
It’s time for the majority to stop catering to the intolerance of a handful of mind numbingly annoying hecklers.
Change the laws back to the original intention of the founders and tell the bigoted whiners to take their twisted interpretation of the constitution and shove it up their perpetually puckered sphincters.
What really bothers me is that somehow Christians are supposed to ignore their beliefs in order to keep everyone else happy. Nativity scenes during Christmas have to be taken down so as not to offend anyone. Why don’t you just ignore it if you don’t believe in it? You want to put up an comparable atheist scene next to it? Fine, I don’t know what that would be but guess what, do it and I’ll pretend it’s not there without uttering a peep against you. It’s not about making sure others aren’t offended. It’s about removing any aspect of Christianity however subtle it may be from all of our lives. Look up the Ground Zero Cross or the Seven in Heaven Way controversies regarding 9/11 tributes and explain to me why atheists have to make such a big deal out of everything. What gives others comfort is none of my business. So, what gives me comfort is none of theirs. Just go on with your lives however it helps you and leave me alone.
If I am wrong, when I die, I guess I’ll have wasted my life believing in something that wasn’t there. It gave me comfort, it gave me peace so I was better off because of it and I will have lost nothing. If I am right, when you die, you will have wasted your life not believing in something greater than yourself and you will have lost everything.
I’m sorry; but this sort of self-deluded logic is the principle reason I became disenchanted with religion. According to your last paragraph, I should believe in God because I stand to lose much if I am wrong. Your position mimics that of a religion teacher I had back in parochial school. As I told him, all I need for that to work is for God to be incapable of knowing my heart. Good luck trying to snow the Deity, friend. I ended up agnostic because I am being honest and understand God (whoever it is) is not stupid.
It is not about YOU (or I); it is about not taking the SAFE or EASY way, about being true to yourself and about seeking the truth (whatever that may be). I truly am happy for those who have a solid belief in God–in fact, I very much wish I was one of them. I just cannot get past the idea that I do not feel what they do, and that I would be awfully full of myself if I simply pretended in order to do some CYA.
By all means, live your life believing what works for you; but please understand that you insult all concerned by trivializing their difficult journeys to peace and understanding simply because they choose not to hedge their bets as you do.
Steve, Steve, Steve.
A simple comment on a web page is an insult to all concerned?
Self deluded?
Really?
Humble people don’t write posts like that.
Humble people are able to admit there are larger forces at work in the universe than themselves and find peace in acknowledging it.
There is nothing wrong with Kate’s logic. If her way of finding peace is wrong, she has absolutely, positively nothing to lose later on.
Sorry you’re getting the short end of the stick on this one, but she’s right.
Try not to take it so hard.
good article.
After reading these comments, I’m quite certain that Mr. Cuttlefish is, in fact, an actual cuttlefish.
The author of this article sounds defeated in his own arguments. He makes it sound like Theology is the minority long under attack by the opposition. We all know that Atheism is the true minority there. He says that the guy on the “soap box” publicly proselytizing theology is “braver” than the guy denouncing it? Bravery is a person will to stand up to something that causes him fear or harm. Last time I checked, in this country, it’s more dangerous to be an Atheist than it is to be a Christian. After all, we’re grossly outnumbered aren’t we?! The comment about Jessica Ahlquist celebrating Christmas was unnecessary, but since you chose to go there:
Christmas is a holiday that was formed by stealing the Saturnalia-related celebrations of paganistic religions, in order to help the soon-to-be Christians swallow the pill of their new doctrine less forcefully, though it was still forceful. Through thousands of years and generations this has become a tradition about many things. Not just the birth of Christ, which it wasn’t originally about anyways. We can all celebrate Christmas as a tradition devoid of the theological aspects, but this in no way, shape or form makes Jessica Ahlquist a hypocrite. Christmas isn’t yours (Christian’s) anymore. Sorry if you didn’t get the memo.
Your comment at the end? Because taking innocent children to church and lying to them about things you cannot prove to them is not okay. It is most certainly not the kind of “respectful” you seem to expect from everyone else, is it?! I didn’t think so. Have a lovely day, Sir.