It seems like the atheists want to save the world from religious artifacts and doctrine. Their religion is no religion. I know this isn’t the way all non-believers believe, but those who do treat anything of religious significance with more disgust than second-hand smoke. Currently, there’s a group of atheists suing to have a cross removed from a 9/11 memorial. This is my letter to them, and every litigious atheist.
Dear Angry Atheists,
In your quest to keep religion away from you and your children, you’re managing to keep it away from our families and children too. Effectively, what you’ve done is force your religion on us. Your lawsuits to keep displays faith in a higher power confined to churches, mosques, and synagogues are crippling this country. I can understand not wanting to be forced to pray, but by not allowing people who do pray to do so, you’re basically making them pray to your no-god.
I know many of you feel superior to people of faith. You think by casting off religion, you’ve proven to the world that you’re smarter because you don’t believe in invisible spirits and hocus pocus. It’s sad, really, that you don’t have anything to believe in aside from yourselves. What I want to know is, why don’t you just shut up and let everyone be? Here’s my thinking…
Most people of faith, any faith, believe when they die there will be some kind of reward for their trust in the higher power. Whether this is Heaven, nirvana, a good reincarnation, or some other joining of the spirits isn’t important. What is important is that these people must follow the teachings of their faith in order to achieve the afterlife their religion believes in. Most people who subscribe to any religion don’t try to force it upon others, rather they pray for free will, inspiration, and education to bring people to the light.
Conversely, atheists don’t believe in God, or any god for that matter. You believe when you die it’s the end. There is no afterlife and no great reward. That’s fine. Believe how you will. But consider this, if we’re wrong, when it’s time for lights out there is no penalty or punishment. If you’re right, we’ll all just be dead and there’s nothing more to it. If you’re wrong, there’s probably not a very good afterlife waiting for you. Additionally, your vehement attacks on believers and public displays of religion – and our legal system’s inability to put you in your place – are breaking down faith in America. Fewer opportunities to pray or thank God for things are resulting in less praying and thanking God for life.
My point is, where’s the harm in just letting people who believe in something pray to that something? You who don’t want to pray don’t have to, you just need to respect that there are people praying…the same as you expect people to respect your decision not to pray. Is it too much to ask that we treat one another with caring, dignity, and equality?
Sincerely,
Dan
If this post has made you mad, made you think, or made you call me an idiot, leave a comment and let me know.
Really bro, I respect your opinion but your suggestion that “Most people who subscribe to any religion don’t try to force it upon others, rather they pray for free will, inspiration, and education to bring people to the light.” is pure conjecture. I was raised in a Baptist household. I haven’t met one Christian who has not attempted to recruit me back into their cult. Religion is a control tactic but if people aren’t strong enough to think on their own, be kind to people or be good enough to do any of those things on their own without some kind of reward system, knock yourself out. I don’t get it but, whatever.
Understand that I’m not Atheist but I still do not appreciate being at Starbucks, attempting to enjoy my 5 shot latte and having a bible study at the table adjacent to me. I don’t care what you do or what you believe in but why should I be inconvenienced by their decisions? There’s a place for that kind of activity and it’s not in a public place. Go home, to a fellow believer’s home or church. Otherwise, keep it away and keep it out of government. Not everyone buys into the Egyptian Sun Worship. You follow?
Jay, where are you meeting the recruiter Christians? The only people who’ve ever tried to get me to come to their church, aside from the people who come to the door with pamphlets, are people I’ve been to church with before.
Also, you’re clearly against a bible study conversation at your local Starbucks, would you also suggest that students studying at an adjacent table would be inappropriate. I wouldn’t have made it through grad school without Starbucks study groups.
You’re an idiot.
Haha… just kidding. Good thoughts!
Thanks, John. I’ve been called worse.
Sounds pretty right on to me. Besides, what was this country founded on? Oh yeah, religious FREEDOM! Escaping those forcing their beliefs. Just as the atheists you describe!
Jason, exactly, not all of the founding fathers believed the same, but they believed in America.
First off, here’s a link to the relevant article if anyone hadn’t yet heard of this:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/atheists-sue-cross-world-trade-center-museum/story?id=14169830
Now, to address the blog. Let me just say that I don’t normally respond to this kind of thing, but whenever someone, atheist or not, tries to portray their opinions as some sort of enlightened “gotcha” without including pertinent details, it just irritates me. I feel compelled to take this one piece by piece. So here goes.
“Their religion is no religion.”
This is a classic misunderstanding of atheism. Atheism is the lack of a belief in a god. It is not a religious belief in “no-god.” There is a difference. Take for instance why I can’t describe a hatted man as a “hat-wearer” and a non-hatted as a “no-hat-wearer” simply because it was more popular to wear a hat. The man with no hat is just a man. Humans have a hard time understanding these types of negatives, particularly when the masses are considered the “positive” archetypes. Once you understand this distinction, you can truly begin to understand atheism. To put the metaphor into action, we do not make our decisions based on what a god wouldn’t want us to do; a god simply never enters the picture for any of our decisions.
“…you’re basically making them pray to your no-god.”
No one is making anyone not pray. This is simply a preposterous notion. Atheists want equality for everyone, not suppression.
“I know many of you feel superior to people of faith.”
This idea is just angry projection.
“It’s sad, really, that you don’t have anything to believe in aside from yourselves.”
It’s sad, really, that you think that’s all there is to an atheist. We raise families, build communities, contribute to society, etc. You can’t do these things if you don’t believe in something greater than yourself. (We just don’t think that greater thing is a god.)
As for the story in question, what you conveniently excluded was that American Atheists was suing to either have the cross removed OR to have all religions INCLUDED. Again, this is a typical response from Christians, thinking their religious symbol should adequately represent all religions despite the fact that it wholly excludes everyone but themselves. It’s not the atheists being the selfish ones here. It’s only made stranger by the fact that there is nothing mystical about the remnants of a cross-shaped structure at the base of a demolished building. I’m sure there were dozens, if not hundreds, of cross-shaped beams (as most buildings are constructed of this pattern.) I think I would have been more excited had a few beams welded together to form a Star of David (or an outline of Cthulhu for that matter.) However, I certainly understand the human need to take comfort in symbols or “signs” if you will, and I cannot proudly mock anyone’s ability to find comfort in tragedy, regardless of where it comes from. (In other words, it doesn’t hurt anyone that you find comfort in a cross, but again, atheists really just want everyone to have their own peace, a trait you do not find in religions.)
“What I want to know is, why don’t you just shut up and let everyone be?”
I should be asking you that question, given that you chose to exclude that this lawsuit was about the pursuit of equality. It wasn’t just a bunch of Christians killed in that attack; it was a bunch of “people.” “Letting everyone be” does not apply when its you who wants to “leave everyone out.”
As for the afterlife, who would you say had the nobler intentions: the man who does good because he believes he will be rewarded for it (or will be punished otherwise,) or the man who does good simply because he’s supposed to? Atheists do believe death is the end, yet they live honest lives and do good for as many as they can while they are here. (Clearly this is not true for all people, Christian, atheist, or otherwise, but I believe most people try to do good; it’s only the religious ones who need the carrot on the stick at the end.) Atheists are “pay it forward” people. We do good in hopes others will do good too. Why? Because we only have a short amount of time, so we might as well spend it getting along and helping each other! If I’m wrong, the Mormons are actively praying me into heaven anyway, so it’s all good. Ultimately, you do NOT need a god to have morals.
“Most people who subscribe to any religion don’t try to force it upon others”
I almost laughed out loud at this one. You clearly have never lived as a minority and simply can’t see what it’s like on the “other side.” Atheists are more despised than homosexuals by the “moral majority.” The bigotry and disgust and fear the majority of religious people hold for atheists make it difficult for us to feel free to speak. So many of us are still “in the closet” about our atheism because of your scorn. But, maybe if you chant to yourself enough this sentiment that you are all so accepting, you can make it come true. (Hint: it won’t, but that’s just the scientist in me who doesn’t believe in the power of chanting…)
“where’s the harm in just letting people who believe in something pray to that something?”
Generally, there isn’t any…until the wars break out.
“You who don’t want to pray don’t have to”
Thanks.
“you just need to respect that there are people praying”
We do.
“the same as you expect people to respect your decision not to pray”
But they don’t…
“Is it too much to ask that we treat one another with caring, dignity, and equality?”
No, so why did you write this blog condemning me?? (Not to mention: why are you pulling for the Christians to successfully prevent the other religions from being represented at the memorial??) There is no superiority in being an atheist, but there is a greater understanding of how to be tolerant and accepting, traits with which religion directly conflicts. Well, not so much really…they TEACH tolerance, but it’s rarely practiced. Until you’ve felt that scorn, you’ll never understand the vehement disgust to which we’re subjected.
Matt, what a thorough reply. Unfortunately, it seems you failed to read the part that said “I know this isn’t the way all non-believers believe, but those who do… This is my letter to them…” I know, and am friends with atheists. They are wonderful and caring people. I also know these generalizations don’t apply to the majority of atheists.
“No, so why did you write this blog condemning me??” If you’re the type of atheist you’ve described, I didn’t.
great post Dan!
No, I read that part, but you missed my point. The people you were actively addressing your self-righteousness toward did not deserve it (as you were omitting the facts of the story to support your own misunderstanding/hatred toward atheism,) so it really read as no more than a weasel’s way to apologize for the uninformed opinions he was about to make. It was the equivalent of “I’m just sayin’, but you really need to lose some weight…I’m just sayin’.” You apparently view your atheist friends (congrats btw…gold star) as the exceptions to the rule. What I was trying to show you is that the good atheists ARE the rule, just like you would expect good Christians to be the rule. However, being Christian does not imply being good. (Logically, also, being not-Christian does not imply being bad.) Because you truly do not “get it,” your thinly veiled acceptance of what you thought was a handful of us wasn’t respectable. Again, I’ll point out that American Atheists are litigating for equality for all, fighting against your desire to exclude everyone except your fellow Christians. The people you were pretending to talk to were in the right to begin with. The bystanders (like myself) you lumped into your diatribe don’t appreciate it. Litigation is often the only tool a minority has available to be heard. This is because people in the majority, like yourself, simply don’t think about anyone outside the majority. Be a good Christian, sir. This includes loving and including everyone and not assuming the majority of everyone else is an awful, awful person just trying to steal your god from you. Understand that bad atheists are the exception, and even they are forming no cabal to rip your rights away to increase theirs. We should start with the same rights to begin with, and it’s you and yours who are fighting tooth and nail to keep ours suppressed.
From the bottom of this weasel’s dark and hate filled heart, thank you for clarifying your position.
I see. You feel no need to clarify yours. I should have stuck to my gut and not fallen for this bait. I was naive to think you might actually have wanted to discuss your position, perhaps even divulge why you thought it was more important to sound your bullhorn than to present the facts of the situation. I was even more naive to think I could get through to you on your misconceptions about atheists. I’ll leave you, then, to bask in your glory and to slink off into blogger obscurity as just another right-wing, talking head.
Matt, there is no bait here. I have stated my position and reiterated the fact that I’m not aiming this post at all atheists. I’ve made no attacks on you, unless you belong to the portion of atheists who feel religion’s only place is behind closed doors. You, however, have repeatedly made attacks on me. Based on your comments, it seems as though you’re not open to a discussion, rather you want to berate me.
I have no misconceptions about atheists. The majority of the group are wonderful, kind, and tolerant people in my experience. I said this before and your response was (congrats btw…gold star).
To the point of the lawsuit, the “cross” is wreckage from the WTC. It was found by rescue workers who were searching for bodies and it holds significance in the story of the events of 9/11 beyond the religious meaning of its shape. There are other artifacts that will be on display representing other groups as well. If there is a law in place intended to prevent atheists from having their own monument included in the memorial, I am both unaware of and against it.
A representative of American Atheists and part of the lawsuit is quoted “…ugly piece of wreckage” that “does not represent anything…but horror and death.” President of American Atheists, Dave Silverman, said the group would “happily, happily drop the case” if all other religious memorials of equal size and prominence were on display. The size of this section of structure was determined by necessity of the buildings, not Christians or the Memorial Foundation.
While Matt was a bit rude, he did make some valid points. Some of the things you said only apply to atheists that are angry, and some are generalizing atheists in general.
When you say “It’s sad, really, that you don’t have anything to believe in aside from yourselves,” you are being condescending.
When you say “But consider this, if we’re wrong, when it’s time for lights out there is no penalty or punishment. If you’re right, we’ll all just be dead and there’s nothing more to it. If you’re wrong, there’s probably not a very good afterlife waiting for you,” you’re barely better than the bible thumpers at Palafox street screaming at people while they walk by.
At the same time you are invoking Pascal’s Wager. Just for a bit of logic let’s follow that point. You’re basically only taking into account Christianity. What if you take into account the other religions that say you’ll burn in hell if you follow any religion but theirs? It’s not a binary question that if you believe in God you’ll go to heaven. You also have to believe in the right god. And if you break it down to the roots, the only reason you believe in the particular god that you do is because you were born into the family and society that you were. If you are going to assert that because someone in India is Hindu instead of christian that you’re going to have a better afterlife than them, than you’re being incredibly arrogant in your assumption of how the world works.
If you deny that then we have to go to your statement and assume that you mean that believing in ANY god will grant you a better afterlife. In that case I ask you; why would actively trying to use our own power to make the world a better place grant us a worse afterlife than believing something because it was part of the culture we were raised in?
Personally, I don’t care about the cross and think this particular case is an overreaction, but in many cases they are defending separation of church and state, which IS important. If you don’t think it is, think about how you would feel if there were Koran or Bhagavad-Gita readings and prayers in your child’s school, and you will understand how atheists feel when there are Christian prayers in school.
For a little insight please watch this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNDZb0KtJDk&feature=fvwrel
Nick, thanks for reading and thanks even more for commenting.
“When you say “It’s sad, really, that you don’t have anything to believe in aside from yourselves,” you are being condescending.”
I don’t force my religion down anyone’s throat, but if I didn’t wish for others to believe as I do, I wouldn’t be a very good Christian (or a very good Buddhist, Jew, Muslim, etc). Being Christian, I believe in Heaven and Hell and the consequences of not accepting Jesus as savior and forgiver of sins. I also believe in love and caring. I don’t want others to suffer an eternity in Hell. Atheists have no chance at any sort of afterlife that requires faith in a supreme being. This is the reason for my position of sympathy. I don’t have the same sort of feeling for people of faiths outside Christianity, because they do have faith, and it’s possible they’re right and I’m not.
“When you say “But consider this, if we’re wrong, when it’s time for lights out there is no penalty or punishment. If you’re right, we’ll all just be dead and there’s nothing more to it. If you’re wrong, there’s probably not a very good afterlife waiting for you,” you’re barely better than the bible thumpers at Palafox street screaming at people while they walk by.”
How is this, in any way, comparable to the Palafox bible thumpers. I’m just stating a possible outcome to not believing the way I do. This is in no way similar to standing on a busy street corner using a bible as a megaphone to condemn others for not sharing my beliefs.
To the Pascal’s Wager portion of your response, I understand that simply believing in a god will not grant a happy afterlife. It is necessary to believe in the correct one, indeed. Having faith, I believe my choice is the correct one, just as others with different religious beliefs have faith their god(s) are right. I also understand that I believe the way I do mostly because it is the way I was raised. If I were born in another country or to a family of different faith, I’d believe differently. But, I’d still believe my faith to be the right one.
I agree that there is no place for religion in government. At the same time, I believe there is no place for government in religion. By that I mean I think it’s a silly waste of time and resources to litigate and make laws to remove faith from the public eye. If there were Koran or Bhagavad-Gita readings at my child’s school I would be perfectly fine with it, as long as the readings are student led and attendance was optional. Like I said, I don’t want to force my religion on anyone. If there is a public place/setting where prayer is mandatory, I’m against it. I’m also against the removal of voluntary and optional displays of faith.
I watched the video you linked. It made some interesting points, but this bothered me:
“We can no longer afford to indulge in the comforts and rationalizations of magical thinking… When we lack belief in gods, we’re free to recognize that we, alone, fill our world with love and compassion or fear and violence. And that the solution to our problems lie in no hands but yours and mine.”
That statement turned this video from a piece stating facts about atheists, agnostics, and people of faith into a pro-atheist, anti-religion piece.
I think you missed the point of my post. I was trying to get you to understand why Atheists feel and act the way they do. The pascal’s wager thing was tangential I suppose.
I agree with you that there is no reason to try to push religion out of the public eye, but I also think you’re assuming that it only goes one way. For every case that’s excessive in keeping the boundary between church and state, there are 100 cases where prayer is being led at a school sponsored event. It seems harmless to you as a Christian to have a Christian student lead a Christian prayer at a school football game, which IS optional but shouldn’t exclude any students. But when it happens, it is basically endorsing Christianity as the religion of the school…you can’t possibly say you wouldn’t be upset at going to your son’s football game and having to sit through a Muslim prayer session.
In regards to having sympathy for lack of faith, we’re fine. Believe it or not, we don’t feel like we have a hole in our life where religion should be. We have no problem with accepting that when we die it is the end. And we definitely don’t want anyone’s sympathy for our lack of belief. It is just condescending and insulting. And even though you think you believe in a caring god, you apparently think that someone that spends their life trying to make this life as good as we can make it is going to have a bad afterlife simply for not believing. You either believe in a cruel god or haven’t thought it out.
It wasn’t my intention to offend anyone simply for being atheist. There is a small but vocal portion of the atheist community who’s idea of religious freedom means freedom of religion by not ever being exposed to religion. These are among the people I can’t abide. The ones who can’t let others be themselves or make their own decisions.
I can’t disagree with your points. I imagine everyone believes the same way their parents (or whoever they grew up with) did…initially, though they may doubt their religion, or religion as a whole, and make a shift at any point in life. I understand anyone’s decision to explore other religious options. There’s certainly enough stuff on the surface of any belief set to make a curious mind question the dogma.
Mine is no different, but I want to be damn sure I’m making the right decision before I do something as serious as abandon Christianity. To the “cruel god” point, though I have thought it out, I haven’t found anything to convince me there is no god. Nor have I found anything compelling enough to make me certain the God I believe in is the the wrong god.
We’ll likely never find scientific evidence of the existence of a higher being, but we’ll probably never proof to the contrary…only proof that some of the details in the texts (Bible, Koran, Dianetics etc.) are wrong. I do have trouble with many of the rules; among them, the pain and torture for not believing.
In a life and death situation, anything is possible, but given two choices – stay or go – I’ll stay until I know I’m wrong for being there. I won’t leave just because I don’t like the smell.
In any case, while the outspoken groups sometimes go overboard (I do agree there are some cases of this), I am very glad that vocal groups exist. You may not be exposed to it, being a respectful person, but there are many people who would gladly infringe upon atheist’s rights. Here is a very long, very true list.
http://atheism.about.com/od/atheistbigotryprejudice/Bigotry_Discrimination_Against_Atheists_Godless_Nonreligious.htm
There are also things as simple as this.
http://xpalmer.podbean.com/2011/11/14/our-adopt-a-street-sign-has-been-vandalized
There is a reason there are outspoken atheist groups, and they do create some critic-worthy litigation, but there are also a large number of critic-worthy religious groups that are largely accepted. For instance, who is ANYONE to tell someone who they can live their life with? Gay rights is an instance of unfair law based on religious belief.
I don’t think we disagree all that much here. The object of love is not a choice and there are hate filled people in every segment of society.
This has been an interesting chat/debate. Thanks, Nick!