The One With Aldacron

In my last post, I once again railed against the senselessness of religious fundamentalism. The following comment was left, under the name of Tyler:

Hey, my dude. Yes religion is a sick and twisted vehicle for human follies too frequently. But I think you might be doing the same thing some of these lunatics are doing. Except in your case, you’ve got a problem with all religions except atheism. My dude, don’t blame the “dentist” for the “cavities.” Don’t blame “Crest” and “Colgate” for the root canals. Collective guilt is a fallacy, one that led to another insanity to destroy religion: The Holocaust. My dude, keep it real, and don’t give in to the cynicism.

I started typing a reply, but as it got longer I decided to turn it into a post instead. Tyler and I see eye-to-eye on the dangers of religion. We disagree on how what I call “hardline atheism” equates to religious fundamentalism.

I have seen the terms “atheist fundamentalist” and “militant atheist” applied to prominent atheists who have voiced their opposition to religion. The former is an oxymoron, the latter an exaggeration. I think “hardline” is a perfect adjective to describe such people, as the majority of atheists are soft on religion. I’ll expand on this below.

First, let’s establish that atheism is not a religion. I don’t have “a problem with all religions except atheism”. I just have a problem with all religions. Atheism is the lack of religious belief, the lack of religion if you will. As such, there’s no “except” to be applied there. You will find a broad spectrum of people who call themselves atheist, agnostic, naturalist, free-thinker, and other things. These days many such people use the umbrella term bright. Whatever their backgrounds, one thing they tend to have in common is that they don’t believe in religion. The basis for their beliefs is as varied as their backgrounds, but a commonly cited reason is a lack of evidence.

Religion, on the other hand, is based wholly on faith. Faith, by its very nature, is based upon a lack of evidence. When someone believes something to be true because evidence suggests it to be, we have a theory or a fact, depending upon the strength of the evidence. When someone believes something to be true because they think it must be so, we have faith. Interpretations of existing evidence can change when new evidence is presented. That’s why science so often uses the term “theory” even when evidence overwhelmingly points to something as fact (such as with evolution).

Because faith is not grounded in any form of evidence at all, it is unlikely that someone is going to change their faith-based beliefs except in the most extraordinary of circumstances. A common Christian response to events which cannot be explained is, “It’s God’s will.” Such a statement is taken as undisputed truth by those who believe in God. Faith defies all logic, all reason.

Over time, religion has adapted to survive in the face of evolving cultural mores. The Christianity practiced today is not the Christianity practiced one thousand years ago. The Christianity practiced then was not the Christianity practiced one thousand years before. The Bible is littered with verses that condone acts which society, as a whole, today deem abhorrent. My favorite example is Deuteronomy 21:18-21…

18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:

 19 Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;

 20 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.

 21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

No one in their right mind is going to take their unruly children out to be stoned to death by the locals. Nor would most civilized societies allow it. This is one of the bits of the Bible that fell by the wayside as time marched on and civilization progressed.

Fundamentalism arises when pockets of a religious group resist the adaptation of their religion. They stick to their guns and follow the religion their parents or others taught them, which may be quite different from what the majority of their fellow believers actually practice. They pass it on to their children and their grandchildren. In some cases, it may die out. In others, it may grow and even become a new branch of their religion. I think stoning people became culturally unacceptable in Western society far enough back that no fundamentalist would teach it as the Gospel today. But there are still enough issues which society recently left behind, or is trying to leave behind, for fundamentalism to thrive. A good example is the status of women. While women have achieved a higher standing in society, while many Protestant religions have accepted women as ministers, the Catholic church still does not ordain female priests. Southern Baptists, seen by many as Baptist fundamentalists, oppose female pastors. Eventually, these groups will either have to adapt to the demands of society or find themselves marginalized. Homosexual marriage is another issue that I’m confident society will eventually accept.

Opposition to homosexual marriage and women’s liberation causes psychological damage to those it affects. I don’t want to trivialize that at all, but far more dangerous are beliefs that cause death or physical harm. Several practices by fundamentalist Muslims can be cited in that category. Jehovah’s Witnesses are guilty. And plenty of Christians kill in the name of God, blowing up abortion clinics, murdering homosexuals, and making good on the death threats they send to atheists. All of these people believe that they are doing the right thing. Their unwavering faith that they are acting in a manner that their deity expects them to rationalizes their barbarism. And it is the idea of religious tolerance that lets such beliefs thrive.

It is a social taboo to criticize someone for their religious beliefs. Why is that? Christians are free to label atheists as immoral sinners touched by the hand of Satan. Why is it OK for them to say that of me, while I have to be silent in order to respect their religious belief? When I do come out and say what I think, that they are all loons living in a fantasy land and we’d all be better off without their silly beliefs, I’m suddenly an atheist fundamentalist?

I said above that the term “atheist fundamentalist” is an oxymoron. Fundamentalism arises from faith. Atheists have no faith. So there is no such thing as an atheist fundamentalist. There are some militant atheists out there who love to provoke confrontations with the religious. But I think they are rare. Hardline atheists are those who stand up for atheism and denounce religion for what it is.

Too many non-believers are content to let things be. They are happy to let the believers have their fantasies as long as it doesn’t intrude upon their atheistic lives. When intrusions do come, and they do frequently, they are simply ignored. Tolerated. People close their doors in the faces of Jehovah’s Witnesses. They smile politely and mutter, “No thanks”
at Protestants come to “spread the Gospel” and save their souls. It is this soft, tolerant approach that allows the fundamentalists to survive behind their more stable brethren. Society doesn’t approve of insulting the religious or their beliefs, so too many non-believers just keep it all inside and move on.

Hardline atheists are not afraid to speak out. If the sky is blue, they aren’t going to let someone sit there and say it’s green without calling them a loon. When they do so, they are branded with labels, accused of doing the same things they are opposed to. Well, sorry, but no they aren’t. They aren’t out chopping off heads and refusing to give their children blood transfusions. They aren’t out bombing abortion clinics or beating homosexuals to death. Richard Dawkins explains this more eloquently than I ever could.

If you want to accuse them, and me, of proselytizing, then that is most certainly true. We are guilty of preaching our beliefs. Society has long condoned the verbal attacks by the righteous and the pious on the non-believers. Now, we non-believers are finding our voices. In growing numbers. It’s time for us to be heard.

So, Tyler, I respect your opinion. But I wholly disagree with you. I am quite different from the religious fundamentalists I oppose. I do not believe atheism is the “one true religion”, as it’s not a religion at all. I don’t believe what I believe for fear of going to Hell, or because I was taught to take it on faith. I wouldn’t hesitate to change my views if contrary evidence arises. I’m just a guy who’s sick and tired of watching those who call themselves moral and good destroy the world in which I live, because a book written hundreds of years ago says it’s OK. I’m tired of being told that I can’t speak my mind for fear of offending those who offend me every day. If you really believe that “religion is a sick and twisted vehicle for human follies”, then how can you sit idly by and let the follies continue?

I add my voice to the growing number of vocal atheists because we need to force a change. People who are in the atheist closet need the confidence to come out and speak their minds. Fence-sitters need to see reason in the face of fantasy, so that the choice between belief and non-belief is clear. Children need to learn that they don’t have to be victims of indoctrination. They are free-thinking people who can, as they get older, choose their own paths in life. They shouldn’t be afraid to tell their parents and their grandparents that they don’t believe in God if, in fact, they come to that realization.

A future without religion is something all non-believers should work to achieve.

Technorati Tags: religion, atheism, atheists, Christaianity, Christians, Islam, Muslims, Judaism, Jews, insanity, fundamentalists, militants