What Atheists Want

The Washington Post ^ | Chris Mooney

[TXLibertarian]

Excerpted from a longer op-ed. Author discusses the danger of legal proselytizing by a few firebrand secularists. Worth a read, IMHO.

What Atheists Want

By Chris Mooney

....

Unfortunately, in my experience, the U.S. atheist and secularist communities contain a number of activists who are inclined to be combative and in some cases feel positively zestful about offending the religious. Madalyn Murray O'Hair, easily America's most famous atheist firebrand, wasn't dubbed "the most hated woman in America" for nothing. Despite her landmark 1963 Supreme Court victory in a case concerning the constitutionality of school prayer, O'Hair's pugilistic and insulting public persona hurt atheists a great deal in the long run. A head-on attack on the pledge seems to epitomize the confrontational O'Hair strategy.

....

[xm177e2]

I'm completely with Mooney. I would like for atheists to be accepted by a wider range of the populace, but I don't think confrontational, obnoxious legal tactics are the way to achieve that. While I would love for more religious people to become atheists, I don't ever try to proselytize them. I'd rather find some middle ground where everyone can live together happily, without stepping on each others' toes too much (this means both sides have to compromise). The "professional atheists" do not represent me, or most other atheists.

[Ronin]

Atheists deserve all the grief they are bringing down on themselves and their "in-your-face" attitude is just as annoying as they militant gays -- and for the same reason.

[Raymond Hendrix]

The Blind Atheist

[Hebrews 11:6]

Why would you "love for more religious people to become atheists"?

[gcruse]

I would like for atheists to be accepted by a wider range of the populace

The author says atheists want to be part of  mainstream America.  As an atheist, I feel
as mainstream as the next guy.  I am a patriot and a veteran.  The fact that
I do not hold the same beliefs as the other part of the population does not diminish
my 'mainstreamism' nor stand me as an outcast any more than a religious person
who doesn't participate in religious activities.  I don't reject or accept people
solely on their religious beliefs.  Bigotry lies there.

[MattAMiller]

I feel mainstream too. I've heard lots of atheists complain about how much rejection they face but I just don't see. Methinks their skin is a bit thin.

[Salman]

Atheists deserve all the grief they are bringing down on themselves and their "in-your-face" attitude is just as annoying as they militant gays -- and for the same reason.

Atheists are simply people who believe in no God, and mainly they keep quite about it, unless confronted.

You quarrel is with Dr. Paul Kurtz's "Humanist Manifesto" bunch, such as Michael Newdow.

[DannyTN]

"While I would love for more religious people to become atheists, I don't ever try to proselytize them"

As a person with strong religious beliefs that I would characterize as a "relationship with God" rather than a "religion", I do try to proselytize atheists.

To you, it doesn't make any difference if I believe or not. Eventually I'll die, and in your opinion, that's it. And if religion makes me happy, then so be it.

But I see you as a blind man about to walk off a cliff with eternal consequences. The least I can do is open my mouth and say "hey! don't go there!"

Even if most of the time, I just end up looking down from the cliff and shaking my head muttering, "why wouldn't he listen".

[Scenic Sounds]

There are lots of people with thin skin. There are lot of Christians who feel that this country is inhospitable to Christian beliefs and values. Sometimes, it seems we just can't make everybody completely happy, can we?

[narby]

I take exception to the author's statements that imply that this case has a solid legal basis. In no way do the words "under God" in a pledge of allegance mean we have established an official religion.

And in any event, only the Congress is specifically prohibited from doing such a thing. Contrary to popular opionion, I don't think the 14th amendment extended any of the 1st amendments principles to other government entities.

The 1st is a specific prohibition of the Congress, in a day when many states had official religions. The 14th merely extended "rights and priveleges" contained in the Constitution to the States. (which is a horribly redundant thing, because if these rights didn't exist within the States prior to the 14th, then where DID they exist? The 14th was merely an instrument to reel back in some recalcitrant southern States after the Civil War.)

Forbidding the Congress from making a particular kind of law, does not convey a "right" to the people, so the 14th is errelevant.

And, by the way. I'm a Godless Athiest Libertarian too.

[wimpycat]

I read the whole article. Interesting. Quite interesting and worth reading. He seems to be worried about backlash against atheists in the event of a win at the Supreme Court. He needn't worry about that....

But he makes some good points, for the edification of in-your-face atheist types...and in-your-face Christians as well. Atheist activists may not realize it, but they do a lot of proselytizing as well: they peddle, preach and promote, and try to force on everyone else, the religion of non-religion, the faith of no-faith, the worship of what they consider to be empirical. They wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for the fact that they attempt to sell their own ideas by attacking others. It's not, "See things my way because my ideas are so good", but "see things my way because your ideas suck" or "your ideas offend me, so everybody else has to do without them". That's enough to piss anybody off, whatever religion you're proselytizing.

[charmtrap]

I'm completely with Mooney. I would like for atheists to be accepted by a wider range of the populace, but I don't think confrontational, obnoxious legal tactics are the way to achieve that. While I would love for more religious people to become atheists, I don't ever try to proselytize them. I'd rather find some middle ground where everyone can live together happily, without stepping on each others' toes too much (this means both sides have to compromise). The "professional atheists" do not represent me, or most other atheists.

Nor do they represent me. However, these kinds of issues are going to continue to pop up. I object to the 'under god' part of the pledge because it ties pledging allegiance to one's country to belief in a god. Considering that many millions of Americans lack a belief in a god, 'under god' presents problems that simply should not exist.

[Matchett-PI]

"While I would love for more religious people to become atheists, I don't ever try to proselytize them"

All people are religious and there is no such thing as a true atheist.

[charmtrap]

All people are religious and there is no such thing as a true atheist.

Now, there's a bizarre assertion. Care to back that up with any facts?

[Mushinronshasan]

But he makes some good points, for the edification of in-your-face atheist types...and in-your-face Christians as well. Atheist activists may not realize it, but they do a lot of proselytizing as well: they peddle, preach and promote, and try to force on everyone else, the religion of non-religion, the faith of no-faith, the worship of what they consider to be empirical. They wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for the fact that they attempt to sell their own ideas by attacking others. It's not, "See things my way because my ideas are so good", but "see things my way because your ideas suck" or "your ideas offend me, so everybody else has to do without them". That's enough to piss anybody off, whatever religion you're proselytizing.

The overwhelming majority of the "in-your-face" atheist types would be of the left-wing liberal types, I suspect. Atheists exist in all sectors of political persuasion. Those of us who tend to be conservative minded are usually not vocal about our lack of religious persuasion, unless backed into a corner.

[antiRepublicrat]

xm177e2: "While I would love for more religious people to become atheists, I don't ever try to proselytize them"

DannyTN: "As a person with strong religious beliefs that I would characterize as a "relationship with God" rather than a "religion", I do try to proselytize atheists."

One person here has enough respect for a fellow human to honor the other's beliefs. Guess which one.

[rdb3]

Atheists are simply people who believe in no God, and mainly they keep quite about it, unless confronted.

Someone should tell jlolegan (sp?) about this. There could be a thread about something of faith, and he will come in and drop a stink bomb even though he was not provoked.

[elfman2]

"Why would you "love for more religious people to become atheists"?"

As an atheist, I wouldn’t. This article’s written by a moron.

[Possenti]

One question:

Where do you believe your rights - life, liberty, the P.O.H. to name a few - come from? Are these just "ideologies" and "concepts" that many have died to secure and protect? Are they something that man has dreamed of through the ages? If it's simply "nature's law", why don't we just collectively lie down and surrender to whoever wishes to oppress us? After all, since we're equal to the rest of nature, we can be dominated like the rest of the animal kingdom.

This isn't intended as a flame. I always associated atheism as going hand-in-hand with godless, oppresive societies - the liberal utopia. I just don't understand how one can be "conservative" and be an atheist.