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.

....

[microgood]

My parents created me. Mom contributed the egg, and Dad contributed the sperm. Did your folks do something else that needed supernatural intervention?

Darn, I have no luck getting you atheists to commit to anything when it comes to creation. I guess that is just part of your faith/religion.

[microgood]

To assume that a god created us, you would first have to posit a god.

No, it would just have to posit that we were created or designed, i.e. did not come out of some random process of decay or cooling. The complexity of the human genome and the order of life lends one to that conclusion. Then from there you get to creator.

[Mushinronshasan]

Darn, I have no luck getting you atheists to commit to anything when it comes to creation. I guess that is just part of your faith/religion.

No, we are just waiting for some evidence of your assertion. Any evidence would be welcomed. You don't seem to have any.

[meowmeow]

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".

That’s a good analogy. Can I quote ya?

Every day people see hundreds or even thousands of advertisements in the form of commercials, billboards, ads, logos, etc. Many are linked to the idea that you are dumb, undesirable, stinky, a bad mother and a terrible lover if you don’t buy brand X. Yet never in my life have I heard anyone say, “Damn those Nike guys! They’re intolerant of me because I wear New Balance!” But just suggest Jesus to someone and watch the sparks fly.

[Prov3456]

Do I, as an atheist, have the right to take something of yours if I want it? After all, my right to self-fulfillment is all there is, isn't it?

It seems to me that if EVERYONE were atheist, then world-wide anarchy would be the logical, end result. (Each person looking out for number #1)

[Mushinronshasan]

O'Hair is NOT a antheist. She is unwashed asshole of an atheist.

No, you may NOT say that here! You just go back into your shell, young man!!! And take that silly race car with you!!

[DannyTN]

"That’s a good analogy. Can I quote ya?"

Of course.

Actually there's biblical support for the position too. God told Exekiel, "If I say that the wicked man shall perish and you don't open your mouth to warn him. Then that man will die in his sins, and I will hold you accountable for him."

God expects us to love others enough to say something. But sometimes they sure don't want to hear it.

[Zack Nguyen]

Well said.

[Ronin]

My contention that atheism is a religion is based on an atheist’s belief that there is no god. To my opinion, that is just as much of an article of faith in a theist’s belief that there is. Since neither side can prove to the other’s satisfaction that their position is the “right” one, it’s very stupid to argue with each other about it.

My own personal position is a vague sort of agnosticism that takes into consideration that I know only what I have seen, heard, read, felt, learned, etc., in my 44 years of life and that my own personal experiences have not caused me to conclude that the existence or nonexistence of a divinity.

Since I am neither atheist nor theist, I have no personal belief in any particular divinity or creed, so I cannot answer your questions regarding attributes. Thanks for pointing out the spelling mistake.

As for my last point, no, I did not make that up. There are several threads on Free Republic about the incident in question as I am sure someone else will point out to you.

[k2blader]

Yet at the same time, organized secularists engage in wildly controversial public actions, usually lawsuits, that are virtually assured of making them despised, and always have the appearance of attacking the beliefs of the vast majority of Americans.

True.

People don't give up their beliefs, and they get deeply offended if you attack them. Sometimes I wonder if many atheists really appreciate this.

Indeed.

Thanks for posting this thoughtful article. Tho' I still completely reject atheism, humanism, and secularism.

[microgood]

No, we are just waiting for some evidence of your assertion. Any evidence would be welcomed. You don't seem to have any.

My original question was, as an atheist, how do you believe life started on this planet? I believe life is too organized and complex to have come from some pot of bubbling goo and neither abiogenesis or evolution even come close to explaining it. However you believe life started, it is a belief because you cannot prove it. So what does a rational mind think is more likely?

[JohnSmithee]

"What part of the definition of “divine” do you not understand? If one does not accept a God given theology, he is not a theist. Therefore he is an atheist, and not religious."

Hmm, what about Agnostics? Or followers of a religion where there is no "god given" theology and yet a belief in god still is present?

[Loc123]

Elfman2 says: "Not being the subject of this inquiry, but being an atheist, I’d like to answer. Rights in a theoretical sense from an Objectivist perspective come from the recognition of the needs of our nature. Being rational beings, we require the liberty to act in our own rational self interest in order to maximize our talents in living our lives."

Ok, so you believe rights are an agreement between men. So why would you stick by your agreement if you or your family (whom stay together for emotional/biological reasons) gain greater power than your temporary theistic allies?

This is precisely how dictatorships flourish around the world--a family has power and then finds morality unnecessary.


To the atheist, there is no purpose in life other than to improve your own, unless you are controlled by our emotions that were shaped by the Judeo-Christian American culture. Atheists are simply pragmatists that ally with whatever belief personally benefits themselves.

If a political party gave greater rights to atheists than non-atheists than no one them could logically complain about it.

Note: I do not mean to personally insult atheists; I would just like a cohert, non-tangential argument as to why I am wrong.

[JohnSmithee]

Nice posts. Refreshingly rational.

[Matchett-PI]

"Any evidence would be welcomed. You don't seem to have any."

Where is your evidence that people other than yourself have minds. Explain how you *know* others minds exist and that they're not just pre-programmed robots.

I'll have to see what your answer is tomorrow, since I have to run out and meet friends for a late dinner. I can't play any more tonight. Ta ta!

[charmtrap]

No, it would just have to posit that we were created or designed, i.e. did not come out of some random process of decay or cooling. The complexity of the human genome and the order of life lends one to that conclusion. Then from there you get to creator.

That might make sense if anyone were arguing that the genome was formed from a random process, sprung fully-formed. As no-one is, your circular logic is left decidedly wanting.

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

What atheists want...
a smug left-brained theoretical certitude that there is no God, backed up by smarmy Ivy League jargon and the mythological imagery of Frankenstein scientism, enforced by an oligarchical totalitarian state which imposes the social conformity of secular humanism and obnoxiously condescending ridicule upon Christians. We seem to be getting there... [irony]

[microgood]

That might make sense if anyone were arguing that the genome was formed from a random process, sprung fully-formed

But this response does answer my question about how you think we got here. Sorry I left out the middle steps of abiogenesis or evolution as I thought everyone on these threads was familiar with them.

[Graybeard58]

"I just don't understand how one can be "conservative" and be an atheist"


...For almost all my adult life I was a member of a labor union and heard from some but not all of my fellow union members, "How can you be a union member and be a Republican.
...At free Republic if I say anything at all positive about labor unions I am certain to be slammed by somebody and I HAVE been asked "How can you call yourself a conservative and say anything good about labor unions"
...I am a Christian and if someone says they are an atheist and conservative, who the hell do I think I am to question their sincerity?

[Graybeard58]

"Madalyn Murray O'Hair, easily America's most famous atheist firebrand, wasn't dubbed "the most hated woman in America" for nothing" (Quote from the article)


...I have never heard anyone who claims to be a Christian say they "hated" Madalyn Murray O'Hair. Just exactly who dubbed her "The most hated woman in America"