Posted on 07/25/2007 10:02:49 AM PDT by GMMAC
The God that whined
Barbara Kay, National Post
Published: Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Back in the day, the many atheists I knew went about their unbelieving lives in a quietly sardonic, but non-combative way: They'd abandoned organized religion, but sought no quarrel with those who stayed. They explained their non-belief to their children, but let them join the boy scouts.
Everything old is new again, but ? different. Yesterday's live-and-let-live atheism has morphed into today's truculent "atheism with attitude," where God is not only dead, but --postmodern glee having replaced Nietszchean gloom regarding His demise -- with good riddance to Him.
The new atheists call themselves the "brights," which makes believers and even agnostics the "dims." I daresay deist Albert Einstein would raise a shaggy eyebrow at being so characterized. But he's not alone: About half of scientists believe in God, and they are dismissed as Uncle Toms by the swaggering brights.
A feature article in last Saturday's Post detailed some of the movement's infrastructure: the new atheism's high priests (whose Eureka! tone suggests they invented atheism, though it's as old as religion), Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitch-ens et al.; their Bibles: The End of Faith, The God Delusion, God is Not Great and other books, as well as magazines such as Canadian Free Thinker; their houses of anti-worship, like Toronto's "Centre for Inquiry" and the American Atheist Alliance International; and even their agitprop for kids: CDs such as Friendly Neighbourhood Atheist (roll over, Mr Rogers!) and Beware of Dogma.
Brights have even opened summer camps. Old-style atheists sometimes sent their children to socialist camps. But summer camps specifically devoted to indoctrinating children in anti-religious faith rather than instilling a positive secular faith? This is something new. (Memo to Johnny in cabin #7: A copy of the Psalms was discovered under your mattress. Report to the re-education tent at once!)
The brights' most potentially consequential political thrust, though, is their sly appropriation of martyrish victimspeak, the kind that other collective rights groups have successfully leveraged for political gains.
Atheist Daniel Dennett, author of Breaking the Spell, says that it takes considerable courage to attack religion these days: "I risk a fist to the face or worse. Yet I persist." Others speak of feeling "marginalized."
But the political handwriting on the wall is especially evident in this statement by American activist Herb Silverman: "What I would really like is for atheists to come out of the closet because we are so demonized in our culture."
"Culture"? "Closet"? Uh oh. The ideological appropriation of "rights" vocabulary is the canary in the identity-politics "equality" mine. Once gay persecution is adduced, can the cry for official atheist equity be far behind?
In grievance-collecting, it's a case of "say the right word, and you'll be heard." True, atheists in democratic countries can't conjure up grim tales of the truncheon's midnight thud on the door, but in our politically correct culture, "feelings" of disempowerment or victimization often achieve moral parity with the real thing. So I'm betting it won't be long before our heartstrings will be tugged by activist atheists who claim that Stephen Harper's saying "God bless Canada" makes them feel "violated," or complaining that reading Christianity-stuffed Heidi makes their children feels psychologically "abused."
In a society where the rights of perceived victims are morally privileged over traditional cultural elites (in this case, believers), political influence accrues to those who can make the best case for bias-based collective past suffering and current defencelessness against those perceived as powerful.
Aggressively marketed grievance has worked for women and gays. The same strategy for brights will doubtless end in a government-funded Status of Atheists Council to undo the iniquities of 10,000 years of theocratic hegemony and repression. After that, we may yet see -- don't laugh until you're sure it can't happen -- demands for reparations payout by churches and synagogues to redress the ignominy and shame now-atheist, former (involuntarily-designated) Christians and Jews suffered as children when force-fed the Ten Commandments in Sunday and Hebrew School. (Somehow, I do not envisage a similar campaign by Muslim atheists directed against the madrassas, not sure why ?)
When bullets whiz overhead, there are no atheists in foxholes. What the bitter, bloviating brights fail to realize is that the whole world's a foxhole nowadays, and that their upthrust swollen heads make a better target for our mortal enemies -- religion's cancers and other, secular but equally totalitarian triumphalists -- than those humbly bowed in gratitude for mankind's loftiest ideals and supplication for the courage to defend them.
bkay@videotron.ca
© National Post 2007
Who cares what Einstein thinks? Do you think I only search out a brilliant mind before I believe in the Lord?
I was not replying to your comment. Many times people just post to the last comment with their thoughts on the subject of the thread or something.
Apparently, when reading through, by your comment, I had the urge to post some ideas going through my head. Maybe it was the mention of the Islamists and how different they are with their hateful lives.
But, of course, feel free to ignore any posts to you that you consider dribble.
Pious dribble? Maybe - but I would never have minded reading such things if I came across a thread talking about the views of atheists and their non-belief.
No comparison - belief or non-belief?
Belief provides a purpose to life, a comfort from above, and salvation and eternal life.
Unbelief provides a belief in the power of one man, no purpose in life other than pleasing ones’ self and nothing after death.
Gee.......let me think a minute.
“The fact that they do not believe in hell carries no weight at all.”
This is one thing that really bugs me. I have heard on popular television shows and among acquaintances the idea that whatever you believe about the afterlife is what will happen. Interestingly, this isn’t taken to its furthest extent to where people choose to believe in a sort of lottery-winning afterlife of hedonistic pleasures. It’s a tacit way of saying that everyone is their own god. I guess it is the ultimate extension of moral relativism, but it doesn’t make any sense and certainly doesn’t have any scientific grounding. It’s just one of those “nice ideas” that made it into the popular consciousness.
I’ve noticed that too.
Of course, they do not notice that they have only the power of one man at their disposal and that that one man has no power in the afterlife. Can they perform miracles? No.
Can they, themselves, make the universe? No. So, how could they, themselves, create a place for themselves after death? And, if there is no God, who would even create the place?
Reminds me of the comments from God in the Bible about the worshipping of the idols. I don’t have the exact verses, but the Lord sends word that man himself carves a wooden image or “makes” the idol, then turns around and worships it. It cannot walk, it cannot even move itself to another place - but they think it will bring rain, blessings, etc.
He even says let your idol Bael save you from the enemies and feed you.
Humans are so weird as they try and understand the universe. They are so compelled to discard God but so willing to believe any other option. I often wonder - “WHY?”
What is going to happen to us Christians when we are told to pray to their god - Allah? Like when the Muslim congressman leads prayer? He is not praying to our God - but to another god.
And, God, will not tolerate us praying to another god. That has been very clear all through the Bible. We have a jealous God and rightly so.
If we do not walk out or handle it in some appropriate manner, we are risking our own salvation.
My British labor union boss uncle sent his kids to a Polish communist "Young Pioneers" camp back in the '70s. My dad, who left Poland after WWII, wouldn't even speak to him.
Today, his kids aren't particularly fond of him either. But that's not terribly important, since no one knows where he is, anyway. He abandoned his wife for a younger model, and is now sailing around the world in his yacht.
Being an atheist means being able to give the world the finger.
“Many times people just post to the last comment with their thoughts on the subject of the thread or something.”
Well, don’t. Direct your comment to the person posting the article if you arent’ commenting on another comment.
3000-5000 over a 350 period, as part of an effort to drive the Mohammedans out of Spain, or 10-20 per year. And to be even more precise, the Spanish Inquisition was a particularly Spanish institution. It's not called the Papal Inquisition, because Rome objected to its excesses.
The Myth of the Spanish Inquisition
Finally, the findings of Church tribunals have never been considered to be infallible. Tribunals are simply internal disciplinary bodies. Modern historians, otherwise hostile to the Church, have found that the Spanish Inquisition was relatively benign, in comparison to other comparable institutions of its day.
Sure, as soon as you learn some manners and quit being so tacky to other posters, I will honor your posting wishes. Rest assured, I will not post to you again.
True - but, of course if they do not believe in God, they will go a step further and also not believe in Satan.
Guess they think dead is dead all over forever.
They have no comprehension of eternity. And since they do not believe in a God, then of course they do not believe Jesus went to prepare a place for us. No God = no place prepared for man.
So guess they do believe all ends at death because there is no being out there creating anything that their soul could go to.
If you want to not believe in God, that is what you get - no God, no eternal life, nothing but death that comes to each man. There will be no magical re-incarnation because that would require a creator or re-incarnator - and they do not believe such exists.
Yes, you get to give the world the “finger” but is it worth the price? Frankly, I think giving the world the “finger” is highly overrated.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.