Posted on 01/19/2010 9:05:33 AM PST by Between the Lines
Famed New Atheist Richard Dawkins has opened up a "religion-free" way of helping the victims of the deadly earthquake in Haiti.
Dawkins has joined 13 other groups to create the Non-Believers Giving Aid. Donors are told that when they give they are "helping to counter the scandalous myth that only the religious care about their fellow-humans."
"[W]e do not hide behind the notion that earthly suffering will be rewarded in a heavenly paradise, nor do we expect a heavenly reward for our generosity: the understanding that this is the only life any of us have makes the need to alleviate suffering even more urgent," the atheist and freethought groups say.
The Non-Believers Giving Aid was set up in response to the devastation from Tuesday's 7.0-magnitude quake that left more than three million people in need of aid. Current estimates place the death toll between 50,000 to 100,000 people.
The atheists' appeal comes amid an increasing number of ad campaigns, books and debates touting morality or goodness without God.
The New Atheists, who are more outspoken than previous humanists and non-theists and endeavor to make belief in God socially unacceptable, have widely put out writings and oral arguments making the case that one can live a good moral life and know right from wrong without God.
Creating a fund for Haiti victims is just one several ways they are demonstrating their point.
"Non-Believers Giving Aid is not a church (that’s putting it mildly) but it does provide an easy conduit for the non-religious to help those in desperate need, whilst simultaneously giving the lie to the canard that you need God to be good," the groups behind the fund maintain.
Though adamant in their argument, New Atheists have provided no objective foundation for their belief, says Chad Meister, director of philosophy at Bethel College and contributor to God is Great, God is Good: Why Believing in God is Reasonable and Responsible.
"No one is arguing that atheists cannot utter ethical statements or live good, moral lives. Of course they can," Meister writes in God is Great. "Believing that something is right or wrong and justifying one's belief that something is right or wrong are two very different matters."
He argues that the New Atheists confuse an epistemic (knowledge) issue with an ontological (foundational existence) one, or in other words, they believe in morality without justifying morality.
Dawkins, author of The God Delusion, has argued that moral action is rooted in biological evolution.
"On Dawkins's schema, one is kind to his neighbor because he's been preprogrammed by his genes to do so (at least some individuals have been so preprogrammed; others perhaps not), and he's been so programmed because acting this way confers evolutionary advantage," Meister summarizes. "It's not that it is a universally binding moral value to be kind. We simply call it 'morally good' because our genes have, through eons of evolutionary struggle, gotten us to believe that it is so."
Meister goes on to note that he has several friends who adopted children and he doesn't suspect they would agree with Dawkins's explanation for why they did so.
"In order to have a consistent and reasonable objective moral stand – a moral view in which you can substantiate a claim that this is right and that is wrong, this is good and that is evil – you need to have an objective moral basis," Meister argues. "I don't see how one can have an objective lawgiver with anything other than a transcendent God. Surely from the physical perturbations of the big bang, moral values didn't spew forth.
"And indeed nothing in biological evolution ... is capable of providing the foundation necessary to ground unconditionally binding moral values" such as compassion, dignity and respect.
The Non-Believers Giving Aid participants include Atheist Alliance International, Atheists Helping the Homeless, Atheists United, The British Humanist Association, and The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science, among others. Dawkins has vowed to cover up to $10,000 in PayPal fees so that 100 percent of donations could reach Haitians in need. The groups have chosen to direct donations to two aid organizations "that do not have religious affiliations" – Doctors Without Borders and International Red Cross.
"Be careful not to do your 'acts of righteousness' before men, to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven.
"So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.
That should read: Matthew 6:1-4
This proves that some atheists are the biggest fools alive. WHY, WHY, WHY do you care? Richard Dawkins, you just saw 200K of your competitors die? You should be celebrating! There is no reason, NONE, for an atheist to do ANYTHING to help. They have no plausible motive that is consistent with their belief system. As Chesterton said, paraphrasing, the atheist has materialism and nothing else.
Won’t work. It’s been proven that the non-religious are much less charitable with their time and money than are the religious.
I can not think of an NGO's that is not is some way "Faith Based". Some have tried to remove the appearance of a faith based organizations, but deep down if the Christians don't support it the funds and workers will dry up.
When bundling supplies, please remember to not form crosses with the binding or the pallets.
It’s nice that they’re doing something, but it’s a shame that they’re doing it out of political motives rather than because they actually give a damn about the people of Haiti. No matter, their contribution will be dwarfed and forgotten in the wake of the religious charities.
Dawkins has joined 13 other groups to create the Non-Believers Giving Aid. Donors are told that when they give they are "helping to counter the scandalous myth that only the religious care about their fellow-humans.""[W]e do not hide behind the notion that earthly suffering will be rewarded in a heavenly paradise, nor do we expect a heavenly reward for our generosity
They DO expect a "karmic" reward (in positive publicity for their atheist movement) for their good deed.
This is a marketing gimmick. Give the money and shut up if you are doing it STRICTLY to be nice. You are doing it to show that "atheists give without expecting ANYTHING in return" when you acknowlege it is to "challenge a myth".
Head Voodoo Priest Protests Haiti’s Mass Burials, Fear of Zombies (Monday, January 18, 2010)
The head Voodoo priest of Haiti is sickened by the desecration of dead bodies, as they are unceremoniously collected off of the city streets and hurled into mass graves. In a nation where many people practice Voodoo, the supernatural prospect of Zombies rising from the mass graves to prey on the living, is a real fear.
Psshaw, liberals are VERY generous with YOUR money.
The ontological argument for God is the most ridiculous of all theist arguments.
"I perceive God to exist, therefore he does."
Sure; good luck with that.
I'm sure the atheist would wave down the nearest Christian while he tended to the physical injury.
What would a Christian relief worker do if an injured Haitian asked the Christian to perform a voodoo incantation to help him.
That’s really stupid, atheists believe that belief in God is man’s biggest problem, you know, all wars are fought in the name of God and what not; so an atheist would likely let the injured be and move onto another. I guarantee that if a voodoo practicing Haitian were injured and a Christian were helping him, he’d be very glad, and he would know that a Christin would not accede to the wish of invoking demons... while the atheist, in his ignorance, would accede and allow for demonic intervention. If the atheist wishes to know whether or not demons exist, stay and live among those who practice voodoo or other paganistc practices, and challenge them to a, shall we say, contest.
What?
You're saying that the atheist would perform a voodoo ritual on an injured person?
Sorry, the stupidity lies with you.
Like it or not, voodoo is not Satan worship or "demonic intervention", but an amalgamation of various West African religions and Roman Catholicism, caused by the forced conversion of slaves during the height of the salve trade. They integrated a lot of the Catholic saints into the calendar and ceremonies. Google Loa.
I'm sure the atheist wouldn't care one way or another if a third party said a prayer to God or conjured up a loa ritual.
What difference would it make if you're an atheist?
The non-believer would probably let the injured person and their spiritual friend be, whereas you alluded that the Christian would most likely try to step in and prevent what he views as "demonic intervention".
As to why people care for one another, I'm not aware of any celestial permission needed to care for another individual and alleviate suffering. Call it human solidarity or whatever you want. There's no moral action performed by a believer that can't also be performed by a non-believer.
Exactly! Evolutionary culling in action! Fewer competitors for scarce resources!
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.