Posted on 03/05/2014 8:17:14 AM PST by Kaslin
Are atheism and promoting atheism consistent with American -- let alone conservative -- values and principles?
The operational policy of the American Conservative Union now appears to contradict Ronald Reagan's view on this.
Reagan believed atheism was not merely wrong, but the enemy of freedom. The ACU has functionally adopted the position that groups promoting atheism can be featured at its annual Conservative Political Action Conference -- so long as they promote godlessness with civility.
In the same 1983 speech in which he declared the Soviet Union an "evil empire," Reagan unapologetically spelt out the "ideals and principles" that brought him into politics.
"The basis of those ideals and principles," said Reagan, "is a commitment to freedom and personal liberty, a commitment that itself is grounded in the much deeper realization: That freedom prospers only where the blessings of God are avidly sought and humbly acknowledged.
"The American experiment in democracy rests on this insight," Reagan said, "its discovery was the great triumph of our Founding Fathers voiced by William Penn: 'If we will not be governed by God, we must be governed by tyrants.'"
CNN reported last week that American Atheists would be sponsoring a booth at this year's CPAC.
American Atheists' point of view is plainly discernable from its website, which features a recent press release applauding President Barack Obama.
"Obama's administration has recognized atheism as having a place at the table more than any previous administration," the group said. "There is still a lot of work to do, and we have a long way to go, but this is progress."
Explaining American Atheists involvement in CPAC, ACU Communications Director Meghan Snyder told CNN: "The folks we have been working with stand for many of the same liberty-oriented policies and principles we stand for."
In the same article, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins rebutted this contention.
"Does the American Conservative Union really think the liberties and values they seek to preserve can be maintained when they partner with individuals and organizations that are undermining the understanding that our liberties come from God?" said Perkins.
"If this is where the ACU is headed, they will have to pack up and put away the 'C' in CPAC," Perkins said.
Also in the same CNN article, American Atheists President David Silverman said: "The Christian right should be angry that we are going in to enlighten conservatives. The Christian right should be threatened by us."
By the end of the day, ACU had disinvited American Atheists -- not because it was promoting atheism but because of the way it attacked Christians.
"We spoke with Mr. Silverman about his divisive and inappropriate language," ACU Communications Director Snyder told Breitbart.com. "He pledged that he will attack the very idea that Christianity is an important element of conservatism. People of any faith tradition should not be attacked for their beliefs, especially at our conference. He has left us with no choice but to return his money."
William F. Buckley Jr., the founder of National Review, described atheism as the main enemy in his classic first book, "God and Man at Yale." "I myself believe the duel between Christianity and atheism is the most important in the world," said Buckley. "I further believe that the struggle between individualism and collectivism is the same struggle reproduced on another level."
Whittaker Chambers, an early senior editor for National Review, expressed the same view in his own classic book, Witness.
Ronald Reagan, the greatest American political leader of the 20th century, often cited Chambers -- including at CPAC.
"The crisis of the Western world, Whittaker Chambers reminded us, exists to the degree in which it is indifferent to God," the newly elected president told the 1981CPAC. "'The Western world does not know it,' he said about our struggle, 'but it already possesses the answer to this problem -- but only provided that its faith in God and the freedom He enjoins is as great as communism's faith in man.'"
"This is the real task before us," Reagan told CPAC, "to reassert our commitment as a nation to a law higher than our own, to renew our spiritual strength."
Two years later, in his Evil Empire speech, Reagan declared: "We will never abandon our belief in God."
"A number of years ago, I heard a young father addressing a tremendous gathering in California," said Reagan. "It was during the time of the Cold War when communism and our own way of life were very much on people's minds. He was speaking to that subject.
"Suddenly," said Reagan, "I heard him saying, 'I love my little girls more than anything in the world, but I would rather see them,' and I thought--oh, no, not that. But I had underestimated him.
"He went on: 'I would rather see them die now, still believing in God, than have them grow up under communism and one day die no longer believing in God,'" Reagan continued.
"There were thousands of young people in that audience. They came to their feet with shouts of joy," Reagan said. "They recognized the profound truth in what he had said."
Now the ACU seems ready to welcome the right types of atheist groups to promote their godless vision to the young Americans attending CPAC.
Certainly you can separate an individuals actions and a world view. What is the atheistic world view? Do you believe human consciousness ultimately came from mindlessness? Do you have an issue with the Amoral Manifesto?:
“Even though words like “sinful” and “evil” come naturally to the tongue as say a description of child molesting. They do not describe any actual properties of anything. There are no literal sins in the world because there is no literal God…nothing is literally right or wrong because there is no Morality…yet we human beings can still discover plenty of completely naturally explainable resources for motivating certain preferences. Thus enough of us are sufficiently averse to the molestation of children and would likely continue to be…( An Amoral Manifesto Part I )Again, if you want to be an atheist - fine. If you want to vote conservative - great. If you think being an atheist somehow takes you out of a belief system and world view - you are mistaken.
Where did I disagree with conservatism or America? I also don’t think I insulted anyone. If it makes you feel better to suggest I’m immature like a teenager, so be it.
Would an Evangelical Christian vote for a Mormon for president? Again, not endorsing Romney. Just talking in general.
Part of my Atheism is that I wouldn’t consider a persons religion or lack there of as a factor in whether I vote for them. Unless you’re talking Islam. No way then.
Don’t you know the answer to that question, Romney got 79% of the Evangelical vote, Obama did better than that with the Atheist vote, since almost all atheists are lefty democrats who despise conservatism, it is a natrual part of being atheist.
When it comes to the TEA party, the group that most despises them, is the atheists, the group most favorable, are the Evangelicals.
Even you as a rare, republican voting atheist, drips with dislike for Christians and the founding fathers, GOD and traditional America.
As long as you vote GOP, fine, but don’t think that other atheists do.
Thanks for the ping!
"Part of my Atheism is that I wouldn’t consider a persons religion or lack there of as a factor in whether I vote for them."
See, that is what I meant about you sounding like a kid. You have been at freerepublic for more than 12 years, a political site, yet you don't know two of the most obvious facts about the vote in America?
You really did not know that Romney won 79% of the Evangelical vote, the highest of any group?
You really don't know the connection between Protestant Christianity and conservatism? Or how the Godless despise America and drives and leads the left, and that the people they are leading consist mostly of the non-religious and little religious?
I’ll take your word for the stats. And yes been here for 12 years. Seen lots of Mormon bashing here over that time. Did I imagine it?
Again, just feel that religious scrutiny of any kind interferes with the bigger goal. I know Atheists are guilty of it. Said that from the beginning.
We can agree probably 90 percent of the time. Good enough for me. Have a good night
Wow, you don’t pay attention to politics, and you just go back to that silly “religion” stuff, your anti-Christian passion does come out in your posts.
You are one of those people determined to cling to what you want to think, rather than reality and truth.
“”The Pew Report reflects that Romney received 79% of the Evangelical vote and 78% of the Mormon vote.””
Good point.
I would add that the atheist world-view as exemplified by the Amoral Manifesto excerpt is incoherent. The act of asserting that concepts such as sinful and evil do not describe properties of anything entails the assumption that there really are abstract, universal, unchanging entities in the first place, which contradicts the atheist view of the universe as random concatenations of material particulars.
None of the following concepts stated in the Amoral Manifesto appear in the ever-changing sensate world of particular matter in motion governed by chance, which is all the atheist world-view has at its disposal. They are not physical objects or physical forces:
"naturally", "description", "child", "molesting", "properties", "thing", "literal", "sins", "world", "because", human", "being", "discover", "plenty:, "completely'", 'explainable', '"resources", "motivating" "certain", "preferences", "enough," "us", "sufficiently," "averse," "likely", "continue", "to be".
What is the foundation of these universal, abstract principles and laws upon which the atheist's rant is built? Time plus chance? The atheist in order to reason at all is compelled to assume the existence of universal, invariant, prescriptive truths, but such an assumption is antithetical to his world-view. The whole enterprise is self-defeating.
Cordially,
Even if I didn’t believe in God, I couldn’t be an athiest. The spokesmen they have are more arrogant the worst of the stereotypical thumpers. Instead of “you are going to hell” it’s “we’re enlightened, and unless you agree with me on everything, you’re not”.
No, just simple deductive logic. Something atheists are incapable of.
Wow, you have no call to make such ridiculous statements.
Take a look over all the responses in this thread and see who is "dripping" dislike and hatred. HINT: it's not the atheists.
I have, you need to do so and look at the anti-Christianity dripping from the atheist’s posts, you can also look at the predictable digs at the founding fathers.
If you want to say something, why not say it rather than just non-noncommittally piggy backing on someone elses negative posts, as a sneaky way to express support.
Attack my posts openly, challenge the facts, don’t hide.
you said "atheism is a path to a sure end of freedom". Looks to me like Bill Clinton, George Bush, and Barry O'bama, all professing religion, are doing a good job of that. Of course you'll argue that they're not really religious enough, and off we go...
You said " atheists despise the tea party, and are dedicated lefties.". So, rather than judging me by what I do and what I say, you would rather disqualify me out of hand.
Strider went out of his way to point out that religion of a candidate didn't enter into his choice, but still you don't seem to care about the politics, it's all in the religion.
I'm ashamed of the AA clowns protesting the cross at the 9-11 memorial today, but you have no more right assuming they speak for all atheists than I would assuming that Pope Sergius III (father of the pornacracy) spoke for all Catholics.
To: secretsexposed89
**I would rather have atheists who support limited government than religious people who do not in politics.**
People who look at voting data know how silly that thought is, if you want big government voters look to atheists, if you want limited government voters, look to Evangelicals.
Atheists are devoted to liberalism, a conservative voting atheist, is a true rarity, and is an exception.
26 posted on 3/5/2014 10:00:33 AM by ansel12
You really need to read my posts rather than ignore them or misinterpret them.
Atheists do despise the tea party, more than any other group of voters, according to PEW.
Atheists do overwhelmingly vote to end freedom.
While constantly going after Christians Strider says he is an atheist who doesn’t pay attention to the religion of a candidate, while implying that the Christian voters do.
Didn’t you read his post and notice the question?
What was my clarification on that rewrite of reality?
“”“”The Pew Report reflects that Romney received 79% of the Evangelical vote and 78% of the Mormon vote.””””
As an atheist you are part of an anti-God, anti-American group that is almost entirely left wing, if you are a rare exception among atheists, then so be it, we can use your vote, but don’t pretend that you aren’t a rare exception, or that Evangelical Christians are not the core of conservatism.
Why not take a deep breath and just read the posts before unleashing your atheist rage against the conservatives.
The atheists and anti-Christians are the leaders of the left.
Which is why I don't care to play the game.
All I know is you wanted to attack me but haven’t been able to say about what, you did try to twist some things to turn them into something negative, but that didn’t explain what you are really angry about.
I get it that you are atheist and vote republican which is incredibly rare, but it doesn’t explain your hostility, at least not on the surface of it.
Just one more reason to have nothing to do with the ACU and CPAC.
Well said.
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.