OUT campaign for those who don’t believe in God
August 1st, 2007 by Erich ViethWhen I was in my 20’s, I was called a “God damned atheist” by a man who was sorely disappointed that I didn’t march off to the Catholic Church with his family. I was dating his daughter at the time, and I had been welcomed to visit her family home for that weekend. Everything was going well until Sunday morning. After I declined his invitation to go to Mass, the livid father announced that I was no longer welcome in that house. It was as if I had tried to set the house on fire. Worse yet, my then-girlfriend’s father was a college philosophy teacher—I had assumed that professors would be more tolerant than that. I was shocked at his intolerance and I abided by his request.
I could give many other stories documenting that I have experienced discrimination, including discrimination that took the form of wholesale emotional rejection by adults when I was young and vulnerable. My stories would not be unique. Here is an especially disturbing episode involving another young man.
In many parts of America, those who don’t believe in God are stigmatized by members of their own communities. That is the reason for the “Out” campaign.
As more and more people join the OUT Campaign, fewer and fewer people will feel intimidated by religion. We can help others understand that atheists come in all shapes, sizes, colours and personalities. We are labourers and professionals. We are mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, sisters, brothers and grandparents. We are human (we are primates) and we are good friends and good citizens. We are good people who have no need to cling to the supernatural.
It is time to let our voices be heard regarding the intrusion of religion in our schools and politics. Atheists along with millions of others are tired of being bullied by those who would force their own religious agenda down the throats of our children and our respective governments. We need to KEEP OUT the supernatural from our moral principles and public policies.
If you want to make your rejection of bureaucratic religion visible, you can buy t-shirts or bumper stickers.
I must admit, though, that I am ambivalent about this campaign. On the one hand, it is shameful that so many people ostracize those of us who don’t claim allegiance to a religion, as though we are per se immoral. Statistics don’t bear out that non-believers are any less willing to help those in need than believers. As I’ve argued before, non-religious altruism is a higher form of morality. It is a purer form of morality to help others because it is the right thing to do, rather than because “God” ordered one to do it under threat of burning in hell. Yet, somehow, the alleged immorality of non-believers is taken as a given by many Americans.
For this reason that non-believers are unfairly criticized and politically ostracized, the “Out” campaign is critically important and I do hope it succeeds in its goals. As Richard Dawkins writes, there are huge numbers of non-believers out there–if more of them would stand up and be counted, it would be harder to discriminate against all of us.
On the other hand, I am not comfortable with the term “atheist” being at the vanguard of the movement. “Atheist” comes loaded with connotations of immorality and stridency. “Atheist” is also a term that suggests, to many people, that one does not have a poetically spiritual side, that one does not appreciate walks in the forest, meditation, or the mutually-healing power of doing good works for others. The problem is that the forces of intolerance have successfully commandeered the word “atheist.”
Personally, I find that it makes a huge difference whether I call myself an “atheist” or, rather, whether I characterize myself as someone who doesn’t “believe in God” or “follow a religion.” When I’ve described myself in a way that doesn’t use the term “atheist,” I’ve found that the people with whom I am conversing are much less threatened and much more willing to engage in meaningful dialogue.
An even better approach, in my experience, is to announce that I reject “bureaucratic religion.” I find that this approach is quite well accepted by most of those who claim to belong to religions. In my experience, most believers are troubled (some more than others) that religions try to get their members to assert factually vacuous claims in order to inspire or scare the members into conforming to programs that are essentially political. It is amazing to me how many people, including church-goers, are at least somewhat suspicious of organized religions for this reason (and other reasons).
What is the alternative to belonging to a religion? How about making the search for ultimate truth a private decision for each person? What if each of us undertook his or her search for “God” or “Meaning” in a manifestly unregimented way? Most people are quite open to this idea, at least in principle. It’s an idea that meshes well with freedom of expression. This approach would be a lot more work for the many who belong to the most regimented religions. Many such people consider the search for meaning accomplished by engaging in rote oxymoronic chatter once per week. I’m not trying to be cruel when I write this criticism–addressing one’s God with a rote prayer makes no more sense to me that if you regularly addressed your parents, children or friends with rote passages written hundreds of years ago instead of talking with them. Reading things at each other strikes me as an odd way to try to communicate.
I’m aware that the negative connotations could change over time if this “Out” campaign is successful, but I’m afraid that shoving “atheist” in people’s faces might kick up the temperature without generating productive dialogue.
I’m for coming “out,” of course. All of us should come “out” to our well-founded beliefs. I just want to make sure that when non-believers do it, it is done in a way that achieves the stated goals of the campaign: to put a halt to the discrimination and intimidation.
August 1st, 2007 at 3:29 pm
Sounds a lot like a Unitarian to me.
August 1st, 2007 at 3:46 pm
I appreciate your views. I joke with my coffee shop friends that if there is a God he would like his athiests because he knows that we aren’t “Suck-Ups.” I suggested that an appropriate bumper sticker would say, “Evolution is Intelligent Design. Get over it and do your homework!” I think you are right that identifying ourselves with the “Hard Label of Atheist” probably makes us prone to provoking negative responses where as calling ourselves “Skeptics” or “Non-Burecratic” moralists give us more of a chance to engage in dialogue with others, rather than shouting matches. I appreciate your article. John
August 1st, 2007 at 4:43 pm
eric,
it sounds like you have had some sour run ins with men and women who call themselves Christians. i too have had similar confrontations. but, the Bible does not call Christians to act this way. there are bad people in both religious communities and “atheist”. i don’t think it’s fair to characterize the whole Christian faith over some bad apples, however many you’ve met. you mention knowing Christians who are weary of some organizations within their faith. this speaks to what i’m saying. just because someone says their catholic, protestant, whatever does not make them such. it is our actions that define us. the Bible calls believers to live a life loving God and others not because we will go to hell if we don’t but because we love God and want to serve Him. Christ died that i may go to heaven. NOTHING i can ever do will add or subtract from that. believing otherwise contradicts the Bible. also, it is not my job to force my beliefs on you but present them. that Christ died on the cross for your sins, was raised to life by the Father on the third day and reigns in heaven. thats it. it is up to you or others whether or not to accept that. but it is my prayer that you do. God bless.
August 1st, 2007 at 5:04 pm
I think that the reason that people refuse to believe that there is a God is because they want to do and live however they want to and not have any fallout over anything that they might decide to do.Women are dead set on killing unborn babies because it is their right and they dont want to be told that it is the wrong thing to do when all they have to do is abstain .
I dont think that someones religion should be shoved down someone elses throat but others work as hard as they can to put it down.If a religious person is trying to live like they think God would have them live then they are made fun of and mocked.
People who do not believe try their hardest to have God removed from anything that they can sit around and think up. And to me that is sad.
I do not consider myself a primate to me that goes along with we all came from monkeys. If that were the case wouldnt there be some kind of proof . There is all kinds of proof that God does indeed exist. All you have to do is believe.
August 1st, 2007 at 5:44 pm
Amen! Oh, can I say that? I work in a government office, surrounded by supervisors and upper ranking management who basically answer every problem with a religious/bible based anecdote. I am hesitant to reply or even verbalize my opinion for fear of being subjected to a sermon or worse, losing my job. Pagan, that is the word of choice for those around me; I agree that “atheist” leaves a bad taste on the tongue and mind. I have a higher power, the force of good, I consider myself a good person, I have raised my kids to make their decisions based on right and wrong, and most people who don’t know my family’s personal beliefs will tell you we are good “Christians.” After spending the majority of my young life being “brainwashed” in the Catholic church (just to find out that they, meaning the Catholic theologians, are aware of the hypocracy they teach) I am more than aware of the judgments that are passed by believers on everyone who does not find their salvation in Jesus Christ. I am excited to find there is a movement in the wings, and once again I say AMEN! Your words truly hit home with me.
August 1st, 2007 at 6:43 pm
First I would have to agree with gabe. It is very sad that so called christians start to force their beliefs on others instead of letting their actions speak for them. Please do not let the few bad apples drive you to believe that all christians are like this. I love God and Jesus. I know that his death is what is securing my way into heaven. If you feel that this is something that you cannot belive in, then so be it. It all comes down to a choice. God wouldn’t be God if he forced you to love him and live a certain way. I hope that one day you will meet a sincere christian whoes beliefs are true and shows you what an awesome relationship we have with God.
Remember to stay strong in your beliefs and do not become luke-warm. Stay hot or stay cold and when the time comes, the truth will set us free.
Peace brothers. God loves you.
August 1st, 2007 at 6:49 pm
The real problem with the term athiest is that is describes what we are not. Law abiding sounds much better than non-criminal, patroit is much better than non-traitor. I much prefer “rationalist.” But when pressed on the matter at dinner parties or in taverns I say that “I do not believe in a personal living god who intervenes in the affairs of man.” Now if you want to believe in a non-personal god who does not intervene in the affairs of man, be my guest but there is absolutely no evidence to the contrary other than our fears which have been cruelly instilled when we were defenseless children.
August 1st, 2007 at 7:11 pm
Eric,
I can appreciate your comments, even though I don’t agree with everything you said. I am a Christian. There are good people who are Christians, and good people who are atheist. However I to take exception with so called Christians who try to shove religion down someones throat, and get mad when people don’t believe.That is not what the Christian experience is about. It is left up to the individual as to whether he or she accepts God. You don’t shove religion, you get people to see Christ by your kindness, your service to your fellow man, your life style you live in Christ. Another thing that upsets me is those who judge others because of what they believe in. For instance, Pope Benedict made a statement that Catholicism is the only true religion of salvation and that other religions were defective. I was perturbed at such a comment. Religion is not going to save a person. Ultimately it is a persons faith, and personal relationship with Christ. I serve God out of love not fear and damnation.
Whatever people believe, and I might not agree, I have no contempt, but love for my fellowman, a love that Christ displays for each of us no matter what we believe. It is he, and only him who has the right to judge.
August 1st, 2007 at 7:33 pm
I call myself an infinitist. I believe in infinity. There never was a beginning and there will never be an end. Infinity has no place for a creator nor a reason to strive for a place to spend eternity. I could be called a trancendentalist because I believe that we transcend only in that we are born, we live, and then we die. End of it: however, infinity continues. I am a part of a multitude of infinities just as the universe is made up of a multitude of infinities. Nothing begins or ends but just transcends through the universe. My atoms will transcend to another form of matter or energy, but, my totality of existence will cease.
I do what I do because it is the right thing to do. I do not believe that I should do what is right to please anyone or anything but because it is the right thing to do. I taught school because I felt that I contributed to the well being of humankind. I believe that if all mankind would look at the world as a continuem which depends on each individual to bridge that moment of existence so that those that follow can also bridge their moment of existence so that the infinity continues optimally then we would have a much more turbulent world. Religion has contributed to world unrest more than any other development of man. Greed drives mankind and religion.
August 1st, 2007 at 8:05 pm
Erich - What a cruddy experience you went through in your 20s. The hypocrisy and the male hierarchy drove me from the Catholic church. The farther I got away from the teachings that my family chose for me, the more I realized that I never really fit with the Catholic ideology. If I still considered myself a Christian, I can tell you that the behavior you have endured is not how any Christian should behave. I consider myself an agnostic. The organized religion that I find most sympatico with my beliefs is Unitarian Universalism, which welcomes atheists, as well as people of all faiths. The individual search for truth and meaning is the first principle of Unitarian Universalism. The one trouble with the UU church is that its followers don’t believe in forcing people to go to church, so it can be pretty hard to get our message of openness out. Good luck on your quest for finding widespread acceptance of atheists.
August 1st, 2007 at 8:06 pm
It is a shame you have had some bad experiences, but in today’s world, there are bad apples in all aspects of society. I am a Christian who, at times, finds herself doubting, but, being a scientist, I have come to realize that this world/universe is so perfect. . . so intelligently designed. . . that there is only one explanation of our existence- a higher power or intelligence. The more one studies how and why our earth is as it is, how life evolved , and how little we are in this unimaginably large universe, the more one sees the perfection in mathematics and science, thus revealing a creator or some sort. We are not random, therefore we are not meaningless. There is a plan for us. For me, I chose Jesus, and even though some of the earlier Biblical stories of creation and destruction may have been passed down for generations via word of mouth, many parts of the Old Testement and all of the New Testement were recorded in writing as historical documents or letters or laws. Let’s face it, most cultures have creation stories, etc. And most cultures have a god or gods. The Jews, Muslims, and Chrisitians all have the same God, believe it or not. The Muslims have Mohammed and the Christians have Jesus. I am not a formal member of any organized church. As with so many organizations, there is so much power seeking and hypcracy, but I do attend a rather small church where Bible study is the center of the church theoloy and actions. I realize you have heard all this before and I am just another crazy Jesus freak in your eyes (I am quite humble about my beliefs though), but I will say a prayer for you and the other non-believers. In reality, I am a minority in this world. Most of us are not Christians and even fewer who claim to be truely are. I will say a prayer for all of you and hope that you find answers to your questions and that one day, in a quiet moment, while looking at something wonderful and beautiful, you see the complexity of what was created and realize the simplicity of the answer.
August 1st, 2007 at 8:30 pm
I am so atheist Madalyn Murray O”Hair wrote a letter to the local Atheist director, kicking me out of her group because I won’t tithe to her group. That was 1980. I don’t know why people must label and categorize each other. Atheism means just what it says. I don’t believe or give credit to the belief of a god, Jehovah, Allah or whatever you want to call it. We still live and die just like the rest of those who want to believe. I kind of like he buddist now. They believe all sentient beings suffer and that it is our mission to pursue happiness. Kinda sounds American doesn’t it. Okay then, I think I’m a Buddist, without the reincarnated into a monkey bit…..
August 1st, 2007 at 8:44 pm
If “atheist” means one who is certain there is no god, might that not be as arrogant a statement as one that insists that there is a diety? I prefer to say that I am an agnostic, because it seems impossible to prove the nonexistence of something that we have never actually encountered directly. Believers consider everything to be a manifestation of their diety, but it is very difficult to come up with adequate proof for the nonbeliever. I have often wondered what people would believe if they had been raised in a society entirely without religious concepts until the age of 30, and were then exposed to all of the world’s religions. Wouldn’t they readily accept the logical questions of Epicurus (search the web if you don’t know them) in regard to a supposed diety?
August 1st, 2007 at 9:31 pm
I agree that religion should be completely separate from government. No to those who always say that’s you trying to destroy religion. This is not the case. I’ve had so many discussions with people who say that it is impossible for atheists to have morals and that to be a good person you must have the love to serve god. I do not believe this is true and indeed it is arrogant and ignorant to think so. Why do you have to have the love to serve god to be moral. In fact their are many extremists who believe they are serving god and killing many innocent people. I have the love for humanity and the love for my fellow man. It is that part that i agree with the bible, love your neighbor as you would love yourself. The words of all religions are so often misused for evil that i feel that having organized religion influence politics is incredibly dangerous for that has happened throughout history with dire consequences.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:07 pm
Bravo! I was raised in a Seventh Day Adventist family. Religious schools and the rest. I found it took me many years to shake the brainwashing I was subjected to as a child and a youth. Bureaucratic religion started as a fairy tale for adults but I fear as with all faith based beliefs it has evolved into a vehicle for the advancement of political and fundamental agendas. There is, in my mind, little difference between the “Christian fundamentalist” and the groups we label as terrorists. Left unchecked any fundamentalist ideology will ultimately resorts to some sort of force to further it’s agenda.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:01 pm
What is amazing to me is that Christians have a vision of a God that is two thousand years old. You know your God is going to destroy your enemy, well I quess that has not changed. You know a God that will destroy you if you don’t believe. That sounds like an intelligent God.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:45 pm
Where to begin to respond. …you are creating an “OUT” Campaign. It is a belief, a way of thinking, a gathering of people who want refuge from other groups. Interestingly, it is a way - a path, another choice someone can make to be part of a community. This is exactly how all religions originally started …is it not. You chose not to believe dispite life on this world. How would you explain life forms deep in the oceans where life should not exist? Simple discoverys science have lead strangely away from connecting us closer to the Earth and to each other. Why? believe in anything…there is evolutionary evidence, there is religious relics, there is communitys all over the world who try and understand there existance by talking to eachother in gatherings. A Sunday gathering, a Saturday gathering…days to reflect and be thankful for your existance to be able to share your thoughts and understand you are not alone. Are we alone in the Universe? Are there beings that have a longer life span than you?…Of course…on Earth the Cedar trees of Lebanon…oldest living creature…4000 years. Supernatual…is science…you live everyday with the supernatual…so your wrong. Science is your proof that a great scientist exists. (read Mary’s comments again) All these religions are only a small part of the overall path …your path,…my path…., all paths lead in the same direction. You can’t blame people who are guided in one direction but don’t get a chance to realize the other directions. No one has all the answers…More importantly no one is in control…When you give up your ways of trying to find answers for countless people then you may find some answers. Don’t try and turn OUT the light.
August 2nd, 2007 at 1:31 am
I don’t judge anyone who believes in a supernatural-based entity (a god, goddess, totem, etc.). However, there is absolutely no supporting evidence for such a being. There is evidence for energy and manifestation of forms and evolution of form and thought. Religions are geographic in nature, and most are spread through warfare, conquering local people, and then frequently co-opting their local beliefs–weaving them into the fabric of the religion held by the conquerors. All had a cultural basis–they sprang from a particular group of ancient people who recorded their folklore and wisdom.
I see people as a global group finally reaching a point where they begin to question belief, investigate the nature of belief, and ultimately determine how to keep the positive practices (meditation/prayer/affirmation, for example) and yet not associate these or ethics with some supernatural power. The power is quite natural, and no magic is necessary to explain it.
August 2nd, 2007 at 5:17 am
Atheist, Agnostic, whatever they all have negative connotations associated with them. I was raised in the commercial Catholic faith. I consider all of the major faiths to be commercialized.
I follow the 10 commandments. Therein, I find the answer to almost every question. I help others in their times of need. I donate my time and I adopt and love homeless dogs. I pay my taxes and work everyday.
In my mind I am better than the commercial faith followers. Many of them are busy coveting thy neighbors wife and stealing or bearing false witness. And they think I am the one who is “bad”. I just don’t know if God exists. No one can really say for sure.
August 2nd, 2007 at 5:37 am
On the other hand, I am not comfortable with the term “atheist” being at the vanguard of the movement. “Atheist” comes loaded with connotations of immorality and stridency.
Really? In New Zealand it isn’t loaded like that. I guess we’re lucky, here. No, I know we’re lucky. I suspect it’s the perceived normality of atheism that makes the biggest difference. You may think you’ve lost the battle over that word, but I have to point out that the battle has only been lost within one particular region of the English-speaking world — and I can’t imagine the problem spreading any time soon.
I’m not saying you should use the term, yourself, though; that’s up to you and I can see why your decision to say “non-religious” or some other variant makes sense. On the other hand, perhaps you can see why, for a Brit like Dawkins, using the word ‘atheist’ would make perfect sense, because the connotations it has just look like a weird American thing, from the outside — like something that (oh, surely…) ought to be changeable.
If “atheist” means one who is certain there is no god, might that not be as arrogant a statement as one that insists that there is a diety?
That isn’t really what ‘atheist’ means, though, as the term is generally used.
I used to call myself an agnostic (I was agnostic about whether or not I was a brain in a lab somewhere being fed sensory input, too), but over the years I decided that since I’m effectively an atheist in terms of how I behave and the decisions I make, I might as well accept the term. Of course, it’s a lot easier for me than it is for some!
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:17 am
If you understand the history of Christianity, you would know about the Christian Crusade and Inquistion of murderers storming the countryside slaying anyone who would not accept their belifefs. Anyone who is a Christian or not should know the history of where their religion started. Also as far as God is concern, he did not create any religion, man did and that is why there are so many ignorant people in the world today. What is a Christain..a catholic,a baptist, a methodist, a pentecostal, protestant, Jehovah,presybterian, evangelist, etc, etc, they dont’t even know. I myself am not an atheist, but a believer of God, not a beleiver of some man made religion that no one understands. I was an atheiest for many years due to being raised in a Baptist upbringing that did not make any since such as you should obey the Ten Commandment, but if you are a Christian.you don’t need to cause you will be forgiven. I knew that did not make sense. It was not until recently I started having dreams and wrote a book called “Jesus Is No Excuse” that explains the bible. It answers why Jesus was crucified and if he returned. It also answers why he told his followers to pick up snakes and drink all deadly things. The next time someone ask you out of their house due to their Christian belief, go to their kitchen and get them a glass of Drano.
I think you will find a lot of answers from this book,it made me a believer.
Go to http://www.jesusisnoexcuse.com for excerpts.
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:48 am
Evolution is OK. Darwinism [All creation derives from a single entity] may be right, if we define the entity as “God.”
Other than that, Atheists are just as one-way as any believer can be. They’re no better than any one else. Plus, I think, that they’re less likely to go to hell because they, at least, will have the potential excuse that they believe in nothing. We believers have no excuse for what we say and do.
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:15 am
I read your article with great interest. It seems to me that the spiritual arguments you raise fall squarely in the fold of the Unitarian Universalists perhaps unbeknownst to you. You may wish to explore this marvelous freeing faith where the individual’s right to think and reach spiritual wholeness is a completley personal journey. The inherent worth and dignity of the individual is upheld as is the right of the conscience. UU’s are a blend of Unitarians (migrating from Europe in the 1700’s) and the Universalists who believed that all people are universally valued and have equal access to salvation. Today the term Unitarian affirms that we believe there is a unity of all life, what the UUA Principles and Purposes calls “the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.” The term Universalism indicates universality of religion itself. In the UUA Principles and Purposes, we affirm that you can find wisdom in all the world’s religions. Check http://www.uua.org. or a quck overview: http://www.uunashua.org/100quest.shtml
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:48 am
From the most primitive tribes to the most developed of societies, there has been a consistant belief in a GOD. Theists believe that this is so, because GOD designed us all. I believe that this is so, because of mankind’s shared genetic code, from which our genetically based behaviors arise. Mankind simply cannot/could not cope with the fact that once the organic body dies, so does it’s consciousness. In response to this seemingly catastrophic end of “self”, mankind evolved a behavioral response, that of a resurrection, to help the species survive and reproduce. Religion and a belief in a GOD was/is a survival trait. Religion is a coping mechanism. I prefer to place my “faith” in rationality, not some adult mythology. This world is big enough for us all: Theists, Atheists, and Anti-Theists. I am disappointed that “tolerance” has not yet evolved along with other these other survival skills.
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:53 am
The real problem between OUT’s and the religious isn’t really God. The simple truth is that there is no afterlife. Afterlife is the belief that injustice in this world will be corrected or balanced in the next. Afterlife is the ruse that keeps most people satified with a poor lot in life.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:08 am
Fundamentalist Atheism doesn’t suit my needs. I readily come out as an atheist, but not under Dawkins’ divisive banner. Belittling those of faith is not going to win anyone over to the rationalist/naturalist camp.
But it is sad to see how many of the responders have no idea where the ideas behind their own faith comes from. Contrary to Mary’s claim, Jews, Christians, and Muslims do not believe in the same God. These 3 faiths (comprising over 16% of the world population) all use the anthology known as the Old Testament as part of the basis of their faith, but the expectations of God in each faith are different. The behavior of their final authority is different. The ultimate destination based on particular behaviors is different. Baby Jesus was visited by 3 Magi (who called God Mithra), not 3 rabbis of Jehovah. Christianity is Zoroastrianism with some names changed and the prophet elevated to a deity.
Many responders here and in the Beware False Explanations post seem to feel that endless circular reasoning from one incontestable source will convert us reasoners to believers. I find that reading many sources (many voices, faiths, cultures) and comparing and testing their claims empirically and/or statistically (i.e: Science) to be much more satisfying than just willing to believe in one book from one culture at one time.
I firmly believe there are no Gods: Atheist.
I cannot prove there are no Gods: Agnostic.
It doesn’t matter if there are any Gods: Ignostic.
I’m all three; no contradiction.
Peter Solomon (incoherently) describes characteristics of a world in which no supernatural intercession were necessary, but somehow thinks this proves said meddling with natural processes.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:40 am
Had enough of the bigoted, arrogant Christian mentality? Try Judaism. I’m serious. I grew up in a Catholic family and I can honestly state with great authority that Catholicism, the first Christian religion, is the greatest threat to religious freedom in the world, second only to Islam. Catholics were the first to persecute us Jews. They were the ones who invented the blood libel. Muslims adopted it later on and we Jews haven’t had a moments peace since.
But in Judaism you learn how much garbage there really is in the Christian Bible (New Testament) and how much it has been rewritten and intentionally misinterpreted over the centuries. They even had to rewrite OUR book (Old Testament) to suit their arrogance. You know those 300 Old Testament prophecies about Jesus? They aren’t about Jesus. And if you read the JPS version of the Old Testament, which is translated for the original Hebrew text, you get the real story.
Judaism comes in four different flavors. There are the Orthodox Jews, the ones who are about as fundamentalist as most Bible Belt Christians. Then there are the Conservative Jews, who are probably not that much different from down-to-Earth Christians. At least they don’t “suffer the little children” literally, if you get my drift. Then there are the Reform Jews, a much more liberal crowd. You’ll find a much more modernist, open-minded bunch. And then, there are the Reconstruction Jews. These folks are closer to Unitarian Universalist than anything, even Judaism. Their belief is that G-d is not so much a supreme being, but rather all the physical forces in the universe, forces that act up when, well, when WE act up-very similar to the good karma-bad karma concept in Buddhism.
It’s up to you to decide, and no one has a right to judge you if you choose to believe or not. Judaism has been around a long time and no one has squished us yet. Whatever you decide on, I wish you the best. Shalom!
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:49 am
For the owner and responders of this trite and disposable piece of non-sense…
I’m not going to tell you that you should “be ashamed, and find God”, and I’m not going to tell you that you should feel differently about your own personal experiences. But I will warn you that any attempt to be foolish and personally stand with conviction against people of ANY religion, will be the direct downfall of your own personal selfs. You may not believe in a god, but surely you can’t believe in your own murdering, self-absorbed governments. America is the only enemy you have…
Just remember it’s not Christianity that makes abortions, over taxes you at the gas pump, creates the poor, allows child-molesters to have their own web-site’s, makes black people the minority, runs secret societies, lies, steals, cheats and murders indiscriminately….
NO, THAT’S THE AMERICAN WAY…
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:58 am
It seems that many of the replies miss the point. He wasn’t telling the story of the intolerant name caller to explain why he was not a believer, but to illustrate that the term atheist has a very large negative meaning to many people.
No, the term atheist does not mean one is certain there is no god. It merely means that one does not believe in a god. To be a theist one merely has to believe in a god, not be certain of it.
Sure there are some “bad apple” Christians, but there are also some vinegar barrel churchs. One cannot get a good apple out of a vinegar barrel.
One does not explain a finite complexity by positing an infinite complexity. That is not science, merely intuition.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:26 am
“Atheists are just as one-way as any believer can be.”
I disagree. As an atheist, I am free to ponder new evidence, and in fact, if I were to see a figure of the virgin mary on my “pop-tart”, and it bled anything other than strawberry goo, I would certainly devote my life to the church. So it really isn’t as one way as you say, since you would not switch to atheism (would you?), even if I showed you evidence that YOUR religion is flawed.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:52 am
To most people, …
Religion = Philosophy which includes a belief in the existence of proof of the existence of gods.
Philosophy = Set of concepts and principles.
Concept = Mental representation/idea of a person or an object.
Examples of People/Objects: A woman named Jane, a ball, and a man named Dick.
Principle = Mental representation/idea of a causal relationship between/among persons and/or objects.
Causal Relationship = People/Objects/Events who/which are causes cause as effects (A) changes in pre-existing people/objects/events or (B) new people/objects/events.
Example of a Causal Relationship: Jane throws the ball to Dick; Jane is the cause of the ball traveling through space and time to Dick.
Theist = Person whose philosophy includes a belief in the existence of proof of the existence of gods.
Atheist = Person whose philosophy includes a belief in the existence of proof of the non-existence of gods.
Agnostic = Person whose philosophy includes a disbelief in the existence of proof of the existence of gods and a disbelief in the existence of proof of the non-existence of gods.
If you do not believe in the existence of proof of the existence of gods or in the existence of proof of the non-existence of gods, then you are an agnostic.
To most people, “agnostic” is not as problematic a term as “atheist.”
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:07 am
too much ignorance comes from wrong teachings, too many rebellious feelings and thoughts come from the inexperienced one. the philosophers are those who can not accept the will of god, but make up their own, out of man comes sinful teachings of pain, suffering, destruction, egotism and calamity..choose your own religious teachings, live without any if you choose, but there is a god and he can be found if you search for him, but do not let others discourage you..every house has a maker, or could a house be built by itself with all its parts, that’s how all around you came to be, he teaches everyone who listens how to have a meaningful life and how to co-exist with others in the world..what do you say when your in serious trouble, or in pain? but is it your rightful choice not to believe in the only true god there is whose only desire is for you to live a long happy life.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:22 am
Actually I consider myself an agnostic. Philosophically, I am an existentialist. This is because I was trained in the science of logic in my early teens. This often places me in a position that is perceived as wrong by atheists and theists alike. However when I explain my beliefs, most atheists will listen open-mindedly, while the theists will try their best to convince me that there is a God (or Gods in a few cases).
From a logical point of view, absolute binary opposites do not exist. The logical opposite of “good” is “not good” and the logical opposite of “bad” is “not bad”. The only situation where binary opposites exist is in Boolean algebra. So, although, I have no evidence to compel me to believe in god, logically the lack of such evidence is not evidence supporting the non-existence of god. Even though I don’t believe in god, I cannot logically prove the non-existence of god, since by definition, non-existence is non-provable. I can honestly say that I don’t know, since knowledge implies evidence.
As an existentialist, I acknowlege that every thing I do has an effect on myself, my social environment, and my physical environment. While many find comfort in the concept of predestination, I find the concept of predestination both depressing and opressive. I acknowledge there are events that are not influenced by my choices, things that I must learn to accept. So I adapt as needed.
There are intolerant atheists as well as intolerant theists. Thse that are offended by the phrase “under God” in the pledge of allegience are intolerant of the theists, who are in majority in the US. True agnostics tend to be much more tolerant of others right to believe as they wish. This tolerance is often viewed as non-comitment by theists and atheists among us.
Once a coworker invited me to her church. I politely declined, telling her that I was not a believer. In a very sincerely caring tone of voice she informed me that I was going straight to hell when I die, and that she would pray for me to change. At the time, it sort of creeped me out. I realized that her intentions were out of concern for a fellow human, so I did not hold that against her.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:23 am
Hmm. Let’s see. By the dictionary, “atheist” is one who does not believe in the existence of a supreme being, “agnostic” neither believes no disbelieves, and “deist” believes a supreme being created the universe but does not influence it. Whichever one fits me varies from day to day. I do believe in science, and science says matter and energy can neither be created nor destroyed, and by that token, life cannot begin with birth (or even conception) nor can it end with death. (Guess that makes me one of Thomas Hogue’s infinitists.
To eyescu:
“Women are dead set on killing unborn babies because it is their right and they dont want to be told that it is the wrong thing to do when all they have to do is abstain .”
I have never had sex. I do not wish to have sex. I have never consumed alcohol to a level where I am not 100% aware of what I’m doing. I live in fear that my rights will be taken away one by one on the grounds that something “might” harm a fetus I “might” be carrying. Worse yet, I fear the anti-abortionists will win and later I could be impregnated against my will and face a murder charge for dropping anything less than a perfectly healthy baby nine months later. It’s enough to make me want to “pre-emptively abort” every child I might ever have with a total hysterectomy. Especially with the discovery of epi-genes and how they can be influenced with diet….
And back to the subject of “words and their meanings”
Did you know that the first monotheists were the EGYPTIANS? “Amen” is actually a variant pronunciation of “Amun,” the “Unseen One” of ancient Egyptian beliefs. The “neteru,” (often translated as “gods”) are more like aspects of Amun, analagous to the “saints” of Catholisism.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:41 am
Wow. Well I read a lot of those responses with a mixture of sadness and anger, yet I am not surprised at a lot of the statements that were made. I am a 23-year old Christian. I was raised ‘in the church’ like so many people refer to it, but it was never brainwashing. ‘Brainwashing’ denotes a consistent, systematic and FORCIBLE pressure to get one to believe in a particular system of beliefs. I wish folks would look words up before they used them. In the first instance, I was raised a Pentcostal; I was raised to believe in Christ crucified, died and raised again on the third day to save us from our sins so that we could be reconciled to the Father. You know what though? I did my own thing. For a number of years, I deliberately chose not to follow and live by the beliefs I was taught and I basically did my own thing.
The beliefs I was taught were never forced down my throat. I was given a choice. I was told “Hey you can believe this or not.” Deep down, I believed, because I have had more than a few personal experiences with God and His goodness. I can’t PROVE with empirical evidence that God exists. I can’t say to any non-believer “Well look, so and so proves that God exists and as such, you should follow Him.” Any Bible-believing Christian knows what I mean. You have all had your experiences, whether it was divine provision, protection or revelation, we are part of an exclusive group.
A REAL Christian will not shove his/her beliefs down another’s throat. I have spoken to people about the Lord and His goodness to me and nearly all of them balked at the idea of ‘giving their life’ to God. Naturally, human beings are rebellious and do not like to submit to authority. Imagine being told that you have to submit to divine authority, basically being told you have to submit yourself to an authority figure who you can’t see or touch or feel in a traditional sense? Well I can just hear the confused and belligerent masses.
I wish I could remember all the things I read earlier because there were some doozies. I agree that Erich had a really crappy experience when he was younger. I agree that that shouldn’t have happened, but I think he should seriously stop whining about it and open his eyes. How many times did this happen in is life? I agree that he is letting this experience close his mind. Yes, people are hypocritical by nature. This all hails back to our sinful nature, but a REAL, TRUE Christian would never kick someone out of his house because he didn’t believe in God or a Divine Creator/Designer. I also know that a lot of people hide behind ‘religion.’ Religion IS organised, but Christianity is NOT a religion. It is a lifestyle that we live.
I take exception to Mark’s comment: “There is, in my mind, little difference between the “Christian fundamentalist” and the groups we label as terrorists. Left unchecked any fundamentalist ideology will ultimately resorts to some sort of force to further it’s agenda.
That is such a ridiculous claim. How can you compare extremist fundamentalists (remember, these people brutally behead others with sharp knives while they are still alive) to the Christian fundamentalist? Mark. do you even KNOW what a Cristian fundamentalist is? There is no ground for your claim whatsoever and the comparison is so radical that it borders on the outrageous. Usually this kind of comment would outrage me, but I realise that as a free-thinking person, you are subject to your own beliefs, and furthermore, the Bible tells us that in the last days, there would be intense opposition to the Christian way of life. So an attack like that doesn’t surprise me.
As for claiming that it is arrogant to assert that a God exists (here’s looking at you MS), it is even more arrogant for one to assert that there ISN’T one, because that means asserting that every man is in charge of his own destiny. A man can try to order his own life and he will be successful to a point, but the Bible says that a man’s steps are ordered of the Lord (Psalms 37:23-26) AND I QUOTE
23 The steps of a good man are ordered by the LORD,
And He delights in his way.
24 Though he fall, he shall not be utterly cast down;
For the LORD upholds him with His hand.
I know someone will blast me for this but who cares? Yes, I am a fundamentalist, and I believe in the Bible. Obviously as a young person, I don’t know everything, and there will be (as there have been) times when I couldn’t explain something in the Bible to a non-believer. This always ends up looking like I had been one-upped, but it doesn’t matter to me. I believe what I believe because it works for me. No one can feel the peace I have felt, the contentment and satisfaction that comes from trying to develop a closer relationship with God. I never tried to force anyone to believe what I do and I never will. Think about THIS: I believe that it takes more of an open mind to believe that a SUPERNATURAL being created everything. That concept challenges one to kind of think outside the box and acknowledge that a higher force than us is in charge, and that our entire existence isn’t or wasn’t come cosmic accident.
This is why I hate discussing ‘religion,’ as it is commonly called. I think that the issue is Man’s refusal to acknowledge that his life is not his own and that it was bought with a price, and that all actions have consequences, whether dire or small. The thing with people is that they want to do their own thing (this hails back to my ’submitting to Divine Authority’ rant a paragraph or so back) and expect that no consequences will come of it regardless of how they choose to love their life. Shame on those who would present the real followers of Christ in a bad and hypocritical light. And yes, sometimes those VERY people can be found lifting hands in church and clapping and singing along with the rest of us trying to live our lives the way God instructed us. The REAL disciples don’t let that kind of foolishness bog us down and hold us back from our walk with God.
Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life, no man goes to the Father but by Him. Why try to jump over the wall, when the Door is being opened to you? God bless you all.
August 2nd, 2007 at 11:07 am
I was terminated by Tri-Met (Portland, OR public transportation) because I am a “Godless hippy”. Oregon Bureau of Labor & Industries did not help because they “dont have the time or money to investigate…”. Who will help me? The laywers I contacted cost to much, the Union Rep had to get to church, who will help me? My grandma told a story of Nazi Germany: First they came for the jews and i ignored them, because it wasnt me. Then they came for the Catholics, and i ignored them, because it wasnt me. Then they came for the ….. Then they came for me, and when I called out for help, there was no one left to hear.
Can anyone hear me?
August 2nd, 2007 at 11:12 am
To Erich Vieth (Campaign for those who don’t believe in God)
What if you don’t believe in the traditional “God” in the clouds and living on a cloud but you still pray/talk (mostly at times of great strain or stress) to whomever/whatever somewhere who is probably not there and won’t answer in any case? Does that make you a semi-atheist, a “lite” atheist, a fallen atheist, an unworthy atheist or just plain confused?
Yes, I would appreciate your take on this contradictory mind stuff.
August 2nd, 2007 at 11:18 am
It really concerns me at the amount of people who are responding with the same belief as you.
For people to say that they do not believe they sure do work hard to try to prove their ideas.You have christians that present them selves as better than anyone else puffed up and haughty. That is not how God would have us act. I think that that is why when any one refers to a christian they say “so called” because people have this missconception that they are supposed to be perfect and then all af their actions are picked apart. People love to say that if there was a God then he wouldnt let bad things happen . We have a choice in what we do and how we behave and then have to take the consequences for them.
God is the most faught against person in our world but we are wanted to embrace every other religion. You want people to believe the same way that you do , that is the reason that you decided to post your comments. You fight hard against it because the intimidation that you say that you have could be an inkling that he does exist.
People are so willing to believe in other religions because there is a person standing in front of them telling them about it.and they say that God is the super natural. A person can stand in front of you and lie and make you believe it .You see some religious christian programs on T.V. and all some of them can do is beg for money and say that if you are or become a christian that you will be very prosperous, that is not the case sither. God is not all about wealth and gain , he is about love , compassion , helpfullness and kindness toward your fellow man.
August 2nd, 2007 at 11:18 am
I find it interesting that while our morals continue to tumble downward into the depths, you claim to be more pure morally because of your rejection of God. Where are your morals based? Did you learn morality from a gum wrapper? Where do we get our morals? I’d say the rules we live by in how we treat one another for instance “the golden rule” comes from the word of God. People from a lack of understanding say Christians only love their fellow man because of fear of eternal damnation. The fact is only God can turn the hearts of men. We are all evil and unworthy of God’s unconditional love. This planet we inhabit was to be a perfect paradise until the influence of evil and the knowledge thereof and it shows itself everyday. Murder, rape, lies, homosexuality, pride, self centeredness are a part of our everyday lives and you could be a victim. We wake up everyday in a defensive stance gaurding our families against the intrusion of these things into our lives. These things are evil and from where do they come? Are some people just bad? How do you explain murderers who find this non existant God and become loving servants of their fellow man? I noticed some time ago that Atheism starts with Mr or Mrs Super intelligent who’s God like pride won’t let them accept that there is a creator. You said that people want to live their lives how they want without worrying about the consequences or punishments handed down by the almighty. Ridiculous!!!! It seems to me your selfish wants and pursuits is your reason for not believing. I had a friend recently who I’ve known for years come back into my life. Last I saw him he was a conservative Christian, had a girlfriend and basically led a normal life. Now he is an alcoholic, drug addict out of the closet homosexual who has become a liberal atheist. He has tremendous guilt which is not from God by the way and it feeds his desire to drink and do his drugs and fall further away. He gave in to a temptation and now it is destroying him. That is how evil works. Lies, deceit, temptation, all the while saying it’s okay and it will make you more fulfilled and satisfied and more morally pure. Our nation was founded by Christian men on Christian principals. We desperately need these principals for our continued survival. Atheist like yourself, probably quite intelligent, forget that not everyone can govern themselves. The more you remove God and his principals of governing ourselves the more the Human government or idiocracy will move in to assume that role. Be an atheist and narrow minded but keep it to yourself. You’ll likely find that impossible since you really do serve a Christ. The anti - one.
August 2nd, 2007 at 11:33 am
MOSI pretty much sums it all up . Well said.
August 2nd, 2007 at 11:34 am
I know how you must feel, having someone say they believe in a God of love and then turn around and hurt you so. I used to be a catholic, went to daily mass all my life and then went out and partied till dawn. All I had to do was go to confession and whamo, it was all forgiven, so I went out that night and did it again. I wanted to love God, but the priests made it clear that only they would enter heaven along with a few nuns. I would never. I did not give up on God, I gave up on man and religion. Now I am the happiest I have ever been in my life. God is love and God is spirit. God would never hurt one of his beloved children. All we have to do is confess out need of a saviour, be willing to turn from the sin that holds us bound and brings all kinds of pains, fears and disappointments, and we will have a new life. If we accept that Jesus is the son of God, we read this in the bible, and believe he died in our place, so we did not have to go to hell. Then our lives will change. I know this is a hard thing to do and I fully understand how you feel, faith, is hard, but God promised that all we need is a mustard seed size faith and he will do the rest. God bless you all, I hope you find the road to freedom/ ITs worth a try.
angi
August 2nd, 2007 at 12:16 pm
Ryan: No, I didn’t learn morality from a gum wrapper. Feel free to explore this website for my understanding of the bases for morality. For a beginning, check out this post: http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=792 and follow some of the links. Also, check out this post: http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=1445
I suspect you won’t like these posts. You asked, though, and this is my response.
BTW, Just because you don’t learn your version of morality from a traditional “God” doesn’t mean that you are forced to learn it from a gum wrapper. If you disagree with me, try to explain your position to all of those godless yet highly moral Scandinavians.
August 2nd, 2007 at 12:18 pm
Life is too short to bury oneself in semantics like believing there is no god or not believing there is a god. As long as there are radical fundamentalists bent on killing me if I don’t convert to their religion, I will publicly acknowledge only that I am a lapsed Catholic. I am married to an ex-communicated Catholic who does not pressure me to return to the faith, but we live in a small community in which we are both shunned socially. I have no trouble admitting that I am an iconoclastic rebel who always questioned everything, though I am well aware that those of us who do not subscribe to any organized religion are a very tiny minority in America. I avoid any public discussion of religion to preempt the inevitable sermon that only serves to make me more determined to resist whatever dogma it supports.
August 2nd, 2007 at 12:41 pm
To most of you who have responded -
What do you do with the people who have met the Savior personally? They do exist. Simply accepting the general Christian teaching that the Lord no longer interacts with mankind is to do yourself a disservice.
For those of you who present yourself as scientifically oriented may find “Suddenly Psychic: A Skeptics Journey” by Maureen Caudill a good read. She was like most of you here; sure that when you die you die. Although she is not one of those who have met the Savior, the journey she describes is quite engaging. Her referencing of and explanations of such topics as string theory and its relevance is good reading.
About the experience with the philosophy professor - you were treading on family tradition and emotional grounding. That’s more than enough to get anyone, believer or non-believer, upset.
August 2nd, 2007 at 12:49 pm
Most of the replys are from atheists who are sick of being looked down upon by the religous, but my experience has been the exact opposite. I have suffered ridicule by atheists because they see my catholic views as unmodern, ignorent or uneducated. Am I the only one here? It’s not like I go around “spreading the word” to everybody, but if I even make a reference to anything “religious”, it seems that there are people waiting to attack. Do atheists really need a movement or support group in this day and age?
August 2nd, 2007 at 1:00 pm
There is a philosophy, though I prefer to call it a theory, called Transpersonalism. To break it down very basically, it says “something is going on we often refer to as spiritual.” It says, “don’t throw out the baby with the bath water.” By looking at spiritual practices like meditation, by agreeing that every religion has something moral and good we can accept, by looking toward scientific investigation of these things, we can learn and grow. Now, I can buy that. There are things we just don’t know.
It is when people start telling me they (and it seems only they) have the truth, the Word of God, that I start heading for the door as fast as I can. People like that can kill you! People like that have fought wars, burned others for heresy, being witches, having another religion. I hope, in the 21st century, the human race might begin to move beyond superstition. Fear and superstition are virtually synonymous. Mystery, on the other hand, is one of the things that makes life worth living. I’m not sure about one pronouncing him/herself an atheist either. It sounds just as intransigent and unforgiving as someone saying they are a believer. However, I accept anyone’s belief as long as that person doesn’t try to impose it on me and therein, my friend, is the rub.
August 2nd, 2007 at 1:15 pm
I feel a little ambivalent about your personal anecdote Erich. Now, clearly this father overreacted, demonstrated a total intolerance and surprising ignorance giving his background. But in some regards, refusing to go to church with the family may have felt like a disgrace to the man in more ways than one. I don’t see any problem with an atheist tagging along with his girlfriend’s family to church as a sign of respect for the family and its regular family habits. Maybe the father felt insulted not just because of your disbelief in God, but also because you turned down an attempt on his part to reach out to you and treat you like a member of the family. Maybe.
But I suppose it worked out for the best. If you had tagged along, let’s say, and things went well with this girlfriend, say you eventually married or had children with her. No doubt her father would demand that you raise your children in the church. It would have caused an even bigger rift if you had refused then. Sometimes even a back-bendingly considerate athiest will still enrage stubborn theists no matter how they try to avoid it.
Now on to the rest of the post: atheism has a very negative connotation to it, hence the formation of “The Brights” and atheists that misleadingly call themselves agnostics. I don’t like retreating to a euphemism. I feel like we need to “take back” the A-word, like young blacks have refused to cower in fear of the word nigger*. And anyway, when a well-meaning nonbeliever tries to use and explain a term like “Bright”, many people have a hard time understanding what exactly they mean. People could easily make the mistake that “Brights” follow some kind of new-age religion, if the Bright doesn’t explain it well enough.
* I DO NOT intend to suggest that the minimal discrimination of atheists parallels or approximates in ANY WAY the prejudice and discrimination exacted against blacks. I just think we should find inspiration in the way that some young blacks have turned a negative connotation around.
August 2nd, 2007 at 1:18 pm
The word Atheist means one who does not belong to or adhere to a religious belief or believe in gods, devils and demons. Atheists understand that the Bible and other alleged holy books are just stories. But what an atheist is as a human being is simply the same as everyone else minus the imaginary friends. All the negative connotations about atheists comes from the Christian apologists and not a part of the actual way that real human beings, atheists, really are.
The term “atheist” was turned into a pejorative just like the term “liberal” was by the very same church people who created their version of a liberal which does not actually exist any more than the pejorative atheist does. Atheism does not cause changes in your humanity, just removes the imaginary friends. Actual, real live liberals, as a rule, are much more moral than Church people are because they are humanists mostly or out right non-fundamentalist Christians but by turning the word liberal into the repository of all evil, which is easy to do, they were able to put in power the most corrupt people on the planet.
So is it important to regain the true meaning of atheist, a person who does not belong to an organized church or have imaginary friends but who is most likely raised in the same culture with the same moral fiber, built in by nature and honed by the civilizing influence of our greater society out there? Nobody on the planet matches up to the liberal label, either. It is a straw man argument device used by Karl Rove and the Republican party that does not exist at all. No atheist on the planet actually matches up to what the Church people claim atheists are, either. Not a one. Yet millions of us are out there hiding from what is a far nobler and fulfilling way of life, a reality centered life free of imaginary friends.
The other Church maligned aspect of the real world is the study of that world. Science is a thing to be proud of and should be read and understood by all citizens but the mere thought of all those science literate people slowly showing up on the scene living lives much better than the church can offer because they are more reality centered than the church people also has most of the scientists out there getting demonized as well. That is because science keeps pulling out the real causes of human problems like disease caused by germs instead of demons. One of the core principles of the Church is that people are born as sinners and have original sin. Not all churches but most of them believe this. They think that human beings are immoral not just by choice but by birth. The problem with the original sin argument is that it does not match up to what studies of humans says about humans. The studies for the causes of crime have shown that lead poisoning causes damage to humans that causes criminal behaviors. It is not the only cause of brain damage to criminals but it is one of the most measured. The drop in crime over the past fifty years has come from cleaning up the lead in the environment. As the lead levels drop the creation of people with the criminal mind brain damage stops and the crime rates go way down so the cause of criminal behavior is brain damage and the vast majority of people with lead poisoning or pre frontal lobe damage to the brain are crime free. Every country that has no lead in the environment or countries where the lead was removed have had very steady drops in crime rates. The countries, like those in Africa and in the Mideast that are filled with toxic chemical dumps are still having high and even rising crime rates. The connection between brain damage and chemical damage to brains is way too strong to ignore and most of the governments out there have removed the lead from their cities and societies and getting the benefit of the lowest crime rates in history and that is in all countries out there with or without death penalties. Harsher laws no more stop crime than prayer does.
Enforced seat belt laws also have caused a huge drop in pre frontal lobe damage and other brain damage caused by hitting the windshield or dashboard with their heads. So according to Christian notions, as more and more people get educated and leave religion behind their original sin is supposed to kick in. The Church has been losing 1.3% of its people for the past fifty years. The crime rate is not even remotely tied to the notion of original sin since the crime rates are plunging the less informed could make the assertion that leaving the church is the cause of the drop in crime. But humans are not simplistic beings and should be insulted by the notion of original sin. We get our socialization from apes and apes are, generally, automatically moral. Studies have shown apes squealing on and helping beat up other apes for stealing fruit and other delicacies from the troop. Our morality is automatic and honed by our culture both. Remove brain damaging chemicals like lead and you remove the causes of criminal brains. Original sin is an insult to most of us humans with normal developed brains and normal socialization. We learn our behaviors from our over all culture, which includes our home life and schools. But we don’t do crime easily unless we got a damaged brain and a culture that pushes criminal behavior over normal behavior. Even in the worst cultures, there are a very high percentage, over 70%, who escape that bad culture and move on into the larger culture and become productive citizens but minus the lead poisoning, most of the people in the world are not criminals and behave in very civilized ways. The more education they get the more civilized they become, too.
This goes totally against what every single religion believes to be true but the turning atheist by Americans has produced over 40 million secular humans with high moral fiber without the Church. You can call yourself whatever you want to call yourself but ‘ancient wisdom’ cannot be applied to a modern, dynamic and ever more complex world. Churches have simplistic answers that any fool can memorize but the instant they try to implement those ancient ideas in the real world fails. The secular American is the cause of progress and the church people are not even remotely on the same page yet alone as effective a life tool as being science oriented with a secular viewpoint.
The vast majority of liberal arts stuff is totally flawed. We don’t have a subconscious mind like Freud and others have said and the support for a soul in the human mind/brain dualism is totally gone because of modern research into how the brain works says we only have one mind and the brain supports that with using most of the brain’s architecture. The new age notion that you only use ten percent of your brain and mind is totally flawed and shown to be a lie.
But, our human side has the ability to enjoy and do art for the sake of art itself. You don’t need imaginary friends to be a great artist. Science fiction writers do the best literature out there and the vast majority of them are fully secular as well. The same goes for most scientists and for most secular people as well. Verbal art is about creating imaginary friends and being secular has no bearing on the creative side at all. I created the Ziptron Omega, the ultimate computer, the one the others call God to illustrate that point. The ZO is the ultimate computer and our universe is a multidimensional subroutine in the ZO’s main program. Most atheists are erudite, well educated and some of the best humans on the planet. You and I are no exception. The religions get in the way of people interacting with each other and should be abandoned for that reason alone.
There is nothing wrong with coming out as an atheist and every one that does come out does show that our numbers have pretty much been growing at the same pace as the public gets better educated.
August 2nd, 2007 at 1:51 pm
“I agree that Erich had a really crappy experience when he was younger. I agree that that shouldn’t have happened, but I think he should seriously stop whining about it and open his eyes.”
We keep telling Erich this but he just doesn’t seem to get it. He just needs to be quiet and accept the ten commandments as God’s written word (not to mention the pseudo-virgin mary). The bible is a factual account of history. Only the names and the word meanings have been changed, everything else is perfect.
I also wish He would stop sharing his personal experiences, they are all SO one-sided.
August 2nd, 2007 at 3:43 pm
Erich, the term atheist actually means a person that thinks that gods do not exist. a = no, none and theo = god. The other term is spiritual that there may or may not be a god, but there is a force or something that is going on. Finally there is religious which one can say is adherence or observation of a set of principles.
Just for those out there may be wondering Christians tend to become religious out of ignorance, since it is easier to follow rules than to think for themselves
Jesus was spiritual as he believed in God. Yet he often went for what was morally good instead of going for what was the religious norm of “The Church”. And like many of you that were hurt by this “Church”, Jesus was considered by “The Church” at the time as evil and was shunned by most of those “religious people” of that time. He was even vilified by those “Church people”.
Erick, Don and others, you have more in common with Jesus, Buddha, Confucius and other “religious people” than you think. Actually they were spiritual.
August 2nd, 2007 at 5:57 pm
Thanks for the article, Erich. I am a lifelong atheist, and came to that personal truth at a very young age (I was 7). Since I’m a feisty sort, the kind of crap aimed at me by religious enthusiasts didn’t & doesn’t really bother me, but I must say being constantly bombarded by the symbolism & the media’s mawkish pandering IS annoying. Canada’s public life is not nearly as affected as it is in the US — it is unlikely we would ever elect someone as far right religiously as George Bush, for instance, and never would such a person get even CLOSE to the opportunity to become leader of our country — but we, too, have churches on every corner sucking the air out of our neighbourhood real estate; a still-raging debate on whether or not to prosecute the perverts who “marry” little girls under the guise of “God’s will” & Mormonism; priests who ripped the heart, the sex & the life out of a whole generation of First Nations & other kids while the Catholic/Anglican churches denied, lied & hid them for years; and, elected town Councils who pray before each meeting so as to persuade “God” to bless their latest sewer system repair budget. Sigh …. In truth, Erich, I thought your article was trying hard not to offend, but I could feel the anger bubbling beneath …
I might just get one of those bumper stickers (even though I’m already pretty OUT about this stuff), but in my community (which has the most churches per capita in the country — how DID I end up here?) that’s likely to get me bumper STRUCK by at least some of those gooood Christians out there. May the power be with you all …
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:02 pm
We don’t choose what we believe. We are presented with evidence, apply logic and reason and draw conclusions. I too, dislike the tag of “Atheist” but find it shorthand to sum up my basic beliefs, or lack thereof. I don’t understand why believers get so defensive when I merely mention that I am Atheist. I really do not care what they believe as long as they don’t legislate their beliefs into law, or spend my tax dollars in institutions that educate and proselytize any religious thought. And I certainly am not out to recruit or deconvert anyone. As far as the OUT program, I am all for it if it will help Americans realize that we are part of this country, and the body politic should realize we really represent a large enough portion of the population to sway the vote.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:43 pm
Among christians there are a few who will tell you “don’t preach if you can keep from it”. The point being that if you can keep from it you have not been called to preach. I would tell “put preferred label here” not to believe if you can keep from it. If you act like you believe when you haven’t been “called to it”, in other words, you have been persuaded rather than convinced, you will cause more harm than good. We don’t choose, God does the choosing when it is your time.
Christians are taught to “come out from among them and be ye separate”. I would tell all the unbelievers to get out of the churches. I would tell the believers to get out of the churches, if they are in ones like Mr. Vieth describes. Believers don’t belong in institutions that teach “commandments and doctrines of men”.
The level of deniability has been rising for centuries in lockstep with religious innovation. Jesus said “If ye love me keep my commandments”. That is what separates the wheat from the chaff. Far too many cannot seem to separate the innovations of men from Jesus’ teachings, or even care to acknowledge the distinction.
August 4th, 2007 at 6:27 pm
Faith is an emotion that I don’t think the psychologists really understand, How can so many wildly different theologies be so readily accepted by mankind. We are still killing one another over differences in religious Dogma. The Pope just proclaimed that only real Catholics will make it to heaven. Many of the Christian denominations claim the same thing. Mormons still believe only they have Gods way to heaven. Someone needs to apply a little reason and logic here. They can’t all be right.
Faith is what keeps otherwise honest people from looking for the truth.
With all the great advances in science and technology; I think it is a perfect time for the religiously faithful to question their faith. This certainly applies to all religious faiths; Christian, Islam, Judaism, and all who believe in a supernatural controlling God.
With all the DNA evidence that has been repeatedly duplicated within various scientific specialties; the arguments against evolution should be questioned by people honestly looking for the truth.
There is now so much repeatable evidence that the universe, and all matter, were created in a big bang; that here again, the religious faithful must question their faith.
What a shame that we are still killing one another over differences in religious Dogma.
This is one big world and we are all related. Let’s learn to live together.
Church leaders also have a real problem with the truth. Look at the great cover up in the pedophilia in the Catholic church. Protestant ministers are in the news all the time for their dishonorable actions and cover up.
Honesty is the best policy. It sure would be nice to find a way to give our leaders the moral backbone to be honest.
Faith and prayer are not working. Please give more careful consideration, to reason, logic and science.
August 5th, 2007 at 12:24 pm
It has been suggested that to insist that there is no god is equally as arrogant as to insist that there is a god. This claim is false for a number of reasons; I will confine myself to just one.
I will rely on an analogy with a court of law. In either the US of A - where I suspect most respondents reside - or in Britain - where I am - the law operates from a simple premise; a person is innocent until proven guilty. What that means is that the prosecutor will claim that I broke the law and the onus is on him to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that his claim is true. There is no requirement for me to prove anything at all, for I am presumed innocent from the start. Obviously, it would help my case if I can show that I was elsewhere at the relevant time, but I do not have to prove anything, or even speak in my defence. It is entirely up to the prosecutor, the one making the claim, to prove that his claim is true.
The correspondence with the religious debate is obvious. If you want to claim that a supernatural entity created the universe and everything in it, that this entity bore a direct descendent who died to save us all and that if we all believe this with you we will be similarly saved, then natural law, from which our formal law is descended, says that the onus is on you to demonstrate that your claim is true beyond a reasonable doubt. I, on the other hand, make no extraordinary claim whatsoever and therefore have to prove nothing.
QED.
August 6th, 2007 at 6:45 am
Martin: I know several true believers. They have personal relationships with their ever present deity, and see his signature in every object and action around them.
To them, the extraordinary claim is that this ubiquitous and very obvious entity does not exist. The observation that man-made unbiased instruments can find no evidence that he exists merely means that the instruments (made by man) are inferior to their own belief (planted by God). They embrace the agent fallacy (that everything has an intending cause), so cannot be convinced that some things “just happen”. Every minuscule object and fleeting event is part of God’s Plan.
There is no amount of objective proof or reason that can convince them otherwise.
August 7th, 2007 at 5:01 am
There has to be some rules to be followed.In schools and colleges we get them and after that we have to follow god.
August 7th, 2007 at 9:42 am
Social imprinting gives us most of our rules. “As God Intended” is a perfect synonym for “What I’m Used To”. Rules that we absorb before we are able to think them through feel God-given. Rules that we impose on children without realizing it — because they were imprinted early in us — seem “natural”.
Godless cultures follow pretty much the same rules as God-fearing or God-loving cultures. This is social evolution in action: Rules that work prevail. Rules that damage a group get left behind.
To follow God’s rules is simply to act on the moral compass that was polarized into one before we realized it was being programmed. The Biblical rules that are hard to follow (or even those that are ignored even by the devout) are hard because they make no moral sense, even when you can intellectually justify them.
August 10th, 2007 at 2:13 pm
Dan Klarmann: I take your point. In which case I delete the word *extraordinary* from my post and it still says what I wanted to say. It is up to the person making the claim to prove that it is true.
Your Reply: True believers are not making a claim, they are simply stating the blindingly obvious.
My Response: Well, if it’s so obvious that god exists, why did Thomas Aquinas, a true believer if ever there was one, have to invent no less than five false proofs of his existence?
Your Reply: True believers say the fact that they can’t prove his existence proves that god has decided that they don’t have to prove his existence. Therefore god exists.
When all I can do is quote Dawkins: That’s an argument?
August 11th, 2007 at 2:58 am
Martin, if you go to court you do have to defend yourself, whether you are in Britain or elsewhere. It would look really bad for you if the prosecutor said, “He was seen entering the victim’s house carrying a gun when the crime happened.” and the only thing you did was respond with silence and your conviction that you are innocent anyway. There’s a good reason people don’t walk alone into court and instead are accompanied by a lawyer.
“I, on the other hand, make no extraordinary claim whatsoever and therefore have to prove nothing.”
You’re quite the exception then.
August 11th, 2007 at 5:14 pm
projektleiterin: I am not saying that keeping quiet is necessarily a good strategy. I am saying that the court does not require me to speak.
The court does however require the prosecution to present a case. They cannot just file into court and say, “He did it your Honour. It’s a done deal.” They are required to present their evidence.
Remember, the court room was only an analogy summoned up to explain why it is that the person making the claim is required to prove their claim, while those who do not believe their claim are not required to prove that it is not true. If I believe in Santa Claus I am required to prove that she exists. If you don’t believe in Santa Claus there is nothing for you to prove, and there is therefore nothing you can be compelled to say on the subject.
And that is why I am most decidedly not the exception when I keep silence about the existence of god. If believers want to have tax money flowing in to their coffers on account of their belief, and if believers want permission to operate outside of the laws the rest of us obey because of their belief, then they are IMO morally compelled to demonstrate that their belief is in something other than a piece of flim flam and hokum.
Having a belief in a creation myth involving some form of invisible omnipotent being is not necessarily a bad thing for some people; most of whom are under seven years of age. But when their belief extends to them seeking a social and financial advantage because of their belief then they have social responsibility to justify those advantages to the rational, critical thinking, rest of us. After all, in my country it is still a crime to obtain money by deception.
August 12th, 2007 at 3:13 am
Martin, sorry, I misread your comment. Forget what I wrote.