"If the GOP is the Party of No, Atheism is the Philosophy of No"
I am an atheist. I make no bones about it. I am happy to call myself one and I'm happy to be open with TPM Cafe about my beliefs.
The quotation which serves as this diary's title was written last weekend by a prejudiced Daily Kos user whose name I will not mention. It was part of an overall screed about how atheists are "elitists," and how cruel corporations of the world are atheistic institutions that have no soul, and how large groups of atheists are dangerous because they somehow lack a moral compass provided to us by God. As evidence for the "dangerous" philosophy that is atheism, he invoked the images of Stalin, Hitler, and Mao, telling other DKos users to "look at the body count for the past 100 years that the atheists in Berlin, Moscow, and Beijing have brought us."
I'd like to have a real, rational conversation about atheism, from one atheist to believers and non-believers alike. If you'd care to join me, please follow me beneath the fold.
I should mention that in fairness to this DKos user, his original anger that provoked those prejudiced statements above was actually understandable. He made these comments on a diary which was published on May 2, 2009 (written, presumably, by a fellow atheist) which stupidly claimed that most religions are "elitist" by definition, and as evidence for that, the diarist pointed to Catholics who burned people at the stake in the 15th century and the "endless number" of Muslims who have blown themselves up to kill babies and enter heaven as heroes.
Besides being poorly written, that diary was incredibly offensive and written for no other reason than to inflame, and plenty of DKos users (including other atheists) called him out on it. Unfortunately, the diary also set off a series of offensive anti-atheist remarks such as those stated in the introduction. plf515, an atheist, made this great observation:
"Religion doesn't make people elitist. Elitists make religion elitist. And the same happens with some atheists."
***********************************
Now, with that out of the way, I'd like to change the conversation. Let me explain where I come from and what being an atheist means to me.
WHO I AM
There are many stories of atheists who came of age in highly conservative, religious families, who then rejected the religious teachings later in life -- but that was not the case for me. I grew up in a very secular household north of Chicago. Instead of church on Sundays, we would sit around and watch the Bears (hence, my username). To my recollection, as a young child I went to church only once (I think when I was 5), and I certainly don't remember what I heard when I was there.
The two most common terms that my parents use to describe their own personal philosophies are "Dubious Agnostic" and "Secular Humanist." They themselves were both raised in different religious cultures (my mother's family was Catholic, my father's was Jewish), and while neither of my parents was strongly religious, they both understood what I consider to be sacred values of family togetherness, kindness, empathy, laughter, music, and love. They instilled these values in me and my brothers at an early age, and they are the values that I hope to inspire in my friends and a future family of my own.
I was able to learn these values without a spiritual belief in a higher power of any kind. My brothers and my parents have also learned these values without religious faith. Contrary to a popular stereotype, we were not "angry atheists." We just lived our lives as Americans.
WHAT I SEE
I am a heterosexual, white male with no physical disabilities. Demographically speaking, I am not really in the minority in this country. It's also no stretch to say that heterosexual, white males with no physical disabilities have historically been given the most power, money, and influence in society, and thus the most tools with which to unfairly discriminate against others. I'm also about average height for men, have a medium-sized build, and have brown hair too, in case you were wondering. I'd be willing to bet that at least one of you has built a Sim or a Mii that looks like me.
However, in addition to all these traits, I'm also someone who happens to believe that there is no God. That puts me squarely in the minority in the U.S. of A. If you lump me in with agnostics and those claiming "no religion," then I fall in with about 15% of the population -- a proportion that's been on the rise, to be sure, but still very much in the minority. There is, based on my count, only ONE openly non-theistic member of Congress: Pete Stark (D-CA). That amounts to a 0.2% non-believer population in Congress -- just a little disparity, if you ask me.
Atheism is also, sadly, one of the most despised minorities in the country. In February 2007, a Gallup poll found that only 45% of Americans said they would vote for an atheist even if he or she were well-qualified, and 53% said they would not -- the worst score for every demographic they tested. Most of that disparity was driven by conservative voters, sure, but compare that with the 95% of Americans who would vote for a well-qualified Catholic, and you've got a bit of a gap, to say the least. In March 2008, Gallup tracked my kind at a -32 net favorability rating (yeah, take THAT, Mitch McConnell!).
But wait, there's more! It also turns out that there are a handful of states in the Union whose constitutions prohibit atheists from holding public office. Those states are:
- Arkansas: No person who denies the being of a God shall hold any office in the civil departments of this State, nor be competent to testify as a witness in any Court. (Article 19, Section 1)
- Maryland: That as it is the duty of every man to worship God in such manner as he thinks most acceptable to Him, all persons are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty; wherefore, no person ought by any law to be molested in his person or estate, on account of his religious persuasion, or profession, or for his religious practice, unless, under the color of religion, he shall disturb the good order, peace or safety of the State, or shall infringe the laws of morality, or injure others in their natural, civil or religious rights; nor ought any person to be compelled to frequent, or maintain, or contribute, unless on contract, to maintain, any place of worship, or any ministry; nor shall any person, otherwise competent, be deemed incompetent as a witness, or juror, on account of his religious belief; provided, he believes in the existence of God, and that under His dispensation such person will be held morally accountable for his acts, and be rewarded or punished therefor either in this world or in the world to come. (Declaration of Rights, Article 36)
- Mississippi: No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office in this state. (Article 14, Section 265).
- North Carolina: The following persons shall be disqualified for office: First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God. (Article 6, Section 8)
- South Carolina: No person shall be eligible to the office of Governor who denies the existence of the Supreme Being. (Article 4, Section 2)
- Tennessee: No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this State. (Article 9, Section 2)
- Texas: No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being. (Article 1, Section 4)
All of which seems to conflict with a certain Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which says this:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
It should be noted, however, that in February, the Arkansas state legislature referred to committee a bill that would repeal the anti-atheist law (which was first introduced by a Catholic representative, Richard Carroll). The ACLU is keeping an eye on it.
WHAT IT MEANS TO ME
So needless to say, I take my minority status as an atheist seriously. It upsets me when I read that the Boy Scouts of America not only do not accept scouts and scout leaders who identify as gay, but that it requires scouts to believe in God. And it hurts me when I read that only 20 years ago, a President named George H.W. Bush stated that atheists should not be considered citizens or patriots of the United States. Such dismissive attitudes and practices have helped shape prejudicial views towards the non-religious in this country. However, it thrills me when I hear President Obama acknowledge non-believers in his inauguration address, when no other President before him had done so.
I have been very fortunate that, in my lifetime, I have not experienced thus far any form of systemic, long-term prejudice on the level of what, say, African-Americans faced during the Civil Rights movement, or what our LGBT brothers and sisters have faced for the past thirty-plus years. But at the end of the day, it really doesn't matter who the target of prejudice is. Discrimination is discrimination, no matter which group is being discriminated against.
I will fully acknowledge that, even though there is a disparity in the number of atheists and agnostics in Congress compared to the general population, I don't want more atheists in Congress simply for the sake of having more atheists in Congress. Being atheistic does not mean you automatically have better judgment, nor does being religious mean you automatically have better morals. George Will is a self-avowed agnostic, but that doesn't stop him from denying that global warming is real. And man, I CAN'T STAND Christopher Hitchens.
As an atheist, I want to be absolutely clear about one thing. I hope you will not read this diary as an anti-religion tirade. It's not. One DKos user's hurtful comments do not represent the views of all Christians. That certain individuals in history have bastardized Christianity, Islam, and yes -- atheism -- does not mean they represent the whole of any religious or non-religious group.
For what it's worth, my girlfriend is Catholic. I love her very much. She loves me. I don't try to convert her, she doesn't try to convert me. She has the right to go to church and practice her faith if she so chooses, and I support her when she does, just as much as I have the right not to go to church or practice a faith. We love each other for who we are, and our differences in our religious and non-religious preference has nothing to do with it.
Here's what it all means to me: Atheism is, for better or worse, a part of my identity. I will not run from it. I will not accept being demonized for it. Yet I still dream of the day when it no longer matters if one believes in a god or not. I do not feel I need the guiding principles of a higher power to be a good person. I will respect the choice of religious Americans -- their choice is guaranteed by the Constitution. I just ask for respect for my choice.
Thanks for reading, and peace to all.
***********************************
UPDATE: Contact the Arkansas legislature to vote YES on HJR 1009, the bill that would repeal the anti-atheist law. The bill's sponsor is Richard Carroll (AR-39).
Arkansas House of Representatives
Room 350
State Capitol
Little Rock, AR 72201In Session Phone:
501-682-6211Out of Session
Phone: 501-682-7771Website listing all Arkansas counties and their representatives.
***********************************
Cross-posted at Daily Kos



















I find myself challenged in the sense that I could be considered an athiest as I prescribe to no religion having studied and experienced many...meditated deeply and found my own understanding of life and myself.
You see I would use the term God to explain life and the consciousness within life. One of my spiritual teachers once said this to me
God, is pure consciousness coming to know itself.
For me, this fits perfectly. Now I don't know that this would meet the 'supreme being, higher power, or variety of relgious definitions of 'God' but it is the most simple, clear, pure expression of the most tangible aspect of 'spirit' or whatever that is... that I can direct my attention toward.
I have met Father Thomas Keating, Brother David a couple of famous Rabbi's, Elizabeth Lesser, Genpo Roshi, many other in integral spirituality conferences and I see everything gravitating to this place that is sort of simple, all encompassing...
Pure consciousness coming to know itself
Am I an athiest? I don't think it matters.
May 8, 2009 4:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
If the Daily Kos diary is worth discussing, then it's worth linking to.
May 8, 2009 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Apparently Richard Dawkins put this article on Twitter. That's amazing!
May 8, 2009 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
I had no idea that some states prohibit non-believers from holding office, and it really chaps my hide. It is outrageous. How can someone believe that there should be equality for all mankind... as long as that person believes in a higher power? It is absolutely insane.
May 8, 2009 5:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
. . . my parents . . . understood . . . values . . . They instilled these values . . . I was able to learn these values . . . .
Values are not "instilled" and they're not "learned" -- although the benefits of acting upon them may be reinforced by one's environment (family, friends, lovers, workmates, society broadly understood, etc.).
Our "values" are genetically determined, the genes for them having been selected over time. For a human to fail to exhibit "values" (that is, to be unempathetic) is to be genetically damaged.
May 8, 2009 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I beg to differ. There is no way that the human moral compass is a genetic trait. The global variability in this regard very clearly and unmistakably stipulates it is a derivation of the societies to which we belong. I assure you there is a wide variation in empathy worldwide and this is reflective not of anything even remotely attributable to genetics. I've lived in and visited many countries and have seen a great deal of this world and know this for a fact. You very clearly have not and are ignorant of the realities beyond our borders. There are vast populations of this world that struggle mightily to even feed and clothe themselves. What you refer to are attributes of a relatively affluent population.
May 8, 2009 9:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're confusing the fact of empathy with the range and extent of its application.
All healthy humans exhibit empathy (the foundation of "values"), but they restrict its deployment to the society of "us" -- family, neighborhood, town, nation, race. All you're arguing about is the size of the "us"; you've said nothing in contradiction to the theory that empathy is innate.
May 8, 2009 9:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
A Fulghum moment --
I suspect that worldwide, the following lesson is given by all mothers to their children around the time they turn five: "How would you like it if Jane/John did that to you?"
If the child doesn't get the Golden Rule, we say he's autistic or a sociopath -- that is, we see him as defective and as a poor mate, evolutionarily speaking.
May 8, 2009 9:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
While your point is well taken that humans have a genetic predisposition to being empathetic I think values could be more accurately described as a philosophical system of thought that directs actions in day to day living. Such a system of thinking is certainly a learned repository of cultural heritage. Of course the underlying foundation of culture and philosophy is myth and that can be viewed as analogous to genes but for societies instead of organisims.
The mytos of Judeo-Christian thought is where the religionists have a leg to stand on in their claims about the underlying principals of USA. Where they jump the track is in their insistance that a person must believe in a deity (or more likely their chosen version of God) to be standing on the foundation of that moral mythos. But of course most believers will go into a tizzy of rage if someone suggests that their religious beliefs are "myths". Myths are what all those other fools and pagans believe. The true religion (yours) is rock solid fact that defies all refutation even by scientific proof.
May 9, 2009 6:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for this honest and thoughtful piece on being an atheist. I'm surprised that there are 10 recommends with no comments.
I'm also surprised at how many states have prohibitions against atheists holding office. That's pretty appalling, considering, as you say, the clause in our constitution that forbids that sort of thing. It seems that religion will always rear its ugly side when it comes to dictating how other people should live.
Cliched as it sounds, some of my best friends are Christians. All of them, as they proudly point out, are flawed--but that never stops many of them from declaring that Christianity is the only way to go. I've met some exceptionally good people who are religious, but I've met just as many who are not. The difference between those who are religious and those who are not is that those who are want you to know it.
I'm frankly baffled by the numbers of people who claim to be religious, believing in Heaven and Hell and a Supreme Being who knows their every thought and even talks to them. I don't understand it, but I don't begrudge them. I wish they would afford me the same courtesy.
May 8, 2009 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I should have known. . .I started this and then walked away for a while. Now there are comments, of course.
There is no reason for anyone who isn't a believer to be looked down on or to be ostracized. It goes against any of the teachings religious followers are instructed to believe. And yet there it is, day after day.
A hairdresser once asked me what church I went to. when I told her I didn't go to church she said, "Oh, you should." I can't believe I just sat there and listened to her. I was younger then. I wouldn't do it now.
May 8, 2009 5:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
You should see the number of commenters over at Kos. It exploded over there.
In any event, thanks! There's absolutely no reason to be ashamed of being an atheist or agnostic. Hopefully this will be something of a constructive dialogue. Lots of religious folks over at Kos who have actually been very supportive.
May 8, 2009 6:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Super, I just went over to Kos. Wow! I'm still reading the comments over there. Very interesting.
Thanks for the link.
May 8, 2009 6:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Very fine presentation. I really do not know how to define atheism any more.
Remember Madeline O'Hare (sp?) She was so funny, ha.
The pictures you present are beautiful and I love going to National Geo and checking out the latest Hubbel stuff.
There is order out there. There are patterns. I just do not believe that there is a man in a white robe living in the clouds giving a damn about what the human insects are doing.
Fine Post Super. Just super as always.
May 8, 2009 7:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I love the photos! To me they may point to an Awesome and Sacred Mystery. To you they may mean something else. Your atheism is as much as "faith" as my "Mysteryism". But I know you heart and my heart point to the same place. That's really all that matters. I'll take a look at your thread at the Orange Satan. ;0
May 8, 2009 8:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
boy, I should have previewed....
May 8, 2009 8:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
This link was provided by mageduly on another thread:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6734321991450996691
It is an excellent discussion on this topic (it is about 70 minutes)
One of Sam's points is that the whole term, "atheist" is inappropriate. A Catholic is an atheist in terms of the Jewish religion. If a person doesn't believe in the Greek god, Zeus that person is an atheist as far as THAT religion goes. To not believe in what is unbelievable is simply a way to live your life, and no label is necessary.
I know that 70 minutes is long, but I promise it is worth it. Go and listen to him.
May 8, 2009 8:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks CV. Yeah Sam Harris really nails it. The transcript to the vid is here as well:
http://www.aifestival.org/library/transcript/believingtheunbelievable.pdf
I think the part about morality is the most striking:
May 8, 2009 10:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, I agree that the part on morality is clear and elegant. His whole speech is. Thanks for posting it. J
May 9, 2009 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
An aside -- because I find it interesting:
I am one of the few people I know of who has argued in print that torture may be an ethical necessity in our war on terror. Sam Harris
May 9, 2009 11:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for that Ellen. Sam has just gone way down for me. I am amazed that he wrote those words. The "ticking time bomb" scenario...he fell for it. I am truly disappointed in him.
Still, I do agree with his thoughts on religion. I guess it's hard to find someone who agrees with everything I think; even Obama has let me down (but not like this!)
May 9, 2009 5:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent piece. Thanks, Super. Have seen your stuff on Kos. Another non-believer here, ready to stand up and be counted. Getting those laws off the books on First Amendment grounds should be made a priority. I'm not a big fan of Dawkins, but I'm glad he's twittering this.
May 8, 2009 10:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, I didn't realize that any states still had such laws on the books. The important thing to point out is that all of these states are old Confederacy states, slave states, Jim Crow states. Michael Ruse has connected Southern fundamentalism with slavery; a literalist interpretation of the Bible sanctions slavery, which is otherwise morally untenable. So lawmakers must believe in God, and (hopefully) a literal interpretation of the Bible. Otherwise they'll be against slavery and Jim Crow. I'll bet that most of these laws go back to slavery times, or certainly Jim Crow times, which certainly weren't very Christian in terms of the golden rule. I wish more atheists would point out the connection between Southern fundamentalism and slavery. Of course, the lasting irony is that African-Americans are the most religious group in the U.S.
May 9, 2009 10:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm reminded of a bit by George Carlin where he points out that the number one cause of Death throughout history is, 'God'... (I'm sure he meant as a result of somebody's screwed up belief in God... ) Just sayin'....
...........
Anyway... I have grown up in a very religious (primarily Southern Baptist) part of the country... My grandfather was a Southern Baptist Minister. My mother was raised Catholic - but later converted over to Southern Baptist with a vengnece! I've given a good honest look into those religions and others... at one point I was baptised in a Mormon Church if you can believe it! But I'm just not interested in any of them any more. Too many bad experiences have contributed to this... but, still, in the end, I don't find them necessary.
To say that Athiests are somehow without morals is laughable, to me.
Actually, I've met a good number of Christians that have, basically, told me that the "ONLY" reason they are "Good" is because they are scared of burning in Hell.
Seriously? That's the ONLY reason? They have NO other reason to behave? I dunno... call me crazy, but it seems to me that those particular examples of Christians are NOT MORAL at all.
I digress..
As for me, I have developed a few of my own thoughts on the matter...
I am a product of my mother and father... I get 23 chromosomes from each. Not 50... not 100... 23. That's my opening LIMIT.
These Chromosomes produce a 3 pound brain... Not 5... not 10... 3. Another limit. Only 10% or so of the brain shows to be active (although this may be disputed, it really doesn't matter... my point will remain in tact). 10%... LIMIT.
It is fed by only 5 senses... not 6 or 7... 5. Another limit. And, really, two of those senses are basically the same: smell/taste. LIMIT.
ENTROPY is a great Constant! Energy is lost and things in an organized state ultimately fall into disorder. Life "resists" entropy, but ultimately succumbs.
Every time neurons fire, energy is lost. Every chemical reaction will involve lost energy or will, at the very least, be imperfect. And all of this entropy takes place over Time... of course.
What does this mean to me? Well... let me give an example:
There appears to be a cup sitting in front of me. I 'know' this because I see it. A photon bounces off the cup and into my eye where it hits my retina... some chemical reactions take place.. followed by more reactions... energy being lost at every step... Until the signal reaches my visual cortex where more reaction have to occur before my brain is able to process the information and tell me that there's a "Cup" sitting there.
I do not see the cup as it "IS"... I see it as it "WAS" a short time ago... And even the image I have in my head is not 100% clear... There have been losses along the way.
The same goes for what I hear, taste, smell, and feel... By definition my understanding of ANYTHING is limited and incomplete.
How in the world can I, or ANYBODY ELSE, "Know" God or God's Will? Answer: I Can't. And neither can ANYBODY else.
Having said all that... I'd like to add that I enjoy being alive. Love it, actually. Even a bad day beats the alternative. So, this begs the question: What do I need to do to insure I stay alive?
Seems to me that there are a few basic ideas that I could follow. I won't kill people, lie, cheat, steal... All of these things contribute to entropy... they contribute to the breaking down of relationships in particular and society in general. In other words, these things make life more difficult and uncertain.
So, without having a Big Invisible Guy in the Sky, By and By... I'm able to arrive at much the same Morals as any Christian... And I do it, NOT because I'm scared of burning in Hell for all eternity...
...but because it just makes sense anyway.
:)
Peace
May 9, 2009 1:09 PM | Reply | Permalink