Trying to Reason with Fundies is Pointless... so... what can we do?

The more time that passes and the more books I read, the more I realize how dangerous the religious right is, and how pointless it is to try to reason with them. You might as well be trying to argue with a brick wall. 

The Christian Nationalist movement (also known as Dominionism - which both Bachmann and Perry appear to have some ties to) is a subset of the evangelical community that is highly mobilized, extremely efficient, well financed, and extremely dangerous.

For many who do not know much about them, they are often dismissed as quacks that have no influence, and those who raise the alarm about them are accused (even in the liberal community) of being "alarmist over-reactors."

 

However... this is one of the most dangerous things about the Christian Nationalist movement.... their chameleon ability to appear harmless and even beneficial. Make no mistake! Those of us who watch them like hawks are NOT alarmists! They are more powerful than most people know, and they often lack any sense of moral decency. They are willing to lie, cheat, threaten, bribe, and even occasionally murder to get their way. They will hide their true motives from the American public with deceptive language, that often they have one message for the public, and another for their own kind. 

 

Knowing how dangerous they are, I wish I knew what to do about them. They are determined to take over the country and forcibly subdue it to biblical law. They are raping and rending the Constitution on their way there. 

 

I have tried using logic, reasoning, and modern scholarship to make them see that what they are doing is wrong in more ways than one. But as I have learned, this is pointless. 

Atheists can debate all they want. We can write books or throw books at them. We can point out logical fallacies or laugh at them. We can make youtube videos or send letters. We can flash our degrees at them and demand they recognize that we know what we're talking about. 

There is no point to this at all.

Christian Nationalists live in their own parallel universe. And certain aspects of this "universe" make it quite obvious that there is nothing we can say that will convince them that they are wrong.

 

Michelle Goldberg lays out the immunity that the Christian Nationalist delusion has devastatingly clear in the book "Kingdom Coming."

1. Most of the "warriors for Christ" have been brainwashed from infancy to believe only what their cult tells them to believe. They are denied public education and herded into either homeschooling or special fundamentalist christian schools... where like any cult, they are cut off from the outside world, until their brainwashing is so thorough that there is no escaping it.

2. They are trained to believe that mainstream science and academics are part of a liberal agenda, corrupted by professors and scientists who push an anti-christian religion. They will therefore, refuse to believe any of modern scholarship no matter how stacked the evidence is against them. In fact, the more the evidence is against them, the more they believe that they are the only pious people, the holders of the real truth that is being suppressed by evil anti-christians. There is no way to get through to them... so don't even try.

3. You can't use liberal christians to convince them because they believe mainstream christians are deluded agents of satan.

 

Basically, nothing we can say will ever get through to them. 

However it is absolutely essential that we stop their drive to push christianity on the country by force. My question is... what are we supposed to do? They cannot be reasoned with. They are relentless and enraged. They are well financed and have many "friends in high places" within our government. 

 

What can we do to stop them before it is too late?

Tags: America, Religious, amendment, and, christian, church, constitution, constitutional, democracy, dominionism, More…evangelicals, first, freaks, fundamentalists, jesus, liberties, nationalism, of, politics, right, secular, separation, state, threat, values

Views: 1006

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

    Did she become one after or before you divorced?  The reason I ask is because after Ron died the ONLY people I knew who came to  help me were Christians. Ok, so they were not fundamentalist types, but they were good wonderful people.  And to be honest it was nice having someone who cared then and still care today.  Still great friends with them and treasure the friendship we share. 

    People tend to believe whatever the group is that is the most supportive.  They say young people join gangs because they need a 'family' or support system. How many atheists do you know who can say they have a strong support system of only atheists?  Look at society as a whole. People tend to want to be round others who share the same values, beliefs.

    Which is probably why most atheists reside in cities from what I have read.  If you are around educated, worldly folks who dont need other people for some kind of support, you may well be in the majority of atheists.  Talk to some atheists who have it much harder, but because of finances etc aren't able to move to some other area.

Atheism has gone from around 2-3% to around 10% in just my lifetime.  It is polling as high as 35% among urban high school students.  You are wrong that you can't reason with them.  You can't with a few of them, but you can in the big picture.  Right now the numbers make most people feel safe not questioning their religious upbringing.  But the numbers are changing.  The Christians are feeling it and some want to know why.  (the nutty ones think it's prophecy)

 

If you want to take their power away, keep that trend going.  Making points on the internet really is working.  If you pay attention, they gripe about it on their sites all the time.  They are afraid of it.  They realize in open debate they look silly at times and don't like it.

 

FYI: I think you are misreading Perry.  I used to live in Texas.  I think the religious stuff is mostly just pandering.  I don't really think he's all that religious.  As a conservative atheist I'd rather see someone like Cain or Newt who I know isn't all that religious, but shares my outlook.  But I don't see Perry as any real threat.  I think he's a politician.  But I don't think most of that will be priorities.

 

http://godlessconservative.com

    Cannot remember if it was the NYTimes or LATimes, SF Chronicle (I read a lot) that had a piece where some folks at a fund raiser here in CA noted they thought some while males might like Perry, and that its the white males the Republicans want to get back.

    And I know that when Jon Stewart goes on O'Reilly and holds his own or when he shares views I tend to agree with.  One thing that doesnt help is hypocrites on the left. When Al Gore gets prizes/awards for his global warming stuff, yet lives in multiple homes that suck energy, not to mention serves on the board of directors for Apple, which wastes natural resources and clutters society with new editions of their China made items, one has a right to be puzzled.

    When the Gates Foundation gives away millions to inner city schools because they want to stress math and science, yet the foundation didnt bother to make sure the test scores that got the schools the foundations money were actually legit, one has a right to wonder just how smart are some atheists.

    There was once the belief that the Democrats want to control where you worked and how much you have in the bank, while the Republicans want to control what you do with your body and inside your home.   We so badly need more than two major parties running the show.

If you want a real circus, go to a multiple party system.

Like the Scandinavian countries..? ;)

If only we could make Americans more Scandinavian.

Step 1: Export all religious fundamentalists to another continent.

Step 2: Profit.

No no no! Don't export them to another continent! Send them to Mars! They can have their own God-fearing world there and leave us alone.

   Heard John Huntsman speak and he seems to be someone who isnt interested in issues like abortion, same sex marriage, and other state issues.  He also isnt 'religious', and even noted when asked in the interview about his LDS beliefs that he wasnt a rigid one, and his wife is Episcopalian, but not a rabid one. 

   Ron Paul is someone I respect,but I fear that the establishment powers in the Republicn party wont support him because like it or not, they benefit from government contracts and programs.

   And thats the rub. Both parties benefit from the government teat. 

Ron Paul is a nicely dressed up nut job who manages to hide that he just as crazy as the others.

His kind of Libertarianism is complete BS in an extremely federal country like the US. He basically wants the states to have all the power. He doesn't want the federal government to infringe on civil rights, but he is perfectly fine with the states doing so. Don't fall for that. It's not liberty, but shifting the source of the infringement a step down. He certainly isn't for civil liberties in any kind of pro-active way.
Traditionally, Libertarianism tends to be politically left. Ron Paul is as right-wing as it gets. Almost a straight-up anarcho-capitalist. He wants complete deregulation and a laissez-faire economy that's just unworkable these days

He is decidedly anti-abortion. He is anti-evolution and a creationist. He wants to privatize education, which just means more faith schools in practice. He also makes a huge deal out of his faith despite denying it:
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/statement-of-faith/

I agree with Beth that Huntsman is certainly the most reasonable Republican in the field. He's also the only one who could be called that

"the most reasonable Republican"

Unfortunately, in these days that's committing political suicide :/

He is the by far best candidate for the upcoming election unless the Dems put Clinton on the ticket. Then again, I'm not American so I probably don't know anything..

Arcus... since you're not American you wouldn't necessarily know this... but the Dems can't put anyone else on the ticket... Obama is running for reelection... so he automatically has the Dem nomination. The primaries will decide which republican candidate will run against him. (Officially the parties can only endorse 1 candidate). Although... if someone wants to vote for Clinton, they can use the "write in candidate" option and just write her in.... however.... the write in option is basically laughable. I've never heard of third party or write in candidates being elected. I have heard of people being so sick of politicians that they write themselves in as a joke. - Maybe I'll do that sometime- lol

RSS

Support T|A

Think Atheist is 100% member supported

All proceeds go to keeping Think Atheist online.

Donate with Dogecoin

Members

Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

Services we love

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Into life hacks? Check out LabMinions.com

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

© 2014   Created by Dan.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service