Comment by Rocky Oliver (LotusGeek) on September 21, 2011 at 11:15pm

Well, the author repeats himself a few times - like the statistic about "15% of the global population" - and a good editor would help him pare it down to be more concise.

 

But language and style are not why we're here - sorry for the tangent.

 

I do agree that we, as a constituency, are extremely nebulous and hard to "nail down" or construct a stereotype. I mean, sure, there are some you can attribute to us:

• we tend to be a bit defensive when someone decides to try to "save our soul" by "witnessing" to us
• we, as a whole, tend to be much more literate about religious history - specifically xianity - than many fundamentalists
• we all are quick to point out to xians that the burden of proof lies with the claimant
• quite a few of us consider ourselves Skeptics, and are strong adherents to the Scientific Method
• you get the idea

But as for political leanings, how we would label ourselves, whether you tend to be aggressive and confrontational or not, and so on make us vastly diverse. We differ greatly from the various religious sects in that we don't have a predefined dogma and sacramental structure, because the only thing we all have in common is a lack of belief in a deity.

 

I will say this: if we were to figure out a way to unify ourselves and work as a cohesive unit, we would be able to make our voices heard, and hopefully counter the rising tide of religious zealotry and desire to use religion as the basis for the Rule of Law.

In fact, I strongly believe that if we don't figure out a way to fight back, with one strong voice, against the rising tide of discrimination against nonbelievers it is only going to get much, much worse before there's any hope of it getting better.

Comment by Chad Poelman on September 22, 2011 at 6:38pm

The religious are commanded to follow their religions view on morality and ethics.  To their credit a large number of them (in Canada at least) do not practice the more immoral of their teachings.  Atheists on the other hand are not restricted to any holy book and therefore are free to make the moral or ethical choices they think best.  So I would say that Atheists have more potential to be moral and ethical people but because of our diversity it is not a given.

I tend to think that the average person is good, I just think that religion too often causes good people to do evil things believing them to be good deeds.

Comment by Dallas the Phallus on September 22, 2011 at 6:45pm

@ Chad

 

In my opinion, the problem is that theism gives a pre-packaged rationality for many kinds of negative behaviors. People who want to do "X" can easily turn to religion to find a justifiable excuse for it, no matter how unfair, sick, prejudiced, or violent it may be. God commands it, so it must be okay. That's one of the major problems I have with theism. And this is what makes theism a dubious form of ethics.

 

Atheists have no ready-made excuse to do these things. They may rationalize it in other ways, I suppose, but they can't turn to a religious book or god to tell them that it is okay.

 

But does that make atheists more honest or ethical? Not necessarily. But a person who can't easily turn to the bible to justify their bad behavior is likely to rethink their own impulses, actions, beliefs, or attitudes. Theists don't have to do that if they don't want to (though I suppose some do), because, as I've already mentioned, they can just pick a verse from any religious text to justify their action. I give you slavery, genocide, sexism, war, pedophilia, infanticide, etc, all of which are justified in the bible or koran.

 

With anything -- beliefs, attitudes, assumptions, behavior -- most people seek to provide post hoc rationalizations for their beliefs, attitudes, etc., but there seems to be ample evidence that these rationalizations are often square pegs forced into round holes.

 

If a person just looks to a religious text to justify their beliefs, all the more convenient for them. At least with atheists, they must seek justification elsewhere, which hopefully would encourage them to think more critically.

Comment by Chad Poelman on September 22, 2011 at 6:58pm

@Dallas

I completely agree.  I heard a quote one time and I wish I could remember the source, but it went something like this.  "good people will continue to do good things and evil people will continue to do evil things, but for a good person to do evil requires religion."

When I was still a Christian I was angered by an old friend of mine that joined a racist christian sect that believed that it was their right as Christians to own slaves.  What angered me more was that he had pretty solid biblical justification.  Now this old friend tried to molest me in my sleep once and threatened to stab a family member if I told, so it turns out he was just an evil bastard doing evil bastard things, but it does show that the bible/torah/koran/etc. can be used to justify some pretty evil stuff.

Comment by Dallas the Phallus on September 22, 2011 at 7:02pm

Yes, I think you got that quote nearly right. And I think it is true on some levels, but not entirely true, in that a good person can do things in a fit of anger or desperation, etc., as well.

Comment by Chad Poelman on September 22, 2011 at 7:04pm

Yeah, true enough.

Comment