Just Let it Be, Dawkins and Co.
I think the atheism movement, or "fundamentalist atheism" as I like to call it, has rather hit a brick wall. Their entire argument is the existence of God, rather, the lack of. So where do they go from here? Endlessly reiterating the same point does nothing to substantiate or progress the argument.
Before I dive headfirst into this, I'd like to say that I'm bringing a fairly neutral perspective to the table, in that I am fairly unsure myself as to the existence of a higher power. To me, the God/no God argument is irrelevant. I'm more interested in the basis for such opinions being formed.
On the whole, us humans object to someone stating the bleeding obvious. Being patronised, having something shoved in our face is the sort of thing we don't like. Dawkins and his followers of staunch atheists relish in ramming their beliefs down our throats. What other groups share this contemptible characteristic. Oh yes, fiercely religious sects of course. I'm just as pissed off when The God Delusionthrust my way as "compulsory reading" as when I'm approached by the Hare Krishna's. "But they're a bunch of deluded religious loonies!" I hear you cry. Perhaps. But are you going to begrudge the fact that Christianity gave my late grandparents great strength when times were tough? Delusional they may have been, but to derive such cast iron will from religion to get through the worst of times cannot be mocked.
"Ah yes, granny and grandad going to church is fine, but what about September 11th?"
A lot of the war and conflict in this world is based on differing aspects of faith. Dawkins argues that religion is an evil tool in this sense. Let me put forward a comparison for you:
If guns were outlawed in America tomorrow, what would happen? Would crime cease? No. Criminals would go on using them, and now the general public would be defenceless. Guns have been freely available in North America for years, and a law isn't going to stop those with the intent to commit crime from using them.
Likewise, citing Islamic fundamentalists as a reason why religion is evil is pointedly short sighted and naive. That's right, I'm calling atheists naive. Whether organised religion was around or not, these people would still be out to cause trouble. Atheists seem to think that if they get everyone converted the weapons will be laid down. Are they really so arrogant that they think they can overturn belief systems which are based on thousands of years of knowledge? It's like trying to overturn the myth that everyone who went to Oxford is a sparkling font of intellectual power.
In a way, I almost want the Christian afterlife to be correct. That way I can have a good old chuckle in purgatory while Dawkins is forced to kiss the feet of a Christian Fellowship, a situation that surely takes on hellish proportions in his mind.
Published by Joseph Stashko-Adamaszek
- ....when "Under God" Became a Threatthe meaning of "under god" yesterday and today. When a pledge became a threat to the words inside it.
- Novus Spiritus Religion, a New Approach to Christianity Founded by Sylvia BrowneOverview of the Novus Spiritus religion with links to the NS homepage.
Religion as Ice CreamGreg Kokul, a teacher and philosopher, unveils the truth about our culture's view on religion, while challenging the way we think.- The Role of Religion in US PoliticsReligion is one of the most hotly debated issues in American politics today. Many believe the United States is a secular nation and religion should be left at the door when people step into public life. Are they right?
- 10 Things I Don't like About Religion!These is 10 things I just don't like about Religion.
- Atheism and Religious Discrimination: Atheists Excluded from Civil Rights Protections
- Eternal Blessings Happen from Having a Relationship with God
- Giving Yourself to God Does Not Have to Be Difficult
- GOD Vs. Allah
- Letters to God Found on Atlantic City Shore
- God
- God: Prove it or Disprove it Man Still Proves Nothing
9 Comments
Post a CommentThanks jordan for offering some constructive criticism, rather than the comments previous. I can see what you're saying, it's just I have problems with people enforcing their views on others. I'm not against atheists per se, just the one who want to make you feel bad if you believe in a religion etc. As I've said before, I'm currently agnostic. Thanks for making a well reasoned and well written point :)
The way that the history of religions has gone within the next few millenniums Christianity Catholicism Judaism etc. will all just become myths and taught in schools just like Egyptian Persian and Greek mythology is taught today. There will be new religions though%2C which people will take literally. So please Joesph do not stereotype the term atheist and do not criticize people such as Richard Dawkins before actually trying to understand what their ultimate goals are.
With no disrespect Joseph%2C I feel as if this article generalizes the term %22atheist.%22 It is not a common goal of atheist%27s to want to abolish religion by converting everyone to atheism. Richard Dawkins is simply trying to raise peoples awareness and consciousness. He wants people to see that religion isn%27t all it is cracked up to be. For far too long religion has enjoyed this idea that it can%27t be criticized. Whenever someone has something negative to say about religion%2C the hurt feeling card is played. Religion will never go away and Dawkins understands that%2C but hopefully it can at the very least be reformed into something without so much evil involved. Hopefully varying religions will be able to coexist in this world each one hating the next simply because they don%27t believe in the same God or prophet. It%27s extremely childish. The way that the history of religions has gone%2C within the next few millenniums Christianity%2C Catholicism%2C Judaism%2C etc. will all j
Can preach all you want. I'm still agnostic. I'm not denying that religion doesn't start wars and causes terrible things, re: the catholic condom issue. I expected to get some comments on this, but to be honest, none so immature as the ones that've been posted. Until you can construct your argument in a polite manner, rather than just insulting "what I believe in" (which you seem to have misunderstood anyway) then please keep it to yourselves thanks. What a great way to start on associated content, truly this is going to inspire me to publish more when I get attacked for writing opinion. Criticism and opinion is fine, out and out rage is ridiculous.
Can preach all you want. I'm still agnostic. I'm not denying that religion doesn't start wars and causes terrible things, re: the catholic condom issue. I expected to get some comments on this, but to be honest, none so immature as the ones that've been posted. Until you can construct your argument in a polite manner, rather than just insulting "what I believe in" (which you seem to have misunderstood anyway) then please keep it to yourselves thanks. What a great way to start on associated content, truly this is going to inspire me to publish more when I get attacked for writing opinion. Criticism and opinion is fine, out and out rage is ridiculous.
you are not neutral you are advocating a xtian faith%25252C you simply lack the honesty of admitting as much. Moral failure is common in christians so you fit in well.%25250D%25250A%25250D%25250Aand thousands of years of knowledge is a comedic farce. but does serve well to demonstrate your bias.%25250D%25250A%25250D%25250AWipe away your tears little boy%25250D%25250A%25250D%25250Athe atheists are bringing reality to a town near you soon
"Are they really so arrogant that they think they can overturn belief systems which are based on thousands of years of knowledge?"
Well, if we want a rational society, we have to start sometime, don't we? It's not as though religion wasn't doing tremendous harm now: one simple example is the Catholic fight against condoms in AIDS-riddled countries. As for longevity, I believe you'll find that Zeus was worshipped for a little over 2000 years, but he doesn't get many lambs sacrificed these days, does he?
I didn't mention anything about my "grandparents depression" if you read again. Who are we to say what gives us strength. Whether you find solace and beauty in music, art, poetry, religion or sport, I don't care, to each his own. I know you're clearly set in your ways and I'm not trying to alter your opinion, but I think people should respect others customs, rather than to preach consistently.
when the writer uses emotionally loaded and inaccurate phrases like fundamentalist atheist and as a comparable refers to Har Krishas
they aren't being neutral
and this little loaded reference to their grandparents finding strength during the depression was just sad - imagine who much sooner the grandparents would have thrived out of the depression to put that faith and effort into themselves instead of a god to look over them or out for them - after all, this is the same god that letthe depression happen