American Atheists Action AlertApril 27, 2007 NEWSWEEK AND RABBI MARC GELLMAN NEED TO HEAR FROM US ABOUT “ANGRY ATHEISTS”http://www.atheists.org/action/alert-27-apr-2006.html He tries, he generalizes, but Rabbi Marc Gellman just doesn’t get it. In the latest web edition of NEWSWEEK, Gellman says that he needs to “understand atheists better,” bears us no ill will, admits we disagree over the issue of “God,” but finds no reason for why we are, well, angry. Read his column at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12498143/site/newsweek/ We suggest that you then respond. Be brief, polite and concise. Share talking points on the NoGodBlog at http://www.nogodblog.com, or at the American Atheists Action Alert page at http://www.atheists.org/action/alert-27-apr-2006.html
Angry Atheist? That’s quite the broad brush. I get angry because of other’s behaviors. Not because of who they are.
Fundamentally, pretty much all people are “good.” However, from time to time some people exhibit inappropriate behavior.
An example of inappropriate behavior are those behaviors that jepordize others. For example, blowing ones self up in order to kill non-believers is inapprpriate behavior.
Do what you want to yourself provided it does not hurt others (go out to the desert and blow yourself up, don’t do it in a crowded market).
Suicide is fine provided you don’t leave a wife and/or kids…
I digress, I’m not angry because you are a theist, I get angry because of the behaviors that your theism drives you to do that affect me.
Does that make sense?
A Rational Being
I don?t know why we keep getting this label. We aren?t angry unless it?s what we perceive as a good reason. When the KKK comes to town I am disappointed they hold such views and I guess angry that they have been taught it?s ok to hate based not on someone?s action but their skin color. When someone denies the Holocaust magnitude I find it insulting to the survivors but I think they?d be mad at the propaganda insulting their suffering. I?m mad they have to have their suffering discounted or insulted. I also get irritated when someone says atheists believe in nothing Rabbi Gellman. I believe in many of the same compassionate things you do except that they are human values, not gods. The purpose of life is what you make it is my slogan. I do think there are things that come close to eternity. The earth and the ozone layer need attention but my short life and the ability to help will cease to help that cause in a mere blink of genealogical time but I will strive for betterment anyway. One of the movements that is hopefully catching traction is a universal idea, Make the world a better place. MTWABP. If religion wasn?t being pushed as literal science in public schools I?d have very little reason to be angry at all with god. I don?t believe in god so you trying to share it with me is too much. I do not believe in god, thanks but no thanks.
Here is the letter I sent to Newsweek:
I appreciate the intention to try to understand us atheists. That is a step in the right direction. I think part of the reason SOME atheists come off as angry is that we are so used to be misunderstood, generalized, and even vilified. We are not people who believe in nothing. We are not people without meaning an purpose in our lives. We are not people without moral and ethical principals. We are not people who unable to feel and enjoy love and a sense of wonder. Most of us came to our beliefs through years of careful soul searching and thought. I don’t want to sound angry here, but the Rabbi’s suggestion that we are atheists because we were damaged by bad events in our lives is both offensive and ignorant.
If Rabbi Gellman is really interested in understanding atheism, he could invite a spokesperson of American Atheists or some other organization to guest-author his column one week. If he were to get to know more real every-day atheists, I think he would find that we are, as a group, much different from what he expects. And the next time he writes about us in a national magazine, he might not have to guess about what’s on our minds.
Here is my letter to him.
Hi Rabbi Mark,
Let me preface my letter by saying I do not hate religion, I admit that it has done many good thing for many people. Some people need religion to guide them and who am I to stop them. I am personally not threatened by gods, the tooth fairy, boogie man, or any other mythology.
What I am mad about is the current state of religion in the US. The right is using religion to stifle science. Christianity, specifically, does not promote being good stewards of our planet it breeds a view that when I go to heaven the earth does not matter. Well I got something to tell you, other people live here and hope to live here a long time. Global warming is a real issue and Christianity could careless. Then they bring there ?moral? on things like embryonic stem cells research. They call not researching them a ?culture of life?. Stem cells are the #1 thing right now that could expand our healthy lifespan. Stem cells have the possibility of saving 1000s of lives a day. And they call not researching them a ?culture of life?, that is a joke. Religion breeds deathism. Christians who live there whole lives looking forward to dying, and when atheists see an opportunity to live the only life they get longer and Christians try to stop them they get mad. I feel that I may die sooner then I have to because of the Christian luddites that are in charge. Just look at the old head of Bush?s ?Bioethics council? Leon Cass. He has been quoted as saying (paraphrasing now) that the government has the right to ask it citizen to die at 120 years old because that is what the bible says. Instead the top figures on the right tell their followers that adults have stem cells, even in their fat. They don?t bother saying that these cells are harder to grow, differentiate, keep alive, they divide slower, and can only form a few cell types. They dumb down the science to a point to where their followers can?t be swayed by the real science.
The media does not help either. Instead of reporting on the science of what is being discovered they focus of the issues that the right has against it and never/rarely mention the science. The media should be reporting on the differences between types of stem cells, what they can do, possibly cure, and make our lives longer and better. Instead they talk about killing clusters of a dozen cells as the main issue. If the media wants to talk about the ethics that is fine, just present the science first so people can see the context.
I am not mad I am SCARED FOR MY LIFE. I would also like to pigeon hole myself into a humanist movement ?transhumanism?. We believe that technology is close to the point where humanity needs to start transitioning to a new way of life. The current world is not sustainable. One of the main changes that we forecast is the defeating of the aging process. Aubrey de Grey is one of the most public proponents to defeating aging. His proposal is called SENS, Strategies for Engineering Negligible Senescence (www.sens.org). We do not need to cure aging now, we just need to expand the average lifespan by more then 1 year ever year. A challenge you to research the current science on aging research and do a column about it and what it might entail to life and religion. I think it could really help you and your readers understand the atheist position.
Thanks for your time.
The reason most atheists Rabbi Gellman discusses religion with grow angry may be because he accuses them of being childish and immature, by rejecting God just because of “an angry degrading sermon, or an insensitive eulogy.” I assume Gellman would be upset if someone implied his “rejection of Jesus” isn’t due to any legitimate theological reasons, but just because he got offended by a preacher one day and stormed out angry.
Yes, atheists can get angry when they hear people like Rabbi Gellman purport tired sterotypes of atheists being “angry at God” or as all existentialists who value nothing and hope for nothing.
Here is my letter. A little less conciliatory than most that I’ve read, but hopefully not over the line….
Rabbi Gellman,
In your column ?Trying to Understand Angry Atheists?, I found myself agreeing with you for the first few lines, becoming slightly annoyed at the assumptions made about both atheism and religion in the middle, and finally rolling my eyes at the whole piece. In the interest of brevity, I won?t debate every point, even though I do disagree with most of them. I would, however, like to challenge your most egregious assumption.
You wrote: ?To be called to a level of goodness and sacrifice so constantly and so patiently by a loving but demanding God may seem like a naive demand to achieve what is only a remote human possibility. However, such a vision need not be seen as a red flag to those who believe nothing.?
Atheists don?t believe in nothing. We just believe in one less god than you do. Other than this one area, however, I suspect that you and I ?believe? mostly the same things ? family, education, freedom, fairness, etc.
I?m interested to know, however, where you?re finding this loving, patient, good God. I admit that I know little about Judaism, but my basic understanding is that the Tanakh roughly corresponds to the Christian Old Testament (see ?Judaism 101? at http://www.jewfaq.org/torah.htm).
In 1 Samuel, God commands total genocide of the Amalekites, even going so far as to specify that the Israelites slaughter all infants, children, and livestock. In Joshua, God orders and assists in the genocide of the inhabitants of Jericho. In Numbers, it?s the Midianites? turn. In Judges, the Spirit of the Lord empowers Samson to kill 1,000 people. In 2 Kings, God has bears maul 42 kids for calling a prophet bald. In Deuteronomy 21, God explains the lawful way to rape a beautiful woman.
There?s a lot more, but you get the idea. Is this the loving, patient God you speak of? Or is God maybe like an abusive father who is good most of the time, but occasionally gets drunk and beats his wife and kids? And how is belief in this ? or some other ? enigmatic being a prerequisite for ?disciplining our animal urges??
Best regards,
Bob
I haven’t written a letter yet but here is what I might say:
Yes I am an angry atheist and I will tell you why.
Religion is used to enshrine discrimination into law in the USA with religious arguments being used to deny gays and les_bians marriage equality. There are no compelling secular arguments to deny us marriage but religious objections are cited as reason for this blatant discrimination.
I am angry that here in North Carolina religious arguments denied us a state lottery until just recently. Tens of millions of dollars were lost to the surrounding states and the lost revenue was made up in higher taxes.
I am angry that churches and other religious institutions are tax exempt yet my tax dollars go to support public services that benefit these organizations.
I am angry that every time I open my wallet I am confronted with a motto which does not reflect the beliefs of every American. In god some of us trust but not all. Also, the phrase “One nation, under god” does not reflect my worldview. What was wrong with the Latin motto “E Pluribus Unum/Out of Many, One”? This is secular and more inclusive of the American ideal.
I am angry that religious objections stifle science and technology. The debate over teaching evolution, the hostility and intimidation of the current administration towards science when it disagrees with national policy, and the backward direction that science and technology is taking in this country scares me.
I am angry that religious considerations dictate when and where I may purchase alcohol.
I am angry that much of my childhood was taken from me becasue of religiously sanctioned homophobic attitiudes. The amount of time I wasted trying to change my core identity and not being open and honest with those I love I can never regain. The lost oppurtunities in my early life to find love will never present themselves again. These same attitudes result directly in the battery, murder, and suicide of gays and les_bians everyday.
As you can see I am angry and rightfully so.
Alex.
I am going to write a letter later tonight
and ps its funny how many of you guys get pissed at phreedm saying he never adds any thing but didnt he drop the link on the last thread
Too long to post here.
http://wrightwing.net/2006/04/28/15/04/272
Not bad, if I say so myself.
Here’s what I wrote: and he deserves it.
Mr. Gellman,
Your column on April 26 is so incredibly flawed; I don?t even know where to begin. In the interests of brevity, I will only address the most egregious of them.
First, not all atheists are angry, and few cling to existential despair. In fact, most atheists aren?t even recognized as atheist unless they ?out? themselves. So let?s just stop with the wild stereotyping. It?s not at all becoming.
Atheists also believe in all sorts of things, just not the god concept. So please quit tying to portray us as pathetic creatures doomed to tragic, empty lives. I, for one, happen to have a wonderful life, free from the fear of a vengeful, infantile deity. So, again, stop with the stereotyping.
I also find it interesting that your litany of motivations for becoming an atheist, not one wasn?t emotionally based. Did you not think, even for a moment, that someone could accept atheism based on methodical, rational investigation? That maybe, just maybe, the atheist found -in atheism- the most reasonable explanation for reality?
Perhaps next time you write column, you may want to do more research than consulting your personal stereotypes and flawed assumptions. There are a number of internet forums that cater to atheists (Secular Web Forum at infidels.org is an excellent example). Surely you could observe their behavior, and ask them why they?re just so darn angry all the time.
In conclusion, I leave you with this piece of wisdom:
?If you don’t know what you’re talking about, shut up.? ? Haladineth (fstdt.com)
Sincerely,
****Real Name****, one of many Proud Atheists
PS ? If you don?t know why atheists complain about living next door to evangelical Christians, it?s because some (you should become acquainted with this word) don?t know when to quit proselytizing.
A little mean, but hey, a little rhetoric gets the message through.
Swintah
Rabbi Gellman,
I was saddened to see your article which paints a stereo-typed picture of atheists that is entirely the opposite of what I see. Such stereotyped comments unnecessarily widen the divide between atheists and believers. I meet with a few friends once or twice a month to discuss politics, religion, economics, and current events. Three of us are atheists, agnostics, etc. and two are Christians. I certainly wouldn?t characterize any of us as angry atheists or angry Christians. We are just a few old geezers who enjoy talking together. My wife is an atheist and I certainly don?t find her angry except when I forget something on her to do list. My children are more open minded than about religion. They are still searching and would best be described as agnostics. They are not angry agnostics.
I don?t like associating with angry people which is why many of my good friends are atheists. I find them charming, happy, open minded, interesting, and stimulating in conversation. I also have a great number of similar friends who are religious. I basically like most people but will admit that people who for whatever reason seem angry at the world can be hard to tolerate.
Your story about James Watson was enlightening. He is like many famous atheists such as Carl Sagan, Richard Feynman, E.O. Wilson, or Daniel Dennett who are good examples of atheists that are not angry. Do you have any statistics that would show that atheists are more angry than Christians or Jews? ?Not to sound? condescending, but ?I am tempted to believe that behind? your stereotype of angry atheists there is ?an uncomfortable personal history.?
Unfortunately there are angry atheists just like there are angry Christians and Jews. Some people just have chip on their shoulder. Personally, I avoid them. Perhaps in your line of work you don?t have this option. If that?s the case try agreeing with them where possible. Try not to put them on the defensive. Be understanding. Maybe you can help them get over their anger. This is what I do when I can?t avoid someone who is angry.
Here’s my letter – I wonder if he was expecting this kind of resposne.
—–
Rabbi Gellman,
My name is Michael Doss, and I’m a lifelong atheist and president of Orange County atheists, a social and political action group in Southern California. I read your column for the first time last week (“The Case for Vegetarianism”), and very much enjoyed your perspective and prose. Because you honestly seem to want to understand atheist anger, I decided to write to you.
The first thing you should understand is that not all atheists are angry. Some are, certainly (and I believe atheists have a lot to be angry about), but most simply want to live their lives. Some are concerned with other people’s religion intruding into their lives, while many others simply want to be left alone. Due to the nature of atheism, there is no “central group” telling atheists how to believe, or how to act. There are vast differences between those without a belief in God or gods.
The loudest atheists, the ones you might be reading online or seeing on talk shows, are often those with something to say, and that comes off as anger. This tends to be true of most groups – those willing to speak up, make themselves heard, and stand out in the crowd are those with a reason for doing this. But every atheist’s reason for this is different.
I meet a lot of atheists as president of my local group – some are angry because of personal histories. They have a hatred of God (and occasionally religious peoples) due to a perception that He is the cause of their problems. This subgroup, however, is by no means the majority of the people I meet, and it’s not true for me. I’m an atheist for the same reason you don’t believe in 200-foot tall purple gorillas or that the moon is made of green cheese – I don’t see the evidence for such things as being convincing, or there’s evidence to the contrary.
Another point I wanted to make was that not all atheists are nihilists – in fact, very few in my experience seem to be. For me, the purpose of life is to live. Because life is short, and because any life after death is unknowable, I must do my best to live the best I can every day. Personally, that means treating others with respect. It means being a vegetarian and working to end animal suffering. It means enjoying life’s pleasures. And it means working to end negative religious intrusion into my life and my government.
Do I have anger? Absolutely. I’m angry that non-Christians seem to get deferential treatment, both directly and non-directly. I’m angry that religious belief is so much assumed to be the moral standard that non-theists are automatically seen as amoral. I’m angry that Christians praise God for the most minor things while seemingly ignoring the millions of people suffering in the world. To me, worship of a being that can help, but doesn’t (or helps those who aren’t suffering while ignoring those who are) is somewhat disturbing. That said, I don’t hate God any more than you hate Zeus or unicorns. There’s nothing there to hate.
I hope this letter finds you well, and provides some insight into the beliefs of some atheists. I hope I’ve conveyed that we’re a diverse, non-organized group, and our beliefs cannot easily be compartmentalized. But the anger that exists does exist for a reason. I’m glad you took the time to write this column, and thank you for your kind treatment of atheists. I hope to hear back from you, and would love to hear any feedback you have, and begin a dialogue on this topic.
Michael Doss
Orange County Atheists
http://www.ocatheists.com
The words “strawman”, “obvious”
and “puff-piece” leap to mind…
I am an atheist. I was born into a religious family and was raised a Christian. No traumatic experience caused my faith to falter. I just happened to be naturally curious and critically inclined. I could not rationalize the existence of the tooth fairy or Santa Claus and at a young age approached my parents and asked for the truth. Later, and with much more consideration and anxiety that same critical mindset led me to involuntarily conclude that the probability of God’s existence was below the threshold of what I considered reasonable. I can’t help the conclusions I’ve reached. It’s like a doctor examining himself and diagnosing himself with cancer. He will likely, as I did, search for any possibility of any other conclusion. But in the end, if he is honest, then he cannot deny the diagnosis at which he arrives. I did not choose atheism. While I promote positive atheism, I believe the anger, which admittedly I feel sometimes (though I’m not constantly bitter as sometimes we’re portrayed),comes from the fact that other people in our society who are marginalized by conditions beyond their control are afforded a degree of protection, however, as recently as the father of our current president our leaders were declaring that atheists are not Americans. One website that sells car decals and other merchandise for atheists has a policy guarantee that will replace any item that is damaged or stolen from your vehicle. This is actually a problem. Tell someone you are an atheists (especially in the south where I live) and most will react as if you have avian flu. The deeply rooted sense of animosity toward atheists (see the U. of Wisconsin study recently released) makes open acknowledgment a dangerous prospect. At the very least it will inhibit access to social networks and preclude many opportunities that would otherwise be available. Finally, it is very frustrating to see articles such as this one. While I appreciate the open-minded approach and have no doubt that Rabbi Gellman has the best intentions and can appreciate his obvious intellect, I find the failure to recognize the generalized animosity toward atheists and the social consequences associated with it disturbing.
mikebdoss…
Well f’in put, buddy.
Maybe we could write some letters to the President while we’re at it. Here’s a statement he made today while declaring that the ‘Star Spangled Banner’ should only be sung in english:
Yep, I’m pretty fucking angry.
i don’t like religious people…i don’t trust or respect them; i would be described as angry i guess….but i just cannot respect people who believe in ghosts…i only get angry within 50 feet of a church or a jeeezuz freak
Mr. Gellman,
Until about six years ago (about the same period of time Bush has been in office) I would have described myself as agnostic. I clinged to that term because it made me more feel acceptable to non-atheists. These were my friends, family and coworkers.
But when George W. Bush and his right-wing scheme machine hijacked America I was violently awoken. A president got on TV and started preaching about god, psuedo-science, and homosexuality in terms I had only ever heard from the likes of Pat Robertsen and Jerry Falwell. Then came the faithful. As if put upon and under attack, Christians the the right-wing punditry started to demand things.
I realized that while I slumbered, during the comparitively enlightened time of Bill Clinton, there was a kabal of angry, power-hungry men determined to take control of this country. And, once in office radically change America. These were not pious men. These were cynics and liars beating a psuedo-religious drumbeat and will to do anything. Political operatives who had no allegiance to anyone but the destruction of a government that would try to provide for the common good, and instead funnel those funds to their clients and cronies.
Then I started to read. And read, and read, and read. Day after day stories emerged. Goverment organizations involved in faith-based initiatives. Politcal appointees of the president admitting belief in the rapture as the basis for government policy.
These disturbing, surreal things made me ball up my fists and think “How can this be happening?” Isn’t somebody going to do something about this? Doesn’t anybody care? Isn’t the separation of church and state part of our constitution? Don’t people realize that having a man, who believes in the imminent rapture, at the nuclear helm is inherently dangerous?
So, I started to ask about those unpopular topics: religion and politics. I started to ask the religious people I knew what they thought about this. And, I was shocked to find out it was okay with them. This IS a Christian country, they would say. After all, the founders were Christian. They thought it was about time they got some respect from the federal government; that the Supreme Court had gone too far and it was time to get religious values back into our government.
I suggested to folks that this was troubling to me because I’m not a Christian. To which I was politely told, in almost complete consensus, that it was just a fact of life that minorities are ruled by the majority.
So I started getting angry. I started challenging the non-atheists whenever they paraded their faith. I began to feel that it was the duty of every atheist to make Christians uncomfortable talking about faith. To show them that if they were going to put their religion in the spotlight, we were going to point out the flaws. When I read “The End of Faith” I was emboldened further, and began to get involved in political action to fight faith in government. I saw it as a rot eating away at our greatness.
So what do I hope to accomplish, you may ask? I hope to pursuade religious people to abandon their faith, or failing that, go back to keeping it in the private sector. My child should be allowed to grow up free of religion and superstition, whether the faithful in their superior numbers agree or not. This is still a free country, isn’t it?
Thank you for listening,
Howard Mandel
tomwright,
Nice letter on your blog. I noted the following typo that you might want to fix.
Good job everyone else on your letters. Interesting ideas and observations.
Put in my 2 cents worth:
Mr. Gellman:
I found your letter of great interest, as I am an atheist myself. Most atheists I have encountered online came to their point of view without a personal trauma that led them to choose as they did. Not all: but many. This is, if I may be blunt, a common stereotype of atheism in general. There is no absolute need of religion for an atheist to be charitable, kind, loving, or any of the other qualities you ascribe to the religious. Indeed, more often than not, atheists are remarkably well-behaved in comparison to religious members of society.
Believing in nothing, by the way, is another common stereotype, an oxymoron wrapped in a contradiction. I for one ?believe? in the great wide world around me.
Since Bush’s inception as President in 2000 (as no doubt you’ve heard from other atheists in their letters), it becomes increasingly obvious that our otherwise secular nation is being turned to religious purposes.
One of the results of this is an increasing number of people are beginning to scapegoat the non-religious. We are told, “You aren’t patriots”, “you are immoral”, or worse yet, “You aren’t an American.” We are constantly equated with hedonists, conspirationists, and all-out whack-jobs. We are vilified in both the press and TV, and are consistently treated as outcasts, lepers, unclean. Violence is done to us, as well as property damage. In short, Mr. Gellman, we should have our own TV show, and I suggest the title be ‘The Last Honest Scapegoat’. The First amendment applies to us equally, and as well, as any other individual in this country. All we ask is this: that this be observed. With the words in your letter, I ask that the religious ?to be good, kind and charitable people? as per their subset of rules that they seem to have great difficulty following.
Yes, we are angry. I would suggest, perhaps, that you look at the cause rather than the effect, or as the old adage says, ?Walk a mile in another man?s shoes.? Then, I would guess, you would know the pathology of the anger.
Peace
The good rabbi claiming atheists to be angry is just parroting a standard right-wing talking point: why are liberals so angry? This is just a transparent (but effective) tactic to make their (religious, political) enemies look bad and unsympathetic. Don’t fall for it.
Newsweek asked me what I thought about Rabbi Gellman’s article. Here’s what I answered:
Not much. Rabbi Gellman admits he doesn’t get what makes unbelievers angry about God. Basically, he just doesn’t get it at all. We unbelievers resent the religious throwing it up in our faces all the time, overtly or subtley, that somehow they are “better” than we are, more “righteous”, more loving, more forgiving, on and on ad nauseum. We can have hope without descending into existentialist quagmires, we don’t crave an after life, we don’t strive for forgiveness, we don’t accept that there is sin (evil, yes; sin, no), we find strengths within ourselves to cope with life and pity those who must rely on supernatural help to get through the day. Morality? There are far more immoral religious people, percentage-wise, than immoral atheists. Most atheists I know are ethical, kind, generous, good citizens… what else do we need to be? We can be “spiritual” without conjuring up a deity who inteferes in our lives. How? We look up at the stars and marvel at what is there and what we know of how it got there. We don’t have to postulate a supernatural force that is repsonsible for it — it just might be that’s the way things are, no reality beyond all that. What you see is what you get. I would pose a question to Rabbi Gellman, and any believer for that matter — give me a necessary reason (no semantic games on reason, please) for belief that does not already entail that belief in some way, e.g., that does not tacitly assume that God already exists.
If I could tug on Gellmans’ coat for a moment, I would recommend a trip to Scandinavia.
We’re a largely easygoin’-christian,
agnostic, muslim-immigrant-atheist mix… with buddishm, neo-nazism and jehova’s witnesses and other myopics
thrown in for good measure- blend of countries.
But above all, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland… what we share is a sense of secular politics.
Sure, religion comes up OFTEN in our politics, but not in the
permeating sense that it does in the U.S.
In the U.S. they’re deadly afraid of Islam extremists.
So are we.
But we’re getting just as alarmed
at the U.S. Christian extremists.
The “The Bible says it’s okay for me to slit your throat”-kind of Christian soldiers.
Because why fight an Islamic Iran,
only to face a Christian one in the U.S. twenty years from now?
Rabbi Gellman,
Congratulations. You have pre-empted the coming attack on atheists from the conservative media (set to begin with an upcoming book by Ann Coulter.) As an atheist, I am offended deeply by the generalizations in your column. Your view that behind atheism may lay ?uncomfortable personal histories? is quite disturbing. Becoming an atheist was a journey I started at the age of twelve. I recognized, on my own, that all religions deserved questioning. This coming from an alter boy who noticed many inconsistencies in the Bible. It?s been a decidedly tranquil path of discovery since then. My guess is, as a rabbi you have not shared much time with atheists or freethinkers. I know many of them. We are rational, law abiding and patriotic citizens who value the Constitution just as much as we relish our Camus. Paul Kurtz, Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins are all atheists in the public eye and I wouldn?t describe them as angry. In the case of Ms. Coulter, she easily fits that bill.
I’m getting tired of the negative perception of atheists and secularists so I think this was a good idea.
I don’t have a problem with someone practicing or believing a religion, but when they force their belief on others, I do. This forcing of belief is mainly evident by harassment homosexuals, the neglegance of science, religious extremism (killing in the name of an alleged higher power) and the governments unconstitutional endorsement of Christianity.
Atheism, Love, and Morality
Rabbi Marc Gellman recently compared his opinion on the existence of the Judeo/Christian god with sports fans’ love for their teams. The difference is that even the most rabid fan knows that there are other teams and wouldn’t dream of forcing his opinion on everyone else ? even on people who don’t like sports. It would be ludicrous for people to do this and outrageous for the government to encourage it. If this occurred some citizens would get upset or angry, especially if they discovered that the team that everyone is supposed to root for doesn’t even exist. No one has ever actually seen this team, but most people seem to like believing in it because it makes them happy and gives them meaning.
Most Atheists that I know are quite content living without the threats and enticements of a god we see as imaginary. We gain meaning from love and a well-lived life that can include helping others and working for a better world. We don’t want other people’s religious beliefs intruding into our government or our lives. We know that we are responsible for our behavior, and life is to be lived and treasured, not spent waiting for some illusory afterlife. We don’t have the debasing idea that we are intrinsically sinful. We realize that Atheism is the simple conclusion that no gods exist, based on evidence and logic. Gods are just the external manifestations of both our base and good emotions. The supposedly sacred scriptures attributed to these gods similarly reflect the strengths and weaknesses of humankind.
Atheists see god-belief/religion as the excuse or source of some of the most heinous actions in history ? slavery, the Crusades, the inquisition, the executions of “witches,” the prosecution and execution of scientists and free-thinkers, the many European religious wars, the Holocaust, and of course 9/11.
Atheists know that fear and greed were at the root of those terrible things. Many also understand that enlightened self-interest and evolution-derived innate feelings have encouraged most humans to cooperate with our neighbors and to love our mates and children. Any ancient humans who didn’t cooperate or love would have been less likely to survive in a tribe or leave offspring. Any humans who did cooperate and love would have been more likely to leave offspring. Evolution is the source of cooperation and love, not mandates from some god.
Morality and laws are the rules of interaction that allow us to function cooperatively. They come from basic human kindness, compassion, and our need to work together ? not from some static scripture. Morality and laws have evolved as humans have evolved our culture.
Rabbi Gellman is correct in concluding that it’s important to accomplish goals of improving the world. What’s most important, I believe, is how we treat each other, not (as Dr. Watson noted) whether we believe in a god. We can all love and care for each other ? if we so choose.
I haven’t sent this yet. I’m going to digest for awhile and feedback is appreciated (but may be ignored
:
Rabbi Gellman,
I’m writing in response to your column titled, “Trying to Understand Angry Atheists: Why do nonbelievers seem to be threatened by the idea of God?”
People’s ability to understand is greatly influenced by their beliefs and the assumptions under which they operate. Frequently people are not even aware of those assumptions. I believe that you are operating under such assumptions based on several of your comments.
I have no idea how many “angry atheist” have written you, the content of what they wrote, nor what topic they were reacting to. But I must wonder about how many atheist have written you of which you are unaware? After all, we don’t typically wear badges or have titles or initials after our names. So my first assertion is that it is likely that your view of atheist is skewed by the fact that you are not aware of the atheist who are not “angry.”
My second assertion is that you seem to think that there is something wrong with being an atheist. Attributing atheism to some sort of traumatic event smacks of labeling a psychological disease. In fairness, presumably you are only referring to “angry atheist.” Do the rest of the atheists get a pass on being part of a pathology? What about “angry” Christians, Jews, and Muslims. Did they choose their beliefs because of bad childhoods? If so, why single out the atheists?
My third assertion is that you seem to believe that people need religion in order to behave in a civilized manner. You say you believe that atheist can do good, etc, but then much more of your text is about how people need religion for these purposes. This is an extremely common belief, and as an atheist a rather tiresome one. It’s ironic really. If you examine the belief, it is basically “God made humans, and they’d be really nasty creatures if it weren’t for the fear of God.”
OK, on to number four. The assumption that not believing in God means that life is a dreary, pitiful existence, at best to be tolerated. No doubt, there are people that live such lives, regardless of their religious beliefs. I personally believe that many people live dreary, pitiful lives because of their fear of God, should I use that brush to paint all people of faith? Anyway, there are a great many atheist that live, or have lived, life with great joy. Richard P. Feynman, Carl Sagan and Epicurus come to mind instantly. Of course mention of Epicurus may be dangerous because of how he was betrayed by competing philosophers. But I trust you would read his works rather than judge him by the opinions of his rivals.
I hope that my assertions will give you something to ponder about your own beliefs. But if I have offended you by telling you what I believe, then perhaps you could use that as an example of what it is like to be an atheist in our society. People are always telling me what I believe, as if I hadn’t put serious thought into it and I need there input to set me straight. Which is more irony. Most people adhere to whatever religion they were born into. Most atheist I know were born into a family with some religious belief, and choose to be atheist.
Now I could write several reasons as to why an atheist might be angry given the current state of US politics, but I would think it should be rather obvious to anyone paying attention and I’ve got other things to do.
Regards,
Mine, of course, I posted a link to yesterday. I’ll put a copy here, since this is the thread for it
—————
Dear Mr. Gellman,
In your April 26, 2006 Web article in Newsweek “Trying to Understand Angry Atheists” you seek to understand the reasons behind the anger. I think I can field this one. I am an angry atheist.
Atheists are not threatened by the idea of God. In fact, quite a number of us know more about religion than the majority of the “true believers.” I, for one, have studied a great number of world religions on my own because they fascinate me. I can’t speak for all atheists, of course. There are some of us who are ignorant of religion and choose to be. So too are the staggering numbers of Americans who choose remain to ignorant of atheism. Particularly concerning are figures like 47.6% of people that responded with “Atheist” to a recent poll question “I would Disapprove if my Child wanted to marry a member of this group” and the 39.6% that, again, answered “Atheist” to “This Group Does Not At All Agree With My Vision of American Society” according to a recent study by the University of Minnesota.
What we are threatened by is the infringement of our rights on a daily basis. Our children’s rights to a bias-free education are threatened by people that wish to teach religion in public schools as if it were fact. We’re angry because of the dim view we’re given in this great American society. The very society we live in that touts itself as the most free society in the world. Our tax dollars are going to religions that we do not support; religions that are intolerant of other religions and especially of us.
We’re angry because, despite great strides in tolerance that our country has made regarding race, gender, and sexual orientation we remain at the very bottom of society’s opinion of minority groups. Our country only declared its independance 230 years ago and atheists were being burned at the stake not all that long before that!
Study of human psychology teaches us that if we change the behavior, the attitude will follow. You admit to “occasionally viewing atheists with the kind of patient sympathy often shown to me by Christians who can’t quite understand why the Good News of Jesus’ death and resurrection has not reached me or my people.” I suggest taking action to be more tolerant and this view will change. Whenever you find yourself thinking things like this, consider how you like to be treated and how you would like to be viewed by others.
You say “I can humbly ask whether my atheist brothers and sisters really believe that their lives are better, richer and more hopeful by clinging to Camus’s existential despair” to which I can most emphatically say yes! Yes, I do believe I can live a richer, more hopeful life by admitting to myself that I only have myself to be accountable to, that I only have one life to live and that I’m determined that it be a good one, and that – upon my death – the world will have been just a little better off because I was in it.
Sincerely,
Sam Thomas
I shallst put on my pirate gear and ask the flying spagehtti monster for some strategery on this matter.
nice letter Mr Doss!
Thanks to all of you for your positive representation of Atheists. I seriously doubt it will be given any credence. The Rabi is in the public eye and will no doubt find negative examples in the letters written to him. Those examples will be touted as proof of his assumptions. I do not believe he wants to understand, I believe he wants to make headlines.
As a Jewish American he should be all too aware of religious bigotry. When Thomas Jefferson died he was in financial ruin. His estate sat empty for years. A group of Jewish people paid his debts and purchased the property to restore it in thanks for NOT making this a Christian country. Why would this man’s ancestors be so understanding? Because without the separation of church and state they would have been murdered(or converted) by the Christians. I think that as human beings we deserve the same rights and responsibilities as his ancestors. Without the actions of our founders he would not be allowed to write the article that he has written.
Thanks again.