Atheists becoming more vocal and outspoken

[Brian63]

How little or far should we atheists (or nontheists, skeptics, whatever) go in trying to advance our views? Should we hold more of a “live and let live” attitude or be more outspoken and vocal in criticizing religion in the public sphere?

My own views have changed from the former to the latter in my life. The atheist guest-host of The Atheist Experience, Jen Peeples, expresses my current views quite succinctly in her brief bio:

“At this point in my life I no longer defend atheism; I actively promote it.”

Religion has far too much power and does far too much harm to merely let it slide by. It shapes the worldviews of people and their values, beliefs, and choices they make. It affects how they vote in public elections, and elections have consequences for us all. It affects what moral opinions they hold and what decisions they make.

To be abundantly clear---being atheist in itself would not at all guarantee any kind of perfect world where everyone is rational, compassionate, self-reflective, humble, etc. Atheists can be assholes and idiots as well. The long-term goal should be for people to become freethinkers and not beholden to dogmas. In the short-term though, religion is an enormous barrier standing in the way of achieving that long-term goal, and so we need to be more outspoken and activist in regards to criticizing religion publicly. We face existential political and existential crises in the U.S. and on the Earth in part because people are still basing their 21st-century worldviews on ancient mythologies. That needs to stop. So I am not of the atheist mindset of just letting everyone believe whatever they want, as long as they do not enforce it on me. Even the more moderate and liberal religious beliefs still enable and empower the more fundamentalist and conservative beliefs to maintain power. Their naïve and lazy beliefs must be confronted head-on and not given auto-respect that they do not merit and have never earned.

The mere idea of publicly promoting humanism, atheism, skepticism, or any other beliefs you hold may itself be a turn-off for other people. That is partly how the bad beliefs maintain their influence and power though---others do not challenge them. At this point it is disheartening to hear other atheists downplay the significance of promoting our views. You may not firsthand see the difference it makes in other people, but it can still have a strong impact on other people. Others who secretly hold doubts can become more confident and motivated, or be willing to find other local community support groups. Believers of any variety can be more willing to investigate criticisms of their views. Think of the “planting a seed” metaphor. The time for staying silent and pacifist about atheism/religion has long since passed. We need to be more outspoken and vocal.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Well, that's what we saw with gays.

When they were all in the closet, there was no change, there was no impetus for change. People held forth from the pulpit about what satanic horrible people they were, predatory and disease-filled, craven and 'different,' without any sort of challenge.

They came out of the closet, and people started to realize that they actually knew homosexuals. And had direct examples that were at odds with the trolling they'd been getting for years. And not only are the gays pushing back on this bigoted narrative, now congregationists with an attention span are also rejecting the fairy tales.
Or leaving the more conservative churches entirely.

 

[Brian63]

Also, the bullshit atheist lines about "nobody ever changes their minds" needs to stop. Yes, people sometimes change their minds. It is difficult, but it does happen. Speaking from firsthand and secondhand experiences, I have changed my own mind and have seen others do the same in regards to their views on religion, in part because of the influence of other atheists and skeptics around them. Everybody, please stop saying "nobody ever changes their minds." It is simply not true. Just because you do not see it right in front of your face does not mean it is not taking place.

ETA: What Keith said.

 

[skepticalbip]

How little or far should we atheists (or nontheists, skeptics, whatever) go in trying to advance our views? Should we hold more of a “live and let live” attitude or be more outspoken and vocal in criticizing religion in the public sphere?

I'm all for the "live and let live" idea but only if it is mutual. Any religious group attempting to force their beliefs on others through law or even through personal actions need to be openly opposed.

For example, I have no problem with the Amish who are happy to practice their rather weird (to me) beliefs without imposing it on others unwilling to accept those beliefs.

 

[ronburgundy]

I think people should fight against irrationality and authoritarianism, and since they are both inherent to theism, I think people should fight against theism and against the epistemology of faith that enables it and other irrational and immoral ideologies to flourish.

In fact, I'd argue that rationality is a moral obligation, because irrationality makes it impossible to accurately understand how our actions can harm others. Thus, fighting against anything that suppresses rationality (e.g., theism and faith) is a moral obligation.

This doesn't mean attacking the faithful as people, unless of course they are attacking us an our basic rights based on their faith. It is paramount that theists right to chose theism be respected, even when they do no respect that same right for non-theists. More generally, it means promoting the practical and moral importance of reason, criticizing the objectively incorrect assertions and faulty logic used to justify theism, criticizing the concept that faith is a virtue, and criticizing the immoral authoritarianism that is inherent to deferring to an unquestionable authority whose will is invented by those seeking to rationalize their actions.

 

[steve_bank]

http://search.myway.com/search/vide...ab&tpr=sbt&trs=wtt&vidOrd=1&vidId=7INIhD9P0Pw

Ron Reagan's video playing on TV. I'm not afraid of burning in hell.

 

[just_me]

Also, the bullshit atheist lines about "nobody ever changes their minds" needs to stop. Yes, people sometimes change their minds. It is difficult, but it does happen. Speaking from firsthand and secondhand experiences, I have changed my own mind and have seen others do the same in regards to their views on religion, in part because of the influence of other atheists and skeptics around them. Everybody, please stop saying "nobody ever changes their minds." It is simply not true. Just because you do not see it right in front of your face does not mean it is not taking place.

ETA: What Keith said.

I don't think its what atheists say more than it's what Theists say and do, that changes peoples minds. Just look at all these crackpot preachers and pedophile Catholics push as far as morality. Look at these waked out televangelists who cherry pick through the Bible for anything that justifies their actions. Look at their answer to gay marriage. All of a sudden it's God that created marriage, when, in fact It originated, I think in Roman society. From all accounts, I've heard The Catholic Church was against it until they found out they could make money off it.

It's the incessant pushing of a glorified version of morality and an equally incessant trail of hypocrisy that are changing peoples minds. People are getting tired of the shell game and that included many who are walking away from the church.

 

[steve_bank]

There needs to be a pushback. I am seeing more and more everyday.

For the last decade or two the theists in the media, like FOX News and prominent Christian shows, have decared atheists are making war on Christianity.

Atheists are taking away Christmas.

It is an uphill battle. Christians have the political power, influence, and position.

Over the last 10 years there have been multiple law suits over religious imagery on public ground. Some won some lost. The 10 Commandments posed in a court area was deemed an historical reverence.

 

[bilby]

Well, that's what we saw with gays.

When they were all in the closet, there was no change, there was no impetus for change. People held forth from the pulpit about what satanic horrible people they were, predatory and disease-filled, craven and 'different,' without any sort of challenge.

They came out of the closet, and people started to realize that they actually knew homosexuals. And had direct examples that were at odds with the trolling they'd been getting for years. And not only are the gays pushing back on this bigoted narrative, now congregationists with an attention span are also rejecting the fairy tales.
Or leaving the more conservative churches entirely.

Yeah, some kinds of propaganda really collapse fast when the audience gets to see for themselves.

Claiming that atheists are evil monsters who eat kittens and babies is only effective when your audience are kept isolated from knowing that they are surrounded by atheists who are just as kind and moral as anyone else.

People who come out as atheists in highly religious environments may well incur all kinds of abuse - but they also show the propaganda against them to be false. And they allow other closeted atheists to realize that they are not, as they had been misled to believe, a rare anomaly. The Internet allows people in isolated communities to see that their town is not a microcosm of reality, and that there are other ways of living and modes of thought that - contrary to what they've been told - do not lead to disaster.

 

[DrZoidberg]

“At this point in my life I no longer defend atheism; I actively promote it.”

Religion has far too much power and does far too much harm to merely let it slide by. It shapes the worldviews of people and their values, beliefs, and choices they make. It affects how they vote in public elections, and elections have consequences for us all. It affects what moral opinions they hold and what decisions they make.

I think there's two different questions here.

1) Religion is a set of practices to help the faithful get through their day. I'd argue that the belief is only a tiny part of what religion is. Most of it are psychological tools our ancestors figured out and which we're using because it's beneficial to us. These psychological tools are baked into packages, we call "religion". When you tell a theist that there's no god, you are also trying to deny them all of those psychological tools they're using which is helping them. If you rip the ladder from out under the feet of a painter, he's not going to be happy, for the same reason.

We atheists are often spiritually devoid. We often struggle with managing our egos. We're often petty, overly consumeristic and narcissistic. We often care about utter bullshit. And we struggle with forming deep emotional bonds with other people. This is apparent to anybody active in any kind of spiritual community. Atheism is literally nothing. It's not a system of ritual and beliefs. Nobody can turn to atheism as a guide for spirituality, or anything much.

So if you go up to the painter on the ladder and say, "Hey, you don't need the ladder. You're fine without it. Look at me. I can paint just as high as you, and I haven't got a ladder". But the guy on the ladder can clearly see that you can't. You're not going to convince them of anything.

2) The sacred texts, woo, and ridiculous magical thinking. This is stupid and laughable and deserves being made fun of. You are only focused on this part of religion. Not on the other part.

Religion isn't just a guy riding a bike backwards and just can't figure out why the steering wheel is behind his back. It's also useful in some respects. If you don't acknowledge that there's no point in actively attacking religion.

I'm 100% an atheist. I don't believe in any woo. But I have had plenty of experiences with spiritual practices and they have helped me in my life. The spiritual practices didn't make a dent in my atheism.

 

[Brian63]

2) The sacred texts, woo, and ridiculous magical thinking. This is stupid and laughable and deserves being made fun of. You are only focused on this part of religion. Not on the other part.

No. The OP explicitly addresses both aspects. I pointed out how "Even the more moderate and liberal religious beliefs still enable and empower the more fundamentalist and conservative beliefs to maintain power. Their naïve and lazy beliefs must be confronted head-on and not given auto-respect that they do not merit and have never earned."

I agree that a fundamentalist, anti-LBQT, YEC, pro-Trump religious nut is far more threatening than a casual Christian or vague deist. Still, the fact that people feel a need to be religious, to any degree, to maintain a sense of meaning and morality in their life needs to change. Some very liberal Christians still cite the authority of the Bible as justification for their social, moral, and political views. That whole approach needs to change (and we should not give a shit what the Bible says, but come to our own judgments through information gathering and analysis). As long as even liberal Christians keep invoking the Bible as authoritative though, they continue to prop up the narrative that that is the accepted norm and everyone else is an aberration and erroneous, and so fundamentalists are more justified in doing the exact same. Neither group will challenge the other on that base assumption. That is why we atheists need to be more outspoken in doing so.

I'm 100% an atheist. I don't believe in any woo. But I have had plenty of experiences with spiritual practices and they have helped me in my life. The spiritual practices didn't make a dent in my atheism.

What spiritual practices are you referring to, exactly? Meditation, for instance? Why use the word "spiritual" to describe it in the first place, when there is a strong religious connotation associated with it? If you find meditation to be medically and emotionally useful for you, say that it is medically and emotionally useful for you. We do not need to say it is "spiritual" when that carries the baggage that we have spirits beyond our material beings. We do not need to tether our behaviors to religious interpretations. We do not need to cede our vocabulary to religious definitions of them.

 

[southernhybrid]

I've always been pretty open about my atheism, but unless someone is a raging fundamentalist, I don't care what people believe. I've gone the opposite way of Brian. All but one of my Christian friends are very liberal Christians who don't deny science and despise the politics of the right. Some of my black Christian friends are such wonderful, caring people that if I were to try and persuade them to believe like me, I would feel like a real asshole. They know I'm not religious and not once have any of them tried to convert me. I don't think that religion is the problem. I think that fanaticism is a problem, regardless of where it comes from.

Religion has many positives that atheists haven't been able to achieve. Religion provides community and support for people who have no other support system. Religion in my city provides an enormous amount of charity, including free clinics, food banks etc. Unless atheism can organize and help provide some of these things, I have to give credit to the more liberal and moderate versions of religion. I think secular humanist has tried to provide some of these things, but it's failed to gather enough support to be effective.

I don't discuss politics or religion with my one conservative Christian friend. In fact, our discussions are usually limited to a few topics. She's a mess, and there is no way that my telling her to give up her beliefs would be helpful, so I just try and give her a little emotional support. She knows I'm an atheist and she's never criticized me for that. Maybe the best thing that we atheists can do is set a good example and show believers that we are every bit as moral and content with our atheism as they are with their religion.

 

[DrZoidberg]

2) The sacred texts, woo, and ridiculous magical thinking. This is stupid and laughable and deserves being made fun of. You are only focused on this part of religion. Not on the other part.

No. The OP explicitly addresses both aspects. I pointed out how "Even the more moderate and liberal religious beliefs still enable and empower the more fundamentalist and conservative beliefs to maintain power. Their naïve and lazy beliefs must be confronted head-on and not given auto-respect that they do not merit and have never earned."

I agree that a fundamentalist, anti-LBQT, YEC, pro-Trump religious nut is far more threatening than a casual Christian or vague deist. Still, the fact that people feel a need to be religious, to any degree, to maintain a sense of meaning and morality in their life needs to change. Some very liberal Christians still cite the authority of the Bible as justification for their social, moral, and political views. That whole approach needs to change (and we should not give a shit what the Bible says, but come to our own judgments through information gathering and analysis). As long as even liberal Christians keep invoking the Bible as authoritative though, they continue to prop up the narrative that that is the accepted norm and everyone else is an aberration and erroneous, and so fundamentalists are more justified in doing the exact same. Neither group will challenge the other on that base assumption. That is why we atheists need to be more outspoken in doing so.

I still think we're talking about different things. Religion isn't a set of rules to follow. It's unfortunate that Christianity is dominant in the west today, since it's such a shallow religion. Which is perhaps why it's so popular. Islam is equally shallow. Take a peak at any other major world religion. The rules in those religions aren't just rules to follow otherwise God won't let you into heaven. The goal is spelled out, because it makes your life better. For example. Buddhism also has "turn the other cheek". But they formulate it differently. In Buddhism when somebody else has hurt you and you want them to realise this and admit it, or you want to take revenge but you can't, or any other childish response to hurt, the only person you are hurting by this is yourself. That's why you should forgive those who have hurt you. That's a spiritual practice, and a hell of a lot deeper than anything in the Bible.

BTW, I hate deists or "religion light" aka "I believe in God but hate religion" type people. It's the worst of the worst. Their religion is 100% self serving and they've completely lost the point of religion. Zero spiritual practice. But veiled in spiritual language. The least important thing of religion is what you believe. The point of any religion has to be that it makes you into a better person. If it doesn't, you are wasting your time with your religion.

I'm 100% an atheist. I don't believe in any woo. But I have had plenty of experiences with spiritual practices and they have helped me in my life. The spiritual practices didn't make a dent in my atheism.

What spiritual practices are you referring to, exactly? Meditation, for instance? Why use the word "spiritual" to describe it in the first place, when there is a strong religious connotation associated with it? If you find meditation to be medically and emotionally useful for you, say that it is medically and emotionally useful for you. We do not need to say it is "spiritual" when that carries the baggage that we have spirits beyond our material beings. We do not need to tether our behaviors to religious interpretations. We do not need to cede our vocabulary to religious definitions of them.

I use that term because that's what all the practitioners call it. Yes, it has unfortunate baggage. But if you're in this community and doing spiritual work, there is no other word for it. It also helps if you want to google something. Any resources on-line will be found using the term "spirituality". I also live in Scandinavia. Religion is dead here. So the assumption for anybody active in a spiritual community is still that they're atheists. So it's not a heavy baggage burden to shoulder. The standard term for atheist spirituality is "spiritual naturalism".

My pursuit down this road has been pretty long. I started in 2012. So I won't bore you with details. I ended up reading every significant religious text ever written for every religion that has ever had a mass appeal (in any age). As well as secular spiritual books, like the "Big book of AA" and all the foundational philosophic and psychological texts. I kept being an atheist throughout all this. What I learned is that when the west secularised we secularised badly. We through out the baby with the bathwater. Because God didn't exist we just ejected all religion without reflecting that there's some of this worth keeping. I can strongly recommend the Big Book of AA to anybody. I've never had any serious addiction problems. But I still found that book extremely enlightening.

As for my practice. I do yoga and mediation. No God necessary. I've been on spiritual retreats. With and without Ayahausca ingested. I've been on atheistic religious festivals, and theistic religious festivals. Been on tantra retreats. Had loads of tantric sex. I do spiritual work. That means doing exercises with others or alone.

All I can say is that it's helped me grow immensely. My life is very different now than it was before. I'm more empathic. I have a deeper connection with my friends. I'm better at connecting with others, making new friends. I have much better sex.

For a time I was active in building an atheistic spiritual community in Scandinavia (Stockholm, Malmo and Copenhagen). That's still going strong and just growing all the time. But I'm not active in that scene much anymore. It's just because of lack of time.

 

[Brian63]

[Responding to DrZoidberg above]

Okay. We live in different areas where the terms definitely can have different interpretations. In the U.S. where I live, people will often use the phrase "spiritual but not religious" to describe themselves. There is still some negative stigma with being very religious and so they can avoid that, but at the same time they use the label "spiritual" to convey that they are not as extreme as those shallow and egotistical atheists who think there is nothing greater than them. They occupy a comfortable middle ground.

We atheists (in the U.S., particularly) need to focus our attention on that group. The liberal-minded vague Christians are more likely to deconvert or at least gain sympathy for us atheists than the dead-set fundamentalists with dangerous views (if I am wrong on that point, I would love to be so). We can have a greater impact on the former than the latter, although it is possible to have some change in both. Those 2 groups share some common assumptions though, to varying degrees---that there is a God of some kind, the Bible is inspiring and should be considered an authority in how we live our lives, that we should obey and worship God no matter what, etc. They will not challenge each other on those assumptions to any significant degree. If anyone will ever step up to the plate to do so, it will be us atheists. Too many atheists are pacifists and non-activists in regards to that though. They mean well and have good intentions, but their approaches are simply not good enough, given our world's circumstances.

 

[DrZoidberg]

[Responding to DrZoidberg above]

Okay. We live in different areas where the terms definitely can have different interpretations. In the U.S. where I live, people will often use the phrase "spiritual but not religious" to describe themselves. There is still some negative stigma with being very religious and so they can avoid that, but at the same time they are not as extreme as those shallow and egotistical atheists who think there is nothing greater than them. They occupy a comfortable middle ground.

We atheists (in the U.S., particularly) need to focus our attention on that group. The liberal-minded vague Christians are more likely to deconvert or at least gain sympathy for us atheists than the dead-set fundamentalists with dangerous views (if I am wrong on that point, I would love to be so). We can have a greater impact on the former than the latter, although it is possible to have some change in both. Those 2 groups share some common assumptions though, to varying degrees---that there is a God of some kind, the Bible is inspiring and should be considered an authority in how we live our lives, that we should obey and worship God no matter what, etc. They will not challenge each other on those assumptions to any significant degree. If anyone will ever step up to the plate to do so, it will be us atheists. Too many atheists are pacifists and non-activists in regards to that though. They mean well and have good intentions, but their approaches are simply not good enough, given our world's circumstances.

Here's a bit of Buddhist wisdom. If you want to change the world, change yourself. And stop there.

I'm not particularly sympathetic to any group of people on a quest to convert the world. We're all on our own spiritual journey. Unless you're the one looking for salvation you're not going to find it. You can't force anybody to see the light.

Christians aren't going to challenge their religious beliefs as long as they are working for them. Until they find something which can give them the same degree or spiritual support and guidance they're not going to jump ship.

I remember as a kid we were speculating on why anybody would be religious. Our conclusion is that religious people are weak and that's why they need religion. We strong people don't need religion. That's the kind of arrogance which I think puts off religious people from atheism. People who have their shit together spiritually are nice people. It's people you want to be around. They are open and curious. They pay attention. They're empathic. They have their ego in check. They understand that we're all just doing what we need to do to hang on and hang in there. They understand that there's many ways to see the world and neither is much superior to any other. Above all... they don't try to convert the world. Because they have understood that we're all on our own spiritual journey. It's only when we run into trouble with our current way of thinking that we have any reason to stop and think and take a personal inventory of WTF we are doing and why our current strategy isn't working. You're unlikely to be able to do this work for somebody else.

Anybody who thinks they've seen the light and are trying to convert the world is usually just trying to convince themselves. Because they probably haven't seen the light.

 

[Brian63]

Well that sounds very poetic, but it is also in error.

It was the mentality I held for much of my life as well, but later came to realize it is inadequate for the problems that exist in our world. I do not want to just improve myself (though I certainly want that), but I want to help others become improved also. Part of that involves getting them to realize they are not alone in questioning their religious indoctrination, that it is healthy and even exciting to doubt one's own beliefs. There are also the legal and social injustices carried out in the name of religion. The live-and-let-live approach, just focus on yourself and do not criticize religious beliefs, is not a realistic method for progress when those very religious beliefs have been so detrimental throughout history. We need to criticize religion vocally and publicly, not just be more meek-minded atheists.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I looked for the person and quote but came up empty. She was the wife of a prominent figure if I recall correctly who did public service work as a volunteer. She said that one person doing public service was more valuable than a hundred people talking about public service.

Religion comes about because it's all people know. Look at the OP and substitute Science and Reason wherever you have atheism and it makes perfect sense. Substitute Ignorance and Superstition wherever you see religion and it becomes clearer yet.

Atheism isn't something to be ashamed of simply because it isn't as popular as ignorance and superstition. People know I'm atheist and if they wrongly assume that I'm some kind of christian or believer in ghosts I correct them. It's a good thing to do because then they learn something, then they go home and talk about with their friends and family.

 

[Brian63]

Let's think of various social movements throughout history---non-discrimination for women, blacks, Hispanics, etc. What prompted those massive cultural upheavals? Was it people being mellow and carrying a "live-and-let-live" attitude, or moreso from being increasingly activist and outspoken about their views and challenging the norms, also having open-but-uncomfortable discussions within our social circles? I do not see why any atheists use the former as a guide when it seems to be so incapable of making significant progress. We need to be more activist-oriented.

ETA: Should we take that live-and-let-live approach to politics also? Encourage people to not be active, do not be outspoken, do not contribute resources to political organizations you support, do not discuss politics with any people in your inner circles. Just focus on improving yourself and how well-informed your own vote is, and then that will be enough to [somehow] sufficiently change the world for the better. Do not be vocal and public about other views are flawed in any way though. Keep the facade of "it's all good."

 

[Tom Sawyer]

/mod

 

[DrZoidberg]

Well that sounds very poetic, but it is also in error.

It was the mentality I held for much of my life as well, but later came to realize it is inadequate for the problems that exist in our world. I do not want to just improve myself (though I certainly want that), but I want to help others become improved also. Part of that involves getting them to realize they are not alone in questioning their religious indoctrination, that it is healthy and even exciting to doubt one's own beliefs. There are also the legal and social injustices carried out in the name of religion. The live-and-let-live approach, just focus on yourself and do not criticize religious beliefs, is not a realistic method for progress when those very religious beliefs have been so detrimental throughout history. We need to criticize religion vocally and publicly, not just be more meek-minded atheists.

Then find other atheists like yourself, form a group and work on the spiritual shortcomings of those in the group. It has the benefit of an instant pay-off. And if you're doing a good job others who are interested will find you.

Now with the Internet evangelism is a complete waste of time anyway.

It's not a question of being meek. Its about doing what works. These are tried and tested methods used by most religions throughout history. Most people have not been converted by military might