"Historically, the most terrible things - war, genocide, and slavery - have resulted not from disobedience, but from obedience." - Howard Zinn
First, a final word in response to the idea that there have been atheist government leaders that have advocated serious crimes to humanity. This is true, but the fact that they are atheist does not actually matter. Sam Harris has pointed this out, but I feel like I can make the point more succinct: Nobody is arguing that atheists cannot be responsible for bad things. The argument is simply that atheism has never been the motivation for any atrocity. This claim holds true in the case of Joseph Stalin, the glowing example, whose motivation took its roots in ill-prepared communism, nationalism and eugenics. Let's lay that argument to rest.
My friends have asked me why I feel the need to go after religion so fervently with, seemingly, every piece I write. Because it is necessary, I respond, to protect my way of life from a collective majority. And what of those whose faith hurts nobody? They are the most important people to convince! They are a part of the majority whether they know it or not. They are the statistics that are used to make points and win elections. Anyone who has not bothered to question their own ideas remains a silent supporter of the default. To live, we must stand up for what we believe. Freedom is not a spectator sport.
"Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions." - Thomas Jefferson
Communication is a funny thing. I feel that words are more often used to shape perceptions than they are to convey information. Information, to the common ear, stings. It is a bullshit proposition that you'll catch more flies with honey when it comes to personal spiritual beliefs. That won't stop people from insisting that I tune it down, sweeten it up, and come off my high horse. They know full well that it won't change a thing, but they know it's coming and they'd rather it not smart so much. Sorry, there will be no softness in my message. You can plug your ears, but I will not dull my voice.
I urge anyone who may be hurt by my words to take solace, at least, in the following reassurance: science is not easily understood. Science is only now (within the last 70 years or so) starting to really get it. There are two points I want to make that the reasonable among you will agree with: that the scientific method is the most reliable way we have to learn the truth about our world, and that we must find explanations that fit our observations, instead of the other way around. It will take another couple decades before science is relied upon more than faith, but it is coming. We have to make sure that there are no hurdles to jump. If that means being intellectually ruthless about it, so be it.
"Those who do not move, do not notice their chains." - Rosa Luxemburg
How can I equate atheism with freedom? I suppose if you've never stepped outside of your belief, you'd not understand. It isn't until you start questioning things that you find the bounds of your constraints. Stretch out your arms and your mind, find the farthest point that they are allowed to go. With religion, and I'm talking philosophically as well as communally, there is not much space to roam. I'm sure I will be told that I have no idea what I am talking about, that religion is actually what sets others free. The fundamental difference in the two arguments is that atheism requires one to let go of dogmas while faith requires one to adopt them. Understanding this, it is clear that some people may not realize what freedom really is. You really must test every standard to acquire this knowledge.
I trust that the more knowledge and intellectual honesty someone has, the more likely they are to happen upon the conclusion of atheism. I say this because it clearly identifies knowledge as an enemy of faith, which may ring some bells inside the heads of anyone who has ever heard of the struggle between the religious community and school districts to teach children various materials. From altering text books to treating intelligent design as a scientific theory, the assault on knowledge is probably faith's most important battle. With more and more members of the newest generation lacking in faith, political pressures by the oldest generation are in place to plug up this leak. As a future parent, I want to know that my child will be taught about the real world, not the imaginary one. As a tax payer, I want to know that I am funding the progression of my society, not the discard of preciously important scientific accomplishments.
"No one is free, until everyone is free." - Dr. Martin Luther King
There are two vital assessments I think every religious person must make. The first would be to evaluate how obedient they would be to a genuine idol. The second would be to estimate their ability to call out a fraud, in the case that all of their peers could not. Indeed, religion is seen as a very convenient tool by the upper and ruling classes. As such, it has been infiltrated by countless frauds (some admitted, some not), but the outing of these frauds was not done by their followers, but by outside observers and by the actors themselves. We, as skeptics, are not here to rain on a humble believer's parade. We are here to make sure they get their fair shake. So far, nobody has passed the test.
2 nibbles: