xtcian

Amen.

i'm sorry, ian, but i don't come onto your blog and say anything about my faith. but you occasionally lapse into absolutely attacking those who do believe in God. see above - it is 'horrifying' that politicians may actually be guided by faith??

you are free to write as you like, of course. but as someone who quickly (and rightly) jumps to the aid of those attacked for their political beliefs, their skin color, their sexual orientation, i find it really amazing that you have no trouble lumping all Christians together and judging them harshly and hatefully.

my skin is plenty thick - but it seems that you want to be able to insult me, and then insult me again when i disagree with you. i have no problem with the fact that you don't have any use for religion. i have a lot of problems with the fact that you see fit to distort and attack my beliefs.

i think it is important that you know that if you put that out in public, it has an effect. we can disagree civilly about many things, but this feels personal and, as you say, not at all fair.

Thanks, Ian. I don't think you ever need to justify your blog posts (especially ones that ring so true for me!), but today's entry was certainly worthwhile.

what Joanna said.

Thanks for that. I couldn't agree more.

I think it's particularly distasteful when a legislator gets all vocal about his/her religious inclinations (I haven't seen elected reps outside of the Christian persuasion doing this). It feels like pandering.

I have been to countries where there seems to be little difference between the primary religion, Catholicism for example, and The Law. It feels weird, wrong, backwards, and downright frightening. THAT is not what anyone would want.

Thanks, Ian!

Mad props for capitalizing "God" in the last sentence. :-)

I'm an atheist and I feel persecuted in my own county - one founded on the principle of freedom of (from) religion. I remain baffled as to how kids can hear about Jesus' birth and Santa Claus revolving around the same day, and later in life decide one is made up and the other one is divine truth.

Frcathie - it is personal. To me, it is intensely personal when people look at me and say, well, one day God will find his way into your heart. They make me want to tell them to go . . ., well, you know.

And when I'm told that I have no "morals" or "ethics" because I don't have an underlying irrational belief in an unseen/unseeable force, I tend to absolutely lose it. I live by my own internal code of ethics that blows away the ethics of most practicing Christians that I know. Where does my code come from? From experience, from unreligious parents, from determining how I want to live. My code wasn't handed to me - or indoctrinated in me - so I don't rebel against it. I don't look for loopholes to avoid the full ramifications of my code. It's me! What makes that inferior to living by the ten commandments?

Until all religious types stop proselytizing, we atheists and agnostics are going to tell you that you are woefully mistaken. The fact that you can't see the irony of your protests that we are 'bigots' when we dare speak the truth just reinforces the fact that we are right.

I appreciate you explaining your position and I actually like these posts, because they make me think. I absolutely agree with you about Brit Hume and politicians - no journalist or politician should be promoting their religion publicly.

I just don't like the blanket assessment of "Christians", any more than my conservative friends and family probably like my occasional blanket assessments about "conservatives." A post like the one last week, somewhat ironically, lets me see things from their perspective.

"....irrational belief in an unseen/unseeable force"

Like... gravity? Magnetic attraction? Quarks? Evolution?

That being said: I agree that religion ought to remain very personal and private, except inasmuch as it inspires us to take seriously such statements as "do unto others" and treating every person as a brother/sister.

Another quote from Scott's comment: "...my own internal code of ethics that blows away the ethics of most practicing Christians that I know." This is such a subjective, broadly-targeted accusation, I scarcely know how to respond except that Scott must know some pretty bad Christians. :-)

Bottom line: I know lots of good people -- people who are compassionate, generous, sensitive -- and they come from all religions as well as agnosticism and atheism. Ditto for "bad" people -- the selfish, the judgmental, the cruel. To me, religious faith (or hope, in my case) has less to do with character than with a quest for the divine -- for that "unseen force" that makes the universe tick, and for the "why" behind it all.

Can't we all just get along? Why: YES we can!

Anne:

The Christians that I know are pretty typical, albeit I now know more Roman Catholics than Baptists. If anything, the folks in the northeast tend to be more moral than the ones I met in the south.

The statement had less to do with the level of their morality and more to do with mine. For example, I don't believe in divorce, especially after you have kids. While there are plenty of examples of a bad marriage that should be ended (abuse, etc.), most marriages end because one of the parties didn't uphold their end of the deal. To me, that is abhorrent behavior. Yet, we continue to see example after example of pious Christians telling us that they are just as weak as they are told they are by their faith and they are just trying to do better. To quote Yoda - Do, or do not. There is no "try."

As to the forces:

Gravity - not unseen. Easily measurable.

Magnetic attraction - same as gravity.

Quarks - similar to gravity, but does require more sophisticated measuring devices.

Evolution - not really a force, but pretty difficult to deny. Not that people haven't tried.

God - no proof, no evidence, mere conjecture piled on conjecture topped off with "If you can't provie it with science, it must be God." Really? I mean, so God was gravtity until Newton came along?

'"....irrational belief in an unseen/unseeable force"

Like... gravity? Magnetic attraction? Quarks? Evolution?'

The difference is that these are rational beliefs. They are explicable, replicable, calculable, soluble, demonstrable.

First, i would like to clarify my comment from two posts earlier talking about singing a Christmas song at my daughter's school. My point was not that religion should be taught in school. I am fine with leaving religion out of school. My point was if you let one religion in, you need to address them all, even the right and belief not to so believe
Second, I do believe that politics and religion are areas where people need to agree to disagree when it is so appropriate so that you can have friends and relations of all different backgrounds and have a glass of wine and laugh and toast at the dinner table with anyone. I can't prove that what I believe is true to you. It is just that - my faith. I also totally understand why you get exasperated about my God sometimes. I would probably get exasperated hearing about the nonexistence of God. What I don't understand is why you (and others - including those who are talking about God) think it is okay to get "rude" about it.

I think the thing that offended those of us who are Christians is the way in which we get depicted. It seems we are pegged as ignorant, little sheep who have swallowed this ridiculous story that's as implausible as Santa and if we only had half a brian, we would see how ridiculous we sound to those who know there's nothing out there.

It's all about choice for both groups. I have made a conscious decision to choose to believe in God. That choice came after not being raised in a church and having no religious background. I hated God for years after the accidental deaths of my dad and granddad. I thought how could there even be a God to let this happen to me.

And then, I made a decision after meeting my now husband to take another look at God. Did God have a hand in this? If you choose to believe you may say yes. If you don't well then it was all me. Regardless, I chose to believe. I chose to believe. It is my right to choose to believe just as much as it's yours to choose not to believe. How do I know there is a God, because I choose to believe. How do you know there is no God, because you choose not to believe. Your choice is as implausible to me as mine is to you and that is ok as long as we respect the other's right to choose.

I think some ground rules should apply to this sort of discussion:

1. No ad hominem attacks. Criticize the behavior, not the person*

2. No generalizations. "You Christians" makes no more sense than "You agnostics." Generalization of course is something that makes human cognition possible, but it's important to know when to stop.

*I am perfectly OK with ad hominem attacks of public figures. Public figures are handsomely rewarded for their douchebaggery, and calling them douchebags attacks their public persona, not their inner selves. If they don't distinguish between the persona and self, they need to find a different line of work.

My previous post notwithstanding, I think something needs to be addressed, something Ian's post touched on: One of the repeated tropes throughout both testaments of the Bible -- both testemants -- is that the larger world is evil, and the God-fearing believers are persecuted.

If you look at the Evangelical movement, and the Mormons for that matter, this is a repeated theme -- the evil world is out to get us. And for Catholics, anyone who dies for faith is a candidate for sainthood. Being persecuted has a certain perverse glamour, and nothing gets Christians more excited than unambiguous cases of persecution -- in the old Soviet Union and China in particular.

In the US, no one can proclaim themselves an atheist and get elected to public office. Some Christians want their beliefs to be enshrined in law, and get upset at any reasonable enforcement of the separation of church and state -- and you'll never see a news report or editorial that criticizes this directly.

Like Ian said, it's over, the Christians have won. It's their country, and the rest of us just have to get on with life the best we can.

My feeling is that Christians who feel persecuted in the United States need to get over themselves. Our country was founded on the ideal (if not the fact) of religious tolerance and idealism, so no one has the right to impose their religion on others. I know it's drummed into you that you have the one true faith, but if you want a country safe for YOUR one true faith, you should respect the beliefs of those who don't share it.

@Salem's Little Sister: I have great respect for the comfort religious faith can give, and for the loving kindness it can bring out in people.

That being said, I didn't choose to not believe in the supernatural being outside our observable universe. The easy path would have been to smile and nod and go through the motions. In fact in our church they told us explicitly to do so -- if you lack faith, keep up the outer observance and faith will eventually follow.

I've probably quoted this before in xtcian comments, but Philip K Dick wrote "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." The facts of the physical universe are independent of what anyone believes. So to say that there's an equivalence between believing in the physical universe and believing in God isn't valid.

Faith is, by definition, believing in things you can't see* The problem with faith, from my point of view,is that believing one unprovable thing has logical equivalence to believing any other unprovable thing.

But the scientific world view and the Christian world view are both just provisional models of the truth of the universe. Neither is a provable ground truth. I certainly can see how Christianity is a successful working model for a lot of people. But it isn't the only model out there. If Christians want to believe theirs is the only true way to see things, that's their right, but they need to learn to respect the beliefs of others.

*for those who bring up "gravity? Magnetic attraction? Quarks? Evolution?" -- again, this is a category error. These are all things that one can see, just not with the naked eye. We can build instruments that can see for us, and what they see doesn't depend on faith. Saying that believing in gravity is like believing in God is just ridiculous. It's like saying believing in sound is like believing in God because you can't see sound.

I'm a Christian and all I have to say is VERY WELL SAID, Ian! Your blog has helped me have a more well thought out and mature faith. In short, your beliefs keep my beliefs honest. Keep doing exactly what you're doing.

I agree with Kent. I would also add that this is Ian's blog and he can say what he likes. Remember he is not going to your blog and insulting you personally. He is voicing HIE opinion and, although I wouldn't say it like he does (I can't write that well and am not usually a curser) I get his point.

Ooops, that should be HIS opinion. Remember opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one.

Hey Emma - are you sure the song in Spanish wasn't a Christmas carol? I agree with you that if they sing a Hannukah song, a Kwanzaa song and a Spanish song maybe they should sing a Christmas carol although I think you could argue that these represent other cultures not religions and that since we live in a clearly Christian culture in the mainstream they are simply trying to represent the minorities. Christmas carols play all day long on every speaker at the mall and every radio station from Halloween on. It's not like we don't hear them outside of school. Although I see no problem with We Wish you a Merry Christmas or something similarly benign personally. And, there's always Rudolf or Frosty!

Oh, these wonderful discussions that Ian sparks!

I'm returning to apologize for the silly gravity/quarks analogy. This is too smart a crowd for rhetorical smoke screens. *sigh* ;-)

Also:

I am not sure of ANYTHING. I am not certain there is a god/God or a Christ or any all-encompassing, guiding intelligence/essence. My upbringing and, as an adult, some extraordinary experiences have led me to think there is Something with a comprehension greater than that of our little human pea brains, something that may answer the ultimate question: Why?

I attend church (RC now; raised mainstream Protestant) because I think humbling myself in a ritual way is appropriate in the face of all I don't or can't know and all I am unable to do on my own; because I honestly believe we see "as through a glass, darkly" when we use our human senses and intelligence. (Must mention how much I adore the poetry of the Bible and of hymns.)

I pray in and outside of church because sometimes in that open, contemplative state of mind, I glimpse something profound and uber-connective beyond the veil of reason. That is a compelling thing, and it inspires me to keep seeking.

Here is a little trick I use to amuse myself when public figures start talking about their "faith" replace "faith" with the phrase "irrational belief"

So when politician X says: "I am proud of my faith" replace it with "I am proud of my irrational belief"

I find it kind of funny, and yeah it does make me feel a little smug too

"Put yourself in our shoes, just for a minute... that book is supreme law...we find it downright scary."

www.iep.utm.edu/solipsis

Solipsism is...properly regarded as the doctrine that, in principle, “existence” means for me my existence and that of my mental states. Existence is everything that I experience — physical objects, other people, events and processes — anything that would commonly be regarded as a constituent of the space and time in which I coexist with others and is necessarily construed by me as part of the content of my consciousness.

For the solipsist, it is not merely the case that he believes that his thoughts, experiences, and emotions are, as a matter of contingent fact, the only thoughts, experiences, and emotions. Rather, the solipsist can attach no meaning to the supposition that there could be thoughts, experiences, and emotions other than his own.

Solipsism is therefore more properly regarded as the doctrine that, in principle, “existence” means for me my existence and that of my mental states. Existence is everything that I experience — physical objects, other people, events and processes — anything that would commonly be regarded as a constituent of the space and time in which I coexist with others and is necessarily construed by me as part of the content of my consciousness. The solipsist can attach no meaning to the supposition that there could be thoughts, experiences, and emotions other than his own.

frcathie, first off, my feelings on religion are not meant personally, and should be not taken personally by any Christian. They are an opinion, and should have no more effect than saying "You like olives? I really dislike olives. I'm tired of everyone putting olives on everything, and I just wish I could go a week with absolutely no olives." In the meantime, you are free to consume and enjoy your olives without incident. I know that sounds disingenuous, and I know it's not that simple, but I'm trying to stress the inequality between Christians getting to say whatever they want, and agnostics who can't say much without being accused of belligerence.

To the other point, imagine the shitstorm that would occur if a Fundamental Shi'ite Islamist was in charge of our nuclear arsenal and said "I use Sharia Law to determine my plan of action". This is how agnostics feel when people like John Ashcroft are in power.

Finally, I have neither distorted nor attacked Christian beliefs. I have simply said how they make me, personally, as a non-believer, feel (and occasionally extrapolated to atheists as a whole, so take that for what it's worth). If I've distorted Christian beliefs in some way, please tell me. I'll also say I've taken great pains to reiterate my brotherly love for those with different beliefs, and see no reason why all of us can't continue to be friends as usual.

The whole point of this entry was to communicate the particular vexation of being agnostic/atheist in America right now, and it seems clear that it remains a thorny thicket.

"Like Ian said, it's over, the Christians have won. It's their country, and the rest of us just have to get on with life the best we can."

Um, you might want to read more history books. It was pretty much that way on day one.

You might also tell me exactly how you are being persecuted. Have you been jailed? Have you been beaten? Lost a job for it?

I think you really dislike hypocrites.

I hate listening to Christmas music and those dipshit Preachers on TV too. Can I be in the club even though I believe in God?

i didn't get the appeal of the antiques roadshow till i turned 40. now i get it. before then, i could never have been convinced it was worth a damn. now i can't wait to see it. weird. some folks will never get the antiques roadshow. do i walk up to folks i don't know and entreat them to watch the antiques roadshow? i do not but i'm pretty certain if i did that about 90% of the time they wouldn't care any more for the antiques roadshow than before i initiated a discussion about it and in fact they probably would at least temporarily hate it more.

my point is, people need to come to their own conclusions about the antiques roadshow. no matter what i do i can't make them understand how freakin AWESOME it is. i get that it would have been hugely annoying to be surrounded by antiques roadshow evangelists prior to my conversion so i don't even talk to my friends about the roadshow. i don't even watch it in front of others. if it's meant to be, then let it happen to them on their own terms and in its own time.

Christianity demands its followers share their faith. While it's not always pleasant for me to hear about the miracle of Jesus, I certainly respect those who choose to do it. They are following the doctrine of their faith.

What lots of liberal folks say about Christians is absolutely personal. It is not the same thing as disagreeing about liking olives. Faith, to those who have it, is a foundation for behavior, for values, for relationships, for questions about the universe, among other things. When that system is attacked, it is nothing but personal. It is the most personal thing there is.

It has always struck me as strange that there are people who believe in some sense of God or some higher power, but do not participate in religion. The point of having deities is to bring one to rituals, to community, to values. It seems silly to embrace the least helpful part of the experience.

I don't like when people say, It's okay for someone to be gay, as long as they don't hit on me. That's what it sounds like when you say, It's fine for someone to be religious as long as I don't have to hear about it. It sounds rude and bigoted.

I'm an atheist. And I occasionally participate in religion, because I find the sense of community and contemplation helpful. But I sure do seem to be carrying the torch for Christianity a lot these days. Just as it was wrong for Bush and Rove to manipulate religious people to win elections, it is wrong for liberals to be so smug and unkind to those of faith.

Thanks for the sentiment, Ian; I love you too. But what you fail to understand is that we Christians share the Gospel because in it we've found The Deal Of A Lifetime and want to share it with everybody. It's like when you find that Sam's Club has a boatload of chocolate covered almonds that they're selling for $2 for a four pound bag, and you tell everybody you know about it.

And you've got it all wrong about the Book; it's not filled with "hundreds of rules", it's filled with Truth that can set you free from the billions and billions of rules that keep you and the other agnostics and atheists in the bondage you've unwittingly chosen. Your blindness to that Truth in the Book is part & parcel of that bondage.

We're only trying to help.

Johnny Galt! Where ya been, baby?

Right where I've always been. Just... lurking. And eating chocolate covered almonds (but avoiding olives.)

Yeah, I guess I feel about those who denigrate my faith the same way I do about those who spaz (sp?) out/give my dogs dirty looks whenever they see them because they hate dogs: it absolutely sucks for you that you get so worked up about 'em, your animosity has absolutely no effect on me whatsoever, I love 'em, they're here, and they ain't going anywhere - have a WONDERFUL day (and I mean it)!

By the by, people who hate dogs suck!!!