Posts Tagged ‘Atheism Links’
Aggressive Atheism
Tuesday, December 1st, 2009Science and Religion
Friday, October 24th, 2008On another board I got into an argument with a group of Christians who claim that there is no problem with mixing science and religion. The Big Bang could have happened by the instigation of God and science should not have issue with this. Furthermore, it is counterproductive to invoke argument between science and religion, as it may have the effect of turning away the more dogmatically religious, further widening the gap between religion and science.
After reading the various arguments to this extent, I felt myself slipping into the Twilight Zone, unable to understand how it was that a naturalistic system (science) could even begin to add on a supernatural system (God), without corrupting the very nature of science itself. No political persuasion should change this dynamic, as far as I’m concerned.
For this, I was labeled a confrontational “New Atheist”, as if it was somehow worse than being an “Old Atheist”.
Frankly, I wasn’t familiar with the term, I had to look it up. I still haven’t figured out who coined the phrase, but it is a label for those like Richard Dawkins, who feel that not only should science be separated from religion completely, but science should challenge religion for the superstitious nonsense that it is. At first being labeled a “New Atheist” left me feeling confused over the implications, but now that I understand the meaning behind it: I accept the label and thank all you deluded Christians for it! I’m quite happy to be thrown into this new class.
You cannot mix science and religion. The reason is a very simple one (one that those I was in argument with refused to accept as even a possibility) that once you apply any supernatural entity, no matter how petty or large, into a naturalistic system – you have corrupted the system. Science is ruled by evidence and there is no evidence for gods, pixies, unicorns, flying spaghetti monsters, or honest politicians. Once you open the door to that without evidence, you have thrown out science and taken on philosophy. The scientific method starts with observation of the empirical, not mental musings of the ethereal.
Until it can be shown that the interjection of the supernatural into a naturalist system can occur, without corrupting the naturalistic system, there simply is no room for it. Inserting supernatural answers into a naturalistic system is far more than just being counterproductive – it destroys the system.
I have had many tell me that my “love” of science is my largest downfall – that it leaves me overly skeptical and ignorant of the good that religion has brought to the world. I counter with this simple test: compare what science has done for humanity in the last 200 years, with the entire history of religion on this planet. Which has produced more, created more, improved more, furthered knowledge? Which has ultimately done more for mankind?
Pray all you want, but science landed us on the moon.
Atheists in Foxholes
Sunday, April 27th, 2008I’ve been asleep at the wheel over this story and wasn’t even aware it was going on until I stumbled onto a broadcast this morning on CBS, covering the story of Spc. Jeremy Hall.
Hall, like myself and others who deal with the empirical, just happens to be atheist because of this view of the world and such has gotten him into a world of hurt from his own associates in the military. As Hall’s lawsuit against the Department of Defense stipulates, he is being harassed and threatened with physical injury and death by many members of the military, who have come to conclude that the US military is a body of the church. All he’s asking for is equal respect for his beliefs. What he’s gotten so far is a round the clock body guard and the aid of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation in his lawsuit. The MRFF press release sums up the current situation.
Austin Cline writes further on the egregious action, where Spc. Hall had gone through all the proper channels to attempt to hold a meeting of like minded individuals at the fort where he was stationed at the time in Iraq, which was sabotaged by an attending Maj. Freddy Welborn. Welborn had described himself as a “freethinker” but ended up instead berating the others at the meeting and said that he would charge Hall with violating the Uniform Code of Military Justice and prevent his reenlistment.
Now, if Spc. Hall had only seen the Major’s MySpace page, he would have known the sabotage was coming before it did.
The most obvious risk in this environment, would be instilling a sense in our soldiers that we’re fighting a “holy war”. Pitting faith against faith, in this case Christianity against Islam, would do nothing but further Islamic distrust and hatred toward our forces, as our already untenable position becomes a new crusade. I can predict no good will come from delusional religionists pushing their distorted view of the Apocalypse onto impressionable youth (most of the military, that is). Knowing the Bush administration and it’s connections to Christian fundamentalism, I highly doubt anything is being done to slow this process down, but rather – like torture – they will promote it as being part of the general good and needed to face the “dangers” against our nation. Ludicrous, but predictable.
Like all things in history, what goes around comes around. As a recent documentary points out, we are back to the days of Constantine.
CNN covers more of this story. TruthOut has an interesting story on Christian fundamentalism in the military.
Why Debate Dogma?
Monday, January 14th, 2008Pat Condell has changed my thoughts about debating Christianity (and religion in general.) His points here are simply too compelling to ignore.
“I think to engage dogma in debate is to legitimize it…”
Pat, I think I finally agree with you. That nascent feeling that something was wrong with my approach, swimming in the back of my brain, has been nurtured by this simple message. There is no reason to be polite about this. It is time to stop giving superstitious nonsense anything but a sound, derisive tongue lashing. I’m done with appeals to logic, softly spoken words and side stepping comments that might cause pain through ridicule. Primitive superstition deserves nothing less than complete and utter ridicule and scorn.
I’m done being diplomatic toward nonsense. I’m done with my old hobby.
A sincere thanks, Mr. Condell.
