The real New Atheism: Rejecting religion for a just world – Salon.com

http://www.salon.com/2013/12/14/the_real_new_atheism_rejecting_religion_for_a_just_world/?source=newsletterprint

 

 

This entry was posted on Wednesday, December 18th, 2013 at 9:34 PM and filed under Religion. Follow comments here with the RSS 2.0 feed. Skip to the end and leave a response. Trackbacks are closed.

One Response to “The real New Atheism: Rejecting religion for a just world – Salon.com”

  1. Ian Alterman said:

    “McElwee begins by calling the New Atheist movement “a rather disturbing trend” in a country ‘whose greatest reformer’ – Martin Luther King, Jr. – ‘was a Reverend.’ Dr. King won fame as a civil rights leader, not as a religious figure. McElwee would do well to recall the words of Founding Father John Adams: ‘the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.’”

    I stopped after reading this (only two paragraphs in) because the writer has already shown not just poor research skills, but confirmation bias.

    He has taken John Adams’ quote entirely out of context. Here is the entire passage from the 1796 Treaty of Tripoli:

    “Article 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims], and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan [Mohammedan] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.”

    In other words, it was written into the Treaty solely to allay Muslim fears that the Treaty would be interpreted from a religious rather than political standpoint.

    In fact, unlike many of his deist colleagues, John Adams was a theist – a devout Christian – who understood that, while the U.S. was not a theocracy in any way, it was, in fact, founded on Judeo-Christian principles.

    If the writer of the article is dishonest enough to attempt to use John Adams’ words in the exact opposite way in which they were meant, I see no reason to read the rest of the article.

    Peace.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.