MB Civic

This entry was posted on Friday, November 27th, 2009 at 1:59 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 “AlterNet: Atheism and Diversity: Is It Wrong For Atheists To Convert Believers?”

1. Ian Alterman said:

   This woman is very confused. On the one hand, she speaks about wanting to actively “convert” believers. On the other, she says, “The atheist movement is passionate about the right to religious freedom…We fully support people’s right to believe whatever the hell they want, as long as they keep it out of government and don’t shove it down other people’s throats. We see the right to think what we like as a basic foundation of human ethics, one of the most fundamental rights we have — and we have no desire whatsoever to overturn that.”

   “No desire to overturn that?” Really!?! Then what is all this talk about “active conversion” of believers? She cannot even get her OWN position straight.

   As well, what “atheist movement” is she referring to? Because the “atheist movement” of which I – and most people – am aware is that of Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, Bill Maher and others who clearly do NOT “support people’s right to believe whatever the hell they want.”

   She then contradicts her own statement by admitting that, “Most atheists would probably be okay with a world that included religion, as long as it was tolerant of other beliefs and stayed the hell out of government.”

   So it is apparently not the “atheist movement” as a whole, but only “most atheists.” Yet, once again, Harris et al CLEARLY STATE that they are NOT okay with a world that includes religion, and would stamp it out entirely if they could.

   What chutzpah for her to speak for “most” atheists (much less an entire “movement”) when she is dead wrong in her claims!

   Finally, she asks, “Was it hostile to diversity for Pasteur to argue against the theory of spontaneous generation? For Georges Lemaitre to argue against the steady-state universe? For Galileo to argue against geocentrism?”

   I have a question for her: Is she aware that all three of these men were DEVOUT believers? In fact, Lemaitre was a Jesuit priest, and Galileo – despite being found guilty of heresy by the Catholic Church – remained a devout Catholic his entire life.

   What continues to shock (and annoy) me about the “atheist movement” (and particularly ignoramuses like this one) is that, despite all their rationality, they cannot make a cogent, INTERNALLY CONSISTENT argument for their virulent anti-faith position, and very often end up citing as examples scientists who were also believers – thus undermining both their basic argument, as well as the canard that science and faith are incompatible, much less mutually exclusive.

   Peace.

   Posted on 28-Nov-09 at 9:54 am | Permalink