Militant Atheism: I Don’t Believe It
by A personal response to milItant atheism’s narrow-mindedness.
Religious belief of one form or another has been around since the advent of man on this planet. It cannot be denied that man has always sought to explain the unexplainable by attributing this to some ‘higher power’. In his attempt to rationalise the reason for and draw meaning from all things existential, man has looked outward and upward toward some omnipotent deity or pantheon of deities.
The philosopher and atheist Fuerbach said that manwas attempting to fill a vacuum of unknowingness with the creation of a god out of his imagination in order to feel comforted. According to modern existentialism, militant atheism and humanism, this is all there is, you live, you die, that’s it, end of story. That belief and it IS a belief, is fine by me if it is happy to co exist with other forms of belief, but the problem is, most militant atheists and humanists are not content to ‘live and let live’ but are so spiteful and hate filled that I find it hard to have sympathy with them.
Take the eminent self appointed spokesperson for all things atheistic, Dr Richard Dawkins, the evolutionary biologist. This man seems to spend most of his waking hours railing against Christianity and belief in religion in general. Dawkins’ television manner is that of an iron fist in a velvet glove. He seems so amiable, so plausible, a nice man…yet he is also so closed minded as to deny the basic rights of his fellow man…which is that of the right to hold a religious belief, no matter what form that may take.
The British Humanist Society is another institution full of ‘eminent erudition’but like its fellow Dawkins…is all mind and no heart! For it appears thatwords like broadminded, liberal, flexible and compassionate are unknownto these doyens of science. These individuals are most vociferous in their call for recognition of their democratic right to hold their opinions and beliefs, yet would strenuously deny us ours! Militant atheists, the British Humanist Society need to learn tolerance for other peoples’ views.
Liked it
-
-
-
-
-
Post CommentRobert
On March 5, 2009 at 12:22 pm
If you would, please cite the instance(s) where Dawkins advocates abolishing or denying the right to hold a religious belief.
clairvoyant54
On March 5, 2009 at 3:55 pm
Hello Robert, Richard Dawkins is a well known militant atheist. In his various tv appearances and interviews he infers that anyone who holds a religious belief is illogical. I have no beef with atheism per se, what I do take issue with is the view that Mr Dawkins holds that somehow holding a religious view is damaging to the world. His hatred of religion is such that he expends a disproportionate amount of time railing against beliefs in general! My point is, what’s wrong with being an atheist or a believer, surely there is room for all views? May I suggest you check out the mission statement of people like the British Humanist Society and you wil see what I mean. If these people could have their way then atheism would be imposed on all of society and by the way, I am NOT in favour of religion being forced upon anyone who is not interested in it either.
My own personal take is, live and let live.
Robert
On March 6, 2009 at 1:44 pm
Expressing one’s disagreement about the beliefs of others is a far cry from seeking to deny them the right to hold that belief. By your standard, the Pope and a whole legion of Christian apologists are “militant” and are equally seeking to deny the right to hold a belief and impose Christianity on all of society. In fact, this is what we see with attempts to introduce the myth of Creationism…er, sorry, “Intelligent Design”.
Unless you’ve been living under a rock for the past few years, you know that religion and deadly violence make uncomfortably common bedfellows. So, at some level, Dawkins is correct. Yet, I don’t see Dawkins calling for legislation to outlaw religious belief. I see him engaging in a public campaign to persuade others. I’m sorry you find this so threatening, but it’s no different than what religious people have been doing for centuries.
teachersmith
On March 8, 2009 at 5:02 pm
when religious belief is a minority it is very happy to live and let live. when that belief becomes a majority woe betide the non-believer. dawkins, hitchens, harris and others are merely pointing out that which we already knew or perhaps had had not considered. no-one is trying to outlaw religious beliefs but the sooner we learn the lessons from history concerning where religious beliefs take you the sooner we can see the danger involved in rigidly holding onto so called orthodoxy.
Stephen J. Ardent
On July 5, 2009 at 9:10 pm
You’re right. I think Dawkins makes intentions clear with his more casual remarks, for example when he quotes Nicholas Humphrey “We should no more allow parents to teach their children to believe, for example, in the literal truth of the Bible or that planets rule their lives, than we should allow parents to knock their children’s teeth out.” One can only imagine that he would think stealing these people’s children through such action as Child Protective Services would warranted and perfectly all right. Perhaps even imprisoning the parents in some kind of facility to be treated – perhaps an “Institute for the Ideologically Unsound”.