• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The dreaded "A" word

You know who the super-hard atheists are, don't you? They would scream in horror when you show them the cross, and they also posses an interesting property: the mirror doesn't reflect their image.
In role-playing game "Call of Cthulhu" vampires are repelled by the symbols of whatever religion they held in life -- and an atheist vampire is very bad news, because he has no such weakness.

Of course, vampires who in life belonged to minority religions can also be bad news:

Player character, holding up a crucifix: "Back, spawn of Satan!"
Vampire, casually batting the crucifix aside: "Too bad I am a Jew."

Of course, in "Call of Cthulhu" it is a given that all human religions are delusions. Cthulhu and other Elder Gods are the real thing, but even they are not really gods, just very very powerful alien creatures.
 
As far as I am aware, religion is largely not an issue in the UK. I know people for whom it is important: for the majority, it isn’t. They may well “go to church” of a Sunday, but in at least one case I know it is because they want to be seen to be active in the community. A couple of others are very active – one is a lay minister – and my cousin’s wife is ordained.

The question has come up three times for me in the last 50 (or so) years. Once as a teenager I was asked if I was a Christian. I said “I used to be one”. I got the reply “If you are not one now, you couldn’t have been a proper one then”.

The second was during the baptism of one of my grandchildren when the vicar wanted everybody present to use the baptismal water to make a cross on the child’s forehead. I sort of disappeared into the background, hoping not to be noticed because I didn’t want to risk upsetting the parents. Unfortunately I was noticed, and they were most apologetic in case they had upset me.

The third was when I was a defence witness in the trial of a friend. (Just to make it clear, I considered that he was innocent, otherwise – friend or not – I wouldn’t have stood in the witness box.) I didn’t want to risk alienating the jury, so I chose to take the oath that “I swear by Almighty God … ”etc. Was I lying by taking that oath? I would argue that I was merely being hypocritical: others may have a different view. (He was acquitted incidentally.)

I would do again what I did in the second and third situations. If it is a situation where people might get annoyed and there are no other ramifications, I will stand my ground and act on that principle although I won’t stand up and wave a banner. Where the possibility of an unjust criminal conviction is concerned, a more important principle was involved and overrode anything else.

Am I an atheist? I’m more an irrelevantist. Pushed to the wire, I am an atheist. Standing in front of a firing squad being asked that question and my response determining whether I walk away or am carried in a box, I’ll swear to just about anything.

I doubt if I am alone in that.
 
Based on my own experience the US is not substantially different than Canada or the UK in this. Religion is not a topic of conversation in normal society.


Oh how I wish that were true. While it's true in some circles and subcultures, it definitely isn't in others. We have vast swaths of people who go about their lives invoking their god routinely in day-to-day conversations, with everyone from friends and family, to coworkers and clients, to the pizza delivery guy/gal. To them, it's a perfectly normal and expected part of everyday life, and the idea that others might find it inappropriate or annoying simply never occurs to them.
 
I'm curious as to what experiences other atheists on this forum had when they first came out to themselves and others. I'm also interested as to whether any of you have noticed a shift in people's perception of atheists and atheism.

Tim

I consider myself an atheist. I think I have posted before that at a much earlier time in my life, when I was very young, I was a believer that there is a God. I even went to Sunday School.

I lost my faith when I was in my early teens (I was born in 1955) at about the time I became interested in astronomy and space. While others might say they saw the Hand of God in nature and the Universe, I saw doubt that He existed and I was unable to reconcile the two. I used to ask questions in Sunday School that made the Teacher uncomfortable, like, "why can't I see Heaven in my telescope?", and "if God is up there and can see us all, how can he see the people on the other side of the Earth?". The answers I usually got involved me trusting rather that proving that God existed, asking me to simply accept things that I could not see for myself. Very unsatisfactory for a pre-teen with a million questions.

In my 20's, I briefly dabbled with the concept of ID, but fell away from it when I came to understand that it was really just another form of creationism requiring faith and a belief in a magical deity. A divine being or magical deity was what I had previously rejected, so I eventually decided that ID didn't fit my world view either. For me, the words "intelligent design" evoke the idea that something/someone real and tangible could be responsible for the Laws of Nature and Physics. The fact that the Earth is only a few billion years old, much younger that the Universe itself, led me to speculate that perhaps life in the universe is billions of years old, and that perhaps it is this billion year old life that us mere humans living on a pale blue dot are mistaking for God. Arthur C. Clarke said it best; "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

I subscribe to the Carl Sagan theory that life arises on planets as inevitably as planets themselves are formed when star systems from interstellar dust clouds, but I remain open to the idea that life may have either come to this planet from elsewhere; even that it could have been intentionally planted. I am also open to the idea that it arose entirely spontaneously.

There is of course, no clear proof either way.
 
"Oh, you're not really that way. You're really one of us. You just don't know it." Last year, at the annual conference the Mythopoeic Society, I was on a panel on religious belief with a Wiccan priestess, an evangelical Christian minister and a Jesuit. When I delineated my position as a conditional atheist, the Jesuit said, "Oh, you're not really an atheist. You're an agnostic." He seemed a bit relieved to be able to say that.


I have encountered that scenario so many times that I've developed a canned response to it. It goes something like:

I guess technically you can argue that case. But if you stretch the word "agnostic" that far, then it becomes meaningless and I'm agnostic about everything, from gods to air molecules to the fact that I'm actually here having this conversation with you, rather than hallucinating the whole thing while I lie strapped to a table in a psych ward. To me the difference comes down to a matter of theory versus practice. You can revel in the idea that gods can neither be proven nor disproven, but at some point you have to get around to making decisions and taking actions and living your life. Many of those decisions and actions would be drastically different if I were certain there was a god, than they would be if I were certain there wasn't. So while I acknowledge the theoretical possibility that there could be something, somewhere that would fit someone's definition of a god, my decisions and actions are pretty much indistinguishable from what they would be if I were certain there were no such thing.
 
Last edited:
I live just outside Raleigh, North Carolina - The Bible Belt.

If I tell people I'm an atheist, I might as well tell them I found the real killers OJ was talking about.

Then then (usually) proceed to ask me "how" and "why", but then I usually ask them, "how" and "why" they can believe.

I was eight years at Pope AFB in North Carolina, and didn't find religion coming up in conversation very often. Of course, it was a military community, where tolerance is enforced by law.
 
Based on my own experience the US is not substantially different than Canada or the UK in this. Religion is not a topic of conversation in normal society.
LOL. If my eyes serve me well, religion appears to be the main topic of atheism. Now we have two As instead of one to de-acronym: AA = Abnormal Atheism.

So the the dreaded "A" word still remains to be "Amen," right?
 
LOL. If my eyes serve me well, religion appears to be the main topic of atheism. Now we have two As instead of one to de-acronym: AA = Abnormal Atheism.

So the the dreaded "A" word still remains to be "Amen," right?
Outside dedicated internet forums, such as this one, atheists hardly ever talk about religion.
 
Living in the U.S., religion is a BIG deal. You may not be burned at the stake these days, but you have to be pretty circumspect in your conversation with friends and relatives who believe. Forget about politics, and in some cases, in spite of anti-discrimination laws, employment.
I hate the agnostic and atheist labels. People seem to have different opinions about what they mean. I think non-believer is a much clearer term, and states my position exactly.
I am encouraged to see that enlightenment has finally reached some areas of the globe.
 
"There is of course no clear proof either way".

Exactly right, but I think that the probabilities are reasonably apparent.
 
A number of years ago, toward the end of the 1990s, I had still not come to grips with being an atheist. I called myself an agnostic. One reason for avoiding the label of "atheist" was that I had somewhat bought into the view of atheists as a rather grim, uncharitable lot who militated against any form of religious belief, something like the White Witch in C.S. Lewis' The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, who made it always winter and never Christmas. Another reason for my avoiding the atheist label was, of course, the stigma attached to the word "atheist."

Meeting decent people who were atheists certainly dispelled both of these illusions, and most atheists I met were conditional atheists, not the hard-nosed, close-minded stereotypes usually presented. Once I came to grips with these facts and accepted the fact that I really didn't believe in any god or that I had an immortal soul, I found that accepting the atheist label was quite natural. As for the stigma, I didn't really want to elected dog-catcher anyway.

Two things I've encountered since I accepted that I was a conditional atheist are people who, once they found I wasn't so terrible, decide I really wasn't an atheist and those who asserted that, while it was fine for me to be an atheist, it wouldn't do for others who weren't strong enough to handle living without a god. This latter reaction is part of what Daniel Dennet calls "the belief in the belief in God," the view that the public in general needs religion to keep them civilized.

As for those decide I'm not really one of those awful atheists, a number of years ago I was able to speak with Julia Sweeney, who went from being a Roman Catholic to an atheist. She shared with me some reactions she had encountered from friends and priests when she told them she was now an unbeliever. It paralleled what I had experienced. They said to her, once they found she still had high ideals, "Oh, you're not really that way. You're really one of us. You just don't know it." Last year, at the annual conference the Mythopoeic Society, I was on a panel on religious belief with a Wiccan priestess, an evangelical Christian minister and a Jesuit. When I delineated my position as a conditional atheist, the Jesuit said, "Oh, you're not really an atheist. You're an agnostic." He seemed a bit relieved to be able to say that.

I'm curious as to what experiences other atheists on this forum had when they first came out to themselves and others. I'm also interested as to whether any of you have noticed a shift in people's perception of atheists and atheism.

Very few, if any, shifts I have personally come across, Most friends and I are pretty stable in that area (though different). We just accept that nice people we like (including each other) have a minor flaw we can work around for all practicals....
 
TimCallahan, I'm a little surprised that an author of your stature, on the topics you write about, would NOT be a serious atheist. Your investigation into the sources of the bible and religion doesn't read as faith-based in the slightest, but reads as a serious scholar would approach the subject without bias. Surely the more you research it, the less you would be convinced that there is anything more behind the bible than fallible and ignorant human beings, not supernatural entities.

Could it be that religion is too ingrained in your upbringing, your surroundings, your environment? It's hard to avoid ALL aspects of faith in typical daily US life. Just the other day, I attended a dedication for a park, a ceremony planned and executed by the local government, where a minister was invited to speak and give a prayer. He ended it with "And all the people say...Amen." That's about as blatant as you can be with government supporting religion, yet if I had stepped up to complain, I would have been seen as a rabble-rouser and probably have destroyed my career and future. It's hard to be an atheist under these circumstances.
 
LOL. If my eyes serve me well, religion appears to be the main topic of atheism.

One of the guys in my Men's Bible Study group (I am agnostic, by the way) was (and probably still is) of the opinion that Atheists spend an inordinate amount of time talking about God, which he found odd, seeing as how they don't believe in Him and all.
 
One of the guys in my Men's Bible Study group (I am agnostic, by the way) was (and probably still is) of the opinion that Atheists spend an inordinate amount of time talking about God, which he found odd, seeing as how they don't believe in Him and all.

Firefighters, who do not believe buildings should burn, spend a lot of time in burning buildings...
 
That would be a meaningful analogy only if firefighters deny that burning buildings exist.

I demur. While not intended as a perfect one-to-one correspondence, it is illustrative of the fact that, particularly here, most of the time atheists spend discussing 'god' is in response to some silly claim of proof of 'god's' existence, or properties, or necessity. Putting out the 'god' fires set by the superstitious.
 
One of the guys in my Men's Bible Study group (I am agnostic, by the way) was (and probably still is) of the opinion that Atheists spend an inordinate amount of time talking about God, which he found odd, seeing as how they don't believe in Him and all.[/QUOTE

It is not about God. Its about the belief in God, and how otherwise intelligent people can suspend all reasonable thought in order to justify wishful thinking.
 
Outside dedicated internet forums, such as this one, atheists hardly ever talk about religion.
Really? So what's the main topic? Interior decorating?

Btw, this forum has been dedicated to religion and philosophy. Speaking of which, do you have any idea what happened to the Roman Empire? Kind of disappeared from the map.
 
.......do you have any idea what happened to the Roman Empire? Kind of disappeared from the map.

When you have read the classic tome on the subject by Edward Gibbons: The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, please come back to us. Don't rush. It is an important and serious book.

If you were trying to make an analogy (were you? If so, it is a truly bad one), then let me take it and run with it a bit.

The Roman Empire took over and controlled everything which fell within its reach. Now, although the remains are clear for everyone to see, it has entirely gone. Its dying took centuries, but eventually the world was rid of something that sought to take over and control people's lives and made slaves of many of them.

Yep, in so many ways, the Roman Empire equates to religion.

Mike
 

Back
Top Bottom