Can Atheists Be Good Citizens?

KingMerv00 said:
Stone Island,

Can atheists be good citizens?
Click to expand...

Are you kidding? We're practically child molesters.

Stone Island said:
Call me a troll, but you know what other group at least 39.5% of the population would say doesn't share their vision of society and at least 47.6% wouldn't want their children to marry?

That's right. Child molesters.

Make of that what you will.
Click to expand...
 
If atheism prevented people from being good citizens, one would expect atheists to have proportionately more criminal convictions than believers, and proportionately lower rates of military and public service.
 
Stone Island,

Would you say that voting should be restricted to the "good" citizens?
A Bahai once told me he believed that in the coming Age of Universal Brotherhood in which there would be a single state religion (Bahai of course), Atheists or any who did not believe the Prophet would not be able to participate in the republic.

Do you think America should be governed according to Bibical Law (minus the sacrificial rites of the Old Testement?
 
Last edited:
JoeEllison said:
I don't eat "porridge," whatever that is. I'm given to understand that it is a breakfast item, and I drink 2 raw eggs before going for a run with my dog every morning.
Click to expand...


You would be a better citizen if you drink the raw eggs first thing in the morning before going out for a run with your God. Get it? I made a joke about dog and god! Get it?

Alright, I might be a good citizen but I am only a C comedian. Tough crowd!
 
jimmygun said:
You would be a better citizen if you drink the raw eggs first thing in the morning before going out for a run with your God. Get it? I made a joke about dog and god! Get it?

Alright, I might be a good citizen but I am only a C comedian. Tough crowd!
Click to expand...
Wow... nasty. You could clean it up a bit by calling me dyslexic, or saying that I should do it all in reverse order. That is to say, instead of drinking two raw eggs and then going on a run with my dog in the morning, I should drink two raw eggs AFTER going on a run with my GOD in the EVENING.

Or, we could just laugh at the idea that not believing is a mythological being disqualifies you from good citizenship.
 
As has been noted by many, the stupidity of this troll-o-gram is in the a priori definition of "atheism = bad". What about us existentialists who do not admit to the existence of "good" vs "bad"? (Yeah, I waiver between existentialism and worshiping at the Church of Body Cavity Searching as an overall life view.) If we cannot even agree that there is such a thing as "good", how can some reactionary religious pundit determine whether or not I'm a good citizen.

In fact, as pointed out, the very definition of a "bad citizen" would be one who puts the good of one's country or society anyplace other than topmost on the list of priorities. Since fundies and religio-conservatives all place Ed at the to of their list, then we can posit that dyed in the wool "Theists Are Bad Citizens".



Originally Posted by Stone Island
Call me a troll, but you know what other group at least 39.5% of the population would say doesn't share their vision of society and at least 47.6% wouldn't want their children to marry?

That's right. Child molesters.

Make of that what you will.
Click to expand...

You pulled these figures out of you butt, right? This kind of crap is like the great mashed potato conspiracy (which can be used to prove anything), which essentially proves that mashed potatoes are at the heart of all evil-doing. (Because 99.5% of the serial killers, 100% of the armed robbers, and 99.6% of the nun rapists in the penal system have have habitually eaten mashed potatoes since early childhood.)
 
In times of testing—and every time is a time of testing for this American experiment in ordered liberty—a morally convincing account must be given. You may well ask. Convincing to whom? One obvious answer in a democracy, although not the only answer, is this: convincing to a majority of their fellow citizens.
Click to expand...
Translation: convincing to the mob.
 
Stone Island said:
Can Atheists Be Good Citizens? by Richard John Neuhaus,(August/September 1991, First Things
Click to expand...

Why would I be interested in the writings of a religious conservative from nearly 20 years ago, published a year before the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War?

Olowkow said:
Religion for dummies quiz:
Click to expand...

:) I love it, but shouldn't that be "citizenship for dummies"?
 
What I'd really like to see someone post a link to a logically flawed (strawman, begging the question) article arguing that theists can't be good citizens on a Christian or Muslim forum. For good measure, throw in the fact that the author has demonstrably incorrect assumptions about theists. What kind of responses do you think they'd get from these particular "good citizens"?

As for me, I am a law-abiding, middle-aged, middle-class, minivan-driving, cookie-baking, sweater-knitting stay-at-home suburban mom who's been faithfully married to the same man for 17 years. I pay my taxes (no fudging!), vote, donate to charity, maintain my property, help my neighbors, patronize local merchants, treat others with respect, and raise my child with love, encouragement, education, discipline, and humanist values that are not derived from any religion.

I am an atheist. I am also a good citizen. The two are not mutually exclusive.
 
Personally I'm not law-abiding. I do buy exclusively American-grown weed, so I'm still a good citizen.
 
It all depends on what a particular government considers good citizenship and the moral standards of the atheist in question. We can't lump all atheists into the same moral mold. What atheists have in common, generally speaking, is a disbelief in the existence of God. That definition should suffice for the purposes of this discussion I think.

Apart from that, atheists vary in what they consider moral or immoral or what government laws they feel justified in respecting or disrespecting via obedience or disobedience to them. So the answer to your question is sometimes yes and sometimes no. All of which is really ethically non-descriptive since to evaluate the morality of that relatively-"good citizenship", one would have to examine what that "good citizenship" involves.

For example, being a good citizen under the Nazi-Germany-regime required approving the violations of human rights. So in that case, I guess we can say that good citizenship meant very little in relationship to being morally just. Which in my view makes that "good citizenship" practically worthless.
 
Last edited:
Hmm..

I'm not a good citizen.

Well.. Depending. I'm Canadian, but I live in the States.

I'm Catholic, but far far from practicing.

So.. Not a Citizen, not a (true) theist, not an athiest.
 
Radrook said:
It all depends on what a particular government considers good citizenship and the moral standards of the atheist in question. We can't lump all atheists into the same moral mold. What atheists have in common, generally speaking, is a disbelief in the existence of God. That definition should suffice for the purposes of this discussion I think.

Apart from that, atheists vary in what they consider moral or immoral or what government laws they feel justified in respecting or disrespecting via obedience or disobedience to them. So the answer to your question is sometimes yes and sometimes no. All of which is really ethically non-descriptive since to evaluate the morality of that relative good citizenship one would have to examine what that "good citizenship" involves.

For example, being a good citizen under the Nazi-Germany-regime required approving violations of human rights. So in that case, I guess we can say that good citizenship meant very little in relationship to being morally just. Which in my view makes that "good citizenship" practically worthless.
Click to expand...

You are answering the wrong question, you have addressed the question "are all atheists always good citizens?", not "can atheists be good citizens?", two very different questions.
 
Stone Island said:
The author explicitly says that they can be citizens (they follow the law, don't they?). That's why I know you didn't read the article. He denies that they can be good citizens.

It's an important distinction.
Click to expand...

Oh really? Take note:

article said:
It follows that an atheist could not be trusted to be a good citizen, and therefore could not be a citizen at all.
Click to expand...


Someone didn't read the article.

:rolleyes:
 
Foolmewunz said:
In fact, as pointed out, the very definition of a "bad citizen" would be one who puts the good of one's country or society anyplace other than topmost on the list of priorities. Since fundies and religio-conservatives all place Ed at the to of their list, then we can posit that dyed in the wool "Theists Are Bad Citizens".
Click to expand...

Wasn't there a concern that a Catholic president would be accountable to the Pope?

Fortunately, I've run into some helpful fundamentalist Christians (who emphasized the capital C) who helped me understand that Catholics are not True Christians anyway! Whew... dodged that bullet. :rolleyes:
 
Radrook said:
It all depends on what a particular government considers good citizenship and the moral standards of the atheist in question. We can't lump all atheists into the same moral mold. What atheists have in common, generally speaking, is a disbelief in the existence of God. That definition should suffice for the purposes of this discussion I think.

Apart from that, atheists vary in what they consider moral or immoral or what government laws they feel justified in respecting or disrespecting via obedience or disobedience to them. So the answer to your question is sometimes yes and sometimes no. All of which is really ethically non-descriptive since to evaluate the morality of that relatively-"good citizenship", one would have to examine what that "good citizenship" involves.

For example, being a good citizen under the Nazi-Germany-regime required approving the violations of human rights. So in that case, I guess we can say that good citizenship meant very little in relationship to being morally just. Which in my view makes that "good citizenship" practically worthless.
Click to expand...
Very good analysis, Radrook! I agree.

brodski said:
You are answering the wrong question, you have addressed the question "are all atheists always good citizens?", not "can atheists be good citizens?", two very different questions.
Click to expand...
True, but Radrook's point explains why the answer is a definite yes. But Radrook left it open to which society can athiests be "good" in.

However, I think an interesting follow up question is:

Radrook, do you beleive that Atheists can be good, moral citizens in America?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom