Just give me that old-time atheism

[Hard-Luck Henry]

By Salman Rushdie

"Not believing in God is no excuse for being virulently anti-religious or naïvely pro-science," says Dylan Evans, a professor of robotics at the University of West England in Bristol.

Evans has written an article for the Guardian of London deriding the old-fashioned, "19th-century" atheism of such prominent thinkers as Richard Dawkins and Jonathan Miller, instead proposing a new, modern atheism which "values religion, treats science as simply a means to an end and finds the meaning of life in art."

Indeed, he says, religion itself is to be understood as "a kind of art, which only a child could mistake for reality and which only a child would reject for being false."

Evans' position fits well with that of the American philosopher of science Michael Ruse, whose new book, The Evolution-Creation Struggle, lays much of the blame for the growth of creationism in America — and for the increasingly strident attempts by the religious right to have evolutionary theory kicked off the curriculum and replaced by the new dogma of "intelligent design" — at the door of the scientists who have tried to compete with, and even supplant, religion.

A staunch evolutionist himself, he is nevertheless highly critical of such modern giants as Dawkins and Edward O. Wilson.

Evans' "Atheism Lite," which seeks to negotiate a truce between religious and irreligious world views, is easily demolished.

Such a truce would have a chance of working only if it were reciprocal — if the world's religions agreed to value the atheist position and to concede its ethical basis, if they respected the discoveries and achievements of modern science, even when these discoveries challenge religious sanctities, and if they agreed that art at its best reveals life's multiple meanings at least as clearly as so-called "revealed" texts.

No such reciprocal arrangement exists, however, nor is there the slightest chance that such an accommodation could ever be reached.

It is among the truths believed to be self-evident by the followers of all religions that godlessness is equivalent to amorality and that ethics requires the underpinning presence of some sort of ultimate arbiter, some sort of supernatural absolute, without which secularism, humanism, relativism, hedonism, liberalism and all manner of permissive improprieties will inevitably seduce the unbeliever down immoral ways.

To those of us who are perfectly prepared to indulge in the above vices but still believe ourselves to be ethical beings, the godlessness-equals-morality position is pretty hard to swallow.

Nor does the current behaviour of organized religion breed confidence in the Evans/Ruse laissez-faire attitude. Education everywhere is seriously imperilled by religious attacks.

In recent years, Hindu nationalists in India attempted to rewrite the nation's history books to support their anti-Muslim ideology, an effort thwarted only by the electoral victory of a secularist coalition led by the Congress party.

Meanwhile, Muslim voices the world over are claiming that evolutionary theory is incompatible with Islam.

And in America, the battle over the teaching of intelligent design in U.S. schools is reaching crunch time, as the American Civil Liberties Union prepares to take on intelligent-design proponents in a Pennsylvania court.

It seems inconceivable that better behaviour on the part of the world's great scientists, of the sort that Ruse would prefer, would persuade these forces to back down.

Intelligent design, an idea designed backward so as to force the antique idea of a Creator upon the beauty of creation, is so thoroughly rooted in pseudoscience, so full of false logic, so easy to attack that a little rudeness seems called for.

Its advocates argue, for example, that the sheer complexity and perfection of cellular/molecular structures is inexplicable by gradual evolution.

However, the multiple parts of complex, interlocking biological systems do evolve together, gradually expanding and adapting — and, as Dawkins showed in The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design, natural selection is active at every step of this process.

But, as well as scientific arguments, there are others that are more, well, novelistic. What about bad design, for example? Was it really so intelligent to come up with the birth canal or the prostate gland?

Then, there's the moral argument against an intelligent designer who cursed his creations with cancer and AIDS. Is the intelligent designer also amorally cruel?

To see religion as "a kind of art," as Evans rather sweetly proposes, is possible only when the religion is dead or when, like the Church of England, it has become a set of polite rituals.

The old Greek religion lives on as mythology, the old Norse religion has left us the Norse myths and, yes, now we can read them as literature.

The Bible contains much great literature, too, but the literalist voices of Christianity grow ever louder, and one doubts that they would welcome Evans' child's storybook approach.

Meanwhile religions continue to attack their own artists: Hindu artists' paintings are attacked by Hindu mobs, Sikh playwrights are threatened by Sikh violence and Muslim novelists and filmmakers are menaced by Islamic fanatics with a vigorous unawareness of any kinship.

If religion were a private matter, one could more easily respect its believers' right to seek its comforts and nourishments.

But religion today is big public business, using efficient political organization and cutting-edge information technology to advance its ends. Religions play bare-knuckle rough all the time, while demanding kid-glove treatment in return.

As Evans and Ruse would do well to recognize, atheists such as Dawkins, Miller and Wilson are neither immature nor culpable for taking on such religionists.

They are doing a vital and necessary thing.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Just give me that old

I think the reason that there have been so many religious-based challenges to science is that not just atheists, but most of the scientific community regardless of belief, are reluctant to challenge the falsehoods that religions put forth as fact.

We've tried staying quiet and letting them have their beliefs, but they've used that silence to attack science.

 

[Twila]

RE: Just give me that old

People will always seek something to believe in. Some want hard facts they can touch, Some prefer fanciful and magical things........Some are happy with a teapot

Teapot Cult bombed

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Just give me that old

I've been worshipping the beer in my fridge since Saturday. On Thursday morning I intend to begin worshipping empties instead.

 

[Hard-Luck Henry]

:lol: Your body is a temple, eh Rev? Are you familiar with 'The Beer Prayer'?

"Our lager
Which art in barrels
Hallowed be thy drink
Thy will be drunk, (I will be drunk)
At home as it is in the tavern
Give us this day our foamy head
And forgive us our spillage
As we forgive those who spill against us
And lead us not into incarceration
But deliver us from hangovers
For thine is the beer, the bitter, and the lager
Barmen."

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Just give me that old

I actually have a framed copy of that hanging on my wall, Henry.

 

[media]

RE: Just give me that old

I am an American. We were founded on Christianity. If you read the Bible instead of making blind statements about it then you will know that we are here to love our neighbors as ourselves. That is why we have not only given billions to other countries but also died for their freedoms. We love you no matter what you think or say about us. God Bless America so that we can continue to bless others.

 

[media]

RE: Just give me that old

P.S.
It is not about religion, it is about a relationship with God.

 

[peapod]

Bullshit! we already seen how you love your neighbours. You have become religious zealots, no better than your enemies.

 

[media]

:roll: I am sorry that you feel that way. Just like any society, there are evil people in our society. But for the most part I think we are good.
Everyone has been given free will. Everyone has also been given a special talent. You can choose to use that special talent for good or for evil. Let me give you an example. If you are talented at playing the drums and love heavy metal music, you have the free will to use that talent to play good music with inspiring lyrics or you can choose to play music that promotes sex, drugs and violence. Your choice.
Following God is not about rituals, it is about using your God given talents in a way that is pleasing to Him, having a relationship with Him, asking for His will to be done with your talents and your life. If you ask him with 100% sincerity, you will know.
Many in our country have turned away from God. The rest of us will continue to love you.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Just give me that old

Uh, Media? Your founding fathers made several direct statements pointing to your country being founded on the separation of church and state. If they could hear that baboon you put in the Oval Office spouting off about god constantly, they'd be spinning in their graves.

 

[media]

RE: Just give me that old

You are mis-informed just as many Americans are. Nowhere in our Constitution are the words Separation of Church and State. However, it does state that the Government shall not make laws governing the freedoms of churches. If you do not believe me, then go to (www.wallbuilders.com). All the proof you need is there.
Actually, our founding fathers are surley spinning in their graves because so many have bought into the separation propaganda. Read our Constitution. I promise you it is not there.
P.S. Jesus loves you!

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Just give me that old

The words do not appear in your constitution, but the writing and speeches of your founding fathers live on. They had no use for the bumbling idiots who insist on mixing politics and religion.

Jesus is a myth.

 

[Cosmo]

Re: RE: Just give me that old

P.S.
It is not about religion, it is about a relationship with God.

Just out of curiosity, Media ... the difference being what? Your posts indicate the two are inextricably entwined for you.

Also, which god? There are many. People worship in a myriad of ways. Personally I think the bible is the work of the devil. That book has started more fights, wars, and instigated more cruel and evil acts than anything else in the history of man. It is ambiguous, contradictory, filled with violence, rage and mayhem. Would a loving god offer up a work that would cause such heinous behaviour? I don't think so. When I hear people quoting the bible I usually wonder if they are evil or foolish.

I am agnostic. I think god is unknowable, but believe a greater power does exist. I just don't think it's as limited as traditional christian belief systems would have us buy into.

 

[media]

To Cosmo-
1. They are intertwined.
2. I do not know how to answer your other question as long as your heart is closed. I already answered that question before you asked it. If you do not want the truth, then you will never find it.
To Reverand-
1. dito
2.You really need to research what our founding fathers said instead of spreading untrue propaganda. That kind of propaganda and falsehood is what is wrong with our society today.

I am so sorry you do not know Jesus. You are really missing out. If you read the Bible, God took total losers and made them into awesome heros. Again, religion and relationship are not the same thing. Jesus was not happy with people that persecuted others for not following the strict religious "rules" and neglected a relationship.
Again, you can continue to down Christians but we will still love you.

 

[peapod]

Save your sheep bleeping for those who cannot think for themselves...nothing but myths...unless of course you can "prove" any of it...oh no wait....the guy in the sky says so..uh huh

 

[manda]

They are not enterwined...Like Hell. 8O

I have faith and Believe that God is my saviour.

I DO NOT, believe in organized religion. I do not need somebody else to read from a book that was written by a man "according to diction from God", but apparently King James was close enough to God to make some changes to better suit him.

I try to live a good live and pray to the almighty, not some building erected for a community to go and Worship instead of God Themself, and where the can compare Gossip. Faithful People, my hiney. Don't feed me that Crap Media, it doesn't settle well and doesn't look so nice when regurgitated in your face

 

[Said1]

Church and state do not govern or influence each other. Period.

 

[Cosmo]

To Cosmo-
1. They are intertwined.
2. I do not know how to answer your other question as long as your heart is closed. I already answered that question before you asked it. If you do not want the truth, then you will never find it.

Hmmm ... didn't realize my heart was closed. Last time I saw the doc he said my heart was working perfectly.

I respect your right to your version of the truth, but if you insist on spraying it around like a foul odour, you must be prepared for some of us to object.

I am so sorry you do not know Jesus. You are really missing out.

What makes you so sure I don't??? I met him when I was in Mexico. He and his brother Juan were wonderful guides when we went out on a day trip!

If you read the Bible, ... (yada yada yada)

Surprise, Media. I have read the bible. Was raised catholic. Baptized, Sunday school, first communion, confirmed in the church. Spent a lot of hours studying the bible. It's what I base my opinions on. Not all of us who disagree with you are just talking out our ass! It's a good thing to have the experience ... helps me get lots of Jeopardy questions right!

I don't "down" christians ... I simply don't agree with your rhetoric. Your reasoning is flawed, your beliefs are spurious. That is my opinion. But I respect your right to them.

 

[Cosmo]

RE: Just give me that old

All reminds me of a bumper sticker ... "Jesus loves you ... but everyone else thinks you're an asshole"