Atheists need not apply
Offline In my lifetime (and I am now astonishingly old) I've witnessed dramatic declines in social and institutional biases against women, racial minorities, and gay people. When I applied to law school in 1971, sex discrimination in higher education was still legal and relatively respectable (Title IX, the federal equal education law, was enacted in '72), courts were still arguing about the application of landmark civil rights laws (see, Griggs v Duke Power Co.) and laws prohibiting discrimination against gay people (much less allowing gay marriage) were practically inconceivable. But while many biases have changed in the last half century, one remains the same: the bias against atheists.
A majority of Americans consider belief in God essential to morality, the Pew Forum confirmed in 2007; and Pew recently found that most Americans do not want their family members marrying atheists. (Note to Brit Hume: I doubt that most Americans would exhibit comparable hostility toward Christians.) The new Pew Research Center report on increased optimism among African Americans notes that while "interracial marriage is now widely accepted by Americans of all racial groups ... there is one new spouse that most Americans would have trouble accepting into their families: someone who does not believe in God." Resistance among people affiliated with a religion to intermarriage with atheists may be stronger than their resistance to gay marriage: seven in ten religious people surveyed by Pew would oppose or resist intermarriage with an atheist. And while comparably high percentages of the most regular churchgoers oppose gay marriage, opposition declines significantly among the less devout.
Given our general progress toward gay rights in recent years (notwithstanding a few reversals in the fight for equal marriage), you might expect gay people to encounter less overt hostility than atheists. But it's worth noting that 25 or 30 years ago, when homophobia was quite strong and socially acceptable, antipathy toward atheism was, in some instances, even stronger. In their 1983 book, Dimensions of Tolerance: What Americans Believe About Civil Liberties, Herbert McCloskey and Alida Brill reported that 71% of people surveyed believed that atheists "who preached against God and religion" should not be permitted to speak in civic auditoriums, as opposed to 59% of survey respondents who believed that gay liberation groups should not be allowed to use public halls to advocate for gay rights.
I don't mean to set up any grievance competitions between historically maligned groups, much less suggest that being an atheist in America is harder than being gay. In general, closeting your lack of faith is probably easier and a lot less stressful than closeting your sexuality. Besides, no one can accuse the "new atheists" of being closeted, or otherwise shy in expressing their disdain for religion, as well as their own disbelief; and they don't lack bully pulpits, which were harder to find a decade ago. (In the mid 1990s, The Atlantic killed an assigned article I wrote in defense of atheism; it was published in 1996 by The New Republic, entitled The Last Taboo). Non-celebrity atheists and agnostics have also begun organizing politically through organizations like the Secular Coalition for America (which I advise).
So I'm not ignoring the beginnings of what some consider an atheist liberation movement (although American atheists are not exactly oppressed). And I'm not complaining: I don't care if religious people consider me amoral because I lack their beliefs in God. I do, however, care deeply about efforts to turn religious beliefs into law, and those efforts benefit greatly from the conviction that individually and collectively, we cannot be good without God.
Persistent hostility toward atheism may not be a source of educational or employment discrimination for individual atheists (although it does engender significant discrimination in the military), but hostility toward atheism is a threat to freedoms of conscience and religion that all of us share. It's an often overlooked irony that atheists who regard all religions with equal disrespect, favoring no one faith over another, are sometimes the most reliable defenders of equal religious rights. But you shouldn't have to be irreligious to consider religious liberty transcendent.
Source - Atlantic Monthly - Author Wendy Kaminer
http://correspondents.theatlantic.com/wendy_kaminer/2010/01/no_atheists_need_apply.php
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck
- Login to post comments
the question about the snowballing levels of hostility that must be faced by gay atheists in the United States...
I have to confess to my own bias. I would never, ever marry a christian. Just being around the smug bastards is troubling enough.
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck
I cannot congratulate you enough...
Wonderful stuff...
In real life i tend to to treat religion like politics, i think you are making a stupid desicion but thats your desicion to make. Unless you start voting for hitler im not gona make a big deal out of it. And lets be honest most people are like that. On the marrage topic i would marry a christian. I probably wouldn't marry a practising muslim..... then again a practising muslim wouldn't marry me
So that is kind of a null question! Religion isn't an important question for me in regards to marrage. I don't see why it should be. you like someone enough and they like you enough. marry them. religion is not involved.
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
as long as you're not planning on having kids, that can work. if you are, however, then comes the old argument of what to teach the children.
"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson
im not seeing the problem. Thats what preschool is for. besides i fully expect if i ever have kids that they will be christain atleast for the first 15 years regardless. its just what happens.
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
preschool is not the primary source of a child's values and worldview. parents are. if you think preschool should be shouldered with that responsibility, you probably shouldn't have kids.
if you're willing to sit back and chill and let your christian wife instill the children with her worldview, then yeah, i guess it could work. but number one, many atheist fathers would not be willing to do that, and number two, many mothers understandably don't want their husbands to be passive when it comes to informing their child's worldview: they want them to be active participants. that means you'll have to at least pay lip-service to your wife's values system in front of the kids if you want to maintain a peaceful marriage. once again, if you're willing to do that, mp2u, but many atheist fathers aren't.
and no, it isn't "just what happens." there are many people in this forum who spent their entire childhoods knowing full well that religion is a fairy tale. there are also many others who didn't have this advantage precisely BECAUSE their parents showed a similar apathy to the formation of their worldview as small children. not surprisingly, they are more than a little upset at their parents for this.
"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson
much easier not having strong feelings on such matters isn't it.
Great article. I feel that the one difference between discrimination of gays and blacks in relation to atheists is that the former has a more active bias. That is, there were groups that enacted laws that were made for the sole purpose of holding down gays/blacks. I feel that bias toward atheists is less of a group bias as it is an individual bias. The strongest opposition to atheism is the individual family, and on a communal level there isn't as much resistance. I know that religious people may feel the common atheist is immoral, but there isn't a different bathroom for atheists and it is perfectly legal for an atheist to marry anyone else (with the only stipulation being that they are of the opposite sex). Exactly as this article points out, many parents would stand against their child marrying an atheist. I am in neither the financial nor emotional state to get married, but I do have a long term girlfriend. Her parents actually like me a lot, but I think their tune would change considerably if they knew I was an atheist (my girlfriend knows, however).
What I'm getting at is that gays and blacks had to deal with those two levels of bias: the larger community enacting legislation to hold them down as well as individual families. I'm not saying that we have it easier as atheists, I just feel the prejudice against us is a semi-different animal- perhaps a subspecies.
Huh?
How is that "just what happens?"
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
it just comes from every direction. teachers, friends, gran parents etc. it just happens. just part of the process. what you gona do refuse to allow it? prevent all contact with the outside world? what are you going to flat out refuse to allow them to believe? you cannot fully controll there lives without going to an extreme. it just happens that is what i mean.
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
So all you need to do to be a Christian is have some relatives and teachers tell you about Christianity? This is bullocks, it doesnt just "happen" at all. And where I come from (Vancouver) It doesn't come from everywhere either. I think it's kinda strange to say "It's just the way it is, i'd expect my kids to grow up Christian, atleast till their 15." Very strange indeed, especially since your an atheist apparently.
My husband says he absolutely refused to date any one who professed to be any religion and he would never marry one. So he got stuck with me.
Having raised 3 sons mostly without religion, I can say that you don't have to accept anything. It doesn't matter what the rest of the world does or says. The parents matter. Never use baby talk to your children, always tell the truth as best you can, and seize every opportunity to have science experiments around the home.
I had a coworker who was a not particularly observant Jew. Her husband's family was Christian. They had no problems with it - until their son's first Christmas. She was appalled at the amount of useless stuff he was given by the Christian grandparents. And for the first time, very concerned about the differences in religion. My recommendation was to remember, as the mother, the children were hers to raise in her religion by her own customs. Also, to celebrate passover with what she felt was the appropriate type and number of gifts. She was much relieved and took over her son's religious education.
It does matter in a relationship about religion. There are unseen got 'cha's down the road. Not least is the sometimes relentless pressure a religious person can put on their not-so religious partner. There was an article on NPR about the Christian movie awards. The number one was about a Christian girl who converted her husband from a life of sin to Christianity. They interviewed some woman in tears after having watched the movie for the sixth time. Can you imagine being married to someone like that - constantly nagging you to go to church and give up all the fun stuff in your life? I don't care how horny I may be - I was/am never horny enough to put up with that!
And, I have been turned down for a job. It was with a religious college. They asked me if I had committed my life to Jesus. I said I was baptized Lutheran and that was all I had to say on the subject. I figured IT had darn little interaction with the delicate ears of the students and so it shouldn't matter what my beliefs were - since I didn't get the job, I guess they didn't agree.
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.
I enjoyed that, atheistextremist. I agree, it is kind of weird that the people who don't have a faith are the most supportive of freedom of religion. :P It shouldn't be that way.
How old are you, Tapey? It seems like you haven't really put a lot of thought into the subject of having children. In my case, I really am more than a little upset that I was raised religious because I really believed in it (everyone I knew was Xian so why wouldn't I?) and when I realized how ridiculous all of it is I felt like I'd been lied to my whole life. But I think it's worse to know that the people who told me everything I knew about Christianity also truly believed in it, and so it wasn't a lie on their part. And so I feel both anger and pity towards the people I used to look up to. Even my own mother, who is so intelligent and bright and talented, has been a Xian her whole life and I still haven't been able to bring myself to tell her that I don't believe. I can't imagine how that would make her feel.
I don't know if I could marry a Xian. My boyfriend is one, and that's fine. But I know that even we do get married and if I get over my fear of being pregnant (It's fucking scary, shut up!) and have a baby with him I'm going to have to educate him/her and prepare him/her for life in the real world, which is something nobody ever did for me. And I'm still learning myself and at this point it seems like I'm never going to know enough about life to be able to teach it to my children so that they don't have to spend their whole lives learning it all over again. That seems unfair and pointless to me.
easier for you, perhaps. for the kid, i wonder...
"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson
all they have to do is believe what they are told and yes all kids are told. I fully expect it because i believed it for a while and im not going to pretend like i expect future kids to be any differant. but all of this is pointless, its just what i expect to happen who knows im sure becoming a father changes people. but yes it really does come from everywhere just think about it for a second. your school ever do morning prayers? Religous education where only one faith is covered? gran parents that believe? there is never more religion around you than when you are a kid. and yes some will go along with it some won't. but hey maybe things are differant there i neither know nor care enough to continue with this.
Nice hint right at the end btw! Just to clear that up yes i am an atheist. But i think some of you see religion as some monster. I don't. I merely believe that there is no god, thats it! that doesn't carry over to me thinking there is anything wrong with believing it or that believing it is harmful . If someone is a theist im happy for them, i think they are wrong but im not bothered by it.
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
no its easier for the kid as well no expectations that they have to be the same.
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
Wwwhat? Children should not just believe what they are told. Kids are smart, and many easily sniff out the bs. I was laughing at the bible stories in church when I was 8 fully understanding how rediculous they all were Talking snakes was the first thing I remember thinking was stupid. My mom believed in the talking snake, I therefor believed she was crazy from the age of 8 or 9. U fully expect that because you were told something stupid and unture was true as a child that your children should be told the same dumb thing is true. Great, way to improve on past mistakes.
NO! Not even close, religous practice was strictly forbidden in my schools curriculum. Where are you from? It is not everywhere here! The people I know and their families are mostly athiests. I know a few Christian families but they wouldn't dare preach to my kids.
Nope. Nope.
I agree that theists have the right to be theists ofcourse, but that has nothing to do with whether or not I'm going allow my kids to believe in talking snakes.
As usual, an excellent post AE. Personally speaking, I have read that atheists are among the most lowly regarded social subsets; occupying a place somewhere between drug abusers and child molesters. While the root cause of this attitude is not difficult to surmise, the audacity of this ignorance is shocking. We are painted as figures of evil who condone all sorts of nefarious behavior simply because we do not profess a belief in god; while this is obviously not the case, it is nevertheless presented as a universal truth. For my own part, I long suffered under the illusion that xtians, while unbelievably obtuse, were nevertheless a benevolent group. As I grew older, however, the insidiousness of their philosophy became readily apparent: it is not enough to embrace the xtian thought structure; rather, said weltanschauung must be foist on anyone professing to have divergent beliefs (or lack thereof). This in and of itself would not be troubling were it not for the political clout held by the xtian lobbyists (in my country, at any rate). While I am not the type of person who devolves to the hyperbolic in order to illustrate incongruities, I nonetheless feel that the abrogation of atheists' inputs to the political process hints at a darker future for people lacking belief.
If I remember correctly, you are of Australian extraction, so I would pose the following queries:
1.) Do you find that the religious crowd are a viable political entity in your country (I am speaking specifically of the ability to present a significant legislative lobbying voice incommensurate with their actual number)?
2.) Can you point to any specific laws that have been enacted that smack of (again, for lack of a better term) "irreligious" intolerance (I ask because I would like to add them to my arsenal of factoids)?
3.) If, in fact, the stench of discrimination is to be found in contemporary society as regards atheists, what do you feel is the appropriate solution?
While it may seem to run towards an apophenic conceptualization of contemporary society, I find many warning signs in the socio-political atmosphere that seem to hint at a dichotomy of sorts: while nominally uncommitted xtians are growing in their tolerance of those who lack belief, self-described fundamentalists are hardening their resolve against the same set. At base, it is a convolution both promising and unsettling...
Regards,
UE
nope.
nope. no religious education at all (except what i read myself) until i got to college. then all faiths were covered.
sure. a jehovah's witness paternal grandmother (she was my fave actually) and a pantheistic maternal grandfather. i heard so many different things growing up about religion that the whole seemed rather buffoonish.
depends on what you meam by "kid." my chief concern is small children. i didn't encounter religion much as a small child. actually i was always a little skeptic. i even used to ridicule other kids who believed in santa claus. i didn't get religion until i was 16 and my family basically started going back to church because of me. i got said religion because of one of those perfectly engineered emotionally religious "milestones" that parachurch organizations like to use to mercilessly play on teenage hormones. had i had a mother who told me as a small boy, "religions are fairy tales, just like red riding hood and star wars," i might have been more resistant to such despicable tactics.
"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson
The religious are a viable entity in Oz - but not in the way they are in the U.S. We have the Family First party here and they and the Greens often hold the balance of power in the senate. You could argue that the fundamentalist evangelical church is the one that is growing in Australia - the mainstream churches are those that are fading away.
These examples are a little trite but in Sydney the Australian Atheists were denied the right to advertise the non existence of god on billboards around the city. We have also had attempts in Qld to introduce creation science to schools but these failed. Importantly, the media and the educational industry are left leaning and predominantly atheist or agnostic. This is a good thing for us.
There are the same areas of funding intolerance with churches and religious groups including extreme Brethren groups, who get vast funding and eye watering tax breaks. Atheist organisations aren't given the respect churches are. Whenever issues of morality are considered journalists reach for archbishop George Pell. This guy is a fuckwit of classic fundy proportions but he's the moral compass of the land. It does my head in.
What is apparent is that religious organisations and collectives of religions are far better organised and more vocal in government and the media than atheist groups. I don't know what the anti-vilification laws are here but they apply in support of religions not the irreligious, allowing godly to teach children atheists are evil from the pulpit while atheists cannot buy advertising suggesting there is no god. It's not the spanish inquisition but the default intolerance is there.
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck
lots of good stuff there, I didn't read it all, but you used a lot of big words, and that's good. I give you A plus plus!!!
Wendy Kaminer in case any one is not getting to the bottom of the post and not seeing the byline and the link. All credit in this thread goes to Wendy.
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck
I personally could not marry anyone who was a believer in any form of woo. Whether religious, crystals, wiccan...didn't matter. I found that the goals for people who are at all religious (even if they are extremely tolerant of other religions/non-religions), just don't have the same set of goals that I do. After my first relationship of 7 years ended, I came to realize that the reason it failed was that we were not on the same page for our goals in life. Even two people who are atheists may have this problem; however, the problem becomes exacerbated when there are two different religions involved.
Having common goals allows the couple to work through tough times (which will happen). Those tough times are easier to work through when both parties are coming from the same starting point on their worldview. While both people can evolve and grow, having the same starting point allows for both people to at least start with the same language and reasoning to work through an issue. When both people are at different starting points, that chasm between the two can grow wider as both people evolve. I knew this from my previous relationship, and it is why I didn't date people who were believers.
Quite frankly, I think that many people seem to be under the general delusion that "love conquers all" when they meet someone, and they do not fully think it through. Then there is quite a bit of bargaining for things like children, money, sex, etc. In the end, one person ends up with more equity in the relationship than the other.
Dolt:"Evolution is just a theory."
Me:"Yes, so is light and gravity. Pardon me while I flash this strobe while dropping a bowling ball on your head. This shouldn't bother you; after all, these are just theories."
Woo-hoo....