Atheism, Religion And Discrimination

stumble digg reddit del.ico.us news trust

Posted May 1, 2008 | 08:14 AM (EST)



Show your support.
Buzz this article up.

Last Sunday, I saw a report on the CBS Sunday morning news about a soldier (two duties in Iraq) being discriminated against in the U.S. military because of his 'atheist' belief. This story is another reflection of what seems to be a growing elevation of religion into so many aspects of government, including the current presidential election. For a country founded on 'freedom' of religion and the separation of church and state, religion seems to play a too prominent role in media, politics, and our public lives.

I am particularly concerned that there are such strong negative opinions about people who believe differently than others.

Religious diversity (across the spectrum from atheist to polytheist to monotheist) is part of human diversity, it is a means of understanding each other's inward discoveries of mind. Knowledge, in general, is obtainable in two ways: external discovery, generally using the lens of science, and inward discovery, generally using the lens of religion or reflective practices (for secular and religious alike). These two modes of knowing are like two sides of a coin, to keep discovery and the accumulation of knowledge active is like rolling the coin on its edge. Letting it fall flat to one side or the other leads to a narrow-minded view and stagnation.

Our human diversity of inward discovery is revealed by the beliefs we have as to our place in the universe. The range of knowledge obtained by this inward process of investigation changes throughout a lifetime, across people, across cultures, and across generations. But the constancy of the investigation - of the process of questioning and discovery - is reflected in many ancient texts of religion, philosophy, and modern science.

It seems to me it is time we attend less to 'what we each believe' and ask the question, are you looking? Are you taking time for reflection, for investigation and inward experimentation? Perhaps those who think they 'have the answer' and that no further exploration is needed are exactly those who see only one side of the 'coin' and keep us from gaining new knowledge. It is the open-mindedness, the willingness to discover using both inward and outer modes of investigation that will likely shape our evolutionary future toward a more conscious and peaceful planet.

Religions provide an institution where one can study ancient teachings and learn from individuals who have done in-depth study of the inner landscape, but religion is not an excuse to stop the process of looking inward for oneself. It is the process of inward exploration that helps us each discover who we are and our place in the universe. These first person experiences must be met and melded with the current worldview of the universe, today defined using the lens of science.

Both modes of knowing are important and both require questioning, investigation, and continued questioning. The role of religious differences (including atheism) in our lives is a vital reflection of a vibrant population of diversity along a dimension of pursuit of inward knowledge. To discriminate against one branch of thought that differs from another weakens the pursuit of knowledge itself.

When religious ideology becomes a guiding principal behind harmful behavior, as all religions have done (and secular institutions as well) at various times throughout history, it is likely a stagnation of the people practicing at that time - a fixation of sorts, when the fluid individual discovery was stopped by forcing adherence to a fixed 'answer.'

I know that the best means to share my understanding of 'the meaning of life,' if you will, is to keep exploring, and to encourage others to explore, the inner landscape of mind.

Henry David Thoreau once said it so beautifully, "Direct your eyesight inward, and you will find a thousand regions in your mind yet undiscovered. Travel them and be expert in home-cosmography."

 
 

Comments
99
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 pages total)

One of the most difficult roles in Amerika is to be a non-believer. Since I was a tiny child, I have loathed organized religion. I believe that religion is at the root of all evil. Fundamentalism is destroying our world. I hate all religions.
Guess what? I have rights, too. I could care less what a candidate's religion is. I do not care who's
imaginary friend is the real imaginary friend. It's all based on total BS.

Separate the state from religion before it's too late.

By the way, my favorite fantasy is that spaceships land in Amerika and suddenly make it clear that there is no imaginary friend. God. That would be bliss.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:58 AM on 05/04/2008

The greatest God-given gift we have is free choice, and that includes choosing Atheism. If you really talked to most people who claim to be Atheists, you may find that the bulk of them are actually Agnostics, which is understandable in these days when religion has become so perverted.

I have a grandson in the military, and it concerns me that the only options he may have should he decide to attend church, would be radical separatism.

One does not have to go to church to believe in God, nor does one even have to believe in God. God still believes in us. It is up to each person to find his or her own pathway. Given time, we will each do so.

And as for believing in God, how cfan we fault anyone for not believing when "the mighty sword of God", "God's warriors" are wiping out humanity? If I had not found my path, I would have chosen to label myself an Atheist rather than a Christian.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:00 PM on 05/03/2008

One, there is no such thing as an agnostic. What you call agnostic is actually weak atheism. Two, if ones does not believe in God, exactly how should one take your statement that God loves them?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:11 AM on 05/04/2008

Obviously not knowing, you should find out. Speculation won't help. Atheism is simply wrong, and there is no point for one who knows God to entertain such foolishness as if it had any validity at all.

In the words of His Divine Grace Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, from the 'Forward' to Brahma Samhita (http://brahmasamhita.com/en):

"People are so much apt to indulge in transitory speculations even when they are to educate themselves on a situation beyond their empiric area or experiencing jurisdiction. The esoteric aspect often knocks them to trace out immanence in their outward inspection of transitory and transformable things. This impulse moves them to fix the position of the immanent to an indeterminate impersonal entity, no clue of which could be discerned by moving earth and heaven through their organic senses."

In other words, those who are trying to figure out about the absolute truth through sense perception are doing it wrong, guaranteeing by their flawed method that they will be unable to find God, and consequently they are becoming atheists. It is their misfortune that they never submissively hear from those who actually know. Atheists are known to be miscreants, as those who have some pious history naturally become attracted to hearing about the Lord's pastimes.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:32 AM on 05/03/2008

blah blah blah,,,wake up!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:22 AM on 05/04/2008

Blindly following a tradition of tribal, nomadic, and contradictory folk-tales and judging others for using a brain that 'God' supposedly gave them is so much better.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:32 PM on 05/03/2008

And then there is the fact that Pat Tilman was an Atheist and an outspoken one at that. He joined the military to fight in Afghanistan only to resent being ship to an "illegal war" (his own words) in Iraq. Towards the end of his service it got out that he had been in contact with Noam Chomsky and planed a full interview that would reveal more than his Christian commanders wonted. He had been at odds with his commanders and comrades over his atheism for his whole tour. Kinda funny how he was killed by so-called friendly fire, ain"t it?

GWW

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:06 PM on 05/02/2008

Citation needed.

I am intrigued, however.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:21 PM on 05/02/2008


Religion is a "virus" that makes people mentally ill.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:36 PM on 05/02/2008

We are seeing more evidence of the dumbing down of America. Very scary. Whether it is evangelicals gaining the upper hand in the infantry, or scientologists gaining sway in Hollywood, it does not mean something good for the human condition. There are thousands of years of evidence of what happens when there is religious intolerance, extremism, and sectarian strife.

As others have said, organised religions tend to serve the ends of specific men. Spirituality tends to serve the ends of all people.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:04 AM on 05/02/2008

Wow. Where to begin? Your entire article takes up an assumed position that your two methods of gaining knowledge are equivalent. There is simply no equivalency between a personal belief and an objective reality.

Certainly, an open mind is needed, but you shouldn"t let your "brains fall out". If you are talking about your external knowledge as coming from science, you need and open mind AND a skeptical one. You need to be willing to listen to new ideas. However, you must also critique them under the rigors of the scientific method. Religion neither requires an open mind or skepticism, and it certainly has no self-correcting methodology to keep the personal view consistent with the objective one.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:21 AM on 05/02/2008

A famous man once said, if I hear anything stupid coming out of my mouth, I know I am discussing religion.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:55 PM on 05/02/2008

Eloquently expressed recless, kudos!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:12 AM on 05/02/2008

What weak-minded twaddle.

Americans have a right to NOT practice religion or worship a god. That's it. Accept it.

Athieism is not a belief system, like Catholicism or Wicca or Creationism. It's the rejection or indifference to a belief system. It does not mean that the atheist doesn't have an internal life, a philosophy, or isn't capable of human decency. On the same note, Atheists can be as strident and annoying as any born-again fundamentalist; they are heir to the same foibles as their religious co-evols, including arrogance, group identification and vanity.

Personally, I'm an agnostic. I think it's arrogant to impose rules on the universe without more information. For all I know, there's a honky with a beard sittlng on a cloud getting ready to hurl lightning bolts at me right now. Intellectually, I think it's highly unlikely, but I, for one, am not omniscient. Are you?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:46 AM on 05/02/2008

Agnostic, eh? Interesting. I love people who label themselves that way. "I don't know" is the whole point is it? Well, ask yourself this: Do you live as if there is a god or gods? As in, do you live as if you might want to appease them if they exist? If you do, you're and agnostic theist. If you live as if there is no god or gods and pay no heed to them whatsoever you are an agnostic atheist. Sorry, but you just can't be an "agnostic". There's really only two sides. See the book "Atheism: The Case Against God" by George H. Smith for a much better detailing of why that is than my crude attempt here.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:21 AM on 05/02/2008

I've never "believed in god". I'm just wired like that. The idea of a god seems illogical and foolish to me, and always has.

However, unlike many atheists and religionists, I don't claim to have a hot line to the truth with a capital T. By my lights, if you do, you are an arrogant asshole. I haven't seen or been everywhere in the universe, so the possibility of some intelligence has to be accepted -- even if it's personally repugnant or illogical to me. I guess you can call it "taking the wide view." I happen to think of atheism as well as religion as a BELIEF system -- just pro or con. Where's the empirical evidence? I don't think we have access to it (yet, anyway. Maybe eventually).

Beiief or disbelief in the supernatural (which is what religion is -- it's on a level with belief in ghosts, and less credible than cryptozoology, as far as I'm concerned) has nothing, to me, to do with group-identification ("you're either with us or against us") which is one of the reasons strident atheism annoys me as much as strident fundamentalism.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:16 PM on 05/02/2008

What annoys me is people like you who believe that atheists claim that there is no god. Which it most certainly doesn"t. Even Richard Dawkins doesn"t dismiss the possibility. I personally do not know anyone who claims to be positive that there is no god. I"m an atheist, an A-Santa Clausist, An A-bigfootist, an A-garden fairyist. An A-dragonist and so forth, get it?

GWW

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:35 PM on 05/02/2008

Prog never said that "I don't know" was the whole point of anything. He just said he didn't know. HE simply decides not to make the leap of faith of saying god(s) don't exist, a leap of faith many atheists make. Agnosticism is a way of avoiding that leap of faith. To say there are only two sides to this issue is a very parochial view.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:25 AM on 05/02/2008

Name me some atheist that is positive that there is no god?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:37 PM on 05/02/2008

religion is business. spirituality is personal. i was told that slavery was wrong. therefore, i can not knowingly choose to follow a religion.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:23 PM on 05/01/2008

"I am particularly concerned that there are such strong negative opinions about people who believe differently than others"

This is more a function of human nature than religious nature. It always strikes me as odd this kind of war between beleivers and non believers. I suspect we share more ideas than we realize. As a Christian who has many friends that are atheists I see that there is more similarity than difference (ethics and values). I have no interest in propagating the faith nor do I advertise my Christianity.

I do have "good Christian" aquaintances where I have observed that once you proclaim this label the trap of arrogance is a constant threat.

I have met atheists that are as narrow and obnoxious as these "good Christians" and who ridicule all believers and people of faith as believeing in fairytales. I find this blanket dismissal just as disturbing
and as narrow.

I uspect both positions come from the same place: the need for human beings to hold on to a mode of being that will help them get through life.

Finally I have grappled with my own belief, not questioning the existence God but forging a relationship that is always about discovery and growth for it is the only way to honor this Unknown Creator , oursleves , and each other.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:13 PM on 05/01/2008

Religious nature is human nature. Religion is part of the human experience. This has nothing to do with the existence of god. We are not logical beings.

Unfortunately, our desire to believe in a big daddy in the sky will probably kill us as a species. We are not paying attention to the multiple crises in front of us.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:23 PM on 05/01/2008

Perhaps the fine men of the U.S. military simply are concerned that atheists won't keep queit about all the rapes of female soldiers, after all a woman in Iraq is more likely to be raped by a U.S. soldier than killed in the line of duty. Christians aren't too conerned though, after all the bible tells a story of a man who gives his to daughters to be raped by an angry mob to protect a guest at his house. It would be such a travesty if these brutish christian soldiers of ours were forced to be examined without a lens of hero worship and patriotic exaltation.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:33 PM on 05/01/2008

Even though I'm an atheist, I have to say you've taken the story of Lot way, WAY out of context...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:24 AM on 05/02/2008

It is an interesting question whether it is true that "When religious ideology becomes a guiding principal behind harmful behavior, as all religions have done (and secular institutions as well) at various times throughout history, it is likely a stagnation of the people practicing at that time"

It is certainly true that religions have to begin as something new by people who are questioning what they were brought up believing. After all, they were obviously brought up on something different. This means that religions when they are new will tend to be more liberal than what they replace.

Of course it is not clear why it would not be better to express this freedom of thought in terms of new philosophies which would hopefully be less hardened and so less likely to turn into a brake on new thought.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:47 PM on 05/01/2008

Ya atheism isn't regarded very highly in this country. I don't hide the fact that I'm an atheist bur I don't advertise it either. There are too many people who are more than willing to stand by or support individuals/groups who beat people over the head with their religions.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:30 PM on 05/01/2008

I enjoyed this article, however atheism is not a belief. It is a DISbelief. Atheists don't have a credo. For instance, the majority of human beings don't believe in flying purple people eaters, but we don't say "one has a belief in the disbelief of flying purple people eaters".

The article states that the purpose of religion is for introspection. I disagree. Religions were created by humans as CANNED ANSWERS to the philosophical questions, not as TOOLS to find the answers. Religions discourage free thought. Why are we here? Answer: God. How did we get here? Answer: God. What happens when we die? Answer: You go to Heaven. Science is more stimulating than any canned answer created by some uneducated peasant who lived 3000 years ago. Don't confuse practicing a religion with philosophical introspection. Two different things. You don't need to believe in God to be introspective. God is unnecessary to have an emotional awareness about your place in the cosmos.

Also, the religious are petrified of atheists, because they are uneducated about what an atheist is. The religious believe an atheist is some sort of baby killer, devil worshiper , or something else sinister. Hello! Atheists don't believe in the DEVIL, nor do they worship ANYTHING! Atheists are the most benevolent, giving, educated, and socially aware people I know. As for the military discriminating against atheists, it's too bad that these people fight and die for a Constitution that they don't even remotely understand. THAT is America's greatest tragedy.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:24 PM on 05/01/2008

Too many flaws in your comment to deconstruct them all. However, let's stick with the worst offenders in the lot.

"Atheists don't have a credo."

Atheists believe in ... nothing? Oh, wait. Atheists don't believe. Silly me. Guess we need to toss out such silly things such as hypotheses and the like as well. A little lesson: a negative belief ... is still a belief. "I don't believe in God," is just such an example. If you say, "God doesn't exist" as a way around that, you've merely logically stated your belief in a convenient fashion, as belief, since you've got no evidence to support your ... er, belief. To claim certainty on the matter only makes you a fool.

Atheists don't worship ANYTHING (sic)? Then you have a woeful understanding of human psychology. Read some Fromm or Jung (both atheists) on the matter. Educate yourself. Wake up. To be brief: all human beings worship something, whether it be God or gods, money, suburbia, their BMWs, their power, their meaningless cog-lives, and so on. There is plenty of evidence to support this.

Think before you post next time. Please.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:21 PM on 05/01/2008

I think you should think about your attacks before telling others to. Since you are naming philosophers and the like, maybe you should take a look at simple logic. Try putting your little "negative belief is a belief" scenerio into a logic proof and see how that works out. Can ~A = A? It's a simple identity statement that isn't correct.

George H Smith's "Atheism: The Case Against God" will also give you an excellent perspective on what proper atheism is. iluvsam pretty much hit the nail on the head.

As someone with a degree in philosophy and going for a PhD soon (also in philosophy), I think it is important to take a look at philosopher's true ideas before name-dropping them in discussions and take a look at arguments in a philosophical context as well.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:49 PM on 05/02/2008

I stand in awe of your truly juvenile attempt at sophistry.

"All human beings worship something"? Nonsense!

"A negative belief is still a belief"...perhaps, if you're referring to something like capital punishment or the benefits of a free market economy. But atheism is non-belief, which is neither.

And you dare council somebody to "...think before you post next time..."? Your incompetence as a logician is exceeded only by your arrogance. Silly you indeed.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:18 PM on 05/01/2008

ROTFLMAO! That is the most ludicrous piece of sophism I been witness to in quite awhile.

BTW, Carl Jung was a Transcendentalist, He believed in human beings having a Divine Soul.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:28 PM on 05/01/2008


How many times must we have this argument?

Millions of human beings believe in Santa Claus (granted, most of them are under the age of 8). I'll bet you don't think Santa Claus exists. Is your un-belief of Santa actually a belief? Is your un-belief of Santa the equivalent of a 4-year-old's fervent belief in the big white-bearded gift-giver (you know, god... er, I mean Santa - now which was I talking about)?

The burden of proof is ALWAYS on the claimant. If I believe flying turtles wearing sunglasses live on the moon, you do not have to PROVE the non-existence of said turtles to dis-believe in them? The concept of god is no less crazy than flying turtles on the moon. There is NO empirical evidence of god or gods - in fact, a case can easily be made as to why humans invent gods: to anthropomorphize the universe which we struggle to understand. In a sane world - one without the concept of god - atheists would not need to exist.

Perhaps YOU require SOMETHING to believe in - be it gods or money or drugs or American Idol. But don't project your inadequacies onto others.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:13 PM on 05/01/2008

You mean there's no turtles with sunglasses?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:53 AM on 05/02/2008

You're using the word "worship" in a very loose sense, one which makes it easier to equate superstitious belief with other aspects of human nature, and an old semantic trick.

If I say I worship an upper-case God, I am making a literal statement. If, however, I say I worship money or power, I am speaking in metaphor. In the case of the former, I am exalting something that cannot be proven, and the impact of which cannot be measured in any scientific fashion; in the case of the latter, we're dealing with tangible goals, which can be easily measured. It's not at all the same thing.

Atheists reach conclusions based on available information. That doesn't take faith, negative or positive.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:54 PM on 05/01/2008

You miss the point here. Theistic beliefs generally play a central role in the belief structure of theists. That is to say the fact that God exists is a belief that is central to ones sense of the world in a way that, for example, Bruce Springstein exists is not.

There do seem to be atheists for whom their atheism plays a similar role. People who are driven to existentialism by a despair born of a lack of Godly purpose would fit in here.

But most American atheists tend to simply not believe in God in much they way they don't believe in Santa Claus. It is an interesting fact that neither God nor Santa Claus exist. But neither are facts of particular import. An atheist is more likely to identify himself according to some other principle that plays the role that theism plays for the theist (if he thinks that far about his beliefs). So humanism or objectivism or some communism or some such thing might play a similar role. But humanism doesn't even need to be atheistic. The important parts of humanism are neutral on the existence of God, and atheism falls out rather than driving the view.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:32 PM on 05/01/2008

EXCELLENT post!!! As an atheist.... living in the south, I can't even tell people I am an atheist... if I do...they look at me like I'm a space alien.... and naturally assume I'm evil... while they lie, cheat, steal and