The Religious Right and the New Atheism

Join Our Community

Collarchat.com

Home Login Search

The Religious Right and the New Atheism

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> The Religious Right and the New Atheism

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/25/2010 9:09:16 AM

Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

Some people believe in God, some don't. Fine. What's for lunch? But some people go farther than that. And when they do, they begin to look a lot alike.

The Religious Right asserts, "God is real" (and we know who He is). The New Atheism asserts, "There is no 'God'" (you're delusional). Neither of these assertions can be established as fact. They are statements of doctrine. But both the Religious Right and the New Atheism advance a vision of a better world. And for both the Religious Right and the New Atheism, it is a world that should be, and could be, and would be, if only it wasn't for "them".

For the Religious Right, the enemy is Satan: "godless atheists" and believers in "false religions". For the New Atheism, the enemy is Religion: people who foolishly believe in gods, goddesses, faeries, wood nymphs, and colloidal silver. And for both the Religious Right and the New Atheism, these enemies need to be either converted to the cause, or else marginalized, made invisible, and denied access to the corridors of power.

But both the Religious Right and New Atheism ignore the most fundamental truth of human nature, namely, that we are imperfect beings; that the temptations of status, prestige, and power are no respecters of persons or ideologies; that scientists are just as capable of self-serving motivations as priests or anyone else; and that scientific knowledge is just as susceptible of serving nefarious ends as religion or anything else.

Thus, both the Religious Right and the New Atheism represent non-reality based utopian ideologies, each with its own vision of a better world, each with its own "Us versus Them" fantasy to explain the shortcomings of our present state, and each with its inevitable prescription for what needs to be done -- to who -- in order to fix it.

Haven't we been here before?

K.

< Message edited by Kirata -- 10/25/2010 9:28:57 AM >

RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/25/2010 9:14:21 AM

Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline

Care to cite examples of a few atheists who've retreated that far into cloud cuckoo land? Not even Dawkins has taken it as far as you're implying, and most atheists find him overly condescending and combative anyway.

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to Kirata)

RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/25/2010 9:20:30 AM

kdsub

Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline

Hi Moonhead

Don't you think pointing to almost any thread on religion right here on CM is proof enough of the cuckoo's... on both sides.

Butch

_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to Moonhead)

RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/25/2010 9:24:25 AM

Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline

If that's what Kirata's on about, then fair enough. I got the impression was that his op was more about the cheerleaders for both sides in the Big Room, though. Last time I checked, the atheists seemed a bit less flakey than the people who are insisting that fairy stories be given equal time to the theory of evolution in public schools, and that sex education is evil.

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to kdsub)

RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/25/2010 9:29:59 AM

Posts: 2784
Joined: 1/8/2009
Status: offline

My problem with the hard core religious right is the idea that everyone needs to follow their rules. if they would stop trying to push their ideas and agenda on the entire rest of the country I could care less what they wish to believe and practice.

The cuckoo atheist on the other end I don't really have issues with. Only because they are a lot easier to just ignore and forget they exist.

(in reply to kdsub)

RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/25/2010 9:30:01 AM

kdsub

Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline

Perhaps... but you are proving his point. Many religions are not pushing for "fairy stories"... or against sex education...but you choose to lump them all together according to your vision of the universe.

Butch

_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to Moonhead)

RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/25/2010 9:33:52 AM

kdsub

Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline

Agreed...but there is a vast middle...and like most middles they say little just live their lives and wish the fanatics of both extremes would just shut the fuck up...as they say.

Butch

_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to flcouple2009)

RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/25/2010 10:14:25 AM

Posts: 2784
Joined: 1/8/2009
Status: offline

I talked about the two in his question.

I don't care what "fairy tales" or anything else a religious group wants to believe. As long as they're not trying to make me live by their rules I will defend their right to practice their religion in peace.

The atheist I feel sorry for.

< Message edited by flcouple2009 -- 10/25/2010 11:09:55 AM >

(in reply to kdsub)

RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/25/2010 10:44:17 AM

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

Kirata's point is, I think (he'll correct me if I'm wrong, I trust), about the inherent lack of logic in extreme positions--from any of the extremes.

Teaching "fairy tales," as people are putting it, has, yes, been pushed to silly extremes. But when I see some of the silly things the more militant atheist groups are doing, I can't say they exhibit any greater mental prowess. Reactionary, in fact--exactly as the reaction to evolutionary theory.

(in reply to flcouple2009)

RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/25/2010 10:49:01 AM

Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline

Excellent post, and a good summary of my position for a while.

Thanks, k.

Firm

_____________________________

Some people are just idiots.

(in reply to Kirata)

RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/25/2010 11:33:23 AM

Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Perhaps... but you are proving his point. Many religions are not pushing for "fairy stories"... or against sex education...but you choose to lump them all together according to your vision of the universe.

Butch

He's only talking about the extreme elements.

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to kdsub)

RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/25/2010 12:02:59 PM

kdsub

Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline

And of course you and I are far from extreme...

_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to Moonhead)

RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/25/2010 12:11:33 PM

Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline

Perish the thought.

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to kdsub)

RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/25/2010 1:30:21 PM

hertz

Posts: 1315
Joined: 8/7/2010
Status: offline

Fundamentalism, in whatever guise it takes, sucks. Be it the unquestioning belief in the Free Market, Jesus or Darwinism, it sucks.

The only difficulty I have with what Kirata has said is this bit:

quote:

...both the Religious Right and the New Atheism represent non-reality based utopian ideologies, each with its own vision of a better world, each with its own "Us versus Them" fantasy to explain the shortcomings of our present state, and each with its inevitable prescription for what needs to be done -- to who -- in order to fix it.

I think it is possible to believe in and strive for some vision of Utopia without embracing the suckiness of fundamentalism. In fact, I'd go further, and suggest that some sort of vision of an ideal future and how to get there is essential if we are to avoid cynicism.

(in reply to Moonhead)

RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/25/2010 1:39:41 PM

Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

What about the new atheist right?

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to hertz)

RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/25/2010 1:50:42 PM

Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline

Not to 'diss' your thoughts there, Kirata. But isn't this a widely held understanding of many political elements in the country at current? Simply replace 'Religion Right' for 'NRA Members' and 'Atheists' for 'Gun Control Advocates', and you get the same concept? NRA members & Gun Control Advocates are generally at the extreme ends of the 2nd Amendment. Or replace 'Religion Right' for 'Tea Party member' and 'Atheists' for 'Democrats'. Those two groups are at odds on a wide range of issues.

We could do this for a number of issues, not those already mentioned, like Abortion, Border Control/Immigration, Economic Stablity, Foreign Policy, etc. And so we can readily find the extreme views, but also, the 'saner' views of their respected sides. They all push the idea, that if Americans simply listen to their cause as 'whats best for America', things will improve. Given conditions in the country, its not to hard to guess, that there are people who are vunerable to unscruplous ploys by groups/individuals seeking one or more agendas.

There is a concept, that is not used anymore. If Republicans gain control of either the House or Senate (or both, in the extreme unlikely event), its fair money, we wont see this concept for at least another two years. The concept is 'give & take'. Two groups sit down, and agree on middle ground, and THEN, argue passionately for things they want in the bill. They are trying to convince the moderates, the other side is much more insane then their position. For a long time, Democrats & Republicans operated under this idea, and goverment generally moved forward. During the late Clinton Administration, is really when the 'give and take' started to disappear. It didn't disappear over night, but over the course of 12 years (my opinion only, folks).

There has to be a middle ground. Not one that is forced at gun point. THAT, is what America is about (or at least, one of its core ideas). Groups of individuals, sharing freedoms given to us under the Bill of Rights, sitting down at a table, and argue passionately their points. But, to do it in a civil manner. If one person is speaking, the other side remains quiet and as least distracting as possible. Their arguements are based on agreed facts, and kepted to an orderly manner. Every man (or women, given its 2010, not 1776), given a chance to speak on the issue of the day. And then vote on the manner to push the bill forward; and tackle the next problem on the on the list.

I personally, do not hold much confidence the Tea Party will bring civil order, maturity, or wisdom to the table. I have no confidence in their choice of candidates, nor the minimal level of maturity needed to serve in a position such as 'Representative' or 'Senator' for the state they represent. No, I believe these individuals, are the representation of more extremists views on one side of the arguement (or set of arguements). That they give example, to the sort of people we, as Americans, can NEVER allow in to a position of power. While a Republican could be expected to represent their Democrat constituents some of the time, these Tea Party canidates will ignore them at every chance.

Lets just say I was a Democrat. If I'm pretty sure the Tea Party will not 'give & take' as reasonable, rational, mature adults; why should I 'give and take'? What is in it for me, if the other side is just 'take' and no 'give'?

< Message edited by joether -- 10/25/2010 1:53:03 PM >

(in reply to Moonhead)

RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/25/2010 2:50:44 PM

Posts: 342
Joined: 2/1/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

Some people believe in God, some don't. Fine. What's for lunch? But some people go farther than that. And when they do, they begin to look a lot alike.

The Religious Right asserts, "God is real" (and we know who He is). The New Atheism asserts, "There is no 'God'" (you're delusional). Neither of these assertions can be established as fact. They are statements of doctrine. But both the Religious Right and the New Atheism advance a vision of a better world. And for both the Religious Right and the New Atheism, it is a world that should be, and could be, and would be, if only it wasn't for "them".

For the Religious Right, the enemy is Satan: "godless atheists" and believers in "false religions". For the New Atheism, the enemy is Religion: people who foolishly believe in gods, goddesses, faeries, wood nymphs, and colloidal silver. And for both the Religious Right and the New Atheism, these enemies need to be either converted to the cause, or else marginalized, made invisible, and denied access to the corridors of power.

But both the Religious Right and New Atheism ignore the most fundamental truth of human nature, namely, that we are imperfect beings; that the temptations of status, prestige, and power are no respecters of persons or ideologies; that scientists are just as capable of self-serving motivations as priests or anyone else; and that scientific knowledge is just as susceptible of serving nefarious ends as religion or anything else.

Thus, both the Religious Right and the New Atheism represent non-reality based utopian ideologies, each with its own vision of a better world, each with its own "Us versus Them" fantasy to explain the shortcomings of our present state, and each with its inevitable prescription for what needs to be done -- to who -- in order to fix it.
Haven't we been here before?

K.

I think this is why we sleep 8 hours a day.

It isn't going to go away.

_____________________________

I used to love anal until I ran into people who's heads I had to remove first.

(in reply to Kirata)

RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/25/2010 4:01:00 PM

Posts: 5871
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline

Incidentally, where do the extreme agnostics fall into this mix? You know the kind who believe that even if the details of a claim are all demonstrably false the claim could still be true.

(in reply to Kirata)

RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/25/2010 4:17:24 PM

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

Actually as someone who has read a lot by the "new atheists" and considers himeself at least a fellow traveler I object to the characterization of the movement. there is nothing utopian about it. And the "new atheists" are most definitely quite closely attached to reality.

In the most basic terms the "new atheists" are simply tired of having religion nonconsensually shoved down their throats. We live in a society where a non christian much less a non believer has zero chance of being elected President. Where the last month of the year (with the creep of the "season" before Thanksgiving it is approaching a full tenth of the year) is a ridiculous display of faux faith over a myth that got set on the date in question simply for PR purposes. Where Pat Robertson and Graham schmooze the powerful as a matter of right while Dawkins and Myers are reviled and shunned. Where the canard "no atheists in foxholes" can be repeated ad infinitum without anyone ever laughing or pointing out the absurdity of the claim.

Finally the "new atheists" aren't exactly new. Samuel Clemens and Colonel Ingersoll said the same things we're saying today over a century ago.

(in reply to GotSteel)

RE: The Religious Right and the New Atheism - 10/25/2010 5:02:22 PM

Posts: 1674
Joined: 2/1/2009
Status: offline

I like your post...your observation...your opinion on this, Kirata. I also think a lot of people "take it too far". A lot of people think 'they' know what's good for everything and often their rants kick off the other side of it all. Next thing you know you're at extreme ends. This doesn't only happen with religion, but with everything, IMO.

If everyone could just calm down, try to see things from their opponents POV (possibly?), they might be able to relate. They might not, either. As your last words stated....

"Haven't we been here before?"

Its my opinion that no matter whether you're talking religion, politics...or anything people get passionate over, it will be taken to its extreme. The job I give myself (or personally try to) is to try to see past everyones opinions, no matter how loud and irate they get, and to form my own. Quietly. Doesn't mean I won't voice my opinion either. It also doesn't mean that someone's opinion won't change my opinion. But I try not to get too extreme...and try to see the difference.

_____________________________

For the great majority of mankind are satisfied with appearance, as though they were realities and are often more influenced by the things that seem than by those that are. - Niccolo Machiavelli

(in reply to Kirata)

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> The Religious Right and the New Atheism

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.156