I just watched a YouTube video on why atheists care about religion.
Here are my half-formed thoughts on the video:
1. First off, just to be clear, the word “care” here does not mean something like “to sympathize” with, but rather has the decidedly negative connotation of “to be troubled” about.
2. One argument the video makes is that atheists care about religion because religion discriminates against them — legally, socially, educationally, etc.
This may or may not be true. But if it is true, then I’ll agree that atheists — like any other minority group — should indeed voice their concerns, call for democratic change, and so on. Just like many minorities did in the 1960s and so rightly won their civil rights.
3. But we need to better define discrimination. Is discrimination solely a legal matter or is this video really calling for something something deeper, such as a more widespread sympathy for and acceptance of atheism? Because, at least in part, the video seems to want to play the role of grassroots popularizer — atheism for the people and the like. If this is valid, it would then go beyond merely challenging illegal discrimination. In a sense it would be atheistic evangelism — which is something some atheists hold against some Christians, among other religions.
4. Should not the religious (Jewish, Muslim, Christian, et al.) likewise be free to voice his opinion, call for democratic change, etc.? Just as there’s no reason why atheism should be kept out of American politics, per se, likewise I see no reason why religion should be kept out of Americans politics, per se, either — as long as all is done in accordance with the laws of our land. In other words, just as the atheist has the right to propose whatever law(s) he wishes, so does the religious person have the right to propose whatever law(s) he wishes. This is how our system of government works. If the religious person in a certain community wants to propose that Intelligent Design be taught alongside evolution, and the majority vote, and the proposal passes, then as silly as it may sound to atheists, I don’t see why that’s not perfectly legitimate, politically and legally speaking. Just like the atheist is attempting to do in regard to other issues.
5. The people of our nation today are predominantly theistic in belief. The majority believe in some deity. However, what if the roles were reversed? What if the majority of Americans were atheists and the theists and/or religious were in the minority? I wonder how the atheist would treat others — not only those who are like-minded, if that makes a difference, but what might be more telling, those in the minority.
I ask because, in an atheistic worldview, there doesn’t seem to be any basis (apart from a social contract) for values such as tolerance for others. After all, why should the atheist tolerate others if it’s not in his self-interest to do so? I don’t say that many atheists do not treat others equitably, practically speaking, but rather I ask, philosophically speaking, why should they?
6. Related to the above, and as seen in the video, atheists often likewise believe that mankind evolved from lower species of animals. If this is so, is there an atheistic foundation for human rights?
7. The video goes at some length to emphasize that the USA is a Christian nation. Moreover, there’s even a hint that the USA might be some sort of a theocracy. Or the fear that it’s headed in that direction. But I don’t see where Americans operate the USA as a theocracy as the video wants to imply. We are a republic. We are free to speak out. We are free to organize. We are free to vote in accordance with our views. We elect representatives to represent us at the highest levels. Sure, this is the ideal, and there are many problems, but take the fact that an atheist (or anyone else) can freely voice his opinion in this nation without fear of physical reprisal — does this not in and of itself speak much to us about who we are as a people and a nation?
Yet if someone continues to contend that the USA is a theocracy, this person should look at those nations which truly are theocracies and compare how they function with how ours functions. E.g. does the contemporary USA honestly resemble Taliban Afghanistan? If someone still thinks so, I wonder, given the choice, where would this person want to live and raise a family?
8. Although the USA is not a theocracy, there are indeed those who wish to make it so. And that’s what atheists (and others) have a problem with. They strongly believe that the USA should not be a theocracy. Which is perfectly fine as far as it goes. However, there are some more militant atheists who wish to make the USA into an entirely secular, atheistic nation. So, I’d ask, why is an atheocracy any better than a theocracy?
9. The video takes the tack that religion in the USA threatens the atheist’s freedoms, among other things. I don’t care to argue the assertion right now, but I do wish to bring up one point: based on real, historical examples, atheistic governments have done far worse in regard to freedoms and human rights.
If the atheist wants to cite the years of slavery in the USA, perhaps the Trail of Tears, or the Japanese internment camps during WWII, all the while alleging that the USA is a “Christian” nation; or if he wishes to focus on the broader spectrum of Christian history in general, and thus cite the thousands killed under the Inquisition or the Crusades, he should at least be fair. That is, he should likewise look at those nations governed under atheistic principles and worldviews. He should refer to governments under the likes of Stalin in the USSR and Mao in China, or even the current North Korean regime, to witness how terrible has been the toll of atheistic governments on human freedoms, dignity, and lives.
I don’t know why we somehow tend to associate atheism with freedom and liberty when in fact the opposite seems to be the case, historically speaking.
