Destructive Tenacities

The rear end of a pachyderm - photoshopped.On a blog sporting an anti-Marxist emblem and the possibly dubious claim that "We're not complete assholes!" I found typical religionist hyperbole, scriptural quotes, and mysteria.

"There are four major world religions. . . . They nearly all have one corresponding feature: an attempt to create positive attitudes through mutual beliefs."

Positive attitudes? Have you not read the Bible? Are you not aware of the Religious Wrong's diatribes and slurs against anyone who has the temerity to reject absolutist controls or to reject various SkyPoppa Myths? Are you not aware of Islamic degradation of women and medieval Sharia laws. Have you not heard of the history of violence between different religions persuasions that continues to this day?

"Then we have the bastard child of religion, namely Atheism. A pernicious anti-creed that has as it's motor negativity and nihilism. Since these individuals must define themselves by what they don't believe, it becomes incumbent on them to repudiate the beliefs of others."

You imply that religious gullibility is a superior state for humans, when it has actually long been the almost exclusive province of the ignorant, credulous, and self-interested. Atheists mostly define themselves by what they do believe–metaphysical naturalism, humanist moral contracts, mutual tolerance, freethinking, love of beauty, nature, family. The label atheism was not self-designated by atheists, though almost all of us are proud to proclaim ourselves atheists. No, the label was originally assigned by theists who could not conceive of how rational thinkers could reject inconsistent, superstitious, malignity invented by ancient tribesmen.

"For such people it is child's play to take the religious texts of those they disagree with and turn them into brickbats with which to pummel the faithful."

Of course it is easy, the texts are inconsistent, often viciously nasty, and fantasmagorical. Theology is a little more carefully thought out, though it too is internally inconsistent and all purported 'proofs' have failed.

"Heck, I could do it quite easily."
If you fancy that you could easily refute the atheist position, you flatter yourself. The burden of proof lies with theistic claimants and they have failed for 2,000+ years.

"The problem with this practice is it is a negative action. It serves no purpose but destruction. No person is helped, no good is done. In fact, the opposite is true."

You probably have a point there, though there is a positive reason for what you feel is a negative action. You are not correct that no person is helped–many closet agnostics and atheists are relieved to have finally found those to whom they can be honest. Good will be done when the pernicious political stranglehold of the Religious Wrong is loosened–unless you think that trillions spent and hundreds of thousands killed and maimed is a good thing.

"We get young men of science declaring themselves to be soulless when they should know from their science that they can know no such thing."

If you knew anything about neuroscience, then you would understand what they mean. I have known many young men of science, and I can assure you that they were not 'soulless' in the sense of lacking positive emotion or a sense of purpose, they were simply acknowledging that we should all live this one life as fully as possible because dualism is wishful thinking.

"We get people forming public policy with the belief that "A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy" (Ingrid Newkirk, PETA)."

Your animal rights activists sorely needs some education in molecular genetics, cladistics, or taxonomy!

"We get a society where Grace is an alien concept and human life is cheapened to the point where millions of dead babies becomes a political issue and not a moral one."

Grace is an invented, imagined, wished-for concept.

If you wish to reduce abortions, making the procedure illegal will simply result in young women's being forced back to hole-in-the-wall abortionists, with resultant death by infection and hemorrhage of many young women in addition to the death of their fetuses. If you do not want young women who get pregnant because of lack of contraception to die at the hands of quacks, then don't make abortion illegal. If you wish to reduce abortion numbers, you will vote for decent social programs. If you wish to reduce the number of abortions, provide good education in contraception and provide free condoms to all who need them. The religionist impulse to render good measures unavailable in vain hope of stopping an activity of which you do not approve, or to overcontrol via legislation simply does not work.

"Discussion and dialog are positive things, and positive results can come from them."
They might be if religionists were not so intent on insulting anyone who does not toe the mythological party line.

"If someone chooses to be a Godless, soulless heathen fine. It's the path they have chosen. "

Your attitude and remarks indicate just the opposite. Yours is the typical hysterical, ad hominem attack.

"I do feel sympathy for such a person"

I sincerely doubt it. I think that you mean that you feel contempt. I don't know a single atheist who needs or even warrants your sympathy. As a group, we are generally emotionally well-adjusted, well-educated, and well-employed.

"for their world is devoid of Divine Grace, and their final destination is merely the grave."
As is your world and your final destination; you just won't face it. Wishful imagining does not make a thing so, particularly when there is not only absolutely no good evidence for that thing, but intstead there is abundant evidence to the contrary. I am quite content to know that death is the end. Atheists are more comfortable in foxholes than are believers.

No comments: