“Atheistic Fundamentalism”
Well, while the Archibishop of Canterbury may be trying to “dumb down” christianity, the Archbishop of Wales seems to be on track:
In his Christmas message, the archbishop said: “Any kind of fundamentalism, be it Biblical, atheistic or Islamic, is dangerous.”
The archbishop said “atheistic fundamentalism” was a new phenomenon.
He said it advocated that religion in general and Christianity in particular have no substance, and that some view the faith as “superstitious nonsense”.
As well as leading to Christmas being called “Winterval,” the archbishop said “virulent, almost irrational” attacks on Christianity led to hospitals removing all Christian symbols from their chapels, and schools refusing to allow children to send Christmas cards with a Christian message.
He also said it led to things like “airlines refusing staff the freedom to wear a cross round their necks” - a reference to the row in which British Airways (BA) suspended an employee who insisted on wearing a cross necklace.
Dr Morgan said: “All of this is what I would call the new “fundamentalism” of our age. It allows no room for disagreement, for doubt, for debate, for discussion.
“It leads to the language of expulsion and exclusivity, of extremism and polarisation, and the claim that, because God is on our side, he is not on yours.”
He said: “God is not exclusive, he is on the side of the whole of humanity with all its variety.”
Dr Morgan said it was “perfectly natural” to have a “coherent and rational debate about the tenets of the Christianity”.
But he said “virulent, almost irrational” attacks on it were “dangerous” because they refused to allow any contrary viewpoint and also affected the public perception of religion.
I think that Dr. Morgan has stumbled in to the Twilight Zone like phenomenon that we in the Colonies call “Political Correctness”. The difference being that here in the US, the Atheist Fundamentalists are only on the rampage against Christianity, and to a much lesser degree, Judaism. I see no evidence that they are similarly opposed to Islam - in fact, I think they choose to see Islam as a Race or Ethnicity, rather than a Religion.
On December 24, 2007 at 12:04 am, Tired Turtle wrote:
The excesses of fundementalist Athiests pale in comperison to the to the crimes perpetrated by the world’s major religions. Millions have died at the hands of Christians, Jews and Muslims. All in the name of God. Even in our so called modern age, carnage and religion go hand in hand.
Before I can accept the premise that Christians are being somehow victimized by those that are fighting for freedom FROM religion I need to see the Christians (especially the Evangelicals) answer for their crimes. Anything else is just pathetic whining.
On December 24, 2007 at 8:34 am, Aurelius wrote:
While I am not an apologist for Religion in general, or any religion in specific, let’s take a look at this.
Death by Christianity: Christianity was a minor cult religion until accepted as the state religion of the Eastern Roman Empire (aka Byzantium). Since the end of the reformation wars in Europe, say no later than 1700, things have been pretty quiet on the Christianity caused bloodletting front. This gives us about 1500 years to play with.
A lot of the deaths attributed to Christianity up to the 900’s are not so much religion oriented, as using religion as a tool for empire and nation building. From the 900’s on to the reformation, the vast majority of bloodletting in the name of Christianity was in wars against Muslims or Huns/Mongols (animists); in the latter, the christian religion was more of a rallying point than a cause. Only in the Crusades do we see a true clash of religions. The reformation was more of a Christian civil war than anything else - primarily the attempt of the Catholic Church to maintain its dominance of Christain thought and practice. Christians no longer fight wars to spread Christianity.
The Jews are, in a point of departure from Christians or Muslims, also an Ethnic group, and so it becomes hard to seperate what is a secual and religious war for them. It is clear that from the time of the disapora, until the mid 1940’s, they Jews, as a group, were not in a position to conduct wars of any nature. Since the founding of Israel, from my reading of history, only ONE of the wars Israel has fought was started by them. All the others were started by their Muslim nieghbors. The current Israeli-Paestinian conflict is primarily a Secular one from the Israeli side - but a Religious one from the Palestinian side. Jews do NOT fight wars to spread Judaism.
Islam has been an aggressive, war like religion since it’s founding. One of its basic tenents is that non-believers must be converted, or live as dhimmi (2nd class citizens, paying taxes to support the Caliphate). Islam is both a religion and a Political foundation, such as the Catholic Church never really achieved. It was the violent spread of Islam that led to much of the wars and bloodshed that the Christian church is tarred with. Unlike Christianity, Islam remains a religion of Empire today, taking by force what it cannot take by persuasion. One of the reasons Islam fights, is to spread Islam. When you couple that with the glorification of the Martyr - to die in the cause of spreading Islam - you get a very dangerous and militant force.
The problem I see with Fundamentalist Atheists is that they are ONLY concerned with Christianity (which is a religion, and a religion only) and Judaism (which is a religion and an ethnicity), but say bothing (beyond your statement above) about Islam - which, from an Atheist standpoint, to be logically consistent, is the ultimate "evil" (not that Atheists recognize evil) of being a Religion and a System of Government.
Yet Atheist Fundamentalists ignore the installation of Muslim Footbaths in public areas, and the set aside of Muslim Prayer Rooms in public areas, but go after Nativities, and Menorahs and the very word Christmas with undisguised glee.
I have no problem with Atheists. I a probably am one, depending on who you ask. I do have a problem with hypocrisy, and cowardice. If you want to go after a religion that is a real threat to Atheists, you need to go after Islam. Becuase Islam is the only one that will KILL YOU for not believing their way (or paying a heavy fine). And Islam is the only one (for the last few hundred years) that would kill either of us for saying the blasphemous things that we have said on this page…
BTW, Merry Christmas!
On December 24, 2007 at 10:57 am, Tired Turtle wrote:
I am not going to debate the reletive righteousness of the various religions. You are correct when you talk of the linkage between cultures, political structures, ethnicity and religion.
The great experiment called the United States of America was designed to overcome these linkages so that each individual could live their lives according to their personal expectations without being subjagated to the whims of government or the persecution of competeing religions. It is true that the various Christian sects dominate the social fabric of the US, but not let us forget that the same constitution that gives them the right to practice their faith without persecution is the same doctrine that gives me the right to choose a life without their God.
The fact of the matter is that religious zealots have done everything they can to usurp the governments of the US and codify their religions. I have no problem with people choosing to adhere to religious dogma in their private lives and for those that need such guidance to give them direction and purpose, good on them. For those that use religion to gain dominion over their fellow citizens I have nothing but contempt for they are a source of hate that we cannot afford.
We often hear of the culture war in this great land of ours. I submit to you that this war was declared by Christians to combat godlessnes. They are not content to ” spread the word” they wish to “enforce the word” thus combating evil in a society they wish to control. The excesses of Athiestic Fundementalism that you cite are mearly the backlash that Christian Fundementalists have earned many times over. It is unfortunate that innocent bystanders have in a few cases been affected, Idiots come in all sizes.
I hope you do have a Merry, and if you choose, a Blessed Christmas
On December 24, 2007 at 11:38 am, Aurelius wrote:
As far as the "relative rightness" of religions; the only distinction I draw is in the willingness of any religions adherents to kill me for not following their path. I am not a fan of organized religion, though I do understand its purpose in society, and in the development of human cultures.
And I agree completely that this nation was founded to allow for all people to worship as they please, or to not worship at all,; as they see fit. That the government has no place dictating, or endorsing, any particular religious creed over another, or at all, regardless of the creeds that may have formed the basis of the founders own doctrines.
I also agree that religious precepts have no place in government or in law. But that does not mean that a good or logical law should be denied or adandoned, simply becuase it’s origin is religious, or it meshes with a religious doctrine, regardless of that religions prominence in society.
There are extremist Chrsitians who would like to encode the "word of god" into law; just as there are extremist Mulsims that would like to have Shari’a become the law of this land. But that is not an excuse to expunge, erase, and eridicate anything that has any religous taint at all from the public forum.
What can it hurt to have "Merry Christmas" and a Nativity on public property, if public funds are not used to install or support it? What harm comes from a Menorah in the town square, if installed and maintained by the local synagogue? How can it be harmfull to society if some small space is set aside, if maintained by adherents, for daily prayers?
In closing, I agree completely that anyone that would use their religion as a blunt instrument against their fellow man is an enemy of all, and should be trreated as such. But I think that massive overreactions simply feed the cycle, leading to more over reaction, more animosity, and more repercusions.
At this moment, the only group of Christians I am aware of that fit this profile is the White Supremecist movement, in its various guises. But these people are ostracised from the mainstream of Christianity around the world, and while they talk a big game, are, on the whole, relatively harmless. If you are worried about a group that is actively trying to subvert the laws of this land, and place their own religion law in its place, you need only walk down to the nearest Mosque. Perhaps the Fundamentalist Atheists would be better advised to seek a truce with thise they can live with, to focus on a far more dangerous adversary.
As the Muslims say, The Enemy of My Enemy is my Friend.
Shalom. Hope you have a great 08.