Saving the soul of secularism?
Steve Hayes
the Soul of Secularism":
== begin quoted text ==
" Since February 2003, millions in the U.S. and around the world have
participated in marches, rallies and varied protests, making a bold, ethical
stand against U.S. military aggression. Citizens have engaged in persistent
resistance to the destruction of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and thousands
of U.S troops.
While numerous humanists have and continue to be actively involved in the
anti-war movement many others are too narrowly focused on issues such as
church-state separation and promoting science education.
The time has come for humanists to actively assert that they are as
committed to peace and ending U.S. militarism as they are to the separation of
church and state. If we can see the threat to freedom posed by the mixture of
church and state, we must see the threat to freedom posed by militarism.
The very legitimacy of secularism and freethought is at stake. Humanists,
atheists, and assorted freethinkers along with the organizations that
represent them: the American Humanist Association, American Atheists, Secular
Student Alliance, Freedom From Religion Foundation, Center for Inquiry, among
others, should join anti-war/peace organizations in calling for a dramatic
change in U.S. foreign policy away from neo-liberal imperialism and
militarism."
== end quoted text ==
This strikes me as very strange.
I can understand why humanists, who believe that human beings have intrinsic
value, might see militarism as a threat to human freedom and therefore a bad
thing.
What I find difficult to understand is the logic of urging atheists to support
such a cause. I can see no logical connection between atheism and a response
to militarism (or to pacifism, for that matter). There is nothing about
atheism that makes it desirable that atheists should join anti-war or peace
organisations. There is also nothing about atheism that makes it undesirable.
Atheism, as atheism, is surely quite neutral in regard to such moral
imperatives.
Why should an atheist, by virtue of being an atheist, believe that neoliberal
imperialism is a bad thing? Some atheists have clearly believed that it is
quite a good thing.
It is possibile to say, as Marx and Lenin did, that it is incumbent on a
communist to be an atheist. But the reverse is not true. It is not incumbent
on an atheist to be a communist. An atheist can just as easily be a neoliberal
imperialist.
This seems to be "fluffy bunny" secularism, as some of my (neo) pagan friends
would say. They seem to be getting carried away by moralism.
http://methodius.blogspot.com/2009/11/saving-soul-of-secularism.html
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
hypa...@comcast.net
doubt one of the dumbest things I have ever
seen written in a newsgroup and, considering
how many newsgroups there are, that is really
saying something. All atheism is is a lack of
belief in the existence of a god or gods. That's
it. Whatever an atheist's personal phiosopy is
has nothing to do with this. But, my real
response to your message is that I, personally,
find that most atheists are better, kinder, more
moral and law-abiding than any other group of
people. This is my personal experience and
what I've read about most atheists backs this up.
(Hitler and Stalin didn't do the horrors they did
because they were atheists. Hitler wasn't an
atheist and he wasn't a very good Catholic, but
he was Catholic and he was insane.. Stalin was
an atheist, but he was also insane. Both were
madmen whose main interest was power and
control over people.) There are far less atheists
in prisons than there are of people that belong
to religions. That is easy enough to back up on
the Internet. (I'll let you check that out, since you
probably wouldn't take my word for it.) Most
atheists are good people because they know that
this is how they should be, not because someone
tells them that they should be this way or some
god will squash them like a bug or send them to
their hell. Atheists don't live in fear of reprisals,
unless they break the laws of whatever country
they live in. That's the way it should be. People
should be raised to think for themselves. I would
rather trust someone who has decided on their
own to be a good, honest person than a person
who has been ordered to be good and honest or
they will go to hell forever when they die. After all,
what is to stop such a believer from doing all kinds
of horrible things once they believe they are going
to hell? What more do they have to lose?