Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)
Friday, October 19, 2007 | Reason : Commentary | print version Print | Comments

Audio A question of belief

Tim Egan, BBC

Thanks to Ivan Bailey for the link.

Reposted from:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7053157.stm

pledgeThe US may be one of the most religious countries in the West but is it undergoing a period of doubt, asks Tim Egan.

A few days ago, I attended a memorial service for a friend who died far too young, of throat cancer. The service was held at a history museum, and it was packed - standing room only.

What was curious, initially, was the lack of any reference to religion. My friend had left a final set of instructions: he wanted to be remembered first as a husband to his wife of more than 20 years, and second as a citizen of his city, and third as a lover of history.

During the tributes, there were many references to how the past can inform our decisions in the present. There were nods to reason and friendship and love.

The closest anyone came to mentioning God or spirituality was when someone told the widow, as an aside, that you often visit the deceased through dreams - when they can appear at no particular prompting.

Even if the formal religion was absent, the habit of expressing a hope for spiritual optimism remains. The secular funeral is still somewhat of a novelty, at least to me.

But it may be something that we see more and more of in the future - particularly on the West Coast, the most unchurched part of the United States.

It may be daring to say it but America seems to be experiencing an atheist moment. Although "In God We Trust" was declared the national motto by an act of Congress more than 50 years ago and has been stamped on the currency for longer than that, some considerable doubt has developed of late.

If you look at the bestseller list over the last year, you'll find a number of books on atheism - to the surprise of the publishing industry.

God has always moved in not-so-mysterious ways when it comes to the literary world. He can sell books, especially ones that foretell an apocalyptic ending just around the corner.

The so-called Left Behind books, a series of novels envisioning the Rapture, when the good are separated from the evil in a fiery judgment day, sell in the millions. They are not for the faint of faith.

Another genre, self-help books that invoke God for the sake of making money, losing weight or finding a date, have a permanent home on the bestseller list. God is kept very busy with this segment of the market.

But until this year, there was thought to be little support - or audience - for tomes by the anti-religious. Several books changed that.

Full-bore polemics

On the academic side, we have God: The Failed Hypothesis by Victor Stenger and Nothing: Something to Believe In by Nica Lalli.

The three most popular books are God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything by the newly-Americanized Christopher Hitchens, The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins and Letter to a Christian Nation by Sam Harris.

hitchThese bestsellers are not cursory academic surveys; they are full-bore polemics against religion, challenging the very idea of God.

Hitchens, with his quick wit and his quiver of quotes from long-dead British luminaries which he carries over from his schoolboy days in England, seems to be having the most fun and the most effect.

You could call him the Pied Piper of non-believers. He makes it a point to debate with a cleric in every city he visits, and is a frequent guest on conservative and religious radio stations.

The premise of his book is that while religion may have served people well in the age of ignorance, now that science can explain the world there is no reason to attribute the sun, the moon and forces like gravity to higher beings.

As he says, the nine-year-old knows more about the natural world now than the leading scholars of a thousand years ago. What has rankled his critics most is his suggestion that religion is usually a force for bad.

Believers point out that people of faith have been at the forefront of significant improvements in human rights and in caring for fellow humans over centuries - everything from abolition of slavery to the civil rights movement in this country, to church-led efforts to reduce starvation and disease in less-developed countries.

I ran into Hitchens not long ago at a book festival where he was jousting away and getting rich in the process. He looked just as the New York Times Book Review had described him: "A village atheist standing in the square trying to pick arguments with the good citizens on their way to church."

I asked Hitchens why he thought his book had such a sudden rise to the top of the bestseller charts when polls show that - at most - barely one-half-of-one-percent of Americans call themselves atheists.

He said that the polls were misleading. There is a large and fast-growing segment of the population that is lapsed or well onto its way to atheism but is afraid to admit it.

"If you're a lapsed Catholic," Hitchens told me. "You're part of a very large and fast-growing group."

Many of those people, of course, might be agnostic rather than atheist?

Revulsion at zealots

More than anything, people without faith hate the description of them as empty or soulless. They have long been singled out for a special kind of hell.

The constitution of the state of Texas, for example, allows discrimination against atheists in employment or jury duty - provisions that have been nullified by federal laws.

And even my mother used to lower her voice in the kind of whisper reserved for people with terminal brain cancer when she described a neighbour as.... an atheist.

Non-believers say they have also been aided by the revulsion of fair-minded Americans to the religious zealotry behind the September 11 attacks and the subsequent violence on behalf of radical Islam.

The latest round of atheism books point to countless wars, slaughters and massacres done in the name of My God is Better than Your God. The 9/11 attacks got people thinking about what sort of God could be summoned for such awfulness.

obamaSocial critics, dating to at least de Tocqueville and Dickens, have always marvelled at the pure number of passionately religious people in this country. Indeed, no Western democracy has so many devout churchgoers, by percentage, as the US.

On the face of it, the numbers do seem to indicate that the United States is a Christian nation, as politicians often say.

The latest surveys by the Pew Centre show that 76% of the population - upwards of 230 million people - call themselves Christians. Jews make up 1.3% and Muslims are under one per cent - though fast-growing.

Atheists are near the bottom. There are seven times as many atheists in Europe as the United States, by percentage. But the second largest group, categorized by belief, are those who call themselves secular or non-religious. They make up 13 percent of the population.

It is this group that has perhaps been afraid to call themselves atheists, for fear of shunning or other censure. They could be largely undecided or they could be searching or they could believe, as some friends say with a wink, in the Church of the Outdoors, or the Church of Baseball. They are also the people buying these books.

But while atheism may have made its way into the public discourse, it remains strictly verboten in our politics. Even though a majority of people say in surveys that a person can still be a good American without Christian values, to be an atheist and run for high office is to wear the scarlet A.

Among the presidential aspirants, half the Republican candidates do not believe in evolution, a view bounded in their religious faith and the imperatives of running in a primary heavily dominated by evangelicals.

Democrats 'more open'

One contender, Senator John McCain of Arizona, made headlines this month when he said the American founders meant to establish the United States as a Christian nation.

In truth, the constitution expressly prohibits establishment of a state religion. The founders were trying to avoid the entanglements of church with state. And perhaps the best known founder, Thomas Jefferson himself, may have been an atheist, in the view of many scholars.

No matter. The Democrats, scorned by a huge sector of the electorate for their perceived secularism, have become more open about faith this time around. Both Hillary Clinton, and Senator Barack Obama frequently mention God on the campaign trail.

But they also put some distance between themselves and the religious. Senator Clinton said last week that if she were president she would shield science and research into such things as stem cells from religion and politics.

The United States may never be as secular as Europe. If you sample even a small share of the reaction, on blogs or Christian talk radio, to these new atheist books, you sense how strongly people feel about their faith. It's not passive or abstract.

But, perhaps we have arrived at a moment where doubt is having its day - and for a time, atheists are coming out of hiding.

Comments 1 - 14 of 14 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #80055 by EEguy on October 19, 2007 at 6:57 pm

 avatarAll in all, a pretty good summary of the current situation. Tim Egan also gives us some hope that the USA is very very slowly changing. I can't blame the politicians for their professed "faith"--it's a necessary condition to get elected. It's what they actually do after winning that counts.

Other Comments by EEguy

2. Comment #80071 by LoneStarTravis on October 19, 2007 at 8:22 pm

People like to pick on Texas. Sam Harris did in Letter to a Christian Nation, and Egan did here. But something they both missed is that in the Texas Constitution (for a good laugh, I recommend you someday read it) it says something like "There is no religious test when running for office, provided you admit the existence of a Supreme Being." What a joke. But, honestly, Texas isn't as religious as one might assume.

San Antonio and the surrounding area have many, many Catholic atheists. Houston, my hometown, is pretty religious (see: Joel Osteen) but it's not uncommon to run into a fellow atheist in a day's happenings. Dallas/Fort Worth/Arlington area has a lot of megachurches, but also more than a few atheist groups. And then there's the shining jewel of Texas: Austin! Does any city on the planet have more atheists than Austin? I doubt it.

Other Comments by LoneStarTravis

3. Comment #80075 by monkey2 on October 19, 2007 at 9:21 pm

 avatar
But while atheism may have made its way into the public discourse, it remains strictly verboten in our politics. Even though a majority of people say in surveys that a person can still be a good American without Christian values, to be an atheist and run for high office is to wear the scarlet A.

Can anyone help me out? I assume Tim Egan is not referring to the scarlet A of the out campaign, so what does the phrase "to wear the scarlet A" refer to?

Other Comments by monkey2

5. Comment #80083 by Zzyx1170 on October 19, 2007 at 10:14 pm

Can anyone help me out? I assume Tim Egan is not referring to the scarlet A of the out campaign, so what does the phrase "to wear the scarlet A" refer to?


It's in reference to a novel by Nathaniel Hawthorne called "The Scarlet Letter".

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scarlet_Letter

Other Comments by Zzyx1170

6. Comment #80110 by scooternyc on October 20, 2007 at 3:19 am

 avatar"I can't blame the politicians for their professed "faith"--it's a necessary condition to get elected. It's what they actually do after winning that counts."

That's like saying the guy you dated is suddenly very different now that you're married - we all know how much fun that can be.

Three things come to mind:

1)If a politician is willing to feign religion and LIE to get elected, what else are they willing to feign and LIE about. Any way you decide to euphemistically refer to it - it's a lie.

The ends do not justify the means; the means reveal more about the propensity to lie.

2)If a politician simply keeps making the statement that a person's faith is between he/she and their creator, how would that offend an otherwise fundamentalist christian jihad.

3)Being faithless should not be a partisan issue. This is an issue that engulfs people on all sides. Too bad that can't be said enough.

Other Comments by scooternyc

7. Comment #80135 by upsidedawn on October 20, 2007 at 6:28 am

 avatarThis seemed quite balanced. However there is the tone, and even the suggestion ("We have arrived at a moment where doubt is having its day - and for a time, atheists are coming out of hiding"), that this is temporary.

[By the way, how does one submit articles for posting here? I found an article that seems wonderfully appropriate for the site--I think it would stir much debate--and sent the link to contact@richarddawkins.net, but have yet to see anything.]

Other Comments by upsidedawn

8. Comment #80141 by bluebird on October 20, 2007 at 7:05 am

 avatarupsidedawn, that reminds me of the beginning sentence of an opinion letter: "The current interest in Atheism..."

Michael Newdow has challenged the "God" references in the U.S. Currency and Pledge of Allegiance, in the interest of separation of church and state: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Newdow

Other Comments by bluebird

9. Comment #80165 by USA_Limey on October 20, 2007 at 10:39 am

 avatarEEGuy,

I couldn't disagree with you more. Living a lie is never a good thing. Living that lie and what is more proclaiming it to all for votes is even worse in my opinion.

This is one of the inherent weaknesses of democracy as it is currently practiced in most western countries. Politicians are almost forced to be disingenuous. However, there are scales of dishonesty. It is my great suspicion, for example, that Hilary Clinton is about as religious as I am, but will tell any lie about her faith if she thinks it can bag her a few votes. This is fundamentally dishonest. If a politician can lie to us about their faith, (or lack of), what else are they going to lie to us about?

Personally I could never bring myself to vote for any politician who I suspected of deception on this point. I'd rather vote for a person I believed to be genuine in their faith, than a liar.

Other Comments by USA_Limey

10. Comment #80172 by keith on October 20, 2007 at 11:45 am

 avatarLoneStarTravis,

San Antonio and the surrounding area have many, many Catholic atheists.

What's a Catholic atheist?

Does any city on the planet have more atheists than Austin? I doubt it.

I imagine you're kidding, right? If not, how about Tokyo? Osaka? Stockholm? Oslo? Another 20 immediately come to mind. Or did you mean planet America?

Other Comments by keith

11. Comment #80175 by USA_Limey on October 20, 2007 at 11:56 am

 avatarKeith wrote:

Or did you mean planet America?



I don't think he was being that inclusive. If you have spent any time in Texas you quickly learn they consider that state primus inter pares, except without the pares part.

Good point well made though. I'd bet my old local soccer clubs small stadium in England had more atheists in it on match day than Austin Texas!

Other Comments by USA_Limey

12. Comment #80184 by kwhitefoot on October 20, 2007 at 1:37 pm

 avatarLoneStarTravis wrote ..." it says something like "There is no religious test when running for office, provided you admit the existence of a Supreme Being."

Would the FSM do?

Other Comments by kwhitefoot

13. Comment #80214 by LoneStarTravis on October 20, 2007 at 7:17 pm

keith,

Catholic atheist = Someone who is culturally Catholic but doesn't believe in any of it.

And yes, I was kidding... sort of. I was over exaggerating, but not that much. I lived in Austin for a while, and more often than not people were atheists. Plus, that city is just freaking awesome. If you are to tour Texas, go nowhere but Austin. Everyone loves Austin, with the exception of people who are extremely conservative.

Other Comments by LoneStarTravis

14. Comment #82910 by 35bluejacket on October 28, 2007 at 8:28 am

I have lived in Texas for 11 years and it is my opinion that the average Texan believes that ignorance is a virtue.

Other Comments by 35bluejacket
Reload Comments | Back to Top

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password: