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)
Wednesday, November 5, 2008 | Reason : Commentary | print version Print | Comments |

Document President Obama: Bad News For the New Atheists and Other Fundamentalists

by Frank Schaeffer, Huffington Post

Thanks to squinky for the link.

Reposted from:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frank-schaeffer/president-obama-bad-news_b_141342.html

The Obama presidency is great news for almost everyone. It's bad news for some odd ideological bedfellows: the Religious Right and the so-called New Atheists.

Into the all or nothing culture wars, and the all or nothing wars between the so-called New Atheists and religion the election of President elect Obama reintroduces nuance. President elect Obama's ability to believe in Jesus, yet question, is going to rescue American religion in general and Christianity in particular, from the extremes.

There is no way to understand President elect Obama's victory as anything less than the start of not just a monumental political change but a spiritual revolution as well.

Full disclosure: I was raised by American missionaries -- Francis and Edith Schaeffer -- who became leaders within the American Evangelical subculture. When I was in my twenties I was their sidekick. We Schaeffers had a lot to do with the formation of the Religious Right. (Sorry!) In the mid 1980s I escaped my tribe's literal-minded religion and currently go to a Greek Orthodox Church. I've also been one of President elect Obama's most vocal and prolific -- judging by the amount I've written -- supporters.

The pro and anti God industry churns. I know. I've worked this turf for years. But there is a new sheriff on the religion beat. He's smart! President elect Obama is a knowledgeable fan of the theologian Reinhold Niebuhr, has lectured seriously on his faith and the relationship of church and state, and is not a nominal Christian for political purposes, but someone who actually prays, believes and lives his faith.

To the New Atheists who think that with the resounding defeat of the Religious Right, we are entering a secular age, think again. Obama will block your path. He'll do it for the same reason he'll make the Religious Right's paranoid fantasies about him soon seem shamefully ridiculous. That's because President elect Obama is that rarest of all rare people: a thoughtful, compassionate and likable statesman who also is a thoughtful, compassionate and likable religious believer.

In the last few years there has been a spate of best selling books published that are for or against religion. All of them are by literalists who speak in fundamentalist tones. On the pro-religion side we find A Purpose Driven Life and the Left Behind series extolling a Jesus-solves-everything one note evangelical born-again message. On the flip side are the equally evangelistic one note New Atheist books including Sam Harris's The End of Faith, Daniel Dennett's Breaking the Spell, Richard Dawkins's The God Delusion and Christopher Hitchens's God Is Not Great.

The New Atheists' books provided a context for Bill Maher's movie Religulous, the most blunt instrument imaginable. Maher's documentary expands what Harris started in his book The End of Faith. Harris begins his book with a scene of a young Islamic terrorist in Jerusalem smiling as he commits suicide while blowing up a bus full of innocent people. In Religulous, Maher gleefully includes many more images of look-how-crazy-God-makes-everyone, religion-inspired violence. The Harris/Maher message is as clear: the world would be better off without religion.

There is another message in the Maher/New Atheist oeuvre: everyone must think in categories stripped of allegory. Forget the idea that perhaps one may hold two contradictory ideas at the same time, say that none of the stories in the Bible happened as written, but that they are true in more subtle ways than mere historicity, or that we're nothing but jumped up chimps, but are also connecting to a deeper reality when we say, "the Lord is my shepherd" and hope that he is.

The New Atheists don't seem to "get" grown up allegory any more than the fundamentalists of the Religious Right do, let alone literary imagination. And both the Religious right and the New Atheists also seems oblivious to serious religious thinkers from Confucius to the Sufi poets, from Reinhold Niebur to one of Reinhold Niebuhr's biggest fans; President elect Obama.

Maher's world contains no Pastor Deitrick Bonhoffer (martyred for trying to assassinate Hitler, and who defined the intellectual and theological terms for resistance to state tyranny based on Christian ethics), or the intellectual man of letters and convert from atheism to the Roman Catholic Church, Malcolm Muggeridge, let alone an awareness of the prayers written by the "atheist" W.E.B. Du Bois for his students, a poignant demonstration that faith is not so easily abandoned.

But President elect Obama has spoken of the need to meld religious ethics with the philosophical underpinnings of statecraft, when for instance he says that the Democrats have been mistaken in not understanding that the abortion issue is first and foremost a moral issue.

On June 28, 2006, Senator Obama spoke at the Call to Renewal Conference sponsored by Sojourners. President elect Obama said:

"For some time now, there has been plenty of talk among pundits and pollsters that the political divide in this country has fallen sharply along religious lines... Conservative leaders have been all too happy to exploit this gap... Democrats, for the most part, have taken the bait... At worst, there are some liberals who dismiss religion in the public square as inherently irrational or intolerant, insisting on a caricature of religious Americans that paints them as fanatical, or thinking that the very word 'Christian' describes one's political opponents, not people of faith...

"I think it's time that we join a serious debate about how to reconcile faith with our modern, pluralistic democracy.

"And if we're going to do that then we first need to understand that Americans are a religious people... This religious tendency is not simply the result of successful marketing by skilled preachers... I speak with some experience on this matter.

"You need to come to church in the first place precisely because you are first of this world, not apart from it. You need to embrace Christ precisely because you have sins to wash away -- because you are human and need an ally in this difficult journey.

"It was because of these newfound understandings that I was finally able to walk down the aisle of Trinity United Church of Christ on 95th Street in the Southside of Chicago one day and affirm my Christian faith. It came about as a choice, and not an epiphany. I didn't fall out in church. The questions I had didn't magically disappear. But kneeling beneath that cross on the South Side, I felt that I heard God's spirit beckoning me. I submitted myself to His will, and dedicated myself to discovering His truth.

"That's a path that has been shared by millions upon millions of Americans -- evangelicals, Catholics, Protestants, Jews and Muslims alike; some since birth, others at certain turning points in their lives. It is not something they set apart from the rest of their beliefs and values. In fact, it is often what drives their beliefs and their values."


Pre the Religious Right take over the traditional focus of the Republican Party had been on foreign policy issues, the economy, military preparedness and a generally libertarian laissez-faire view of the world-things William F. Buckley, and Barry Goldwater would have recognized. This was replaced by the "religious ethics" of what I imagine as the Saturday Night Live Church Lady's older, stricter, uglier, dumber and terminally self-righteous big sister. This humorless desiccated hag remade the Republican image as the anti-everything party. And in doing so this hag also took down all religious people through guilt by association. And that is the context in which the evangelistic New Atheists emerged.

Okay, so a lot of religious people are nuts, or worse, intolerant. That still doesn't address the baby swirling down the Maher/New Atheist anti-religion drain along with the right wing bathwater they're flushing.

President-elect Obama brings another perspective to faith . It goes something like this:

How do cultures define themselves if not through ritual? In the "big moments" of life; birth, marriage, sickness, death "who" -- in the inimitable words of Ghost Busters -- "you gonna call?" As President elect Obama has said, and I paraphrase: Strip the human race of our spiritual language and what do we tell each other about hope?

As President elect Obama has pointed out, a world of all math but no poetry is not fit for human habitation. If everything feels flat and dull, stripped of mystery and meaning who will bother to do the science? Why bother, if all we're doing is serving those selfish genes for another round of meaningless propagation?

So does this faith always make "sense?" No. Because our perspective is from the inside, something like paint contemplating the painting of which it's a part. We're all in the same boat, all stuck on the same "canvas."

So let's admit we all share the problem that was best articulated by Darwin in his dairy: "Can the mind of man, which has, as I fully believe, been developed from a mind as low as that possessed by the lowest animal, be trusted when it draws such grand conclusions?"

As our new president recognizes, self-awareness and mortality are already such a mutually exclusive (and terrifying) contradiction that accepting a few more contradictions is par for the course! And President elect Obama has a generous enough spirit and a large enough intellect so that he can do with his spiritual life, what the Religious Right and the New Atheists have not done: understand that there is no shame in embracing paradox.

President Obama is about to make reasoned faith fashionable again. It's about time.


Frank Schaeffer is the author of CRAZY FOR GOD-How I Grew Up As One Of The Elect, Helped Found The Religious Right, And Lived To Take All (Or Almost All) Of It Back. Now in paperback.

Comments 1 - 50 of 181 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #278950 by Eshto on November 5, 2008 at 12:47 pm

 avatarBad news? A literate president who believes in evolution, supports science and education, supports the rights of gay people (for the most part) and women, and despite pandering to religious people, understands the United States Constitution and doesn't force a particular religious viewpoint into his policies?

How is that bad news?

EDIT: Oh that's right, we're supposedly as bad as the fundamentalists and want everyone to be forced to think like us. I must've forgot.

Other Comments by Eshto

2. Comment #278951 by Kiste on November 5, 2008 at 12:47 pm

If you bring up Dietrich Bonhoeffer, at least learn to spell his name correctly. Bonhoeffer was only remarkable for being one of the few protestant clergymen who were not rabid Nazis and that hardly makes him a "martyr". He had nothing to do with the assassination attempt on Hitler.

Anyway, I wonder what the author means by "Obama will block your path". What path? The path towards maintaining church state seperation?

Other Comments by Kiste

3. Comment #278953 by mismos00 on November 5, 2008 at 12:48 pm

 avatar"You don't believe in a Flying Jewish Zombie born 2000 years ago to a virgin and who is his own father????
What are you? Some kind of extremist?"

Idiot!

Other Comments by mismos00

4. Comment #278959 by dhudson0001 on November 5, 2008 at 12:53 pm

 avatar"There is no way to understand President elect Obama's victory as anything less than the start of not just a monumental political change but a spiritual revolution as well."

Hmm..another "non-violent" revolution I hope. I love how people just throw these words around.

Other Comments by dhudson0001

5. Comment #278962 by blueollie on November 5, 2008 at 12:54 pm

This TGD reading atheist was thrilled to have BHO get elected.

Look: religious myths have some value as, well, a type of poetry or art.

All I ask is that one forget about the idea of some deity intervening into the events of this universe.

Obama's election has been cheered by most of the free thinkers that I know.

Also, 76 Nobel Laureates in science endorsed him.

Other Comments by blueollie

6. Comment #278973 by Arthur86 on November 5, 2008 at 1:02 pm

I have a problem with the term reasoned faith. In the first instance, it is oxymoronic. A belief for the sake of belief is illogical, not reasoned. Reasoned beliefs can be deduced through a series of logical steps. Faith skips these steps and assumes the conclusion. However, I have reason to believe the author has a different definition for the term reasoned faith. He might mean faith that doesn't lead one to act in fanatically violent ways (i.e. Christians murdering doctors who perform abortions). But the Christian who murders doctors who perform abortions carries the same faith as most Christians who don't do such atrocities in the name of their faith - which points to the ultimate unreason of the faith itself. The faith itself is wrong, unreasonable, and illogical - despite the actions it causes one to make.

Other Comments by Arthur86

7. Comment #278974 by ShavenYak on November 5, 2008 at 1:03 pm

"As President elect Obama has pointed out, a world of all math but no poetry is not fit for human habitation. If everything feels flat and dull, stripped of mystery and meaning who will bother to do the science? Why bother, if all we're doing is serving those selfish genes for another round of meaningless propagation?"

He should have read Unweaving the Rainbow too - then he might not ask that question.

Other Comments by ShavenYak

8. Comment #278978 by Tyler Durden on November 5, 2008 at 1:05 pm

 avatarObama mentioned the word "science" in his victory speech. Bush probably can't even spell the word.

I'm happy with Obama. Let's see what he does.

Other Comments by Tyler Durden

9. Comment #278981 by Ubiquitous Che on November 5, 2008 at 1:08 pm

Funny how you can always tell when someone hasn't actually read the material they claim to be criticising, ain't it?

For example, Breaking the Spell is hardly an "evangelistic one note New Atheist book" - I actually felt a little bit let down that Dennett didn't push harder in it. It was much too forgiving for my liking.

Silly Mr. Schaeffer. :P

Other Comments by Ubiquitous Che

10. Comment #278991 by F_A_F on November 5, 2008 at 1:11 pm

There seems to be a general opinion that Atheists subscribe to a particular dogma on most areas of thought.....we would do well to dispel this opinion.

I hold no belief in fairies, yet show me inconclusive proof of their existence and I shall still have no belief......better than that, I will KNOW of their existence.

All that many of us ask is that beliefs and knowledge are split along lines demarked by EVIDENCE. I couldn't care less what people care to believe in their own homes, but once it starts to infect society...such as anti-gay laws or persecution of the religous/irreligious then I have a serious problem with it.

Getting around this misconception that atheists want to force belief is a major part of the fight. We don't want to force submission to belief, we want to force submission to knowledge and facts.

Other Comments by F_A_F

11. Comment #278996 by Eshto on November 5, 2008 at 1:13 pm

 avatar8: I saw that and cheered a little.

Other Comments by Eshto

12. Comment #278998 by squinky on November 5, 2008 at 1:14 pm

 avatarI recommended this article when I found it and I hoped it would piss you all off as much as it did me! Let's see...new, young, progressive, brilliant US president = atheists run for your lives. The worst non-sequitur of all time. If you really want to hear Obama on religion, hear him in his own words because he might be the closest thing to an agnostic humanist that we will ever see:

http://www.youtube.com/watch'v=LXcvbnzNIjg

You will NEVER hear an American president utter these words again. Atheists celebrate and Frank Schaeffer, smoke my pole.

Other Comments by squinky

13. Comment #278999 by PeterMcKellar on November 5, 2008 at 1:14 pm

This author is so typical of religious apologists and theists in general. A few quite unjustified smears are included in this article. I don't speak for other atheists and nor do they speak for me - and the author certainly does not, nor does his description fit me.

I love and embrace all the arts. This is what it means to be human, not being some slavering idiot to a censored, orthodox concept of "art". Atheists do not burn books, art or witches. That is the exclusive preserve of the theist - and not just the fundamentalist, but also the more "moderate" anti-stem cell (and anti-vaccination) nutters and the temperance looneys.

I see nothing in the New Atheist movement that would be challenged by Obama being president. Any move to separate State and Church must be encouraged - provided it also includes the right to free debate. Any group that accepts converts must also freely allow them to leave (something islam does not allow).

I would also suggest that the author have a look at some of these discussion boards - the non-theistic religions fare much better under the stark spotlight of reason, but do not escape unscathed, though somewhat better than the lame "give it up, you'll go blind" doctrines of the abrahamic religions.

This article was poorly thought out and its arguments were the typical straw dog stuff I've come to expect from xtian apologists. - FAIL

Other Comments by PeterMcKellar

14. Comment #279003 by Elles on November 5, 2008 at 1:16 pm

 avatarTwo things, first about the title.

Perhaps somebody someday somewhere will bother explaining to me what it takes to be a "Fundamentalist Atheist."

My understanding is that the closest thing that comes to being a shared "doctrine" for Atheists is that there is no God, but I know of no Atheists who say that there is definitely with 100% certainty no God (I assume they exist but the vast majority don't seem to have 100% certainty in not-God).

Second of all, about holding two contradictory beliefs.

Ignoring the fact that the vast majority of people don't seem to give a damn about truth let's say that we all want our beliefs to be true...

Since when was reality in the habit of contradicting itself'

Other Comments by Elles

15. Comment #279010 by Steve Zara on November 5, 2008 at 1:19 pm

 avatarThis is nonsense.

Obama may be a man of faith, but he has also spoken in support of secularism, to the annoyance of some Christians:

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/10/more_christian_irony.php

Other Comments by Steve Zara

16. Comment #279015 by Goldy on November 5, 2008 at 1:22 pm

 avatarElles - there is, emphatically, no god or gods outside of mankind's own imagination.
Trust me on that.

Other Comments by Goldy

17. Comment #279019 by burkbraun on November 5, 2008 at 1:29 pm

So, if it is all allegorical, then that means that God does not exist, right? It is just a whacky language we use for comforting each other? I get it!

Other Comments by burkbraun

18. Comment #279027 by lol mahmood on November 5, 2008 at 1:36 pm

 avatarhttp://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/PageServer

is WL Craig's website. Craig is an intelligent, articulate and very persuasive deluded god-botherer who uses all kinds of already refuted, or even self-contradictory, arguments to press the case for the xtian god.

As for 'reasoned faith'...I've no idea; sounds like an oxymoron to me. Perhaps it's meant to be a nod to Craig...


As far as I can tell, Obama is probably an atheist who knows that to come out as such would make him unelectable.

Other Comments by lol mahmood

19. Comment #279030 by Mike O'Risal on November 5, 2008 at 1:37 pm

 avatarElles:

I will say that I have 100% certainty that there isn't a God or gods because I have yet to see anything that looks even remotely for evidence that such beings exist. That isn't to say that I wouldn't be open to considering such evidence were any to be found, but there simply isn't anything there to be examined. I have this same certainty exactly in the same way that I am certain that if I let go of a bowling ball while standing on the surface of the earth, it will fall to the ground no matter how much I try to convince myself that it is possible to make it levitate without recourse to some extraordinary means.

Not being 100% certain that God exists or does not exist would be something more similar to agnosticism (agnostic = "without knowledge") than to atheism ("without theism")

Having said that, I don't care what anyone else believes... including Barack Obama. I start caring when they decide that I have to live my life according to their beliefs. When it becomes a matter of law or national policy, then it affects everyone. Otherwise, the religious beliefs held by others have no more effect on my life than does the god they might believe in.

Other Comments by Mike O'Risal

20. Comment #279034 by Godless Sodomite on November 5, 2008 at 1:42 pm

Reasonable faith? Obama suffers from the cognitive dissonance of not supporting full marriage rights for me and my partner based on what his faith tells him his imaginary friend wants. As an expert on the Constitution and the offspring of interracial parents who wouldn't have been able to marry had their civil rights been left to popular vote, he should know better. His faith is no more reasonable than anyone else's. That he's not a totally unreasonable ignoramus like Dubya was (is) is beside the point. In matters of faith, when confronted with reality he's shown that he is quite unreasonable indeed. His religion is just as silly and unjustified as any.

Other Comments by Godless Sodomite

21. Comment #279036 by AdrianB on November 5, 2008 at 1:43 pm

 avatar
14. Comment #279003 by Elles on November 5, 2008 at 1:16 pm

Two things, first about the title.

Perhaps somebody someday somewhere will bother explaining to me what it takes to be a "Fundamentalist Atheist."

My understanding is that the closest thing that comes to being a shared "doctrine" for Atheists is that there is no God, but I know of no Atheists who say that there is definitely with 100% certainty no God (I assume they exist but the vast majority don't seem to have 100% certainty in not-God).

Oh Elles, you're so naive.

We all know that the only shared "doctrine" of atheists is "There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life." Well for a fundamental atheist it becomes "There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life."

:)

Other Comments by AdrianB

22. Comment #279037 by Steve Zara on November 5, 2008 at 1:43 pm

 avatarComment #279030 by Mike O'Risal

I will say that I have 100% certainty that there isn't a God or gods because I have yet to see anything that looks even remotely for evidence that such beings exist.


I am sure you have not yet seen any evidence for alien civilizations, but are you 100% sure they don't exist?

There is good reason to be sure that a supernatural God does almost certainly not exist. But not having yet seen evidence is not one of them.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

23. Comment #279040 by Enlightenme.. on November 5, 2008 at 1:45 pm

 avatarHelp me out here.
Let's try to look past the fallacies and NOMAcies within the article and attempt to address the overall proposition itself please.

His conclusion talks of the coming fashion; Reasoned Faith.
Why didn't he tell us what that is then?

Other Comments by Enlightenme..

24. Comment #279042 by Logicel on November 5, 2008 at 1:46 pm

 avatarThis article is quite encouraging because this dipshitz shows clearly that he does not understand a thing about the 'new' atheism. Therefore, it will continue to bite this murkie on the arse. Seems like this moron thinks as he KNOWS god he KNOWS Obama's faith. He knows nothing except what he wants to believe. Typical blubbering murkie.

Other Comments by Logicel

25. Comment #279044 by Mr0Joshua on November 5, 2008 at 1:47 pm

Does this guy actually make a living from writing? Talk about opaque.

Forget the idea that perhaps one may hold two contradictory ideas at the same time, say that none of the stories in the Bible happened as written, but that they are true in more subtle ways than mere historicity, or that we're nothing but jumped up chimps, but are also connecting to a deeper reality when we say, "the Lord is my shepherd" and hope that he is.

Perhaps parenthesis would make his point a little clearer. In this one run-on sentence he uses the word "that" 5 times.

And the evidence he uses to support his conclusion is pretty lack luster, i.e. quoting a speech given to at a religious venue during an election year. Rule one of speech writing: know your audience. Duh!


Other Comments by Mr0Joshua

26. Comment #279047 by Enlightenme.. on November 5, 2008 at 1:50 pm

 avatar20:
"Obama suffers from the cognitive dissonance of not supporting full marriage rights for me and my partner"

Does he?
I've heard that he doesn't believe in gay marriage.

Do you know his position on your rights yet?

Other Comments by Enlightenme..

27. Comment #279050 by dochmbi on November 5, 2008 at 1:51 pm

 avatarThis news article was posted to troll, clearly.

Other Comments by dochmbi

28. Comment #279051 by Amy_Sydney on November 5, 2008 at 1:51 pm

The New Atheists don't seem to "get" grown up allegory any more than the fundamentalists of the Religious Right do, let alone literary imagination.


I'm sorry, what' At the risk of sounding sycophantic, this guy obviously hasn't read The God Delusion. Not only did I find it to have incredible literary imagination and employ breathtaking imagery, but you don't have to throw out half the book (or distort passages) to get a decent, modern, or civilised, let alone an uplifting, message.

(I could talk about how The God Delusion helped me improve my life immeasurably, but that'd make me sound even more like a sycophant)

EDIT: tried to fix question mark after "what"- didn't work.

Other Comments by Amy_Sydney

29. Comment #279055 by lol mahmood on November 5, 2008 at 1:52 pm

 avatarEy up Steve,

There's no direct evidence of alien civilizations, but there are plenty of indicators to suggest that they are possible and statistically likely. On that basis, I am prepared to accept that they almost certainly do exist, but that we'll probably never contact any in my lifetime.

God, at least the Abrahamic one, is extremely unlikely if you try to justify him with scripture. BUT, if someone came up with conclusive or at least persuasive evidence that he existed and/or that most of the bible was true, then I'd have to accept his existence.

I have listened to debates and trawled xtian websites without finding a trace of that evidence.

I may have to resort to reading a few flea books..can anyone recommend a worthwhile one?

Edited: Spelling

Other Comments by lol mahmood

30. Comment #279058 by Steve Zara on November 5, 2008 at 1:54 pm

 avatarComment #279055 by lol mahmood

I was just being my usual pedantic self about the "100% sure" statement. Atheism need not be based on certainty, just the default sensible position.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

31. Comment #279069 by Enlightenme.. on November 5, 2008 at 2:04 pm

 avatar27:
"This news article was posted to troll, clearly."

..in the Huffington post, yes, clearly.

Thanks for that reassurance.

You know all about Ariana Huffington then:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianna_Huffington

..erm, refer to post #12

And note:






Spirituality
Huffington's book The Fourth Instinct is based on the idea that all humans have an inherent spiritual yearning.[7]
After her attempts to woo the religious right, in 1994, Doonesbury Cartoonist Garry Trudeau created a spoof of Arianna Huffington's spiritual experiences with a Los Angeles-based spiritual organization founded by John-Roger, the Movement of Spiritual Inner Awareness. The purpose of the Movement of Spiritual Inner Awareness (MSIA) is to Soul Transcendence, which is becoming aware of yourself as a Soul and as one with God, not as a theory but as a living reality. Huffington has said that "I've been involved with John-Roger and the church for many years now"[citation needed] Tax returns show Huffington as an MSIA donor.[citation needed]
Huffington has also courted conservative Christian Republicans[citation needed], commonly referred to as the Religious Right, by advocating a removal of the welfare state, to be replaced by voluntary charitable donation, stating that "big government cheats people out of the spiritual rewards of giving to the needy".

"It's time to bring God into the public square,"
Arianna Huffington declared,

while giving a talk on The Fourth Instinct before a Republican women's conference.[citation needed]
More recently, Huffington has criticized the Christians of the Republican party as those "who don't believe in evolution but believe in torture".[citation needed]


Her weblog, The Huffington Post, has three of the world's most prominent atheist writers as contributors: Sam Harris (The End of Faith); Richard Dawkins (The God Delusion); Christopher Hitchens (God is not Great).

=================
She is the founder of The Huffington Post, a liberal[1] online news and commentary website and aggregated blog.

Other Comments by Enlightenme..

32. Comment #279085 by Border Collie on November 5, 2008 at 2:18 pm

 avatarWritten by a mind too small. A mind that simply doesn't understand Richard or Sam or Daniel or Christopher ... and never will.

Barack Obama might be religious, but he doesn't seem to be the type of religious person who would cram his religion down my throat. Such is what the rightwingnuts tried to do and it is why they are despised.

Other Comments by Border Collie

33. Comment #279086 by Ex~ on November 5, 2008 at 2:21 pm

 avatarThis article is nonsense.

Obama speaks corageously and powerfully about the need to make America tolerant of Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, and people "with no faith at all."

Obama is very good news for all atheists.

Other Comments by Ex~

34. Comment #279093 by Enlightenme.. on November 5, 2008 at 2:29 pm

 avatar#6

Yes,
but has he got a point?

Apart from;

These Neo-atheists think it was them that pointed out Palin 'walks with dinosaurs'.
No, it was us.


Remember, Obama almost wasn't black enough, he didn't bear enough scars from 'the struggle'
Hadn't put the hours in.

We may not be liberal enough?

Just a theory.

Other Comments by Enlightenme..

35. Comment #279095 by lol mahmood on November 5, 2008 at 2:30 pm

 avatarSteve,

Yeah I know; I was just rising to the bait for the hell of it.

Other Comments by lol mahmood

36. Comment #279097 by Red Foot Okie on November 5, 2008 at 2:33 pm

 avatarWait a second, Schaeffer starts off condemning both athiests and the religious, but then he focus on athiests for special abuse. He list one book by the religious extremists (and one fiction series), and then all four of the "new" athiests books. And then goes on to criticize a movie.

Poor show, all around Mr. Schaeffer. Barack Obama seems to be smart enough to have enough to have enough "faith" to get by in the electoral process, but eloquent enough to state, bluntly that faith has to be reconciled with a modern pluristic democracy-- in essance that faith is a problem of some kind.

Which it is.

I'm eager to see what the future holds under an Obama presidency. I'm also eager to see what the revelation that the religious right is NOT the huge king-making bloc it has advertised itself as being will do to the politics of religion in the U.S.

Oh, saw RELIGULOUS this last weekend. Funny stuff if a bit scary to be shown just what some people will believe.

Other Comments by Red Foot Okie

37. Comment #279101 by jimbob on November 5, 2008 at 2:36 pm

This without-superstition-life-has-no-meaning opinion is just that--an opinion!

The premise of this opinion seems to be along the lines of "I believe, therefore I am," and it's self-deceptive corollary seems to be "If you don't believe, you are not!"

Time will tell with Obama, but given the contrast with the likes of bible spice, I'm very optimistic!

Other Comments by jimbob

38. Comment #279102 by prolibertas on November 5, 2008 at 2:37 pm

'If everything feels flat and dull, stripped of mystery and meaning, who will bother to do the science?'

Um, 93% of the National Academy of Science are atheists... obviously they don't all feel that everything is flat and dull and meaningless, and can not only do science, but are the best at science.

Other Comments by prolibertas

39. Comment #279106 by Donald on November 5, 2008 at 2:41 pm

I am very pleased Obama won. He was the best candidate from the point of view of atheists and western civilisation (IMO). (The first time in my lifetime the American people have the elected the candidate *I* would have voted for.)

He made a tremendous victory speech which was remarkably free of religious overtones.

But, for me, it was spoiled at the end by his choice of final words:
"God bless you. God bless America."

Other Comments by Donald

40. Comment #279108 by NormanDoering on November 5, 2008 at 2:42 pm

Frank Schaeffer has apparently never heard of PZ Myers' "The Courtier's Reply."

http://richarddawkins.net/article,463,The-Courtiers-Reply,PZ-Myers

Other Comments by NormanDoering

41. Comment #279109 by Enlightenme.. on November 5, 2008 at 2:43 pm

 avatar"flat and dull and meaningless"

Spare us, 'bleedinart.

Other Comments by Enlightenme..

42. Comment #279114 by Red Foot Okie on November 5, 2008 at 2:52 pm

 avatarHey Donald, I've often wondered what an athiest president would end his or her speeches with.

The whole "God bless you and god bless America" thing is pretty powerful, you have to admit.

"Live long, and may America prosper"... it just doesn't have the same pull...

Other Comments by Red Foot Okie

43. Comment #279116 by shaunfletcher on November 5, 2008 at 2:55 pm

 avatarIts hardly news that US politicians have to play lip service, and appear to pay much more than lip service, to religion in order to gain a serious position. I have formed the opinion that Mr Obama is indeed paying lip service only. He likely doesnt share my views that religion is outright harmful, but if he is a 'true believer' then I will eat my hat.

Yes this means lying to get elected, and yes this is a bad thing, but given that right now the other option would be to cede the leadership roles to the actual nutbags I will cheerfully take someone who believes in science and reality but is prepared to play the game as it is.

Naturally should he prove me wrong I will be ready to change that view.

Other Comments by shaunfletcher

44. Comment #279118 by Nova on November 5, 2008 at 2:58 pm

It's very likely Obama is secretly an atheist. His mother was an atheist, his father was a Muslim who became an atheist, he doesn't seem to have anywhere to have picked religion up from. He doesn't seem to practice it or bring it up anymore than he needs to and he's a member of one of the most liberal churches - perfect for an atheist feigning religion.

Other Comments by Nova

45. Comment #279120 by Ai Deng on November 5, 2008 at 3:00 pm

 avatarIf Obama is bad news for the New Atheist, then what in holy hell do you call Sarah Palin?

Other Comments by Ai Deng

46. Comment #279124 by Donald on November 5, 2008 at 3:02 pm

Hey Donald, I've often wondered what an athiest president would end his or her speeches with.
The whole "God bless you and god bless America" thing is pretty powerful, you have to admit.
"Live long, and may America prosper"... it just doesn't have the same pull...

Given the mantra he was promoting, how about "We are Americans, Yes we CAN."?
Traditions have to be broken some day. The God-mantra has to be broken some day.

Eventually nationalism will have to be broken. In the meantime the Can-Do attitude of Americans is better than God-will-Do.

Other Comments by Donald

47. Comment #279126 by prettygoodformonkeys on November 5, 2008 at 3:03 pm

 avatarNo mention of God or Not-God in this:

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap080722.html

Other Comments by prettygoodformonkeys

48. Comment #279127 by Robin Burgess on November 5, 2008 at 3:07 pm

Of course Obama's bad for New Atheists. They don't exist.

As for the moderate religious people.. I usualy find that anyone I consider a moderate is, in fact, a humanist. They just take the bits from the bible that appeal to their humanism and dump the rest as something not to be taken literally. (In fact, I'd almost go as far as to say that my definition of a moderate theist is a humanist theist.) So, that's a pretty good step forward, in my opinion.

Other Comments by Robin Burgess

49. Comment #279133 by Flo on November 5, 2008 at 3:16 pm

 avatar"[...] that none of the stories in the Bible happened as written, but that they are true in more subtle ways [...]"
Oh boy. Sometimes I feel that if I EVER have to read stuff like again I'LL SCREAM TILL I CAN'T SCREAM NO MORE (and there'd better be none of those Bible-believing people around so I don't kick their heads in LESS subtle ways for using language in this misleading way).
Either the biblical stories are true or not. There is no other "kind" of truth, at least not one that would lend any credibility to the claim that those stories' original source is the all-powerful creator of the universe.

Other Comments by Flo

50. Comment #279135 by lol mahmood on November 5, 2008 at 3:16 pm

 avatarSarah Palin is bad news for republicans.

I heard one report suggesting that exit polls had identified her as significant factor driving republican voters to support Obama!

Other Comments by lol mahmood
Reload Comments | Back to Top

More Comments: 1 2 3 4 | Next | Last

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password:

This article is reposted from a website that accepts comments.
Why not share your comment on the article there as well? CLICK HERE