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, January 3, 2007 | Reason : Commentary | print version Print | Comments |

Document Letter From America: Atheists throw down the gauntlet

by Richard Bernstein, Herald Tribune

Reposted from:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/01/02/news/letter.php

NEW YORK: Here on the first days of the year of our lord 2007 it seems awkward to talk about a Godless world, but the fact is that in the waning months of 2006, a kind of militant atheism was making itself felt across the land.

There were two best-selling books declaring belief in God to be a kind of mass delusion, and a harmful mass delusion at that, occasioning a vigorous and often angry response from many people who believe the repeated announcement of the death of God to be wrong, spiritually deaf and dangerous.

This situation gives rise to a New Year's prediction that 2007 will see an intensified war of religion in America, or, perhaps more accurately, a war of the religious against the irreligious, and why that should be happening just now is an important sign of the times, a reflection of our moment in history.

Atheism is nothing new, of course, and perhaps not even the militant, proselytizing atheism of the sort taking place just now. And yet, when a figure of the scientific stature of Richard Dawkins writes a book called "The God Delusion" and the book climbs onto the New York Times best-seller list and stays there, for 14 weeks so far, you know something significant is taking place.

Atheists have generally tended to live their lives quietly inside the comfortable cocoon of their secular community, in which, say, a blessing before dinner, or some remark about Jesus' love would be about as chic as cappuccino made with instant coffee.

But at least a few atheists are now actively, angrily, passionately trying to persuade the religious to their point of view, none more conspicuously than Sam Harris, a graduate student in neuroscience whose book "Letter to a Christian Nation," another recent New York Times best seller, portrays Christianity as a kind of malign nonsense. Harris is engaging in no polite parlor discussion, showing due respect to the views of others. For him, as he puts it, the grievous harm caused by religious conviction "is what makes the honest criticism of religious faith a moral and intellectual necessity."

The mood can be found elsewhere. The New York Times reported a couple of months ago on a conference at the Jonas Salk Institute in California during which participants, who included Dawkins and Harris, called on scientists actively to combat religion, with the physicist and Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg delivering this summary of the mission: "Anything that we scientists can do to weaken the hold of religion should be done and may in the end be our greatest contribution to civilization."

Atheism as a necessary attribute of civilization — religion as the opposite of civilization — that argument is being stated more assertively and is being welcomed in some quarters more warmly now than at any time before. What is going on? One conclusion is not so far-reaching. It could be simply that there's a market for just about anything in this country — whether atheism or psychic channeling.

The best-sellerdom of books like those of Harris and Dawkins shows that there is a market for militant atheism, but the market for religious belief is bigger. I wouldn't imagine any candidate for office winning on a platform of disbelief in God. I would similarly suppose that Billy Graham and other televangelists will have far vaster audiences than Harris does.

The timing of all this is telling, the atheists' best sellers coming when what might be called faith-based extremism and conflict is on the increase. Harris is obviously bothered by the rise of Christian fundamentalism in the United States, which has coincided with the very violent rise of fundamentalist Islam in the Middle East, one product of which was the attacks of Sept. 11.

The two movements are almost entirely dissimilar, of course, with Christian fundamentalism engaging in no violence or threats. Still, both movements arise from the deep conviction that a return to a kind of pure religious practice, rather than secular Enlightenment thought, is the answer to humanity's problems. Murderous Hindu nationalists in India and Orthodox Jewish settlers on the West Bank who believe they are following God's commands in seizing Palestinian land are other illustrations of faith-based extremism.

To atheists like Weinberg, Dawkins and Harris and their many avid readers, it is clearly disappointing that in America, unlike in most of Europe, rationalist, scientific ideas have not become the norm. Harris gloomily recites poll figures on this point: 53 percent of Americans, he says, believe in creationism, which to scientists is like believing that the sun revolves around the Earth. In what he sees as an illustration of mass self-delusion, 80 percent of the survivors of the Katrina disaster claim that the hurricane and flood strengthened their faith in God — rather than serving as powerful evidence, as it does for Harris, that God does not exist.

Clearly, to a secular rationalist this is all disturbing. "Our country now appears, as at no other time in her history, like a lumbering, bellicose, dim- witted giant," Harris writes, and in writing his "Letter to a Christian Nation" he clearly is hoping to do his little bit to reverse the trend.

Will he succeed? It is doubtful. There are no available statistics on who exactly is buying the books by Harris and Dawkins, but it seems reasonable to suppose that the majority of them are already solid members of the rationalist choir. Books no doubt do sometimes change people's minds, but more often they help to foster a sense of solidarity among members of an existing group, whether believers in alien space abduction or disbelievers in God.

In this sense what the atheist phenomenon reflects is the extent to which America is culturally divided. It used to be, as the British novelist and scientist C. P. Snow famously said, that there were two cultures that failed to understand each other — the scientific and the humanist. Snow's analysis may well still hold true, except that the main divide now seems not to be between physicists and poets, but between those who make religion central to their lives and those who don't.

E-mail: pagetwo@iht.com

Comments 1 - 39 of 39 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #15835 by thompjs on January 3, 2007 at 9:28 am

Christian fundamentalists not violent? Not exactly
true.

Other Comments by thompjs

2. Comment #15838 by Louis Perry on January 3, 2007 at 9:44 am

Re: Paragraph 11: "The two movements are almost entirely dissimilar, of course, with Christian fundamentalism engaging in no violence or threats."

Ask any gay person: The Christian fundamentalist war against full civil rights for gay Americans is both violent and threatening.

Other Comments by Louis Perry

3. Comment #15841 by Michael on January 3, 2007 at 9:50 am

I hope Bernstein is wrong in his prediction. He is certainly wrong to suggest that Xian fundementalists are not violent.

Other Comments by Michael

4. Comment #15848 by Mr. Mark on January 3, 2007 at 10:27 am

"...Christian fundamentalism engaging in no violence or threats."

Yep. It's Islamist fundamentalists bombing those abortion clinics all righty. And how about those Islamic fundamentalists who hold the protests at the funerals of dead American servicepeople? The ones who say god is glad they're dead?

"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Xianity." Which Islamic fundamentalist uttered that bon mot?

And how about the current leaders of the US government, those Islamic fundamentalists who have taken Ms. Coulter up on her challenge and have invaded countries, killed their leaders and - in the words of at least one GOP Congressman - should be converting Islamists to Xianity?

One could go on, but who wants to eat up all of Richard's bandwidth?

Other Comments by Mr. Mark

5. Comment #15852 by toomanytribbles on January 3, 2007 at 10:42 am

 avatarHarris gloomily recites poll figures on this point: 53 percent of Americans, he says, believe in creationism, which to scientists is like believing that the sun revolves around the Earth.

is like...? i don't understand.. is richard bernstein implying that it is somehow different?

Other Comments by toomanytribbles

6. Comment #15854 by MarcusA on January 3, 2007 at 10:56 am

It's annoying to see Dawkins and Harris characterized as "militant". Where have they tried to incite violence like the christian right? "Militant" is a word I would reserve for extremists. Dawkins has NOT demonized individuals or spread hatred. These are the methods of Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. Look at the way the christain right has personally attacked Judge Jones in the Dover Intelligent Design case.

Other Comments by MarcusA

7. Comment #15857 by Homo economicus on January 3, 2007 at 11:04 am

 avatar'The two movements are almost entirely dissimilar, of course, with Christian fundamentalism engaging in no violence or threats.'

So abortion doctors are not threatened or killed by Christian fundementalists?

Dawkins et al militant? Well I do not want acts of violence for my ideas nor do they. I just want children to be taught science and for everyone to think for themselves critically about life the universe and everything. Give them the analytical tools to come to their own conclusion.

And if that scares the pants off anyone, then they should be ashamed of themselves.

Other Comments by Homo economicus

8. Comment #15865 by Kismettena on January 3, 2007 at 11:46 am

Ugh, this is ridiculous.

I love how he mentions disbelief in God and belief in alien abductions in the same breath.

And even though everyone else seems to have commented on it: Christian fundamentalists not violent???? WHAT!? He needs to read that Blackwater article. I was recently talking to a marine stationed in Iraq who was working with these Blackwater fundies, who apparently had to be replaced because they were getting servicewomen drunk and assaulting them.
And I suppose Dr. Slepian was murdered by Muslims?

What an asshat.


And I'm SICK and tired of hearing atheists described as militant, it is a completely unfounded accusation. I'm a feminist. It reminds me of hearing Rush Limbaugh's asinine term 'feminazi' spewed by so many idiots who do not understand feminism in the least. Speak out against the status quo and you're not just uppity, you're 'militant.'

Other Comments by Kismettena

9. Comment #15873 by Seti on January 3, 2007 at 12:22 pm

 avatarThis guy would probably describe himself as a "moderate" - and he's excatly the sort Richard is talking about when he says they're dangerous. They close their eyes to the extremism in their own camp, and because of this fail to perceive why atheists have felt they have to stand up and protest about what is happening.

I - and I suspect most of us - would be more than happy to leave beleivers alone, happy in their delusions, if they would simply acknowledge that all they have is a beleif, and that does not give them the right to dictate how others should live (or die) or to demand financial support from our taxes, or to infiltrate their delusions into the minds of other people's children.

Other Comments by Seti

10. Comment #15874 by anon on January 3, 2007 at 12:30 pm

 avatarIf some journalist had blindly labeled muslims or christians as militant they'd be receiving death threats by now.

He's too pessimistic about our chances, there aren't enough 'militant atheists' to account for the success of books like TGD, and many more secret doubters in the religious flocks than is ever acknowledged.

Other Comments by anon

11. Comment #15883 by Frostbit on January 3, 2007 at 1:50 pm

"80 percent of the survivors of the Katrina disaster claim that the hurricane and flood strengthened their faith in God"

Someone please tell me this is not true!!!!

Other Comments by Frostbit

12. Comment #15885 by dpieper on January 3, 2007 at 1:53 pm

"New Year's prediction that 2007 will see an intensified war of religion in America, or, perhaps more accurately, a war of the religious against the irreligious,"

It's amazing how the Religious "Right" likes to use the metaphor of "War". I much prefer open dialog and discussion to "War".

Other Comments by dpieper

13. Comment #15889 by roach on January 3, 2007 at 2:03 pm

"Books no doubt do sometimes change people's minds, but more often they help to foster a sense of solidarity among members of an existing group, whether believers in alien space abduction or disbelievers in God."

Well that was a depressing article. It's almost as if the author doesn't think much can be gained by reading or writing books. I think this type of pessimism comes from an "all or nothing" line of thought. That is, unless a book or argument is so insightful that it instantly changes everyone's mind it must be useless. Luckily, social change is a slow, gradual process (sound familiar?)and thankfully we have people who are willing to give it a little nudge.

Other Comments by roach

14. Comment #15890 by Lionel A on January 3, 2007 at 2:05 pm

 avatar... Christian fundamentalism engaging in no violence or threats.'

Cognitive dissonance is rampant amongst these commentators.

That is just one example from the above, taking the piece apart anymore will serve no useful purpose.

Other Comments by Lionel A

15. Comment #15893 by blaine on January 3, 2007 at 2:37 pm

Brand new example of a threat of violence from an american Fundamentalist:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/01/02/robertson.predictions.ap/index.html

There's an obvious difference between saying "I will kill you sinners" and "God will kill you sinners", but both are genuine murderous threats.

Other Comments by blaine

16. Comment #15899 by BracesForImpact on January 3, 2007 at 3:41 pm

 avatarPat Robertson becomes front page news on CNN and FOX for saying that God told him there would be a big terrorist attack in the U.S. in 2007. This man has inspired more hatred and bigotry than I can imagine. Yet, we atheists are militant and "in your face".

Other Comments by BracesForImpact

17. Comment #15905 by Duff on January 3, 2007 at 5:41 pm

Having grown up in a fundamentalist christian environment, I can tell you that Christians (capitalized) want nothing more than violence in the name of the Second Coming. Violence is as important to the fundamentalists as it is to the Taliban and if you don't believe it, you don't know anything about the Fundamentalist Christian Religion.
Every fundamentalist looks for signs that the second coming is nigh. Violence in the middle east is the mothers milk of extremist, insane Christians, the same as it is for the insane Islamists. Hate and intolerance is the nuclear force that drives this insane war and the Christians don't have any less passion than the Muslim jihadists. A pox on both their houses!!!

Other Comments by Duff

18. Comment #15907 by eris on January 3, 2007 at 6:11 pm

It's not militant so much as fed up. Dealing with the very religious is as if you had a teenage kid who still adamantly believed in Santa. There's only so much gentle nudging you can do before finally escalating to the "Oh come off it!" stage.

Other Comments by eris

19. Comment #15911 by HappyPrimate on January 3, 2007 at 7:11 pm

 avatarTo reply to Frostbit -- I live in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 80 miles from New Orleans. YES they do believe God had everything to do with the storm and those who survived it and were rescued are now convinced that God did it! That is what I live in everyday here. LOL!!! The article is dog doodoo. I can't put a bumper sticker on my car that supports my political or nonreligous beliefs for fear that damage will be done to it. Non-violent? You tell me.

Other Comments by HappyPrimate

20. Comment #15915 by ICONIC FREEDOM on January 3, 2007 at 7:52 pm

 avatarHaving worked as a therapist for several years, I can tell you that verbal/mental/emotional abuse is more damaging at times than physical abuse. That said.

"Christian fundamentalism engaging in no violence or threats"

The indoctrination and overtaking of our nation slowly, methodically, and with all intent of converting it to a nation of christianity will create more violence and creates more lack of hope than most behaviors from these christians that I see.

They're just as dangerous as if they were acting violent, at least we could combat their behavior in terms of violence, it's the tiptoeing of change that will kill everyone with ignorance.

Other Comments by ICONIC FREEDOM

21. Comment #15936 by tholin on January 3, 2007 at 11:31 pm

"The two movements are almost entirely dissimilar, of course, with Christian fundamentalism engaging in no violence or threats."

Wow! Imagine the fatuous impulse required to launch that stinker into flight!

Let's remember that, despite all the consistantly loony 12th Imam tosh spewed from Tehran, it was our President who actually DID invade and occupy Iraq after claiming to have "consulted" God.

Other Comments by tholin

22. Comment #15953 by gcdavis on January 4, 2007 at 1:21 am

 avatar"...the rise of Christian fundamentalism in the United States, which has coincided with the very violent rise of fundamentalist Islam in the Middle East, one product of which was the attacks of Sept. 11. The two movements are almost entirely dissimilar, of course..."

Strange that he hasn't noticed the connection. The parallel rise in Christian and Islamic fundamentalism during the last 20 years is not a coincidence, both feed off a fear of the other. The murder of Israeli hostages at the 1972 Olympics by Palestinian terrorists demonstrates how things have changed. This act was motivated by a political grievance; Islam was nowhere to be seen then, whereas a similar act nowadays would be portrayed as a victory for Islam against the infidels!

Other Comments by gcdavis

23. Comment #15962 by Aussie on January 4, 2007 at 2:13 am

with Christian fundamentalism engaging in no violence or threats.

Iraq?

Undermining of the Middle East peace process to bring on the "Rapture"?

This guy is almost totally uninformed.

Other Comments by Aussie

24. Comment #15969 by Ian on January 4, 2007 at 2:43 am

I hope this reporter doesn't consider himself an ace political analyst. Apart from missing Christian violence and power fantasies, he fails to realise that the rise of the atheist voice marks a sea-change in American politics and politics across the globe.

Up to now, religion has dominated political discourse by waging a cynical hate campaign against the unbeliever and those who have found the claims of religion absurd have had to accept political disenfranchisement.

The rise of the atheist voice is marking theists' cards: that disenfranchisement is coming to a close. The politician who sees the sales of The God Delusion now knows that there are millions of people who agree and are willing to put their money where their mouths are. The age of religious despotism is coming to a close.

Our ace political analyst also misses the distinction between activism and militantism. No atheist has ever threatened violence against the religious, or even that religious right of worship be truncated.

There are no training camps for atheist the equivelent of Brown Shirts. We have only opened up avenues where the religious might be criticised and if that criticism has beeen harsh, it is only because the religious have had it all their own barbaric way for far too long.

Rationalism may not deliver a political paradise, but we would have to be astoundingly incompetent to do as badly as the religious. The secular Clinton helped bring peace to Northern Ireland, the Christian Bush has wasted thousands upon thousands of lives in Iraq and Afghanistan. How stark does the difference have to be before journalists see it as it is?

Other Comments by Ian

25. Comment #15971 by dave p on January 4, 2007 at 3:12 am

I'd also question the article's implied association of Islamism with violence. Jihadism is one particular form of politicised Islam, but such violence isn't universal among adherents of Islamic law and government. There are violent and non-violent fundamentalists on both sides.

Other Comments by dave p

26. Comment #15974 by ICONIC FREEDOM on January 4, 2007 at 3:47 am

 avatarComment #15936 by tholin on January 3, 2007 at 11:31 pm

You mentioned god told President Bush to invade Iraq, do you or anyone reading for that matter, have any link to audio of this or video? I've searched the web tirelessly about it and really would like to hear it for myself as I agree with the insanity of making such a remark.

If you know, please assit.

Cheers!

Other Comments by ICONIC FREEDOM

27. Comment #15983 by ICONIC FREEDOM on January 4, 2007 at 4:53 am

 avatarPerhaps I can't find it because I can't spell! That word was assist, not assit.

Anyway, the only thing I find is that the reports are stating that President Bush told Palestinian leaders, blah blah.

I would find this information very questionable given the Palestinian leadership and their disdain for the relationship between the United States and Israel.

Certainly if it were true I would not object to it's precepts as invoking any god is stupid, but this story is starting to take on an air of "urban myth" with relatively little based on facts?

Other Comments by ICONIC FREEDOM

28. Comment #15984 by ICONIC FREEDOM on January 4, 2007 at 5:05 am

 avatarThis is the closest I could find, but it's hardly an endorsement of Bush's statement, in fact, I would say they(Palestinian Leadership) are NOT endorsing the claim.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4320586.stm

Any one know differently, I would not want to perpetuate such a claim if I knew better. I'd really like to see the truth about this story once and for all.

Cheers!

Other Comments by ICONIC FREEDOM

29. Comment #15990 by daveadams on January 4, 2007 at 5:29 am

I am a Christian and I condemn all violence, and threats to it, used by the Christian right in America. Bernstein is wrong to suggest that no such events are not occurring.

However, as Dawkins himself questions, are we really concerned with coming up with two role-calls of iniquity? If we are, then Christians can point the finger at many, many atheists. Yes, Christians who commit violence may well be hypocrites, but what insurance does the belief there is no God offer against violence? It may remove one excuse for it, but hatred, envy, jealousy, the territorial imperative, ethnicity, politics, and many cultural dividers remain.

A world without religion would be a world with less violence. But that will not stop people from believing what they do - because they believe they are right. Show them why they are wrong, by all means, but don't tell them violence alone is a reason to get rid of religion. Violence, for most of them, is either a gross misinterpretation of their religion, or an unfortunate by-product. Then there are the minority of religious people who indluge in it, who I condemn on all fronts.

Other Comments by daveadams

30. Comment #16011 by daveadams on January 4, 2007 at 6:43 am

I in fact meant "Bernstein is wrong to suggest that no such events are occurring" - sorry!

Other Comments by daveadams

31. Comment #16029 by SMART on January 4, 2007 at 8:10 am

Comment #13 by ROACH is quite correct. The people who campaigned against racial and homosexual discrimination, or in favour of women's rights, didn't achieve their goals overnight. Re the current sneering at Dawkins and Harris (in some quarters) I am reminded of how Winston Churchill was portrayed in the British press in the 1930's when he tried to warn us about the Nazis.

This apparent "rise in militant atheism" is in fact a symptom of religion's spiralling decline (in the civilised world anyway). Let's help speed up its death by speaking out against the evil of religion at every appropriate opportunity!

Other Comments by SMART

32. Comment #16032 by Rob3fm on January 4, 2007 at 8:12 am

Like "dpieper" up there, I don't like to think in terms of our being at war with religious people. If we must use "war," I'd rather think of the ideas themselves being at war. That's the approach that allows frank criticism without being personally disrespectful. I'm always happy to defend my ideas with someone who disagrees with me, as long as I don't feel personally attacked.

Other Comments by Rob3fm

33. Comment #16127 by CrysOdenkirk on January 4, 2007 at 6:56 pm

 avatarUgh!

Speaking as someone who was nearly burned at the stake (well, a tree, not a stake) by children whose Fundamentalist parents and priest lauded them for it, I tell you, I'm ready to do a little violence to that article! Christians as a whole aren't violent but Muslims are? Frankly, I don't see much difference between them!

But I could go on at length about that and I won't.

My real comment is a response to scooternyc's question about citation. I remember watching one of his hare-brained speeches to the country and hearing him say that God had chosen him for "this fight" I think is the exact phrase. I don't remember exactly. I'm digging through speeches to find it. When I find it, I'll post it to:

http://del.icio.us/CrysOdenkirk/god_made_me_do_it

I'm in the process of reading through the millions of stories I found when I started looking for that speech. I think I'm going to start collecting examples of the "God made me do it!" defense, and they'll be at that link as I find them.

Other Comments by CrysOdenkirk

34. Comment #16135 by atkinson on January 4, 2007 at 9:09 pm

 avatarComment #15974:
Google "bush god told me to"

Other Comments by atkinson

35. Comment #16136 by tholin on January 4, 2007 at 9:41 pm

Re; 15974 by scooternyc:

The 'God as war consultant' reference I made to Bush 43 is taken straight from consumate insider Bob Woodward. In "Bush at War", Woodward asks 43 if he consulted Father 41 for guidance prior to the decision to invade Iraq. "There's a higher Father that I appeal to for that strength", 43 replied.

Here's a link that captures the background and quote in detail:


http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0420-01.htm

Other Comments by tholin

36. Comment #16143 by Mroberts3 on January 5, 2007 at 12:17 am

"It's annoying to see Dawkins and Harris characterized as "militant". Where have they tried to incite violence like the christian right? "Militant" is a word I would reserve for extremists. Dawkins has NOT demonized individuals or spread hatred. These are the methods of Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. Look at the way the christain right has personally attacked Judge Jones in the Dover Intelligent Design case."

Exactly. While I think this article gives a good summary of what is going on to someone out of the loop, militant is certainly not the right word. I bet this is unintentional on his part. My this is one of the things we need to change about people's perceptions. A fundamentalist Christian and a very outspoken Atheist are NOT the same thing; they are not poles on a spectrum. One is a fundamentalist in the way it should be defined, and the other is not.

Other Comments by Mroberts3

37. Comment #16144 by Mroberts3 on January 5, 2007 at 12:20 am

Calling Dawkins a militant Atheist is like calling an out of the closet homosexual a militant one.

at least they are not banning "Atheist marriage"... yet

Other Comments by Mroberts3

38. Comment #16215 by snarkyboojum on January 5, 2007 at 3:14 pm

The Bernstein article is appalling.

My blog post about it: How to write about book(s) you probably haven't read...

Other Comments by snarkyboojum

39. Comment #16566 by elroySF on January 7, 2007 at 11:21 am

Mr. Bernstein -

In your op ed piece you make the incredible statement "...Christian fundamentalism engaging in no violence or threats." Excuse me? Apparently we live on very different planets. As a gay American, I can assure you that violence and threats from the Christian fundamentalist mob are a part of everyday life. And how many abortion doctors have been killed by Christian fundamentalists? How many "activist judges" threatened and in a least one case, killed? Perhaps you should read a newspaper occasionally instead of simply opining in them.

Brian Reed

Other Comments by elroySF
Reload Comments | Back to Top

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password: