Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Choy Lee Mu · 06-11-2002, 03:40 PM

Hello All,

I wrote an email to syndicated columnist Reggie Rivers in response to <a href="http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36%257E73%257E628811,00.html?search=filter" target="_blank">This Column</a> in May 23rd's Denver Post Op-Ed page. His response to my email is below.

I'd appreciate any advice you all could give me on my forthcoming response. He seems to have re-define atheism in such a way that he feels justified in calling it a "religion" and equating it with religions such as Christianity, etc. Notice how he qualifies his definition as "active disbelief". I take the more traditional George H. Smith definition in that the words "theism" and "atheism" indicate the presence or the absence of a belief in god, but nothing else. The qualifiers (I.E. "Presbyterian", "weak" atheist, "mormon", "strong" atheist, etc.) are added after the basic presence or absence is stated by the terms "atheist" or "theist."

Thank you in advance, <img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" />

-Choy Lee Mu

Quote:

> Dear Mr. Rivers,
>
> First of all, please allow me to congratulate
> you on your stand in regards to Church/State
> separation. I have only one small thing to
> point out.
>
> In your column on May 23, you stated:
> "I'm sure the community would be outraged if
> the school set aside 60 seconds for Shields to
> take the microphone and issue an atheist's
> prayer. And their anger would be justified,
> because the school should not endorse religious
> belief. (Yes, atheism is a religion, too.)"
>
> I apologize, Mr. Rivers, but this is just not
> true. Atheism is the lack of religion.
>
> How can the lack of something be the same as
> the thing itself?
>
> Is "Theism" a religion? No. "Theism" means "A
> person with god beliefs."
>
> Conversely, "Atheism" means "A person without
> god beliefs."
>
> Is baldness a hair color? No, it is simply a
> lack of hair.
>
> Is atheism a religion? No, it is simply a lack
> of god beliefs.
>
> Thank you for allowing me to present my view on
> this matter by making your email address
> available.
>
> Have a wonderful Memorial Day weekend,
>
> -Choy Lee Mu
> Choyleemu@yahoo.com

Hi Choy,

Well said. I understand what you're saying, and I agree with you for the most part. However, I
believe that an "active" disbelief in God is as much an act of faith as an "active" belief.

Since the universe exists, there had to be a first cause. My computer hasn't always existed. It was created by men. I haven't always been here. I was created by my parents. But what about everything else in the universe? The stars, planets and empty space. Doesn't each of those items have to have a first cause? And if so, what existed before all of that.

I'm not a believer in Biblical creation. The story too nonsensical for me. But I do believe that at some point, there was a first cause. Some scientists argue that the only answer to the paradox of "what happened at the beginning of time?" is that there must be a realm outside the temporal universe that is not constrained by space, time and matter as we understand it, and it was out of this other realm that our universe emerged. It might have been a spontaneous event (e.g. the big bang) or it could have been a creator.

I think that all we can say is that we don't know whether a deity exists. Was it a God that created
us or a spontaneous event? We have proof of neither, so belief in either scenario requires faith. That's why I believe an "active" disbelief in God is every bit as much a religion as an "active" belief.

Obviously, you don't have to agree with me on that, but I just wanted to explain why I view atheism as a religion.

Thanks again,
Reggie

The Other Michael · 06-11-2002, 04:18 PM

Hi Choy Le Mu,

Try pointing out to him that at its most basic being an atheist means that you've not been presented with a god claim that convinces you, and therefore you don't have a belief in god.

You aren't DISbelieving in a particular god that has been proven to exist. If Fred says "my God exists" and you say "give me proof of this" and he doesn't come forward with any convincing proof, you are quite justified to reject his claim based on inadequate proof.

That is quite different from Fred saying "here's a stack of proof", you going and validating the proofs, and then saying, "you know Fred, this convinces me in your God's existance, but I have decided to not believe in your God anyway".

Or you can try the "there is also a possibility of invisible pink unicorns living behind Saturn who were the original creators of the universe" version. He can't prove you are wrong, but it is so unlikely that he's got a high probability of being correct by not assenting to the statement. But there is now another option - he can believe in a creator God or a creator IPU. Is he going to claim that his disbelief of the IPU is a strong a statement of belief as his belief in his creator God?

There are an infinite number of possibilities for the cause of the creation of the universe - does he hold a religious belief by denying any one of them, much less all of them?

You might also take a look at the "Why is there something rather than nothing" article on
<a href="http://spot.colorado.edu/~vstenger/" target="_blank">Victo Stenger's website</a>

I hope that helps,
Michael

06-11-2002, 05:46 PM

Uh, atheism isn't the lack of religion. Buddhists are atheists. Thats an important misconception, rereply and add that.

06-11-2002, 05:50 PM

Oh, and the point of the question. Call him on it, ask him that first of all, what was the first cause of God? Then ask him how can certain atomic phenomena not have cause or effects but rather happen spontaneously.

By the way, what would an atheists prayer be like?

"God sucks, amen."

Also note the definitions of religion according to webster:

Quote:

From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) :

Religion \Re*li"gion\ (r[-e]*l[i^]j"[u^]n), n. [F., from L.
religio; cf. religens pious, revering the gods, Gr. 'ale`gein
to heed, have a care. Cf. Neglect.]
1. The outward act or form by which men indicate their
recognition of the existence of a god or of gods having
power over their destiny, to whom obedience, service, and
honor are due; the feeling or expression of human love,
fear, or awe of some superhuman and overruling power,
whether by profession of belief, by observance of rites
and ceremonies, or by the conduct of life; a system of
faith and worship; a manifestation of piety; as, ethical
religions; monotheistic religions; natural religion;
revealed religion; the religion of the Jews; the religion
of idol worshipers.

An orderly life so far as others are able to observe
us is now and then produced by prudential motives or
by dint of habit; but without seriousness there can
be no religious principle at the bottom, no course
of conduct from religious motives; in a word, there
can be no religion. --Paley.

Religion [was] not, as too often now, used as
equivalent for godliness; but . . . it expressed the
outer form and embodiment which the inward spirit of
a true or a false devotion assumed. --Trench.

Religions, by which are meant the modes of divine
worship proper to different tribes, nations, or
communities, and based on the belief held in common
by the members of them severally. . . . There is no
living religion without something like a doctrine.
On the other hand, a doctrine, however elaborate,
does not constitute a religion. --C. P. Tiele
(Encyc.
Brit.).

Religion . . . means the conscious relation between
man and God, and the expression of that relation in
human conduct. --J.
K["o]stlin
(Schaff-Herzog
Encyc.)

After the most straitest sect of our religion I
lived a Pharisee. --Acts xxvi.
5.

The image of a brute, adorned With gay religions
full of pomp and gold. --Milton.

2. Specifically, conformity in faith and life to the precepts
inculcated in the Bible, respecting the conduct of life
and duty toward God and man; the Christian faith and
practice.

Let us with caution indulge the supposition that
morality can be maintained without religion.
--Washington.

Religion will attend you . . . as a pleasant and
useful companion in every proper place, and every
temperate occupation of life. --Buckminster.

3. (R. C. Ch.) A monastic or religious order subject to a
regulated mode of life; the religious state; as, to enter
religion. --Trench.

A good man was there of religion. --Chaucer.

4. Strictness of fidelity in conforming to any practice, as
if it were an enjoined rule of conduct. [R.]

Those parts of pleading which in ancient times might
perhaps be material, but at this time are become
only mere styles and forms, are still continued with
much religion. --Sir M. Hale.

Note: Religion, as distinguished from theology, is
subjective, designating the feelings and acts of men
which relate to God; while theology is objective, and
denotes those ideas which man entertains respecting the
God whom he worships, especially his systematized views
of God. As distinguished from morality, religion
denotes the influences and motives to human duty which
are found in the character and will of God, while
morality describes the duties to man, to which true
religion always influences. As distinguished from
piety, religion is a high sense of moral obligation and
spirit of reverence or worship which affect the heart
of man with respect to the Deity, while piety, which
first expressed the feelings of a child toward a
parent, is used for that filial sentiment of veneration
and love which we owe to the Father of all. As
distinguished from sanctity, religion is the means by
which sanctity is achieved, sanctity denoting primarily
that purity of heart and life which results from
habitual communion with God, and a sense of his
continual presence.

Jamie_L · 06-12-2002, 04:54 AM

From the standpoint of endorsing "religion" in schools, I would say atheism does qualify as a religion - in the sense that teaching that God(s) do not exist is a violation of church/state separation.

However, SECULARISM is not a religion. Teachers should neither be able to declare God is a fantasy nor to preach from the Bible. Schools, and government, should remain neutral on these issues.

Now, specifically regarding the issue of "faith" in a first cause - well, you don't HAVE to have faith in either. You can choose to reserve judgement (as I do) since information is lacking. This stance requires no faith at all.

Jamie

queue · 06-12-2002, 05:41 AM

I'm sure the community would be outraged if the school set aside 60 seconds for Shields to take the microphone and issue an atheist's prayer.

Who am I, as an atheist, supposed to be praying to? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

The Other Michael · 06-12-2002, 05:58 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by queue:
<strong>Who am I, as an atheist, supposed to be praying to?

</strong>

You sure went straight to the heart of the matter there - good point!

cheers,
Michael

Choy Lee Mu · 06-12-2002, 08:09 AM

Thanks All, for your thoughful replies. I will construct my reply to Mr. Rivers and send it off.

If anyone's interested, I will post it here as well.

Thanks again,

-Choy Lee Mu

Choy Lee Mu · 06-12-2002, 08:12 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by himynameisPwn:
<strong>Uh, atheism isn't the lack of religion. Buddhists are atheists. Thats an important misconception, rereply and add that.

</strong>

Hi Pwn,

I never called it a "lack of religion", simply a "lack of god-belief".

-Choy Lee Mu

06-12-2002, 05:03 PM

Quote:

> I apologize, Mr. Rivers, but this is just not
> true. Atheism is the lack of religion.

Yes, you did.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-11-2002, 04:18 PM	#2
The Other Michael Honorary Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: In the fog of San Francisco Posts: 12,631	Hi Choy Le Mu, Try pointing out to him that at its most basic being an atheist means that you've not been presented with a god claim that convinces you, and therefore you don't have a belief in god. You aren't DISbelieving in a particular god that has been proven to exist. If Fred says "my God exists" and you say "give me proof of this" and he doesn't come forward with any convincing proof, you are quite justified to reject his claim based on inadequate proof. That is quite different from Fred saying "here's a stack of proof", you going and validating the proofs, and then saying, "you know Fred, this convinces me in your God's existance, but I have decided to not believe in your God anyway". Or you can try the "there is also a possibility of invisible pink unicorns living behind Saturn who were the original creators of the universe" version. He can't prove you are wrong, but it is so unlikely that he's got a high probability of being correct by not assenting to the statement. But there is now another option - he can believe in a creator God or a creator IPU. Is he going to claim that his disbelief of the IPU is a strong a statement of belief as his belief in his creator God? There are an infinite number of possibilities for the cause of the creation of the universe - does he hold a religious belief by denying any one of them, much less all of them? You might also take a look at the "Why is there something rather than nothing" article on <a href="http://spot.colorado.edu/~vstenger/" target="_blank">Victo Stenger's website</a> I hope that helps, Michael

06-11-2002, 05:46 PM	#3
himynameisPwn Guest Posts: n/a	Uh, atheism isn't the lack of religion. Buddhists are atheists. Thats an important misconception, rereply and add that.

06-12-2002, 04:54 AM	#5
Jamie_L Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: U.S. Posts: 2,565	From the standpoint of endorsing "religion" in schools, I would say atheism does qualify as a religion - in the sense that teaching that God(s) do not exist is a violation of church/state separation. However, SECULARISM is not a religion. Teachers should neither be able to declare God is a fantasy nor to preach from the Bible. Schools, and government, should remain neutral on these issues. Now, specifically regarding the issue of "faith" in a first cause - well, you don't HAVE to have faith in either. You can choose to reserve judgement (as I do) since information is lacking. This stance requires no faith at all. Jamie

06-12-2002, 05:41 AM	#6
queue Regular Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Colorado, USA Posts: 368	I'm sure the community would be outraged if the school set aside 60 seconds for Shields to take the microphone and issue an atheist's prayer. Who am I, as an atheist, supposed to be praying to? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

06-12-2002, 08:09 AM	#8
Choy Lee Mu Junior Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 70	Thanks All, for your thoughful replies. I will construct my reply to Mr. Rivers and send it off. If anyone's interested, I will post it here as well. Thanks again, -Choy Lee Mu

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.