I found this excellent poem at The Digital Cuttlefish. There are two versions, the second being in response to the recent exchange between Rep. Monique Davis and Rob Sherman. If you enjoy them as much as I did please stop by the site and leave a comment to let the author know. Here’s the original:
I thought I saw an atheist, once, walking down the street.
I checked for horns, I checked for tail, I checked for cloven feet;
Began to tremble frightfully—my heart was in my throat—
Then sighed in happy recognition, for ‘twas but a goat.
I thought I saw an atheist, down near a swollen stream
With scaly skin, and blood so cold, I couldn’t breathe to scream!
I looked into his bulging eyes, and prayed “God, grant my wish”
Then laughed in my embarrassment—it only was a fish.
I thought I saw an atheist, with fur and pointed claws,
And wicked teeth for chewing up Judeo-Christian laws,
I ran, and tripped, and fell to earth, then hid behind a log—
It caught me, though, and licked my face—of course, it was a dog.
I thought I saw an atheist, though cleverly disguised
Not giant and reptilian, but human, normal sized,
It looked to be engaging in productive, useful labor;
But no, this was no atheist—this person was my neighbor!
I thought I saw an atheist; in fact, I saw a few!
My neighbor, and the grocer, and the cop, and maybe you!
I even found some in the church, right there beneath the steeple;
It turns out, to my great surprise… that atheists are people.
Now here is the second version, “I Thought I Saw an Atheist” Revisited :
…I thought I saw an atheist, upon the witness stand
It couldn’t be! Not where I live! This is a Christian Land!
The Constitution guarantees my right to scream and shout;
As the Good Lord is my witness, I demanded “You! Get out!”
I thought I saw an atheist demand an equal voice;
I told him he could leave right now, and that could be his choice.
I said his view was dangerous–our children must not hear!
It goes against the Bible, which our government holds dear!
I thought I saw an atheist nod quietly, and sigh.
The odds were stacked against him, which no person can deny;
What happens when a person is denied his civil right?
I may have seen an atheist who’s now convinced to fight.
Or maybe it’s in the water. I don’t know what it is but it’s very disturbing the way hate-filled politicians have been coming out of the woodwork of late. This time it’s not a homophobe but an atheist hater. You may have heard already about State Representative Monique Davis (D-Chicago) who unleashed her fury on atheist Rob Sherman recently. Friendly Atheist has the original story (see his site for important links):
Outspoken atheist Rob Sherman, who (with his daughter) filed a lawsuit that eventually put a stop to the Mandatory Moment of Silence, was back in the Illinois General Assembly on Wednesday.
He was there arguing Governor Rod Blagojevich’s $1,000,000 grant to the Pilgrim Baptist Church — which was given to them via the more secular Loop Lab School. (Shadiness all around.)
Anyway, he got into an exchange with Rep. Monique Davis (D-Chicago).
Below is a video that includes audio of the exchange between Sherman and Davis.
What an interesting perspective Davis has. It’s dangerous for children to know atheism exists? That’s like saying it’s dangerous for them to know cold exists–for what is cold except the absence of heat? And atheism is nothing more than the absence of theism. It’s only those who lack conviction in their own, or others’, faith who fear what a little knowledge will do.
Then there was the insinuation that Sherman was wrong for pursuing cases regarding the “moment of silence” in the schools when he wasn’t addressing guns in schools. Who is Davis to talk when millions upon millions of Christians spend infinite time, money and effort on fighting LGBT rights yet none on fighting poverty, homelessness or war?
Moving on now, Friendly Atheist has an update
Illinois State Rep. Monique Davis recently said to atheist Rob Sherman: “It’s dangerous for our children to even know that your philosophy (atheism) exists!”
The audio of the exchange was picked up and circulated, and the story (which was brought to the public’s eye by Chicago Tribune reporter Eric Zorn) has made its way through the blogosphere.
It’s made its way to the mainstream media, too.
Tonight, MSNBC news anchor Keith Olbermann named Davis his nightly “Worst Person in the World.”
Thanks to Spazeboy, we have a video!
Visit Friendly Atheist to see the MSNBC video, which is brief but good.
Should you be inclined to contact Rep. Davis (though I’ve heard she hasn’t responded to anybody yet) you can do so at:
Representative Monique D. Davis
1234 West 95th Street
Chicago, IL 60643
(773) 445-9700
(773) 445-5755 FAX
This video presents some rather interesting and up-to-date statistics about atheism and atheists around the world.
You may recall that I previously wrote about the ongoing problem in the US military with persistent Christian evangelism and bigotry toward those of other faiths, or of no faith. Recent news indicates that the trend continues, sadly. Spc. Jeremy Hall, the atheist who filed a religious discrimination lawsuit, has recently alleged that he has been threatened as a result.
Spc. Jeremy Hall filed a formal statement Wednesday with the Army. He says he overheard a conversation between two sergeants in his platoon and one wanted to “bust Hall in the mouth.”
Hall says he faces the animosity because he is an atheist and is suing the Department of Defense. He alleges it permits a culture that pushes fundamentalist Christianity.He says he does not feel safe his unit.
Apparently Freedom of Religion, particularly in the military only applies to Evangelical Christians. Woe to non-conformists.
Now, from Newsweek:
The little book, with the camouflage cover, is everywhere. There are more than 50,000 copies with the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. It’s on military bases across America. It’s in the homes of military families, who are praying their dear ones come home. It’s circulating at the Pentagon. Even the president has allegedly read it. “An aide to President Bush called me and said, ‘Henry, I think you’d like to know that the president is on his face before God every morning, and he’s using your [book]’,” its author told NEWSWEEK. The author is Henry Blackaby, a 72-year-old Canadian minister who is largely unknown outside Christian circles and who wrote the book together with his son Richard more than a decade ago. The book is the ever popular guide to prayer called “Experiencing God Day by Day.”
The Blackabys had already written and published the devotional when Henry was invited to speak in 2005 before a group of U.S. military chaplains. The chaplains were so inspired by Blackaby’s talk, the story goes, that they asked for copies of “Experiencing God Day by Day” to give to the men and women in the Army. Blackaby took the request to heart: he tapped some of his friends in the business world, received $176,000 in donations, redesigned the cover to match the Army’s camouflage uniforms and, with the help of his publisher, printed 100,000 copies to be distributed to the Army free of charge. …..
Military bases are flooded with religious literature, Christian literature in particular, and “Experiencing God Day by Day” is notable mostly for its serious tone and its orthodox approach to evangelical Christian theology. The book presents a daily verse from Scripture and a commentary on that verse; its intention is to help readers keep God ever present in their minds……The devotional is also a deeply evangelical text, and as such holds Christianity above other religions. “If you did not grow up in a Christian home,” reads the entry for June 10, “you can decide, as Joshua did, to reject your heritage of unbelief and begin a generation that serves the Lord.”
There would not seem, on the face of it, to be much of a problem with a group of private citizens sending a Christian prayer book abroad to lonely and spiritually hungry men and women who are, for the most part, Christian. But if you look closely at the “Experiencing God” phenomenon, says Jeff Sharlet, there is. Sharlet is a journalist who has been covering the Christian right for many years and is author of “The Family,” a forthcoming book about fundamentalist elites in America. “The military stands for our democratic nation, not for any religion,” he says. The ubiquity of this devotional “creates the appearance that this is an approved religion, that it’s favored by the state.” Not only is such an appearance isolating for military men and women who happen to not be evangelical—even mainline Protestants on military bases say they can feel marginalized, Sharlet says—but it also continues to create the impression abroad that the United States is engaged in a holy war. One man’s comfort is another man’s crusade, and such is the sad state of the world.
I find it disgusting, particularly considering the evangelical slant of the book. It’s obviously designed to recruit new Christians in addition to offering reading material to existing ones. Would the military allow books intended to proselytize for other religions, for atheism, etc? If not, then why are they allowing books evangelizing for Christianity and for one form in particular? This is wrong on so many levels.
Now from TheReporter.com :
What do the U.S. military and Christianity have in common? Nothing, if Mikey Weinstein has his way.
Weinstein is the founder of Military Religious Freedom Foundation, a nonprofit organization that seeks to resurrect what he believes is the crumbling wall between church and state in the military.
Specifically, Weinstein believes that a minority Christian viewpoint - one that seeks to turn the military into a Christian force - is infiltrating the ranks at all levels. If they succeed, he says, their beliefs could be forced onto people around the world and here at home.
As Weinstein says it: “We’re a Tiger Woods’ putt away from becoming the United Fundamentalist Christian States of America, brought to you by the faith-based Department of Defense and its Pentacostalagon.”
…..
It’s a cause that came to him four years ago, in the form of a conversation with his younger son, who at the time was a sophomore at the U.S. Air Force Academy in Colorado. His son complained about being unduly pressured by other cadets and academy leaders to give up his Jewish faith and become a Christian.
Weinstein, a 1977 Air Force academy graduate who served in Judge Advocate General Corps for 10 years and also did a stint in the Reagan White House, said he’d look into it. He thought it could be resolved with a few phone calls.
But as he probed, he began to see evidence of what seemed to be U.S.-sanctioned proseltyzation not only at the academy, but throughout the Air Force and in all branches of the military. Locally, he said he’s event received complaints from Travis Air Force Base, though he would not detail them.
Now the Military Religious Freedom Foundation has been in contact with more than 7,500 active-duty military members with similar complaints. Weinstein estimates that “96 percent” of those complaints come from other Christians.
“We’re at war, with the fundamentalist Christians pitted against the nonfundamentalist Christian brothers and sisters,” he says. “This is a national security threat internally every bit as much as that which is now challenging our country externally by a resurgent Taliban and al Qaida.”
The threat isn’t just to individual service members’ ability to practice their chosen faith - or nonfaith, as in the case of an avowed atheist whose opportunity for a promotional interview was rescinded, allegedly because he declined to participate in Christian prayers, according to a lawsuit recently filed by the foundation.
And it’s not just that “combat troops refusing to accept their commanders’ biblical world view are sent on more dangerous assignments,” or that “commanders are censoring movies,” so that troops are having trouble obtaining “Lord of the Rings” or Harry Potter DVDs, as Weinstein has been told by service members.
So much for the claim that atheists and other religious minorities aren’t actually put in harm’s way by the discrimination they experience.
The threat to national security comes when American Humvees are “driven through Iraqi cities playing, in Arabic, Rick Warren’s “The Purpose Driven Life,” or when company commanders are allowed to hand out tracts in Iraq depicting Christians going to heaven and Muslims going to hell, as alleged by a soldier who contacted Weinstein. Such actions serve to fuel the belief in Muslim countries that they are engaged in another holy war, and that this time, the Christian crusade is being led by the U.S. military.
But I thought they hated us for our freedoms. It couldn’t possibly have anything to do with the hostile religious behavior of the occupying forces. (Of course when Christian missionaries behave in similar ways and face violent backlash they call it “persecution” rather than face the reality that antagonistic behavior has repercussions.)
Needless to say, the US Military has far to go in bringing its Evangelical strain under control and making the environment safe and equal for people of all beliefs and non-beliefs. Fortunately the MRFF seems to be launching a formidable counterattack on the religious bullies. It will be worth keeping an eye on the situation to see how it pans out.
I bring you a theologian who attempts to dispel the “myths” he sees atheists presenting. If you wish you can read the first installment of his series “Myth 1: Atheists are Smarter” before continuing. The second installment attempts to prove incorrect atheists who hold the opinion that religion does more harm than good.
Hitchens, for instance, in his book God Is Not Great, asks whether the net effect of religion is positive or negative. Does religion do more harm than good (p. 217)?
He answers with a resounding “Yes!”
Religion is the cause of all social woes. The provocative subtitle of his book — How Religion Poisons Everything — seems to imply that religion does nothing but harm.This may strike us as strange, since the common wisdom of humanity has always held that religion makes people better, not worse. Our own experience often backs this up.
I suppose that depends on who you are and what your perspective is. The Crusades and The Spanish Inquisition are just two events that make me question the notion that religion makes people better. In more recent times religion and the Bible were used to support slavery and segregation in America, and to oppose interracial marriage. Currently women seeking reproductive freedom and LGBTs certainly can speak to the problems visited upon them by those preaching in the name of Biblical Truth, God’s Word and the like.
So what possible reasons could the atheists have to make the extravagant claim that religious belief has a negative effect on people’s behavior? What evidence do they put forward?
On close examination, it turns out that the atheists’ real evidence is rather thin.
I’m not sure what “real evidence” Father Williams has been examining other than Hitchens’ God Is Not Great
Sally Kern goes on hateful homophobic rant for which she will neither apologize nor meet with protesters then has fellow haters stage a “free speech for Sally Rally”–as if she’s been censored or silenced in some way.
Mary Frances Forrester echoes Sally Kern.
State Senator Gary George goes on racist, homophobic rant.
Wiley S. Drake calls for people to pray for death of Americans United leaders.
Traditional Values Coalition violates the 9th Commandment to advance their anti-gay agenda.
Focus on the Family spreads lies and propaganda to keep marriage equality away from LGBTs.
Traditional Values Coalition tries to trick to senior citizens as part of its anti-gay agenda.
Christians post death threats and other hate-speech against atheists on message boards. (Their hatred and death threats against LGBTs can be found here. )
RW Christians try to prevent laws that would forbid discrimination against transgender students in MD schools, using propaganda and lies.
Concerned Women of America use lies and propaganda to attempt to keep LGBTs from being added to CA schools anti-discrimination policy.
I could keep going, but I believe I’ve made my point.
Hitchens, for example, prefers to offer anecdotal evidence for his claim. He begins his 13th chapter titled “Does Religion Make People Behave Better?” with a personal attack on Martin Luther King Jr.
Here Hitchens makes a clever, though absurd, assertion. He asks whether King’s Christianity made him a better person. His answer is that yes, Martin Luther King did all sorts of good things for society in the area of civil rights, but … here’s the kicker … he wasn’t a Christian. He may have said he was a Christian and thought he was a Christian, but he was mistaken, and Hitchens knows better.
…..
The only proof he puts forward to back up this thesis is that King didn’t advocate violence and didn’t threaten people with hell, so he must not have been a true Christian.
This is like saying that Hitchens couldn’t be a true atheist, since he is too nice a guy.
The notion that King couldn’t be a true Christian simply because he didn’t advocate violence or threaten people with hell is indeed faulty. But then again look at the countless Christians who claim atheists cannot ever be moral because they don’t believe in God. That’s just as flawed a perception, yet it is responsible for centuries of bigotry and oppression toward atheists .
In making their case, Hitchens and company refrain from considering the almost countless ways that Christianity has benefited the world as we know it today.
What of the hospitals? What of the orders of nuns established to care for the dying or educate young girls? What of the soup kitchens and orphanages? What of the preservation of classical culture? What of the artistic and literary treasures?
Atheists don’t ignore those things (though they don’t trumpet them either–the Church does that just fine on its own while sweeping all of the evils under the rug). Atheists merely point out the fact that, in general, people could be inspired to do good without the need for religion–and all the negatives it entails. The reality is that millions of people are inspired to do good without religion, which is a fact that many of the religious hate to acknowledge.
By the way, how often do the religious search out instances of atheist philanthropy, altruism and heroism? Not that often I suspect. But they’re quick to spread the news of any misstep we make, be it real or trumped up.
There is no doubt that religious people could do more, and Hitchens’ accusations, though mean-spirited, do oblige us to a serious examination of conscience and a renewed commitment to offer a more consistent witness.
Yet an impartial examination of the facts will lead any objective observer to the conclusion that religion, and Christianity in particular, has been and continues to be an overwhelming force for personal and social good.
It’s good that Father Williams admits more could be done, but I’d hardly consider him an objective observer. As I’ve been on the receiving end of much bigotry from Christians (though I was one for about 20 years) I don’t know if I’d be able to consider myself fully objective either, but I’d say Christianity is not, overall, an “overwhelming force for personal and social good”. While I have no particular beef with Liberal Christians (except their nasty tendency to not stand up against their RW brethren often enough) the RW Christians are pure evil in my book. I’ll close with a quote from Steven Weinberg that sums up my feelings on the matter. With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Addendum. A comment has arrived. Ebon said:
Weinberg makes a very good point but I don’t think he takes it far enough. To my mind, the personality of an individual affects how they approach their faith just as much as the faith affects the individual or, to put it another way, the a**hole will always practice his faith in a way that lets him remain an a**hole.The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King was a great man but I suspect his greatness came from within himself. He may have been inspired by his Christianity but I think he would have still been a great man if he had been a Hindu, Jew, Muslim, athiest, whatever. The difference between his faith and that of, say, Fred Phelps isn’t in the doctrines they held, it is in the different emphasis each placed on particular parts of that doctrine. They took the same faith but viewed it very differently.
Incidently, I apologise for the plethora of comments recently but you keep posting thought-provoking stuff.
The personality and intentions of a person do indeed affect where they take religious belief. As Susan B. Anthony said, I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires. While some are taught bigotry and evil by their religion (children in particular), others take their pre-existing hatreds and use religion to justify them. They search the Bible, the Koran or other holy texts to justify their beliefs and use the “Word of God/Allah” to try to make their hatred carry more significant weight. At the same time they ignore wholesale other portions of those same texts that are inconvenient or of no interest to them, making various justifications for their actions.
I agree fully about MLK Jr. (about whom I’ll be posting later tonight). He was an amazing man and as far as I’m concerned he would have done much good with or without religion, despite his position as a Baptist minister. He wanted equality and justice for blacks, for the poor and for people in general. That doesn’t require belief or religion. It simply requires compassion and empathy for one’s fellow humans.
I always return to the universality of the Golden Rule, which is found in nearly all religions, spiritualities and philosophies. It’s too bad that more people don’t follow this simple rule, for if they did life would be much better.
That’s what happened to me, more or less. I posted this ten days ago and personally invited people to reply. Then I prepared myself for a barrage of comments and got only one, from a Satanist no less. So either not that many Christians are reading or none were able to rise to the challenge. Nonetheless, here is Ebon’s reply to the original post:
I’m a person of faith (Satanist, as it happens, but still faith). For all the atheists I’ve met (and I work for Beliefnet so that’s a lot), I’ve only ever met two I would classify as fundamentalist and both of those wanted (or said they wanted) to make religion illegal. That would be my classification of a fundamentalist, the desire to control another’s faith.
That said, i also recognise that those two were very much the lunatic fringe.
A Satanist working for Beliefnet, you certainly are brave. I’ve been a member of Beliefnet off and on and given up out of frustration after fighting with some of the more rabid RRRW types who think they and their religion run the world. They just can’t understand why “The Bible says…” doesn’t make everybody just stop in their tracks and obey. Like most places, Beliefnet is not particularly friendly to anybody not of the “dominant religion”.
That being said, I myself don’t care about what religion anybody is so long as they don’t push it on me, don’t harm anybody with it and don’t infringe upon the rights of others with it. It’s also a quirk of mine that I feel a bit of an affinity for people who practice the less-mainstream religions (yours included) simply because they have to put up with so much discrimination and bigotry–mostly RRRW Christians–which is something I certainly know about.
Now, technically there is no such thing as a “Fundamentalist Atheist”, at least not in the strict sense of the term. For example, Fundamentalist Christianity generally is typified by belief in the following “five fundamentals”:
* Inerrancy of the Scriptures
* The virgin birth and the deity of Jesus (Isaiah 7:14)
* The doctrine of substitutionary atonement through God’s grace and human faith (Hebrews 9)
* The bodily resurrection of Jesus (Matthew 28)
* The authenticity of Christ’s miracles (or, alternatively, his pre-millennial second coming)
Atheism is, simply put, non-belief in deities (weak/implicit atheism) or belief that deities don’t exist (strong/explicit atheism). There are no scriptures or doctrines, and therefore it’s not possible for atheists to be Fundamentalists in the way that Christians (or even Muslims) are Fundamentalists. (Go here for a more comprehensive explanation.) That doesn’t mean that atheists can’t be dogmatic or intolerant, however, and that’s where your thoughts come in.
There are, of course, some atheists who see any form of belief and religion, however moderate, as harmful and potentially dangerous, and therefore something to be eradicated. While I agree that religion has definitely been behind many hideous acts historically and currently, I don’t advocate active attempts to rid the world of it. (I wouldn’t, however, mourn its natural demise should people simply cease practicing it.) A number of the more prominent of these atheists are very vocal, have written best-selling books. From them and their supporters sprang the term “New Atheists”, and it’s also likely where the concept of “Fundamentalist Atheists” developed.
Ironically I just stumbled across this comic that depicts a fictional “Atheist Apocalypse”. If you follow any of the high-profile atheist authors you might recognize the Four Horsemen in the comic. While I find it amusing and somewhat intriguing, it’s also rather overreaching (as are most things of its nature). Yes, world without religion–particularly certain forms of religion–would go a long way in eradicating many of the ills of society. But we wouldn’t have the Utopia envisioned in the comic, for atheism is not a panacea. There are no panaceas. (And that, of course, is just my humble opinion.)
Of course I’ve rambled all over the place, as I’m sometimes wont to do. And the wine hasn’t even kicked in yet… 
Life under “Fundamentalist Atheists” (or dogmatic/intolerant Atheists), if they became numerous and powerful enough, could potentially result in religion being outlawed. To me that’s as inappropriate as religion being forced upon people by law or other coercive means. If there’s no opportunity for choice then it’s wrong, plain and simple. There are others (on both sides of the spectrum) who disagree, however. And that is very sad indeed.
Edward Current explains why Atheism is a dangerous, intolerant religion that kills!
Just in case anybody was unsure, the preceding video was satire.
If you’re anything like me, the prospect of new books is an exciting one. So here is something to whet your appetite; forthcoming titles in a variety of intriguing genres. Enjoy!
Robert Frost was born in San Francisco, CA, on March 26, 1874 and died in Vermont on January 29, 1963. In between he wrote some of the most amazing poetry. In honor of his birthday I’d like to share some of my favorite Frost poems and quotes.
THE ROAD NOT TAKEN
TWO roads diverged in a yellow wood,
And sorry I could not travel both
And be one traveler, long I stood
And looked down one as far as I could
To where it bent in the undergrowth;Then took the other, as just as fair,
And having perhaps the better claim,
Because it was grassy and wanted wear;
Though as for that the passing there
Had worn them really about the same,And both that morning equally lay
In leaves no step had trodden black.
Oh, I kept the first for another day!
Yet knowing how way leads on to way,
I doubted if I should ever come back.I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I–
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.
“I turned to speak to God, About the world’s despair; But to make bad matters worse, I found God wasn’t there.”
“I hold it to be the inalienable right of anybody to go to hell in his own way.”
FIRE AND ICE
SOME say the world will end in fire,
Some say in ice.
From what I’ve tasted of desire
I hold with those who favor fire.
But if it had to perish twice,
I think I know enough of hate
To know that for destruction ice
Is also great
And would suffice.
“A person will sometimes devote all his life to the development of one part of his body - the wishbone.”
