The Misogyny Of Atheism

Yeah, that’s a beauty of a title. I didn’t make that one up. A blog called ‘Cutting It Straight’ put up this short post. I want to talk about this given it’s relevance to some episodic rumblings in the atheist community – whatever that is supposed to be.

http://api.ning.com/files/wggDR0Y3MYy7d0lHGugQbPoZiFaUQXR9AJMTt5stnNT9IQ9SvdMlUqve5o9Oe7ra7fErNCDFd8amRj314GSLSE4GN0WHWdqs/biblequote.jpg?width=381&height=480

Their post was short, so here it is entirely.

The Misogyny of Atheism

“How can a progressive, important intellectual community behave so poorly towards its female peers?”

Because atheism’s fundamental intellectual commitments (if pursued consistently) lead inexorably to such behaviour.

This article (not for kids to read, by the way!) shows the fundamental incoherence and hopelessness of atheism, because it displays the logical devaluation of the individual that inevitably results from naturalistic materialism. See, if human beings are merely animals and there is no transcendent, objective morality, “might makes right”–and men, being stronger than women, dominate in the jungle of naturalistic materialism. On atheistic grounds, how would that be wrong? (How is there any right and wrong to begin with, anyway?) If evolutionary theory is right, men increase their chances of reproductive success by objectifying women, using them as means to an end rather than valuing them as individuals.

But, if there’s a God and he made gender and sexuality for a purpose–and if men and women are made in his image and derive their value from him–then, and ONLY then, we have a basis for the inherent equality of men and women. The answer to this behaviour, then, is the Gospel.

 

Did you get that? Not believing in a god is a fundamental intellectual commitment. That means that pastors who stop believing in a god will end up being misogynists. Go figure. Without active belief in an imaginary friend we’re all fucked.

Apparently my thoughts are supposed to be incoherent and full of hopelessness, all because I don’t believe in gods. I’m also meant to be misogynistic. Well, fuck me, how did I get to be egalitarian? I must be doing this atheism stuff all wrong. If only there were a guide book, perhaps weekly meetings so we could all get the same world view to go with our lack of belief in magic sky daddy.

But wait, there is more:

if there’s a God and he made gender and sexuality for a purpose

Now those are some big questions. First we have ‘if there is a god’ and then ‘if _he_ made sexulity for a purpose’ – it doesn’t get better than that. Whatever comes next you can be certain is prattle. To prove it the author follows up by saying only through a god is there a basis for inherent equality. Read it again, inherent properties change depending on what god you believe in. Yes, they wrote inherent. Webster’s says that inherent means: existing in something as a permanent, essential, or characteristic attribute. Clearly that word does not mean what he thinks it means.

This is not to say that there are no misogynists who are also atheists. Nor is it to say that there are no misogynists who are also religious. There is no proven link between the two, though there is strong evidence for correlation on the latter.

I don’t know about you, but I’m counting on people being much more reasonable than their gods. I want them to be egalitarian despite their gods not because of them. Am I asking too much?

 

 

The Sound Of Religion Dying

I love the sound of religion dying. Yes, it has a sound. The cries of the religious whining about how they aren’t special anymore. The blog 410AD id doing just exactly that whining.

 

http://cdn.tradyouth.org/uploads/2014/06/tumblr_inline_mvznfwcq5n1qc27pq.jpg

 

For those you who think atheists are out to get you, this next bit is for you.

You are either misinformed , wilfully ignorant, or dishonest. Atheist do not wish to remove “..every religious reference – especially Christian ones – from public life.” They only want the government to stop using tax dollars to erect them or maintain them and prevent the government and its many agencies from displaying favoritism of one religion over others and none at all. Atheists want the government (federal, state, local) to treat all religions and no religion equally, not giving special dispensation to any single religion or group of religions. When the government et al is allowed to give preferential treatment to one religion over others, the others and those of no religious belief become second class citizens.

I presume that you’d like everyone that is not Christian like you to be a second class citizen. Your speech is bigoted and smacks of someone crying because their religious privilege is being questioned and removed. Go on, use the O word. Yes, just because Christians can’t act like they are above the rest of us they think they are oppressed. I’ve got news for you. Read your book. Nowhere in your holy book does it say you should have privilege. In fact it says much the opposite. So not only are you crying about not having special privilege you are being a hypocrite to boot. Yeah, I get to criticize your behavior. You aspire to be christ-like so the mandates for your behavior are laid out in a book that all can read. I’ve read it and I can tell you this much, you’ve got a long way to go before you can be said to be christ-like.

Eternal life is completely meaningless

myatheistlife:

Yep, most Christians don’t read their book and don’t know what it says about heaven. You can find out: http://www.biblestudytools.com/topical-verses/heaven-bible-verses/
It’s not much of a promised eternity… in fact, from the descriptions it’s not much at all. Make believe. Wishful thinking. pffffft If somebody offered you that to loan them 1000 dollars you’d say no. It’s worth nothing.

Originally posted on The Atheist Papers:

I woke up early today with a long list of problems to solve and chores to finish. I started the day off by breaking one of the 10 Commandments (I chose to work on the sabbath). I finished my list of chores and solved many of the problems I set out to solve, and then I came home and worked up an entire new set of chores and problems to solve. Indeed, writing this post is both a chore and a solvable problem (how do I word this correctly?). By reading this you are completing a chore and solving a problem (do I understand what he’s trying to say?). By completing chores (both good and bad) and solving problems, we enable ourselves to form memories of the experiences. These memories form the basis of our experience of time. They also serve as a list of our accomplishments…

View original 641 more words

Christian Pastor Offers Atheists $100K to Prove God Doesn’t Exist

myatheistlife:

Well, I’m tempted to say that Feuerstein is an idiot. He has thought this through but didn’t do enough research. Towards the end he prattles on about how god ‘wrote morality onto our hearts’ which, despite the fact this demonstrates a bad understanding of what a heart is, begs the question of why YHWH had to write down that murder is wrong, twice, in stone for his chosen people. Shouldn’t that have been selfevident if it was truly written on their hearts? Something is definitely wrong with this thinking and I’m going to go with ‘there is no god’ so this terribly confused hogwash Feuerstein is spouting makes no sense because he’s making it up or copying from people who made it all up.

Originally posted on Believers vs Non-Believers:

Evangelical pastor and Internet celebrity Joshua Feuerstein lives in a bubble. It’s a bubble so encapsulating, he can’t see how ridiculous he looks challenging his ideological opponents to prove a negative.

In a recent video that’s blowing up the Internet, mainly in Evangelical circles, Feuerstein challenges atheists to provide “proof or evidence” that God does not exist. If they can, he will give them $100,000.

Here it is:

View original 168 more words

That’s Why…

Whoever Said That All Bikers Are Bad?

myatheistlife:

This is worth sharing…

Originally posted on Good Time Stories:

There is a negative stigma that is attached to most motorcycle gangs. Many people consider these riders as crude, unthoughtful, vulgar, callous, tough and generally greedy individuals. So, when I found this little “photo story” I thought that it would be a beautiful story to share. I hope it warms your heart as it did mine!

Whoever Said That All Bikers Are Bad?

——————
Sorry folks…I couldn’t find the source to give credit to the author.

View original

She’s A Material Girl … And A Particle Physicist

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/002501501/3936905985_Materialism_xlarge.png

I know, you’re thinking I’ll never deliver on that title… amiright?

 

That might be a long way to go to get to thoughts on materialism, but I think they segue nicely.

philosophy : the belief that only material things exist
1 a :  a theory that physical matter is the only or fundamental reality and that
all being and processes and phenomena can be explained as manifestations
or results of matter
b :  a doctrine that the only or the highest values or objectives lie in material well-being and in the furtherance of material progress
c :  a doctrine that economic or social change is materially caused — compare historical materialism
2 a preoccupation with or stress upon material rather than intellectual or spiritual things

Okay, yes, that’s Merriam-Websters definition but there is a more specific philosophical definition:

Materialism is the idea that everything is either made only of matter or is ultimately dependent upon matter for its existence and nature. It is possible for a philosophy to be materialistic and still accord spirit a (secondary or dependent) place, but most forms of materialism tend to reject the existence of spirit or anything non-physical.

Some theists (and others) get caught up in the idea that materialists do not believe we have free will. Let me correct that for  you. In my opinion the right thinking materialists understand that consciousness is an emergent property and does not rely on billiard ball interaction between past and present to make decisions. The argument is clearly one fraught with issues on all sides. I maintain that we have free will because consciousness is not an elemental part of the physical world, rather it is an emergent property of parts of the physical world. It is dependent upon the physical world yet operates independently of it, at least in the ways we think are important: making decisions and experiencing the world etc.

Yes, I know Sam Harris said this or that, and he’s wrong on free will. Trust me, that’s another argument altogether.

Mind body dualism has a fair bit of dogma attached to it. It is neither necessary nor useful when explaining consciousness. Yes, I know you’ll want support for that but you’ll have to wait. I promise it’s coming. The point is that simply claiming materialism does not preclude you from understanding mammals to have free will. If it did, we would need proof that the mind is not an emergent property which acts in discord with the physical world – meaning that it acts with self agency rather than simply react to the physical world. It would be best if I could prove this, but currently we have no proof either way on free will for materialists. I do know that Sam Harris is wrong because he makes simple assumptions about a set of observations without considering the whole of the brain and how it works.  His views are like saying that vehicles are fuelled by passengers because they never go anywhere until there is a passenger in the vehicle.

In the quote above I highlighted ‘most forms’ for the reason that not all forms of non-physical are necessarily beyond the physical world. For instance (shout out to the philosophy students) red is immaterial but is only part of the physical world. Before you jump too far, the color red is only a problem for philosophers, physicists are quite alright with it. Philosophers are not an overly helpful lot. All this talk about brains and thinking yet not one of them can define what a thought is. They’ve had a pretty good run at it and just can’t get over that hurdle.

I’m a materialist and I know we have free will, all mammals do and probably even more species of life on this planet.

 

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 629 other followers

%d bloggers like this: