My good friends at the Freedom from Religion Foundation are at it again, further exacerbating our hyper-sensitive world here in Washington State, where having certain beliefs is apparently tantamount to a threat upon the livelihood of others.I've previously blogged about their proselytizing billboard campaign. This time they have a "religionless" display at the Washington State capitol in Olympia, along with a Nativity scene, a Menorah, and an Xmas tree (apparently the Hindus, Muslims and Buddists et. al, are out of luck).
The lack of foresight that can't seem to recognize or understand the difference between a religious display like a Menorah and an atheist article that openly disparages religious belief astounds me. This FFRF display is nothing short of socially acceptable bigotry.
According to this article, the FFRF manifesto, er . . . vendetta, uh . . . I mean display (yeah, that's it) at the capitol turned up missing within a few hours of being put up. The FFRF quickly replaced it, along with plans to include the well-known religious directive, "thou shalt not steal." Seriously, FFRF? It's easy to imagine that the inclusion of this commandment (held as sacred by more than one major religion) was meant to further ridicule religious belief but you seem oblivious of the contradiction here. I thought the purpose of religion was to brainwash? Now you use it to your advantage, even in jest, when necessary?
I find the foundationally contradictory nature of your organization unfortunate (I would like to note that while I do not share in the belief, I accept atheism as a valid belief system). I find the increasing acceptance of the FFRF in our society at large to be a disturbing trend and, as it bodes for the future, more than a little scary.
9 comments:
So the nativity scene is for the Christians, the menorah for the Jews; who's the tree for?
It is interesting that their polemic conforms to so many others across time and space (ill-informed of the other, unwittingly uses the other's sources both to tear it down and to support themselves, etc.).
If one could have a display representing a central celebration of his/her belief, what would an authentic atheist display be? Are you suggesting that, in the case of "holi-days," that they simply not participate and be ok with those who do?
And finally, why is that the FFRF seems to be the (verbally) militant wing of atheism? The similarities to how we categorize other faiths are interesting.
I'm suggesting that they have a celebration of the Winter Solstice that does not disparage religious belief or make back-handed comments suggesting that only those who are rational celebrate the solstice. None of the other symbols ridicule (either overtly or implied) other religions.
I'm a bit unsure what you are asking in your second question. I don't mean to single out the FFRF, but I ran into this story recently. I have friends who are atheists and they don't ridicule me (at least not to my face).
Freedom from "religion," and unto what? Their argument is indeed as bigoted and simplistic as expressions that can be found among the simplistic "religious." And even more, the identity is merely positional, it seems to have no meaning other than as "being against;" this seems to be just as much an enslavement as the unquestioning "religious" whom they disparage. Are the advocates of FFR as enslaved to "religion" as they are to "anti-religion"? There seems to be a co-dependency present in the motive behind their polemic.
What a strange hypocrisy is present in their approach; coming across as an equal-opposite to the ones they oppose.
Regardless of their position (or opposition), I , personally, still believe (In one God, the Father Almighty...) and will continue to. I'm not willing to let a more overt (and well-funded) group cause me to hide what it is that I believe in; and even more, why I believe in the personal nature of reality, the eternal value of each created human person, and of the non-accidental centrality of Love to all of life and being.
It seems that they are reacting specifically to a poor experience--or a sickened view--of what have come to be referred to as "Judeo-Christian Values," in particular.
God forgive me for contributing to the cause of the anti-religion through my own hypocrisy, lack of humility and love.
I agree with your sentiments, Jeremy. Right or wrong, I chose not to include some of these same sentiments in the post itself but rather chose to keep the focus on the FFRF and not let them off the proverbial hook.
I don't know, perhaps it is that same sort of attitude (I'll correct you instead of myself) that distorts Xnty and the Church?
I recently heard about this display on NPR, and have been wanting to write about it.
One thing that was interesting is that many of the callers said that they were glad that the display is there because it keeps religious people accountable. They thought that religions have been given too much slack in our society and that there is nothing wrong with ads like this that cause people to question their beliefs.
The problem that I had with this analysis is that it displays a terrible knowledge of the history of ideas? Our culture and society have been too easy on religion? Really? Religion hasn't been challenged even through 300+ years of Enlightenment humanism? This position makes no sense.
What is more, if the FFRF really wants equal protection under the constitution, and wants to ensure that the state doesn't favor any one religion, then they should have to choose which "holiday" they are going to celebrate and stick with that. It is certainly unfair treatment for them to be able to put up displays whenever any other religion puts up displays. Christianity has the two central holidays of Easter and Christmas, Jews have Yom Kippur, Hannukah, etc, Muslims have Ramadan, and I'm not even sure which holidays the Eastern faiths adhere to. It only seems fair that the atheists should choose which days out of the year to publicly celebrate their beliefs. If they get to put up signs during the holidays of every other religion, then there is no equity.
I find these atheistic evangelicals annoying as well. One thing I like about becoming Orthodox is that we possess the single greatest critique of atheists who think that their way is eminently more rational, peaceful, and humanitarian than the religious way. Just ask all of the Russian priests and bishops who were sent to the gulags by Marxist-Atheistic ideologues whether they believed secularism to be any less violent than the religions. If this kind of violence can attach to religions as well as to ideology, then we should be able to get them to admit that it is not a distinctly religious phenomena, but rather a human phenomena. Whenever we think of ourselves as exemplary, we are one step away from the worst atrocities.
When the Seattle Times ran their story on the FFRF's billboard, they included a message board for reader response. Like you Todd, I was quite surprised that posters were in favor of the billboard by a 2:1 margin, if not even higher.
Yes, the 20 million or so murdered under Stalin does spring to mind. This quote by Alexander Solzhenitsyn was posted in the last thread on the FFRF as well:
"If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being."
oooh, oooh, FFRF at it again, and I've missed all the back-and-forth.
Funny story, I fix people's appliances and was working on a microwave in some lady's home the other day. I had to call in to our tech line for a support question and as the guy is processing my call he mentions the whole capitol controversy. Hah! He, from Texas, blamed it all on Gregoire...
ahhhh.... I still get a kick out of the bumper stickers that say, "Don't blame me! I voted for Rossi!"
I didn't, for the record.
But, back to the topic, I agree.
Religion claims to liberate the soul and wants people to find salvation. Atheists claim their is no soul and want people to find "elightenment". Now, atheists, insisting their is no soul, insist on liberating our minds (?) from the enslavement of religion.
O William Wilberforce, you despicable enslaver!
Oh Billy Graham, you and your
cruel altar calls!
St. Paul, there is therefore no condemnation indeed!
If you would but read Marx, Sartre, and Nietzche, you would understand.
Of course, a fond reminiscence of Nietzche,
"The thought of suicide is a great consolation; by means of it one gets through many a bad night."
Give me that, and give me freedom from,
"Come unto me all who are weary and burdened, I shall give you rest."
Unfortunately, (fortunately) my sarcasm can't extend to this Speaker. The only Good. Jesus, who being Christ, is celebrated in that nativity scene.
But it is expected that He is mocked and that the FFRF wants to liberate me from my Liberator. He told me me it would be like this. I shouldn't be surprised, shocked, angered, or march on the capitol. I should remember, be grateful for the grace to see Truth, and pursue Him more vigorously.
job
Well said Job.
I have a suggestion for a possible FFRF PR slogan. "The Freedom From Religion Foundation: We're bigots even by our own standards."
On a more serious note, I've been re-reading a book by Roman Catholic author GK Chesterton (quoted in the banner of my blog), "The Man Who was Thursday." It deals with the same theme that undergirds much of Dostoevsky's work: the dichotomy between theism and atheism and particularly, the many faceted ways in which atheism manifests itself. The fictional novel is more fantastical than fantasy and is a vehicle for Chesterton's impeccably sharp wit. Highly recommended.
Oh my. This is getting out of hand (as it it weren't already).
http://www.komonews.com/news/local/35616504.html
Post a Comment