You have to listen to
this radio piece by National Public Radio. It really got me fired up when I first listened to it, but I was in my car, so I couldn't blog about it in the heat of the moment.
Listening to it again, Sam Harris still gets me flustered. NPR says that he "wields logic like a knife", yet his sweeping generalizations would shame any highschool debate student. He says that belief in a higher power is dividing people, and then uses as an example, a person's belief that God has allowed Islamic extremists to fly planes into the World Trade Center because of gay marriage. He uses extremists and fundamentalists to make his points in an attempt to woo these "moderates", but his beliefs go against any belief in a higher power. Setting aside my belief in God, I still have to say that his arguement is riddled with logical holes.
It's funny. Every atheist that I've ever encountered is incredibly passionate about their belief in nothing. I think that the passion in their arguement stems from a nagging doubt. If you're an atheist reading this, I may have just offended you and well, I'm sorry you feel that way. More on that later.
Someone who truly doesn't believe in God would be dispassionate about religious debates. Gary Wolf, interviewed in this NPR piece would seem to agree that these New Atheists are vehement to say the least. Brooke Gladstone says that according to Wolf, the "
polemics (I had to look that one up) of New Atheism can be just as nasty as the fundamentalists'." Wolf says (and I'm paraphrasing here, but I think correctly) that fundamentalists and
New Atheists almost sound alike in the ferver of their arguements.
Why don't I try a bit of Sam Harris' debate style here. I don't like Pokemon, but if I heard some people talking about Pokemon cards, games, and movies, I wouldn't become irrate or frustrated. My pulse wouldn't quicken by a single beat. I might sit there and listen to see what these folks were carrying on about, but in the end, I would get board and move on. Sam Harris doesn't seem bored in the least, and neither have any of the atheists that I've ever spoken with.
I'll admit: there are probably very few Pokemon proselytizers, but I didn't say that my arguement would be fully logical.
Sam Harris contended that there's nothing mean or intolerant about trying to stifle Christians anyone who believes in a higher power because in his words, he believes that we are under a "delusion."
The piece gets down-right laughable (but in a good way) as it goes on. Harris' call to moderates in the beginning of the piece is to moderates to stop tolerating the delusions of religion in the name of civility, but as the show continues, we hear from Ellen Johnson, president of American Atheists, who is
offended by the phrase "There are no atheists in foxholes". So now religious people have to be careful not to step on the toes of atheists...well no surprise there. That's old news, and yet here NPR is giving this air time. We've been hearing of courtroom drama surrounding prayer in schools, the name of God in our pledge of allegiance, the name of God on our money, and most recently in my recollection,
prayer commencing government meetings. But this phrase is "demeaning" and offensive to atheists because it implies that they may some day, in a moment of hardship, start believing in God. That outrages atheists...?
"Jonathan, you know, deep in your heart, you like Pokemon, and you'll play with Pokemon cards some day, I know it." I'd feel so violated.
Harris says that his contacts in journalism and in Hollywood experience, "a profound sense of relief" when they are "given permission" to express their doubts where religion is concerned. Is that like the rush you get when you find out that it's okay with the members of a group that you're around to tell a joke based on prejudice or outright racism? I don't know about you, but I'll always be offended by racist jokes (although I am ashamed to admit that I can remember times when I didn't stand against such joking).
Actually, I think that this point as made by Harris is pretty sly. For years now, the media has paid but token respect to social conservatives, and the editorials that get any attention are ones laced with thinly veiled disdain for Christians. It's not surprising that journalists of that sort would entertain Harris' ideas. If Harris had his way, he's saying he'd like to see the media biased against religion of all sorts. Thanks Sam, but I would like to hear the news reported objectively for what it is, whether I like what I'm hearing or not.
I can hear Harris doing a traffic report now.
Well Jan, traffic was moving along nicely until this mini-van with a Jesus fish got onto the interstate. How can you blame people for slowing down to gawk at that kind of idiocy!?So bottom line, yes, I was angry when I heard Sam Harris' comments, and I think that Ellen Johnson is ridiculous, but the bottom line is I don't think that they should be silenced. That's where I'm more American than they are. The constitution guarantees me the right to speak my mind, and more importantly, it guarantees me the right to pursue happiness. I'm happy being a Christian, Sam. Deal with it.
Hah! Check out this response on the Riehl World View.