Atheism - a personal F.A.Q.

Once upon a time, I used to spend a lot of time reading and posting to usenet, mostly in alt.atheism. I was not always nice while doing so - in fact, I was often downright offensive. Usenet is a fine place to practice one's command of invective, and it can usually be aimed at targets who ask for it, repeatedly. After a time,though, I got tired of the amount of negativity that I was dealing with, so I stopped. Below are answers to a lot of the questions that I used to be asked back when. Reading them will give you a reasonably accurate idea of how my lack of belief works, and some insights into some of the things that piss me off.

1. Are you the same asshole who flamed me on usenet?
If you were posting to alt.atheism, I probably was. Here's something to keep in mind; if I insulted you, then as far as I am concerned you bloody well deserved it. You deserved it by insulting me personally, or by insulting my intelligence, or by substituting dogma for argument, or for spouting your religious shite in a newsgroup where it is not needed nor wanted - more than likely, you did all of the above - so don't expect an apology.
2. But I'm an atheist - I'm on your side, damnit! Why did you flame me?
Probably because you have an urge to tell other people how to behave. The self-proclaimed serenity monitors that seem to infest the 'net have no business on unmoderated usenet groups. I will bloody well tell people what I think of them, in exactly the same fashion that I do in real life. The difference of course, is that it's rare for someone to be as rude and nasty to me in real life as they are on the 'net.
3. Why don't you let religious people alone? Aren't they trying to make the world a better place?
Because many "religious people"(and in this case I am almost always talking about American-style "born again" Christians, and/or their allies in the religious right) are not content to leave the rest of us alone. Contrary to what the Christian right would have you believe, the United States was not founded by religious zealots, nor is it in any way a "Christian" country. The First Amendment to the Constituion of the United States makes this abundantly clear. Unfortunately, the Christian Right continually attempts to codify their dogma and moral stances into legal statutes. That brand of so-called morality, as expressed by that dogma, is also repellent to me personally, and to many ethical people who have the ability to think. Despite this, the religious right have far more political power than their numbers would indicate - and I will not stand by and let those motherfuckers screw those of us who do not and will not believe as they do. Unfortunately, we all know that this type of behavior isn't confined to the religious right in the U.S.A. (especially given the events of 09/11/01). As is amply evidenced by the wonderful examples of religious fanaticism that we have in Northern Ireland, Israel and the Middle East, Malaysia, most of northern and central Africa and other such wonderful places, religious fanaticism is thriving.
I won't argue that many religious people are acting from conscience (I even know a number of them), and are tolerant of others beliefs and (for lack of a better term) 'lifestyles". However, the vast majority of those types don't post to alt.atheism, not do they form Political Action Committees, hire lobbyists to bribe politicians, murder O.B.G.Y.N.'s, bash gays or attempt to give my tax dollars to wealthy churches. They are still wrong in my estimation - but if they are not interested in converting me, or passing yet more laws limiting my civil freedoms, then I could care less what kind of Mystical Space-Pixie, Earth Mama, or Messiah-on-a-Stick they want to believe in. Really.
4. Why aren't you out committing crimes? If you don't believe in God™, you obviously don't fear divine punishment or have any morals, right?
I've seen this one a lot. It's bullshit, obviously, but questions like this seem to be a favorite of the younger, less educated born-again types. I don't go around "committing crimes" for the same reason that most people refrain from doing so, whether they are aware of it or not: self-interest (those of us that are aware of this fact have enlightened self-interest, at least to some extent). Basically, people will do things that make them feel good, or that allow them to get some kind of a reward (and feeling good about "doing the right thing" is a reward). Except for sociopaths, humans generally learn that it's far easier, and usually more emotionally rewarding to achieve what one wants by positively engaging the people around them.
5. Do you have any kind of "moral code?
I do not define what I have as morals. I have what could best be termed conditional ethics. The problem that I see in the various religious "moral codes" that are out there is that they are inflexible (this is of course limited to the ones I have some experience with). Those rules of conduct and custom were codified by cultures long dead; cultures that bear little or no resemblance to any modern culture. As such they are almost totally unworkable because they do not address the issues of modern cultures in ways that are useful. In the U.S., this gives us things like our bizarre marriage laws, unfathomable liability laws, and the current hyperactive (and completely useless) Wars On Drugs and Terrorism. Conditional ethics are far more flexible, and allow for greater personal responsibility, an absence of shame, and a high level of tolerance for others. They allow me to make my decisions about things relating to customs and mores based solely on the facts of the situation as I interpret them, rather than having a clergyman tell me that "X is wrong" or "Y is sinful".
6. You just claimed you were tolerant of others! You're obviously not, you hypocrite!
Certainly I'm tolerant. But I'm not going to let anyone smother me. I rarely ever "turn the other cheek". If I am attacked, I will fight back. Not only will I fight back, but I will do my best to make sure that the offending party learns a lesson (boundless optimism on my part, but there it is). By many definitions of the term, I am not a nice person at all. I don't lose any sleep over it. That being said, I rarely have to do this anymore - I don't like to associate with people who regularly piss me off.
7. How can you look at the world and not believe in some sort of deity? Isn't it obvious that there is something out there greater than ourselves?
It may be obvious to you, but I see no such need to justify this messy, but on occasion gloriously beautiful, existence. It just is. I happen to be able to enjoy some of it and am lucky enough to be able to share it with other people with whom I share an emotional bond. The premise that "there must be something greater" is cultural. You were raised with that notion - it's programmed into all of us. Once a person gets past that silly need to justify their existence, they no longer need any sort of belief in deity. They still may want some sort of belief as a comfort, but in my experience, people on that plane of religious belief care nothing for making sure others believe as they do.
8. That's not an answer! Why don't you believe in $DEITY_OF_CHOICE?
I do not believe in any god(s), in exactly the same way that I do not believe in leprechauns, telekinesis, perpetual motion, and the Tooth Fairy. Saying that I don't believe in god(s) makes me an atheist. The statement is a negative one - it does not make any claims. However, I am also a skeptic and a materialist, so I will make an additional statement: It is my opinion that "no god(s) can exist".
Most people, (including many atheists) would say that my statement is preposterous.
I explain it thus: The class of objects that are labeled "deity" have no fixed definition, and all attempts at a fixed definition end up being nonsensical - and therefore useless. I use "fixed definition/useful definition" as shorthand for "a definition of a thing that is accurate enough to use when designing an experiment to test for the existence of that thing". It's impossible to even make an experiment that shows that a deity might exist, because deity cannot be adequately defined. If there is no way to prove that a thing might exist, then it probably doesn't (This is an application of Occam's Razor). To me, this shows that the entire concept of deity is flawed. Obviously, this is where "faith" happens, to people that have the capacity and will to take wild, unprovable claims at face value. But I am a person who just cannot do "faith". The entire concept of religious faith is foreign to me, though I did try to "find faith" for a number of years in my late teens and early twenties. As a result, I see no reason for me to believe in your deity. There's no reason for me to even bother looking for evidence of one.
9. But there is so evidence! You atheists just refuse to see it!
Well, as a skeptic, my standards for evidence are the same ones used by reputable researchers and scientists. As an example, if you tell me that you can shoot sparks out of your ass by concentrating real hard, or that there is a magical telepathic universal overmind that has an abiding interest in how often I masturbate, or any other wild claim - and you want me to believe you - then you are going to have to prove it to me,. I'm not likely to believe in claims of things that contradict observable reality on some person's say-so. You'll have to prove it using the scientific method, and then have your results tested by others and peer-reviewed. Good luck.
10. You're just mad at God™ because your life sucks! Admit it, and stop picking on us Christians!
Not that any of you Christians out there likely to believe me, but my life doesn't suck. I have nothing to prove in that area. Believe me or not, as you see fit. And I only "pick on Christians" because there are so damn many of them on usenet - it's a 'target of opportunity' sort of thing. Believe me - I pick on other religious zealots when they rear their heads. I'm an equal opportunity bastard, I assure you.
11. You are obviously not a heathen, and it's statistically unlikely that you are actually a bastard. How come you call yourself one?
It's true, I don't fit the actual definitions of heathen or bastard. But a long time ago, some schmuck on usenet called me a heathen bastard (after I pointed out to him some of the more obvious errors in his perception of reality, and called him many vile names). When I stopped posting to usenet under my real name, I decided that the epithet was an appropriate nickname - even if I don't fit the specific definitions, it does describe me pretty well, at least as regards my stance on religion and deities.
12. It doesn't matter - this country [the USA] was found on Christian Doctrines, and we are a Christian country, so get used to it!
Well, actually, that's wrong. Here's what a number of our "founding fathers" had to say about it. And you might really read the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constittuon carefully. It is quite explicit.
12. Who the hell are you? Why don't you have your real name on your $NET_ACCESSIBLE_PUBLICATIONS?
You don't need to know my name. I am a computer professional, an artist, a homeowner and happily married. Even that is more than you need to know - I just like to brag a bit. I don't have my name on this site because I don't wish to have it here. Period.
That's all for the time being. I'll update this as necessary. If you feel like discussing any of the above, feel free to mail me. I invite reasoned discussions on this topic - but do be careful - if you have the bad manners to proselytize me, I will treat it as harassment and contact your provider. If you do it more than once you will likely have your account pulled.

If you are interested in reading more about atheism, humanism, and/or skepticism, these sites would be a good place to start.

BACK