Something to ponder
I think it's about time I post something. I know it's been awhile. I usually have this problem where I have so much on my mind that I have a difficult time deciding what I should talk about in any single post. So, I've been thinking about one particular subject for quite some time and thought i'd make one of my rare posts.
I think a little bit of background is necissary before I continue. Recently, several "secular" and "atheist" organization got together and funded a lobbyist, Lori Lipman Brown, for the non-religious. This story has been in the news for some time, but I recently read a story that made me think about how Brown campaign is being framed. You can find the story here:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/02/20/ATHEIST.TMP
Basically, Brown draws the comparison between acceptance of gays in society to the acceptance of atheist. I agree that one could make some comparisons given that both groups of individuals are usually not accepted due to the relation they have to the more religious in society. That is, being gay and/or atheist is seen as heresy in the context of some religious beliefs. However, some would argue that one's religion is a choice, whereas we have enough evidence to conclude that sexuality has some basis in genetics.
I don't really agree with either of these assertions entirely. I agree that these movements, the current secular movement and the gay rights movement, are not really equivalent. I don't think you can equate sexuality with religious belief. With that said, I don't think that religious belief or affiliation is entirely a "choice".
Many people have done research on why people believe in religion. If one were to browse the philosophy of science section in any bookstore or library they would find a number of books on the topic of belief. I think some people are just more prone to belief than others. I would also say that for one to call themselves an atheist is, perhaps, the most bold move you can currently do in American society. (This is not to say that being gay, or for that matter a part of any minority group, isn't difficult) This could explain why so few people openly admit their "choice". I suppose I could choose a religion, but at the end of the day would I really believe in it. Is faith really a choice? Most people usually choose the faith of either one's parents or spouse. So do people really choose thier religion?
I think that the current secular movement has more in common with Anti-Defamation League. It seems to me that being anti-secular or anti-atheist is more akin to being anti-semetic. Both are rooted in theology. Furthermore, the ADL is very secular in nature despite the fact that Judiasm is a religion. Also, the two have similar goals in mind. That is, both would like to see tolerance for those of different religious or non-religious backgrounds, and both are in favor of a strict seperation of church and state.
I know I've quoted this before, but I gotta do it again. A survey was given asking the following quesiton. If a well qualified X was running for office, would you vote for him/her? (in the question X was Christian, Muslim, Jew, etc) The only X to get below 50% was atheist. I think that something is terribly wrong with that.
I think a little bit of background is necissary before I continue. Recently, several "secular" and "atheist" organization got together and funded a lobbyist, Lori Lipman Brown, for the non-religious. This story has been in the news for some time, but I recently read a story that made me think about how Brown campaign is being framed. You can find the story here:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/02/20/ATHEIST.TMP
Basically, Brown draws the comparison between acceptance of gays in society to the acceptance of atheist. I agree that one could make some comparisons given that both groups of individuals are usually not accepted due to the relation they have to the more religious in society. That is, being gay and/or atheist is seen as heresy in the context of some religious beliefs. However, some would argue that one's religion is a choice, whereas we have enough evidence to conclude that sexuality has some basis in genetics.
I don't really agree with either of these assertions entirely. I agree that these movements, the current secular movement and the gay rights movement, are not really equivalent. I don't think you can equate sexuality with religious belief. With that said, I don't think that religious belief or affiliation is entirely a "choice".
Many people have done research on why people believe in religion. If one were to browse the philosophy of science section in any bookstore or library they would find a number of books on the topic of belief. I think some people are just more prone to belief than others. I would also say that for one to call themselves an atheist is, perhaps, the most bold move you can currently do in American society. (This is not to say that being gay, or for that matter a part of any minority group, isn't difficult) This could explain why so few people openly admit their "choice". I suppose I could choose a religion, but at the end of the day would I really believe in it. Is faith really a choice? Most people usually choose the faith of either one's parents or spouse. So do people really choose thier religion?
I think that the current secular movement has more in common with Anti-Defamation League. It seems to me that being anti-secular or anti-atheist is more akin to being anti-semetic. Both are rooted in theology. Furthermore, the ADL is very secular in nature despite the fact that Judiasm is a religion. Also, the two have similar goals in mind. That is, both would like to see tolerance for those of different religious or non-religious backgrounds, and both are in favor of a strict seperation of church and state.
I know I've quoted this before, but I gotta do it again. A survey was given asking the following quesiton. If a well qualified X was running for office, would you vote for him/her? (in the question X was Christian, Muslim, Jew, etc) The only X to get below 50% was atheist. I think that something is terribly wrong with that.