According to a study done by the University of Minnesota, atheists are more distrusted than any other minority. That includes all ethnic/racial minorities, gay men and lesbians, women, and members of any religion, including Muslims and Jews. The study was done via a phone survey in which participants were asked, among other questions, who they would feel least comfortable with their child or children marrying. Considering how far some of the other minority groups have to go before being accepted by mainstream American society it’s not just a little concerning that we’ve got an even steeper climb ahead of us.

On the plus side, since we are such a disparate group that has yet to decide on an official armband color we’re less likely to be picked out in a crowd, so long as we keep quiet about our beliefs. Like ninjas, we can blend in almost perfectly in any social situation, so long as it’s not a church bake sale (holy cupcakes make us vomit up the Disbelief Demon residing in our intestinal tract).

Honestly I don’t mind that so much, because that’s all I want out of the faithful. I don’t want everyone to be atheist - that would be dull and annoying. Religion in and of itself can be a good thing, and if it speaks to some then good for them.

But just as we’re courteous enough not to broadcast our disbelief like a touchdown celebration whenever a topic arises that has a tenuous relationship to faith, I feel it’s perfectly reasonable to expect the same. And to be fair, most of the faithful do reciprocate that courtesy. It’s their minority that are the loud-mouthed bigots that make everyone look bad (faithful and non alike), just like it’s our minority that make us look like elitist, bickering pricks.

Basically I’m saying don’t ask, don’t tell. Live and let live. So if you promise not to tell me why I should follow your faith, I promise not to sneak into your pagoda and slit your throat before vanishing in a cloud of smoke.

The evidence is clear going back to at least 1988 when George (H.W.) Bush stated that he didn’t believe atheists should be considered as patriots or as citizens. This seems to be the vocal beginnings of what I call ’sacred patriotism.’ It certainly seems as though the politico-religious fervent of America claim a sole right to patriotism. It may not be blatant or in your face all the time, but it exists.

“In the U.S., no public figure and certainly no one who wishes to enjoy popularity as a politician could risk it being said that he was a disbeliever. This would very nearly be political suicide.” - Johnathan Miller

Never has the sense of sacred patriotism been more present than in the current presidential race of 2008 where Huckabee and Obama have emerged as the front-runners for their respective parties. As David Domke and Kevin Coe explain, The God Strategy works. (If you want to find out more, they recently published a book on the subject.)

I’d like to remind people that our country was founded by people who were escaping domination from what was basically a governmental religion. They came here to breathe the free air and not have to obey a church. George Washington was a very unenthusiastic churchgoer. The presidents who followed him were considerably less than devout.

You can see their desire for separation …

“God is an essence that we know nothing of. Until this awful blasphemy is got rid of, there never will be any liberal science in the world.”
– John Adams (quoted from Ira D Cardiff’s What Great Men Think of Religion. According to Cardiff, “this awful blasphemy” that Adams refers to is the myth of the Incarnation of Christ.)

The clergy [...] believe that any portion of power confided to me [as President] will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly: for I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all they have to fear from me: and enough, too, in their opinion.”
- Thomas Jefferson (Letter to Benjamin Rush, 1800)

I have seldom met an intelligent person whose views were not narrowed and distorted by religion.”
- James Buchanan
Source:from Rufus K. Noyes, Views of Religion

“My earlier views at the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them” - Abraham Lincoln

Given the beginnings of our nation, it’s surprising that we have made such a departure from those ideals about the separation of religion from politics. With the standard set by George Bush Sr., and his belief that religion is a prerequisite for patriotism, it would be very doubtful if any of these great presidents I quoted above would have been considered for the presidency, much less voted into office today. None of those great presidents would have been given a voice at all to speak.

With this trend of sacred patriotism, I should feel uncomfortable here as an Atheist, but I don’t. Fortunately, the majority of Christians in this country aren’t radically fundamental. That doesn’t mean we can rest. We need to disconnect politics from the grasp of organized religion and move towards progress.

Another reason we can’t rest? H. res. 888 is up for a vote soon. It further blurs the line between religion and politics. read here for more. If this gets voted in, we’re one step closer to a Theocracy.

It seems like in America being an atheist means little more than being a minority - it’s a label that’s associated with no single race, gender, sexual preference, upbringing, or social class. The notion of there being an atheist “community” seems a bit silly since we’re likely not to share much beyond a lack of something. That said, I do believe that most modern atheists (and certainly all pre-modern atheists) do share a stigma attached to the idea of non-belief, and to non-believers.

Not only is there an external stigma regarding atheists among “people of faith,” but also an internal stigma I’d wager is shared by many of us. We see the same fringe atheist element decrying the phrase “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance, “In God We Trust” on our currency, and other pithy issues that have little bearing on our day-to-day lives. Issues that make most of us roll our eyes and change the channel, regardless of belief.

First, let me state for the record that I’m not suggesting that these things aren’t emblematic of a societal predisposition toward faith. What I am saying is that harping on those issues is completely asinine, as is the all-too-often tone of superiority that emanates from the vocal minority. These people do little except to perpetuate the stereotype of atheists as smarmy elitists without basic empathy or compassion for their fellow man, should that fellow man be so deluded as to believe in a supernatural entity. In my humble opinion, they do more to further the stigma than any outside bigotry - they come out swinging an agenda like a cudgel (calling it ours), and are the caricature upon which people of faith make snap judgements and apply them to all atheists.

Every stereotype is founded upon fact - an often offensively exaggerated fact, but a fact nonetheless. This stigma we share, what keeps us from feeling comfortable publicly admitting our lack of faith when confronted, is not merely the result of a world history filled to bursting with religion. It’s also the product of the present action (and inaction) of those identifying themselves (often only privately) as non-believers.

I’ll be the first to admit my own lack of effort toward the removal of that stigma. Up until now I’ve shunned the notion of an “atheist community,” largely based on a mental picture of sitting in a room full of self-indulgent, back-slapping snobs. At the same time, I’ve felt the disconnect between myself and my friends who do subscribe to any of an assortment of religions. My friends know me as a caring, empathetic individual, and I’d like to think that these good people wouldn’t harbor prejudices from the years I’ve spent in their midst. But as people grow older and have children, the question assuredly comes up regarding who and what their precious bundle of joy should be exposed to during their formative years - needless to say I’m not anticipating being anyone’s godparent.

That said, I’m coming around to the idea of a community, for a multitude of reasons. However I’m still enough of a realist to know that any act of seclusion will only serve to widen the gap between those with and without faith in the divine. I believe that the first step toward removing the stigma placed upon all of us is to look inward, and honestly look to see if the atheist stereotype rings true in ourselves.

Just as an example, it’s often said that atheists are immoral. While most of us aren’t thieves, murderers, or rapists I can’t help but wonder how many of us go out of our way to do good and not merely abstain from evil. Donating, particularly of one’s time and energy, is a great way to demonstrate the empathy and compassion which most of us have. It’s my belief that public service is a key point to overcoming the atheist stigma - it simultaneously addresses claims that we’re elitist, self-centered, and morally bankrupt. In fact, donating your time to a charity or organization which promotes religion (such as the Salvation Army) not only demonstrates the qualities that we as atheists purportedly lack, but that we’re not so self-absorbed as to let our disagreements over faith keep us from helping those in need.

And here comes the part I’ve been dreading, the lose-lose conclusion where I mention that I myself have done precisely what I’m suggesting. I fully realize that by bringing up this fact that I open myself to criticism of self-congratulatory egotism, but were I to leave it unsaid I’d be open to being called a hypocrite. Given the choices, I’ll take the former, but anyone’s perception of me in particular is beyond the point.

The point is that as a group it will take the bulk of us, the normal, law-abiding, compassionate people who only deviate from the mainstream in regard to religious belief to form a productive community, and that such a community would have an obligation to work toward developing a more inclusive role for atheists in society. Bickering and insults haven’t accomplished anything, but defying the prejudices that exist in society at least offers some hope of convincing those who would listen of our common humanity.

In it’s latest nationwide survey of religion and politics, the Pew Research Center uncovered how polarized the public is with regard to opinions on religion. Their research finds that most Americans (59%) say that religion’s influence on the country is on the decline, and most of those who express that view think this is a bad thing. To me, this is telling. It says that the U.S. populace wants more involvement from the religious. The public is more divided on the question of whether religion’s influence on government is increasing (42%) or decreasing (45%). Most of those who think that religion is increasing its influence on government leaders and institutions view this as a bad thing.

Regarding faith, 62% of white evangelicals say the Bible is the actual word of God, to be taken literally, while only 35% of the public (­including 24% of Catholics and 17% of white mainline Protestants) ­ share this literal view of the scriptures, with most believing that although the Bible is God’s word, not everything in it is literally true.

Tension in the public’s views of science and religion, especially in opinions about evolution and the origins of life, are still present. However, there is broad agreement across the religious spectrum that scientific advances will help rather than harm mankind. Nearly two-thirds of all Americans (65%) express a positive opinion of scientific advances, compared with 19% who feel such advances harm mankind. With that much of an approval rating for scientific advancements, it is hard to understand why they find such stiff opposition when it comes time to vote for bills that would fund further projects in those fields of science. I can only surmise that this means there exists a percentage of people who are favorable towards scientific advancements still reject them on same basis due to their ideas of morality.

With numbers like these, it’s apparent why political leaders, and presidential candidates would want to cast themselves as religiously pious as possible.

I’d like to see our government make a commitment to separate religion from politics, but when so much of the voter base is religious, and the government IS the people, what more can be said against religion in the political realm?

Image Credit: Pew Research Center
Research Statics by:
PEW RESEARCH CENTER FOR THE PEOPLE & THE PRESS
AND PEW FORUM ON RELIGION & PUBLIC LIFE
JULY 2006 RELIGION AND PUBLIC LIFE SURVEY
July 6-19, 2006

ievers are forced to bear the tax burden of the religious.  What does this mean? Churches don’t pay taxes on revenue they generate. Sure, a lot of money comes from tithes, or gifts. It seems to me, at the very least, that any corporation or organization exempt from taxation should be required to provide full and open access to their financial records. Perhaps this is an over-reaction, but I suppose I just don’t fully understand why taxation exemptions exist. If you have more information on this, I would be glad to read it.

From another viewpoint, perhaps allowing the government to tax churches sets a dangerous precedent allowing the government to tax certain religious affiliations which it doesn’t agree with into oblivion. However, given the number of religious currently in the United States,  I’m not sure why they would be worried about this. These days, if a politician has any religious affiliation, it’s as if he has a stamp of approval from the “moral majority”.

There are plenty of so-called secular mediums through which religion is promoted. Whether this is inappropriate or not is up for debate. I’m getting a little off-topic here. This doesn’t have much to do with the subsidization of religion, but schools requiring students to quote the pledge of Allegiance to the United States might seem like an annoyance to those who don’t necessarily believe that we are “one nation, under God”. I recently read about a non-religious student who refused to quote the pledge. This seems to fly in the face of the notion that we have a freedom of religion (or freedom from religion).

I’m not sure how much people actually care about these issues. I’d like to hear what you think.

If you are sick of the religious faithful and their claim to a monopoly on morality, then this site is definitely for you.

We’ll be making fun of religious zealots who mis-step in the name of their faith and will be pointing out the intelligence and good behavior of those who may call themselves atheistic, agnostic, or otherwise non-religious. We’ll also, from time to time, try to raise the bar and have intelligent discourse on these subjects.