click here for the new...
FIVE BEFORE CHAOS HAS OFFICIALLY MOVED TO A BIGGER AND BETTER PLACE! PLEASE CLICK THE ABOVE BANNER TO GET THERE, AND DON'T FORGET TO BOOKMARK THE NEW LOCATION. THANKS FOR STOPPING BY!

Tuesday, January 2, 2007

Rude Atheists

One thing that I've always had an issue with in regards to us skeptics, atheists, and such, is that many of us are downright rude. We don't exactly endear many people with our arguments because they are often laced with contempt with our outrage at the both perceived and real stupidity of our opponents. As one look around this blog will attest to, I count myself among the guilty. It is an incredibly frustrating thing to try to communicate with people who are seemingly impervious to reason, when you have people that believe Jesus is returning this year, for example, and they've been wrong over 2000 times, you get a little tired of all the wasted ink and oxygen. And I'm not necessarily defending this rude behavior, but it's hard to bite my tongue when trying to present evidence to people who don't need evidence to believe what they do in the first place (and I'm not counting 'personal revelation' as evidence - there are many holes and viable explanations for that).

Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris, two rather outspoken atheists that get a lot of mention on here and in the press, are the rudest of the rude. And I agree with a good majority of what they're saying, but I just can't help but wonder if the tone were a little different, if it would reach more people. But on the flip side of that, religious belief has been given such a free ride, such an absolution of any accountability in the public sphere (as in having people offer some proof as to why God wants a law passed/struck down), that part of me feels that it is appropriate and way past due time to point out the idiocy of some of what these people are saying.

Another angle, though: it is easy often to rudely dismiss a group, when you look at the collective image presented, as in the way the fundies have a pretty nutjob public persona. It's a different experience altogether when going one on one, as my current ongoing discussion with Charity is going (here, here, and soon here). When there is an actual human element involved (when they're all not James Dobsonlike nuts), it changes the tone to a more respectful one. And that is where our problem lies... just as I know that not every fundie is a complete Ted Haggard nutjob, there is still that public image of that for me, which is reinforced just about every time the religious right is in the news because it's never in the news for saying something with an inkling of rationality to it. And as to our side, I think we run the risk of others, especially those who might be open to our reasoning, being alienated or turned off, thinking we're all a bunch of nasty people.

And my 'Rudest Atheist Post of 2006' goes to Cenk Uygur's 'If You're A Christian, Muslim, or Jew, You Are Wrong'. It's so very rude and disrespectful, yet says what many people are feeling yet can never bring themselves to say. It's great and horrible at the same time.

(note: I've just realized Uygur's post is from 2005... but I've still found none ruder)

UPDATE: A poster at DKos speculates on how Jesus will return...

My guess is that He'll show up in His Hummer at religious right retreat, with a Cuban cigar hanging off His lip and the front seat loaded with empty Big Mac® wrappers.

Jesus will step out of His Hummer, give a big hug to Richard Land, Don Wildmon, Pat Robertson and John McCain and declare loudly, "Time to wipe out those ragheads!"

I think that's what the 25% are envisioning.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

What a post from Mr. Uygur, thanks. "Great and horrible" indeed!.

Kit bought me The God Delusion as --of all things-- a Christmas present. I'm looking forward to it.

J.D. Ryan said...

Alicia, where did you see the 'Root of All Evil' videos? I've seen clips of them on YOUTube, are they available to rent or are you watching them on tv?

Although I think Dawkins is straight and to the point, I definitely think he can be a bit rude, but I'm okay with that; I get the same way when trying to deal with the ridiculousness of the arguments that believers come up with. I do think that there is a certain passion that Dawkins conveys that Harris doesn't. I have some serious issues with Sam Harris, not with his atheism but with his Islamophobia and the remedies he seems to be okay with (torture). I'm going to do a piece on it in the next few days, so check back here.

Dawkins also seems to convey a greater sense of maturity than Harris does. Every year, the Center for Inquiry has a cruise for secular humanists, in which they travel to some of the places Darwin originally visited, and Dawkins goes on these cruises. I'd relly like to go on one, sometime.

Thanks for stopping by, come back again!

Anonymous said...

I watched The Root of All Evil series on google video:

The God Delusion
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6169720917221820689&q=the+root+of+all+evil

The Virus of Faith
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5752208690443739173&q=the+root+of+all+evil

I too agree that Dawkins would be more effective if his tone were not so grating.