The ruler and figurehead of the Roman Catholic Church really knows how to come out swinging. The United Kingdom’s increasingly secular society is a great threat to the success of his religion there, and so he starts his visit to the UK with this gem:
Pope Benedict XVI urged the UK to resist “more aggressive forms of secularism” .
He said: “We can recall how Britain and her leaders stood against a Nazi tyranny that wished to eradicate God from society and denied our common humanity to many, especially the Jews.
“As we reflect on the sobering lessons of the atheist extremism of the 20th century, let us never forget how the exclusion of God, religion and virtue from public life leads ultimately to a truncated vision of man and of society,” he added.
“May it [Britain] always maintain its respect for those traditional values and cultural expressions that more aggressive forms of secularism no longer value or even tolerate,” he said.
By “aggressive,” I think he means secularists who don’t just sit back and accept the influence and rules of religion on the laws, standards, and traditions of their country.
Terms like “neo-atheists” and “atheist extremism” are thrown around like insulting buzzwords within the religious community. Those of us who speak up against religion and confront the theology and doctrines with which we disagree are seen as a menace, a group without morals, and apparently the same desires for society as the Nazi party. These insulting words are carefully crafted to make atheists with opinions seem like fringe groups with violent, anti-societal agendas. I have my own views on “militant” and “extremist” atheists. We’re really not worth the propagandized vocabulary.
In response to the pontiff’s slight against secularism, the British Humanist Association said:
“The notion that it was the atheism of Nazis that led to their extremist and hateful views or that it somehow fuels intolerance in Britain today is a terrible libel against those who do not believe in God.
“The notion that it is non-religious people in the UK today who want to force their views on others, coming from a man whose organisation exerts itself internationally to impose its narrow and exclusive form of morality and undermine the human rights of women, children, gay people and many others, is surreal.”
If any of us is “extreme,” I’d say it’s the Roman Catholic Church.
(Thanks for the tip @Fargough)
EDIT: Pharyngula posted a long list of quotes by Hitler that apply to this papal insult. Check it out.
I could go into all kinds of (obvious) reasons why this is so, but my first response is this (and you’ve probably heard something like it before):
I am an atheist because I do not believe in any deities. None. Zilch. Zip. Baal? Nope. Helios? No. Lotan? No. Yahweh? No.
Christians, Jews, and Muslims (for example) are also atheists. Do they believe in Baal? Nope. Helios? No. Lotan? No. Yahweh? Well, yes; that’s the only difference.
If my atheism is a religion, then so is the atheism of every single believing person on this planet. And if all of atheism is a religion, then Christians, Jews, and Muslims may have a problem since they’re not supposed to worship anything but Yahweh, Yeshua, and the Spirit. According to their own teachings, they should not have two religions.
Don’t worry, believers; atheism is not a religion. It simply means you don’t believe in a god. Welcome to the atheist club … because you are one.
I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.
–Stephen F. Roberts
Any deity that refuses evidence honors the intellectually dishonest, the ignorant, and the gullible.
… Or this deity is totally hands-off and doesn’t give a shit, which basically means we don’t need to give a shit either.
… Or this deity doesn’t exist.
Choices, choices.
I attended the screening for “The Nature of Existence” tonight. Since I blogged about the film last week, I wanted to follow up with my thoughts and reactions.
Director Roger Nygard interviewed over 100 people of different nationalities and beliefs. I heard the views of scientists in the same minute as Jainists, Native Americans, and New Age gurus.
Everyone answered the same 85 questions. Much of the insight I’ve heard or read before, but the most striking part of this documentary was the cacophony of thought and theory made up by all of these radically diverse groups. At first, It just felt like a mess of totally unrelated beliefs. I laughed quite a bit–both at the absurdly delusional and the fabulously comedic. Not until the very end when I had a time to reflect did I see the larger point.
It may seem simplistic, but I came away from The Nature of Existence with a renewed compassion for spiritual and religious people. My curiosity about world religions and the individuals that follow them has ballooned once again. Becoming an atheist may have brought a new realization that religion is based on delusion and unnecessary, but hearing people of all different philosophies ponder why we exist and what it means to live a good life just makes me want to be kinder and more open to those who are on the same journey as I am. The difference between us is which path we choose to get there.
There may be a larger truth, but no one religion has it. Even science doesn’t fully understand yet. We search for meaning because it’s part of our natures. Let’s just be kind to one another along the way, ok?
P.S. Go see the movie! Support independent film makers!


