In the Name of Atheism – Second in a Series

‘The burden in proving God doesn’t exist does not lie at my door; it’s up believers to prove he does’ writes one atheist commentator. Though I wish I had a compelling personal journey which produced my atheism, I don’t. While I agree the burden lies with the believers, I will nevertheless try and justify my personal stance. I feel uneasy about the distinctions made between atheism and antitheism. For me, if you’re a non-believer, it’s natural that a part of you is hostile towards religion. Quite like I believe a rejection of ‘religious humanism’ inevitably produces support for ‘secular humanism’.

Though there were once theories supporting the existence of God, evolutionary theory drastically challenged arguments such as the world was six thousand years old and was created in six days. It was shown dinosaurs were millions of years old, yet religious leaders still dogmatically claimed they existed several thousand years ago. I choose however, to place my faith (pardon the expression) in science and empiricism. I dismiss design arguments that pre-suppose the complexity of the world inevitably means there must be some omnipotent, intelligent creator.

My atheism however, is not just a response to the scientific counter argument – though this alone should provide sufficient justification. Whilst I believe religion can promote desirable values in society, such as liberty, equality, toleration and mutual respect for one another (which would rule me out as an antitheist), I also believe it can drastically undermine these notions (which would make me an antitheist). Societies must contain universal values, free from all religious interference. I deplore the way religion is used in politics – even in liberal democracies.

In Britain, we are thankfully not confronted by this problem, but the US for example, is. Presidential candidates since Carter have attempted to use their beliefs for political gain. Though faith ought to be personal and private, it is too often public and political. In Western societies, religion in politics produces the inaccurate belief that in order to be conservative you must be religious. Just because supporting retributive justice and individual responsibility for example, have a religious basis, faith is not a pre-requisite in marking GOP on your ballot paper. This is reminiscent of the assumption you cannot be conservative, yet liberal towards cultural issues such as abortion and gay rights.

Although religion in Western politics is undesirable, the effects are generally benign and does not lead to an abuse of the values mentioned above. It’s in authoritarian theocracies where the dividing line between the church and state evaporates. Yet this necessary division shouldn’t be perceived only as a Western value. Theocracies abuse not only the rights of domestic citizens but constitute a threat to world peace.

Whilst I don’t intend to tar all believers with the same extremist brush, I associate religious beliefs as a fundamental cause of political and cultural radicalism in societies. And when I say ‘religion’, I mean all major faiths, as radicalism transcends inter-faith differences. For example, it may be evangelical Christians in the US carrying out attacks on abortion clinics on behalf of the pro-life movement, or Islamists blowing up fellow citizens and killing infidels in the name of Allah.

I deplore the attempt by clerical preachers to proselytize and indoctrinate young impressionable individuals into dogmatic ways of thinking before they understand the ideas. Equally sickening is when preachers deliberately obfuscate their beliefs making them inaccessible to non-believers, in an attempt to legitimize their radicalism. It is refreshing that many ultimately reject the beliefs forced upon them. For example, the Dutch politician and writer Ayaan Hirsi Ali spoke out against authoritarian Islamic practices, and the author Ed Hussain, experienced Islamism first hand as a member of extremist Islamist groups in Britain, before rejecting their fundamentalist teachings.

My defintion of ‘radicalism’ is not exclusive to terror attacks upon individuals and non-believers; or the proselytizing of hate preachers. The abuse of those individuals who are part of the faith also constitutes radicalism, whether this be the oppression of women through forced marriages, polygamous cults, or the female adulterers and homosexuals who are stoned to death. These primitive practices are detrimental not only to Western socieities, but all societies throughout the world. And, just because these illiberal semi-feudal practices are viewed as ‘tradition’, this doesn’t justify their existence.

The final reason I renounce faith is due to the historical link between religious beliefs and war. Men have always gone to war over their faith; the Crusades being the most apt historical example. Contemporarily, we see evidence of religious conflicts dividing people and countries. Again this trascends faiths, whether it be Islamic Jihad on infidels, Protestants versus Catholics in Northern Ireland, Sunnis versus Shi’ites in Iraq, Hindus versus Muslims in Pakistan, or Jews versus Muslims in Israel.

I recognize these disputes can be perceived as political as much as religious, but the significance of religion cannot be underestimated. Iran may disagree with Israel’s right to exist politically, but their belief originates because Israel is a Jewish nation. When different faiths and sub-sections claim their tenets are absolute and that they have a spiritual right to territorites, war is inevitable. One need only look at Jerusalem to illustrate this – a sacred holy site for Christians, Jews and Muslims. As one commentator puts it, religion represents ‘a threat to human survival’. It’s not that religion necessarily equals violence, terror, and war, but that the latter often has unavoidable roots in the former.

As mentioned, for me, being a non-believer and being hostile towards religion are mutually exclusive. Athiests must in some form be antitheists. If they weren’t they would have no logical reason not to believe. Voltaire said ‘If God did not exist, he would have to be invented’. For me, man created God, not the other way round.

All non-believers should say Amen to that.