Is Atheism a chiefly liberal or conservative philosophy?

I know this may seem like a bit of an odd question but I’ve been wondering about it for the past few days and for some reason I can’t escape the feeling that it (atheism) would be a rather ‘conservative’ point of view (that is, at least in title), and yet I’m constantly being called a liberal because of my social and political leanings. I'm just wondering what your views are on this.


PS: I’ll be gone for a few days but I will catch up with this thread when I return.

Views: 2344

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

And no, MT, nobody said anything about equality. You are right there, equality is impossible, and it would be moronic to assume that this is what anyone is arguing for. A more fair and just society? Yes. A more level (i.e. fair) playing field? Yes. So is it unfair to ask for a fair society, or unfair to ask for an unfair society? Duh.


Also, no MT, I did not insinuate at all that Objectivists were religious. As usual you are barking up the wrong tree.


I’m trying to figure out a way of reinforcing your point further with regards to “duped into supporting the party of big business and the banking sector” because it’s something that’s been stuck in my craw for a long time (yes I should have that looked at), as it was also the original intent for why I even asked the question in the first place.

Personally I’ve been working in the public service sector for much of my life and one thing I’ve become disturbed in noticing is the various businesses toting the Catholic Fish symbol, either in their advertisements or business cards. This, whether you’re aware of it, is much more that a statement of religious ideology, as it’s also a poorly subliminal assertion of social solidarity. A sort of religious lightning rod.

Of course this is nothing more than a simple rehashing (or modern day retooling) of the old Jewish method of displaying a hechsher for various foods or businesses that sell Jewish foods – only in this case the Christian symbol extends far into the services and business market. In any case it’s also a calling card for potential politicization. Businesses who tote the Christian symbol will receive the interests of Christian households as well as be more likely to employ Christian employees; Christian (branded) politicians will take note of this and vie to work more in the interest of said businesses. With more and more businesses springing up displaying support for Christian “values” it’s no surprise that it would produce “Christian (Tea Party) Politicians” (like John Boehner). In fact it’s easy money.

Personally I’ve long thought that American Christian Political Ideologies were (and are) based on ignorance and social apathy and having seen what’s going on here in Wisconsin between Governor Scott Walker (a Christian) and the teachers union I can certainly see that my views may not be exactly unfounded, especially when you consider that his actions have also attracted the interest (and support) of Sarah Palin (tea party figurehead).

As a side note (and topic for a potential future question) is the issue of a potential future atheist society in America should the Tea Party machine win in any foreseeable future elections? It’s not an issue of whether they win or not, but let’s just say that even idiots smashing their heads on a wall will eventually have their day in court, and who’s the biggest bunch of idiots (them for their actions or us for not believing it could happen). Hey, H.L. Mencken said "nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public”.

And if you think America isn’t that stupid just remember this fact, Holocaust denial is a viable academic option for academic thesis’s in American colleges that teach world history, primarily because of issues of belief, so why not this?

Yes there is a relationship between atheism and politics. Just as there is a relationship between atheism and armpits. They exist. The one exists. The other exists. They often exist in proximity. Your armpit may connect to your right hand or your left hand. Makes no difference to your atheism.

Atheism is a-theism; without belief in gods. That is all it is. Note that atheism is also abaggage; without baggage, be that baggage politics, economics, culinary choices, sexual preferences, or singing ability.

I suppose you (whoever) could start up Political Atheism but I sure wouldn't join, and in fact, would be tempted to fight you and ridicule you (you Political Atheists, not anyone here in particular) at every opportunity.

Call me sentimental, but I think politics is detrimental to societal well being, and could be lumped together with racism, national chauvanism, religion, mysogeny, unfettered capitalism, ethnic cleansing etc. in a list of humanity's to-do-away-with list.


i find that the liberal mindset is sort of like "there is no such thing is truth, so i will believe what i want, don't try to make me change", whereas the conervative mindset is like "my truth is the only truth, so i will believe what i want, don't try to make me change". there's a commonality there, one that makes a scientifically informed sceptical atheism quite contrary to both of them, because our view should be "there is one truth, let's find out what it is, and embrace the change it may inspire in us".  i say "should be" because too often atheists will alternate between the other 2 mindsets.
As a liberal, I will completely disagree with your characterization of liberals. I, and certainly the lion's share of other liberals with whom I am familiar with, do believe that there is a truth of the matter. To be fair, both sides probably engage in a little of the mindset you attribute only to conservatives. However, my experience is that we liberals get there more honestly and with due process, i.e., looking for the truth regardless of what we wish it was and doing as you say, and say quite well I think - embracing "the change it may inspire in us", than those Libertarians. And to be fair still, both sides do this, but, well, one of us is more wrong and one of us is more right (its extremely unlikely that we are equally right/wrong), which means one of us does it better than the other. So I don't think things can be reduced very well at all to this epistemological point.
How is it that every time I engage on this post, you all come out of the woodwork and start reeling in disgust? Because I make more sense than you guys can handle personally, I think. Just like when you tell a theist that there is no God. Meddlesome is capitalizing and bolding grade-school insults, for Christ's sake.
What arguments? You simply lash out in emotional angst.


I’ve read many of your entries on here and I know very well that what Meddlesome and others have been saying is true. The way you express yourself is with a hyper inflated sense of ego. Case in point, your statement of “Because I make more sense than you guys can handle personally”, comes off as excessively arrogant. Had you said anything like that in the presence of the person you’d probably receive a black eye. These are people here, not minions, troglodytes or fools.

I should also point out that ‘you make sense to you’, the object of debate is to persuade on a level that allows your opponent the opportunity to realize the superiority of the point you’re trying to convey. You can’t just say “my point’s gonna be superior” say a bunch of crap and expect everyone to fall supine to your sharp wit, especially if you’re the only one who truly understands the intention of your statement. If your intended audience only comes away with a feeling like they’ve been talked down to then you’re probably not communicating your point very well, unless condescension is your original intent.

And really, you do sound condescending.

You are quickly beginning to demonstrate, Park, that you may not be an adult.

So, basically you are saying that there are ignorant people on the street that would resort to physical violence because of what I am saying, like all the kids on this thread react with emotional lashing out at my argument. That would be pretty stupid considering the laws in this country. I am not afraid of a fist fight and I am not really concerned if my words about how the mob should not institutionalize violence makes people feel bad. I think that should be clear to you by now.

"How is it that every time I engage on this post, you all come out of the woodwork and start reeling in disgust?"

Maybe its because your egoist philosophy is disgusting, and we came to this website to escape from delusional thinking and when it rears its ugly head we become justly angry with it? Why don't you ignore the immaturity and deal with the grownup issues, if you don't like it? I called you out on your lies, and you responded only to me calling you a liar without responding to the actual accusation. But there really is no defense for blaming the victim, so I completely understand why you avoided the issue.




Update Your Membership :



Nexus on Social Media:

Latest Activity

Patricia commented on Loren Miller's group Quotations – Momentous, Memorable, Meaningful
5 minutes ago
Idaho Spud commented on Daniel W's group Godless in the garden
41 minutes ago
Loren Miller commented on Fred Edwords's status
2 hours ago
Fred Edwords posted a status
"Enjoying retirement and writing a book."
3 hours ago
Fred Edwords updated their profile
4 hours ago
Randall Smith commented on Daniel W's group Godless in the garden
6 hours ago
Profile IconMOHANLAL MITRA and Josie Potter joined Atheist Nexus
6 hours ago
Randall Smith commented on Randall Smith's group Sports Talk
6 hours ago

© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: The Nexus Group.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service