Here we go, A/N, a fresh article from non other than Fox News contributer and "Atheist" S.E. Cupp
My real question is, do we have any reason to believe she is an atheist at all?
Wow.. she couldn't be more incorrect with her assumptions of atheists and the incorrect conclusions she draws from her lack of parallels. To group all atheists as one voice is the first major assumption she makes (calling herself one..? HA!) we are freethinkers with our own perceptions and voices. And I would not consider atheists as a whole arrogant - where is the exaggeration? - We point to the known facts. Are we condescending? Perhaps for some. I would be lying if I didn't consider Christians below my dignity level of importance - in that religious area of thinking, but this doesn't include all areas of expertise. Not that I would be haughty about it of course. I quietly disagree, and usually don't bother speaking up because those with religious delusion are asinine to me. I am one not to belittle Christians, I do think they are quite delusional, but they have the knowledge not to be, it is their choice (irrational may it be) but they seem to pride themselves in that department. To call us meanspirited or unenlightened is arrogant of her, and most certainly condescending in itself. Or to say that atheists "reflect a total unwillingness to learn something new about human nature"? wow... really? Really? What do you even say to that kind of remark? I am certainly not one to provoke religious believers in a meanspirited manner. Has that ever been an effect method to educate anyone? Kindness (though difficult at times!!) and education is the way to open the eyes of the delusional believers.
..thats my 2 cents
total unwillingness to learn something new about human nature
SE Cupp doesn't make any sense. She said that she admired GWB because "he answers to a higher power". A higher power that she claims she doesn't believe in. Why would you admire someone for having a belief that you think is false? This is just so nonsensical I can't even put it into words. Either she believes in God or she just really, really hates that she can't bring herself to believe in it.
Or to say that atheists "reflect a total unwillingness to learn something new about human nature"
The irony in that is that I study human nature in psychology. So I learn plenty. I am taught by my clients.
I think Ms. Cupp is dishonest. She gives the story of a woman in Rwanda whose faith helped her through her hiding. She doesn't disclose the role of christian religion in the genocide. Wikipedia. Many clergy did not protect civilians who sought their help, either from fear for personal safety or desire to see them killed. A smaller number incited the genocide. These include most prominently Seventh-day Adventist Church pastor Elizaphan Ntakirutimana, who was convicted by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and Theophister Mukakibibi and Maria Kisito, Rwandan Roman Catholic nuns sentenced for helping to kill hundreds of Tutsi during the genocide. Also involved were Roman Catholic priests Wenceslas
Munyeshyaka, Athanase Seromba, and Emmanuel Rukundo, all of whom have been convicted of genocide
Nons and priests who committed genocide. But that one woman was reassured by her faith. Hmmmmm....
This is not to demean the religious people who tried to save Tutsi minority people -that is also in the wikiedia link. But by presenting a supportive vignette without the damning context, Ms. Cupp is perilously close to presenting a great mistruth about the role of religion in the murderous blood orgy that was Rwanda in the mid 1990s.
She states nothing about the search for truth that many atheists have undergone, or our religious journeys. The snarky twit complains about the snarkiness of others.
She states "The fact that religion has inexplicably persisted, even despite Copernicus, Darwin and the Enlightenment, doesn't seem to have much sociological meaning for
Actually, cancer has existed since the time of the ancient Eqyptians, but that doesn't mean there is something wrong with people who want to avoid it, have it treated, and try to cure others. There is no logic in her argument. What else has persisted.... syphilis. heart disease. murder. jock itch.....
Cupp seems to be one of those commentators who like to take contrarian points of view to piss people off without actually saying anything meaningful. They sell books by being controversial, and get off on stirring up the pot.
Park, great gob getting much deeper into the story. I like seeing people do research and not accept things at face value.
It wouldn't surprise me if Cupp announces "conversion" to religion. Probably timed at some point when she feels she needs a career boost. "Prominant atheist converts to christianity" is the headline she'll seek. Pure speculation on my part, of course.
Cupps style is one of partial information, baseless assertions, and logical fallacy. A second-rate Anne Coulter clone.
I try to live by "to each his own." As such, I don't disparage or belittle those who are believers. If fervent belief gets them through each day, then I have no right or justification for interfering - unless the table is turned and their belief directly interferes with my life. Then I might get a bit militant.
So, yeah, I generally agree with Cupp's article. It pains me to see folks like Mahr acting like a snot. It does nothing constructive for atheism. Rather, it reinforces negative stereotypes.