Why Atheists Can't Be Republicans

CJ Werleman's just published  Atheists Can't Be Republicans.

That atheists are secularists is one reason why atheists can’t be member of today’s Republican Party.

The Grand Old Party (GOP) is ... a theocratic sponsor,...

Atheists can’t be Republicans because the economic and social policies of the Republican Party have been proven abjectly false and dangerous. Much in the same way religion is false and dangerous. In other words, atheists who cling onto modern U.S. conservative ideology are hanging onto ideas that have either been proven mythical at worse or remain unproven at best. If atheists applied the same litmus test to their political ideology as they do to theology, then clearly an atheist cannot be a Republican.

Atheists are the fastest growing minority in the country. We now have the critical mass to shape elections and policy. Were atheists able to establish a monolithic political demographic, one that is based on proven economic and social policies, then our potential political power would translate into saving this country from the clutches of the American Taliban and Wall Street.

On the other hand, the author also says,

... I have come in contact with as many idiot atheists as I have with idiot Christians, Jews, and Muslims.

Views: 1897

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

That's true, Carl, but I do know what the author is saying. I run onto atheists who have no clue about god, which tells me they didn't read the book that their particular god came from. If you claim not to know about something you should at least be familiar with the literature about the subject. If you are not, this is what you get.

Bob:  I don't believe in god.

Rob:  Why don't you believe in god?

Bob:  I don't know why, but I just don't believe in god.

I run onto a few of these all the time, and this is an idiot atheist. Running onto an idiot atheist is like running onto a college professor without the PhD.

I don't know why, but I just don't believe in god.

Does someone need a reason to not believe, though?

Isn't it more a matter of, one needs a reason TO believe in something? 

Is "believing in God" something everyone really should think about?  I don't see why. 

A reason to not believe is just like a reason to believe. Theists are shoving their "god" down your throat, using their beliefs to try and change laws and even our constitution, trying to prove their beliefs because "the bible says," and on and on with a bunch of batshit crazy bullshit peddling it as absolute truth! Believing in god is the poison that kills us all.

Is believing in god something everyone should really think about? I believe so. How else could you answer a theist, and why would you join an atheist website? If belief in god was not an issue you could be on any website. If believing in god was not an issue I would not be discussing things that have to do with whether you do or do not believe in god!

Most certainly you would know WHY you do not believe. In a lifelong study I have found that there is no evidence!

I think you are talking from the perspective of an ex-religious person.  You had to think about those issues.  Others didn't. 

Many people who aren't religious, are not religious because they simply  weren't brought up that way and they aren't attracted to religion. 

If belief in god was not an issue you could be on any website.

Indeed, many nonbelievers aren't on this website and would have no interest in an atheist website. 

Michael, I agree with Luara; I see in your words an influence of religion, perhaps a recent influence.

I quit Catholicism in 1957 and have been an agnostic, more recently an agnostic atheist, since then. I chat at least weekly with a man ten years younger who wants to quit but is unable to take on the responsibility. I tease him about his need to obey every rule he sees, and even some non-rules he wrote as a guide for himself in a Toastmasters club.

He has for months been unable to understand my disregard for everything spiritual. Finally, a week ago, after 20 or so minutes reading Wikipedia on the subject, he turned to me and said Wikipedia agrees with me.

Something might be happening, a few hours ago he ignored a non-rule he has been obeying for months.

Tom, I've been atheist now for 2 years. There's no going back. You simply follow logic and reason. If I say that not having a reason to dis-believe in god is OK and valid, just where is the logic and reasoning? Come on, Tom. You have to have a reason. If you like certain foods, cars, TV programs, etc. you have a reason. Whether god exists or not (and he doesn't) is the same thing. I applied logic and reasoning to conclude there is no god. The world's sacred writings tell you about god, but a person can prove those writings to be bullshit. It matters not if you were EVER religious, you have to have a reason for not believing in god just like you have a reason that you do not like tripe.

Claiming that a friend or relative died, or that god didn't bring you a pony is not a valid reason. In these cases you need therapy.

Pretend a moment that I had never studied for the ministry. To understand the world concept of "god" I would have had to study some "sacred writings." I did this and found out it was bullshit! All they did was make it up. That's why I do not believe in god. When you examine the facts god is imaginary!

This is why I say some people appear to be idiot atheists and some are moron atheists. You have to know what you believe and be able to back it up!

You simply follow logic and reason.

Michael, it's not that simple.

Quitting religion requires at least as much emotional effort as logical and reasoned effort.

Metaphorically, logic and reason follow, inhaling emotion's dust.

Intellectual folk deceive ourselves when we insist or pretend otherwise.

Well, Tom, it did seem that simple for me. It just took a long time to set in with me as to what was going on. The only emotional baggage I have from my theist days is anger over the fact that people wanted me to believe that crap in the first place. I'm not an intellectual and I don't give a holy crap about religion. You might say I feel like the kid that just 2 years ago discovered the truth about Santa Claus, and today I am 68 years old. The transition was pretty simple once I figured it out!

There was a long time where I didn't believe in God without having a substantial basis for that position. I was born an atheist, like everyone else, but the indoctrination attempts simply had no chance of gaining traction with me no matter how young or old I was. Now I'm older, and I have an enormous basis for not believing in gods, but that basis doesn't substantiate my life long position, it only enhances it. I don't think anyone needs any more reason to not believe in gods than they do to not believe in a Flying Spaghetti Monster. It's a fundamentally simple aspect of the human condition to baselessly not believe in gods, just as much as it is to believe in them without basis.

The mentality of "well, I've got mine, brother, you get your own" comes straight from Ayn Rand, and her theory of Objectivism which in part says that the basis of morality is the pursuit of one's own happiness. This is the part the modern day tea baggers in the GOP tout as gospel. Of course, they always tend to leave out one little, eentsy, weentsy, teeny, tiny part of her overall philosophical outlook which happens to be a key component. ATHEISM! 

I find it absolutely assinine that they sing the praises of Ayn Rand and Jesus in the same breath. 

I'd like to see those right wing conservatives who tout Ayn Rand as a hero explain this.

Excellent observation Pat. And not only was she an atheist and an objectivist, she clearly was a proponent of selfishness, which, after all, is objectivism. The old Republican philosophy was an obligation of the rich to care for the poor. There is no vestige of that thinking in the modern Republican theory, nor in the modern mega-churches. 

I think the modern Republican philosophy is the poor are there to serve the rich.  With as little in return as possible.

I think I might have been OK with some of the fiscal issues of the Eisenhower republicans.  Then again, that is prehistoric on most human rights issues.   As I recall, he wasn't comfortable with some corporate issues  - didn't he say not to trust the military-industrial complex?




Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service