Mandatory Lesson: Atheists are The Enemy

Speaking about incidents in which atheists allow themselves to suffer abuse without standing up to the abusers, the Daily Kos has a story of a presentation given to air force officers in England. This presentation was camouflaged as a talk on suicide prevention. It was, in fact, a propaganda lecture telling air force officers that a life is not worth living unless it is spent fighting against atheists, materialists (naturalists), and evolutionists.

(See: Daily Kos: Creationism: The Latest in Military Suicide Prevention.)

This slide tells the theme of the presentation:

This is a classic "us" verses "them" propaganda piece. Where "us", the "good guys", the ones who have lives worth living believe in God, and "them", "the enemy", "those the good guys are truly at war against", are those who do not believe in God.

The Daily Kos referenced above ends with a declaration that those who are responsible for this presentation should face trial.

This 'Purpose-Driven Airmen' mandatory presentation is the epitome of military-sanctioned 'hatred of the other' and those commanding its viewing must face trial by General Courts Martial."

They are entirely correct. If this were a story about an air force officer, not in uniform, expressing a private opinion – even if he does so before an audience as a guest speaker – then the only legitimate response would be in the form of words of condemnation and private actions – though both words and private actions should express the harshest condemnation.

As it stands, the people who used their air force authority to command attendance at this presentation should be treated no differently than if they had given a presentation in which "them" were the Jews and the nation of Israel, or "them" were blacks corrupting the pure and wholesome blood of the white race.

This case represents an abuse of authority and, unless it is punished, delivers the message that the official government position (the position that the government has the right to order those in uniform to learn) is that atheists are, in fact, the enemy, and deservedly regarded as such by all military officers.

We have a right to demand that the prestige and authority of the U.S. government not be put behind a message of hate such as this – and to punish those who use their authority as officers in the military to execute such a campaign of hate.

Yet, the question remains whether the people responsible for this presentation will get the punishment they deserve. It is a question about whether those concerned with right and wrong in this case care enough to demand punishment.

Please consider contacting the Military Religious Freedom Foundation and ask them how you can best help them ensure that justice is done in this case.

Anger, Abuse, and Hate Speech

I am undergoing an evaluation of this blog - the things that I like about it, the things that I do not like, with an eye towards making some improvements.

I have wanted to use this blog motivate people into some sort of action, particularly against anti-atheist bigotry. However, several events in the past year have suggested that atheists are like the abused spouse sitting on the floor bruised and broken while the abuser tells her, "If you just wouldn't make me so angry, this wouldn’t happen." After which, the victim apologizes to the abuser, saying, "I'm sorry. I'll try not to make you angry again." And so we hear apologists condemning atheists any time atheists do something that makes others angry.

What types of things make them angry?

Well, as Hemant Mehta, (a.k.a. The Friendly Atheist) tells us, this:

is considered hate speech by some. This makes them angry.

(See: Friendly Atheist, Questioning God is Apparently Hate Speech)

It is, of course, useful to them to be angry at any attempt among atheists to form a community, and to do what they can to kill those communities before they have a chance to form. As long as atheists are separated and fragmented from each other, they (we) are politically impotent and socially weak. Furthermore, it gives them the opportunity to "sell" religion as the only provider of something that humans basically seem to have a strong longing for – a sense of community itself.

This usefulness does not imply that those Christians who get angry at the thought of atheist communities – who view them as a threat – are involved in a conscious attempt to stand in the way of allowing those communities to form. Instead, the usefulness of destroying the formation of those communities simply makes it "feel right" to do so. This understanding of the need to disrupt those communities is something that they feel on an emotional level, not something that they have reasoned out. It is, in this sense, a crime of passion – like the crimes of an abusive spouse.

The abusive spouse, when he strikes out in anger, truly is angry. What he says and does in order to control his victim has the effect of manipulating the victim into staying inside of that abusive relationship. However, it is not because the abuser has carefully worked out a plan to control and manipulate the situation. Rather, the abuser is simply going with what feels right – with what is comfortable – with what is useful.

I have wanted to put an end to this. Yet, here, too, like dealing with an abused spouse, the victim needs to recognize that a better world is not only possible, but that she has the right to take part in that better life. I have hoped, as a part of writing this blog, that I could provide some words of encouragement in that direction. I have not seen as much success as I would have liked, but I will keep trying.