Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, May 18, 2007
Mary Grabar :: Townhall.com Columnist
Another Famous Literary Atheist
by Mary Grabar
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


He is a man convinced that he is right and he is very angry that most of the world refuses to recognize it.

One person he hates in particular is Jerry Falwell whom he called an “ugly little charlatan” and “bully and fraud” on the day of his death. He began his interview on CNN with Anderson Cooper by proclaiming, “I think it’s a pity there isn’t a hell for him to go to.” Christopher Hitchens, sophisticate and contributing editor to Vanity Fair, joins Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins and others who have written bestsellers claiming that religion causes hatred. His is called God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything.

That’s the thing about atheists: They greet death with great relish and glee. Along with their loss of an overall sense of sanctity goes their respect for the sanctity of the occasion. I imagine they have the neighborhood gossips giving the dirt over their own mothers’ ashes. Or upon the death of a spouse, perhaps they quickly dispense of the body and resume the pursuit of their next pleasure, which is the only solace they have in their little kingdoms of one.

The twentieth-century was one of the reign of terror by atheists. On a global scale we have seen this in the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, China, and numerous principalities around the globe.

But before such egomaniacs come into power the groundwork has to be laid by such “progressives.” We begin with Marx and then proceed to the early twentieth-century apologists for atheism. Such men capitalize on world crises. The present company of atheists is capitalizing on Islamic terrorism.

They enjoy their own moments in the spotlight as they boldly declare their contempt for God and freedom from the fear of death.

But their personal lives reveal something far different.

Mark Twain, funny and talented fellow that he was, spent his last days penning bitter tracts. Sinclair Lewis, for all his glib satirizing of bourgeois small-town life and gullibility of those who follow preachers, ended his life in lonely dissipation and drink. He, like today’s atheists, demanded God prove his existence. Lewis stood at a church pulpit and gave God ten minutes to strike him dead. Needless to say, God did not follow Lewis’s orders.

Today’s atheists repeat these same tired tactics and arguments that Lewis and others used in the 1930s and before. The difference is that they do it on television and in “debates” on college campuses. The difference is that people are even more gullible today than they were back then because they are more ignorant of the Bible.

And they are ignorant of the misery that atheism causes in this life.

I could get through only half of Theodore Dreiser’s diaries of a life of “free love” in Greenwich Village back in the 1910s for fear of lapsing into my own depression. His days seemed to be filled with meaningless sexual encounters, hostility from girlfriends, and frequent visits to a clinic for therapy and medication.

Women fare worse, for sometimes pregnancies result from affairs, and then abortions. Edna Saint Vincent Millay may have been a brilliant poet and a role model of an early liberated woman for feminists, but I would not want the emotional turmoil of her open marriage and numerous abortions.

Ernest Hemingway, after his fourth marriage, and facing his sixties, put a gun to his head. Most recently, in 2005, a protégé, Hunter S. Thompson, did the same and gave instructions to his widow and friends to have his ashes blasted from a cannon.

The symbolism of the ashes heading up into the sky is obvious, but the physical laws of gravity (the only laws atheists ultimately obey) require that what goes up come back down.

I will not presume to know where Hunter S. Thompson is now, just as I do not presume to know God’s reasons for allowing 9/11. I do recall, though, the wonderful description of Satan being hurled from heaven in Paradise Lost:

. . . . Him the almighty power

Hurled headlong flaming from the ethereal sky

With hideous ruin and combustion down

To bottomless perdition, there to dwell

In adamantine chains and penal fire,

Who durst defy the omnipotent to arms.

Nine times the space that measures day and night

To mortal men, he with his horrid crew

Lay vanquished, rolling in the fiery gulf . . . .

But it seems to me that atheists who fancy themselves all-knowing and all-powerful, have created little hells for themselves on earth already. Hitchens, Harris, Dawkins, et. al., are enjoying fame and financial success right now. But we have not yet seen them at the end of their days.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Mary Grabar earned her Ph.D. in English from the University of Georgia and teaches in the Atlanta area. She is a Pushcart Prize-nominated poet and published fiction writer. Visit her website and get on her mailing list at marygrabar.com
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
sigh, more of the same junk here at TH
Ms. Grabar, why do you fall into the same trap as so many others and paint all atheists as a monolithic bloc represented by the few outspoken media voices? Would you like me to take David Koresh, Osama Bin Laden and Meier Kahane as representative of all believers? For one as bright as yourself, it is rather irresponsible intellectually.

Do you (and others here at TH) simply write junk like this to fire up the religious right conservative base? The liberals love to say that the conservative movement can only survive by creating bogeymen as enemies, and you sure are helping to prove them right.

I happen to be an atheist. I am also a committed libertarian as my handle suggests, and I vote Republican 100% of the time. I live a moral life, I believe in a right and wrong, and contrary to your drivel, I fear death and try to live life to the absolute fullest because I don't believe in some fairy tale afterlife.

I really wish you and others here at TH would go back to writing on more important political topics and leave the religious diatribes to the Bible-thumping websites. Many of us atheists/agnostics are your allies in the fight against socialism and Islamic fundamentalism, and would appreciate if you stop trying to alienate us so frequently.

Honestly?
Christopher Hitchens is now the harbinger of a new Nazi party, or a new Soviet Union style dictatorship?

So, we must now resort to the same kind of ridiculous analogy that groups like PETA resort to? ("Holocaust on your plate, anyone?")

Don't people actually have to LISTEN to listen to Hitchens before he can do any damage? Yes, yes, he has a bestselling book, but so did Mick Foley, a pro wrestler who's claim to fame was getting beaten repeatedly with a folding chair....

With 80% of the United States claiming to believe in some sort of higher power, I don't think your brownshirts are marching quite yet.

To claim that Atheism somehow makes one automatically unhappy or immoral is to claim that religion automatically makes one joyful and moral. This sort of thinking can be refuted by any sophomore ethics student. (Like myself! PHI 226 Social Ethics, Fall 2006, Northern Virginia Community College taught by a fellow at the Discovery Institute btw, so hardly a left leaning liberal professor)

I could list some of the pasts happy, moral, atheists and some unhappy, immoral, men of the cloth, but would waste my fellow readers time.

I am a husband, father and active duty member of the armed forces who is currently serving year 14 of my (hopefully) 20+ year career. I love my wife, I love my child and I am loyal to my country, and a pretty happy fellow. I also happen to be an atheist. To claim that happiness, obedience to the law, or simple human decency requires belief in whatever your particular deity happens to be, (Jehovah, Allah, Buddha, Zeus?) Is not only insulting, but completely beneath the level of reasonable discourse I would expect from a page like Townhall.

Killer & Mary
Killer, you are sentenced as penance to say 10 Hail Marys and 10 Our Fathers. If you don't, your barbeque pit will explode, consuming you in flames. All men (and women) know by their nature that God exists. Defective nature, Killer?

St. Thomas knew that some men seemed to suffer from what he called "invincible ignorance." I would respectfully submit that Killer and others like him read and meditate on St. Thomas' writings. If you don't do something like that, your immortal soul will be in serious jeopardy.

Mary and I both learned this in Rochester, New York, the spiritual center of western New York.

I think Mary writes beautifully. She's aespecially good on matters of religious belief.

steve maloney
ambridge, pa

TK....
Amen, brother.

LOL

Amen, stonesean :-))
TK_libertarian,
THANK YOU for beating me to the punch. Why is it the writers here at TH are so eager to alienate an entire group of people who actually are on their side on many issues? And for pete's sake, why do they keep promoting these books if they're so wrong? You'd think that right now they'd be trying to unite people behind them instead of drawing lines around themselves that exclude an ever-increasing number of people.

YO - Christian conservative writers - Who is your ally against hate-crimes legislation, your signature free speach issue? GET A CLUE.

Stonesean
Well written on your part.

It makes me wonder, if religious people are so secure and confident in the righteousness and correctness of their beliefs...

Why are they so threatened by a handful of notorious atheists? Nobody is forced to buy any of their books, or watch/listen to them being interviewed. They are not trying to stifle religion, merely offer an alternative viewpoint.

As a final point, I would really like one of the religious posters here to justify Mary and other columnists' painting of all atheists with such a broad brush.


my 2 cents
Stonesean - Where I live we have t-shirts (highly prized by out-of-staters and the cognoscenti in general) that proclaim:

PETA - People Eating Tasty Animals.

Thanks for your service.

Moving on

Christopher Hitchens - up until a few days ago I had never heard of him.

Lucky me.

Vanity Fair - excuse me?

Noone is trying to impose his or her belief or non-belief on anyone, but it is fun to read your arguments and I want to thank you for that.

IN CONCLUSION

Oscar Wilde was a late 19th century author in England who was famous for his somewhat unrestrained lifestyle (I'm trying to be tasteful here) and perhaps his most famous book was "The Picture of Dorian Gray".

But perhaps he is most famous for his deathbed conversion.

I am a practicing Catholic.

Grace a Dieu

afn&tt

TK and stonesean
Atheism doesn't "make you unhappy" and Ms. Grabar didn't make such an assertion. Believers and non-believers alike are all in the same boat called life on earth.

So, bull excrement on both your straw men diatribes. And give me a break: Ms. Grabar or anyone else at TownHall can write about what they want, notwithstanding your "alienation" (give me a freaking BREAK).

So just chill.

1 more thing
I am told that you can find out all you need to know about christopher hitchens, sam harris and richard dawkins et. al by turning to radio station WGAF.

You can thank me later.

Blanket statements...
"That’s the thing about atheists: They greet death with great relish and glee. Along with their loss of an overall sense of sanctity goes their respect for the sanctity of the occasion."

Questions:
How's the view from your high-horse?

Do you know any atheists personally, or is this conclusion based on limited exposure to TV atheist personalities?

If we're going to use one-off examples to prove atheists (or atheist writers) are not aware of the misery that atheism causes in life, can we also presume that the hundreds of religious pedophiles may be equally unaware of the misery they cause?

In trying to re-buff the point that religion contributes to many of the global society's ills, do you recognize any irony in the following: "The present company of atheists is capitalizing on Islamic terrorism"?




reply to TK_libertarian
Since you're a libertarian, you should really think carefully about your continued support for Republicans and conservatives. The conservative core of the Republican party consists of religious conservatives who reject the very possibility that (a) you can be a serious atheist and (b) have any sort of moral beliefs at all. The core of the Republican party rejects you just as it rejects gays. As the Objectivists say, "Check your premises." Perhaps you will conclude that you don't really belong with the Bible-thumping party.

Lowenberg,
Your bull: "Atheism doesn't "make you unhappy" and Ms. Grabar didn't make such an assertion. Believers and non-believers alike are all in the same boat called life on earth."

Did you READ the column?

Ms. Grabar: "And they are ignorant of the misery that atheism causes in this life," yada, yada, yada...


wrong battle
There are many battles being waged in the political arena right now, and as a young progressive in a big city, I love to keep up especially on the "Culture War", thus my going through the masochistic exercise of reading Townhall regularly.

But even as an Atheist, I don't think "Whether or not God exists" is a battle that's worth anyone's time. Political discussions should be conducted in the left side of the brain, and anyone who has faith knows its a right side trait. I blame both sides, Atheists and Believers, for continuing this inane confrontation which yields absolutely no benefit to mankind. Books like Hitchens', and articles like Grabar's, are both idiotic, time wasting dissertations.

The discussion we should be having is how much the belief of God in our society should influence our public policy. I believe that our Freedom of Religion was intended to include our Freedom FROM Religion, but I'll admit that that doesn't mean God should be completely absent.

I wrote in a comment on Coulter's article yesterday that we should base our morals, our very definitions of Right and Wrong, on the wisdom gained throughout the entire history of Man, not just one antequated book. One particularly firey poster shot back "So that shouldn't include the Bible?!" Well, of course it should.

The problem comes with Biblical Literalism, and that those who subscribe to it believe they have the distinct Duty of working to get US policy as close to Biblical policy as possible, on every issue.

Well, I believe Christians when they say that Leviticus and Romans, et al, specifically denounce homosexuality. So as a happy, healthy, productive gay man, I can not sit idly as my government is taken over by Biblical Literalists, just as I would not want Sharia law to be our policy.

Our policy should be based on the wisdom of Man. God will judge us for everything later, and if you believe that, please feel free to live your life according to God's plan. But leave the rest of us, including the "Laws of the Land", alone.

Lowenburg...may I draw your attention...
May I draw your attention to the following quotes from the column.

"The difference is that people are even more gullible today than they were back then because they are more ignorant of the Bible.

And they are ignorant of the misery that atheism causes in this life."

then shortly follows with:

"Ernest Hemingway, after his fourth marriage, and facing his sixties, put a gun to his head."

-----------------------------------------------

I am not sure that directly refuting the columnists subtle suggestion that athiesm causes more misery than religion (I am sure there are plenty of victims of "martyrs" througout the ages that would disagree) is building a straw man.

Regarding Hemmingway, Hemmingway himself claimed that the electroshock psychotherapy he received later in life caused his misery. No mention of the non allegience to the Lord. I personally would tend to look at his alcoholism.

The author seems to suggest that no, it was his non-fealty to an interventionist God that made him put a gun to his head. If I had never heard of anyone religious committing suicide, I might entertain the idea.

I would say that in my experience, joy and misery are equally distributed between the faithful and non, and if anyone is putting those scarecrows out there, it's Ms. Grabar.

So Now We're Suicidal?
It is amazing to me that conservative Christians complain bitterly when they are all lumped in to one group, but some of them (Ahem, Ms. Grabar) have no problem lumping 10% of this nations population into one group. Let's hit the high points here:
1. Atheists are looking forward to death?
2. Atheists ruined the 20th century.
3. Atheists are destined to die miserable.
4. Apparently, we're suicidal.
5. Oh and my favorite - We're all so screwed up because we're ignorant of the Bible.

Would all of you Christians like to know the reason why a lot of us Atheists seem like we're pissed off all the time when you see us in the public arena. It's because we are truely the last group of people in America today who people feel OK about demeaning. Do you not believe that the article here is demeaning and bigoted? Read it again, but this time, substitute Blacks for Atheists. Yeah Ms. Grabar, that's me calling you and your ilk bigots.

I find
Jeffrob wrote: "The problem comes with Biblical Literalism...."
--------------------------------------------

I find my discussions about religion end before they start when I ask someone if they read the Genesis story of creation as poetry, or literal fact.

The poetry and allegory folks tend to want to engage in reasonable debate, the literal fact folks tend to just say "because this book says so".

Gestell

You are right in that I identify myself as a libertarian who votes Republican. However we are currently in a 2 party system in this country, and rather than throw away my vote and help elect a socialist Democrat, I vote Republican. On my #1 issue of smaller government and lower taxes (which promotes individual freedom) they are "less bad" than the Democrats. I also live in the Northeast, and up here most Republicans are closer to the libertarian ideals than they are to Bible Thumpers anyway.

So yes, I would absolutely love a viable 3rd party for those of us who want government out of our lives in ALL aspects and for religion to stay in the churches and out of the public sphere - but I would rather work to influence the Republican party from within for the time being and not throw away my votes.

One More Thing
Will all of you historical revisionists take a minute to memorize the following sentence: HITLER WAS NOT AN ATHEIST!!! He wasn't so much of a Christian either, but he did believe in a personal god.

Moral Equivalence
Joseph McCarthy was quoted as saying something to the effect that "It doesn't matter what God you believe in, just as long as you believe in some God." McCarthy of course was referring to having "In God We Trust" on U.S. money. He was also of course referring to communism where atheism was part of the doctrine and "In God We Trust" was seen as a blow against communism. Seems Mary and TH is still fighting that fight?

The Bible, however, doesn't say this. God is a jealous God. There are quite a few things about false idols and false gods in the Bible.

More importantly, the Bible does not distinguish between the heathens. Nine levels of h**l do not exist. It is just hell. There is no special h**l for child molesters and people who talk at the theater. God does not say "beware this sinner over all others for they are the most dangerous." Yet Mary would have us believe that atheists can be singled out amongst the heathens.

The Bible doesn't say, "well, if you have to be a sinner, it is better to believe in a false god than no god." In fact, quite the opposite.

If one is not a Christian then one is not a Christian, it is that simple.

I find it curious that on one hand, the right wing is trying to sound the Islamist Extremist alarm and yet articles railing against atheists are far more predominant on TH.

Let's have a discussion. Are the unorganized, small set of outspoken atheist elite more of a danger to America today than Islamist terrorists?

Islamist Terrorists:

1.) Billions strong.
2.) Organized.
3.) Have made many direct threats against western countries.
4.) Have videos beheading people.
5.) Suicide bombers.

Atheists:
1.) Less than 9% of U.S. population.
2.) Unorganized
3.) Few, outspoken individual writers.


Either Islamo Facism is the battle of our time, or its not. Looking at all the articles battling atheists on this site, one would get the impression that atheism is the biggest battle today.

To wit, you people are not very convincing that Islamo Facism is worth dying for in foreign countries when you are still fighting communism.

Fighting atheism was one prong of fighting communism. McCarthy erroneously made the statement that "it doesn't matter which God you believe in, In God We Trust."

You can't be treating communism and atheism as the biggest battle of the day and at the same time claim the GWOT against Islamist terrorism is the biggest battle.

Only one can be the biggest. And judging by articles written on TH, communism is still number one.

Forget Regan.....
Forget a new Ronald Regan....I want a new Barry Goldwater!

"The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both. I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in A, B, C, and D. Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me? And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of conservatism." ~Barry Goldwater

drivebyposting...
You said it.

The reason I have no problem voting Republican.

They are wrong on some social issues, but we are on the same page about the most important issue of our day.


Stonesean
Amen. Barry hailed from the good ol' days of the Conservative movement where we cared about things like reducing the size of govenment and streghtening our economy and defenses. Now, the Conservative movement has been reduced to screaming about abortion and limiting the rights of gays. It makes me sad.

drivebyposting
I keep re-reading your post for the liberal gotcha. I can't find it. Am I missing something? Good post.

an analogy
I grew up a stones throw from an indian reservation in Canada, and saw a race based welfare ghetto can do to a people. When I talk about indians ("indiginous native persons" or whatever the PC version is today) I am talking about those that live on the reserve and have adopted all of the trappings of the defeatist lifestyle that welfare promotes. Those who choose to live as I do, who share the normal goals, dreams, and drives of the mainstream society to me are not identifiable as "indian", they are identifiable as "Canadian".

When I speak with someone for the first time on social issues, they usually have a very different background from mine. Unless I explicity explain where I'm coming from, they think I mean that I'm calling the local rap-attack fire-fighting crew (which was setup by local indians as an indian owned business) lazy layabouts. Nothing could be farther from the truth: they are among the hardest workers you'll ever see, and are proud Canadians.

What I'm wondering is whether Mary is referring to the athiests that are suing to keep Christmas a "winter festival", ban the pledge of allegience, and remove "in God we trust" from the money or if she is talking about all athiests. I would hazard a guess that it's the former.

re: Julz writes:
Ooops, sorry.

I forgot to add "and Ann Coulter is pox on all Christianity."

Actually, all of my posts are to have just one agenda. I believe the right wing has fallen to delivering all its messages with mudslinging and name calling and has no public respect or credibility.

My goal is to argue against Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh et. al. not because of the message but how they are delivering it.

Barry Goldwater had respect from his enemies because he gave it.

So, I digressed from my one objective from this site, to minister that hatred is not the path to spreading messages of good or God. I see no point in preaching to the choir and writing about things we would all agree upon. Maybe it is time for me to move on. Err, move forward.

Seeing the right wing reaction to Ron Paul and John McCain is appalling. It is no different than the left wing reaction to Joe Lieberman.

There will never be a world without liberals. Conservatives need to get back to engaging them in constructive fashions. Editorials on TH need to start praising political compromise where religious compromise may not acceptable. McCain's compromises with Democrats have been failures precisely because any compromise with Demcorats is seen as failure today by conservatives and McCain is not getting the respectful, constructive criticism to set him aright. Instead, he is just getting all out hatred for even talking with Democrats.

The right wing has isolate itself with its strident, no compromise, in your face, scorched Earth politics.

I do not believe in objective journalism. I do believe in respectful journalism. I believe most God fearing Christians want respectful journalism. Yet the paragons of conservativism today are the likes of Ann Coulter. Most of the quiet conservatives like myself just ignore her, hoping she will go away. I decided to be outspoken.

Jim Leher has a liberal bias. But he has conservative respect. He never denegrates them in any way. His question are many times liberal leaning. Where is the right wing Jim Leher?

I have watched PBS and listened to NPR for years and have never been so offended as when I watch FOX news or listen to AM Radio. I can't. To this day I still listen to public radio. The NYT may be liberal and inaccurate at times, but it is generally respectful. Every person is responsible for parsing the news to weed out miss-information. The Bible is your source of morals, not the media.

Respect is the lubricant and the glue needed for parties who do not agree to compromise in the best of fashions.

The right wing media rose to power on the wave of shock jock, outrageous, emotional appeal of the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly. The shock jocks are moving to XM radio to avoid the public's wrath. America is getting tired of all the distasteful humor at the expense of the enemy.

Ok, so now I feel better.

Beliefs
I am Catholic. I am supposed to believe that if you're not a Catholic you will burn in the perpetual fires of hades. I don't. While I have my beliefs, you have yours. I don't care if you choose one lifestyle or religion over another, as long as you don't force those on me or throw it in my face.

There is a comic who says something to the effect "I'm now going to make everyone really comfortable. Have you found Jesus?" How true.

As a Catholic I believe that my greatest ability to persuade another to share my beliefs is to demonstrate them in my life. I don't preach my religion to anyone, I just try to live by my beliefs and demonstrate through my actions my religious convictions.

I find articles like this amusing from the standpoint of the posts following the article. Mary has her position on evangelism and I have mine. That's fine.

ctjaeger
"I am Catholic. I am supposed to believe that if you're not a Catholic you will burn in the perpetual fires of hades."

No you're not. The Council of Nicea in the early 1960's changed that (it was the same time they stopped saying mass in Latin). Now Catholics believe that faith in Jesus and good works get you into heaven. I'm an Atheist already! Don't post comments telling everyone how Catholic you are if you don't even know the tenants of your own faith.

Gestell: Really?
"reply to TK_libertarian
Since you're a libertarian, you should really think carefully about your continued support for Republicans and conservatives. The conservative core of the Republican party consists of religious conservatives who reject the very possibility that (a) you can be a serious atheist and (b) have any sort of moral beliefs at all. The core of the Republican party rejects you just as it rejects gays. As the Objectivists say, "Check your premises." Perhaps you will conclude that you don't really belong with the Bible-thumping party."


really? What a thoroughly gratuitous statement emanating from the People’s Republic of Massachusetts. Not all conservative thinkers conform to the “bible thumping” stereotype to which you allude. Actually, classic secular conservatism depends upon analytic thinking in contrast the hyper-emotionalism endemic to the modern Left, e.g., Benford’s Law of Controversy: Passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available.

Moral beliefs & the Democratic Party? From my perspective as a minimally-franchised & thoroughly disposable libertarian white male, all I see is a group of morally superior “International Socialists” (iNazis) pandering to the same small ideological tent containing a cloister of like-minded organisms: Neo-Marxist women-children, Neo-Marxist gays, Neo-Marxist minorities, Neo-Marxist poor people, Neo-Marxist uneducated people (an oxymoron if there ever was one), etc. Every one of them fully ensconced in the “to each according to her needs” column of that great socialist equation. Where do these iNazi get their gravitas? Leftists like yourself seem to think that their particular ideology imbues them with an esoteric insight on all matters pertaining to the reality in general and the human condition in particular. If the rest of us were intelligent enough to appreciate the subtle beauty of social engineering (gender/racial quotas, wealth-redistribution, etc.) we would of course be morally-superior leftists as well. Hence, because we don't agree with the dominant leftist-paradigm we must be stupid or immoral.

Why would any rational male associate himself w/ a party that is actively promoting Society’s antipathy (in word, policy & deed) and outright Misandry toward MEN in general & WHITE MEN in particular?

response to Driveby
I think that the whole of society has degenerated far enough since Goldwater that the politeness that he and his political enemies would don while debating is dead.

Ann Coulter talked in one of her books about why she moved away from the legal profession and to being a sarcastic pundit: seeing how the defend-Clinton folks treated the legal team she was working on. Debate and facts were not the order of the day, ad-hominem was. She decided to try to give as good as she had received, and said that she would stop using these methods when the other side did.

Do you honestly think that those who despise her most would instantly become civil when talking with or about her if she were to go back to being a lawyer?

Theists are far more Arrogant
What's more arrogant than the idea that you are a chosen people, more divinely spiritually than the rest of the world?

LOL at the airheads using an ancient book of stories as a crutch for your existence. It's just as ridiculous as worshipping voodoo dolls or dancing to make rain.

In response to TK
"It makes me wonder, if religious people are so secure and confident in the righteousness and correctness of their beliefs...
Why are they so threatened by a handful of notorious atheists?"

Perhaps because certain famous, 'secure' literary atheists insist on defining themselves by their attacks on Christians. Apparently certain atheists (though not all) figure they or their co-religionists should be able to attack, slander and spin the most libellous conspiracy theories about Christians with impunity, while Christians should be adult enough and civil enough to refrain from responding or pointing it out.

They are right. Their behavior is *exactly* what Christ said we should expect from the world, but we are not to be like the world.

Well, perhaps if we were perfect like Christ we *would* be able to constantly turn the other cheek. But by all means, let those particular atheists keep up their tirade: it only teaches us to be more Christ-like.

May God touch you in a special way, and draw you one day to His grace and atonement.


Revenge is always the best answer...
"Ann Coulter talked in one of her books about why she moved away from the legal profession and to being a sarcastic pundit: seeing how the defend-Clinton folks treated the legal team she was working on. Debate and facts were not the order of the day, ad-hominem was. She decided to try to give as good as she had received, and said that she would stop using these methods when the other side did."

Motivation by revenge is always a good way to do business....

At least in Coulter's case, it's a lucrative way to pander and bait...

I never knew that about her. Makes me like her even less...

stonesean, julz, etc.
Still waiting for citation to Ms. Grabar's alleged assertion that Atheism, per se, makes one unhappy. I am all ears. Regardless of our "theistic" differences, you and I take away equal happiness from the joys of life. More accurately, the point of Ms. Grabar's column is that ultimately Atheism is a philosophy without hope.

Hemingway famously boasted of being free from God, free from the bonds of moral guilt, etc. etc. In his time, Hemingway was the uber-playboy, the uber-talent, a man's man, presumably the guy who had it all. I think that he is a prime example of how freedom without the God, if such freedom is extended to its logical conclusion, leads to irrationality and madness. Alcoholism and depression was the symptom of his rudderless freedom - not the cause. Thus, the tremendous success of Alcoholics Anonymous is in reliance on a "higher power" to break the bonds of alcoholism.




drivebyposting: Really?
"My goal is to argue against Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh et. al. not because of the message but how they are delivering it."

Really? I'm quite sure that the aformentioned offenders are really quite grateful WRT you pointing out the error of their ways. Delivery?As opposed to the "intellectual nuance", overt profanity and/or censorship of alternative opinions on left-wing sites like DU, Huffington or Slate? As opposed to the censorship & bias of PBS? As opposed to Erica Jong wishing a certain Republican Senator would die of a heart attack on NPR? Also, please don't be so intellectually dishonest as to equate conventional "talk radio" w/ "shock jocks" like Opie & Anthony. Or does your pedantic intellect lack such granularity?

In responset to drivebyposting
The perceived threat is not so much that of the 'famous literary atheists' themselves, but of what they represent: the insidious, creeping antipathy toward the notion of God's existence, in our society.
Oh, sure, I know most atheists claim that they simply don't believe in God. However, when put to it, very, very many reveal the fact that they *loath* the notion of a sovereign, holy God who insists on obedience and judges sin. Those atheists insist that such a God has no right to be. Those atheists insist that others not believe in such a God.
This is not a case of being 'without God', but rather of being 'against God'. I do not claim that you or any other individual is one of these; but an honest and thoughtful individual like yourself undoubtedly must admit that you know of some of these persons.

No one should *ever* pretend that Islam's violent side is not the greatest threat to America's physical, secular safety. But spiritually, the great threat to Americans is that mindset which Paul said would gain great following in latter days: "lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy... false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good... lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God."
That's my view. Do with it what you will.

desu: Really?
desu writes: Friday, May, 18, 2007 1:08 PM
Theists are far more Arrogant
What's more arrogant than the idea that you are a chosen people, more divinely spiritually than the rest of the world?

+Actually most people who believe in a deity do so w/ the humility that they are not so arrogant (in this universe as large as it is) as to believe that every single question about our existence can be answered via our current limited understanding of “physical laws.” Consider macro-evolution and the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

LOL at the airheads using an ancient book of stories as a crutch for your existence. It's just as ridiculous as worshipping voodoo dolls or dancing to make rain.

+As opposed to “Secular Progressives” who employ the ubiquitous “State” as a crutch for their existence? It’s just as ridiculous to worship the “collective” as tool for good.

Stones
You didn't answer my final question: would those who oppose or loath Ann Coulter immediately refer to her respectfully if she were to leave the pundit realm? I think not.

Similarly, the uber-athiests who maintain that they want to exist in a God free (and god free) zone such that others are not allowed to talk of Him seem to me to be demanding "this is the code of conduct I expect of you, but I don't need to follow it because I'm different/special". For all of its lack of God/a god, athiesm has all of the aspects of a religion. Right down to intolerant castigators of the unbelievers.

Most down-to-earth athiests are as easy to get along with as the down-to-earth Christians (and the few down-to-earth Muslims that I know). Can we agree that "do as I say or else" is bad regardless of where it's imposed from?

View from both sides
Problem with most people is that good people don't know why they're good, bad people don't know why they're bad. Most people just live their lives and want to think of themselves as best they can. Me, I've kinda seen both sides and think I have a feel for why they are the way they are.

I grew up as an Atheist. My life was worse than most, so I hit bottom faster than most and did become the caricature of the miserable, suicidal, pathetic Atheist.

In my late teens/early 20's, I had dropped out of school and was living in my mother's basement. Then, for the first time in my life, I was getting a full night's sleep, dieting and eating fairly well (including Omega 3 supplements, which are said to help with brain health), and I started messing around with mnemonic brain exercises. All this made my mind healthier, and, I think, eventually, Christian. Surprising, but true.

Out of nowhere, I would wake up in the morning with an overwhelming bright warmth in the front of my mind that felt religious somehow. I vaguely started to believe in something. One day, I saw a religious movie that made me weep out loud. I read my father's Bible for the first time, and the pages literally glowed and the words floated to my eyes.

Eventually, I found an exercise, a cross between prayer and meditation that developed the part of my mind where that bright sensation seemed to be. The exercise didn't take long to work. It was like cracking open a dam, and it felt like suppressed anger poured out of me like polluted water. Importantly, I forgave my father automatically for his failures in life, and came to love him and respect what was good in him. I heard the voices of demons tempting me away from the faith, and came to understand deeply some of the truths in the Bible. The bright sensation became part of my life. I don't feel anything anymore while I meditate.

The person I used to be is dead. All the thoughts, emotions, lusts, desires, phobias, doubts, prides, vanities, weaknesses, etc. of that person are gone. I was born again as something else, and life is now easy and peaceful.

I've come to see that, apart from the soul, the body is just sort of a machine, sort of energy and dust. The mind is part of that too. The way it works is that, without the over-riding front-brain "light", the mind becomes a spiral of emotion and constant thought. Your thoughts make you feel, your feelings make you think. You bury the emotions you don't want to feel, and your thoughts rise to distract you from those. Because strong emotion, repressed or otherwise, excites lust, your thoughts and feelings make you sexual. In turn, you can't control your emotions or your perversions.

Your perversions make you weak for sex, and thus for women. The man/woman relationship gets divorced from the family. Men get weak for the approval of women, women get bitter and contemptuous of men. If they ever do marry, by the time the marry, the woman will be in in control of the home. The only way the man can take control at that point is by being abusive and taking the power back.

Either way, the woman will get control of the children. The children will hate their father (either for his weakness or his cruelty), hate masculinity, reject a masculine God, and associate with an emotional mother, which, in turn, makes them even more thoughtful and even more emotional and, as adults, even more lustful, even weaker for women.

Yikes, I'll have to stop typing eventually.

My other mixed thoughts about Atheists are these: an example I use about Atheism is that it's like bringing a science book to a gunfight, or using math on a Biology test - they're unprepared for this life. And, back to the "dust and energy" example, I can't help but think that their machines can be taken over by anything that threatens body or seduces pride.

I also look at Hitchens and think: if this man has the secret of life, wouldn't it best be kept secret?




Most of the Atheists
i have met are the first ones to know when it rains, as there noses are so high in the air. Never have i met a group who felt so much like they are "enlightened" and look at the rest of us with such hate and disbelief. It makes them feel like their intelligence is far above and beyond regular people, like the rest of us are so stupid for just not getting it. I think that Atheists like to believe there is no God so they feel free to pursue whatever line of thought and action pleases them the most without feeling a hint of guilt or conviction. I guess they better enjoy it now as this is as good as it gets for them...

Wondering
If atheism is the way to enlightenment and mental clarity, why is it that so many atheists like Hitchens and some (some) I've observed posting here seem so perpetually enraged?

Solo610
What you're feeling is your own self loathing and suppressed envy because you wish you could join them.

My favorite and Solo 610, ElizabethBenne
The best sentence in Garbar's column: "Atheists meet death with relish and glee".

I never fail to be surprised yet again at the sheer stupidity of some of these columns. For Grabar to get a degree in English literature, one can only assume she was sleeping with the Dean.


Alot of atheists become enraged because so much blood has been spilt, so much ignorance perpetuated, so much harm has been done in the name of religion. It's more like outrage. Institutionalized punishment for "heresy" existed right up to the time of the civil war, when the inquisition was abolished, finally.

Do with it what you will - OK!
"Spiritually, the great threat to Americans is that mindset which Paul said would gain great following in latter days":

(One atheist's return)

lovers of their own selves: check
covetous: hmmm, check
boasters: nahh, not really
proud: check
blasphemers: strictly defined, yes
disobedient to parents: on occasion
unthankful: NO
unholy: no
false accusers: no
incontinent: Hey, that's personal!
fierce: check
despisers of those that are good: NO
lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God: yes

Anybody else?

Maybe i'm missing something lowenburg...
"And they are ignorant of the misery that atheism causes in this life."

I'm not sure how much more clear I can be, man. She claims Atheism makes you miserable! So instead of splitting hairs, replace my word "unhappy" with her word "misery". See where I'm coming from yet?


"That’s the thing about atheists: They greet death with great relish and glee."

Funny, on October 15th of last year, my father in law died of complications related to lung cancer. I remember no glee, nor do I relish the memory very much. Thanks though, Mary for the fantastically insightful and well thought out commentary.


Did atheists give us the Bill of Rights?


Will atheism preserve the Bill of Rights?

The theists among us are being encouraged by some atheists to suppress our opinion. After all we are told there are other more important issues for discussion.

What is more important to conservatism than the foundations of liberty? Do you think that liberty just happened by the will of men? Doesn’t history teach us that men by nature rule over other men?

Our premise is that American liberty springs solely from the fruits of Biblical Christianity that flourished in North Western Europe during the Reformation then came to New England in power during the Great Awakening.

It follows then that the suppression of Biblical Christianity, either by government coercion or false theology will ultimately limit our liberties.

Liberty depends on limited government and limited government is not possible without a self-governing people. Our premise is that self-government is dependent on a free church, an open Bible and preachers of the truth. Name a more powerful principle of transformation of the heart of men than the gospel of grace in Jesus Christ.

Members of His kingdom have the Law of God written on their hearts. They fear sin more than they fear the government, making limited government under the rule of law a possibility.

With the decrease of self-governing and responsible men the options are limited, either lawlessness or government oppression both of which are increasing in America today

This is why we speak against atheism; it undermines the very foundation of Western thought and culture. You cut yourself off from the only reference to law and morality. Without the Scriptures you are left with finite and fallible men as the arbiters of truth. The fruits of which are the guillotine and the gulag.

Form and freedom cannot be maintained where atheism is a dominant philosophy. Innate human depravity leads to lawlessness and despair apart from the grace of God.

Let’s be reminded that the Scriptures say that believers are at war and that our warfare is spiritual and that God has provided us with the necessary spiritual weapons. Behind the cultural war lies this spiritual warfare. We are not surprised by the depravity of the enemy…

‘Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord and in the power of His might. Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day…’ [Ephesians 6:10-20]



What is your preference?
Choose between a country where people govern themselves by following a few simple New Testament rules or a government led by ego-soaked mortals.

Christians stuggle with the first choice and often fall short. Christians are always a work in progress. The vast majority keep trying, and many end up living "blameless lives" which means they harm no one, they hold themselves accountable for every choice they make in life, and they personally and privately do good for others.

Then there is the other choice where we are the lab rats for social experimentation per the whim of very flawed humans. They dictate rules for us as they live in their self-perceived personal glory while perched high above the masses. When the resulting human tragedies manifest, no one is held accountable and they start again.

Bless you, atheists. Your freedom not to believe was established by a bunch of Bible-believing, frocked coated, wig-wearing, silk-stocking-clad intellectuals who knew their personal limits as humans. Thank God.


Ann Coulteresq
" That’s the thing about atheists: They greet death with great relish and glee."

The thing about the right is they make generalizations yet never support them. What athiest have greeted "death with relish and glee?"

Desu
I feel something, but it is not self loathing or the envy to join you. Its more like i pity you really. If i wanted to be an Atheist it would take little more than letting go of everything right and pursuing my own selfish agenda.

BTW JoJo
A thesis i used in the past concerned the fact that more blood has been spilled in the name of Atheism and the attempt to expunge religion from mankind, than from man serving almost ANY God. It took little research to prove this one. Easy A......

By the way.....
To the person who previously posted that Hitler was a Christian, you couldn't be farther from the truth.

While visiting the German National Memorial at Dauchau a few years ago, I read the rule where every third Catholic priest brought to the camp was killed to prevent sermons from being held. The Nazis thought that would prevent worshiping Christ and giving hope to the prisoners. The surviving priests held mass in secret, anyway, and those that were discovered were immediately killed. The surviving priests STILL held mass.

Hitler was an occultist who believed in mediums and astrology. He lived and died by it.

Marlin
The argument that Hitler was a Christian, along with thousands others like him, is always made by Atheists in an attempt to prove that innocent blood was spilled in the name of Christ. Thus the label Christian is being applied by those who have no idea what it means.

JoJo
You write: "Alot of atheists become enraged because so much blood has been spilt, so much ignorance perpetuated, so much harm has been done in the name of religion. It's more like outrage. Institutionalized punishment for "heresy" existed right up to the time of the civil war, when the inquisition was abolished, finally."


As far as violence and bloodshed, why is the violence and bloodshed brought on by 20th century atheistic despots, such as the ones Miss Graber pointed out, excused? I am not interested in getting into a discussion as to whether or not Hitler was an atheist. His philosophy was certainly based evolutionary atheistic principles.
The crux of the matter is whether the one shedding blood is acting consistently or inconsistently with the tenets of his belief system. In the case of the aforementioned atheistic despots, they were acting in accordance with the logical conclusions of evolutionary (nature is red-in-tooth-and-claw, survival of the fittest) atheism. Christians, however who behave in a barbaric manner, shedding bloodshed are in opposition to the principles of the faith they claim to represent.
When you point out the crusades, the inquisition...while tragic, those numbers pale in comparison to the millions and millions tallied by atheistic dictators such as Mao, Stalin and others. Alexander Solzhenitsyn estimated that those who died due to the Soviet Union's atheistic policies from 1917 to 1959 were over 66 million.
Don't even get me started on the great history of benevolent institutions began by Christians. Why do you think so many hospitals have names like Baptist, Presbyterian or Saint?

I am tempted to believe that your rage is based on prejudice rather than facts.

Mistaken?
Well Valient....

You are mistaken in your belief that the founding fathers were Christian.

The founders were mostly Deists, meaning they felt the Universe had a creator, but that he/it does not intervene in human events. Read the entire constitution...nowhere does it say Christ, Christianity, Bible or God.

Check this out: http://freethought.mbdojo.com/foundingfathers.html

This seems a much more reasonable view of the world than to take the self-contradictory and implausable stories in the Bible/Koran/Torah/Bhagavad Gita as literal truth.

Hell, i'm even willing to entertain the idea that since John Mather and George Smoot (American Physicists and 2006 Nobel Prize for Physics winners) have essentialy given us the best proof for the Big Bang theory of cosmology that has ever been produced. That if we see the universe has a solid "created on" date, maybe the "created universe" had a trancendant "Creator" (e.g. God).

Taking some of the statements made over the years by Falwell, Robertson, et all in this light, the alternative of Deism sounds downright reasonable in comparison.

Atheists
This post is harsh, future ones will not be. This is my "get it off my chest" post.
----------

I can't get past people being so sure about what they can never prove.

If you are wrong about God existing, you lead your loved ones to Hell and you are proud of your intellect?

This is why I personally am concered about atheists. Not that I dont' have agnostic acquaintences, but the downside to being wrong is unimaginable suffering which atheists are willing, gladly, to roll the dice on; Even if it leads to eternal damnation.

It makes zero sense. No matter what the alternative argument it is unconscionable.

Beleivers have to love our neighbors as ourselves. That doesn't sound so hideous does it.

I am well aware a divisive post tlike this is not productive and I know it is very unlikely anyone will give it reasonable consideration. Still, if I am right and teach your children, they go to paradise. If you teach mine and there is a God, you send them to Hell.

No. I don't agree even a little with that being ok.

YOU DO NOT KNOW AND CAN NEVER PROVE TO ANYONE'S satisfaction that there is no God. You have every right to risk everything when it comes to yourself. You have no right to risk anyone else's soul so you can feel intelligent.

Yes, there are many religions. NO, that doesn't mean you just dropkick all religion. You have to do like everyone else. Research them and seek out what makes sense to you. Everything is riding on whether you choose to just give up and throw them all out or give it a try showing you actually care about your loved ones.

Your responses are welcome. I could type them for you since I know your point of view all too well.

I'll just smile & take the heat. I don't hate anyone here. You frustrate me but that's my problem, isn't it.

note to TK_libertarian
I myself find the vein popping condescending antics of angry atheists amusing.

If you are not one , don't get your panties in a bunch about it.

stonesan
The founding fathers were Christians, with the exception of a couple. Even then they had respect for religion. The internet is like a bathroom wall, anyone can come in and write anything. That link is garbage. You better do some REAL reading about the founding fathers. Start by reading classics and biographies by reputable authors instead of random websites.

ValiantForTruth
Did atheists give us the Bill of Rights?

Are you kidding -- As a matter of fact, YES, THEY DID! Stop listening to your preacher every Sunday and go pick up a real history book. Our Founding Fathers were not Christians. I'm going to repeat that one more time for all of you "America is a Christian Country" folks...THE FOUNDING FATHERS WERE NOT CHRISTIANS! It has been well established that Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and several others were either Deists (the belief that a god of sorts started everything but plays no part in our everyday life) or Atheists. It is also well established that Ben Franklin and Thomas Paine were straight up Atheists.

I'm fully aware that you really want to believe that America really is a Christian country, but it is not. You've been shown quotes from the Founders that may imply that they adhere to some vague religion or belief. But for every one of those (which they typically stuck in letters to avoid getting outed as Atheists) I'll produce five others from letters they wrote each other that you won't like.

"Will atheism preserve the Bill of Rights?"
Do you honestly believe that Fundementalist Christians will? Please note that I used the term "Fundementalist" there to separate them from average Christians (because, yes, I do think average Christians will preserve the bill of rights). The way I see it, the two groups inside America that are actively trying to destroy the Bill of Rights are the wacko fringes of the Liberal and Fundementalist Christian movements.

Fuzzy....
Actually, though I disagree with you, I like the fact that you are being honest about the how and why of what you feel. More than some do around here.

I've always wondered why people think that things like education and science and religion have to be one in the same.

About me being a teacher vs. you being a teacher. It seems perfectly reasonable that science asks the "how" questions of the universe and religion asks the "why" questions....though if I wanted to be a wag, and get stuff off my chest myself I would say religion makes the unquestioned "Why" statements and if you doubt you burn...but that's a different post.

It seems to me, that if you or I were a history teacher, we should both be able to get the story of say, Pearl Harbor through to our kids without ever having to say the word "Jesus".

Just a thought. ;-)

Solo610
Thank you for your pity. It is indicative of your smug bubble view, that blindly following the opinions popular among your social group are a personal statement you are superior to the rest of us. Say what you want about atheists being arrogant, but theism by defintion is arrogance and elitism.

how about....
The DOI? Can we get that story with the word God in it or will that offend you?

Stonesean
No arguement here, if we were teaching history.


Desu
What you fail to realize is that truth by definition is exclusive. Since you claim to know the "truth" you are just as exclusive as any religion.

Solo610
Thats a good one. I may have to plagarize you sometime. You won't sue?

Fuzzy
You wrote,
"I can't get past people being so sure about what they can never prove."

That's what alot of atheists say.


Hitchens says:
(in his haughty and smug tone): "Religion is for the masses; atheism is the province of the elite".

I always held a grudging respect for Hitchens until this week when he uttered his disgusting comments denigrating Dr. Falwell. Falwell must have really made Hitchens question his "undeniable belief in atheism", otherwise, why the overreaction?

People who truly believe in God believe they are ultimately answerable to Him for the way they live their lives. Atheists believe the same thing. They are just so repulsed by the notion of accountability that they insist there is no One to whom they must be accountable.

to drive by posting
You can't be treating communism and atheism as the biggest battle of the day...And judging by articles written on TH, communism is still number one."


Usurpation(by communism etc) of meritocracy the free market and it's spoils is and will remain a larger threat than islamofascism.

Case in point look how comfortable the (majority) democratic leadership is in espousing
excess profit confiscation, wealth redistribution and dilution of property rights.

ElizabethBennett
I don't know what you mean by "evolutionary atheistic principles" (regarding Hitler) -- I've never heard that term before. What does that mean?

To imply that violent Christians were not acting in according with their religious tenets is just wrong - most of the worst heresy persecutions were carried out precisely because they beleived their was only one true form of Christianity, or, they felt that heresy was a threat to the power of the church. Despotism happens anywhere and everywhere.

As for hospitals, I think it's great that hospitals were originally founded by monastic orders that catered to travellers and plague victims. Are you saying that only Christians can be altruistic? That seems pretty naive.

You are right, that Atheists get angry and outraged. They see religion trying to interfere with and determine the course of government, and consequently their own lives. They feel overwhelmed with pious, often self-righteous and closed minded forces in the same way that conservatives often feel overwhelmed by what they see as a liberal force that works against their interests. If you don't think that's true, just read down the titles of TH columns any day of the week, very few are about genuine ideas, most are angry polemics against anywbody who has different opinions.

JoJo
Is it so hard to consider, however, that it if the Chrisian can't prove it, it barely matters; but if the athiest can't prove his/her position, it is monumentally consequential?

I still find the atheist argument completely vacant. Why are you willing/determined to take such a risk?

If the Christian is wrong, he/she dies