by 
Picking up on the topic yesterday, perhaps you figured out that the scenario was meant to be equivalent to the scenario that I’ve been debating over at Christian Personal Finance about whether we should keep “In God we trust” on our bills.
Now, in that discussion I’ve attempted to remain on task, but Rex and I have left a lot of loose ends uncovered. One of those ends is “Why are atheists so adamant about this?”
What Is Behind a Decision
On the face of it, most Atheists go back to this common thread—that they don’t want decisions made by this country to be made by someone that has beliefs in the supernatural and that is not based in reason.
On the face of it, it sounds reasonable, but there’s a flaw. In order for any decision to be reasonable, it must be grounded in fact. And the facts are in dispute.
You see, Atheism and Christianity1 state different things about the reality of the world. To the Atheist, there is nothing besides what we can see/observe. To the Christian, there is a supernatural realm. If the Christian is right, the Atheists position is absurd, since it does not reflect reality, and likewise the other way around.
What is Moral
Which goes back to a discussion that’s ages old: What is moral, what is right and wrong? For the atheist, there is no external entity declaring right or wrong, so right and wrong is a function of the majority. If a majority of individuals believe something to be right or wrong—regardless of whether they can maintain such a standard—then it must be right or wrong.
This presents another dilemma for the Atheist, for if a majority of people think it’s fine that their money carries a statement about a God that the Atheist doesn’t believe in, it should be right to do such—by very definition.
It’s All About Perspective
However, this is where we find that the Atheist is not all that different than the theist. Regardless of the philosophy, if the Atheist believes that it’s wrong to do something, it’s wrong. If the Atheist believes that the correct interpretation of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States creates a wall of separation, then it must be the case—regardless of whether the founders or Supreme Court justices that have sat on cases and disagreed believe so.
The Atheist—especially the militant ones—is as devout a believer in Atheism as the fundamental Christian is in his Christianity. Every statement that goes against his “faith” must be wrong, and everything that supports his views must be “right”.
The difference is that the Atheist refuses to recognize that this is his state—preferring to state that he is open minded, when in reality he is not.
Removal Of Rights
And this is where the situation gets dangerous. When any group of people begin to believe that they have the only viewpoint, and that any other viewpoint must be discriminated against, sectioned off, and refused to practice or believe what they wish, then that group no longer has religious freedom, and no longer is safe.
For over 200 years of this country’s existence, there has been a tacit acknowledgement to “God” and yet at the same time people have been free to have faith or not to have faith according to their conscience. This is not the case in Afghanistan, where Buddhist monuments were destroyed or Communist countries (USSR in the past, China…) where Christians have to worship is secret.
And yet, the militant Atheists wish to remove faith from public discourse. They wish to exile belief in a deity to churches and your homes, and wish to banish faith from the public square.
The truth is that the morality of this country is founded on a worldview and a belief system. Though a majority of that belief system the Atheist may accept—apart from worshipping other gods and sexual freedoms—they do not realize the fact that when there is no moral underpinning anything can become moral.
Democracies devolve into anarchy for precisely this reason. Without an external guidepost, laws become whatever a mob of people wish them to be.
As is the case with what we are seeing in our nation today, where it’s more important to get health care reform than it is to make sure that the powers that the government is exercising is indeed granted to said government.
Conclusion
The Atheists absurd claim is that “In God We Trust” bothers them. They cannot both say they believe in free exercise, but then also talk about wanting to limit speech and influence. They cannot say “there is no such thing as a god” but then also be worried about people that claim they believe in a god.
If there any time in this nation’s history where Atheists had been persecuted for their “faith”, then I could see being worried about it. Right now, it’s just a bunch of whining.
All this posturing about “standing on principle” is ludicrous in the face of the bigger issues that face this nation.
- Substitute your religion of choice here. [↩]
You are quite right that the problem with your christians is they do indeed cleave to the supernatural – with no evidence whatsoever.
But to pick up on your last throwaway point. The problem with your “In God we Trust” is that is quite obviously contrary to the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the US Constitution. The fact that so far the courts have been too spineless to deal with it doesn’t alter the fact that it is unconstitutional. Ditto the recently added ‘godding’ in the pledge – particularly said in public schools.
These are not “free speech” issues. These are matters of constitutional law.