you're reading...
Atheism, Religion

Moderate Religion — Two lies in one.

This is an old article of mine that has been revamped a couple of times, but I think is still well worth the read. I hope you enjoy it.

*******

One of the most controversial questions among atheists involves moderate theists. Many who identify themselves as simply non-religious would prefer that us outspoken atheists leave moderates alone. After all, they will say, moderates don’t hurt anybody, and most of them are really nice people. Their religion is mostly just cultural. They don’t really believe the nasty parts of the Bible. They should be left alone even though they do happen to practice a potentially nasty religion. I take an opposing view, and I believe there is a very good reason for doing so.

Without spending thirty minutes finding statistics that will be debatable, I’m going to hazard a guess that maybe 20% of Christians in America are either fundamentalists or evangelicals or both. It doesn’t really matter. The point is, they’re the minority of Christians. Most are moderates. They believe in some version of Christianity, most likely one that leaves out the nastier elements like stoning homosexuals, and the unscientific elements like a 6000 year old cosmos.

These moderates, in my view, are the ones directly responsible for the decline of America into quasi-theocracy that has occurred in the last 30 years. Their complicity is a result of at least two things: first, they defend fundamentalists as “slightly misguided, but genuine, honest people,” and second, they defend “faith” as a legitimate source of knowledge. The first defense is maddening. In any other discussion, moderates would most likely not advocate letting people continue to do harmful things just because they are well intentioned. Imagine an alternative medicine guru who advocated a return to the use of mercury to cure various illnesses. Suppose that he had been living by himself somewhere for the last thirty years, and was simply unaware of the mortal danger involved with mercury. Would moderate Christians say that he should be allowed to continue with his recommendations simply because he had a genuine desire to help people?

At this point, many people, including some atheists, might be balking at my comparison. After all, we know that mercury kills, and advocating taking poison is not the same as letting people have their religious beliefs, is it? Well, in the case of right wing fundamentalism, it’s not really much different. After all, it is right wing fundamentalists who refuse to permit stem cell research, effectively killing people who would benefit from cures available only through this new research. If that’s not concrete enough for you, think for a minute about abortion clinics. They have security systems that would make a Guantanamo Colonel swell with pride. That level of security isn’t excessive, either. Without it, we would have a lot of dead doctors. With it, many doctors who perform abortions fear for their lives, and occasionally, one of them dies at the hands of someone doing “God’s will.” Every election, two of the biggest issues are gay marriage and abortion rights. It’s probably not too much of a stretch to say that George Bush gained eight years of power riding the coattails of the Fundamentalist Right.*

Still, you may object that most moderates are vehemently opposed to right wing violence. They detest it as much as us non-theists. It’s unfair to say that they are not opposed to such things. This is where I, along with Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, and other atheist activists, part company with even the majority of atheists. I say that not only do they facilitate violence,  they are actually causing much of the violence because of their refusal to examine their own beliefs and reject the very foundation of religion itself!

Moderate Christianity is deceptively alluring because of its seemingly scientific basis. Most educated Christians have no problem admitting that there’s something to evolutionary science, and they have no problem admitting that the earth is very old, and that dinosaurs once roamed about. In fact, if you get a good Moderate Christian into a theological discussion, they will almost inevitably tell you that they believe questions are good, and that any thinking person ought to question what they believe.

Forgive me, but the devil is in the details, and they’re missing a very, very important detail. The admission that questions ought to be asked makes it seductively simple to believe that moderate Christianity is ok, and doesn’t hurt anyone. Maybe it’s even helpful in some way. The problem, and the main point of this essay, is that questioning is not ok for moderate Christians. I can prove it. Next time you’re talking to a moderate, try getting them onto the nature of god. If you’re any good at debate, you can quickly steer them to one of the half dozen paradoxes inherent in god belief. Once you get them there, note how quickly they will revert to the position, “There are some things you just have to take on faith.” If you press them into explaining why, they will get defensive. They will probably end the discussion very quickly.

The simple, indisputable fact is that any god belief requires faith, and if you follow my writings at all, you know that “faith,” properly defined, is “belief in a thing despite evidence to the contrary, or a total lack of evidence.” Once you get them to the point of admitting that they hold a belief despite it’s opposition to reason, you can see that the facade of moderation is just that – a facade. At their core, they are exactly the same as fundamentalists. They just pick a more socially acceptable irrationality. What they really mean when they say you should question everything is that you should question everything – except for the validity of faith as a means of acquiring knowledge.

This is why I don’t let spiritualists off the hook, either. They advocate the same thing. There are some things that are true because they just feel true. It’s exactly the same foundation, and it leads to exactly the same place. If we, as skeptics and atheists, allow this hedge-bet to go unchallenged, we are also complicit in the religiostupidification of America. In the case of both fundamentalists and moderates, the individual’s own sense of morality determines how much “faith” they need, or in other words, how much irrationality they will accept.

Another way of saying this is that where religious faith is concerned, allowing a little irrationality is no different from allowing a lot. This point is so important that it needs to be made again. Accepting the belief that some things are true and irrational is what gives a perception of validity to every religious belief. Right wing fundamentalists are crazy. These are people who are out of touch with reality. The reason they are not either publicly ridiculed or maybe even forcibly medicated is that they are given a free pass — because it’s religion.  If people believed the Jolly Green Giant was making proclamations from the side of a can of vegetables, they would be examined by a psychologist.   However, when they believe an invisible man in the sky tells them to kill abortion doctors, they’re politely encouraged to be a little more moderate.

The primary reason that moderates refuse to come out publicly against fundamentalists is the vulnerability of their own position. The really smart moderates know this, and I suspect that the rest sense it even if they can’t put their finger on it. The only way to effectively call out the fundamentalists is to challenge them on rational grounds. Moderates are too intellectually dishonest, or too scared, to apply logic to all questions, lest they have to give up the precious illusion that their own personal invisible friend will make everything ok for them.  So, you see, the lie in Moderate Christianity is that it is moderate at all.  It is not. It is, however, to use the colloquial term, chicken shit.   Moderates do not take a stand against those of their own faith who are using faith as a weapon, and causing untold suffering among gays, women, atheists, and, dare I say it… Iraqis.**  They cannot, in good ecclesiastical conscience, take a firm stand against those within their order who eschew science, for if they did, they would be opening the door to the scientific scrutiny of their own beliefs.

Moderate Christianity is a lie.  It is a whitewashed facade covering up a hateful, irrational, and utterly nonsensical faith.  I suggest that it is time to stop giving moderates a free pass just because they embrace a softer, gentler version of insanity. People of reason will never have a rational leg to stand on until we challenge the very foundation of religion – all religion – that is, the errant and dangerous belief that “faith is a virtue.”

* UPDATE:  It is refreshing that at the time of this update, President Obama (by all accounts a religious moderate) is attempting to alleviate some of the worst atrocity inflicted upon the world by the Bush administration.  I certainly applaud the President for his efforts.  However, I would caution the reader to avoid the temptation to conclude that moderates aren’t so bad after all.  I’ve never said or implied that moderates are not good people, or that they don’t often try to do good in the world.  My argument is that their own religion hampers them by condoning the actions of those they oppose.  Without the religious idiocy that led to the Bush administration’s very existence, Moderately Religious President Obama wouldn’t have a problem to fix.  Moderately Religious President Obama, along with the rest of Moderately Religious America, allowed Fundamentalist President Bush to be an idiot and ruin America precisely because it didn’t have a rational leg to stand on — because all religion is founded on faith.

** (UPDATED 3/09) Let us not forget that just because we have a new president, the Iraq Debacle is not finished.  Perhaps the trillions of dollars spent on the military would have been better spent shoring up the faltering economy and preventing the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression.  We are still hemorrhaging money abroad while jobs, homes, and livelihoods are being lost at home.  Let us not forget that Christians elected George Bush — not just fundamentalist Christians.  Without support from the middle, the Fundamentalist Right would not have enough power to elect a local mayor, much less a president.

Discussion

24 thoughts on “Moderate Religion — Two lies in one.

  1. It is a stretch of an analogy but as I read this I am reminded of the parents who sue McDonalds because their kids get fat.
    It isn’t the parents fault at all and yet they are blind to the fact that they are the parents and they can tell their 3 year old NO when asked to get a burger and fries. Just as moderates can stand up and say NO to those 20% of theists who find it acceptable to hate homosexuals or attack abortion clinics.

    -Renee

    Posted by Renee Obsidianwords | January 28, 2009, 6:26 pm
  2. Edit* “It isn’t the parents fault at all” That was pure sarcasm… :-)

    Posted by Renee Obsidianwords | January 28, 2009, 6:27 pm
  3. A rational theist is an oxymoron.

    Posted by Husky | March 5, 2009, 6:25 am
  4. Well stated. I very thoughtful analysis of the moderate issue. Thanks!

    Posted by Brian Dyk | March 19, 2009, 3:18 pm
  5. Excellent writing on an important topic.

    Posted by Eric | April 12, 2009, 8:47 pm
  6. Great article! I’ve been saying for awhile now how the ones who make up their own versions are even crazier than the ones who follow the exact “word of God” in the bible!

    Posted by Jessica Anderson | July 7, 2009, 3:11 pm
  7. You say religion is lies. What is wrong with lies? Maybe selfishly believing in lies hurts you in some cases, but it doesn’t hurt me, so why would I bother believing the truth, if it wasn’t useful? You can say I’m therefore immoral, liar, etc, but so what? Survival of the fittest and if I survive and you don’t, I am by definition better suited for the environment, despite this silly obsession with ‘truth’.

    It’s funny how similar fundamentalist religious a&&hats and fundamentalist atheists are. BOTH sides are ignorant of their true motivations, which are buried under a veil of half-truths, half-understood philosophy.

    Posted by John | December 14, 2009, 11:01 am
  8. @Hambydammit, I really enjoyed this article and I wish to point out what I think are two potential weaknesses.

    1. strawmanning the moderates

    Moderate theists are diverse. They are already thinking and reasoning rationally about their religious beliefs, metaphors, and mysteries/faith. All the while leaning on their evidence of A) God’s mind intevening in earthly matters and B) their theologians having reliable ways of seperating information about God from misinformation.

    Meanwhile academia has discovered A) It can’t and B) they don’t.

    2. targetting too narrow

    Yes moderate Christians remain passive towards hardcore Christians. However equally silent are those of other religions and the non-religious (agnostics, pantheists, apatheists, humanists) – the only current exception being hardcore atheists. Please let me know if academia is telling us that moderates are best placed to convert bigots.

    L’Chaim!

    Posted by @blamer | October 13, 2011, 5:29 am
  9. I’d like to start by saying I’m not a Christian, nor am I American and nor was I raised with a religious background.

    Now, that I’ve got that disclaimer out of the way, I’d like to say you’re not unique, you’re just another neurotic American Atheist with a grudge against religion that seem common in the U.S.A. for some reason. You bash Progressive, Moderate and Liberal Christians (no doubt, you also hate LGBT Christians too), you think the only true Christians are the Fred Phelps variety?, I’m sure you also believe Bin Laden was the “perfect” Muslim too (although you and right-wing Christians can both agree on that, so there’s something you have in common, bond with them!).

    I’d like to ask you something, go see a therapist, and work out your neuroses, projecting them out on a blog is just unhealthy, it doesn’t free you from your neuroses. Then, go out and meet some nice Christians, and go to a bar or club with them, and laugh and joke and have fun over a few drinks, and dance with some nice cool Muslims (who do exist, and are in the majority, BTW, you just don’t hear about them much on right-wing Media institutions like Fox News), and meet some nice Hindus, and so on, and, pretty soon, I guarantee, you’ll wake up one day and be like “dude, I can’t believe I ever wasted my time bashing religions and religious people, and reading morons like Hitchens, when I could have been out having fun”, you’ll soon find there’s more to life then rushing back to your computer to check how many comments you’ve got for your posts, how many other American “New Atheist’s” have said “OMG, I loved you’re post, yeah, religion is shit, you da man, dude”, which they seem to write for every post, you’ll soon have no time for blogging every day, because you will have something that we in the real world call “a life”. Blogs can be fun, don’t get me wrong, although, the ones I check out are usually funny or about art or LGBT themed (featuring a lot of hot men!), but, I don’t get obsessed with them.

    Now, seriously, get out of the dualistic mindset you’ve got where Religions and Religious people are the “bad guys” and you, and the “New Atheist” crusaders are the “good guys”, put away the “cosmic war” that the “New Atheists” believe they are fighting in against what they perceive to be “irrationality”, and go out and enjoy life. Go out and talk to your Christian friends, not rant at them about the “evils” of their religion or “how stupid they are for believing in it” (that’s not friendship at all), if you don’t have any, then make some ,and likewise, go out and make some Muslim friends (and, yes, I’m sure you can bond over a lot of things), and so on, and pretty soon you’ll have a diverse group of friends, you won’t just be hanging out with “New Atheist” types which isn’t healthy (it likewise isn’t healthy for anyone to just hang out with the same types of people, whether it’s Christians only being friends with Christians who share their views, Muslims with Muslims, Buddhists with Buddhists, etc).

    Or, feel free to ignore my post, and make fun of me the non-religious (but not anti, big difference) young gay guy from the UK, and bash the UK, bash other LGBT people, and become a bitter person later in life.

    The choice is yours.

    Posted by David. | May 31, 2012, 10:05 pm
  10. I enjoyed this post, and my answer to the comment placed by David would be: if the author here was protesting pollution or strip mining, or clear cutting or some other obviously harmful practice would you be as opposed to it? There are those of us who see theological belief as harmful to individuals and to society as a whole. Given that that’s so shouldn’t people who believe this way act on those beliefs? Lots of people give no consideration to the question and that’s fine, but if you genuinely believe a thing to be wrong and say nothing isn’t there something wrong with that? Also, without knowing anything about the author how can you assume that he hasn’t got an active social life and a “diverse group of friends” This is a view that I see a lot of, a non-theist who speaks out on the topic must be angry, bitter, and isolated from the general flock of humanity by this belief. I wouldn’t consider myself angry, bitter or isolated, I have friends, acquaintances, and even family of various backgrounds and theological leanings and I thoroughly enjoy them, and my life, I don’t spend my whole life “rushing back to your computer to check how many comments you’ve got for your posts.” What’s more I find my model of non-theism to be much more common than the bitter, hateful closeted atheist you paint a picture of in this comment. The judgement implicit in your post is unconscionable.

    Posted by goldheathen | September 19, 2012, 4:50 pm

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Pingback: Times of India: Power to the Atheist « Life Without a Net - February 4, 2009

  2. Pingback: Court Decision: School may discriminate « Life Without a Net - February 5, 2009

  3. Pingback: Pope to Legislators: You must appose abortion « Life Without a Net - February 21, 2009

  4. Pingback: I’m sorry. No. I’m Not Christian « Life Without a Net - March 8, 2009

  5. Pingback: “I’m Not Christian” | End Hereditary Religion - March 8, 2009

  6. Pingback: Teaching vs. Indoctrination « Life Without a Net - March 9, 2009

  7. Pingback: | End Hereditary Religion - March 9, 2009

  8. Pingback: Nate Phelps and Me « Life Without a Net - April 12, 2009

  9. Pingback: Nate Phelps and Religious Abuse | End Hereditary Religion - April 12, 2009

  10. Pingback: Francis Collins, God, and Me « Life Without a Net - July 30, 2009

  11. Pingback: New Age is the New Jesus « Life Without a Net - December 3, 2009

  12. Pingback: Religion is a hypothesis « Life Without a Net - December 10, 2009

  13. Pingback: What Does “Progressive Christian” Mean? « Life Without a Net - August 11, 2010

  14. Pingback: Teaching and Indoctrination « Life Without a Net - November 19, 2010

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow Me On Twitter!

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 137 other followers

%d bloggers like this: