Baggage Claims

I recently submitted a reply to the National Post's "Do you believe in a god?" question (LINK)

My reply is somewhere near the bottom in the online extras. After reading everyone else's replies, and a few of the comments (I wouldn't want to read too many of those, as they are usually a waste of time), I noticed a common theme. When people of faith talk about atheism, it usually a straw man argument. People have an assumption of what an atheist believes (whether it's accurate or not) and then they attack their own assumption.

Now, it seems to me that if you disagree with someone's position, then it's a damn good idea to understand that position as accurately as possible. Here are a few examples from the link above:

 The photo of the bus ad “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” (ECREE) should include atheism on its list.
ECREE is a nice slogan and rhetorical device (as well as an intended conversation stopper).  It is also mere assertion.  On that level it is no better or worse than any religiously based assertion.  But the atheist  has his own problem with regard to extraordinary claims.  First, regarding
the universe, he must claim that the universe came into being from nothing and by
nothing, which would violate a basic metaphysical principle that something
cannot come from nothing.

First of all, atheism has nothing to do with the origin of the universe. Atheism is simply a statement of non belief. Many atheists do hold that the universe came into being from nothing, that's true.  However, assigning it as a required belief of atheists and attacking it as a positive claim is not a valid argument. The only thing that all atheists agree on is that we don't believe a god exists. That's all! And it can be for a good reason or a bad reason, but the reasons we employ are separate from that. I don't believe in a god largely because the assumption would not be scientific. That makes me a scientific skeptic and an atheist, but those are not interchangeable terms. ECREE also implies no assertion, as it's a claim in direct contradiction to assertion, but I digress.

Those who insist on intellectual proof that God exists have a comically high regard for themselves. They wouldn’t dream of trying to explain to their cat how the kitchen toaster works, but expect the human brain to understand how the cosmos was created.

 Atheists do not insist on intellectual proof that god exists. We simply don't believe the claim that one does. This post assumes that us arrogant atheists think we have the capacity to know everything, and that's simply untrue. Sure, many people are arrogant pricks, but the arrogant prick philosophy is not necessarily a part of atheism.

I’m with G.K. Chesterton: “If there were no God, there would be no atheists.”

 This one's always fun. In fact, we can just replace the words and the term "atheists" with its definition and see just how ridiculous this statement is:

• If there were no God, there would be no people that don't believe in God.
• If there were no unicorns, there would be no people that don't believe in unicorns
• If the Earth were not flat, there would be no people that don't believe the Earth is flat

That's enough of that. Next!

 If there was no belief in religion in our lives, we won’t have chance to think about sins and deeds. When we believe in God, it is a way to feel how we meet our goals. In Islam we believe that God is our Creator. The reason why I believe in higher power because there is a reason why we live. When wrong things happen, we weep about our failure. We should remember that happens is for a reason.

 This assumes that atheists, because we have no religion, never consider their moral acts and cannot feel satisfied with our accomplishments. In short, that there is no meaning in our lives. This is probably one of the most damaging misconceptions about atheists. It ought to go without saying that being an atheist has nothing to do with morality (it's simply a statement of non belief in a deity), but to say we hold no morals would be a gross misunderstanding. It's a heavy piece of baggage to carry around as an atheist, because it's often quite hard to explain to others that we can have morality without authority. I'd elaborate, but I'll save that for another post.

I believe in God for two reasons. First, no monkey pounding away at a typewriter would ever turn out a literate text. Thinking that the universe created itself is like thinking Shakespeare’s works could be created by that monkey. Second, the one factor common to all successful societies, and which all unsuccessful societies lack, is a brush with Christianity.

 Atheism has nothing to do with evolution or the creation of the universe. Got that? With regards to the claim itself of monkeys and typewriters, that's not how evolution works at all. This commenter is a perfect illustration of a straw man argument. Disagreeing with someone's position without knowing the position's details is bold faced ignorance. As for his second statement, he's factually wrong, but in the instances where he is right, the only reason why the societies were unsuccessful was because they were wiped off the face of the earth by Christian crusaders. I guess that's one way to have a successful society: conquest!

I believe in God. It is a conscious decision, an act of faith. Why would I choose to live my life ignoring God’s grace and love? Being an agnostic might seem the most rational choice, but why choose angst or indecision? I look at the beauty and complexity of all living creatures and think it would take enormous faith in one’s self to say: God does not exist.

 No self respecting atheist I've ever known has stated certainty when it comes to god's existence, nor did they pair their non belief with angst and indecision. The claim that you need faith to say god does not exist, is a true one. You do need faith for that. But it's not atheism. And what atheists have to say about the god claim is exactly the opposite of faith.

I feel like I'm beating a dead horse here. Everyone seems to agree that atheists are wrong because of the positions they don't hold. The best I can do is be open about this stuff. Perhaps once believers get over the fact that they just might have something in common with their heathen peers, some progress can be made in our understanding of one another, and maybe just maybe, the world could be a tiny bit better of a place.