Atheist Douchebags

Atheist Douchebags

I just got through reading a Facebook post from a former coworker who is very Christian. Perhaps this sounds like the beginning of a philosophical diatribe, but it isn't.

In his note, he encourages his fellow evangelists of Christ to refrain from criticizing the habits and beliefs of those they consider to be on an incorrect path. This caught my attention:

It is of little use to try to reform others by attacking what we may regard as wrong habits. Such effort often results in more harm than good.

Neat. I wish more Christians thought like he does.

Looking at it a second time, though, and out of its context intended for Christians, I wonder if it can't apply to anyone with a philosophical message. Atheists for example.

I can already hear the counterarguments of my fellow atheists, which would say that fundamentalist Christians must be treated in a hostile way if their agenda to teach intelligent design in schools, ban abortion, and stop gay marriage is to be effectively countered. I would say that those are all political battles that must be engaged politically, not ideologically. Let me state unequivocally that I think religion has no place in schools (except in a historical context, but viewed as a cultural artifact), abortion should be legal, and gay people should have the same rights as straight people. Let me also be clear that I do not condone harassment or threats (or worse), and currently such hostility from religious zealots toward atheists is far more common than the other way around.

Anyway, in a strictly cosmological discussion, there is no need to treat the Christian mindset - or more accurately, the theistic mindset - as inferior to a strictly empirical one. In The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins encourages this kind of philosophical snobbery, and as my Christian friend stated, it does more harm than good.

There are reasonable people of faith, and we atheists must make inroads with them. We must form alliances to counter the actions of ideologues of any stripe who want to create dischord and obfuscate a legitimate philosophical discourse in the name of political ends.

Personally, I value peace with my fellow men above all other things. I don't need to be considered right in my beliefs by anyone, and I'm certainly not by anyone who believes in the existence of a supreme being. I have no false hopes of swaying religious people into my way of thinking, or even dissuading zealots from attacking me for my beliefs. Still, someone has to be the first to attempt to bring down the level of hostility. As the self-proclaimed side of reason, I think it is incumbent upon atheists to assume that role.

Oh, and about that title... I wouldn't exactly qualify Dawkins as a douchebag, although he does inspire a great deal of douchebaggery. I'm talking more about the pompous, self-righteous preaching of guys like PZ Myers, whose insular rantings are greeted on the atheist side by a great deal of nodding, but fuel the rage of angry zealots. It's a lose-lose situation.