The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference.
--Richard Dawkins, River Out of Eden
And boy the atheists are up in arms! They're mad as hell about my post "Where is Atheism When Bad Things Happen." Many responders informed me that tragedies are normally considered a problem for religion, not atheism. Where is God when bad things happen? Yes, people, I know this. My point was that if evil and suffering are a problem for religion--and they are--they are an even bigger problem for atheism.
The reason is suggested from the quotation given above. When there is a tragedy like the one at Virginia Tech, the ones who are suffering cannot help asking questions, "Why did this have to happen?" "Why is there so much evil in the world?" "How can I possibly go on after losing my child?" And so on.
In my post I noted that Richard Dawkins had not been invited to address the mourners at Virginia Tech. Several atheists--who haven't yet lost their fundamentalist habit of reading--took this sarcastic statement literally. "So what? The Pope hasn't been invited either!" My point was that atheism has nothing to offer in the face of tragedy except C'est la vie. Deal with it. Get over it. This is why the ceremonies were suffused with religious rhetoric. Only the language of religion seems appropriate to the magnitude of tragedy. Only God seems to have the power to heal hearts in such circumstances. If someone started to read from Dawkins on why there is no good and no evil in the universe, people would start vomiting or leaving.
One clever writer informs me that atheists don't deny meaning, they simply insist that meaning is not inherent in the universe, it is created by us. Okay, pal, here's the Virginia Tech situation. Go create some meaning and share it with the rest of us Give us that atheist sermon with you in the pulpit of the campus chapel. I'm not being facetious here. I really want to hear what the atheist would tell the grieving mothers.
Reader Comments ( Page 2 of 10)
16. Mr. D'Souza,
I am not so naive as to think you will read this, but this and the post before it are complete and utter nonsense. Where are the atheists, you ask? They're sitting next to their religious friends in the auditorium during the convocation. They're supporting their friends in and sharing their grief. They're doing what every other human being does when confronted with tragedy - trying to understand the madness that drives people like Cho to do what they did.
That you are, like so many other asinine bobbleheads, trying to capitalize on this for the purposes of self-aggrandizement demonstrates you to be less human than the shooter!
JC Samuelson at 10:37PM on Apr 19th 2007
17. Who says that there is only good in those that follow religious practices? By what circumstance do you claim that good has nothing to do with Atheism? Just because the first commenter, who allegedly is an atheist, has no poetic heart to the situation doesn't mean all atheists are of the same rhetoric.
Right now, I'm saying I'm an agnostic. I don't practice any religion. But my “grievance” speech would contain "mournful" sayings to psychologically ease the pain. I wouldn't mention, "God bless you all", because who am I to say that God would even do such a thing, let alone actually exist? Rather, I would say more on the lines of: "We will remember such a tragedy, and all that had fallen. Guide your sorrow for these students in the path against those that murder." Who knows what Richard Dawkins would say at a time like the massacre at Virginia Tech. Does it matter what he would say? Richard Dawkins does write very well about Atheism, but when did Richard Dawkins become the God, spokesman of all Atheists, pal?
Ashton at 10:37PM on Apr 19th 2007
18.
That isn't at all what the majority of your atheist commenters said. Most atheists do not presume to tell Christians how they should cope with the deaths or their loved ones, just as most atheists do not wish to hear Christians talking about how our loved ones are with god and we can find some sort of deeper meaning for our lives with him at their funerals (I saw it at my fathers funeral despite the fact that he was a hindu by practice, the serviceman just felt it would be a good time to recruit his family at the funeral home in their time of grief, yeah that's a lot of christian love right there). Being a non-Christian does not mean you are incapable of sorrow or compassion, it's a shame you haven't realized that yet, nor does being an Atheist mean you are absent of moral values.
Peter at 10:46PM on Apr 19th 2007
19. Time can be unfriendly to us. It will pass us by without concern when all we want to do is stay in this moment, sit in this pain, and cry for our loss. As evident by the mass of people converging upon this city, we do not need time to be our friends, because we are not lacking in people reaching out to befriend us. We are not alone. The nation weeps with us in a collective cry of shock and sorrow. They extend their hands, patience, and compassion to us before we ask. Moments like this can define us, but we can also define the moment. This is moment is already one of sorrow, but we can also make it one of strength.
The Alpha at 10:53PM on Apr 19th 2007
20. You see Dinesh, there is a problem when you write stuff like this. It is all true, yet Atheists don't get what you are saying, or what is implied by Richard Dawkins. If there is neither evil nor good, then how can anyone say the VT Massacre is a 'tragedy?' They cannot, because there are no defining parameters without good and evil. Obviously, very few people on this site can read an intellectual analysis of the deeper things inherent in Atheism and understand their meaning and/or significance. Oh well, at least you tried, eh?
However, an Atheist can offer condolences, but I could not see an Atheist giving a 'sermon,' as the word implies something that is religious.
As my final thought, I don't understand why Atheists would be mad at you; your God doesn't exist anyway and you are going to dissolve into nothingness when you die, right? Why do they care; they are going to share the same fate. I find funny the vehemence with which they will argue with you to achieve... hmm... nothing.
Death of Reason at 10:51PM on Apr 19th 2007
21.
Also, allow me to explain to you how "atheists" honor the dead.
Is it so wrong to honor how these people impacted our lives and the personal love we had for all of them without having to get a divine entity involved who promises to reunite them with us someday? If that were the case there would be no reason to mourn their loss.....Our own personal love is more important than god's love and we should always remember what they meant to all of us who were affected by their life and loved them for who they were.
I'm sick of being accused of having no morality because I don't buy into your superficial crap about death like it's the only way to make a real connection with other human beings, you are absolutely mistaken about the rationale for emotional connections, and atheists miss their loved ones just as much as you do.
Peter at 10:57PM on Apr 19th 2007
22. Almost forgot to respond to the main point...
"My point was that if evil and suffering are a problem for religion--and they are--they are an even bigger problem for atheism."
Not at all, sir. Evil is a human invention, plain and simple. It is a sad fact that humans are capable of committing atrocious crimes against one another. How, exactly, is this a bigger problem? An atheist faces the fact that he cannot blame evil on some devilish spirit, thereby abrogating the evil-doer's responsibility for his own actions. After all, if the devil made him do it, then the killer is blameless.
The evil lies within each of us, and it does no one any good, and brings no real comfort to anyone, to say that some evil spirit possessed the gunman. The atheist knows this. Some religionists apparently do not.
"Go create some meaning and share it with the rest of us Give us that atheist sermon with you in the pulpit of the campus chapel."
The only characterization that fits is "senseless." There is no greater meaning or purpose to Cho's actions or the deaths of those people. What would an atheist focus on? Bringing the school together as a community, not by talking about gods or demons or some other such nonsense, but by sharing our humanity and the ties that bind us regardless of faith.
Blaming it on the devil, or some god, or the educational system, or science, or gun control does absolutely zip for people grieving. The service the other day was perfectly fine, and in case you haven't noticed, the atheist's as a whole aren't slinging mud at this cause or that, instead focusing on the human tragedy. On the other hand, we have Ken Ham, the Renew America Movement, Neil Boortz, Michelle Malkin, et. al. ad nauseum (including you) trying to find someone to take their anger out on. You've chosen atheists, and erecting a towering straw man of, well, biblical proportions.
And yes, I still think you're disgusting for trying to capitalize on this.
JC Samuelson at 10:58PM on Apr 19th 2007
23. "And you too are an animal. Evolution, remember?"
DD
At least I did evolve you retard.
Alan at 12:36AM on Apr 20th 2007
24. Death of Reason:
// If there is neither evil nor good, then how can anyone say the VT Massacre is a 'tragedy?' They cannot, because there are no defining parameters without good and evil. Obviously, very few people on this site can read an intellectual analysis of the deeper things inherent in Atheism and understand their meaning and/or significance. Oh well, at least you tried, eh? //
Morality is subjective. We define what is 'good' and 'evil.' Morality is constantly changing due to our changing subjective opinion. History should be evidence of that.
//As my final thought, I don't understand why Atheists would be mad at you; your God doesn't exist anyway and you are going to dissolve into nothingness when you die, right? Why do they care; they are going to share the same fate. //
It's because I lack a belief in an after-life that I'm concerned about real-world issues. I have no fantasy to rely on. This is it.
The Alpha at 11:11PM on Apr 19th 2007
25.
You assume that good and evil are defined only by the Bible, and not by the most basic of human emotions. There are multiple scientific studies which suggest moralitiy is a biological trait, not a religious trait.
There are just as many religious mass murderers as there are atheistic mass murderers, I don't feel either should claim moral superiority over the other.
Peter at 11:14PM on Apr 19th 2007
26. Hell, even I feel like granting you almost everything in your two articles, it does nothing to talk about the truth of the matter.
If it turns out that believing that the moon is made from silly putty actually comforts people the most during a tragedy, would you start promoting that belief?
A Thinking BUM at 11:27PM on Apr 19th 2007
27. D'Souza its a terrible terrible thing YOUR GOD did, wasnt it? I mean, how could an all knowing, all powerful entity such as Yahweh stand aside and let this happen? Oh he does this everyday, doesnt he? This is ALL about strengthening our 'faith' isnt it?
You pratt, no actually, you are far worse than that, you have taken a tragedy and used it to further your childish message to the world. Shame on you. Shame on your righteousness. Where is your humanity? Its typical of the religous types to take a tragic circumstance such as this and milk it for every teardrop.
Question: Where Is Christianity When Bad Things Happen?
Answer: CHASING THE AMBULANCE.
I'll tell you what atheism offers. It gives us a true(r) understanding and appreciation of the world. Those poor victims havent gone to a better place. There is no better place in the universe for those people than with the people they loved.
Do you even realise how grossly you cheapen life with the promise of immortality. Now, as hard as it may sound, is the time to celebrate the lives lost. They were beautiful people and although we are poorer for the loss, the lives of those who knew them were all the richer for knowing them.
This is really simple stuff Dinesh, you dont need an imaginary friend to be honest and sympathetic to those who are grieving.
daevos at 11:31PM on Apr 19th 2007
28. Never trust your dog to watch your dinner while you go do something.
Never trust an Atheist to offer you any kind of hope or comfort when you grieve.
And you who are Atheists, you can't have it both ways. If you do not believe there is a God, do not ask "Where was God when this happened?"
If you ask that question, obviously you do believe in Him, but have issues with how He runs things, which means you are not an Atheist at all, right?
Regards, and thanks for your blog, Dinesh. Well said.
Roger Born at 7:57AM on Apr 20th 2007
29. Mr. D'Souza;
You, sir, are angry and filled with hate. This is the basest of man's emotions.
Is you hate directed against the shooter? No, you call his actions evil, but that is incidental to calling the atheist evil. You hate us more than the cruelty which fills this world we share.
Your call to arms is not directed at the evil in the world, but that which you consider to be your greatest threat. The atheist.
You can’t stand diversity. You want control over people’s lives. You want us to suffer like you do. You are inflexible, and unwilling to share space with someone who is different.
Turn on the news; you will find you are in good company.
You mentioned Nikki Giovanni previously. Here is the link to the transcript:
http://www.vt.edu/tragedy/giovanni_transcript.php
It is an obvious example of what an atheist would say. Sorry but it is not filled with religious symbolism as you suggest.
Joanna at 12:07AM on Apr 20th 2007
30. A few of the commenting atheists were civil, but far too many consider D'Souza's honest question "hateful." What was hateful and how was his question "milking the tragedy"?
If you don't believe in God, fine. Belief is a gift. But, if you are as rational as you assert, then you should be able to forgo the vulgar responses. The slander of believers signals a level of hatred that is inappropriate to temperate and thoughful people.
Maybe too many atheists have "daddy issues."
For me, the final question is, "How did we get here out of nothingness?" God, Whoever he is is the only answer. How he did it is a profound mystery. I look to the history of believers via the Catholic tradition and the Bible, to try to determine the Why of His creation and what my response to it must be.
Margaret at 12:28AM on Apr 20th 2007