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 7 of 10)
91. As Dawkins has not and will not say "get over it" to the mourners, I conclude sir you are a liar. Moreover, you are a pious hypocrite liar which makes you even more foul.
Does the phrase, "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor" ring any bells?
Didn't think so.
Anna Z at 3:08PM on Apr 20th 2007
92. D'Souza, you are an immoral, insensitive, opportunistic, callous ghoul. You should be ashamed of yourself, your words and your attitude, but for some reason I can only see you being proud of the "controversy" you think you've created using the blood of the victims at VT as the ink in your unfeeling pen.
You're a sickening individual.
nullifidian at 3:03PM on Apr 20th 2007
93. Dinesh D'Souza, you are simply bound and determined to hate a group of people you do not understand and have no intention to, despite the fact that they pose no threat to this nation whatsoever. The fact that one-fifth of the world's people are not horrible monsters obviously distresses you. You need professional help, not a national platform. You seem to be headed down the same hateful road at the shooter at Virginia Tech - just substitute "atheists" for "rich kids" in that guy's rambling manifesto.
Did Dawkins actually say, "Get over it!" And in this context? Because the Westboro Church has, and they are the ones, not atheists, who are decending upon Virginia Tech to "preach" during the funerals of the victims. You could be denouncing them instead but apparently Fred Phelps and his cabel are acceptable to you.
I think you'd better back that statement of Dawkins up with some citation or other evidence, because otherwise I'm pretty sure that it's defamation.
And aren't you the man who once said, "Even on the right, traditionally the home of patriotism, we hear influential figures say that America has become so decadent that we are 'slouching towards Gomorrah.' If these critics are right, then America should be destroyed"?
Kristine at 3:04PM on Apr 20th 2007
94. Even though I am not a Christian, I do not understand how someone could live day by day and be an atheist. Somehow, the big bang theory without the accompanying theory that someone created the big bang just doesn't cut it - and doesn't explain to me how umpteen zillion plant, animal species exist, as well, of course, as we humans. Decades ago, someone suggested I read "How Bad Things Happen To Good People." I wish I had.
Phil at 3:15PM on Apr 20th 2007
95. ///52. Sean,
Namaste means something like, "May the divine in me salute the divine in you," according to my Yoga instructor (I go for the exercise, not for the religion, which is the new fad of the post-Christians in the West).
So if you don't believe in God, what is the divine stuff you are saluting?\\\
Hi Margaret,
Actually, Namaste is an eastern greeting which essentially is a recognition of the other person's equality and divinity (My Atman is your Atman and Atman is Brahman). Of course I don't believe in anything supernatural, but I enjoy the phrase and, as you saw in my full message, I have modified it to fit for atheism. As I wrote right after the , we are all made of the same star stuff. We each have the same components and we are all destined to die and return to these same components. In this way, 'namaste' from a naturalistic worldview makes perfect sense and is a constant humbling reminder that we are all equal. No deities or supernatural forces required.
///I can respect atheists for their honest clarity of observation that God is not readily apparent in our lives. What I don't respect is their so obvious anger at those who do believe. Believers, for the most part, are willing to sacrifice for others because of God's commands. Atheists are inconsistent in being moral (where do they get their morals except derivitively from religion?). They should only grab for the most gusto and let lesser folk fall by the wayside because they only live once.
Believers give of themselves precisely because we we know that the Christian God expects this of us and will reward us with His presence and love eternally if we live according to His precepts. It is this service above and beyond the requirements of work for personal survival that adds to the comfort and delights of this otherwise harsh world.
Atheism, as practiced by its experts, totalitarians, is what made the 20th century a horror of concentration camps and killing fields.
Margaret at 9:21AM on Apr 20th 2007\\\
You may want to check your facts on this one, Margaret. Atheism, contrary to what you may have read on AnswersInGenesis.com, is not responsible for all of the horrors of the past century. Yet for all of the millions and millions of people who died in the first and second world wars and all of the wars and conflicts between and after, how many of these fallen were killed in the name of atheism?
Here are some things which you might not realize:
Hitler was not an atheist either. A review of his speeches demonstrate that the nazi movement was not influenced by atheism:
http://nobeliefs.com/speeches.htm
(I won't even get into how religion was used by the Nazi's, I'll play nice)
Not even the horrors done under Mao Tse Tung or Stalin can be said to have been because of atheism, because they were instead done in the name of communism.
(oh, and communism does not equal atheism... you might realize that if you've ever read Marx)
It would seem you are running out of tyrants. I would posit that it is not religion that has caused the majority of problems over the years, but dogmas. Political and religious dogmas are dangerous, because they incite their adherents to fanatical devotion. Atheism and the rejection of dogmatic, unquestionable beliefs and institutions, are not.
I'll end with a quote from Sam Harris, as I see it as fitting:
"Auschwitz, the Soviet gulags, and the killing fields of Cambodia are not examples of what happens to people when they become too reasonable. To the contrary, these horrors testify to the dangers of political and racial dogmatism. It is time that Christians ... stop pretending that a rational rejection of your faith entails the blind embrace of atheism as a dogma.... The problem with religion--as with Nazism, Stalinism, or any other totalitarian mythology--is the problem of dogma itself. I know of no society in human history that ever suffered because its people became too desirous of evidence in support of their core beliefs."
Again, Namaste... we're all made of the same star stuff,
- Sean
Sean Goff at 3:47PM on Apr 20th 2007
96. People get paid to write this sort of thing? What is AOL thinking?
Anonymous at 4:04PM on Apr 20th 2007
97. As an atheist, I have helped friends and family morn the loss of loved ones. I didn't need illusions to do it. I just cried with them and did all I could to help them through their time of need. Dinesh D'Souza's attempt to get attention by villifying me and prostituting the memory of the victim of the VT massacre is beyond disgusting.
attotheobscure at 5:17PM on Apr 20th 2007
98. Mr. D'souza, you are displaying a horrifying prejudice here. What of people who believe in a god other than yours? Or Buddhists, no strangers to tragedy, who believe in no god as you understand the term?
And as an atheist I have my own way. Note that atheism is not a complete belief system like your religion, it is a statement about one belief. Humanism, would be an example of a belief system that might contain atheism. Atheists like believers range across the whole spectrum of mental health and other characteristics of humanity.
Before you say an entire segment of humanity is bereft of meaning, you should reconsider. Yes, you have gotten some angry responses, and you deserved them. You have exploited a tragedy for your own ends, and slandered people of whom you apparently know nothing.
george wiman at 11:07AM on Apr 23rd 2007
99. Though it is rude and simple of me to be so blunt, I must say: By the way you have expressed yourself, you are proving yourself to be a rude and simple man. Your apparent, intense need use this tragedy as leverage to push an agressive anti-atheist agenda is sickening at best.
I hope that you find your way to a more constructive and positive message soon.
Giania at 6:09PM on Apr 20th 2007
100. Coffins are not soapboxes, Mr D'Souza.
Willo the Wisp at 12:32PM on May 5th 2007
101. I would tell grieving mothers do not worry he has gone to a better place. He is at peace with the world. He is the best son that ever existed.
And what if the mother were an atheist, she would say what do you know you patronising idiot.
Why do you assume all mothers live in cloud cuckoo land just because you do.
Are mothers particularly vulnerable to myths.
You are an idiot.
john bircham at 7:35PM on Apr 20th 2007
102. Phil
I find living day by day as an atheist very easy.
Probablly easy than a christian does. I have no fear of the afterlife fo a starter.
You mentioned the zillions of plants and animals we share the earth with. Surely this makes more sense with the hit and miss evolution process than with a designed Univers. If man is the reason for creation why are there so many needles varieties of things. How many animals were on the arc and as you rightly say how many of the zilions of plant specieces did noah take. If you question Noah you also question monoteitic Gods, it is with these stories belief was propogated.
john bircham at 7:45PM on Apr 20th 2007
103. D'Souza, if you want to know what an atheist eulogy looks like, you could do worse than the following:
http://www.edge.org/documents/adams_index.html
D. Jacques at 8:22PM on Apr 20th 2007
104. Atheists believe there are only about 6 billion humans alive - with no do-overs and other lives. This is it.
That makes the stakes so much higher for Atheists, and Life so much more precious.
Joseph francis at 10:06PM on Apr 20th 2007
105. Dinesh, you should seriously spread Christianity in Baghdad. It's safe there, just ask John McCain. You have so much to offer the world.
Daniel Warner at 11:30PM on Apr 20th 2007