Richard Dawkins has a bright idea: Atheists are the new gays. Is he joking? Not at all. The bestselling author of The God Delusion has been suggesting for two years now that atheists can follow the example of gays. You see, gays have found a good name. Gays used to be called homosexual, but then they decided to pick a positive-sounding name like "gay." Suddenly the meaning of the term "gay" was entirely appropriated by homosexuals. Dawkins cited this example in advocating that atheists call themselves "brights." After all, atheist is a somewhat negative term because it defines itself by what it is opposed to. "Bright" sounds so much happier and, more important, smarter. "Bright" kind of reflects the high opinion that atheists have of their own intellectual abilities. Even the stupidest village atheist gets to pat himself on the back and place himself in the tradition of science and philosophy by calling himself a "bright."
Dawkins has also suggested that atheists, like gays, should come out of the closet. Well, what if they don't want to? I don't know if Dawkins would support "outing" atheists. Can an atheist "rights" group be far behind? Hate crimes laws to protect atheists? Affirmative action for unbelievers? An Atheist Annual Parade, complete with dancers and floats? Atheist History Month?
Honestly, I think the whole atheist-gay analogy is quite absurd. How bright is it for Dawkins to urge atheists to come out of the closet in the style of the all-American boy standing up on the dining table of his public high school and confessing that he is a homosexual? Dawkins, being British, doesn't seem to recognize that this would not win many popularity contests in America. And if Dawkins' public relations skills seem lacking in this area, they are positively abysmal when they come to building support for science. Remember that Dawkins is professor of the public understanding of science. He has a chair funded by a Microsoft multimillionaire. If I were that guy, I'd withdraw the support, not because I disagree with Dawkins, but because I think he is setting back the cause of science. Basically Dawkins is saying if you are religious, then science is your enemy. Either you choose God or you choose science. No wonder that so many Americans say they are opposed to evolution. They believe that evolution is atheism masquerading as science, and Dawkins confirms their suspicions. Indeed Dawkins takes the same position as the most ignorant fundamentalist: you can have Darwin or you can have the Bible but you can't have both.
Dawkins is in some ways a terrible representative for atheism, which I'm glad about because a bad cause deserves a bad leader. He is also a terrible advocate for science, which I'm sad about because science deserves all the support it can get.
Reader Comments ( Page 3 of 30)
31. "Dawkins is in some ways a terrible representative for atheism, which I'm glad about because a bad cause deserves a bad leader."
I have to say, I lost a great deal of respect for you and your opinion when you said this. You compromised your objectivity by including an unfair and uncompassionate personal bias, which ruins the entire post for me. I suggest that you reevaluate your discriminatory views before you feel like you're entitled to express your opinion to such a broad audience again.
Robin at 7:43AM on Nov 9th 2007
32. Another narrow minded christian homophobe at work !
You either see it their way or you will burn in the eternal fires of hell. Sounds like a loving God to me !
Rick at 7:39AM on Nov 9th 2007
33. I as a Christian I have no issues with Atheists (and have several close friends who don't believe). I worry for them at times - it must be sad to believe that this is it, with no hope for any future life. I think that they have rejected the bastardized view of God - that of a tyrant task master - that much of Christianity portrays. So in many ways - Christians are as to blame for Atheists as anyone. Personally I think that God loves us all - atheists included and winks at our ignorance. I predict we'll be very surprised at some of the people we meet in Heaven. Instead of bashing those that don't believe - maybe we should think about who Jesus would be ministering to if he walked the earth today. It would be the folks most in need of his "water of Life". Look at the "rabble" and "unbelievers" he hung with we he DID live as a man. He wouldn't be condemning - he'd be loving, accepting, and forgiving.
For those that have rejected a false view of God or been hurt by self righteous Christians - folks - sorry. I encourage you to read the bible for yourself - really read it. It's a love story - about separation, loneliness, betrayal - but ultimately reconciliation and love - with an incredible gift that we don't necessarily deserve - but is freely given. It's all about the Grace!
alglea at 8:03AM on Nov 9th 2007
34. Much like Mr. Ann Coulter and other fascist leaners/mental cases, Dinesh consistently attacks atheists rather than promotes Christianity. Is your blog simply a "bash atheists/sell my book" vehicle? Because that is what always comes across.
Bravo, AOL, for promoting this hack. No wonder you've lost more than 1/3 of your subscribers in the last year.
brandon at 8:33AM on Nov 9th 2007
35. MJzimmer 88... Wow. I'm from the South. I was born in Alabama. HATE ME. Because apparently I have no choice but to be stupid; all that is predestined by my place of birth? And people claim Christians are the judgemental ones... I'm not offended by your comment, but I do find you pretty closeminded.
Jess at 8:37AM on Nov 9th 2007
36. What many fail to realize is that Christians believe in science and that , yes, you can believe in creation and science...to a certain point.
Science is the study of something already created and in existence, though there are theories lacking physical evidence.
God took nothing, as only He can do, and created something. The reason there is a misunderstanding between creation and the big boom theory is that many fail to realize that while God created the heavens and the earth, He did so in Such a way that we see it in scientific terms. Everything has its purpose and everything is too perfect for there not to be an intelligent being.
decamp59 at 7:42AM on Nov 10th 2007
37. Dinesh needs therapy to help him get over his hatred of atheists.
Knight_of_BAAWA at 8:53AM on Nov 9th 2007
38. What's that? A post from decamp that's not in all-caps? No way! The unevolved little thing did learn something after all.
Knight_of_BAAWA at 8:55AM on Nov 9th 2007
39. I just hope that the Christians on this board will realize that DD is using their faith to stroke his own ego and line his own pockets. You're being USED, folks. You want to talk about "false prophets"? Just keep buying his book.
J Boyd at 10:09AM on Nov 9th 2007
40. "Dawkins is in some ways a terrible representative for atheism, which I'm glad about because a bad cause deserves a bad leader." I think atheists are fluffy and cuddly, so shut up! Atheists aren't out to fight God. They fight off people who tell them what to believe.
"Everything is too perfect for there not to be an intelligent being." is too presumptive to put much stock into.
Mokele Mbembe at 9:08AM on Nov 9th 2007
41. Jesus Christ used illustrations to explain spiritual things when He spoke to the crowds in order to make them understand...He is the only one who can give someone spiritual eyesight
Bridget at 9:17AM on Nov 9th 2007
42. Diagrams of spiritual mechanics would be a far better approach than evangelism.
Mokele Mbembe at 9:24AM on Nov 9th 2007
43. There's no such thing as the "spiritual".
Knight_of_BAAWA at 9:35AM on Nov 9th 2007
44. This topic, obviously to promote a book is getting somewhat rediculous. DD is selling his current book and now is doing speaking engagements. Lining his pockets. Many people will buy this book and put it on their shelves and never read it. DD talks about the same authors, same topics same rationale in hopes to make the New York Times best seller list.(I'm told to takes selling 25 books to get on the Best seller list).
The thought of there being a GOD or no god as little if any effect on my daily life. I do enjoy reading which is why I read his blog and comments. (I also read about Britney Springs) There's no winners or lossers to DD's topic. It's just a topic and it's getting old.
Bill at 3:45PM on Nov 10th 2007
45. There's still a thick fog of mystery around the nature of consciousness, so I don't think anyone should be prepared to declare "There's no such thing as the spiritual".
Mokele Mbembe at 9:47AM on Nov 9th 2007