Was Charlotte Allen's Anti-Atheist Bigotry And Stereotyping Provoked By The Anti-Religious Bigotry Of Atheist Supremacist Spokespersons?
"Bible-Belt" atheist U*U blogger Steve Caldwell has blogged about being "shocked" by the Los Angeles Times' publishing of author, blogger, and Beliefnet editor Charlotte Allen's recent anti-atheist diatribe in an Opinion Editorial piece headlined 'Atheists: No God, no reason, just whining' and sub-titled 'Superstar atheists are motivated by anger -- and boohoo victimhood.'
According to the letter to the editor that Steve Caldwell submitted to the L.A. Times he was "shocked to read Charlotte Allen's recent display of religious bigotry and stereotyping" in this newspaper.
Mr. Caldwell writes -
"Imagine if she had done this sort of stereotyping with any other group -- let's say Christians, Jews, Moslems, women, homosexuals, etc. Would the LA Times print unfounded smears about these groups like they did about atheists?"
He has a point of course, although it is open to some debate as to just how "unfounded" Charlotte Allen's various criticisms of atheists actually are. It seems that Charlotte Allen's worst mistake aka sin was in painting atheists with too broad a brush. If she had clearly specified that she was criticizing that minority subset of atheists who I and other people describe as "fundamentalist atheists" or even Atheist Supremacists, her alleged "smears" would not be all that "unfounded" at all and, as a reader and promoter on his blogroll of obnoxious "fundamentalist atheist" P. Z. Myers' Pharyngula blog, Steve Caldwell really ought to know this. . . The argument that Steve Caldwell makes above can be very readily applied to the bigoted stereotyping and slanderous smears that U*Us, including U*U clergy like Rev. Ray Drennan, Rev. Victoria Weinstein, Rev. Cynthia P. Cain just to name and shame a few "less than excellent" U*U ministers. . . make about various people, or indeed whole groups.
Steve Calwell asserts that -
"Atheists and other free-thinkers may sound angry but their anger is justified."
while failing to consider the possibility that Theists (and other free-thinkers. . .) may sound angry about what I call "fundamentalist atheists" and Atheist Supremacists but their anger is justified by the anti-religious bigotry and stereotyping that obnoxious atheists such as Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, P. Z. Myers and others, including "small fry" like "Humanist" U*U minister Rev. Ray Drennan, engage in from time to time if not quite regularly. . .
Then of course activist atheist U*U Steve Caldwell ever so predictably launches into the standard anti-religious bigotry and stereotyping that "fundamentalist atheists" aka Atheist Supremacists just can't restrain themselves from hurling at religion and religionists whenever the opportunity presents itself, such as stump speeches announcing their candidacy for President of the UUA for example. . .
"Given the role that religion (as it is actually practiced and not as it's taught in seminary) has in promoting injustice, ignorance, hatred, war, and terrorism, we can't afford to be unquestioning about religious ideas anymore. Religion is too influential and has the power to hurt too many people to go unquestioned."
Fundamentalist atheist "Humanist" U*Us like Steve Caldwell never cease to amaze me. . . If they are so utterly convinced that religion, as it is actually practiced rather than how it is taught in seminary (to say nothing of U*U principles and ideals), has a strong role in promoting injustice, ignorance, hatred, war, and terrorism etc. etc. why do they chose to belong to the Tiny, Declining, Fringe *Religion* known as Unitarian*Universalism? I am truly baffled by such U*U atheists. They seem to be remarkably conflicted human beings. . . Going on and on about how terrible religion is yet knowingly and willfully choosing to belong to a so-called "religion" in any case.
Without further ado, although I assure U*Us that I could go on at length if I chose to do so. . . here is the comment that I posted to Steve Cladwell's 'Liberal Faith Development' blog earlier this afternoon -
Here is my response to Charlotte Allen's anti-atheist diatribe in the Los Angeles Times as posted to the pertinent blog that responds to her somewhat off-base Op/Ed -
I agree that Charlotte Allen painted atheists with too broad a brush in her Opinion Editorial piece and thus engaged in at least moderate anti-atheist bigotry. Most ironically it seems quite clear from her Op/Ed "rant" that it was the intolerance and bigotry of what I often term "fundamentalist atheists", and sometimes even Atheist Supremacists where this is warranted. . . that provoked her public attack which did not distinguish such intolerant and indeed bigoted atheist zealots such as Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and P. Z. Myers et al from the more moderate mainstream of atheists who have no great quarrel with believers and seek only to be allowed to adhere to their atheistic world view in peace, if not a reasonable amount of acceptance and even some respect. In fact it seems that a rather bigoted statement made by that world-famous pompous ASS* Richard Dawkins in a recent interview is what set Charlotte off. If she had only inserted the word fundamentalist before atheists or had substituted the term "Atheist Supremacists" for atheists in the following telling statement should could not justifiably be accused of anti-atheist intolerance, prejudice or bigotry at all -
:Maybe atheists wouldn't be so unpopular if they stopped beating the drum until the hide splits on their second-favorite topic: How stupid people are who believe in God. This is a favorite Dawkins theme. In a recent interview with Trina Hoaks, the atheist blogger for the Examiner.com website, Dawkins described religious believers as follows: "They feel uneducated, which they are; often rather stupid, which they are; inferior, which they are; and paranoid about pointy-headed intellectuals from the East Coast looking down on them, which, with some justification, they do." Thanks, Richard!
As we can readily see, professor Richard Dawkins is in full Atheist Supremacist Spokesperson mode here in suggesting that God believing people are uneducated, "rather stupid", and even altogether *inferior* human beings. . . Where have I heard talk of *inferior* human beings before? Yes, Charlotte Allen "misspoke" in painting all atheists with too broad a brush, but Richard Dawkins' rather disturbing Atheist Supremacism, as evidenced by these and other well documented public statements, seems to me to be a rather worse form of intolerance and bigotry. Thank God Richard Dawkins is only a 21st century university professor rather than a high ranking politician in the Stalinist Soviet Union or Maoist China. . .
* Atheist Supremacist Spokesperson
end quote
Allow me to take this opportunity to remind you and other U*Us that anti-religious bigotry and stereotyping is 100% OK in the U*U World if Robin Edgar and other theists are the target. . . In fact, the UUA's very aptly named Ministerial *Fellowship* Committee is on record as saying that the quite egregious anti-religious bigotry and stereotyping of one Rev. Ray Drennan is "within the appropriate guidelines of ministerial leadership." I have yet to see the UUA retract that effective endorsement of fundamentalist atheist "Humanist" U*U minister Rev. Raymond Drennan's anti-religious bigotry and stereotyping of yours truly and/or hold him accountable in the slightest manner for his anti-religious bigotry and stereotyping of me personally and God believing people more generally.
According to the letter to the editor that Steve Caldwell submitted to the L.A. Times he was "shocked to read Charlotte Allen's recent display of religious bigotry and stereotyping" in this newspaper.
Mr. Caldwell writes -
"Imagine if she had done this sort of stereotyping with any other group -- let's say Christians, Jews, Moslems, women, homosexuals, etc. Would the LA Times print unfounded smears about these groups like they did about atheists?"
He has a point of course, although it is open to some debate as to just how "unfounded" Charlotte Allen's various criticisms of atheists actually are. It seems that Charlotte Allen's worst mistake aka sin was in painting atheists with too broad a brush. If she had clearly specified that she was criticizing that minority subset of atheists who I and other people describe as "fundamentalist atheists" or even Atheist Supremacists, her alleged "smears" would not be all that "unfounded" at all and, as a reader and promoter on his blogroll of obnoxious "fundamentalist atheist" P. Z. Myers' Pharyngula blog, Steve Caldwell really ought to know this. . . The argument that Steve Caldwell makes above can be very readily applied to the bigoted stereotyping and slanderous smears that U*Us, including U*U clergy like Rev. Ray Drennan, Rev. Victoria Weinstein, Rev. Cynthia P. Cain just to name and shame a few "less than excellent" U*U ministers. . . make about various people, or indeed whole groups.
Steve Calwell asserts that -
"Atheists and other free-thinkers may sound angry but their anger is justified."
while failing to consider the possibility that Theists (and other free-thinkers. . .) may sound angry about what I call "fundamentalist atheists" and Atheist Supremacists but their anger is justified by the anti-religious bigotry and stereotyping that obnoxious atheists such as Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, P. Z. Myers and others, including "small fry" like "Humanist" U*U minister Rev. Ray Drennan, engage in from time to time if not quite regularly. . .
Then of course activist atheist U*U Steve Caldwell ever so predictably launches into the standard anti-religious bigotry and stereotyping that "fundamentalist atheists" aka Atheist Supremacists just can't restrain themselves from hurling at religion and religionists whenever the opportunity presents itself, such as stump speeches announcing their candidacy for President of the UUA for example. . .
"Given the role that religion (as it is actually practiced and not as it's taught in seminary) has in promoting injustice, ignorance, hatred, war, and terrorism, we can't afford to be unquestioning about religious ideas anymore. Religion is too influential and has the power to hurt too many people to go unquestioned."
Fundamentalist atheist "Humanist" U*Us like Steve Caldwell never cease to amaze me. . . If they are so utterly convinced that religion, as it is actually practiced rather than how it is taught in seminary (to say nothing of U*U principles and ideals), has a strong role in promoting injustice, ignorance, hatred, war, and terrorism etc. etc. why do they chose to belong to the Tiny, Declining, Fringe *Religion* known as Unitarian*Universalism? I am truly baffled by such U*U atheists. They seem to be remarkably conflicted human beings. . . Going on and on about how terrible religion is yet knowingly and willfully choosing to belong to a so-called "religion" in any case.
Without further ado, although I assure U*Us that I could go on at length if I chose to do so. . . here is the comment that I posted to Steve Cladwell's 'Liberal Faith Development' blog earlier this afternoon -
Here is my response to Charlotte Allen's anti-atheist diatribe in the Los Angeles Times as posted to the pertinent blog that responds to her somewhat off-base Op/Ed -
I agree that Charlotte Allen painted atheists with too broad a brush in her Opinion Editorial piece and thus engaged in at least moderate anti-atheist bigotry. Most ironically it seems quite clear from her Op/Ed "rant" that it was the intolerance and bigotry of what I often term "fundamentalist atheists", and sometimes even Atheist Supremacists where this is warranted. . . that provoked her public attack which did not distinguish such intolerant and indeed bigoted atheist zealots such as Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and P. Z. Myers et al from the more moderate mainstream of atheists who have no great quarrel with believers and seek only to be allowed to adhere to their atheistic world view in peace, if not a reasonable amount of acceptance and even some respect. In fact it seems that a rather bigoted statement made by that world-famous pompous ASS* Richard Dawkins in a recent interview is what set Charlotte off. If she had only inserted the word fundamentalist before atheists or had substituted the term "Atheist Supremacists" for atheists in the following telling statement should could not justifiably be accused of anti-atheist intolerance, prejudice or bigotry at all -
:Maybe atheists wouldn't be so unpopular if they stopped beating the drum until the hide splits on their second-favorite topic: How stupid people are who believe in God. This is a favorite Dawkins theme. In a recent interview with Trina Hoaks, the atheist blogger for the Examiner.com website, Dawkins described religious believers as follows: "They feel uneducated, which they are; often rather stupid, which they are; inferior, which they are; and paranoid about pointy-headed intellectuals from the East Coast looking down on them, which, with some justification, they do." Thanks, Richard!
As we can readily see, professor Richard Dawkins is in full Atheist Supremacist Spokesperson mode here in suggesting that God believing people are uneducated, "rather stupid", and even altogether *inferior* human beings. . . Where have I heard talk of *inferior* human beings before? Yes, Charlotte Allen "misspoke" in painting all atheists with too broad a brush, but Richard Dawkins' rather disturbing Atheist Supremacism, as evidenced by these and other well documented public statements, seems to me to be a rather worse form of intolerance and bigotry. Thank God Richard Dawkins is only a 21st century university professor rather than a high ranking politician in the Stalinist Soviet Union or Maoist China. . .
* Atheist Supremacist Spokesperson
end quote
Allow me to take this opportunity to remind you and other U*Us that anti-religious bigotry and stereotyping is 100% OK in the U*U World if Robin Edgar and other theists are the target. . . In fact, the UUA's very aptly named Ministerial *Fellowship* Committee is on record as saying that the quite egregious anti-religious bigotry and stereotyping of one Rev. Ray Drennan is "within the appropriate guidelines of ministerial leadership." I have yet to see the UUA retract that effective endorsement of fundamentalist atheist "Humanist" U*U minister Rev. Raymond Drennan's anti-religious bigotry and stereotyping of yours truly and/or hold him accountable in the slightest manner for his anti-religious bigotry and stereotyping of me personally and God believing people more generally.
Comments