“We’re here! We’re godless! Get used to it!,” chanted the crowd
of 20,000 or so atheists at this past weekend’s Rally for Reason in Washington, D.C.
As the chant suggests, the protesters styled their event on the
National Mall (which was not affiliated with
Reason magazine in any way) as a “coming out” party
for atheists. One participant even carried a sign ripped off from
the heyday of gay rights demonstrations: “Hi Mom. I’m an
Atheist!"
The rally was advertised as the largest ever gathering of
atheists, agnostics, freethinkers, and other assorted faithless
folks. The relatively young crowd was treated to talks, rants,
and routines by such faithless luminaries as biologist Richard
Dawkins, American Atheists president David Silverman, professional
skeptics Michael Shermer and James Randi, mythbuster Adam Savage,
profane musician Tim Minchin, and (via video) comedian Penn
Jillette. Off to the side was a small collection of Christian
counterprotesters (including members of the truly awful Westboro
Baptist Church) who assured the assembled nonbelievers that
Christianity’s loving God would consign them all to everlasting
fiery damnation unless they changed their wicked ways.
But it is not just Westboro Baptist kooks who dislike atheists.
Polls show that most Americans are uneasy (to say the least) with
unbelievers. Consider a Pew Research poll from June 2011 that
found that 33 percent of respondents said that they would be
less likely to vote for a candidate who was homosexual and 62
percent said that it would make no difference. For atheist
candidates, the numbers were basically flipped: 61 percent of
respondents said that a candidate's atheism would make them less
likely to vote for them and only 33 percent said it would make no
difference. A June 2011 Gallup Poll
reported that only 49 percent of voters would vote for a “well
qualified” presidential candidate who was an atheist. The next
lowest vote percentage went to a gay candidate for whom 67 percent
would consider voting. The good news for atheists is that the
trends are moving in the right direction: in a 1958 poll only 18
percent said that they'd vote for an atheist.
In fact, a side-by-side comparison of polling data finds that
tolerance for theological deviance is evolving slower
than acceptable of what used to be called sexual deviance. In
1977 a Harris poll reported that
55 percent respondents thought that gays should not be allowed to
be teachers but 80 percent said they could work in factories;
now 69
percent say it’s OK for them to be teachers and a later
survey finds that 89
percent believe that gays should have equal rights in
terms of job opportunities. Atheists as a group lag behind in
acceptance when compared to gays; a recent study found that
only 33 percent of respondents would hire an atheist as a day care
worker, but 65 percent would hire them as a waitress.
It’s no wonder that atheists poll so badly—religious folks
believe that the godless are about as trustworthy as rapists, at
least according to a recent study. In “Do
You Believe in Atheists? Distrust is central to anti-atheist
prejudice” [PDF], published in Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology in December. The
researchers reported that religious participants in the study
regarded atheists as being
more criminally untrustworthy than rapists. "Outward
displays of belief in God may be viewed as a proxy for
trustworthiness, particularly by religious believers who think that
people behave better if they feel that God is watching them,"
explained
University of British Columbia psychologist Ara Norenzayan, one of
the researchers on the study. "While atheists may see their
disbelief as a private matter on a metaphysical issue, believers
may consider atheists' absence of belief as a public threat to
cooperation and honesty." In a 2003
study [PDF], 48 percent (the highest of disapproval rating of
any group) of Americans said that they would disapprove of their
children marrying an atheist.
This distrust prompts one to wonder if believers really do worry
that people would engage in rampant murder and mayhem if they
thought that there was no vengeful deity monitoring their behavior
at all times. In fact, psychological research does
confirm that a lot of religious believers do tend to think this
way. In light of those fears, one prominent slogan featured on
placards at the Rally for Reason, “Be Good for Goodness’ Sake” must
appear nonsensical to believers.
Distrust of atheists has an long intellectual pedigree. After
all, Athenian philosopher Socrates was convicted for,
among other crimes, preaching atheism (which he artfully denied).
Eighteenth century liberal British philosopher John Locke is
thought to have jumpstarted the notion of the separation of church
and state in his A Letter Concerning
Toleration. However, even Locke believed that atheists
were not to be tolerated. “Promises, covenants, and oaths, which
are the bonds of human society, can have no hold upon an atheist,”
he wrote. In addition, Locke asserted, “Those that by their atheism
undermine and destroy all religion, can have no pretence of
religion whereupon to challenge the privilege of a toleration.”
Only believers have the standing to demand that their beliefs be
tolerated by the state.
“God and government are a dangerous mix,” warned Annie Laurie
Gaylor, co-president of the Freedom from Religion Foundation at the
rally. Believers especially would do well to keep this fact in
mind. Locke’s proposal for the separation of church and state was
an idea devised to prevent the legal domination of one sect over
other dissenting sects. As Locke well appreciated, mixing
government and God has proven to be a sure recipe for civil strife
and often war. The government should be secular, reserving civil
society as the non-coercive arena for religious practice and
contention.
Unfortunately, some politicians, most especially including this
season’s flock of would-be Republican presidential candidates want
to inject a little more God into government. Their loud professions
of faith may, however, be provoking a backlash among voters.
Another Pew poll
reported earlier this month that the percentage of Americans
who say that there is too much public expression of religious faith
among politicians rose from 12 percent in 2001 to 38 percent now.
Sadly, 30 percent still think there is too little faith-mongering
by politicians and 25 percent believe the amount is just about
right. Even better news: 54 percent now say that churches should
keep out of politics, whereas only 40 percent think that they
should express views on social and political questions. Back in
1996, 54 percent thought churches should meddle in politics and
only 43 percent wanted them to butt out.
Voters will certainly bring their religious convictions (or lack
thereof) into the voting booth with them. But what the
constitutional principle of separation between God and government
prevents is setting religious tribes against one another in a fight
over political favors and the distribution of tax dollars.
In its March 12 issue, Time magazine listed “The
Rise of the Nones” as one of the biggest trends in the U.S. It
turns out that fastest growing religious group in the United States
are Americans who list their religious affiliation as “none.” A Pew
survey found that 16 percent of Americans
are unaffiliated with any religious group; about of whom half could
be described as secular unaffiliated. Twenty-five percent of
Americans aged 18 to 29 are unaffiliated with any particular
religion. If this trend toward nonbelief continues, it’s going to
be harder and harder for believers to “hate” atheists because the
damned nonbelievers are going to turn out to be people they already
love and value, their children, other relatives, friends,
neighbors, and co-workers.
See the Reason.tv video, "What We Saw at the Reason Rally," by
my colleagues Joshua Swain and Lucy Steigerwald below:
Disclosure: I have been “out” as an atheist since by early
teens, and as far as I know I have never suffered discrimination
based on my lack of belief in an omniscient Sky God.
Ronald Bailey
is Reason's science correspondent. His book Liberation Biology: The Scientific and
Moral Case for the Biotech Revolution is now available
from Prometheus Books
of 20,000 or so atheists at this past weekend’s Rally for Reason in Washington, D.C.
As the chant suggests, the protesters styled their event on the
National Mall (which was not affiliated with
Reason magazine in any way) as a “coming out” party
for atheists. One participant even carried a sign ripped off from
the heyday of gay rights demonstrations: “Hi Mom. I’m an
Atheist!"
The rally was advertised as the largest ever gathering of
atheists, agnostics, freethinkers, and other assorted faithless
folks. The relatively young crowd was treated to talks, rants,
and routines by such faithless luminaries as biologist Richard
Dawkins, American Atheists president David Silverman, professional
skeptics Michael Shermer and James Randi, mythbuster Adam Savage,
profane musician Tim Minchin, and (via video) comedian Penn
Jillette. Off to the side was a small collection of Christian
counterprotesters (including members of the truly awful Westboro
Baptist Church) who assured the assembled nonbelievers that
Christianity’s loving God would consign them all to everlasting
fiery damnation unless they changed their wicked ways.
But it is not just Westboro Baptist kooks who dislike atheists.
Polls show that most Americans are uneasy (to say the least) with
unbelievers. Consider a Pew Research poll from June 2011 that
found that 33 percent of respondents said that they would be
less likely to vote for a candidate who was homosexual and 62
percent said that it would make no difference. For atheist
candidates, the numbers were basically flipped: 61 percent of
respondents said that a candidate's atheism would make them less
likely to vote for them and only 33 percent said it would make no
difference. A June 2011 Gallup Poll
reported that only 49 percent of voters would vote for a “well
qualified” presidential candidate who was an atheist. The next
lowest vote percentage went to a gay candidate for whom 67 percent
would consider voting. The good news for atheists is that the
trends are moving in the right direction: in a 1958 poll only 18
percent said that they'd vote for an atheist.
In fact, a side-by-side comparison of polling data finds that
tolerance for theological deviance is evolving slower
than acceptable of what used to be called sexual deviance. In
1977 a Harris poll reported that
55 percent respondents thought that gays should not be allowed to
be teachers but 80 percent said they could work in factories;
now 69
percent say it’s OK for them to be teachers and a later
survey finds that 89
percent believe that gays should have equal rights in
terms of job opportunities. Atheists as a group lag behind in
acceptance when compared to gays; a recent study found that
only 33 percent of respondents would hire an atheist as a day care
worker, but 65 percent would hire them as a waitress.
It’s no wonder that atheists poll so badly—religious folks
believe that the godless are about as trustworthy as rapists, at
least according to a recent study. In “Do
You Believe in Atheists? Distrust is central to anti-atheist
prejudice” [PDF], published in Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology in December. The
researchers reported that religious participants in the study
regarded atheists as being
more criminally untrustworthy than rapists. "Outward
displays of belief in God may be viewed as a proxy for
trustworthiness, particularly by religious believers who think that
people behave better if they feel that God is watching them,"
explained
University of British Columbia psychologist Ara Norenzayan, one of
the researchers on the study. "While atheists may see their
disbelief as a private matter on a metaphysical issue, believers
may consider atheists' absence of belief as a public threat to
cooperation and honesty." In a 2003
study [PDF], 48 percent (the highest of disapproval rating of
any group) of Americans said that they would disapprove of their
children marrying an atheist.
This distrust prompts one to wonder if believers really do worry
that people would engage in rampant murder and mayhem if they
thought that there was no vengeful deity monitoring their behavior
at all times. In fact, psychological research does
confirm that a lot of religious believers do tend to think this
way. In light of those fears, one prominent slogan featured on
placards at the Rally for Reason, “Be Good for Goodness’ Sake” must
appear nonsensical to believers.
Distrust of atheists has an long intellectual pedigree. After
all, Athenian philosopher Socrates was convicted for,
among other crimes, preaching atheism (which he artfully denied).
Eighteenth century liberal British philosopher John Locke is
thought to have jumpstarted the notion of the separation of church
and state in his A Letter Concerning
Toleration. However, even Locke believed that atheists
were not to be tolerated. “Promises, covenants, and oaths, which
are the bonds of human society, can have no hold upon an atheist,”
he wrote. In addition, Locke asserted, “Those that by their atheism
undermine and destroy all religion, can have no pretence of
religion whereupon to challenge the privilege of a toleration.”
Only believers have the standing to demand that their beliefs be
tolerated by the state.
“God and government are a dangerous mix,” warned Annie Laurie
Gaylor, co-president of the Freedom from Religion Foundation at the
rally. Believers especially would do well to keep this fact in
mind. Locke’s proposal for the separation of church and state was
an idea devised to prevent the legal domination of one sect over
other dissenting sects. As Locke well appreciated, mixing
government and God has proven to be a sure recipe for civil strife
and often war. The government should be secular, reserving civil
society as the non-coercive arena for religious practice and
contention.
Unfortunately, some politicians, most especially including this
season’s flock of would-be Republican presidential candidates want
to inject a little more God into government. Their loud professions
of faith may, however, be provoking a backlash among voters.
Another Pew poll
reported earlier this month that the percentage of Americans
who say that there is too much public expression of religious faith
among politicians rose from 12 percent in 2001 to 38 percent now.
Sadly, 30 percent still think there is too little faith-mongering
by politicians and 25 percent believe the amount is just about
right. Even better news: 54 percent now say that churches should
keep out of politics, whereas only 40 percent think that they
should express views on social and political questions. Back in
1996, 54 percent thought churches should meddle in politics and
only 43 percent wanted them to butt out.
Voters will certainly bring their religious convictions (or lack
thereof) into the voting booth with them. But what the
constitutional principle of separation between God and government
prevents is setting religious tribes against one another in a fight
over political favors and the distribution of tax dollars.
In its March 12 issue, Time magazine listed “The
Rise of the Nones” as one of the biggest trends in the U.S. It
turns out that fastest growing religious group in the United States
are Americans who list their religious affiliation as “none.” A Pew
survey found that 16 percent of Americans
are unaffiliated with any religious group; about of whom half could
be described as secular unaffiliated. Twenty-five percent of
Americans aged 18 to 29 are unaffiliated with any particular
religion. If this trend toward nonbelief continues, it’s going to
be harder and harder for believers to “hate” atheists because the
damned nonbelievers are going to turn out to be people they already
love and value, their children, other relatives, friends,
neighbors, and co-workers.
See the Reason.tv video, "What We Saw at the Reason Rally," by
my colleagues Joshua Swain and Lucy Steigerwald below:
Disclosure: I have been “out” as an atheist since by early
teens, and as far as I know I have never suffered discrimination
based on my lack of belief in an omniscient Sky God.
Ronald Bailey
is Reason's science correspondent. His book Liberation Biology: The Scientific and
Moral Case for the Biotech Revolution is now available
from Prometheus Books
No comments:
Post a Comment