Over the weekend I caught an article on the Washington Post website titled “Why do Americans still dislike atheists?” which made the case AGAIN that discrimination of atheists is wrong. What was more interesting was that some of the comments to the post proved the point.
The article by Gregory Paul and Phil Zuckerman included tid bits like this:
A growing body of social science research reveals that atheists, and non-religious people in general, are far from the unsavory beings many assume them to be. On basic questions of morality and human decency — issues such as governmental use of torture, the death penalty, punitive hitting of children, racism, sexism, homophobia, anti-Semitism, environmental degradation or human rights — the irreligious tend to be more ethical than their religious peers, particularly compared with those who describe themselves as very religious.
and this:
Nontheism isn’t all balloons and ice cream. Some studies suggest that suicide rates are higher among the non-religious. But surveys indicating that religious Americans are better off can be misleading because they include among the non-religious fence-sitters who are as likely to believe in God, whereas atheists who are more convinced are doing about as well as devout believers. On numerous respected measures of societal success — rates of poverty, teenage pregnancy, abortion, sexually transmitted diseases, obesity, drug use and crime, as well as economics — high levels of secularity are consistently correlated with positive outcomes in first-world nations. None of the secular advanced democracies suffers from the combined social ills seen here in Christian America.
The story isn’t new but being on the Washington Post website gives it some status than if it appeared on an non-theist blog like this one. There is a question about the claim the authors make that 60 million people “are not believers”. Friends of mine in the secular movement would love to see that evidence. The number we agree on is closer to 12% of the population not the 1/5th cited by the article. Of that 12%, 2.3% were atheists, 4.3% are “Huxlian agnostics”, and 5.7% were wishy-washy agnostic.
What was more interesting for me were that some of the comments to the story seemed to prove the point – that atheists are still disliked.
Americans don’t, for the most part, generally dislike atheists. It is more that, much as many people dislike religious believers who are very pushy and proselytize them in an intrusive, in your face manner, they equally dislike atheists who are very pushy and who proselytize on behalf of atheism’s beliefs in an intrusive, in your face manner. Religious believers and atheists who quietly hold their beliefs and teach them to their children at home, and who respect others’ rights to believe and teach to their own children at home what they wish even when it is different from them as religious believers or as atheists, are not any more disliked by the American people than anyone else is. In short, the American people expect both religious believers of all stripes and atheists to be tolerant and respectful of others’ views and lives. And they dislike those from both groups who are not
This is common. As long as we shut up and don’t draw attention then people like us. I only wish Christians and other strident religious people would do that then I might like them.
The author seems to be making a common mistake: atheism and nontheism are not interchangeable. As a nontheist/agnostic, I see atheism as requiring as great a leap of faith as any belief in God. Perhaps it is the scientist in me that wants proof before I commit. In this case, I am comfortable with admitting I don’t know. I don’t understand, but can accept that others think they do. And if you want to proselytize, be advised it will be an exercise in frustration on your part and a source of amusement to me
Here the reader makes the common mistake that atheism is a religion requiring faith when it is in fact the believer who needs faith to believe since they have no rational evidence that a god exists. The atheist simply doesn’t believe in any god.
The United States has the largest prison population in the entire world. It has absolutely nothing to do with religion. It has much more to do with Obama’s WAR on drugs – not his war on religion.
Our nation was founded by people of faith and the freedom of religion. Maryland was founded by people of the Catholic faith and Pennsylvania by people of the Quaker faith. If you don’t like American religiosity – try living in Saudi Arabia.
This comment shows the reader has no sense of history. Quakers and Catholics came to this country due to persecution elsewhere and both supported separation of church and state. The Quakers did as a matter of conscious and Catholics did because protestants ran all the government agencies. Check out this article about the Philadelphia Bible Riots in 1844:
As my colleague Rob Boston noted in a Liberty magazine article, the city’s public schools were Protestant-dominated and featured recitation of (the Protestant version of) the Lord’s Prayer, readings from the (Protestant) King James Version of the Bible, and singing of (Protestant) hymns. When Catholic Bishop Francis Patrick Kenrick objected, the school agreed to excuse Catholic students from the exercises.
Protestant extremists were outraged at this nod toward diversity, and full-scale Protestant-Catholic riots erupted. Many city residents were injured and killed, and houses and church buildings were burned. The militia had to be called in to restore order.
Sounds like something that would happen on the streets of Saudi Arabia today.
Hatred is born from ignorance. We need more education to show that atheists are people too and maybe soon, we will be less disliked.
Related posts:
- Nightline serves up some crap cake to atheists
- Atheists not invited to Democrat Convention opening event
- A new survey says 21% of atheists believe in God?


Salon.com
Comments
It is my understanding that an atheist actually believes that they can prove the non-existence of god, whereas an agnostic believes it cannot be proved one way or another.
As a final note, I believe that the association between the dislike of Religious fanatics and atheists is understandable. Both parties have a sense of superiority over others. Religious fanatics often believe in a spiritual superiority wheras many atheists believe they have an intectual superiority. In my view, both parties would be more well liked if they had a live and let live approach to others beliefs.
Like so many other perplexing conundrums that have me scratching my head in disbelief lately, I have to wonder why anyone would even care if another person was an atheist, not to mention liking or disliking him based on that fact. To answer the question "Why do Americans still dislike atheists?" I'd have to say it's probably because that's what they think about when they get tired of their other two favorite obsessions: abortion and whether or not Obama is a U.S. citizen. Wait, scratch the last one - now they've got only two things to obsess over.
And now to the rant...
Oh, FFS.
I am becoming increasingly impatient with the way people (alas, myself included) generalize about and often stereotype groups they don't know.
The gays...the atheists...the Muslims...the evangelicals...polygamists...it all boils down to US vs. THEM (until you get to know one of THEM, and then you find out, more often than not, that THEY are a lot like US).
It's understandable to feel that way. It may be part of human nature (I've had to correct myself many times when I catch myself making assumptions about THEM), but it's a recipe for conflict and sometimes disaster. It also impoverishes experience. I've learned so much from people who aren't part of my US.
As someone who falls into the category of spiritual-but-no-longer-religious, I've learned a great deal from atheists, the deeply religious, the non-religious and yes, even evangelical Christians, who are a THEM in my neck of the woods (actually the big city). What my friends and acquaintances have in common are 1) the willingness to look beyond the group (be it religion, ethnicity, skin colour, age, gender, sexual orientation or whatever else) and deal with the individual and 2) a "live-and-let-live" attitude.
I think that by posting your blog, even if the audience on OS probably tends to be more atheist-positive than average in the U.S., you're contributing, in whatever small a way, to people encountering an atheist as an individual. And that's a good thing.
I am a Christian.
I attend the Methodist Church where I live, and have been with this particular church just over 10 years now.
I also agree with much that you share and say here. Using morals as a yardstick, I have no problem believing that many athiests and agnositics are every bit as moral as any religious person, and even concede the evidencce that they may be more so. (I have seen that study too)
I have asked myself why this would be. Why would non-religious individuals be "more moral" than those that are religious? (Please forgive my admittedly inexact question...I hope you get it's intent?)
For me it comes back to a comment I have seen a time or two in Open Salon...that religious individuals do not think for themselves on the issues of morals the way non-religious people often do.
That has gotten my attention! I think I might agree again. (you did no tsay this in the blog, so forgive me pulling this thought in, but it helps me metabolize where I am going)
I think the answer to that for people like myself is that we SHOULD think more. If a religion cannot hold up to scrutiny, then what is the point?
So I argue that a good Christian should be much like a good agnostic or atheist. He/she should be thoughtful, and should constantly be testing their beliefs.
I do not believe that God calls me to blind obedience. I believe He gave me a mind and expects me to use it. I believe He expects me to learn about Him and my religion. I believe He expects me to grow as a good person.
One thing that is a touch uncomfortable for me here....our mission statement.
"To make and be disciples for Jesus Christ."
Making disciples could be easy to interpret as bible thumping in-your-facers...something I have tried to avoid.
So know thatI appreciate your article, and that I personally am trying to be a just and moral person DESPITE my religious nature.
It could be some work!
Very rated
.
Yes!
I live in the bible belt, and I hold elective office. I find that if I stick to my basic beliefs, I'm fine in any company. And my basic beliefs are these - you are free to worship or not worship as you please - so am I. You are free to pray in my presence, because I was raised with enough manners to know that I should be respectful of my fellow man. You should not automatically expect me to attend your church, synagogue, or temple to pray at your side any more than you should expect me to expect that of you.
I do not discuss my religious beliefs in public. Not because I am ashamed of them, but rather because I feel no need to explain them or justify them - to anyone, ever!
I expect people to evaluate my potential based on my actions, not on my physical presence on Sunday morning (or Friday night, or Saturday afternoon). I extend that same respect to them.
So far, so good. We'll see how it goes from here on out.
Really good discussion though. Thanks for opening that door.
They then assume atheists either don't have a source of morals/ethics or have rejected it. Therefore, they must have rejected morals and ethics.
I call myself an atheist. I can't prove there is no God, (nor do I feel a need to) but then, theists can't prove the existence of one. I feel that agnostic implies a greater acceptance of the theory that there probably is a God of the sort we currently imagine (as opposed to say, the Gods of the Egyptians and Romans) than I have.
Prisons are mentioned, but one thing that is not mentioned is that practically none of us are in prisons. We make up not even 1% of the prison population, probably not even half that, and probably not half of that. In a country where even the Supreme Court has called us a "religious people" the function of religion as a regulator of morality seems not to work, and we imprison a greater proportion of our population than any other country. In most European countries where religion is less popular, imprisonment rates are far lower and violent crime is a fraction of what it is here.
Curiously, I am pretty certain that we atheists are more likely to be able to name the first book of the Bible and name the four gospels than the general population. I think we are by far less ignorant of the principles that allegedly guide the others than the degree to which religious types are ignorant of what matters to most of us, science. And yet, while they may hold up John 3:19 at all manner of public events we don't strut around with the periodic table or copies of Darwin. So who is being pushy?