Skip to main content

Stick to your beliefs, or else what do you stand for?

By Carl S ~

The first thing this morning, I turned on the TV, and the words “soul search” appeared on the screen. The subject was the Republican Party’s defeat in the 2012 elections. The chief speaker was a very close adviser to Mitt Romney on campaign strategies. What was obvious to me is the fact that his party is still in shock and denial, nearly two weeks after the election, and still unbelieving that they were out of touch with the majority of Americans. He thought they should have stated their causes stronger, for one thing.

My wife woke up soon after, and I told her something about this discussion. She had a different take about the Republican Party’s not dealing with their defeats, which prompts me to write this response. She said,
“They did what they believed in, and they should stick with what they believe in. Or else, what do they stand for?”

Did she realize what she said? I don’t think she realized what she said, but I've been thinking about it ever since. Unawares, she made a point, but it includes her own Christian beliefs.

Firstly, let us admit that, yes, there is something honorable and noble in “sticking with what you believe in," when your beliefs are those of an abolitionist, a woman’s rights or civil rights advocate, etc. Individuals and groups have been jailed, tortured, and even murdered for such beliefs. They had to do a lot of soul-searching to arrive at those beliefs, a lot of weighing the evidence for staying with or bucking the traditional system. But - and this is a big BUT - there is a difference between such “sticking with what you believe in” and the religious intractability of belief, unamenable to discussion, adaptation, or negotiation. This problem might be considered by that Party in its soul-searching; because it was taken over by religious believers, it became them and stuck to what they believed in. By being true to what it had become, it lost and will lose in the future by sticking with its beliefs.

When I switched channels, I came to another example of sticking to beliefs: the brink of war between Israel and Hamas. Both sides are “sticking to what they believe in, or else what do they stand for?” Would they lose their identity, their legitimacy, and their belief in being the traditional true faiths by compromise? I‘m sure they really, truly, absolutely believe they would, and that’s why they're sticking to those beliefs, and have been at war with each other and at war with those among their own people who urge compromise. Neither side wants to give in, as if doing so would be a kind of death. Meanwhile, they actually kill each other. Historically, what is happening in that region repeats the religious and political wars we are familiar with throughout the world.

Anyone who has heard the hymn, “Faith of Our Fathers,” knows it‘s about sticking to the faith, faithfully. What was good enough for them is good enough for me. It defines “us,” it is our character, our identity, what makes “us” unique, right? It's what gives us legitimacy and a right to respect granted by our deity and tradition. Or else, what do we stand for? We have our martyrs and leaders, respected in our communities. (Notice that these claims apply to every religion.).

Because religions are not reality based and insist on sticking to their beliefs in spite of evidence to the contrary and the contradictions in their beliefs, they will continue to make no moral progress. The difference between progress and no progress lies in a personal and social soul-searching open to other points of view and opinions. At base, what is needed is a truth-finding willingness to not stick to what they believe in if what they believe in runs in opposition to reality. That’s the reason why the Republican Party lost, why the Religious Right lost, and why religions should lose.


Popular posts from this blog

Are You an Atheist Success Story?

By Avangelism Project ~ F acts don’t spread. Stories do. It’s how (good) marketing works, it’s how elections (unfortunately) are won and lost, and it’s how (all) religion spreads. Proselytization isn’t accomplished with better arguments. It’s accomplished with better stories and it’s time we atheists catch up. It’s not like atheists don’t love a good story. Head over to the atheist reddit and take a look if you don’t believe me. We’re all over stories painting religion in a bad light. Nothing wrong with that, but we ignore the value of a story or a testimonial when we’re dealing with Christians. We can’t be so proud to argue the semantics of whether atheism is a belief or deconversion is actually proselytization. When we become more interested in defining our terms than in affecting people, we’ve relegated ourselves to irrelevance preferring to be smug in our minority, but semantically correct, nonbelief. Results Determine Reality The thing is when we opt to bury our

So Just How Dumb Were Jesus’ Disciples? The Resurrection, Part VII.

By Robert Conner ~ T he first mention of Jesus’ resurrection comes from a letter written by Paul of Tarsus. Paul appears to have had no interest whatsoever in the “historical” Jesus: “even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, we know him so no longer.” ( 2 Corinthians 5:16 ) Paul’s surviving letters never once mention any of Jesus’ many exorcisms and healings, the raising of Lazarus, or Jesus’ virgin birth, and barely allude to Jesus’ teaching. For Paul, Jesus only gets interesting after he’s dead, but even here Paul’s attention to detail is sketchy at best. For instance, Paul says Jesus “was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” ( 1 Corinthians 15:4 ), but there are no scriptures that foretell the Jewish Messiah would at long last appear only to die at the hands of Gentiles, much less that the Messiah would then be raised from the dead after three days. After his miraculous conversion on the road to Damascus—an event Paul never mentions in his lette

Christian TV presenter reads out Star Wars plot as story of salvation

An email prankster tricked the host of a Christian TV show into reading out the plots of The Fresh Prince of Bel Air and Star Wars in the belief they were stories of personal salvation. The unsuspecting host read out most of the opening rap to The Fresh Prince, a 1990s US sitcom starring Will Smith , apparently unaware that it was not a genuine testimony of faith. The prankster had slightly adapted the lyrics but the references to a misspent youth playing basketball in West Philadelphia would have been instantly familiar to most viewers. The lines read out by the DJ included: "One day a couple of guys who were up to no good starting making trouble in my living area. I ended up getting into a fight, which terrified my mother." The presenter on Genesis TV , a British Christian channel, eventually realised that he was being pranked and cut the story short – only to move on to another spoof email based on the plot of the Star Wars films. It began: &quo


By David Andrew Dugle ~   S ettle down now children, here's the story from the Book of David called The Parable of the Bent Cross. In the land Southeast of Eden –  Eden, Minnesota that is – between two rivers called the Big Miami and the Little Miami, in the name of Saint Gertrude there was once built a church. Here next to it was also built a fine parochial school. The congregation thrived and after a multitude of years, a new, bigger church was erected, well made with clean straight lines and a high steeple topped with a tall, thin cross of gold. The faithful felt proud, but now very low was their money. Their Sunday offerings and school fees did not suffice. Anon, they decided to raise money in an unclean way. One fine summer day the faithful erected tents in the chariot lot between the two buildings. In the tents they set up all manner of games – ring toss, bingo, little mechanical racing horses and roulette wheels – then all who lived in the land between the two rivers we

Morality is not a Good Argument for Christianity

By austinrohm ~ I wrote this article as I was deconverting in my own head: I never talked with anyone about it, but it was a letter I wrote as if I was writing to all the Christians in my life who constantly brought up how morality was the best argument for Christianity. No Christian has read this so far, but it is written from the point of view of a frustrated closeted atheist whose only outlet was organizing his thoughts on the keyboard. A common phrase used with non-Christians is: “Well without God, there isn’t a foundation of morality. If God is not real, then you could go around killing and raping.” There are a few things which must be addressed. 1. Show me objective morality. Define it and show me an example. Different Christians have different moral standards depending on how they interpret the Bible. Often times, they will just find what they believe, then go back into scripture and find a way to validate it. Conversely, many feel a particular action is not

Why I left the Canadian Reformed Church

By Chuck Eelhart ~ I was born into a believing family. The denomination is called Canadian Reformed Church . It is a Dutch Calvinistic Christian Church. My parents were Dutch immigrants to Canada in 1951. They had come from two slightly differing factions of the same Reformed faith in the Netherlands . Arriving unmarried in Canada they joined the slightly more conservative of the factions. It was a small group at first. Being far from Holland and strangers in a new country these young families found a strong bonding point in their church. Deutsch: Heidelberger Katechismus, Druck 1563 (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) I was born in 1955 the third of eventually 9 children. We lived in a small southern Ontario farming community of Fergus. Being young conservative and industrious the community of immigrants prospered. While they did mix and work in the community almost all of the social bonding was within the church group. Being of the first generation born here we had a foot in two