Skip to main content

On the Happiness of “Dangerous” Atheists

By Carl S. ~

Am I and others like me, the kind of persons referred to when most people say, “It takes all kinds?” In other words, are we eccentric, not dangerous, harmless outsiders to “common sense explanations” of the majority? After all, we don't accept the “obvious truths” of dogmatic things believers take for granted and prefer not to think about. We don't believe in supernatural gods/forces/explanations. We not only question, but outright dismiss “sacred” texts and the “authorities” who quote them for their own purposes. (We OFTEN find those things boring.) Does this make us dangerous and unhappy? A hell of a lot of believers are taught to believe it's so.

A hell of a lot of believers are afraid of becoming “that kind” of person like me. They believe that in leaving belief they would take the chance of being condemned to eternal torture; that belief is of paramount importance for everyone's happiness. And they raise their children to ignore or shun “people like him.” This is part of their contract; their eternal insurance policy for their kids. If they can keep me/us in the closet, they can make me/us into any kinds of demons they want to. (A method the Nazis successfully employed against the Jewish people.) This isolation alone, because we're social animals, ought to cause us unhappiness. It comes with a cost-benefit: We do not have that unhappiness which comes from trying to force ourselves to believe things we just can't. (We leave that for those who are unnecessarily struggling to force themselves to believe.)

One reason that believers of all faiths avoid atheists may be that they don't want to take the CHANCE that atheists will question their beliefs or even imply that religious doctrines actually INSULT their intelligences. Nobody wants to face the possibility of being a victim of a con job. Nobody. It's much the human thing to deny and avoid, than to discuss and face that possibility. This is cause for non-believers' outside-the-box head scratching, and investigating.

In some countries, atheists are imprisoned and even await EXECUTION for “blasphemy” because they refuse to PRETEND to believe! Let's face it: if they pretend to believe, then nothing will happen to them. A so-called “Almighty” God is threatened by non-believers in him and can't have his faithful hearing from them? It isn't enough to punish them after death, eternally, either? He sends his goons out to make the lives of non-believers miserable for the short time they have on Earth. Or to end their lives, as we say, “prematurely.” Talk about insecure faiths! And the source of all this misery comes from an intolerance to those who merely declare that they find no proofs for a One god or many gods. THIS is what brands atheists as dangerous and unhappy? No, WE'RE not the dangerous and unhappy ones.

Before the believers get their hackles and defenses up, let me tell you this atheist's point of view. We'll start with a great quote from Charles Kingsley : “WE ACT AS IF COMFORT AND LUXURY WERE THE CHIEF REQUIREMENTS OF LIFE, WHEN ALL WE NEED TO MAKE US REALLY HAPPY IS SOMETHING TO BE ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT.”

Back in the 1960's, they said, “Whatever turns you on.” (Of course we must add, “Just so it doesn't harm anyone.”) If someone came up to me beaming away and said, “I'm a born-again Christian!” I'd say, “Whatever.” The person might be offended by that. What it comes down to is simple. If you're enthusiastic about it, go for it. But don't expect me to share your enthusiasms. I've got my own, like music, humanism, evolution, etc., etc. ( I'm enthusiastic when sending money to buy birth control pills for a mother who already has 4 kids and lives on two dollars a day, for example, rather than to some god who should be providing for them and doesn't.) If YOU want to purchase a four foot statue of the Virgin Mary, garland it with flowers, light a dozen votive candles in front of it, then go for it. If, on the other hand, you want to put that garland on a bed and the votive lights around the room so that you've made a sweet atmosphere for lovemaking, well... that's what I would be enthusiastic about. You can take your guitar and drums to church, play your heart out for Jesus, and/or spend the evening jamming with a rock combo. Whatever you're enthused about. I'm all for it. Just leave my enthusiasms alone.

If I find religions boring, anti-thinking and unreasonable, that's no reason for you as a believer not to enjoy the comforting fantasies you're enthusiastic about. No problem for me if that's what turns you on. Just allow me the same freedoms for my enthusiastic pursuits.Sadly, those who would convert us non-believers are unwilling to allow US to give OUR input. They're missing out. Many atheists/agnostics have been there, already have done what they're doing, and are now free. My personal responses for them at this point in my life are, “Whatever turns you on.” (Or they might echo Judge Judy's: “That’s your problem, not mine,” or, “What has that to do with anything?”) Write me off as insulting, but isn't mine a better attitude than the Shias, Sunnis, Israelis and Palestinians, Evangelicals and Catholics, have to each other? Yet atheists are their common enemy!

If I find religions boring, anti-thinking and unreasonable, that's no reason for you as a believer not to enjoy the comforting fantasies you're enthusiastic about. No problem for me if that's what turns you on. Just allow me the same freedoms for my enthusiastic pursuits.

I don't care if someone enthusiastically does good deeds and gives credit to God, Allah, Jesus, Holy Spirit, Krishna, Jehovah Satan, etc., or if the good deed doer takes all the credit, enjoys pitching in, relieving suffering. Just so the person is doing good. This is something to be enthused about. On the other hand, if that Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, etc., is enthusiastically doing evil deeds in the name of a god, the acts are still evil - something for their victims to be unenthusiastic about. And before anyone points out the atheists Stalin and Mao, Catholic Hitler and Franco, Muslim Saddam, let's be honest: they were only being themselves. (As God the Dictator is only being himself.)

WHEN we consider happiness as having something to be enthusiastic about, as a “chief requirement of life,” then we naturally should extend THAT possibility to EVERY individual. This is where atheism/humanism are MUCH BETTER at promoting enthusiasms and happiness, rather than religions, (which claim to bring comfort and happiness.) Religions RESTRICT or DENY this aspect of happiness, that possibility, to others: predominately WOMEN, non-religious, and those adults and children in those religions, who really need to know the world as it is. There is so much to be known, to be enthusiastic about in knowing and discovering in REALITY that religions smother!

Good reasons atheists like me would give for not being a faithful member of any Abrahamic religion come from statements made by, of all people, Nazi Rudolph Hess. His speech of June 30th, 1934, contain the words, “One man remains beyond all criticism, and that is the Fuhrer. This is because everyone senses and knows: He will always be right. The National Socialism of all of us in anchored uncritical loyalty, in a surrender to the Fuhrer.” If you substitute “God” for “Fuhrer”, and “the Faith” for “National Socialism,” you have the foundations of Abrahamic religions. On a practical level, for “the Fuhrer,” substitute “God's spokesmen,” and for “National Socialism” substitute whatever faith they represent. Now you get the picture. Atheists/humanists, as all other freedom of conscience supporters, are opposed to what are religious dictatorships.

Happy atheists? I'M happy without any gods or their dictators in my life. No one can really be happy without God? Let's see now. We know of wheelchair-bound individuals who are happy without legs and blind people happy without sight. There are people happy though they have practically nothing in material goods to be happy about - but they're enthused about their kids, friends, hobbies, sports teams, etc., etc. I and you are happy without tons of money, luxuries, and extraordinary pleasures. Sure - you can be perfectly happy without “God,” too. Millions and millions of people are.

Happiness isn't without sorrow, betrayals, or disappointments either; life is a kaleidoscope including “mistakes“ experiences. Sometimes you just have to accept that there are some things you've done or not done for which you'll never be forgiven. And there are some things you won't be “all right about.” That's life. Sometimes you might want to consider that you were happier before belief than after, and now you've returned to that prior state. Be enthused about the New World you've found! And if some believers are unhappy, upset, angry about this, well, maybe it's time they ASK why you're happy.


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

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

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