Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
One media take on the atheist Reason Rally- Fox News
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/03/24/rally-for-nothing-in-particular/
The atheist "Reason Rally" that will take place in Washington on Saturday, March 24 symbolizes the growing strength of atheism in American culture and politics. Events of this kind are meant to get our attention and to generate media interest and articles such as this one.
So as people prepare to gather on the National Mall to celebrate their belief in nothingness, we might reasonably wonder what they want.
In the last decade there has been a spate of books denouncing religion and the religious. Leading this crusade are men like Oxford University?s professional atheist Richard Dawkins.
Finding abuses of religion is low hanging fruit?the sexual abuse scandal within the Catholic Church, self-detonating Muslim extremists, snake-handlers, etc.?and Dawkins and his ilk have made a fortune peddling it.
Dawkins has even turned it into a movement. His minions organize conferences, evangelize the believing, and even gather for Sunday meetings.
Paradoxically, it has become a kind of religion, a Church of Unbelief complete with a saint (Christopher Hitchens), a high priest (Richard Dawkins), and holy writ (anything Dawkins writes). And now, with the political nature of this rally, Dawkins is set to become the Pat Robertson of atheism.
But there is something not quite right about all of this. Christianity, whatever the faults of its adherents, has a rich intellectual tradition that has a comprehensive view of life.
It has given rise to the West as we know it. Our laws, arts, governments, and the very framework of our thought find their meaning in Christianity. Take for example the central premise of the Declaration of Independence: ?We hold these truths to be self-evident. That all men are created equal.?
As Indian philosopher and social reformer Vishal Mangalwadi points out, there is nothing self-evidential about the equality of men.
Indeed, that most of the world believes in the inequality of men finds expression in many of the oppressive laws and governments in non-Western traditions. The only way such a statement makes any sense at all is in a Christian context.
Atheism, by contrast, has no creed, no principles, no philosophy, and can give no guidance. It is but to have a settled disposition on a single question: is there a God?
As my friend the late atheist and journalist Christopher Hitchens conceded, ?atheism is nothing in itself.?
That not withstanding, atheism does have a history?a bad history. By conservative estimates, the twentieth century, an experiment in secular governance, witnessed the deaths of more than 100 million people. That is more than all the religious wars in all previous centuries combined.
One gets the impression, however, that these so-called ?new atheists? listened to John Lennon?s ?Imagine? in the black light a few too many times and really believe that a godless society would be utopian in nature.
How we answer the question of God?s existence or non-existence will largely determine our view of man and that, in turn, will determine our view of government.
If, for instance, you do not believe in God, you are likely to conclude that man is a temporal being meant to serve the state, an eternal institution. This is the view of the communist world. Sacrificing a few million people for the sake of building socialist paradise was always deemed an acceptable price to pay.
If, on the other hand, you believe in a just, benevolent God who made man in his own image, you will likely draw a very different conclusion: man is an eternal being that the state, a temporal institution, is meant to serve.
Proponents of a society free from religious influence can point to no nation or civilization that was founded upon atheism that we might call even remotely good. The story of those regimes is well documented and may be summarized in a word?murderous.
What they can point to are secular societies that are still running off of their accumulated Christian capital. But beware. When the fumes in that tank are spent, tyranny cannot be far away.
In his farewell address, George Washington offered a sober warning: ?Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.? This he deduced without the benefit of seeing the twentieth century. The eighteenth, it seems, was enough.
So as the rally for nothingness meets to celebrate, well, nothing in particular, reflect for a moment on the world they would give us. One need not imagine it. It has been done.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/03/24/rally-for-nothing-in-particular/#ixzz1q9Y2ZeKb
Re: One media take on the atheist Reason Rally- Fox News
Found the following reaction to the link above:
Get out your notebooks, kids. Class is in session. If you ever want to engage in persuasive writing, nobody does it better than Fox News. I am consistently impressed by how well they spin things and how uniform their message is. Let's take a look:Events of this kind are meant to get our attention and to generate media interest and articles such as this one. So as people prepare to gather on the National Mall to celebrate their belief in nothingness, we might reasonably wonder what they want.Brilliant use of pronouns right off the bat to subtly, but definitively establish "us" (wholesome God-fearing Christians) vs. "them" (Godless hate-mongers). Now that we've established who's on whose side...Leading this crusade are men like Oxford University?s professional atheist Richard Dawkins.Use of the word "professional" might seem like it's complimentary, but it's not. People will read this and associate "atheism" with a profession. Of course if one were to stop and think about it nobody would come to the conclusion that you can make money by simply "believing in nothingness." But subconsciously, readers will form an - albeit irrational - link between atheism and personal, financial gain. He returns to this point...?and Dawkins and his ilk have made a fortune peddling it.This one's particularly impressive. Once again, we see that the evil atheist leader is prioritizing his income over his convictions. But, also notice how the demeaning word "peddling" was used. Atheism is barely more significant than a neighborhood kid's lemonade stand. This is brilliant stuff, I tell you.His minions organize conferences, evangelize the believing, and even gather for Sunday meetings.These don't even need elaboration. Also, I was unaware of the Sunday meetings. Where's my invite?Paradoxically, it has become a kind of religion, a Church of Unbelief complete with a saint (Christopher Hitchens), a high priest (Richard Dawkins), and holy writ (anything Dawkins writes). And now, with the political nature of this rally, Dawkins is set to become the Pat Robertson of atheism.This is where we start to get the really good stuff. By framing atheism as a religion, the writer is able to cast it as something to which his readers can relate. For me, the best part is the Pat Robertson line. Most people who are familiar with Pat Robertson either love him or despise him (if you're neither, then you're not sufficiently familiar with the man). The writer used this analogy knowing that those who love Mr. Robertson will see just how big a threat the leader of the enemy camp is. And those who despise him will instantly transfer their dislike of his extremist views over to the new guy who's clearly just as extreme, but for a different "religion."As my friend the late atheist and journalist Christopher Hitchens conceded, ?atheism is nothing in itself.?"Look, I'm not biased, I'm even claiming one of these heathens as my friend!" Never mind it's the one who's no longer alive to refute this claim.That not withstanding, atheism does have a history?a bad history. By conservative estimates, the twentieth century, an experiment in secular governance, witnessed the deaths of more than 100 million people. That is more than all the religious wars in all previous centuries combined.Wow. Where did I put that- here it is. Now, any 2nd grader can destroy the flawed logic in this statement in no time at all, but our writer knows that by now, his readers aren't thinking analytically anymore (if, indeed, they ever were), and they're just looking to be told what to think.After this, he goes on to tell us about "murderous" atheist "regimes" and how the good Christian folks in this country should beware. Notice how he started out with the subtle clues and gradually worked his way up to the final doomsday warning level of rhetoric? Top notch stuff. Fox knows how to hire good persuasive writers (being a good fact checker is not a requisite for being a good persuasive writer). I tip my hat to Mr. Larry Alex Taunton, and his mastery of persuasive writing.I only pray (not literally!) that enough readers are equipped with the analytical ability to see through his brilliantly crafted devices. Class dismissed.
What the fu?king fu?k? I'd like to see some kind of basis for the bolded.
I'm not holding my breath? Very little of what these asshats peddle as "News" has a basis.
As an atheist, I might be tempted to attend an atheist rally to show that we exist! We are your neighbors, your friends, we are nothing to be feared!
I swear I am a perfectly lovely person--I have rather high moral standards that align with most Judeo-Christian values. While I have more faith in The State than some, I do not hold it as our highest purpose.
I have no interest in eliminating religion, just as long as you leave me alone and don't upset children by telling them they are going to hell and that nonsense because their parents believe differently than you.
And atheism does have some influence on morality--there is no one to blame for my mistakes or to have faith that there is a higher purpose--just me. While others have influence on our lives, it is totally up to me as to what I make of it.
Some believers seem to think in very black/white, up/down, right/left terms. As though an atheist view of the world is somehow the complete opposite of everything they think they get from religion. Fact is, atheists really aren't that different. Ultimately good people do good things because they are the right thing to do and they make the world a better place. It's really not that complicated.
Yup. Some folks just don't see to understand the difference between atheism and nihilism.