Shaun Micallef sees a religious zeal in atheism

[rug]

JANUARY 13 2017
Kerrie O'Brien

The meaning of life has fascinated writer/comedian Shaun Micallef for some time. His commitment to exploring the question led him to make the series Shaun Micallef's Stairway to Heaven, in which he tries to get inside the minds of various believers. He embeds himself with Mormons in Salt Lake City, Christian doomsday preppers in the US and faith healers in Brazil.

He is intrigued by "this need for magic in people's lives, this desperate need to have a man or woman in the sky, a magic fairy, this idea of fate or being pre-ordained". While there are millions of people around the world devoted to particular religions, Micallef is also struck by the rise of militant atheism. Led by Professor Richard Dawkins, who wrote The God Delusion, it's an anti religion philosophy that, ironically, is religious in its passion. "It's almost like a religion of non-believers," says Micallef. "They KNOW what you believe is wrong. I don't know whether that's a very good thing."

Atheism has been around for a long time but the fervour with which this non-believing is pursued is a recent phenomenon. "There's a case I think for answering somebody with zeal with that sort of argument but I'm not sure you can go and pick a fight. You can use this as an armour rather than a weapon. It's a bit similar in a way to this objection people have to same sex marriage. Hang on – what's it got to do with you? It's not going to affect you. It's not going to devalue whatever love you have with someone."

Despite his best efforts, Micallef came away from the series a firm non-believer. Rather than any particular set of beliefs, he argues the greatest gift you can give your loved ones is to encourage them to be curious. "Encourage them to be really interested in other people. Anyone, if you look closely, who does that is fascinating. Our job is to find the good and see that, rather than what's wrong. You can't build on what's wrong. Build on the good stuff and make that your life's work."

http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/shaun-micallef-sees-a-religious-zeal-in-atheism-20170105-gtmg3b.html

http://www.artemisfilms.com/productions/shaun-micallefs-stairway-to-heaven

[HassleCat]

1. Why atheists get too zealous

We are very tired of being pounded with religion by our civic leaders. We are tired of turning on the TV and seeing some reporter remind a disaster victim she needs to thanknGod she's alive when her husband and three kids were killed. And so on.

[guillaumeb]

6. But by reacting in the same way, does this not validate the intolerant behavior? eom

[HassleCat]

7. Yes, and there is a line that gets crossed.

Labelling religious believers as stupid or deluded, for example. I would be perfectly happy to achieve a live and let live situation.

[guillaumeb]

8. Agreed. Unfortunately some theists feel the need to impose

their beliefs on others.

[Bretton Garcia]

9. I'm intolerant of religious intolerance

Fight fire with fire. Give them a taste of their own medicine.

Extreme persistence may count as intolerance, by the way

[guillaumeb]

10. Fighting intolerance with intolerance seems to be illogical

because the responsive behavior validates the initiating behavior.

[Bretton Garcia]

11. Not if the other side loses

And sues for peace.

[immoderate]

2. Very nice. What does a 'religious zeal' have to do with religion?

--imm

[Kashkakat v.2.0]

3. Two kinds of atheists, 1 has an absence of belief in god (aka agnostic) and the other has a belief

that there is no "god" or afterlife. Its that latter type that can be a royal PITA - not always, but they can be as evangelical & intolerant as any evangelical & intolerant Christian. Gives the rest of you a bad name (or do I mean to say gives "us" a bad name - I guess im sorta agnostic, sorta pagan believing in a "great spirit" unifying force, as well as complete separation of church & state).

[J_William_Ryan]

4. This fails as both a straw man fallacy and hasty generalization fallacy.

Those free from faith are not ‘anti-religion’ – indeed, the vast majority of those free from faith harbor no ill-will toward theists, they acknowledge the right of theists to believe as they see fit, and defend the right of religious liberty.

As is the case with all classes of persons, there might exist those who are aggressive in their views, and those free from faith who are aggressive in their views constitute but a tiny minority who are in no way ‘representative’ of everyone free from faith – consequently, there is no ‘rise’ of ‘militant atheism,’ no ‘anti religion philosophy,’ where being free from faith does not manifest as ‘religion.’

[guillaumeb]

5. We can see this atheistic intolerance, (perhaps the counterpart to theistic

intolerance?) , occasionally in evidence at DU.

And it is intolerance, not theism or atheism, that is the problem.

[Bretton Garcia]

12. I see a mild verbal aggressiveness in atheists as?

Last edited Mon Jan 16, 2017, 05:23 AM - Edit history (1)

A tactically useful temporary strategy. To be put aside ... if and when atheists are allowed civil discussion, by often rabid or zombie-ized and literally murderous religious zealots.

Even there, atheists know that pacification, the imposiition of "peace," is one of the great tricks of religion. Asking for peace is really a way of a domineering class achieving the submission and servitude of others.

So personally? I like civil discussion. But occasional angry outbursts are useful.

And a certain polarization is useful in order to clarify the different sides any issue. As well as to maintain the Internet Blog style.

So I guess I'd say? Let those who want a peaceful discussion have one. But let those who want a more animated expression of differences have that as well.

Particularly since 1) religion will still continue to be a violent subject, overseas and in evangelical circles. And particularly since 2) its "peace" is mostly pacification or cancellation, suppression, of its opponents.

So: no gag orders here. Or suppression of free speech.

(Where IS "Blur" anyway?)

[rug]

13. Here he is:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=131176

[guillaumeb]

15. What an interesting bit of reading that profile was.

I am glad he credited me at least with an 8th grade education. Far better than I probably deserve. I suppose his little speech is much cheaper than therapy, but I would still recommend the therapy.

[rug]

16. This is why claims of wanting civil discussion ring hollow.

[guillaumeb]

17. Most here do, in my opinion, engage in civil discussion.

But the profile was pure venting. Better to write it and then delete it.

[rug]

18. Four months of lurking is more than simple venting.

[guillaumeb]

19. Therapy might help with the anger.

The poster might be happier at another site.

[AtheistCrusader]

25. You got called out in *another* poster's farewell bio?

What's the record, I wonder?

[rug]

38. Well, if we're going for the record, you have to add this one:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=110596

[AtheistCrusader]

39. How does one search for these? I must have left a trail of my own..

[rug]

40. If that annoying sound suddenly stops, search the name of the cause.

[guillaumeb]

14. I understand verbal agressiveness.

But attacking believers by calling them stupid, or scientifically ignorant, or other things rarely leads to dialogue. And given that there is a dedicated AA space, there is no restriction of discussion at DU.

[Bretton Garcia]

20. "Scientifically ignorant" does not sound like a simple insult.

But something with a potentially serious point.

Atheists often note that believers do not seem to know enough about science. Or that their anti evolutionists ignore, or misrepresent, or even attack, the science of, say, Biology.

[rug]

21. Are atheists now a monadal bloc?

[Bretton Garcia]

34. If atheists sometimes do something ...

One reading here would be that some do, and some don't.

[guillaumeb]

37. Add the qualifier "some" to your description and I would agree. eom

[Bretton Garcia]

42. Insistance on polite decorum...

Is often used to suppress rightly angry people.

That's important.

Maintaining peaceful decorum is not always a good thing. When that consists in telling slaves and victims to keep their mouths shut.

[guillaumeb]

43. What you said in a previous post:

Atheists often note that believers do not seem to know enough about science. Or that their anti evolutionists ignore, or misrepresent, or even attack, the science of, say, Biology.

I would modify to read:

Some atheists often note that some believers do not seem to know enough about science. Or that their anti evolutionists ignore, or misrepresent, or even attack, the science of, say, Biology.

I agree that politeness can be used as a tactic, but my personal feeling is that at a certain point, one either has dialogue or there are two sides shouting back and forth. I do not feel that anyone in this forum is attempting to tell anyone else to not speak. I can and do respect your views without agreeing with them. And I would always defend your right to have those views.

[hrmjustin]

22. In real life all the atheists I know in real life are live and let live people.

Same with all my believer friends as well.

The internet well...

[AtheistCrusader]

24. This is a political site. Politics and religion are intertwined heavily in the United States.

Strike up a conversation with one of your believer friends, (play devil's advocate, and assume the typical right wing religious role) state you're against abortion because of your faith, and let me know how 'live and let live' easy peasy the conversation goes.

Religion is contentious in this country because of the political dimension, and no other reason.

[hrmjustin]

28. If you say so.

[AtheistCrusader]

29. I never once talked to another human about religion and the fact that I was an atheist

until it came to a head over a political issue; specifically abortion.

Not once.

[hrmjustin]

30. OK. Maybe because I live in NYC I don't encounter many anti-choice people.

[AtheistCrusader]

31. Any other strong political opinions?

What about the 'pledge of allegiance' issue when you were in school?

[hrmjustin]

32. In HS people either did it or didn't. Several religious students didn't because they didn't

believe in pledging allegiance to a flag.

[Bretton Garcia]

35. NYC today is a very multiethnic and fairly liberal town

Not quite as liberal as DC though. Which went 93% for Hillary in the recent election.

[hrmjustin]

36. Fairly liberal about explains it.

Some people think it is a complete leftist city and if you follow our politics you will see that is not the case.

[AtheistCrusader]

23. The cognitive dissonance in this statement is mind-boggling.

"You can use this as an armour rather than a weapon. It's a bit similar in a way to this objection people have to same sex marriage. Hang on – what's it got to do with you? It's not going to affect you. It's not going to devalue whatever love you have with someone."

First off, non-theists are typtically overwhelmingly in favor of same sex marriage because we are overwhelmingly left of center, and fighting that battle for a long long time.

Second, the people we fight AGAINST for civil rights, are typically right wing and religious. We don't go after people who keep their religion to themselves. When's the last time anyone heard Dawkins say something negative about Unitarian Universalists? This is such a bullshit, made up claim. This is blaming the victim for fighting back, and it's complete nonsense.

[DetlefK]

26. "Hang on what's it got to do with you? It's not going to affect you."

Yeah! Why are atheists so passionate about topics like same-sex-marriage and abortion? It doesn't affect them in any way! Why can't they just let go and accept other people's lifestyles on this? Gosh, atheists are so zealous and intolerant...

[DetlefK]

27. In other news, Jeff Sessions put it up for debate whether atheists can even know "truth".

Why are these atheists so angry? It's not like the incoming Attorney General categorized them as a lower life-form than believers!

[Buzz cook]

33. Seems like both siderism.

You can't say something about one side without saying something about the other. So you get atheists are just like Westboro Baptist.

[Bretton Garcia]

41. Good point

There are not always two sides to everything. Like the question, "does gravity exist." There is only one right answer, there.