Why Must Religious Morality Always Be Negative?

Over at Paryngula, PZ takes Minnisota columnist Katherine Kersten to task for a pretty batty rant about New Atheism, or atheism, or materialism, or something. It changes. She trots out a many of the tired old gambits many on the religious right have been riding to death for years (If there's no god, how come there's altruism? How can we believe that life has value if there's no afterlife?), puts a bow on them, and sets them out there as if she came up with some fresh new line of reasoning. Our Squid Overlord fisks her better than I ever could, but a thought occurred to me as I read her article which kind of struck a chord: perhaps because I'm a recovering Catholic.

Why the growing audience for notions like these? Religion poses a serious challenge to our cherished idea of personal autonomy. Unlike our forebears, we define freedom as the right to live as we choose -- to "be ourselves" -- unconstrained by social norms or a morally grounded sense of guilt or shame.

It says a lot about the religiously devout that when they speak about morality, it is almost always about constraint and control, about shame, fear and guilt. That's a pretty sad way to live your life. They can't be moral on the grounds of love? Of concern or empathy? They can't do the right thing out of simple kindness?

Why is it that they feel incapable of behaving themselves if they're not constantly beaten over the head with accusations of fault and dire warnings of eternal torment?

Michael Newdow is a Gigantic Asshat

Would someone please duct-tape this idiot's face shut? Literally?

It's no great secret that the US is an overly evangelical country. We require all of our congressional representatives to indulge in empty, fawning religious obeisance before we will elect them to office. We structure much of our lives around religious practices. We invoke God or credit him for helping us achieve the most trivial and asinine goals, like scoring a touchdown. And it can get damned frustrating for a person who does not indulge in Armband Religion (thank you for that phrase, Kathleen Parker).

But come on. It's a stupid little ritual that occupies a few minutes of time and will not be remembered a year from now. At least, it wouldn't have been, if this self-important jackass and his capering sycophants hadn't decided to pop up from under their collective rock and make fools of themselves. Now, Bill "War on Christmas" O'Reily and Sean "Brain? What brain?" Hannity will be regaling the nation with tales of how evil secularists are persecuting poor, helpless Christians. And for what? NOTHING.

There are real, tangible separation issues occurring in our society. People lose custody of their children because judges apply religious dogma in their decisions. Prisoners are differentially sentenced, or granted or denied parole on the basis of whether they are "saved". Military personnel are targeted for proselytization and abuse, and denied promotion on religious grounds. And the inauguration invocation is the best gripe this band of morons can come up with?

Mr. Newdow, please go back to playing in your sandbox and let the grown-ups do the heavy lifting. We don't need your interference.

Today, I am No Longer Catholic

I've tried: lord, I've tried.

I was raised in a fairly moderate Catholic family. No idiocy like that which has surrounded Crackergate, or the story coming out of the UK about how demons cause STD's and are spread by in-vitro-fertilization. No belief in trans-substantiation (though the same cannot be said of my grandparents), demonic possession, or hell. In short, fairly open-minded, middle-of-the-road white-bread Christianity. My mother's family are very conservative Opus Dei, John Bircher types, but both of my parents are fairly mellow.

But is there any particular point in being such a Catholic? I can't find one anymore. I simply can't accept that God would send himself down to Earth in order to sacrifice himself to himself to try to convince himself not to punish every man, woman, and child that has ever lived for non-sins that were never committed by two people who never existed. That a being capable of creating the cosmos would take a deep and abiding interest in what parts of our bodies we rub on whom. That there is value in sacrifice, or suffering, or the rote performance of sacraments. If one cannot accept these things, is there a point in remaining a member of such a faith group?

I used to find value in the performance of the rituals, the taking of the steps themselves whether or not one accepted the dogma. Kind of like doing yoga or Taiji Chuan without believing that you have invisible energy lines running through your guts (Qi). But the older I've gotten, the more pointless it all seems to be. If there is a God, how could such actions or such belief possibly be of any value to it?

I started drifting away from the Church over two decades ago, in high school (a Catholic, Jesuit high school, before anyone starts babbling about how secular public schooling leads to a loss of faith). The Jebbies taught us to question our faith: that doing so was a healthy part of one's spiritual development. I guess I just questioned a little harder than they intended.

So I really haven't been much of a Catholic for some time, but I guess the garbage that's been coming out of Church leadership and out of loose cannons like Bill the Perpetually Offended has pushed me over the edge. I just can't have any respect for the Church as an institution, as a philosophy, or even as a theraputic set of rituals. I give up. I quit.

I don't think that I can call myself atheist or even agnostic at this point: giving up on the comforting idea that there might just be a guiding purpose behind the universe is something I do find myself shying away from, though I'm not entirely sure why this should be so. I guess I'd test out as a Taoist Deist, if one were to examine my remaining beliefs. But I think I'll stop describing myself as having been "raised Catholic" when people ask about my religious beliefs, as I have been doing for years. I like many others, answer this way to avoid starting religious conversations with family and others which we would rather not have. From now on, it's just "I don't belong to any church".

Of course, the Catholic Church would contest me on that. They marked me at my Baptism like a dog spraying a bush. There's an invisible mark on my soul, and as a 16-year old I dutifully and without significant consideration reinforced that mark by going through Confirmation, like all good Catholic boys did at that age.

But so what, says I, If I no longer believe in invisible marks (or souls, for that matter)? Just another bullshit article of faith on the pyre.

On Fundamentalists and Anonymous Blogging

Anyone familiar with the blog Atheist in a Minivan (aka Possummomma) knows that someone who admits to an absence of religious faith on the internet can draw some pretty intense and unsettling attention from the God-botherer crowd. The blogger, Possummomma, has been harassed by email and at her home, had her daughter stalked by a preacher on her way to and from school, and been subjected to other "spreading of the good news" which she is understandably reluctant to discuss. This, of course, is entirely irrespective of the endless parade of religious whackaloons who traipse through her blog and try to reclaim her for the Zombie Messiah. She is not alone in this: others, such as Prof. PZ Myers, have received death threats.

A few weeks before this post was written, an atheist blogger who had been going by the name William J. Isom revealed himself as Craig A. James and issued a call for others to "come out". He states in essence that previous civil movements promoting equality for minorities succeeded because of people who stood up and rattled the cages of the established powers that be.

While I'm entirely in agreement that this was appropriate in the case of the womens' and civil rights movements, I'm not sure I buy his argument as it applies to non-believers. The rights movements of the 20th century were able to succeed because the mistreatment was based on factors which the abused did not consciously choose: you are born female or black. Those of us who abandon religion, however, do so out of choice. This does not carry the potential for empathy which physical factors beyond one's control can draw out. In essence, the populace at large doesn't give a damn about non-believers, because our situation is seen as one of our own making. This is, I think, a big reason why abuse of atheists and agnostics does not make the news: no one really gives a shit. Non-believers are on their own.

Hell, look at what society does to homosexuals, because of the FALSE perception that being gay is a "lifestyle choice". Our decision is TRULY a choice: what fucking chance do we have?

So, I think I will remain anonymous, thank you very much. While I have no fear for my own safety (I actively practice my second amendment rights), I don't trust that some well-intended but bat-shit insane god-botherer from the boonies won't shine around and harass my family to try to use them as leverage to "bring me back to Christ".