Firstly, you have likely heard the cliche jokes about atheists spending their lives denying ‘God’. The jokes imply that it is pointless to spend one’s time debunking things they don’t believe in. If atheists don’t believe in any gods (or, as you would say, ‘God’) then why do they spend so much time talking about ‘God?’ Of course, if you’ll think this through honestly you will quickly realize how silly and wrong it is. Many Christians spend huge amounts of time and effort debating with and attempting to debunk the beliefs of other religions and philosophies. They don’t do this because they secretly believe these other beliefs are true, but because they sincerely believe they are false and misleading. The same is true for atheists such as myself. I value the truth.

Another important thing to consider is that many atheists are former believers, and so invested much time in beliefs they now consider false. There is a certain self-loathing and heightened annoyance at religion due to this. Also, it is very difficult for a Christian living in America – especially fundamentalists – to realize just how religion permeates much of our society. You probably tend to think Christianity (at least your circle) is being discriminated against, persecuted, shouted down, and so forth. That is natural, and if you believe it you can certainly find evidence to support it. However, the truth is that the vast majority of Americans are Christians and that religion touches practically every aspect of public discourse in America. Of course, if you are a fundamentalist, you largely write off the legitimacy of most other Christian groups. But the differences you make much of are quite insignificant to everyone else.

In order to understand just how much Christianity fills the public sphere in America, you would need to imagine yourself living in a country – such as Iraq – with a majority Muslim population. The subtle differences among the various sects (Sunni, Shiite, subgroups) would be insignificant to you as a non-Muslim. The simple fact is that, in these nations, Islamic beliefs affect everything from media to politics to education. Such is the state (although probably not in the same measure and type) of Christianity in American life.

a Christian interrupting a stranger's day to tell him he's wrong...

You probably don’t understand why atheists don’t just leave believers alone and let people believe what they believe. But I could ask you the same question. Why do Christians try to convert nonbelievers and people of other faiths? In fact, billions of dollars and millions of man hours are spent by Christians every year writing books, producing television shows, marketing to nonbelievers, and even going out into neighborhoods and venues to confront people who haven’t requested any information about your beliefs at all. Of course I know why Christians do these things because I was one. It should suffice to say that atheists can have all of the same reasons as Christians for speaking out: they think the information they have can be helpful, they think the beliefs they are confronting are harmful to society, etc.

And let’s be frank: even outspoken nonbelievers don’t spend nearly as much time or energy promulgating their beliefs as believers. And they certainly don’t practice the confrontational telemarketing-style tactics of soul-winners. As far as vociferous groups go, atheists are probably the most harmless. It isn’t likely that atheists will be on the evening news rioting in the streets or shooting up a church. At best, they will be out debating and writing books and posting to their blogs.

Now, on to the point: Why is religion so bad? Of course, you will not agree with most of my reasons because you believe differently. However, I would ask you to imagine – just imagine – that you believed as I do. Pretend for just a few moments that you didn’t find any evidence at all to believe in any gods or any of the world’s religious claims, and see if it doesn’t help you to understand why someone such as myself finds religion worth confronting.

the money spent for this preacher's airline ticket probably could have been better spent...

1. Religion wastes massive amounts of resources.

For example: When Christian missionaries go to third-world nations with food, medicine, water filtration devices, and other supplies, how much time and effort is spent – not in actually raising the standard of living of the people they work with – but in indoctrinating them (‘discipling’) religiously? Let’s be honest: huge portions of funds, efforts, and educational resources at the dispense of religious charity efforts are spent this way. Now, you think this is acceptable because you believe this ‘aspect’ of aid is more important than the others. But can you understand why somebody like me would find it absolutely disgusting and wasteful? Consider: not only do I think that it lessens the humanitarian impact, but I also think that the religious beliefs being taught are themselves false and damaging.

The same goes for the world’s resources as a whole. What if religious beliefs really are just myths? You find this an absurd proposition. But I believe it. If you were me, what would you think about the fact that much of the population dedicates much time and money to their religious group? Wouldn’t you want to free these people?

2. Religion stands in the way of progress in every way imaginable.

Throughout human history, religion has fought progress at every step: scientific progress, technological progress, moral progress. And there is a reason: religion thrives upon ignorance and control, and is weakened by education and change. Religion is little more than the practice of asserting things are so, as opposed to figuring things out. This is why any time someone figures things out (whether it is the nature of the solar system, the origin of the species, etc.) he had better be prepared to run from religion. Libraries have been burned, scientists have been threatened, reputations have been smeared, and every sort of progress imaginable has been sabotaged in the name of religious beliefs.

har.

Progress usually wins out. But religion has managed to delay, delay, delay. Think about it: just a couple hundred years ago, protestants were burning people at the stake for interpreting the Bible differently. And today even you, my fundamentalist friend, find that abhorrent. It is your modern sensibilities – those enabled by moral progress – and NOT your religious beliefs that aid you in making this judgment. There are still believers in America who think that black people or white people are cursed by ‘God’. You might find this repulsive as well. But don’t ignore: they use the same Bible you do to make their points.

At every rung on the ladder of progress, the pastor or priest has been there to stave the world off with the Bible and hell. And, when they eventually lose the battle, they simply retreat to the next rung up. If you were me, you would be seriously wondering, “How much would we have accomplished by now if we had given religion the boot?”

3. Religion poisons the mind of children (and adults, too).

When a parent or a teacher tells a child a certain thing is true, the child – more often than not – believes them. Fundamentalists are crippling their children with the things they are teaching them. For instance, you are probably telling your children that biological evolution is a massive lie. You are teaching them, in so many words, that scientists are either just big liars, or just really stupid and gullible people. (I hope you can appreciate the great irony I see in this…) This sort of education is devastating because it teaches children to partition their minds and to reject anything whatsoever – regardless of the evidence – that contradicts their beliefs. And, furthermore, you do not allow your children to consider any alternatives to your religion. You tell them from the time they are born that your beliefs are true and immutable, over and against all claims.

How to Brainwash Children and Disable Their Minds

This produces adults who are, quite literally, mentally disabled. Frankly, any adult who thinks that a universally accepted scientific theory is a big lie because of what his religious book says is mentally disabled. If you were a nonbeliever, you would think this too. Try to understand that to me, this is not different from a person thinking the world is flat or that it rests upon the back of a giant turtle or that evil old women turn into cats. If a person rejects such obvious truths out of hand because of their religious beliefs, they are crippled mentally. And this is only one expression of that disability.

Why is this such a big deal? Because this disability spills over into other areas that affect society even more, such as tolerance, foreign relations, etc. Any time a person holds unjustified beliefs in higher regard than justified beliefs, their critical reasoning skills are damaged and they are potentially susceptible to extreme, irrational influences. It is incidental that your beliefs do not lead you to blow up a bus or fly planes into buildings. Your children will probably not learn that people of other faiths should be exterminated (although they will think God will take care of that with hell…). But they will believe other things that are just as irrational, such as that Jesus is coming back to destroy the earth soon or that homosexuals are wicked people or that if they talk to God he will answer them. I know you honestly believe these things. But again, if you didn’t, wouldn’t the whole thing be quite unsettling to you? Especially if you had once believed it all and now realized just how debilitating it is?

4. Religion robs your life of value and happiness.

This will be a hard one for you to grasp, but I hope you try. You believe that you will live forever, and that your life is important because you have a purpose given to you by your creator. I believe that death is final and that life has whatever purpose we determine for ourselves. Let me quickly set aside a major hangup believers have about ‘purpose’ without gods:

The idea that life without a creator could have no purpose is not rational. Firstly, everybody’s life – including yours – has exactly the purpose that the person himself determines it has. If you think about this, you will realize it is true. ‘Doing God’s will’ is your life’s purpose because you make it your life’s purpose. Secondly, we can easily see the fallacy in this line of reasoning: consider God. If a life only has purpose if it was created for a purpose , then what about God? What is God’s purpose in life? Of course, we would have to say that God ‘just is’. He didn’t choose to be, and he wasn’t created. So wouldn’t the same line of reasoning that says we can have no purpose without God – that our lives are meaningless and that we should despair – mean that a god’s life would have no purpose and that his existence would be entirely meaningless? I think you get the point.

So, if you put yourself in my shoes, you would feel very sorry for those people who spend so much of their life toiling as though they will reap the rewards in another life and as though they will live forever. I recognize that when these people die, they will never so much as see a glimmer of light again much less experience the pleasure and freedom they forfeited in this life to prepare for the next. I know that even those who toil do derive some satisfaction from their efforts, whether it is the simple sense of satisfaction from hard work or the belief that their dedication will be rewarded later. But I believe much of the life that you live – the rules you follow, the initiatives you pursue – will not in fact bring anything other than the present satisfaction you feel.

Think: if you believed that this life is the only life you get, how would you live it? It would instantly become more valuable to you, as it did to me. So would the lives of your loved ones. And the realization that all of the petty things you now believe God cares about (what people do when they are naked, what they drink, what sorts of clothes they wear, what sort of entertainment they enjoy, etc.) are really just decisions you yourself are free to make is a liberating one.

Millions of Muslim women are still treated as property thanks to the oddity of religion

If you believed as I do that this life was the only one people live, and that enjoying life is always good so long as it isn’t at someone else’s expense, wouldn’t you feel inclined to do your part in refuting beliefs that said otherwise? You can, in fact, understand where I am coming from at least to a point: consider the lives of strict Muslims or Amish communities. Consider how Muslim women are expected to dress and act, how isolated the Amish try to remain. Do you not pity them on some level? Do you think these people are wasting their time? Do you think they could potentially be happier on some level if they were freed to live as you do? I think so, too.

Of course, there are many more reasons – and further details – as to why I think religion is bad. However, I think this should be enough to at least help you understand why many nonbelievers feel it necessary to address religion. Ultimately, the reason is as I stated earlier: I value truth. Anyone who values truth will find it difficult to remain silent where they believe myths are being promulgated as fact.

For those of you who are not fundamentalists, I suppose I will pick on you later.

Ever since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, West Germans as well as East Germans are regularly polled on their stance toward religion. When asked whether they believe in God, most East Germans simply respond by saying: “Nope, I’m perfectly normal.”

This reply must come as a shock to most Americans. After all, it implies that there is something “abnormal” about a belief in God. As if they had been brought up reading Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion, East Germans do indeed consider religious folks to be odd, bizarre, or even insane.

Being born in East Germany myself, I can easily relate to this attitude. In contrast to what a lot of Americans seem to think, we have never been raised to be hostile toward religion. Actually, it was much worse: we have grown up to be totally and utterly indifferent toward religion.

On Sunday mornings, when American kids went to church, we went to the cinema. I still remember enjoying Joseph L. Mankiewicz’s Cleopatra and Anthony Mann’s The Fall of the Roman Empire, or laughing out loud while watching Blake Edwards’ The Great Race or Billy Wilder’s Some Like it Hot.

One day — I must have been around ten years old — I was late for Jean Delannoy’s The Hunchback of Notre Dame starring the fabulous Anthony Quinn and the beautiful Gina Lollobrigida. Disappointed to have missed the screening, I went home, passing the St Paul’s Cathedral. Given that I had some extra time on my hands, I decided to sneak into the church. There were about 15 or 20 people in there, mostly in their 60s or 70s. The musty smell, the morbid paintings, and the bleeding savior nailed to a cross made me anxious.

Still, in order to see what these people were doing, I moved a bit closer. Apparently, they were celebrating the Holy Communion. Gathered around an altar, they handed around a chalice and a platter asking each other to “Eat the Body and Drink the Blood of the Lord.” I shivered! How can anyone eat the flesh and drink the blood of another person? What kind of people are these?

Running home, I asked my mom about the people in the church. She said, “They’re Christians. They believe in God and Satan, and Heaven and Hell. My own parents were religious, too. My father was Jewish and my mother was Catholic. Seeing that they were killed by the Nazis while I was only three years old, I don’t know anything about religions, though.” In order to change the seemingly uninteresting subject, she added, “Never mind, it doesn’t concern us.”

It must have been around that time when I first saw Roman Polanski’s movie Rosemary’s Baby on TV (on a West German channel, of course). Later I learned that the movie was not depicting Christians, but Satanists. Yet at that time, I could not see any difference. For me, both were weird people, believing in weird beings, and doing weird things. One may say I was simply too young to be able to tell the difference between two entirely different cults. But this is exactly my point. It only proves how unprejudiced I was! I must have looked at Christianity the same way a Hindu must look at it (or, for that matter, how Christians look at Hindus — as lost and doomed souls praying to a heaven filled with hundreds of Gods).

As strange as it may sound, I was already 12 years old when I first met a Christian in person. In grade six, the daughter of a pastor joined our class. Although she turned out to be a wonderful human being, I still recall that I was reluctant to talk to her. After all, I considered religious people as mystifying people who claim to be in contact with gods, demons, and other beings no one has ever seen.

“Philanthropist” is a word which, translated from Greek, literally means “lover of humanity.”  There is no caveat attached to this term that dictates that the lover of humanity must also believe in a god or gods, but it would seem that some religiously affiliated and atheist-wary folks ignore that lack of a religious requirement. Those people are certainly misguided. It is only the religious who feel that religion is needed in order for a person to be charitable.

Something which should be a point of pride for all atheists, especially when you’re being told by someone who knows little about you besides the fact that you’re not a believer — and often assumes the worst —  is that the two biggest charitable contributions in American history can both be attributed to non-believers: Bill Gates and Warren Buffet.

But charity is not, and should not be, a tally of which side has done more, and the subsequent declaration of a winner. It shouldn’t be about who wins. The focus should be on helping people whether you’re religious or not. I have been told more than once by religious people who were disturbed by my atheism that, if there were no god fearing, good people on this earth there would be no hospitals, no orphanages, no clothing and food drives, no helping hand for anyone. In this bleak and truly apocalypic atheist future, everyone is looking out for themselves and the very idea of helping others is perverse and uncessesary. Help out your fellow man? Heh, who’s gonna make me?

The fact is that there are plenty of secular institutions already in existence that provide every kind of charitable resource you could imagine — and they provide these things without the common proselytization-in-exchange-for-help attitude which is often found at religiously affiliated institutions and events.

I remember specifically helping an older woman whose husband had died. A big group of us were there cleaning her house and fixing up her yard. I was helping the woman sort through clothes and she started talking about how wonderful the Catholic organization was that had set up the work we doing and by proxy, how wonderful we all were. I thanked her, and I didn’t correct her assumption that we were all Catholics doing good Catholic work because I felt that the work we were doing was important, not the details of who was doing it to be nice and who was doing it because of god. However, I realized that in many cases, people assume charity work is being done in the name of a “holy” organization.

The only way I can see to change the public perception of atheists and to help change the assumptions being made about charitable work is for atheists to get involved with their communities as atheists so that we can show by example that we are upstanding citizens interested in philanthropy in it’s purest form.

Below is a list of secular charities and aid-based organizations which would be worth looking into if you are looking to donate some time or money to your fellow human beings. This is by no means a complete list and does not include many local organizations which are always looking for volunteers. Remember, while donating money is always appreciated and needed, what a lot of charities need even more is your time and physical involvement. If we all tried to get involved or if those of us who can’t get involved were willing to support those who are even a little bit, we could do a lot to change the commonly-held and entirely unfair position that atheists are selfish, mean people who don’t have the capacity for compassion that religious folks have. It’s not at all fair, but it’s up to us to prove them wrong. Keep reading for a list of charities.

DonorsChoose.org is a simple way to provide students in need with resources that our public schools often lack.

Kiva.org lets you connect with and loan money to unique small businesses in the developing world.

The Union of Concerned Scientists is a leading science-based non-profit working for a healthy environment and safer world.

The American Red Cross, a humanitarian organization led by volunteers, provides relief to victims of disasters and help people prevent, prepare for, and respond to emergencies. The USA’s premier emergency response organization, over 91% of Red Cross spending is on charitable services.

The mission of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)  is to preserve all of constitutional protections and guarantees relating to First Amendment rights, including the freedom to practice religion and the freedom not to have religion rammed down our throats, equal protection, due process, and right to privacy.

United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) mobilizes political will and material resources to help countries, particularly developing countries, ensure a “first call for children” and to build their capacity to form appropriate policies and deliver services for children and their families. UNICEF provides emergency and disaster relief.

Doctors without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) is an international independent medical humanitarian organization that delivers emergency aid to people affected by armed conflict, epidemics, natural and man-made disasters, and exclusion from health care in nearly 70 countries.

Amnesty International’s vision is of a world in which every person enjoys all of the human rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international human rights standards. In pursuit of this vision, AI’s mission is to undertake research and action focused on preventing and ending grave abuses of the rights to physical and mental integrity, freedom of conscience and expression, and freedom from discrimination, within the context of its work to promote all human rights.

Oxfam International is a confederation of 12 organizations working together with over 3,000 partners in more than 100 countries to find lasting solutions to poverty, suffering and injustice. The Oxfams operate in over 100 countries worldwide working with local partners to alleviate poverty and injustice.

The Nature Conservancy is a leading international, nonprofit organization dedicated to preserving the diversity of life on Earth. An environmental group that protects natural habitats and the wildlife within them. Focuses on “science-based” initiatives.

Population Connection is the national grassroots population organization that educates young people and advocates progressive action to stabilize world population at a level that can be sustained by Earth’s resources. Works against faith-based policies that are supported by the Religious Right.

DefCon: Campaign to Defend the Constitution is an online grassroots movement combating the growing power of the religious right. It includes a blog on religious freedom issues, action alerts, and in-depth articles on scientific, religious, and legal issues of the day.

The SEED foundation is a national nonprofit that establishes urban public boarding schools to prepare students from underserved communities for success in college.

Project Peanut Butter is a therapeutic feeding program for malnourished children in Malawi and Sierra Leone, on the continent of Africa. It was founded by Professor Mark Manary, M.D., a pediatrician at St. Louis Children’s Hospital and a professor of pediatric medicine at Washington University School of Medicine.

When our freedoms in the networked world come under attack, the Electronic Frontiers Foundation (EFF) is the first line of defense. With the expertise of lawyers, policy analysts, activists, and technologists, EFF achieves significant victories on behalf of consumers and the general public. EFF fights for freedom primarily in the courts, bringing and defending lawsuits even when that means taking on the US government or large corporations.

Mercy corps exists to alleviate suffering, poverty and oppression by helping people build secure, productive and just communities.

Seva’s programs serve people who have been economically, politically, or otherwise marginalized. They change their program’s approach to relate to culture and circumstances, reaching out in different ways to nomads in Tibet, women in Tanzania, and indigenous Mayans in Guatemala.

The International Peace Institute (IPI), formerly International Peace Academy, is an independent, international institution dedicated to promoting the prevention and settlement of armed conflict between and within states through policy research and development.

Most of us have connected with people that we haven’t seen in a long time, by Facebook, Myspace, Classmates or other social media sites. Sometimes, it’s an opportunity to do a little harmless catching up, combined with a chance to see what became of person X. In some cases, it’s a chance to rekindle old friendships, or repair relationships that were damaged by time, distance or immaturity.

Once in a while, it’s a chance to make a difference in a person’s life.

I’ve been in contact with some people from my high school via Facebook. It turns out that at least one of the people with whom I graduated (in Colorado) lives on the Peninsula, and once lived no more than five minutes from me in Olympia. She and I recently reconnected, along with another classmate who now lives in Wisconsin and was visiting Washington. The conversation was great, but lead to something unexpected.

My facebook profile lists me as an atheist. Not long after the trip to Washington, this woman contacted me to ask about my lack of belief. She said, “I’ve never had a chance to discuss things with an actual atheist, and you’re the only one I know.” It turns out that she’s in that early stage, when the teachings of holy book “X” no longer make sense, when the morality espoused by a religion or theistic framework no longer look like they correspond with basic human values. She was doubting her faith, and asking my opinion on her areas of doubt.

Those that know me, know that I read philosophy for fun, that I have a strong working knowledge of the bible, and that I love a good debate. But, interestingly, I don’t think that this is the time for all that. I read her doubts, and they were legitimate ones. I learned that this is not new, but the stewing of thoughts and processes that had been going on for years. I heard the fear in her at the thought of sharing these things with her family, all of whom are believers.

I sympathize. This is my path, all over again. Raised Southern Baptist, closeted as an agnostic for years for the sake of my family and my marriage, scared to tell my parents… many of us have been there. I felt a responsibility to this person to be supportive, to answer questions but not — as some of us are wont to do — to be a lawyer for the prosecution, to attack the framework they are just beginning to see has cracks and missing supports. For all of us, the means of our “coming out” is different, and each of us has had to confront some form of hardship as a result. Another of my old friends came out as a gay man to his parents nearly fifteen years after graduating high school, waiting so long only out of fear of judgement. We, as atheists, don’t have to endure that kind of fear, but few of us are able to say that going public with disbelief was an easy thing.

I know it was as much chance as choice that I became the atheist that this person, out of my life for 25 years, chose to hear her doubts, and the person to whom the questions came. It’s no less thrilling and scary, though. Unlike the christian evangelist, however, I view the responsibility differently. It’s not my place to convince, unless asked. What I feel is my responsibility is to guide the questioner to find their own path, perhaps with a recommended book, or an opinion followed by an attribution to its source. It’s better, I think, when a person comes here on their own, with the sense of accomplishment and freedom that real study brings. I’m answering questions now, mostly about the field of humanist study, about authors I feel represent humanism and atheism as I see it, and directing her to sources that explain morality without the need for deity.

Remember the teacher that really inspired you? Not the one who gave you the answers, but the one who expected you to do the work, the research, and gave praise when you did? It made me work even harder, knowing that I was accomplishing, on my own, something that made sense, and that I would be recognized for having beaten through the underbrush through my own efforts. I’m trying very hard to be that person. And, perhaps, I’ll have a chance to see the birth of a new member of a more enlightened humanity.

It turns out that someone was listening.

Scott Roeder, a long-time anti-abortion activist, a man who had been monitored for years, and who had committed trespassing, criminal mischief and other minor nuisance crimes against clinics including Dr. Tiller’s, allegedly killed Dr. Tiller while the physician served as an usher at his church. Dr. Tiller was more than aware of Roeder, who had on more than one occasion glued the doors to his clinic closed, and about whom Dr. Tiller had made numerous complaints to both local and Federal authorities. Tiller had made such a complaint less than twenty-four hours prior to the shooting.

Roeder was following his faith, which defined abortion as murder of unborn children. In the service of this faith, fed by the voices of ideologues, Roeder believed that any measure, including killing, was justified to protect the lives of those unborn. He was, it seems, not alone. In the wake of George Tiller’s murder, hundreds of posts on far-right and anti-abortion message boards celebrated the murderer as a hero, while making such statements as “George Tiller was aborted in his 203rd trimester,” and “George tiller: now in his fifth hour in Hell.” The suspect himself has made numerous statements to the press essentially celebrating Tiller’s death as a good thing, while denying his involvement in the killing itself.

This “celebration” is not limited to individuals. Randall Terry, founder of Operation Rescue, has tried to simultaneously distance his organization from the murder and laud the act itself. This is proving more difficult by the day, as the investigation reveals the involvement of employees of his organization with Roeder. Commentators who previously referred to the victim as “Tiller the baby killer” are now attempting to claim that they never, ever advocated violence, of course they didn’t.

This is terrorism. The intent of the slaying was to create terror, to reduce the availability of abortion services by killing a provider while at the same time sending the message to others, both providers and those who seek their services:  you could be next. It’s the same message sent when a man detonates a bomb strapped around his waist in Tel Aviv. It’s the same message sent when men fly planes into buildings in New York City. It’s the same message sent when a bomb made of fertilizer destroys a Federal Building in Oklahoma. It is, as of today, the same message sent when a man walks into a museum recording the deaths of millions and opens fire in the name of hatred.

Guess what? It’s working.

Women’s Health Care Services of Witchita, Kansas is closing. How could they not? Who would dare take Dr. Tiller’s place, to be the next target of Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity, the next subject of curses in the mouths of those who claim a god’s love while advocating the murder of another physician? Won’t women now reconsider before going to a clinic providing abortions, wondering if one of the people standing in front with a sign showing the picture of a fetus might have a gun as well? George Tiller’s murderer knows this. It’s a bonus, above and beyond the removal of a hated opponent, this chilling effect.

There are non-religious terrorists. I don’t mean to imply that religion is the only motivator for senseless killing. It is, however, the most common by far. When you hear about a terrorist attack you, like me, immediately thing of one thing: religious fanaticism gone to the extreme. It’s fed by the rhetoric of hate, it’s fanned by the apostles of publicity, it’s perpetrated by the true believers of the Cause, whatever it may be.

In the state of Kansas, whatever you may have thought about the practice of late-term abortion, Dr. George Tiller was within the bounds of the law. Why is it then that the victim of a murderer is being portrayed as less sympathetic than his killer? And what are we, as rational people, doing to counter those voices that celebrate death as a tool of ideology?

Eventually, I want not to have to talk about atheism and religion anymore. I don’t care about people having a religion (I care in that I think that religion breeds hatred and violence). I wish they were a lot more rational about the world, and cared more about empirical evidence than they do. I wish that they saw gods as I see them — the same way I see the Easter bunny or Santa Claus — as silly, useless and illusory. I wish that they could experience the wonder of the unknown, of discovery, rather than being shackled by myths that explain everything, but in such a delusional way. I wish they could be comforted by people, not fables. I wish they were not so afraid of death, and more respectful of life.

I want them to not care that I don’t believe in their god(s) — to not be offended by my presence in this world, by my absolute affront to their faith by simply existing in a state of non-belief. I want to have people walk by me wearing an atheist t-shirt and not make a stupid remark (kind of like you don’t see me making a stupid remark about a Christian t-shirt). I want to not be excluded/rejected/criticized/ostracized for my “lack of faith.”

I want them to stop preying on the depressed, the hopeless, the lonely, the alcoholic, and the hungy. I mean, sometimes, they are well-intentioned, but the help they give comes with a heavy price. Going to an AA meeting requires obeisance to god, as well as praying. Getting food at a religious soup kitchen requires prayer and sermons. All they’re proving is that people will do anything to eat.

I want them to give credit where credit is due. When a child is rescued, or someone survives, (or when a team wins) they credit a miracle — God’s intercession — rather than human effort, compassion, and strength. When someone pulls themselves up, it’s because they did it — they found the strength inside themselves, and maybe there’s a community, friends, and family supporting them. But they didn’t accomplish anything because Jesus helped them. If you did something important for yourself, it was you that did it. You should give yourself some credit.

Prometheus Books is interested in publishing a book of testimonies of college students who have left the fold, including the testimonies of founding members of the various freethought campus groups that have sprung up across the country in the last decade or so. There will also be room for testimonies by “leavers” from Christian colleges, even ex-seminarians. Though most of the contributors ought to still be fairly young. Anonymity will be maintained.

Contact Edward T. Babinski (editor of Leaving the Fold: Testimonines of Former Fundamentalists, Prometheus Books, 2003)

Are more social ills associated with religion or a lack thereof?

If you’re honest, your answer to this question probably maps to your belief status. After all, most of us like to think we’re on the side of the elves, not the orcs — that we and our kind are making the world better. In the absence of clear evidence, the religious and the nonreligious both believe this. Every once in a while, though, we actually get a bit of data that gives us something to mull over, and last week some interesting research hit the press.

One of the oft touted benefits of religion is that it eases our dying. Surprise: According to a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, “Terminally ill cancer patients who drew comfort from religion were far more likely to seek aggressive, life-prolonging care in the week before they died than were less religious patients and far more likely to want doctors to do everything possible to keep them alive.”

Religious patients were less likely than secular patients to sign do not resuscitate orders or to create living wills. They were more likely to want ventilators to keep them breathing till the bitter end. They got more ICU care. Dr. Holly G. Prigerson, an author on the study, offers a very benign explanation for this pattern: “To religious people, life is sacred and sanctified,” Dr. Prigerson said, “and there’s a sense they feel it’s their duty and obligation to stay alive as long as possible.”

If you are a nonbeliever, set aside your annoyance at her implication that life isn’t sacred for the rest of us. The problem with this explanation is that it simply doesn’t map to the facts of the situation. These patients knew they were already in the final stages of the dying process. They also knew that their use of extraordinary measures was costly, though they wouldn’t incur that cost themselves. Medicare spends one third of its entire budget on people in their last year, much of this on people in the last week of life. In a world where children go without immunization, women go without prenatal care, and young adults can’t afford insurance, the choices these patients made did not increase the sacred and sanctified life on this planet. The opposite is true.

Even for themselves, they may have gained little. The measures used to prolong the dying process often are associated with suffering and pain above and beyond that caused by the terminal illness itself — leaving a person with little capacity to experience a few more hours or days to experience that which we cherish in life.

Why might devout believers avoid preparing for death and then want anything medical science has to offer to prolong the dying process? I can’t help but put on my therapist hat here and offer a hunch.

The fact that devout patients more often failed to take preparatory steps like living wills and advanced care planning gives us a clue. It suggests that they were avoidant — coping with the dying process in part by not thinking about it. As a coping mechanism, avoiding works really well in some ways and not so well in others. It can shut out a host of negative emotions, but it also can get in the way of doing what needs doing, on a practical level or an emotional level or both. Then, if an avoided reality breaks through, you’re not ready. Think, for example, about how you avoided studying for exams.

Avoidance suggests anxiety or fear

We are made to be scared of dying — to fight for life and as the poet Dylan Thomas put it to “rage against the dying of the light.” Non-religious people have to face this head on. They have to wrap their brains around the idea of nonexistence, which frankly is rather hard to grok. Emotionally it raises not only fear but anger, confusion and grief. Religion offers a shortcut. Death isn’t really death. It is a transition to the next phase of life. In Christianity, when you die you retain your personal identity and memories. You become either a perfected or perfectly tormented version of yourself. For the Christian believers in the study, this is what their religion teaches, and as believers they expect to be perfected, not tormented.

But very few people believe in heaven or hell the same way they believe in the floor beneath their feet. If they did, as Christian philosopher Ken Himma has pointed out, it would be unconscionable for them to have children and risk the latter. This week a devout airline pilot was convicted of manslaughter, because, in the face of potential disaster he handed off controls to a copilot and began praying (sixteen people died). Cases of this type are mercifully rare; if they weren’t, the devout would not be entrusted with planes. Faced with the prospect of fiery death, usually prayer isn’t quite as trusted as the control panel.

In psychological research, stated beliefs don’t always match what subtle indicators like eye movements, sweating or reaction time reveal a subject’s underlying assumptions to be. Freud was wrong about many things, but he was right that a whole lot of stuff going on in our brains isn’t available to our consciousness. We know this to be true of religion (Pascal Boyer).

Implications?

Even though belief offers a shortcut around anger and fear at the thought of death, it isn’t a perfect solution. At some level, a believer may wonder or even know that he simply doesn’t know, but belief itself precludes the hard work of coming to peace with nonexistence. So, in those hard final days, faith is there, but subterranean fear is too. We are all human, after all.

That is my best guess about what is going on with those cancer patients. Correlation is not causation, and let me caution that my clinical hunch may be quite wrong. Religion may increase other feelings that make people want to prolong the dying process. Fear of death may increase religiosity. Some other factor may contribute to both. Given the social costs, these questions seem worth exploring.

As a society, it is becoming more and more clear that collectively we have to make some hard choices about medical care. We have been living high on the borrowed hog, pretending that we can have it all. But in a world where economic theory meets reality, unlimited access to aggressive life prolonging technologies has an opportunity cost. The tradeoff is less healthy children and young adults because of money not spent on simple preventive measures and early interventions.

Will religion help us make these decisions in the most moral way possible? (Our wisdom traditions, both religious and secular, do archive the best ethical thinking of our ancestors.) Or — will the yearning for eternity make it harder to tend the precious fragile lives that are sacred to all of us here on earth?