Atheists React to Anti-Atheist Bigotry on Paula Zahn Now
Wednesday February 7, 2007
Cruising around the internet, I have found quite a few reactions to the recent Paula Zahn Now episode in which three religious theists, but no actual atheists, were invited to comment on why atheists are so hated and discriminated against. Some of the atheists reacting to this have interesting comments to make about both the show itself and anti-atheist bigotry generally. I thought it would be worth adding some links and quotes to my own February 1 post, but there are so many I realized I should create an entirely new post for them.
PZ Myers at Pharyngula, as I noted in my original post, offers a strong perspective:
It convinced me of a couple of things. I apparently have not been militant enough, and am going to have to work harder at aggressively promoting godlessness. And I'm adding CNN to my list of news agencies to ignore, along with Fox.
Just Throwing it Out There has a nice post and includes a message he sent to CNN:
The panelists that you featured included two Christians, one Jew, and zero atheists. It was intellectually insulting to watch such a biased discussion, with biased questions. Perhaps instead of "Why do atheist inspire such hatred?" you could have posed the question, "Why is mainstream America so intolerant toward atheists?" The first question implies that atheist are deserving of the scorn they receive, while the second asks for real justification.
While I respect the opinions of the panelists, I have to say that featuring three religious people in a debate on discrimination against atheists is unethical at best. CNN had a chance to bring about real discussion, and failed to do so in so blatant a way that I feel it damages your credibility. You cannot host such a one sided debate in a forum where balance and honesty are paramount. I personally expect more from a news organization with such prestige and reputation, and I believe that you owe atheists and Americans an apology for that panel.
Snefsky writes:
The banner behind all this while they were talking read "Why do atheists inspire such hatred?" Might as well ask why Jews inspire such hatred, or Muslims, or Catholics, or Hindus...etc... Atheists have it tough in todays world. Cinema, literature, and parenting has raised kids to think that believing in something utterly, without any proof whatsoever, is a wonderful thing. In any other area, this is called stupidity, and we make fun of people for it.
I dream of a world where no one believes in God(s), where religious wars are something we laugh at as a pointless relic of an earlier age, where old, decaying, or entirely baseless rules/taboos are thrown out, where no man may feel justified in killing another thinking he's doing the lords work. *cough cough Osama cough cough Bush cough cough*
According to Dreyonlegacy:
You know, I thought it was just an isolated incident when my interviewer encouraged me to find religion during college. But no. Apparently atheism is the new black. Because belief in God makes you a moral, rational, upstanding person (eg. Hitler).
The Bacon Eating Atheist Jew is typically pointed in his comments:
But it was Debbie Schlussel who really pissed me off. If America is a Christian nation like she says, it also a White nation then too. Why doesn't she tell the black panel members to shut up as well? She states that Atheists target Christians. This has to do with the fact that there are a lot more ex-Christian Atheists than anything else. And they know the psychological brainwashing that goes on with a Christian youngster.
God has his own blog, which I didn't know, and God wasn't at all happy about the CNN segment:
If you take My name out of your pledge and your money, you’ll be just another hot-bed of sin like Canada.
To say atheists believe nothing is to underestimate the threat they pose. They believe the best way to understand the Universe is through cautious, rational inquiry, and that you shouldn’t jump to poorly supported conclusions just because they make you feel good. That’s much worse than believing in nothing. If that way of thinking spreads, all the industries that rely on people believing false things will collapse. Yadda yadda yadda, armageddon.
Godless Geek at Braindump is similarly critical:
I had given myself time to calm down before I wrote this post, but writing it has just gotten me worked up again. This is the most bigoted thing I've ever seen on television. If they were saying this about any other group besides atheists, they would have been fined, lost advertisers, and would have fired multiple people, but because it was about atheists, no one cares. If anyone needs an example of the discrimination against atheists, this is it.
The Jaded Skeptic also takes on the segment, quote by quote, and concludes at the end:
So why are atheists put upon, picked on, mistreated. Because they deserve it. Apparently atheists victimize and use everyone around them. Do they steal children in the night as well?
That's what Paula Zahn taught me.
Jane Orben links to the videos and includes a letter she sent to CNN:
How dare your commentators talk about a whole group of peoples’ worldview so flippantly and in such a derogatory manner. Atheists are not some homogenous group. We are as diverse in our approaches to ethics, spirituality, politics, and lifestyle as Christians or any other religious group. And how similar are United Methodists to Amish fundamentalists? Not very. A minority of atheists are militant, especially in parts of the country where we are most discriminated against. But other groups of atheists form coalitions with religious communities on issues we share in common.
Atheists don’t believe in “nothing”. We have beliefs about the natural world, ethics, political ideologies, and love for our family and friends. Many of us have values identical to some religious folks, even if the foundation for those values is different. According to polls, we are less likely to get divorced or to end up in prison. “Atheist” is not synonymous with “nihilist” or “hedonist”.
In the comments to the original post, Mark Thomas posted the letter he sent to CNN:
Dear Paula Zahn,
Thank you for showing the video on discrimination against Atheists in America, on your January 31st show. If you or your panelists plan on discussing Atheism in the future, it would be good to have someone who can defend that point of view. Also, most studies show that approximately 15% of Americans can be called non-believers, not the 1 to 3% that was stated. The actual number is likely even higher, but many people are afraid to express their true beliefs because of the discrimination against Atheists.
I was astounded at the level of intolerance, religious chauvinism, and prejudice toward Atheists displayed by Karen Hunter and Debbie Schlussel. It’s especially egregious because these two are themselves members of minorities. Would either of them tolerate similar statements against her minority group? Karen Hunter should understand how Christianity has been used to endorse racism and slavery. Debbie Schlussel should understand how Christianity has been used (especially by fascism) to control the populace and deny rights to Jews and other minorities. Apparently neither of them understood what I saw as the main point of the videos you showed — that overt discrimination is still active in America, and it is wrong.
Karen Hunter said that schools should have religion, as long as it’s her religion. She obviously does not understand that public schools are for all students, no matter their religion or lack thereof. Debbie Schlussel put forth the false idea the we have freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. Freedom of religion means the right to reject any religion, including all religions. Only Stephen A. Smith understood the concept that freedom of speech is critical especially when one disagrees with what is said.
Debbie Schlussel grossly overstated the teaching of Islam in a California school, see http://www.snopes.com/religion/islam.htm Her statement about Muslim prayers at football games and public high schools also seems to be overstated and intentionally inflammatory. However, both these purported incidents should give her some idea of what it’s like to have somebody else’s religion foisted upon a captive crowd.
Karen Hunter said that Atheists believe nothing. This is a common belief, and it is false. Most Atheists are also Secular Humanists. The philosophy of Secular Humanism declares that humans are most important, not any imaginary gods. We have the power, thru love, reason, science, courage, and vision, to solve our problems. We shape our destiny. We are each capable of personal development and satisfaction. Humanism holds as its highest goal the happiness, fulfillment, and freedom of all humankind.
All of your panelists agreed that the United States is a Christian nation. Although most citizens are Christian, the Constitution mandates that the government takes a neutral stance on religion. This was also expressed in the Treaty of Tripoli, which stated, “The Government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.” One other function of the Constitution is to protect the rights of minorities from the tyranny of the majority — a concept that all your panelists should understand.
Qwerty writes:
This is just astonishing to me. They run a story that clearly shows that this family was discriminated against, and follow it up with a panel discussion that backs up just about everything that town did to the family. Where was the atheist on the panel, or at the very least, where was somebody who actually has an understanding of the first amendment?
Dead Spin praises Stephen Smith as a voice of sanity:
This isn't the first time he's debated non-sports topics on CNN, but this is the first time we've grabbed a clip.
And you know what? We think that, without question, Stephen A. comes across as the only sane person in this clip. It might be because the topic of the show is the oncoming propaganda onslaught of atheists -- they're coming for you next! -- and a topic like this is destined to bring out the crazies. (Seriously, do atheists really need a "better PR campaign" and "Hallmark cards?")
In all the legitimate criticisms being made against the other two guests, I'm glad to see people are also making a point of noting how reasonable Smith was, at least.
At One Good Move, Mitch writes a comment quoting an interview Martin Luther King, Jr. did in 1965 in which he was asked for his reaction to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling holding state-written and state-endorsed prayers in public schools to be unconstitutional:
I endorse it. I think it was correct. Contrary to what many have said, it sought to outlaw neither prayer nor belief in God. In a pluralistic society such as ours, who is to determine what prayer shall be spoken, and by whom? Legally, constitutionally, or otherwise, the state certainly has no such right. I am strongly opposed to the efforts that have been made to nullify the decision.
In the same interview, King elaborated on some of the problems religion has been involved with:
In a world gone mad with arms buildups, chauvinistic passions, and imperialistic exploitation, the church has either endorsed these activities or remained appallingly silent. During the last two world wars, national churches even functioned as the ready lackeys of the state, sprinkling holy water upon the battleships and joining the mighty armies in singing, “Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition.” A weary world, pleading desperately for peace, has often found the church morally sanctioning war.
Martin Luther King, Jr. obviously wanted to use religion to encourage peace and justice, but that didn't make him blind to the fact that religious theism is often involved in war and injustice.
Ed Brayton is one of several Science Blogs writers weighing in on the issue and says:
Schlussel is a raving lunatic and always has been, so there's nothing she says that surprises me. But Karen Hunter, who I'd never heard of before, is an absolute moron. "Don't impose upon my right to want to have prayer in schools"? Are you daft? These people really do think that if they can't force YOU to participate in their religious exercises, you're denying THEIR rights. It's absolutely insane reasoning.
Laurence A. Moran at Sandwalk is even more pointed:
I've just about had it with Paula Zhan. She's almost the most stupid "journalist" on TV, a fact she demonstrated in her January 31st report on atheism in America. ...Did it never occur to CNN that having an atheist-hating Jew and two evangelical Christians discuss atheism was a bad idea? Where were the atheists on a show about atheism?
Questionable Authority calls for a boycott:
CNN did something that was very wrong here, and we need to get them to right the wrong. A tactic that has worked for other groups faced with similar situations is a boycott, and I think one is called for here. Let's tell CNN that they need to take i steps to address the unfair and unbalanced way they treated atheists on that program, and that if they do not, we will boycott their advertisers. At a minimum, these steps should include: (1) a public apology for their failure to include atheists in a discussion about the treatment that atheists sometimes receive; and (2) a broadcast that re-examines this issue and that does include atheists in the discussion.
If you have written to CNN — hopefully something polite — let me know and I can post the whole message or at least excerpts. If you hear back from CNN, definitely let me know so we can publicize their official comments, reactions, and position on the matter. Don't let the story disappear and be completely forgotten.
People who wish to complain to CNN can write to Paula Zahn on her comment page (thanks to Triphesas for this link). Debbie Schlussel has a contact page, but I doubt there is much point in using it. Stephen Smith also has a contact page, if you'd like to thank him for standing up for decency and equality.
Comments
Thanks for covering this. I sent an email, but I hold little hope that it will do any good. I fear CNN has been trying recently to capture some of FoxNews’ viewers, and this is the type of thing we may have to get used to. Here’s the letter I sent:
As a fan of CNN I was very disappointed in the FoxNews’ish segment Paula Zahn conducted recently on why atheists “inspire such hatred.” I appreciate the story, and wish CNN and other news agencies would do more to show the religious majority in America that we atheists are good, decent people who are patriotic and productive members of our society. However, to have a panel discussion on this topic and have the panel composed entirely of religious people of obscene. Imagine, if you would, a panel composed of only Christians, fascists, and Muslims discussing anti-Semitism.
Some of the comments from the panelists that went basically unchallenged showed just why atheists feel so isolated and threatened in our nation. Perhaps in the future CNN could do a better job in covering the basics on these types of stories rather than pandering to the religious.
Thanks for link Austin. As a reward for sending me some traffic, you will not face eternal hellfire. Not that you were going to before… but still.
God
Thanks for the linkback. I’ve been a fan for a while. It’s easy to feel alone where I live, so I’m glad the internet is able to provide a forum to reach a larger audience and stay in contact with others like me.
Thank you for the link, and thanks also for the bringing this issue to light for other people. It is always good to know that there is a community of good people who care about issues like this and are willing to demand that CNN change their practices.
http://www.humaniststudies.org/enews/?id=280&article=2
I just stumbled across it while looking to see how wide the Zahn piece has spread, but it’s rather interesting to see what CNN put out just a few weeks ago.
Heh, after that Zahn discussion, it should be pretty obvious why so many atheists, for the most part, will want to “play it safe.”
I found it very odd that Debbie Schlussel seemed to view her participation as a chance to bash Islam. What was her point, that we should embrace Christianity as the lesser of two evils? Why not choose “none of the above?”
Hi Austin. I posted this over at the thread of gods4suckers.net:
Dear Ms. Zahn:
No doubt you have been inundated by multiple responses in re: your panel on ‘Why are atheists so hated?’
You provide three people, none of whom are atheists, who discussed the topic in the vaguest and briefest manner possible, and the trio spouted all sorts of stereotypical nonsense to the nth degree. I will touch on these only briefly:
A. ‘Atheists believe in nothing’.
This is tacitly untrue. We don’t believe in anything AFTER this life. We are constrained by reality to ‘believe’ in this world, as we process it through our five senses.
B. ‘This is a Christian nation’.
While it is true that Christians make up the majority of the population, it is also true that white people make up the majority as well. Should we then say that the US is a ‘white nation’? This country was founded primarily on secular Enlightenment values, not predominantly Christian mores.
C. The tall fellow states that ‘I’ve heard there was discrimination, I’ve read it, I just don’t believe it.’
I find this to be particularly obnoxious, as you preempted the alleged ‘panel of discussion’ with an actual video news story explicitly outlining a specific case where such discrimination took place.
D. Much as I hate to point this out, you managed to bring in a trio of minorities to comment on an unrepresented minority, as if to say, ‘See, here’s three minorities who happen to disagree!’ As if this lends weight to the discussion.
E. ‘They took prayer out of the schools’. This is a rampant misconception: the Supreme Court took state-led and government-led prayer out of schools. Students are allowed to pray in school if they so desire. There is no historical proof that praying makes an individual more moral, nor is there any scientific basis to whether it even works at all.
All in all, the brief discussion points to a ‘shut up about it already’ attitude that is reinforcing some truly bigoted stereotypes without any sort of journalistic research on the matter, outside of one minor sampling of the issues at hand.
For instance, that in most states, child custody is granted (directly or indirectly) based on a parent’s belief. A large number of states require a religious oath be sworn to hold public office (direct violation of the Federal Constitution). Prayer in public schools (when it slips by) results in students harassing those who won’t take part in said prayer. Indiana has banned gay parenting as well as single parents. Oaklahoma has a certificate of gestation. A Minnesota study shows that we are the least trusted minority in America.
Shame on you, madam. Perhaps you should put together another panel, this time allowing us equal time on the matter? Fair is fair – having an equal say on the airwaves is doing a subject justice, is it not?
Exclusion is the enemy of liberty.
I received a standard form letter stating that Ms. Zahn can’t respond to each email – more on this as it develops.
The shadows of bigotry grow a little longer every year…
I’m not quite as good with words as some of the other commenters, but here’s the comment I sent in:
Thanks for the link. Debbie Shlussel is a Dhimmi for Jesus. Karen Hunter should just shut up and sit at the back of the bus:)
Looks like Richard Dawkins will be on Zahn’s show tomorrow.
And after looking at Schlussel’s blog, I realized she’s just a Coulter wannabe. I mean the title of her blog about the response to her CNN piece is “When Atheists a/k/a Future Muslims Attack”
http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2007/02/when_atheists_a.html
It looks now like the late-breaking death of Anna Nicole Smith has more importance than anything Richard Dawkins has to say in defense of atheism.
PZ’s page
Link was removed. But check Paula Zahn’s page on CNN.
The e-mail I sent to CNN:
It would have been scarcely possible for you to have provided more dramatic support for atheists’ claims of bigotry in your feature, “Beliefs under Attack”, than if you had presented a piece that resembled professional journalism. After a fairly reasonable report from your correspondent in which some atheists’ grievances were aired, you and your producers presented a discussion from your “out in the open” panel that left me absolutely stunned.
Paula: Do you believe that atheists should keep their religious beliefs secret?
Karen: What is [sic] their beliefs? What does an atheist believe? Nothing. I think this is such a ridiculous story. Are we gonna take ‘In God we trust’ off of our dollars? Are we not going to say one nation under God? When does it end? You know, we took prayer out of our schools, what more do they want?
Perhaps if you had made an attempt to include an atheist or at least someone with a shred of intellectual integrity on your panel, they would have refuted these bigoted and inaccurate assertions. To the charge that atheists believe nothing, perhaps a less bigoted panelist would have replied, ‘Atheists have beliefs, principles, morals, and ethics. The difference between theists and atheists is that atheists beliefs are not associated with religious dogma and they are not obligated to hold beliefs that are contradicted by mountains of evidence, simply because religious orthodoxy requires it.’
Paula: Are you going to defend them here tonight?
Debbie Schlussel: No, I agree with her 100%. I think the real discrimination is against atheists against Americans who are religious. Listen, we are Christian nation. I’m not a Christian, I’m Jewish. But I recognize we’re a Christian country. And freedom of religion doesn’t mean freedom from religion.
Really? The Founding fathers of this country didn’t agree. The Treaty of Tripoli, passed by the U.S. Senate in 1797, read, in part: “The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.” The treaty was written during the Washington administration, and sent to the Senate during the Adams administration. It was read aloud to the Senate, and each Senator received a printed copy. This was the 339th time that a recorded vote was required by the Senate, but only the third time a vote was unanimous (the next time was to honor George Washington). There is no record of any debate or dissension on the treaty. It was reprinted in full in three newspapers – two in Philadelphia, one in New York City. There is no record of public outcry or complaint in subsequent editions of the papers.
Debbie continues: …The problem is that you have these atheists selectively, I believe, attacking Christianity. You had a case in California where school children were forced to dress as Muslims and forced to learn from the Koran. In Michigan there’s a high school, Fortson’s high school, where they say Muslim prayers at the high school, Fortson’s high school. You don’t see atheists complaining about that.
So what is Debbie doing here? Does she sound tolerant of Muslims to you? She sounds unhappy about these Muslim prayer sessions – she isn’t explicit, but I have the feeling she isn’t a subscriber to the notion that “freedom of religion doesn’t mean freedom from religion” when the shoe is on the other foot. And finally, has anyone ever asked atheists whether they would approve of compulsory Muslim prayer? I strongly suspect that atheists would be much more consistent than Debbie is complaining about public schools promoting either the Christian or Muslim faiths.
Karen: … I think they should shut up.
And from there the “discussion” descended into a vapid back-and-forth about whether an atheist should have a right to speak out. How nice it was to have Stephen defending atheists’ right to hold their distasteful position, and while he agrees that atheists should shut up, they don’t have to.
And the banners the producers ran in the background? Why do atheists inspire such hatred? Are atheists’ tactics too militant?
Which brings us back to the main point: That you and your producers felt this ‘panel’ conducted a “discussion” worthy of putting on the air does indeed show how deeply-rooted bigotry against atheists runs. It is as if, 50 years ago, you had run a piece discussing discrimination against Jews and African Americans with George Wallace, Strom Thurmond, and Archie Bunker on the panel spewing poison while banners in the background ask, ‘Why are negroes so uppity? Why are Jews so distasteful that we’re forced to exclude them from our universities and country clubs?’
What a disgraceful excuse for journalism.
It was not until several days after the original airing of Zhan’s Atheist segment that I saw it on onegoodove.org. I was so deeply offended by the segment that I promptly messaged CNN, on Ms. Zhan’s comment page. This is the exact message that I sent:
I recently saw a piece, anchored by Paula Zhan, where an Atheist family is presented, and the horrors and injustices they endure are spoken of. In the following segment she invites three speakers to discuss Atheism and Atheist “tactics“. The setup and tone of this discussion was immediately noticeable as against the Atheist position. Two of the three speakers were so furiously and ignorantly anti-Atheist that their vitriol nearly suffocated me, in my home. The third speaker, while generally defensive of the Atheist position of disenfranchised minority, was dispassionate in his defense, not being an Atheist himself, and was often vocally subdued by the other speakers. All the while Ms. Zhan remained silent.
I tuned in to this particular report because I believed that commonly maligned Atheists would receive some, much needed, positive press and insight into the troubles Atheists face every day. Instead I became witness to yet another verbal pogrom against Atheists. This cloak-and-dagger tactic used by Ms. Zhan, her producers and guest speakers, and CNN as a whole is emotionally upsetting, infuriating and ultimately unacceptable.
Of particular upset is Ms. Zhan’s tacit approval of the Atheist bashing statements expressed by her guest speakers. Ms. Zhan, whose entire career is presently about speaking up against “intolerance”, sat there quietly, allowing the anti-Atheist assault to continue unchecked.
I have spoken with other Atheists about this, all who feel similarly offended and disappointed with CNN, a source of news we once considered the news station of record.
The bait and switch Atheist bashing I witnessed on the program in question is unacceptable. The fact that Ms. Zhan allowed such vitriol against one group when she, specifically, is supposed to stand for an end to intolerance is hypocritical and intolerable, and forces me to request, as a regular viewer, that Ms. Zhan lose her job, much in the same way she has already lost her credibility.
We will never defeat these Nazis unless we cultivate some black hatred and bigotry ourselves. It is possible to have a black hatred for the manipulating bastards without trying to kill them. I have a sign on my car that says, “Anger is tiresome. Black hatred is serene.” I trade giving the bird with Nazis on the road (no peace sign for me). The righties are right. Liberals are just as cowardly as they are. Republicans are only 16%. Think about it.
I sent this to CNN a few days ago:
I took a night to ’sleep it off’ after viewing the ‘panel’ discussion on discrimination against atheists before writing. I’m still working on it. What an outrageous display of intellectual dishonesty! Did CNN even consider the outcome of not having one atheist on board to counter the misinformation being tossed around? I have to think they must have, since no one in this line of work can really be so mindless. Or can they? This leads me to some assumptions regarding their bias against atheism. Hopefully they have some good damage control tactics in place to salvage any credibility they may have had with those who believe in freedom of speech. The only redeeming quality I find is Mr. Smith’s stand for this right, albeit, he does add to the misinformation presented in the discussion. At least that can be used to their credit. The former, not a chance.
Even the title on the background screen alone is just wrong. “Why do atheists inspire such hatred?” This is akin to saying abused wives like being hurt and bring it on themselves. Do they mean atheists like to be discriminated against, and therefore, cause their own discrimination? That they like being disowned by even family members and close friends simply because they cannot believe what they find to be unbelievable. Should atheists really be forced to keep their core identities to themselves in order to avoid societal hatred? Were the panelists at all concerned in the least for the family portrayed in the documentary? Is this a mark of their theist morality? Or do they feel they deserve to be thought of as sub human? This is the kind of thinking that has led to countless abuses of human dignity throughout history.
So Ms. Hunter is a noted journalist and educated woman. I find it difficult to believe now, that she is sincere in her views on tolerance. She emphatically states that this is “one nation made up of different people with different views from different places” as quoted from her own article appearing in the New York Daily News originally published on July 30, 2004. She goes on to say “forcing people to choose sides is ugly. Worse, urging people to hate those on the other side will be our undoing as a nation. Only through understanding those who hold different views will we get stronger” (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/col/khunter/). I’m guessing it’s appropriate now to say she “needs to shut up?”
These comments are notable since they demonstrate hypocrisy at it’s worst. It is apparent neither Ms. Hunter nor Ms. Schlussel have no clue what atheism is about by making such comments such as “what does an atheist believe in? Nothing right?,” let alone try to understand it. Do some research, brush up on cultural diversity, or at the least speak to an atheist before you go informing others of what you think atheists believe or don’t believe. Many of us are former Christians. How do you think we got to be atheists? Just on a whim? No, it was through a purposeful and intentional, sometimes painful, process of looking honestly and intellectually at what and why we believed as we did. We don’t live in a vacuum of nothingness. We all have beliefs in many things, just not god beliefs.
Speaking of ‘inspiring hatred’ as the aforementioned title draws attention to…….. How ironic that Ms Hunter, herself, along with Ms. Schlussel who agrees that we should ’shut up’ have now fanned the flames of misunderstanding and growing tensions between theists and atheists. Perhaps Ms. Hunter and Ms. Schussel might like to work alongside with atheists in designing a line of “Hallmark cards for atheists” as an approach to bridging the gap they, themselves, along with CNN, have widened now. What a step backward in the progress of humanity and basic human rights.
Do NOT tell us to shut up…..just don’t!!! We will be even more vocal. Christians have had their say for centuries now. It’s simply too bad for them that many of us will no longer be silenced.
Yes, recent revelations of anti-atheist bigotry should stimulate us to the same actions taken by other formerly ignored minorities which now languish in the mainstream: Speak loudly against easily defeated arguments of religious idiocy. The world will be a better place once religion is seen as simply myth. We cannot imagine 911 without religion. Religion was the spark of evil in that instance just as in so many other evil historical events.
Pretty late in the game here. I saw the Zahn clips on YouTube today, and sent the following comment to her CNN site:
It is a fine example of irresponsible journalism to have a panel discussion on the subject of atheism with no atheists on the panel. Are you providing a training forum for Karen Hunter to be the next Anne Coulter?