Karen Hunter's first response to criticism of her anti-atheist bigotry and commentary is posted in the discussion thread on Richard Dawkins' Official web site:
For the record, to compare atheism, again a choice, to someone who is black is definitely off.
Let's put this to rest. I hate no one. you have the right to believe or not believe anything you want. Just don't compare your plight to some sort of civil rights issue. It's not. You choose to be an atheist. I didn't choose to be black. I have never seen a sign that read: Christians Only. You never had to sit at the back of the bus because you're an atheist and I cannot recall a single atheist being hung from a tree or drag from behind a truck until his limbs fell or shot at 50 times just because he was an atheist. So while you are in the minority in thus Judeo-Christian society, you are far from persecuted
A second response is posted shortly thereafter:
Soundbite television does not give anyone an opportunity to fully express their views. I hate no one, I believe people have the right to believe or not believe anything they want. Just don't impose your views on me. I want prayer in school. If you don't want to pray, don't pray. you won't be locked up for not praying, nor should you be vilified or bothered. That's your right. But if I want to pray with my students, I can be fired.
You chose to be an atheist. You weren't born that way. It's a belief system and no one has to know unless you walk around with a sign or throw in people's faces. Live and let live. Do what you want. But if I believe that this society lacks morality and I believe that the kids in my neighborhood would be better served by having a little of that in their lives, please don't go to the Supreme Court to ensure that they don't. It doesn't impact on your ability to not believe on iota, does it?
First, you'll note Karen Hunter's repeated use of the myth that a person "chooses" to be an atheist and, therefore, discrimination against atheists is presumably more acceptable. Neither side of that "logic" is valid. First, not believing in any gods is no more a "choice" than not believing that there are elephants in my kitchen — beliefs aren't acts of will, but simply conclusions we accept based on what we know and already believe. Second, even if atheism were a choice, that wouldn’t matter. Would it be acceptable to discriminate against or express bigotry against Jews because being Jewish is a "choice"? Would it be acceptable to discriminate against or express bigotry against Catholics because Catholicism is a "choice"? Of course not — even if atheism is a choice, that's ultimately irrelevant to the issue at hand. Brining it up is simply a convenient way to avoid explaining why one thinks atheists should be treated as second-class citizens.
Closely related to this are the myths that atheism is a "belief system" that a person isn't born with. Both of these are just as incorrect: atheism is merely the absence of belief in gods and isn't even a single belief, much less an entire system of beliefs; atheism is something that everyone is born with because everyone has to be taught to believe in whatever gods happen to be popular in their culture and family at the time. Theism and religion are learned beliefs; if they weren't taught, most people would remain atheists.
Next, notice the implicit standard Karen Hunter sets for persecution and civil rights. Apparently, unless there are signs that deny you admittance to certain areas, unless you sit at the back of the bus, and unless members of your group are lynched, then you are not "really" being persecuted. That's a pretty high standard and it's clearly not an appropriate one. Discrimination, prejudice, persecution, and bigotry take many forms and can be expressed in many different ways. Some are worse than others, of course, and it's true that the situation for atheists isn't nearly as bad as it once was for blacks, but it's impossible to justify anti-atheist bigotry by pointing this out. The fact that one group doesn't have it as bad as another group did in the past does not and cannot mean that the situation for the first group is acceptable.
In fact, we can say with a great deal of confidence that Karen Hunter herself probably doesn’t believe this standard because on the Paula Zahn Now show Debbie Schlussel claimed that atheists are the ones discriminating against religious Americans. Are religious Americans being forced to sit at the back of the bus? Are religious Americans being lynched? Of course not — but you didn't hear Karen Hunter object at the time. On the contrary, she implicitly agreed with Schlussel when she complained that she is being imposed upon because there aren't any official, state-written and state-sanctioned prayers in schools.
Speaking of prayer in school, it's interesting that Karen Hunter continues to insist that atheists are "imposing" their views on her because she wants prayer in school. Obviously there is already prayer in school because students are free to pray on their own whenever they want, but that's apparently not enough for her. Yes, it seems that students having the right to pray what they want, how they want, and when they want just isn't enough for Karen Hunter. Instead, she wants to ability (in theory, since she doesn’t teach in public school) to use her position as a government employee to lead a prayer with her students. Should teachers have that ability? Certainly not — public schools aren't churches and public school teachers aren't priests.
If Karen Hunter wants to pray with students, she can do so in her church or Sunday school classes. Public school teachers do not and should not have the authority as government employees to single out any particular religious rituals to lead other people's children in. Is there some reason why Hunter doesn't try to argue that government employees should or do have the authority to lead students in religious rituals while on government property and during school time? She would need to in order to justify her position, but I haven't seen anything even remotely like that from her (or from anyone else who holds this position).
Finally, let's look at the claim that "society lacks morality" and the implicit insistence that this is somehow due to atheists preventing the government from choosing her personal religious beliefs to promote, encourage, and endorse. Karen Hunter's basic argument seems to be that either religion generally or her religion in particular are necessary for personal or social morality and, moreover, that atheism prevents morality from taking hold. Several times she insists that she doesn't "hate" atheists, but how seriously can we take this protest?
When a person insists over and over that there can't be morality without religion and theism, all the while promoting blatant falsehoods about atheism, how is compatible with not "hating" atheists? If I spread falsehoods about Judaism and argue that Jews are responsible for economic problems in America, would anyone believe me if I said I didn't hate Jews? If I spread falsehoods about blacks and insisted that blacks are responsible for crime in America, would anyone believe me if I said I didn't hate blacks? If that's "love," it's a love I would rather do without and I suspect that most people would agree.
Of course she’s defending what she said. Isn’t that exactly how these things work? First the insult, then an attempt to say that it wasn’t what she really wanted to say, then, after a while of people not buying it, the apology.
Of course, when dealing with someone who may not even recognize their own bigotry (or may not regret it), it probably won’t be a satisfying apology, if we even get one.
If you “liked” her response, get a load of Julie’s response. She’s upped the ante and called us “future Muslim extremists” who are hypocrites for “obeying a higher power’s” call to email her about her bigotry.
“Just don’t compare your plight to some sort of civil rights issue.”
Perhaps Ms Hunter should stop by Harvard for a history lesson. “For what would today be called consensual crimes or crimes against morality, by contrast, the early northern colonial penal codes were often harsher than English law, because of the religious origins of many of these colonies. Blasphemy and idolatry were in principle capital crimes in connecticut, Massachusetts and New Hampshire…”
http://www.hup.harvard.edu/pdf/BANDEA_excerpt.pdf
I am becoming ever more convinced that atheism truly is growing in popularity, as it relates to having a conventient target to spew misinformation and intolerance towards. This woman seems to have it completely bass ackwards. How do these ignoramuses continue to get repeated air time?
Great post. A couple of things:
Actually we are born Atheist and we have our “choice” as to which God we believe forced down our throat by parents/family/society.
I wonder if Karen would object if while her kids were praying at school other kids drowned out those prayers with “there is no God, and Jesus never existed” ?
I sent a letter to Ms. Hunter.
******************
I have been following your dispute about atheists.
In this dispute, you wrote, “You choose to be an atheist. I didn’t choose to be black. I have never seen a sign that read: Christians Only.”
I have.
It appears on every piece of American currency I have ever seen. The sign says, “In God We Trust”. This is just half a step away from saying “Christians Only.”
And it appears in the Pledge of Allegiance. It says, “One Nation Under God.” Again, a hair’s breath away from saying, “Christians Only.”
I bet that if you ever lived in a state where children were pledging allegiance to “One White Nation, Indivisible”, you would not see much difference between this and a sign that says, “White’s Only.”
And the claim that atheists choose to be atheists but you did not choose to be black is out of place.
This statement says, “It is okay to denigrate you because you choose to be who you are, but it is not okay to denigrate me because I did not choose to be who I am.”
Yet, you can’t make this claim without first admitting that the treatment is denigrating and derogatory. If you assume thta the treatment is not denigrating and derogatory, then why are you bringing up a question of choice?
And what would happen if race became a matter of choice? What if you could take a pill and become white? Would that make all of the treatment that blacks get permissible? Would you then say that the bigotry and hatred expressed against those who do not take the pill are justified?
I suspect not.
Thanks for posting her response. It sure isn’t written very well for something from a Pulitzer-prize-winning journalist, is it?
I’m glad somebody’s out there taking the time to spell out these logical arguments against the theists which are so obvious to the rest of us, so I can just sit back and poke fun at them.
I dugg your story.
And all those witches and heretics that got drowned or burned? While most may not actually have been atheists, they were accused of being against Christianity. Atheist, Jew, pagan, all were attacked.
I see she subscribes to the fallacy that only religionists who fear Hell and desire Heaven can be moral.
So, had she not been indoctrinated as a child, she would now be a depraved and self-centred sociopath. That’s a scary mindset they’ve got.
I wonder what the reaction would have been if she had said the same things about Jewish opposition to teacher-led Christian prayer in school.
“For the record, to compare the practice of Judaism, again a choice, to someone who is black is definitely off.
Let’s put this to rest. I hate no one. you have the right to believe or not believe anything you want. Just don’t compare your plight to some sort of civil rights issue. It’s not. You choose to practice Judaism. I didn’t choose to be black. I have never seen a sign that read: Christians Only. You never had to sit at the back of the bus because you practice Judaism and I cannot recall a single Jew being hung from a tree or drag from behind a truck until his limbs fell or shot at 50 times just because he didn’t believe in the divinity of Jesus. So while you are in the minority in this Christian society, you are far from persecuted”
or
“Soundbite television does not give anyone an opportunity to fully express their views. I hate no one, I believe people have the right to believe or not believe anything they want. Just don’t impose your views on me. I want Christian prayer in school. If you don’t want to pray in Jesus’ name, then don’t. you won’t be locked up for not praying to Christ, nor should you be vilified or bothered. That’s your right. But if I want to pray to Our Lord and Saviour with my students, I can be fired.
You chose to be a practicing Jew. You weren’t born that way. It’s a belief system and no one has to know unless you walk around with a sign or throw in people’s faces. Live and let live. Do what you want. But if I believe that this society lacks morality and I believe that the kids in my neighborhood would be better served by having a little of that in their lives, please don’t go to the Supreme Court to ensure that they don’t. It doesn’t impact on your ability to not believe on iota, does it?”
It is nearly as difficult to imagine her saying the same thing about Muslims. Of course if Christian bigots like this succeed in silencing us atheists, they will quickly turn the same rhetoric against other religious minorities.
I think your response was very appropriate and well worded. Definitely brought up points I hadn’t thought of.
Perhaps a better comparison would be atheists and homosexuals; you (mostly) can’t tell a homosexual by looking at them, atheism and homosexuality are both just as much a “choice,” (while you say we’re all born atheists, I think we’re all born with an inclination to believe in the supernatural or not), and homosexuals have had to stand up and make the nation accept them.
But I understand that “christians” are more accepting of other minorities than they are of homosexuality. It’s like atheists and gays threaten them to the core.
Also, one could have brought up the facts that, in states where church attendance is lower, so is instance of divorce, crime, and other problems in society.
But, I don’t think these women really care about anyone (or anyone’s opinion) unless they fall in line with their “christian nation” agenda.
I bet that if you ever lived in a state where children were pledging allegiance to “One White Nation, Indivisible”…
And what’s wrong with that? It’s just “Ceremonial Racism”, in other words it doesn’t mean no shit.
It sounds to me like she’s suggesting that we sit back and wait till this does happens before we start complaining.
Personally, I’d rather not let it come to that.
And what’s wrong with that? It’s just “Ceremonial Racism”, in other words it doesn’t mean no shit.
If “ceremonial deism” really didn’t mean anything, there wouldn’t be such an issue about removing god from government oaths and documents, would there?
Larry Hooper. I’m sure there are others that haven’t made the news as much.
Brilliant post Patrick.
/golf clap!
Austin, the Karen Hunter you link to at the Hartford Courant is not the Karen Hunter that was on CNN. I would recommend that you take the link down.
The Karen Hunter on CNN is a professor at Hunter College in New York and her e-mail address can be obtained if you go to the Hunter College website for the Film & Media department faculty page.
Thanks, Tommy. I really thought they were the same person…
I think karen hunter handled herself very well, and I am also a big fan of her’s and miss her radio show here in nyc…..KAREN U GO GURL!!!!!!!
If that is true, then perhaps you could explain and defend her bigoted statements about atheists. Why are you cheering on a bigot?
Religious freedom is not a civil rights issue? Like you said atheists should, I believe you “need to shut up”, because each time you open your mouth you dig yourself deeper into a hole. Prayer in school is not an expression of religious freedom. Many religious minorities, including Christians of various faiths, have had their religious freedom trampled upon by the various Christian majorities indoctrinating children and setting up an environment where children of faiths other than the majority are seen as “less than”. Is this the “morality” that you believe prayer in school will bring to our children. If you want that in your children’s lives, that is your right as a parent; give it to them at home and at church. Do not impose it on others in a public school environment. Not only does it impose on an atheist’s ability to not believe, it imposes on a the ability of those who are religious, both Christian and non-Christian, to believe and to practice their faith in the way that they choose.
If there was a Skygod, prayer is probably the worst insult. Nobody likes to put up with a beggar.