Wayne Laugesen: Atheists Should Act Like Christians, Jews
An unsigned editorial in the Colorado Springs Gazette lambasted atheists for daring to question why the Democratic Party would hold a special event designed to cater to religious theists and exclude nonbelievers. Wayne Laugesen, the editorial page editor for the Gazette, took personal responsibility for the screed in comments while trying to defend his "arguments." The sad truth is that he was only digging his hole deeper because he revealed more and more the extent to which he was unable to give the same treatment or consideration towards atheists which he manages to do without a second thought for religious believers.
...an amazing number of atheists have taken to confronting and insulting believers of other religions. They pretend that atheist beliefs are proven true, while others are proven false. They refer to other religions as "irrational," and "superstitious." Their approach to ministry is overbearing and rude. They engage in confrontation, with disregard for persuasion. It's as if they've watched too much "American Idol," where Simon Cowell briefly made it hip to be the bully.
Source: Colorado Springs Gazette
This is key passage because it states in a straightforward manner what Wayne Laugesen thinks is wrong with atheists today and why he thinks it was the right decision to exclude them from a special event at the Democratic National Convention (he doesn't merely say that they have a right to do it, but that it was the right thing to do). In comments Laugesen elaborates by saying that he believes "atheists have acted rudely in their zeal to disprove and refute other religions, which they clearly cannot ever do." He goes even further by insisting that "the crusade of high profile atheists to "disprove" or "malign" other religions has needlessly stirred hostilities in our culture."
Now, if we were to apply these standards fairly and consistently, how do you suppose Christians would fare?
Have Christians confronted and been insulting to believers of other religions? Yup.
Have Christians pretended that Christian beliefs are proven true while others are proven false? You bet.
Have Christians referred to other religions as false, Satanic, evil, etc? Check!
Have Christians had an overbearing and rude approach to ministry? Double Check!
Have Christians engaged in confrontation, with disregard for persuasion? Check again!
Have Christians acted rudely in their zeal to disprove and refute other religions? Absolutely.
Have Christians stirred hostility by trying to disprove or malign other religions? Yes again — seven for seven!
Clearly not all Christians have behaved in this way, but then again neither have all atheists — and Wayne Laugesen admits this. So if this sort of behavior from some atheists over the course of a couple of years is sufficient to deem them unworthy of inclusion in a major "values" event, then the same behavior from some Christians over... well, millennia, should be enough to deem them even more unworthy of inclusion. Yet for some reason Laugesen doesn't arrive at this conclusion... nor does he make any effort to apply these standards to anyone but atheists. Why not? Is there some reason why "bigotry" isn't the right answer here?
(I won't even get into just how ridiculously and obviously false it is for him to try to attribute current attitudes towards atheists to recent behavior from a few high-profile atheists — attitudes towards atheists have consistently scored the highest negatives of any group for over 50 years no matter what atheists are doing, and attitudes have not gotten worse in recent years).
Consider the righteous indignation of Becky Hale, founder of Freethinkers of Colorado Springs: "By reaching out to people of faith, they have shown the back of their hand to those who do not believe," Hale told The Gazette. In other words, if I'm not invited to your party then you're bad. Even the name of Hale's group is insulting. It implies that people of other faiths are something other than "free thinkers." No, Ms. Hale, nobody gave your group the back of the hand. You simply weren't invited to a private party for "believers."
Wayne Laugesen thinks it's silly for atheists to be upset that they weren't invited to a party for "believers," (even though he insists more than once that atheists are also "believers," thus undermining his point). This is a sign that his thinking has been limited by religious privilege. Laugesen is treating the act of having a "religious" event which is exclusive to religious theists as natural, expected, and beyond question. What he fails to ask is why a non-religious organization is holding a special, high-profile religious event that caters to religious theists and religious theists alone.
Would Wayne Laugesen wonder why Jews are upset at being excluded from a "Christian" event or would he ask why there is an event being held to cater to just Christians in the first place? Would he deny that this would case of Democrats showing Jews the back of their hand? Probably not, because Laugesen can probably recognize anti-Semitic, Christian privilege as unjust.
What if there were a "Protestant" religious service and Catholics complained — would Laugesen wonder why Catholics wanted to attend a Protestant event, or would he wonder why a secular organization was holding an event to cater to just Protestants? Probably the latter because he can surely recognize that it would be wrong for the Democratic National Convention to treat Protestants as special.
For some reason, though, he can't recognize that it's also wrong to treat religious believers as special and deserving as special privileges or recognition over nonbelievers. He can't recognize that it's wrong to suggest that Democrats are exclusively religious theists with no atheists. Why not? Once again, is there some reason why "bigotry" isn't the right answer here?
Hitler imagined a world without Jews. The Freedom From Religion Foundation rented a billboard near the Colorado Convention Center that says: "Imagine No Religion."
If all the rest of Wayne Laugesen's screed is merely knee-jerk bigotry from a person who can't imagine life where atheists aren't second-class citizens, here we descend into some of vilest, nastiest, and most offensively disingenuous bigotry we're likely to find in a mainstream publication. Basically, Laugesen is comparing the Freedom From Religion Foundation to Hitler; here he implies and elsewhere he states more explicitly his belief that atheists' desire to see religion disappear is a prelude to killing religious believers.
That's as reasonable, sensible, and moral as claiming that the slogan "Imagine No Poverty" is a prelude to killing the poor. The complete absence of even an iota of logic or reason to such a conclusion is unambiguous when applied to other contexts and so once again we're forced to wonder if there is anything other than bigotry that would explain how a person could take such a complete leave of their senses and write such libelous filth?
Imagine a world with no religion and one sees a world without the Golden Rule, devoid of most charities, hospitals and great universities. One sees hurricane recovery zones, minus all the chartered planes and buses full of churchgoers giving their time and money to rebuild homes. How many children are fed and clothed by atheist charity organizations? Approximately none.
Wayne Laugesen believes not only that "organized, institutionalized religion produces most of the charity in this world," but also that without religion charity would cease. If religion disappears, Laugesen believes no one will pay for "orphanages, soup kitchens, homeless shelters, missionaries, etc." Well, I'll agree with him about the missionaries, but it's interesting that he thinks that counts as "charity." I only need to look at my taxes, though, to see how social and welfare services can be paid for without religion.
Laugesen makes a serious error in limiting "charity" to just organized religion. The purpose of charity is to help people in need and make the world a better place; if that is what Laugesen in truly concerned about, he'd find that atheists achieve it in at least two ways: individual action and organizing through secular government programs. He can't have missed the government programs and he'd know about individual action if he took the time to ask around. Yet, for some reason, he chose to ignore both in order to construct a deliberate straw man about charity. Why, if not for the sake of bigotry?
American Muslims, Baptists, Jews, Christians, Buddhists, Mormons, Quakers, Amish, etc., don't erect billboards saying "Imagine No Atheists." They don't advocate government force to cleanse atheist expressions and teachings from the public square.
Actually, religious believers in America do erect billboards with religious messages, encouraging religious belief and attendance at their churches. You can see them all over the country, and who missed the stark black billboards with pithy quotes from "God"? Encouraging people to believe, rather than not believe, is effectively the same message as "Imagine No Atheism" (notice how Wayne Laugesen writes "Atheists," making it about getting rid of people rather than ideas — do you really suppose that an editorial page editor wasn't 100% aware of what he was doing and how it shifted meaning?). Once again, we have a clear, unambiguous example of Laugesen getting upset over atheists doing what Christians have long done — but this time, instead of ignoring the fact that Christians do it, he just denies it.
The falsehood in the second sentence is even worse. It is not the case that atheists "advocate government force to cleanse [theist] expressions and teachings from the public square," though they do join with believers to prevent the government from favoring, promoting, or encouraging religious beliefs. When challenged on this, all Laugesen could come up with are a couple of lawsuits doing just that: objecting to government involvement in religion.
The best that can be said about this is that Laugesen can't tell the difference between private expression of personal religious beliefs and government encouragement of religion. Worse still, we can find examples of believers trying to "cleanse atheist expressions and teachings from the public square." Every year the FFRF erects a Solstice display alongside a religious display and there have been regular attempts to deface or steal it. Given how much Laugesen seems to know about the FFRF, what are the chances that he isn't aware of this?
Once more, we are faced with the question of why Laugesen would write things which are so obviously contrary to facts and reality, if it isn't personal bigotry and animosity towards atheists?
Atheists should fund universities and hospitals. They should feed and clothe starving kids. They should act more like Christians and Jews. If they do some of that - if they contribute to a diverse humanity - they might get better party invites.
This is an ironic end to a vile screed: over and over it can be shown that atheists have been acting like Christians in America, and sometimes better, but Wayne Laugesen wants to condemn all atheists for the actions of a few while giving Christians a free pass for the same (and worse) behavior. He might object to some of the more obnoxious behaviors of a few, but he won't entertain the possibility of treating Christians like he treats atheists. It's not good enough for him to insist that he has also criticized Christians in the past because he's not really "criticizing" atheists here; instead, he's use falsehoods, innuendo, and slurs to generalize about all atheists and trying to excuse this by saying that a small number of atheists have done a few things he doesn't like.
This isn't just an expression of personal bigotry, though. Attacks like this ultimately have just one real purpose: to encourage bigotry and animosity in others. Given its positioning, people will read this editorial and get the impression that it's actually making reasonable, factual points. Many will miss the falsehoods, the carefully chosen rhetoric, and lack of logical coherence. In the long run, this editorial will make it easier for people to justify their own distrust of and animosity towards atheists.
If this editorial were re-written to replace "atheists" with "Jews" or "blacks," it would be impossible not to conclude that the author was not just a hater, but a hate monger. Isn't the same conclusion justified from what was actually printed? Shouldn't we be able to expect newspapers like the Colorado Springs Gazette to rise a few notches above Der Stürmer? I'd like to recommend people write in to complain, but I fear that all complaints will ultimately end up going through the very source of the problem itself.
Comments
I think that Wayne Laugesen is a charter member of the Freedom From Thought Foundation.
While there may not be charitable organizations that are openly atheistic, there are many that are secular (i.e. non- religious). Also, this does not exclude individual atheists from doing such things on their own. Just because no one announces “I’m doing this because of my atheism!” doesn’t mean that atheists aren’t engaged in such actions.
Oh…WOW…I see “Mr. Delusional” poster boy wannabe…Jack (silly-)Savage…is still wasting his time amongst us…the poor, non-Faith-based…Scientific evidence-based and…yes…evolutionary and rational-based, critical thinking oriented…atheists. I’m guessing his totally mythologically and contradictory based bible is still firmly and perhaps, permanently entrenched…WAY up his obviously Un-intelligently “designed” ass!
Oh wait!…He must be ass-less by now…by his own commented admission…he was in the process of laughing it off!
Maybe it’s somewhere in his backyard!…?
Speaking of the word “bigot”…
It seems to me that the word probably has its true origin in the infamous “Begots” of Genesis fame. I have no absolute proof of that; but I can’t conceive of any other rational, linguistic explanation for its common usage.
If that’s the case; since we non-religious atheists don’t believe in any literalistic truth of that childish Bible mythology…in other words, we don’t accept, in any legitimate sense, that the story is anything more than ridiculous Bronze-age, made-up BS masquerading as historical fact…how can we even be CONSIDERED…”bigots”?
Perhaps…we’re really…non-bigots…or…abigots?
I rest my (non-lawyer/non-begotten) case!
Why would anyone expect to have atheist charity organisations ? If someone wants to start a charity to help people, to label it with a non-belief sounds bizarre ; This is the “feed the poor, there are no pink monsters” charity. Eh? Its not relevant.
With religious charities, they do tend to add “Christian” to it - why?; perhaps advertising, perhaps pride, perhaps because they want to spread the word - but it is just as meaningless to the ACTUAL charity work that is taking place.
This is an interesting philosophical question, Mr. Savage. Can, indeed, a fictional character be a liar?
Savage:
If Jesus was so historical where are any contemporary mentions of him? There are no mentions by any contemporary historian or writer. If he was so important, why is that? Why is it that almost word for word of this “history” is borrowed from ancient mythological text that predated the NT by centuries?
Why is it that you and others like you have not done any truly historical research on this mythological Jesus? Why is it that what is in the bible is considered the truth BECAUSE IT’S IN THE BIBLE? How circuitous is that argument?
Show me where any of this is any different than the stories of Hercules, or Pandora or any of these legends about the deities. In other words prove it, or “kwitcherbellyaching”!
It is too bad that too many atheists do act like Christians and Jews. They moralize almost as much and they often bully others because they are still suckers.
I do not in any way defend Christian dogma, but I will try and defend the man Jesus. I believe he actually lived! Not because of the bible or Christian stories, but because the Romans described him, his offenses against Roman order and how they searched for his family after his death. The Torah was and is a book by and for those of the Jewish faith. They do not write of a godly, Jesus. The problem seems to occur when non Jewish followers teach about Jewish Jesus. Jews have the knowledge, understanding and wisdom to know the real Jesus. Apparently, Christians do not! The godly aspects of Jesus are misunderstood parts of Jewish parables. If you want to learn about the real Jesus. Read what Jewish scholars write about Jesus. It is a shame that Jesus remains such a mythical person to some and not respected for what he actually did and taught. Born, raised and died Jewish, Jesus’s guide would have been the Torah. It is the book to learn about Jesus’s teachings. That and a Jewish rabbi might give you the insight necessary to answer your most important questions. Those that promote exclusion aren’t following the teachings of Jesus. It is my belief that they shouldn’t call themselves Christians!
“Not because of the bible or Christian stories, but because the Romans described him, his offenses against Roman order and how they searched for his family after his death. ”
Feel free to provide citations from original, independent Roman records that substantiate your claim.
“Feel free to provide citations from original, independent Roman records that substantiate your claim.”
I saw it in a movie called “The Robe”. Does that count?
Wow. Well, to start with, I’m sorry that the non-religous politicians were offended that they were not invited to a Christian event. However, I have a friend who is homosexual, and as am a Christian, if he didn’t invite me to a gay pride event, I understand, because we have different lifestyle views, and I don’t support homosexuality. If atheists don’t support Christianity, what should be the concern?
Have Christians made mistakes in the past? Yes, definetly! However, while we are trying to change and be better people, we are still human. We still do some pretty bad things! I would also caution that some Christians who claim to be Christians aren’t. When the FBI is trying to find a fake dollar bill, they simply study the authentic kind. If you want to find a phony Christian, simply find a true one.
Would charities still exist without Christians? I’m not sure, but probably. I’ve met non-Christians who are very generous. However, with Christians, the reason why we serve is because when someone lays down their life for you, you want to do the same thing in return in your own way. I also know that when Jesus changes your life, you naturally want to help change others lives, too.
Should Atheists act like Christians? Well, don’t be something you’re not, but I will say that there are some definete benefits from following the Bible. For example, the Bible says to forgive your enemies, and sure enough, I have found peace in forgiving those who hurt me. The Bible even says that laughter is the best medicine, and studies prove that laughing shoots up feel good chemicals to your brain.
Wow. I think it would help if you go back, re-read, and think carefully about what I already wrote about this specific point:
Just in case this is still confusing: creating an event that is exclusive to one particular group is itself discriminatory. Sometimes this is justified, like creating a girls-only bowling club. What Leah Daughtry did was not justified, however, because she created a theists-only event to discuss morals and values, then used that to “prove” that Democrats are all theists.
Now, if you disagree with me and support the actions of Daughtry — and the defense offered by Laugesen, then feel free to make a case. But please, don’t raise arguments that I have already clearly addressed.
Past? You really think Christians’ mistakes are all relegated to the past?
Insofar as Christians are represented by bigots like Leah Daughtry and Wayne Laugesen, I would hope not.
Once again, my Canadian non-religious charity list. Sorry it’s so long: but then, that’s because there are so many non-religious charities out there, of which I only have a sampling. Oh, and I live my life every day ensuring that I follow exactly NOTHING that is “Christian” in any way. I don’t live my live by fear and guilt; don’t think that I should kill others merely for not sharing my beliefs; I value evidence-based reason as a virtue, not faith-based superstition. I could go on, but this post will already be long enough.
NON-RELIGIOUS CHARITIES
Abilities Foundation of Nova Scotia -
Acclaim Health & Community Care Services -
Alberta Easter Seals Society -
Alzheimer Society of British Columbia -
Alzheimer Society of Canada -
Alzheimer Society of Manitoba -
Alzheimer Society of Saskatchewan -
The Banff Centre - of south-western Alberta.
Barrie Literacy Council -
British Columbia Cancer Foundation -
Beaverlodge Day Care Centre -
Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Georgian Triangle -
Bosco Homes - A Society for Children and Families -
Boys and Girls Club - large national provider of day care services to school-aged children.
Boys and Girls Clubs of Greater Vancouver -
Brain Injury Association of Alberta -
Bridgepoint Health Foundation -
British Columbia Children’s Hospital - the specialist hospital for children in British Columbia, and the large fundraising efforts which support it.
Calgary Association of Self Help -
Calgary Counselling Centre -
Canadian Cancer Society - the primary fundraising organisation for research into cancer disease.
Canadian Celiac Society -
Canadian Digestive Health Foundation -
Canadian Federation of Humane Societies -
Canadian Heart and Stroke Foundation - the primary fundraising organisation for research into heart and stroke disease.
Canadian Immunideficiency Society -
Canadian Women’s Foundation -
Canuck Place - the Vancouver children’s hospice funded largely through the efforts of the Vancouver Canucks hockey club.
Cerebral Palsy Association of Alberta -
CGA - Canada Research Foundation -
Children’s Wish Foundation of Canada - fundraising organisation which pays for a “wish” for terminally ill children.
Cliffcrest Community Centre -
Canadian National Institute of the Blind (CNIB) - the national funds and awareness raiser for blindness.
Community Care Haliburton County - in Ontario.
Community Home Assistance to Seniors (CHATS) -
Cowichan District Hospital Foundation - of Duncan, British Columbia.
Centre for Opportunities, Respect and Empowerment (CORE) -
Douglas Mental Health University Institute Foundation -
Education Matters -
Family Leisure Centre Association of SE Calgary -
Flemingdon Neighbourhood Services -
Grand River Conservation Foundation -
Groves Memorial Community Hospital Foundation -
Habitat for Humanity Canada - a global organisation which provides building materials and volunteers to build homes for extremely poor people in poor nations.
Hearing Foundation of Canada -
Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario - the fund and awareness raising organisation for heart disease and strokes in Ontario.
Hospitals of Regina Foundation -
Imagine Canada -
Interim Place - emergency shelter for women in Peel County (Mississauga), Ontario.
Jennifer Ashleigh Children’s Charity -
John Howard Society of Ontario - an international organisation that raises funds for provision of services and items to prison inmates, and raises awareness of the possibility of wrongful prison convictions. Named for a person who served many years in prison after a wrongful conviction.
Kinark Foundation -
Kinsmen Service Clubs - a Canadian-based service club that allows members to support local charity projects of their choice.
Leadership Waterloo Region - of Ontario.
Lions Foundation of Canada - the fundraising arm of the Lions Club.
LOFT Community Services -
Lupus Society of Alberta -
Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) Canada - an international organisation which raises awareness of drunk driving and raises funds for non-alcholic high school graduation parties.
Make-a-Wish Foundation of Canada - fundraising organisation which pays for a “wish” for terminally ill children.
March of Dimes - fund raising for the physically disabled.
Mentoring Artists for Women’s Art -
Moorelands Community Services -
Muscular Dystrophy Canada -
Nanaimo and District Hospital Foundation - of British Columbia.
National Youth in Care Network -
North Shore Neighbourhood House -
North York Women’s Centre - of Ontario, just north of Toronto.
Oakville Senior Citizen’s Residence - of Ontario, just west of Toronto.
Ontario Brain Injury Association -
Opportunity International Canada -
Ottawa Regional Cancer Foundation -
Oxfam Canada -
Prince Edward Island Council of the Disabled -
Park Manor Personal Care Home -
Plan Canada -
PLEA Community Services Society of British Columbia -
Pregnancy and Family Support Services - in contrast to religious “pregnancy” support which consists solely of stalling until the mother is past the time period for having safe abortion, this secular organisation provides counselling, teaching and support services for mothers, without an anti-abortion agenda.
The Prep Program -
Red Deer College Foundation - of central Alberta.
Red Door Family Shelter -
Saint Thomas Elgin General Hospital Foundation - of Saint Thomas, in south-western Ontario.
Save the Children Canada - “our organization has no political or religious affiliation”, advertisement in MacLean’s magazine, 30 June 2008.
Science Alberta Foundation -
Sick Kids Foundation -
Simcoe County Association for the Physically Disabled - of central Ontario.
Soldier’s Memorial Hospital Foundation -
Southlake Regional Health Centre Foundation -
Special Olympics Ontario - sports programme for mentally handicapped people.
Spina Bifeda & Hydrocephalus Association of Ontario -
Starlight Starbright Children’s Foundation -
Stratford General Hospital Foundation - of south-western Ontario.
Student Life Education Company -
SUCCESS Foundation -
Taking It Global -
Toronto Centre for Community Learning and Development -
United Way - an umbrella fund-raising co-ordinator for multiple charities within communities.
United Way of Greater Simcoe County - in central Ontario.
United Way of Greater Toronto -
United Way of Greater Victoria -
United Way of London & Middlesex -
United Way of Winnipeg -
University of Western Ontario - in London.
VOICE for Hearing Impaired Children -
War Child Canada -
West Coast Legal Education & Action Fund -
Wildlands League -
WISH -
Workman Arts Project -
INTERNATIONAL
A disproportionately large percentage of the rock and movie stars who give to charities (ie the Bob Geldofs and Angelina Jolies of the world) are non-religious.
Amnesty International - the global organisation which promotes change on human rights issues through non-violent means, particularly through mobilising huge letter writing and other awareness campaigns.
Big Brothers/Sisters - providing adult volunteers to spend time with children from single parent homes.
Doctors Without Borders (Mediciens sans Frontières) - a Non-Government Organisation which brings doctors to places which have little or no modern medical infrastructure.
Greenpeace - the global environmental protection (and confrontation) organisation.
International Red Cross - a Non-Governmental Organisation which brings emergency food and medical supplies to impoverished and/or disaster afflicted nations and regions. Despite its name, and the name of its sister charity in Muslim nations (Red Crescent), it is a secular organisation.
Kiwanis Service Clubs - a global service club that allows members to support local charity projects of their choice.
Lions Service Clubs - a global service club that allows members to support local charity projects of their choice.
Rotary Service Clubs - a global service club that allows members to support local charity projects of their choice.
United Nations - and all of its charities, including UNICEF (United Nations Children’s Emergency Fund).
Christie: You have a gay friend, but you disappove of him being himself? You and I have different definitions of the word “friend”.
Drew: Thanks for that list. Almost all of those have an equvalent in the US.
Jack Savage: The Jewish religion disintegrated? That will certainly be news to the 13+ million Jews in the world.
Well Jack, there were 4 million more Jews prior to the 1930s. What ever could have happened to them? Oh yeah, hatred like yours run amuck. And FYI, there are only 7.6 million JWs.
As for my friend “boinking” my wife, that would be a breach of trust that is not the same thing as someone loving someone of the same sex that does not in any way affect me. If my friend made my mother happy (and she was single), then I would support their relationship. This is called being an adult. And being an adult, I am not even going to respond to your idiotic beastiality remark. Grow up, Mr Savage. Grow up.