Considering that 20% of Americans have left religion
behind, it may be surprising that only 2.4% of Americans identify as atheists. This low reported number might be
attributable in part to the powerful cultural forces that impact on our lives
and the perceived correctness of our
opinions. Ours is a country where God is
regularly invoked even in largely secular contexts. Atheism, characterized as
such or not, seems somehow disloyal. So
I have taken responses to pollsters' "God question" with a grain of salt, seen them as
suspect.
How entrenched the assumption that God exists and plays a role in events, especially those
branded Acts of God, can be seen in an
exchange between CNN's Wolf Blitzer and Rebecca Vitsmun, a victim of the
devastating Oklahoma tornado. Jessica
Ravitz reprises it in her recent CNN Belief Blog:
“I guess you got to thank
the Lord, right?” he (Blitzer) asked.
“Yeah,” she mumbled,
smiling and looking down.
“Do you thank the Lord for
that split-second decision?” he continued.
“I, I, I,” the 30-year-old
stay-at-home mom stammered before adding, “I’m actually an atheist.”
Notice that Ms. Vitsmun's first and reflexive
response is "Yeah" and that the second, declaring she is an atheist, was
so unusual as to go immediately viral.
While unsuccessively trying to reach Vitsmun, Ravitz
writes that her friend Waylon Flinn "...shed some light on who she is. She and her husband, who Flinn said is also an
atheist, aren’t the sorts who advertise their beliefs or throw them in people’s
faces. When she agreed to go on camera,
it wasn’t for that platform; she didn’t even see the Lord question coming."
The Vitsmun's don't talk much about or flaunt, their
atheism. I'd guess they aren't active in
any organized atheist group. In fact,
what stands out here is that Rebecca volunteered anything about her beliefs. In a moment of refreshing candor, she effectively
challenged conventional wisdom — God's involvement in the tornado and
intervening on her (or anyone else's) behalf. Few people are willing to acknowledge that,
especially in such a public way. That's
too bad because very many of us, even among those religiously identified, don't
believe God has anything to do with disasters or much else that comes our way,
nor do we necessarily believe there is a God.
Some atheists, declared or not, may wish there was such a being and
even reflexively pay it lip service (including in responding to pollsters), but
God plays absolutely no part in their lives or daily thinking.
Of course, billions of the world's people identify
with a religion largely premised on God and participate in some or many of its
rites. Relative to that, organized
atheism, to the degree that it exists, is a total bust even among professed
atheists. Why is that so? Let's start with the fact that many of our
most visible public atheists are, or are seen, as provocateurs, often-angry
provocateurs at that. They write books,
pen articles, occasionally are heard on PBS and give talks or engage in public
debate. Their books, in part because
they are (often purposefully) provocative, sell — sometimes are best
sellers. We may respect their intellect,
agree with their bottom line conclusions but they aren't necessarily our
natural role models. We don't share
their anger or necessarily their often-dismissive animus toward religion. So, to some degree, the lack of a robust
atheist movement — followers generally in the hundreds, even thousands, but not millions — may not reflect
an ideological problem but a messenger
problem.
This may be a factor but a much more profound and
fundamental is that most of us, whether in managing our lives or say casting
our votes, find it very hard to rally around a negative. Belief in a god — for God — is a positive and
thus compelling, disbelief — against God — not so much. A god-belief fosters and promotes some degree
of action. Gods demand attention, often
lots of it, we think. Because God is
seen as somehow connected with putting our world, not to mention us, in place,
we are moved to express our appreciation, to give thanks. Moreover, gods
are seen to have transcendent powers so we ask for their intervention or at the
least seek their guidance and strength. God
is there to protect, to invoke and to rally around, a flag to salute. Customs to observe and milestones to celebrate
formalize and regularize the relationship. They serve to build community. In
theory at least, God provides us with answers, even to the seemingly
unanswerable questions. Above all, God
testifies to the idea that there is something
beyond ourselves and by implication perhaps there is more to us, an enduring/eternal
more. You may place little value on any of
these; see them as wishful thinking. Perhaps,
but atheism offers none of them.
As suggested in my book Transcenders and in these
posts, trying to prove the unprovable — namely that God exists or doesn't — is a
hopeless exercise. For the vast majority
of the religious a belief in God is
all that is required and, most especially, wanted. God is a given. Some theologians may spend time trying to prove
God's existence, but that kind of thing doesn't play or compute at the ground
level. When Rebecca Vitsmun's fellow
disaster victims and people like them thank God for saving them or their
families or say that what hit them was "God's will and way",
they are expressing a heartfelt belief that invites no further documentation. Their church, synagogue or mosque will
reinforce their faith; their clergy will dutifully confirm that God is with
them in their hour of need, that those who have perished are now protected under
the divine wing.
Most of those who believe there is no such thing as
God don't spend much if any of their time testing or trying to prove their
belief. So Rebecca likely looks at the tornado
that hit her home and community scientifically — the result of a collision of
incompatible moist and dry with hot and cool weather systems. She is no less devastated by the tornado, no
less grateful that her family escaped with their lives. She was saved by her own instincts and the smarts
that drove her to take her baby and run for their lives; not being in its path saved her husband. Their home was destroyed not because it was
God's will but that it couldn't take the action she did and, unlike her
husband, it was in the tornado's path.
Like the Vitsmun's, I'm an atheist. I don't believe in the existence of a god but
admit that my belief, however real and relevant it may be to my life, is no
less or more an unsubstantiated belief than those who believe in God. Of course, as with theists, there are many consequence that
follow from my belief. There was no
Creator involved bringing about either our universe or us. There is no one to thank, to blame or from
whom to seek intervention. The only
reason that we're here is that our parents had sex at the right moment for conception, the
only reason we do whatever we do is because we made a decision to act or had to
respond to circumstance. This life is
all we have, and when it ends it's over — no soul or eternity.
Needless to say, there is much more that follows and impacts on our lives from being atheists. Atheism is not one
of them.
That brings be to another reason that atheism (as a
movement) is a bust relative to religion.
Many of those who have left religion behind, have also abandoned the
idea that beliefs have to be embodied in an organization. They have rejected the institution of "church"
and the notion that they need some sort of group guidance on how to live their
lives. For sure mysteries abound in our
world, but we look to science for answers/solutions whether it be on matters of
the weather that caught the Vitsmun's in a tornado or cures for cancer and
AIDS. As to matters of behavior and
morality or insights into what makes us tick, philosophers, psychologists and
novelists, among others, serve us well.
What does atheism bring to the table that we don't already have, and
have in abundance? Nothing really.
In fact, if atheism makes any claim on being able to
guide us, let's say on matters of morality, then it claims a credential that
is no more valid or viable than that of religion.
This is not to put down religion or to discount its meaning/relevance to the vast
majority of our fellow humans, but to say that atheism adds no value to the
atheist, nothing she doesn't have or can't acquire on her own. Secular humanists have organized themselves
around faux churches, offering tepid copies of religious programming but
without God. Perhaps some people need
that or have succumbed to a societal message of "organize" because
"that's the way we do things around here". Perhaps they want/need a sense of likeminded
community, what my friend Doug Smith calls "thick-we's". For me, being an atheist is enough especially
when such great life-teaching resources are at hand and always accessible. Atheism isn't needed and doesn't cut it.
_____________________
No comments:
Post a Comment