From Here & Back Again

By Jim Coufal

(Cazenovia, NY – Jan. 2012) My friend the Cazenovia Curmudgeon (Don Krueger) quoted Lord Balfour as saying, “…so few enthusiasts can be trusted to speak the truth,” then Don went on to point out the inconsistencies told by Christmas story enthusiasts; in other words by Christian believers.

About the same time, syndicated columnist Cal Thomas wrote about Christopher Hitchens in a piece Thomas titled “Death Comes to an Atheist,” often quoting passages from what appears to be his source for enthusiasm, the bible.

Long ago, esteemed Christian thinker St. Ambrose said, “I should not believe in the gospel if I had not the authority of the church for so doing.” He did not find the bible credible except that Pope and clergy told him that it was to be believed.

Believe; don’t think.

Doesn’t say much for his thinking.

Thomas, in his usual half-baked way, continued passing on untruths about atheists, saying they are nervous because they don’t believe in an afterlife, they cannot be moral without god, that without god they are devoid of meaning and purpose, and others.

He points out, apparently unknowingly, things the atheists object to about religion, as in quoting Proverbs 9:10, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom,” as something good. Notice it is not the “love” of god, but the “fear” of god. Is this to transfer so that here on earth the fear of parents is the beginning of wisdom?

Atheists see religions as a means of controlling humans through the use of fear and guilt.

Thomas ends by inviting atheists to use the Christmas season to come to believe and to receive the “ultimate gift” of faith, again without apparent understanding; atheists don’t value faith, they value reason, as in “Reasons Greetings.”

And here is where I come to the title of this piece, “Christmas, Atheism and Freedom,” because one of the illusory cries of Christian oppression comes by apologists who say atheists and liberals want to “take Christ out of Christmas,” stop the celebration of Christmas, stop prayer is schools and so forth.

Don Krueger notes that many atheists, liberals, humanists, secularists, (together called unbelievers herein), celebrate the secular Christmas with comfort and joy, just as Christians do. We love the music, the lights, the gathering of families, the sharing of meals, the pointed acts of kindness and the random acts of kindness of the season.\

We just don’t believe the Christmas story or the need for a god to reward us for our acts of love and empathy or to punish us if we don’t act compassionately. People like Cal Thomas simply can’t believe this is possible, although research indicates non-believers are just as, if not more, ethical than religious believers.

Nonbelievers uphold the right of Christians to celebrate their holidays, just as we uphold the right of Jews to celebrate Hanukah, Afro-Americans to celebrate Kwanza and Muslims the right to celebrate Ramadan.

We only ask that believers do not try to force those celebrations on unbelievers or people of other faiths; we ask that our – and those of believers – constitutional rights of separation of church and state be upheld.

For example, it’s a downright lie for Christians to say nonbelievers want to take away their right to pray in school. We uphold their right to do so, and say, “Pray, pray, pray.” We only ask that you do it privately.

Wasn’t it Jesus who said, “When you pray, go into your room and close the door. Pray privately to your Father who is with you. Your Father sees what you do in private. He will reward you” (Matthew 6:6).

What atheists, secularists, humanists, etc., object to is the attempts by religious believers to have government back and impose religion, and especially their particular brand of religion.

Here, in the spirit of giving, I give credit to an essay by Robert Creamer for inspiring what is written here, an essay I also borrow from. Creamer points out that the real threat to the spirit and celebration of Christmas comes from the right.

His main example is the respect and admiration offered by many rightists – Paul Ryan, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Clarence Thomas and others – to Ayn Rand and her philosophies, as witnessed by so many republican votes and actions.

Creamer offers these direct words of Rand from an interview:

Interviewer: “Christ, and every other important moral leader in man’s history, has taught us that we should love one another. Why then is this kind of love, in your mind, immoral?”

Rand: “It is immoral if it is placed above one’s own self.”

Interviewer; “And then if a man is weak or a woman is weak then she or he is beyond love?”

Rand: “He certainly does not deserve – he is certainly beyond.”

Interviewer: “There are very few of us that would, by our standards, are worthy of love – is that your view?”

Rand: “Unfortunately yes – very few.”

Interviewer: “You are out to destroy almost every edifice in contemporary American life – our Judeo-Christian religion, our modified government – regulated capitalism, rule by the majority will. Other reviewers say that you scorn churches and the concept of God – are they accurate criticisms?”

Rand: “Yes.

Creamer goes on to compare this to Jesus’s story of the Good Samaritan, who, as the “good neighbor,” stops to help a stricken traveler, cares for him, takes him to shelter and pays for his care and returns to be sure he is alright. I would add Matthew 19: 16-22, where the rich man who has kept the Ten Commandments asks what else he must do to enter heaven, and Jesus tells him, “Go sell all you have, give it to the poor, and come and follow me.”

Of course, the rich man doesn’t do that. I might argue that Jesus’s sayings are often beyond the reasonable ability of humans, but the spirit of empathy, compassion, caring and giving he commends is completely the opposite of the Ayn Rand idolized by so many of the right.

Or of Ron Paul, who said a sick person who cannot afford insurance should just die.

Throughout, the believers – especially the Christians – claim they are being oppressed.

Rather, they are being opposed in their acts to have government support religion … of course, their particular religion. It is atheists and secularists who are afraid to let their light shine for fear of being ostracized.

Poll after poll finds atheists are the least likely group to be voted for as president; some states still have laws on the books prohibiting atheists from running for elected office. Newt Gingrich proclaimed on a nationwide broadcast that a person who doesn’t pray can’t be trusted with power, and other public figures offered no criticism.

What if he had said no Jews or no Afro-Americans or no gay person could be trusted? In terms of religionists being oppressed by atheists, there is one self-identified atheist in the U.S. Congress, while most are Christians, with some Jews and others.

As I come back to finish this essay from its “simmering time,” an editorial in the Post-Standard (Dec. 26) notes that 76 percent of the United States population, or 224 million people, are Christian.

Again, so much for the oppression of Christians.

At the same time, we have “as many Jews as Israel, nearly as many Muslims as Kuwait. There are 1.5 million Buddhists, 1 million Hindus and a host of Taoists, Wiccans, atheists, agnostics and others, plus the 38.8 million “nonreligious.” Our constitution prevents the support of any religion and allows us to hold and practice our beliefs.

All of us.

Who then really mounts an attack on Christmas and the practice of Christianity? Is it the atheists, secularists, humanists who strongly support acts of compassion, laws of compassion and constitutional rights, or the religious and rightist fundamentalists who praise and support anti-Christian and anti-religious beliefs and actions?

Which philosophy should we as a nation choose; love yourself above all others or love your neighbors as yourself?

The choice is still ours to make.

Jim Coufal of Cazenovia is a part-time philosopher and full-time observer of global trends. He can be reached at madnews@m3pmedia.com.