American Atheist's Webmaster's Astounding Assertions

"Fallacies of Atheism," [seemed to mean fallacies about atheism] "Atheism is NOT a Religion," "Atheism is NOT linked to Communism," "Atheists are NOT 'secular humanists'_," "Atheists are NOT 'Forcing their Opinions' on Society," and "The Best Way to Learn More_"

We begin with the explanation that stated:

"Atheism is NOT a 'belief.' Atheism is derived from the Greek, atheos, and means simply 'away from the belief in a god or gods.'"

One wonders why they are engaging in semantics but it appeared to be that they would like to believe that they are logical and "belief" would be below them.

Firstly, "atheism" as defined above is particular to "American Atheists" since the various sects of atheism define their positions differently. Even THE WEBMASTER states, "There are Atheists, and there are Atheists." For instance, some atheists do in fact claim that atheism is a religion.

Secondly, the simple fact is that atheists "believe" that God does not exist. They may state that God's existence has not been, or cannot be, proved but they "believe" that God does not exist. Simply stated, they probably deny "believing" that God does not exist because of a logical fallacy: they believe that God does not exist and do not offer proof because you cannot prove a negative. Therefore, they believe that God does not exist without proof. Hence, they believe it by faith. But notice that they most certainly believe that atheos means "away from the belief in a god or gods." Although atheos means a: without and theos: god hence without God.

Take note that Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language-Second College Edition2 defines "believe" as: "1. to take as true, real, etc., 2. to have confidence in a statement or promise of (another person) 3. to suppose or think."
Moreover, it defines "atheism" as: "the belief that there is no God, or denial that God or gods exist."
Notice that it is a belief.
Also, it defines "atheist" as: "a person who believes that there is no God."
Notice that an atheist believes.

This is nothing new to THE WEBMASTER who in the opening statements besmirched Webster's New Twentieth Century (Unabridged) for stating that "atheism" is "The belief that there is no God" and an "atheist" as "one who believes that there is not God" just as we quoted above. However, THE WEBMASTER then relies on the dictionary definition of "religion" in order to prove that atheism is not one. Thus, when a dictionary definition suits THE WEBMASTER's purposes it is correct but when it does not, it is not.

THE WEBMASTER wrote:

"Nearly every dictionary will define religion as 'belief in a divine or superhuman power or powers to be obeyed a worshipped as the creator(s) and ruler(s) of the universe.'"

Thus, THE WEBMASTER further states:

"There cannot be an Atheist 'Church', or an Atheist 'priest' anymore than there could be an Atheist 'god.'"

This may be true in the traditional sense of the terms. However, the contradictions between theistic systems and atheistic systems are actually not very different. Theists have a church (synagogue, mosque, etc.), atheists have their organizations and meeting halls-they meet together in order to discuss and encourage each other in their belief, they even collect a tithe, or due. Theists have priests (pastors, rabbis, imams, etc.), atheists have leaders in the same role as guides, encouragers, apologists and preachers. THE WEBMASTER wrote, "_our organization works to encourage these people to 'come out of the closet,' and proudly admit - and proclaim - their Atheism!" Theists have a God (or gods), atheist have placed humans as the very height of creation, to the atheist there is nothing above what they see in the mirror. Atheists even have faith based dogmatic beliefs.

THE WEBMASTER states:

"Atheism is NOT historically linked to Communism, or any other particular system of social organization."

It is odd that an organization named "American Atheists" would claim that atheism is NOT linked to any system of social organization. They most certainly organize for various purposes such as press releases, speeches, media appearances, lawsuits, protests and rallies.
In a section of their website entitled "SPEAK OUT!" they list 74 current and "inactive" campaigns in which they have involved themselves. They also list 75 "Affiliated Groups and Activities." As well as, "affiliation program for local organizations" in order "To strengthen atheism at all levels," these programs include: "Announcement[s]," "Assistance in arranging on-going programs," and "Assistance in setting up new local organizations." It is THE WEBMASTER who stated, "_our organization works to_"

We just saw that THE WEBMASTER denies that atheism is linked to Communism, now THE WEBMASTER further states:

"While Communism and its leading theoreticians happened to be Atheists, social activists of other persuasions have been Atheists as well."

We can always instantly discern a fallacious argument by the fact that we can use the very same argument in order to make the opposite point. If I wanted to state that atheism is indeed linked to Communism I could state something to the likes of, "Atheism is linked to Communism because Communism and its leading theoreticians were Atheists." Moreover, it is a misnomer to state that they just happened to be atheists. It is precisely because they were atheists that Communism was established and functioned in the way that it does. These particular atheistic Communists concocted a mixture of denial of moral absolutes, denial of a higher power, denial of God given human dignity, denial of God given human rights, acceptance of the madness of secular-nihilistic philosophy, acceptance of the latest pseudo-scientifically based racism, eugenics, applying survival of the fittest as social Darwinism, and a concept of government based on human beings as the supreme authority.

At this point it is possible that Vladimir Lenin (1870-1924) may elucidate the issue at hand since he was, after all, the first leader of the USSR who modified Marxist doctrine as a communist theoretician:

"Our party program is in its entirety built upon a scientific hence materialistic world view_.Thus our program necessarily contains the propaganda of atheism."3

Lenin also wrote,

"Atheism is a material and inseparable part of Marxism, of the theory and practice of scientific Socialism. In accordance with their fundamental philosophical outlook, Marx and Engels always called themselves materialists."4

E. Yaroslavsky,

"The program of the Communist International also clearly states that Communists fight against religion_Remember that the struggle against religion is a struggle for socialism."5

Albania's Enver Hoxha was committed to orthodox Marxism-Leninism and supported Stalinist policies. In the 1960s part of his "Cultural and Ideological Revolution" manifested in the form of the suppression of, "religious superstition." He proclaimed that "the Religion of Albania is Albanianism." Thousands of religious institutions and places of worship were shut down. Religious clerics of all faiths are imprisoned or forced to labor in the fields of industry or agriculture. In a final stroke, Albania was proclaimed the world's first atheistic state. Hoxha is responsible for thousands of deaths.

One wonders if THE WEBMASTER would accept their very own argument were it made by Christians about the Crusades: Christianity is NOT historically linked to the Crusades, while the Crusaders and its leading theoreticians happened to be Christians, social activists of other persuasions have been Christians as well.
Moreover, the parallel argument that we just posed can be further augmented by stating that the majority of the Crusader's actions were not in keeping with Christianity's morals. Thus, the labeling of those involved as "Christian" ought to be questioned. However, the only way to disavow atheism's linkage to Communism would be to claim that Communism and its leading theoreticians were not atheists, that they were secretly theists or agnostics of some sort.
Ultimately, let us consider a case in which both an atheist and a Christian committed violence and oppression. The atheist can say that there are no absolute morals and since there is no foundation for morals he can do as he wishes. Thus, he can claim to be faithfully following his beliefs. Atheism would allow him to be like Mother Theresa or like Joseph Stalin (the atheist responsible for some 20,000,000 deaths). The Christian could not appeal to the actions and teachings of the founder of his religion to justify neither violence nor oppression. In fact, he would be acting in direct violation to the actions and teachings of the founder of his religion. He would be condemned by Christianity's very own morals. In fact, when atheists condemn the actions of Christians they must first borrow Christian morality. Atheists condemn persecutions by Christians without foundation. Christianity condemns persecutions by Christians with a foundation. Evil done in Christianity's name does not prove the evil of Christianity, since no such evil can rightly be claimed as being prescribed in its orthodox teachings, nor did its founder or apostles engage in such actions, but it does prove human evil.

Consider why THE WEBMASTER would deny that atheism is liked to Communism?

1 -

Perhaps because the argument is often made that atheism is linked to Communism. The argument is historically and logically valid. Thus, THE WEBMASTER seeks to deny the facts of the argument.
2 - The argument may be denied due to the fact that the acceptance of its facts would discredit a favorite atheist argument against theism/religion and would cause them to admit hypocrisy.

One of atheism's favorite arguments is often stated in the words to the likes this belligerent statement by Richard Dawkins:

"Much of what people do is done in the name of God. Irishmen blow each other up in his name. Arabs blow themselves up in his name_The achievements of religion in past history - bloody crusades, torturing inquisitions, mass-murdering conquistadors, culture-destroying missionaries."

He also throws some other assorted besmirchments into the mix:

"Imams and ayatollahs oppress women in his name. Celibate popes and priests mess up people's sex lives in his name. Jewish shohets cut live animals' throats in his name_legally enforced resistance to each new piece of scientific truth until the last possible moment_It has all been a gigantic waste of time and a waste of life. It would be a joke of cosmic proportions if it weren't so tragic."6

Mr. Dawkins engages in ignavus cogitatus (lazy logic) which he commits in many forms and that perfectly demonstrate atheism's lazy logic in general:

1 - His statements are simplistic, painted with a boom, and are one sided.
2 - He attributes actions to his opposition without bothering to take into consideration that his own position has also partaken of the same actions. This hypocrisy is precisely the very thing that THE WEBMASTER is trying to avoid admitting.
3 - He neglects to take an extremely simple logical step-people engage upon violent and oppressive activities for various reasons and not just theism/religion.
4 - He most certainly neglects to go into some of these reasons, some of which are:
a - due to theism/religion.
b - due to warring over territory.
c - due to warring over material goods/resources.
d - due to racism.
e - due to sexism.
f - due to wealth and poverty.
g - politics.
h - science.
i - due to atheism.

Stephen Jay Gould, describing himself as a Jewish agnostic, makes a point about:

"the historical paradox that throughout Western history organized religion has fostered both the most unspeakable horrors and the most heart-rending examples of human goodness in the face of personal danger. (The evil, I believe, lies in the occasional confluence of religion with secular power. The Catholic Church has sponsored its share of horrors, from Inquisitions to liquidations-but only because this institution held such secular power during so much of Western history. When my folks held similar power more briefly in Old Testament times, they committed just as many atrocities with many of the same rationales.)" [Stephen Jay Gould, "Nonoverlapping Magisteria," Natural History, March 1997]

It is said that absolute power corrupts absolutely but in reality it is absolute freedom corrupts absolutely. This is because the person with absolute power thinks that they have the freedom to do as they please. When theists are in power they become corrupt and when atheists are in power they become corrupt. Blood has been shed and people have been oppresses in the name of religion and in the name of atheism. Some religions systems are inherently oppressive, such as the Hindu caste system. Also, individual atheists may argue that violent and oppressive actions are wrong, but they have nothing beyond their own particular likes and dislikes to appeal to. Get the point? Atheists are passing moral judgments while lacking a moral system. Moreover, they certainly do not want to turn this pseudo-moral position on themselves. If they did, they would have to admit that when atheists are in power they are just as brutal, if not worse than theists. Mr. Dawkins, and atheists in general, most certainly neglect to mention that atheists are not exactly known to be the ones who establish, run and fund all sorts of charities, homeless shelters, soup kitchens, disaster relief organizations, hospitals and universities. Rather, theists are known for these acts.

Note also that virtually all of Mr. Dawkins' statements can be attributed to atheism in the following manner. In the name of atheistic political powers people have blow each other up, have engaged upon bloody crusades, torturing inquisitions, mass-murdering conquistadors and culture-destroying missionaries in the form of the oppression of religion and the oppression of any one who opposed the atheists power structure in general. Atheism's amoral system messes up people's sex lives for no better reason than hedonism. Atheists cut live animals' throats_wish that they could legally enforced resistance to each new piece of scientific truth with any hint of an intelligent designer_It has all been a gigantic waste of time and a waste of life. It would be a joke of cosmic proportions if it weren't so tragic.

Incidentally, it is very odd to state that "Jewish shohets cut live animals' throats." What might his point be? Is he a vegan vegetarian and animal activist? Following strict kosher laws Rabbis have always slaughtered animals by a quick slice across the neck with a very sharp knife. This is a very quick and painless practice.

Now, back to THE WEBMASTER who appear to be a fundamentalist atheist:

"Atheists are NOT 'secular humanists', 'freethinkers', 'rationalists' or 'ethical culturalists'_Often, people who are Atheists find it useful to masquerade behind such labels."

One is left wondering from whence THE WEBMASTER acquired such authority. THE WEBMASTER determines what atheism is and what it is not. Also, determines who is an atheist and who is not. And determines that atheists who also identify themselves by various other terms are masquerading. Judgments wherein a person sets themselves up as the arbiter of other people's motivations are not allowed by the Bible (see our essay On Judgmentalism). Yet, unconstrained by such concepts, THE WEBMASTER's fundamental atheism seeks to determine the orthodox and the heretical, and or pseudo, atheism.

THE WEBMASTER states:

"Atheists are not 'forcing their opinions' on the society. But we ARE standing up for our constitutional rights, especially those guaranteed in the Establishment and Free Speech Clauses of the First Amendment. Religious organizations, in fact, have been working to force their doctrines onto society through mandatory prayer recitation in government halls and public schools. They are also trying to institute 'bible law' as the basis of civil society, and advance a religious agenda through political means."

Firstly, note the diversionary tactic here: We are not doing it but they are! Look at them! Look over there! Don't look at us anymore! Secondly, we have pointed out that "American Atheists" are a very socially and politically active organization. Thirdly, it is true that religious organizations have been working to force their doctrines onto society. For instance, there were those theists, deists and Christians, who established the "America" that is inherent in the name "American" Atheists. These superstitious religionists advanced their agenda to such an extreme that they declared independence from Europe by stating:

"_We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unaliable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men_"-Declaration of Independence

The very rights and freedom of speech that allows American Atheist and their THE WEBMASTER to form an organization based on expressing intolerance for the overwhelming majority of the country is based on the idea of a creator who endowed us with these rights and freedoms (see our One Nation Under Whom?!?!). The thanks that atheists offer to God for these rights and freedoms is to force their opinion on the culture and seek to remove even the most generic term "God" from public view.

THE WEBMASTER states:

"The best way to learn more about Atheism is from Atheists! Read our books, pamphlets and magazine. AMERICAN ATHEIST PRESS has a wide assortment of materials_"

In a manner of speaking, this makes perfect sense-who would know better what one believes than one who believes it (although THE WEBMASTER "believes" that they do not "believe" what they "believe"). However, this is not always true. For example, many Jehovah's Witnesses do not know that their organization has predicted the end of the world on numerous occasions (see our essay, The Eschaton Strikes Again). This is because they are restricted from reading any outside information. This is part of the reason that they are considered a cult. Just like the Jehovah's Witnesses, THE WEBMASTER states that we ought to rely on "Atheists!" and, of course, buy from them. However, the American Atheists sell various books about Christianity and the Bible written by and for atheists.

THE WEBMASTER has sought to elucidate what atheism is, and what it isn't, but ended up providing a barrage of faulty arguments, generalized assumptions, and disappointingly nothing of substance on which to engage upon logical argumentation.

1. 1. THE WEBMASTER, Atheism - What It Is, and What It Isn't
   (Copyright © 2006 American Atheists, Inc. All rights reserved)
   
2. 2. David B. Guralnik, ed. in chief, Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language-Second College Edition (Simon and Schuster, 1953, 1980 ed.)
   
3. 3. Hank Paulson, trans., ed., The Collected Works of Lenin Vol. 12, p. 245 also see Dr. Fred Schwarz, You Can Trust the Communists to be Communists (Long Beach, CA: Chantico Publishing Co., 1966-69), p. 155
   
4. 4. V. I. Lenin, Introduction to Religion, quoted p. 153, The Communist Conspiracy, Part I, Section A, U. S. Government Printing Office
   
5. 5. E. Yaroslavsky, Religion in the U. S. S. R., quoted pp. 279, 284, The Communist Conspiracy, Part I, Section B, U. S. Government Printing Office
   
6. 6. Richard Dawkins, "The Improbability of God," Free Inquiry, Volume 18, Number 3