The Atheist Ethicist blog has a great post on the idea that atheists are less charitable than religious believers:
There is a reason why atheists do not build hospitals or engage in charity in the name of atheism. It is because atheism is not an organized religion. An atheist does not make a contribution in the name of 'no god'. He makes a contribution . . . period.
For example, two leading atheist billionaires - Bill Gates and Warren Buffett - have contributed $60 billion in private charity. This is more than all of the top 50 Christian billionaires combined. Yet, nowhere in their charitable work will you see the word 'atheist'. This is because atheism is not a religion. Atheism is simply a belief that, because there is no God to take care of us, we must take care of each other.
The only thing I'd change in this quote is the "Atheism is simply..." bit. Atheism is not, in itself, a set of beliefs, but rather denotes a number of positions ranging from nihilism at one end to humanism at the other - and it's the latter that lays claim to being "a belief that, because there is no God to take care of us, we must take care of each other."
Aside from that, however, the post is a good example of standing up for atheism without resorting to crude attacks on the other person's religious beliefs.
2 comments:
Perfectly reasonable to me.
I don't like it too much when Evangelical Atheists try to claim that all religions are inherently bad. I admire Dawkins, but sometimes he makes me wince.
Myself, as I think you now, am a theist.
Evangelical Athiests? I don't think evangelical is the right word as it is strictly a Christian tradition. As the Athiest Ethicist rightly points out, Athiesm is not in any way and organised religion but it does rely on the fact that all organised religions are inherintly flawed, not bad.
Matt,
Remind me again what is wrong with "crude attacks on the other person's religious beliefs"? Most of the time it is only a percieved attack as people of faith are often unable to answer direct questions and choose to see these questions as an attack. How do you prove an idea is false without attacking it anyway?
Post a Comment