The World's Largest Coalition of Nontheists and Nontheist Communities!

ORIGIN OF ATHEIST PRIDE

ORIGIN OF ATHEIST PRIDE

We have everything to be proud about when declaring our atheism.

Above all, this is because we hold the intellectual high ground in being RIGHT.

Atheism is the rational and only correct way to observe and interpret Life and the Universe.

By contrast, the religious pitifully prostrate themselves at the level of the intellectual low ground because—often through little initial fault of their own, having been indoctrinated when young—they are not aware that religion is the mistaken, indeed bogus, way with which to regard the universe and its splendorous life.

Atheism is not a belief. It is the default situation into which every innocent is born.

Religion is something imposed on children’s initially-free mentality by the perverse will of elders, whether parents, school, church, synagogue or mosque.

One does not need to be a scientist to understand and agree to the atheistic viewpoint. What is needed is commonsense and a readiness to accept the results of what millions of elite scientists have discovered during the course of their hundreds of millions of experiments, particularly those carried out in the last two centuries.

The world can be proud of the history of its scientific achievements, all of which steadfastly point to an ancient universe and a neo-Darwinian interpretation of the story of Life and Humanity.

Sadly, we accept that most religionists will never give in. Their prejudiced minds are made up. They will not absorb knowledge that is new to them.

Just as we loudly proclaim our atheistic world view, we can look at the religious with pity as they humble themselves and grovel before their imaginary gods that exist nowhere but inside their heads.

Tags: atheism, atheist pride, commonsense, intelligence, life, religion, universe

14 members like this

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Jason Edwin DeLeo on November 2, 2011 at 1:40am

You know Ayn Rand said something on this topic . She was an atheist and was unapologetic about it . She said something to the effect that a person who is a mystic ( read theist ) is a person who upon being confronted with the existence of other people with differing opinions decided that fear was the only response and then made it his/her life goal to either obey or command others and therefor never have to think for him/her self again . Any refusal to accept the truth of the real world and the fact that there is no other life than this one is actually damaging to the mind . In the same way and in the same fashion as perpetuating a lie is . This is because in almost all cases lying to others means that their opinion of you matters more to you than your own . Eventually if enough lies are told this destroys all semblance of rational thought in that mind . The exception to the no lying rule is if you or your loved ones are under threat of violence or any other kind of force in that case it is in ones and ones loved ones best interest to lie as any one who initiates the use of force against another has given up any claim to rationality and should expect no forgiveness or help. This is just. I have thought about this for many years and have come to the conclusion that it is not my job or my goal to persuade any one of anything and in fact that if I see no possible positive outcome to a conversation I simply don't have it . I am proud to be an atheist although I consider it the default of any rational mind so I am not so much anti - God , gods as pro-reason and pro-thought and pro-freedom .

Permalink Reply by Maruli Marulaki on November 2, 2011 at 12:01pm

I do not consider my being an atheist, skeptic and apistic as a reason to be proud.   Instead I am very grateful.   I am lucky to have been born with a brain, where the space for the need for and attraction of any faith has been left void.   I have not made my brain.   Having been spared the need for faith is not my own achievement. Therefore I am as little proud to be an atheist as I am to have two feet.
Being void of faith is like having a talent. Every talent is like having been a winner in the lottery of life.
I am the grateful winner of the talent to be free and independent from any faith.
I feel like a winner not due to comparing myself with the religiously troubled losers, but because the absence of needing a faith makes my own life better.

Permalink Reply by Madhukar Kulkarni on November 14, 2011 at 8:57am

Every atheist becomes an atheist for different reasons and by a different thought process. So, there could be different reasons of all of us for being atheists. I generally totally dislike talking about myself, but I have to do so if I have to talk about my pride for being an atheist. The roots of atheism must have existed in my blood when I was eight or nine! I observed happenings around myself with a total detachment and stored their memories in my mind till I was free of family induced religious beliefs, when I was about eighteen. I took fourteen more years to become a confirmed atheist. As I look back now on my life, I see that I possed a good analtyical ability, an independent and rational mind, a strong belief in free thought and strong resistance to accept anything because it was a rule. I am perplexed in my mind that I possed these faculties even though my parents were very orthodox, but it was so. Possessing these qualities of a free mind and being able to use them in a right manner that ultimately led to atheism, the philosophy of the future, makes me proud, or rather, selfrespecting. Pride in this case simply means a selfrespect, for being a rational creature.

MADHUKAR KULKANI

Permalink Reply by Steph S. on December 19, 2011 at 6:54pm

You were lucky to be raised Atheist and didn't have to suffer the indoctrination -- so nice to have you as a friend Valerie!

Permalink Reply by Byron Keith Molloy on December 19, 2011 at 6:35pm

You state, "Religion is something imposed on children’s initially-free mentality by the perverse will of elders, whether parents, school, church, synagogue or mosque." There is at least one other large group that has had religion imposed on them...primative cultures around the world that have been destroyed by missionary zeal. In my under-educated view, a primative people's culture is defined by their religion. Christianity has made it a priority to convert these people thereby destroying their original religion (culture). Of course the result is the same for a primative people as it is for a child indoctrinated from birth...an irrational belief maintained by outlawing rational thought.

Permalink Reply by Dr. Terence Meaden on December 19, 2011 at 6:46pm

Yes, you are right to indicate that overzealous christian missionaries usually succeed in destroying anciently-held cultures that nonetheless did have merits of their own, as anthropologists and professorial historians of religion have often pointed out.

Permalink Reply by Lilium Mitchell on February 11, 2012 at 9:04pm

I agree with everything you have said. We do have the advantage of having the most accurate information due to the scientific method.

But I agree with Allan as well. In my opinion, because of the knowledge we have, we should stand in awe and be humbled by it rather than feel higher. Science does not hold all of the answers and has been wrong several times. The most fascinating thing about science is when we are wrong or find something completely different all together. The scientific method is beautiful.

Religious people who base their lives around faith and the thought that god will provide for them should not be looked at with pity despite their flawed logic. People who are unable to accept anything besides what they know previously are all equally flawed. Atheist and religious alike. Just because someone does not believe God exists, doesn't automatically mean they are logical or able to see past their own previously conceived notions. In my opinion it is the generalization of group characteristics that bring about prejudice and the inability to reason with each other.

With intelligence comes great responsibility. We need to be the example. Many people have come from religious backgrounds into atheism because of the humility and beauty of reality shown by an atheist that they could not find within religion. My opinion is that humility is the back bone of scientific discovery and knowledge.

Permalink Reply by Madhukar Kulkarni on February 11, 2012 at 10:29pm

Lilium Mitchell

With intelligence comes great responsibility. We need to be the example.

I wholeheartedly agree with you on the above points, but the atheists have to realise this responsibility and the need to be an example for others. Atheist refuse to realise this responsibility and say that atheism in nothing more than not believing in god and nothing less.

Permalink Reply by Steph S. on February 14, 2012 at 5:45am

Enjoyed reading that.

Permalink Reply by Nathan Ortberg on February 23, 2012 at 11:54pm

I agree with you that by and large atheism holds the intellectual high ground. However, as you reference the religious as humbling themselves to imaginary gods, I can't help but feel you are insinuating that we as atheists should not feel humbled. I disagree, if that is the case.

With the knowledge we have, by our choice to obtain it, we see how vast and powerful the universe is. Not controlling, so as to watch over us and intervene, but powerful nonetheless. We should feel empowered, in our knowledge but humbled by sheer wonder of what else we will discover. I'm not sure if I am getting my point across, so I will point to a very meaningful quote but one of our brilliant scientific minds, who I amcertain you are all familiar with.

“Recognize that the very molecules that make up your body, the atoms that construct the molecules, are traceable to the crucibles that were once the centers of high mass stars that exploded their chemically rich guts into the galaxy, enriching pristine gas clouds with the chemistry of life. So that we are all connected to each other biologically, to the earth chemically and to the rest of the universe atomically. That’s kinda cool! That makes me smile and I actually feel quite large at the end of that. It’s not that we are better than the universe, we are part of the universe. We are in the universe and the universe is in us.” - Neil deGrasse Tyson.

I sometimes hard to find it hard to articulate precisely what I mean, but I think that quote sums it up pretty well. My point is, there is a great amount of unknown in the universe. We know quite a lot, but almost nothing in comparison of what there is to know. To be humbled and stalled in pure wonder of all of the universe, all of existence, that wonder and curiosity is what drives us to discover more.

Permalink Reply by Tyler Holmstrom on February 25, 2012 at 1:04pm

Incredible. You have summed up my perspective of atheism perfectly. The only thing I try to 'preach' as an atheist is doubt because doubt is humble. When you peer back into our past it's just full of things that we get dead wrong. I don't understand how people can logically have blind faith in anything because everything is up to interpretation and debate. I was raised without religion so perhaps that grants me a different insight into the situation. I've come to the conclusion that I just can't understand the brain of a believer because whenever they try to give me 'proof' of their God's existence they either get into the metaphysical or beat around the bush and get into a 'deep' discussion which pretty much translates to "God exists because the Bible says so."

I literally can't reason with them unless they are moderately religious or agnostic.

Permalink Reply by Matthew Newman on March 5, 2012 at 2:08am

What's up, Doc?

My question is; what do we call the unforeseeable? Surely it need not be anything deific or fantastical, but what is a prediction when you're downwind of it? Surely mysticism points to truths, if we learn not to accept them as not whole truths, but mere expectations.

Why all the hubbub over what one person calls one thing? What of the "soul" and its more demure impact on what we call life? I can attest to having no prior knowledge of what a "soul" might be... but perhaps a portent for something indistinguishable to any of us at this point in our lives.

I suppose what I'm trying to say is; what do you call a hypothesis when you're trying to look at its substance before defining its beginning and its end?