Something very weird just happened.
Let me explain.
There is a religious blog I like to read. The writer is very nice (think CG here on NV) and we like to debate back and forth. After my return from my extended absence from the Internet, I made a comment on his blog and he said he was glad to see me back because I challenge him in ways that his regular audience does not.
His latest blog dealt with the Sandy Hook school shootings. He called it an ‘act of evil’. I responded by saying:
Calling it 'evil' distracts from the very real causes. By doing that, we try to easily rationalize something, which distracts us from understanding why the shooter did what he did, and ultimately, if we want to prevent it from happening in the future, we have to understand the root causes.
In response, another poster (not the blog owner) asked me this:
I am trying to get a handle on what you are saying. How would you describe the slaughter of children? You at least seem to feel its worthy of prevention, but I am curious how you would describe it, and why in your opinion it should be prevented.
At first I was puzzled by the question. I mean, I would probably describe ‘the slaughter of children’ and feel ‘it’s worthy of prevention’ for the same reasons as the one who asked the question.
But then it dawned on me (I had just woken up alright!) that the poster might be insinuating that because I don’t believe in God, that I have no reason to care about those children or any reason to want to prevent such a thing from happening again.
I could be wrong, but why else would someone ask that question?
It seems the answer is fairly obvious, yet they seemed a little shocked that I would give a damn. Yet the only difference evident in the comment section between me and the poster is that he has faith in a God, while I do not.
So, I went and visited his blog. I read through a few of his posts and came to the conclusion that he has a decent grasp of the English language. I think he knew exactly what he was asking, although his reason behind asking is still in question.
I asked my partner whether she could think of any other reason to ask that question and she said she can’t think of one.
I wonder if it has anything to do with the Fundamentalist preachers who came out and blamed the Sandy Hook tragedy on atheists…and of course their favorite punching bag…homosexuals.
Things like this:
Bryan Fischer of the American family Association said the victims at Sandy Hook had lost God’s protection because prayer has been prohibited from schools. “The question is going to come up, where was God?,” Fischer said. “I thought God cared about the little children. God protects the little children. Where was God when all this went down. Here’s the bottom line, God is not going to go where he is not wanted… Now we have spent since 1962 — we’re 50 years into this now–we have spent 50 years telling God to get lost, telling God we do not want you in our schools, we don’t want to pray to you in our schools, we do not want to pray to your before football games, we don’t want to pray to you at graduations, we don’t want anybody talking about you in a graduation speech… In 1962 we kicked prayer out of the schools. In 1963 we kicked God’s word out of ours schools. In 1980 we kicked the Ten Commandments out of our schools. We’ve kicked God out of our public school system. And I think God would say to us, ‘Hey, I’ll be glad to protect your children, but you’ve got to invite me back into your world first. I’m not going to go where I’m not wanted. I am a gentlemen.”
Not sure why a deity would need permission, but okay. And by the way, people can pray when they want. The school just cannot mandate prayer or endorse one religion over another. That’s a point that is lost on people like Fischer.
The article above ended on this note:
Who hates Jesus? It isn’t the so-called new atheists like Richard Dawkins. It’s the Christian leaders bent on taking Christianity down with them into their private hell of stupidity. With friends like these Jesus needs no enemies. The re-crucifixion of Jesus by his “followers” continues.
I agree wholeheartedly.
I also hope that the poster who asked me that question didn’t think that there would be no reason for me to care whether or not innocent children had their life snuffed out, simply because I’m an atheist.
However, I think that’s exactly what they were getting at, which is not only insulting, but shows that some religious people believe that without belief in their brand of deity, you have no reason to care about anything, including the massacre of innocent children.