My response to my friend...input will be appreciated!

Iruka Naminori
atheist
Iruka Naminori's picture
Posts: 1955
Joined: 2006-11-21
User is offlineOffline
My response to my friend...input will be appreciated!

If you haven't read any of the other threads, the short story is this: I had a clash with an online friend over religion.  I finally wrote a very long reply, which I'll include after my friend's letter.  I haven't sent it yet, so input will be valued.

Thanks!


 Hi,
 
First off, I sincerely apologize for not writing you personally and sooner.  Chris offered to be intermediary and I took him up on it because basically, I am a coward.
 
When we spoke via Skype ... you know, I don't even recall exactly what was said but all of a sudden you went off on a huge and long rant.  I'm not saying you were wrong or not justified.  But in doing so, you scared the living hell out of me.  Plain and simple, that's why I haven't been in contact with you.  You scared the hell out of me.  All the times we talked about the "fundies" who go insane and rant and rave and go on an on and on... in that instance, you sounded exactly like them.  It terrified me to the point where I felt I couldn't even risk communicating with you because I was terrified that you would suddenly go off on me again.  Yes, I guess we could try to have a "safe" word (maybe not "banana"... see?  I read your emails).  I want to try.  I want to fix this.  I miss you, dammit.  But I feel like I've been hugely traumatized and I still feel very, very scared.  Frankly, I feel sick to my stomach just writing this.
 
Chris wasn't quite right in saying I lost my faith when my dad died.  My faith has been severely battered over the years but the truth is, I never entirely lost it.  I am a Christian.  I became one in high school.  I have struggled dearly with it all these years.  But I've never lied to you about it.  I cannot bear pushy Christians, cannot bear pushy anybody who insist they're right and I'm wrong and that's all there is to it, it doesn't matter what the subject.  Actually, the more I think about it, the more I realize that this doesn't have anything to do with whether or not you or I believe in God.  The real issue is that you went totally "fundy-like" and I couldn't cope.
 
I am willing to try to fix this.  If we can't, then I'm hoping to at least part as friends who have just moved on in different directions.  I don't want to be in an unstable relationship either and face it, neither of us are terribly stable.  But I don't know if I want to just throw away all the years we've known each other.
 
Think it over, ok?
 
Deb 


Hi Deb,

 

Here is a response to your e-mail.  Please read it carefully and get back to me.

 

Thank you,

 

Laura

 

 

I am a Truth-Seeker.  Prior to the phone conversation that freaked you out, I had been undergoing a lot of changes.  Actually, I’ve been undergoing changes for years.  That is the nature of constant truth-seeking.  It keeps you on your toes and quite frankly, it is tiring. Once, Tim said something very wise to me.  He said, “You have to drive all over the road before you can find the middle.”  That’s what I’ve been doing.  I’ve been driving all over the road, trying to find the truth and the moral high ground. 

 

I’ll continue to seek the truth.  Rationality requires keeping an open mind, which is hard.  I had to question some of my core beliefs recently.  That’s why I was suffering and needed to vent.  What I said to you was more like venting than recruiting, although I have changed my mind about the relative abhorrence of the latter (recruiting, persuading, proselytizing, etc.)  I’ll get to that later.

 

There is No Such Thing as an Atheist Fundamentalist.  Let me explain something about the nature of atheism.  It is impossible to be an atheist fundamentalist because there is no dogma about which to become fanatical.  Atheism is quite simply a lack of belief in a god or gods.  It is a lack of dogma, nothing more; nothing less.  At the Rational Response Squad, we have Objectivist, Libertarian, Liberal, Socialist and Marxist atheists.  That covers the political spectrum from right to left.  The one thing we all have in common is we abhor the current crop of Republicans.  I even found an Objectivist who can’t stand Bush.  Imagine. J

 

What is a Fundamentalist?  So, what is a fundamentalist (or fundy)?  A fundy is someone who adheres to a strict dogmatic position on a cadre of issues regardless of the facts.  They can’t be swayed through rational discourse even if you demonstrate their errors to them.  A person who can change his or her opinion on a subject when proven wrong is not a fundamentalist (or ceases to be as much of a fundamentalist as soon as he or she becomes more flexible).

 

There are religious and political fundamentalists of every stripe.  There have been fundamentalists who also happened to be atheists, but atheism was not the source of their fundamentalism.  I’m thinking mainly of despots like Joseph Stalin, Pol Pot and Mao Zedong.  These atheists had radical, dogmatic political views which they clung to despite evidence that their “programs” weren’t working.  In some cases they insulated themselves from the truth.  George W. Bush likes to do that.  It’s also common among religionists and other fundamentalists who can’t handle having their beliefs questioned.

 

Trying to Convince Others You Are Right Does Not Make You a Fundamentalist.  For a long time, I viewed anyone who was pushy or took a stringent stand of any kind as a “fundamentalist,” but this is an incorrect view.  This is one of the “core beliefs” I questioned and tossed aside. (After all, when you wrote me, weren’t you trying to persuade me your position was correct?) A person can hold a strong view, be pushy and not be a fundamentalist.  It took a bunch of pushy people to abolish slavery.  It took pushy scientists to force fundamentalist religionists to acknowledge that the earth is spherical and that it revolves around the sun.  It will take even more pushy people to force fundamentalist religionists to acknowledge that evolution is a fact, that homosexuals are not evil, that the United States in not a Christian nation, that the bible is not a good guide for morality and that faith-based initiatives result in destroyed World Trade Centers, endless wars on terror and the eroding of civil liberties.  There has never been a greater need for pushy people of conscience.

 

Religion as Sacrosanct.  For many years religion has enjoyed a position of unassailability.  It is not only considered “rude” to question a person’s religious beliefs, in some countries it is punishable by death.  In Afghanistan, the half-time entertainment of a soccer match consists of burying adulterers, blasphemers, etc., up to their necks and stoning them to death with brick-sized stones.  The United States isn’t this badly off yet, but we will be if we continue to “respect” religious beliefs.  Just look how far things have deteriorated under President Bush.  He won’t fund stem-cell research.  He wants abstinence-only sex education.  He invaded Iraq because god “told him to.”  The guy is religiously insane and so is a good chunk of the general population.

 

Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and many others finally convinced me that our current position of respecting others’ religious beliefs must come to an end.  Religion must be held to the same scrutiny as all other beliefs.  We don’t allow people to hold erroneous beliefs on whether or not the earth is flat, whether or not the holocaust happened, whether or not pi is a (probably) infinite number that starts with 3.14.  All other beliefs—including political beliefs—are under constant, intense scrutiny.  But religion is somehow different.  Why?  If religious beliefs have value, they should stand up to a little scrutiny.  If religious people are honest, they shouldn’t mind allowing their beliefs to be scrutinized.

 

Sam Harris says it best: “[When it comes to religion] the conversation never takes place….The moral arguments never have to be made at the political level because it is fundamentally taboo to criticize someone's religious beliefs.  Faith is really a conversation stopper.”  And if you don’t believe it, just look at the three and a half months of silence that has descended on our friendship.

 

The time for respecting religious beliefs has long since passed. Criticizing religion is not only a right, it is a responsibility.

 

Religious Moderation is a Dead End.  During the last several months, I’ve also started questioning my respect for moderate and liberal religion.  After all, liberal and moderate religionists are well-behaved.  They don’t fly planes into buildings or stone people during half-time.  They aren’t the ones squalling about homosexuality being a sin.  They aren’t the ones stalling stem-cell research or calling for creationism and abstinence-only sex education to be taught in the classroom.  As citizens go, these people are good people, but there are some problems with their beliefs.

 

1. Moderate / liberal religion betrays faith and reason equally.  Moderate religionists barely know what their sacred texts say.  Hell, it’s been twenty years since I formally studied the bible, but I bet the rock-solid education the fundies gave me during the first half of my life trumps the knowledge of most Christians, especially moderate and liberal Christians.  The moderate and liberal Christians I’ve known have been downright shocked when I quoted nasty bible verses to them.  They didn’t even know what was in their own holy books!  Once the shock wears off, the moderate religionist will attempt to explain away the genocidal hatred shown by the god of the bible.  If only I had a dollar for all the times I’ve heard the following:

 

  • It’s allegorical!  You’re not interpreting it correctly! (Who gets to decide what parts are allegorical and which are literal?)
  • The new covenant did away with the old.  We’re not under Old Testament Law anymore. (Oh really?  And if god is perfect, why would he need to change covenants in the first place?  Why is the old covenant so flawed?  And what’s so great about sending everyone who doesn’t believe in Jesus to hell?)
  • Faith is an alternative path to knowledge.  Faith is “heart” knowledge. (Oh yes? Then why do we have so many mutually-exclusive religions?)

 

In their rationalization, moderates betray scripture.  Why can’t they just admit the text says what it says? (Answer: because then they’d have to admit that the bible is an immoral book.)  By continuing to believe irrational things—Jesus was the Son of God; Jesus was born of a virgin; Jesus rose from the dead; miracles really happen; prayer works—they betray reason just as thoroughly as they betray faith.  Moderate and liberal religionists try to have it both ways, which is intellectually bankrupt and woefully dishonest.

 

2. The worst thing about moderate / liberal religionists is they provide a shield for the fundamentalist nutcases.  Moderate and liberal religionists constantly clamor for others to respect their religious beliefs.  Fundamentalists have no such compunctions; they criticize everyone’s beliefs but their own, yet expect their own beliefs to not only be respected, but to become the law of the land!  In this paradigm, those who want to “live and let live” don’t stand a chance.  As long as it is politically incorrect to question someone’s religious beliefs, no progress will be made against faith-based nonsense.  The only voices heard will be those of the religionists.

 

When Is It Appropriate to Criticize Another Person’s Religious Beliefs?  The short answer is I haven’t worked this out completely.  That’s why I vented in your general direction.  I was (and am) in flux, trying to decide the best way to approach the matter.

 

Sapient, one of the founders of The Rational Response Squad, has a very level-headed way of viewing the matter.  Because religion is such an emotional topic, he leaves his friends and family out of it completely.  He says if the movement grows, then hopefully some other atheist will have an effect on his friends and family.  He can agree to disagree and leave it at that. 

 

The Rational Response Squad keeps all activism in the public sphere.  Basically, we pull “publicity stunts” to get people to think and respond.  The last publicity stunt was the Blasphemy Challenge on YouTube.  It pissed off a lot of people, but boy did it ever open up a discourse!  What we want is to open up a dialogue.  We want people to come and defend their religious beliefs and listen to our rebuttals.  If someone ends up proving god actually exists, that’s great!  We’ll believe. 

 

Most of all we want to get rid of the cultural taboo against criticizing religion.  Then, and only then, can we even begin to arrive at anything that resembles the truth.

 

Buddhism and Mindfulness Meditation.  This leads me to my final point.  Although I lack belief in god, I am not against the concept of “spirituality.”  I believe that it exists not on some metaphysical plain, but in the human psyche and that someday we’ll be able to quantify and measure it.  What is “spiritually” true will be true, whether the practitioner lives in Los Angeles, Tokyo, Baghdad, Calcutta, Jerusalem or Bangkok.

 

With that in mind, I’ve just begun looking into mindfulness meditation, which comes from the Buddhist tradition.  Now, I don’t believe in reincarnation, but I do believe that humans can attain altered states of mind.  These altered states (and even permanently altered brain patterns) show up on brain scans.  Tomorrow science may prove this too is bunk, but I’m interested enough to give it a try.  It helps a lot of people attain peace of mind.

 

What’s more, I’m impressed with the Dalai Lama, who is open to science and even defers to science when religion and science clash.  (It’s always religion that eventually gives way.  It’s just the faith-based dogmatic religions tend to drag their feet for centuries.) This is the kind of spiritual leader that is needed in today’s society.

 

This Tome is Finished.  That’s all I have to say.  I just wanted to explain the recent changes in my life that led me to bring up the topic of religion.  I also had to explain to you that I am not a fundamentalist.  When it comes to simple atheism, there is no such thing.  I have become more active in the “culture war” declared by Christians against us and I intend to make sure that rationality and reason win out in the end no matter where they may lead.  I fully intend to keep my “culture warrior” activities in the public sphere and away from my personal relationships as much as possible.  That’s a fancy way of saying I won’t bring it up unless you do.  If I do, then it’s my fault (as it was before) and I will cease and desist immediately.

 

Sincerely,

 

Laura

 


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
LMAO. I'm impressed that

LMAO. I'm impressed that you made it all the way through without referencing the flying spaghetti monster, Star Wars, or pirates. That's something that has seemingly become such an everyday thing with a lot of us.

The letter also shows you to be open minded, but not loose minded.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


Iruka Naminori
atheist
Iruka Naminori's picture
Posts: 1955
Joined: 2006-11-21
User is offlineOffline
darth_josh wrote: LMAO.

darth_josh wrote:

LMAO. I'm impressed that you made it all the way through without referencing the flying spaghetti monster, Star Wars, or pirates. That's something that has seemingly become such an everyday thing with a lot of us.

The letter also shows you to be open minded, but not loose minded.

I'm impressed you made it all the way through reading it. Smiling  And yes, I was careful not to mention Flying Spaghetti Monsters, Star Wars, pirates or the fact that parrots are dinosaurs.  Hmmm...I wonder if a T-Rex could take out an X-Wing?  If an X-Wing can take out a Star Destroyer, does that mean a T-Rex could take out a Star Destroyer?

Random WTF? moment: Watch this...thing. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wGR4-SeuJ0  

Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
Iruka Naminori

Iruka Naminori wrote:
darth_josh wrote:

LMAO. I'm impressed that you made it all the way through without referencing the flying spaghetti monster, Star Wars, or pirates. That's something that has seemingly become such an everyday thing with a lot of us.

The letter also shows you to be open minded, but not loose minded.

I'm impressed you made it all the way through reading it. Smiling And yes, I was careful not to mention Flying Spaghetti Monsters, Star Wars, pirates or the fact that parrots are dinosaurs. Hmmm...I wonder if a T-Rex could take out an X-Wing? If an X-Wing can take out a Star Destroyer, does that mean a T-Rex could take out a Star Destroyer?

Random WTF? moment: Watch this...thing. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wGR4-SeuJ0

It was good reading. It might be too much for your friend all at once, but I hope it works out. 

LMAO. I didn't have to because I've already seen all of the chad vader episodes.

I have over 10,000 video views on youtube. More than CapnOAwesome, brettkeane, xild, OneLessGod, and TheAmazingAtheist. 1,234 of them for the blasphemy challenge alone. lol.

I am the picture of a youtube freak! lol. We get together in my office and watch videos every day on my account. 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


Iruka Naminori
atheist
Iruka Naminori's picture
Posts: 1955
Joined: 2006-11-21
User is offlineOffline
Response from my Friend

Response from my Friend (YOU RESPOND...if you want).  I'm kinda getting tired of it all. Pththththththt. 


Hi,
 
I'm going to start by putting this reply in a sort of "quote and reply" way, not necessarily in the order in which you wrote.
 
You said "Faith is an alternative path to knowledge.  Faith is "heart" knowledge. (Oh yes?  Then why do we have so many mutually-exclusive religions?"
 
My reply:  Man made religions, not God.  Human beings created organized religions.  God created faith.  This is my own opinion and belief.
 
You said: "After all, when you wrote me, weren't you trying to persuade me your position was correct?"
 
My reply:  No.  I was merely stating my position.  I was not trying to persuade you of anything.
 
Perhaps we should both take a note from Sapient and just agree to disagree.  Perhaps I used the term "fundy-like" incorrectly.  Whatever.  All I know is that you were, and still are as evidenced by your email, to my perspective, extremely confrontational.  I cannot handle confrontation.  It is a huge trigger for me.  I guess I thought you knew that but I guess you didn't know just how seriously it affects me.  Just the fact that I'm writing this in an effort to get past all this should tell you how much I do not want to lose your friendship.  You have triggers that I have had to learn to be careful of.  Well, so do I and confrontation is one of them.  The triggers of yours that I have become aware of over the years, I have learned to deal with and respect and avoid.  I just ask that you do the same for me.  I know you have done so in the past.
 
I'm not going to address any other part of your letter because I would really rather not get involved in any more discussions of these particular subjects (religion, atheism, fundamentalism, The Bible).
 
Deb
 

 

Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Iruka Naminori
atheist
Iruka Naminori's picture
Posts: 1955
Joined: 2006-11-21
User is offlineOffline
Ah, never mind.  I am

Ah, never mind.  I am getting tired of this crap, so I just went with something a little more to the point:

Concerning agreeing to disagree: This is what I have been trying to say from the start (nearly four months ago), but first you wouldn’t speak to me, then you sent me an e-mail saying I was a fundy and you were afraid of me.  I felt I had no choice but to respond to that accusation.  My entire e-mail was geared toward trying to explain that I wasn’t a fundamentalist and that I wanted to agree to disagree.  My e-mail didn’t target you in any way, except for the mention of a fact: You didn’t talk to me for three months even though I tried to engage in a dialogue.  The rest of my e-mail was geared toward explaining the reasoning process I’ve been going through. It has nothing to do with you unless you make it yours.

I feel like you want to play the blame game.  I don’t want to play.  I have repeatedly apologized for bringing up religion.  I have said I will try very hard not to do it again.  Is this good enough for you or not?  If so, then stop bringing up things I have to either apologize for or defend myself against.  If not, then I guess we don’t have anything more to say to one another.
 

Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Maragon
Maragon's picture
Posts: 351
Joined: 2007-04-01
User is offlineOffline
I thought that first letter

I thought that first letter of yours was brilliant.

 

Her reply made me feel as if she didn't even really read it. Frown


Iruka Naminori
atheist
Iruka Naminori's picture
Posts: 1955
Joined: 2006-11-21
User is offlineOffline
Maragon wrote:

Maragon wrote:

I thought that first letter of yours was brilliant.

 

Her reply made me feel as if she didn't even really read it. Frown

That's the feeling I got, too, so I just cut straight to the chase in my last note.

After reading her "reply," I'm not feeling very beneficent. I'm thinking maybe it's time to move on and find some friends that I don't have to tiptoe around.

I'm glad at least you (and darth_josh) read the first letter.  Thanks.  I'm thinking about editing it for future use.  I don't know what else I'd use it for, but you never know. (It could use some editing, still.) 

Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


BenfromCanada
atheist
BenfromCanada's picture
Posts: 811
Joined: 2006-08-31
User is offlineOffline
I can say that, based on her

I can say that, based on her replies, you really don't need her. She'll never listen to you. Either don't speak about religion with her, or forget her completely.


Iruka Naminori
atheist
Iruka Naminori's picture
Posts: 1955
Joined: 2006-11-21
User is offlineOffline
This is my final answer. 

This is my final answer.  I decided to move on.


Hi Deb,

Look, I’m just being honest with you.  In a healthy relationship, people can share all kinds of things with each other.  They can even confront one another.  Instead, by trying to avoid conflict, both of us have probably let certain things build up.

This is my problem: I don’t trust you anymore.

By the time you finally got around to contacting me, I had given up on you.  I figured I’d never hear from you again and started moving on with my life.  I went through the entire grieving process.  I tried to figure out where I had gone wrong and tried to learn from it.  Then you had Chris contact me.

One of you lied to me, which I didn’t find at all amusing: “She doesn't know I am writing this to you. She would have a major fit if she knew” followed by “Chris offered to be intermediary and I took him up on it because basically, I am a coward.”  No one likes being lied to.

So, I had moved on with my life.  Then out of the blue comes this letterbomb: a dishonest letterbomb.  How the hell am I supposed to feel?  I was finally healing and then suddenly, “Oh by the way, I want to be friends again.”

You wrote, “It hurts that I can't seem to say anything anymore without you taking it the wrong way.” 

You’re projecting, here.  I’m the one who can’t bring up certain topics without you taking it the wrong way.  Previously, we had no agreement to avoid the topic of religion.  I told you about some things I had learned.  You freaked out and didn’t speak to me for over three months and wouldn’t even tell me why.  I had to guess and even then you wouldn’t speak to me.  How does that make you the one who “can’t seem to say anything anymore without [my] taking it the wrong way”? 

I admit I am angry with you and I don’t think I can stop being angry with you because my anger is focused on things neither of us can change, at least not immediately.  We can’t change the past, for example. 

The things we do to one another have consequences.  I should have realized you wouldn’t appreciate the things I’ve learned about religion.  I opened my big mouth.  Insert foot. 

When I tried to talk to you about it four months ago, that was when we should have worked to fix things.  You can’t expect to snub someone for three and a half months and then waltz back into their life like nothing happened.  Life doesn’t work that way.  I don’t work that way.  I simply don’t trust you anymore and there’s nothing I can do to make myself trust you. 

Yeah, we did this whole song and dance once before and we never fucking talked about it.  How unhealthy is that?  Pretty damn unhealthy.   Chris may be able to accept that kind of volatility, but I cannot.  I intend to pursue some kind of stability in my relationships. 

So I guess my answer is this:  I don’t feel comfortable entering into a relationship with you because I don’t trust you.  I don’t think there’s anything you could say that would make me trust you because trust is based on actions. 

My action was a spur-of-the-moment thing, but your subsequent reaction was overblown and took months. Also, our relationship has shown a pattern of not talking to one another about important things like actions that may have caused hurt.  This has happened on both sides and it’s not something I care to repeat. 

I’m working very hard on my life to make it better and more fulfilling.  Yeah, I’m not perfect, but I am trying.  I’ve stabilized relationships with family members as best I can at this point.  I’ve joined political and religious forums to learn how to better handle conflict. I’m treating myself with more respect and trusting myself more.  I’ve allowed myself to become a moderator at a forum site.  They asked; I accepted.  I’ve done fine so far.  It’s allowed me to take a step back from certain situations, which has been a great learning experience.  I am far from the place I want to be, but I am addressing my problems. 

The thing that concerns me the most is I don’t think you’re trying at all, anymore.  You won’t go to a counselor.  You won’t work on your problem areas.  Your relationship patterns are even more volatile than mine and that’s saying something.  I’ve watched you and Chris go around and around, yet you don’t seek help.  Until you do seek help, I am not interested in renewing our relationship.  It wouldn’t be good for either of us. 

I still care about you and what happens to you enough to tell you this: You need professional help and you need it yesterday.  Finding the right counselor might be hard, but challenge yourself to do it.  You need someone who understands you but will still challenge you.  The right mix will be hard to find.  My current counselor is just “okayish,” but that will have to do for now.  You may have to settle for less than perfect, too.  Any kind of focus on fixing what’s wrong can only help. 

For now I bid you adieu. When you have been in counseling at least three months, please contact me again.  Until we’re both working on our problems, a relationship will not be good for either of us. 

See you in a few months,

 

LH

Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.