The crimes of the entire Papacy over history outweigh a few modern cranks?  Sure.  But the crimes of the Soviet Union, Mao’s China, Pol Pot, Hitler?  Not even close.  Atheism Empowered murdered and oppressed more in one century than Christianity did in twenty. 

You say “That’s not my kind of atheist!”  But you refuse to accept that Christianity (and Catholicism) can be all kinds of different things as well.  You know what you know, and  you don’t want to learn any more.  Might confuse you.  You feel offended by its very existence–but it’ll be around long after you’re gone, like it or not. 

Double standard.  You want zero accountability for yourself, 100% for anyone you don’t like.  That’s bigotry in a nutshell.  You set the bar higher for others.  You only notice the crimes committed by the other side. 

“Hey, maybe atheists suck at being in power, but remember, we’re so disliked in western society now, we have very little power to abuse!”

Religious affiliation is falling–but people willing to identify themselves as atheists?  Statistically speaking, no significant change.  

Do you ever wonder why that is?

Look at your leaders. (If you want to call them that.)

(First serious gay presidential candidate–committed Christian–Anglican is just a WASPier Catholicism, you know)

Thing is, even though any Profession of Faith from me would get me drummed out of the Corps (I don’t believe Jesus was God, remember?), I’ve come across so many priests and nuns who showed remarkable courage and devotion.

And I’ve admired many a skeptic.

But professed atheists leave me colder than a basement floor.  Too much in love with themselves.  And rarely do they ever stick their necks out for anybody (a lot of them are Libertarians, and might I inquire if that’s a thing you’re into?)

Dorothy Day–Ayn Rand–not a tough choice.  For anyone with a conscience.  Day was even a better writer.  (Not that this is saying much.)

My animus against certain prominent atheists (again, I have no problem with not being religious in the conventional sense) is definitely clear, and has to do with the fact that they all suck.  Your unwillingness to deal with the fact that basically all prominent atheists are white males–you tell me.  Social Democrats are supposed to believe in equality, but I’ve noticed that is often not the case.  

But I’m glad to know you’re not a Libertarian, though you must know it was a natural question for me to ask.  And no, it isn’t the first question I’ve asked you (it may be the first you gave a straight answer to).

Say what you will, Ayn Rand didn’t advocate for an unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation that was all about oil, because she hated Muslims.  And then refuse to admit how horribly wrong she’d been.  Hitchens was a fraud, from beginning to end.

Are you as bored with this as I am?

Why do you want me to stick around here?  Afraid of being even more bored?  🙂

Kind of hilarious you say “These men you mention are nothing to do with me” and then say you’ve met them all except Dennett.  😀

I’ve never met a Pope, I’ve spoken to precisely one Archbishop (briefly, at a relative’s memorial service), and none of them have ever done anything to restrict my activities in any way, even when I was a practicing Catholic.  Why did you think otherwise?  Would you have worried JFK was going to impose Vatican Law on the U.S.?  People did, you know.  There were some bad things about him, but that wasn’t one of them.  Eugene McCarthy (beloved of Social Democrats at one time) was actually a much more serious Catholic. 

It doesn’t really make sense that you celebrate the ‘values’ of Libertarianism, since it doesn’t have any.  Libertarianism is just anarchism without balls.  “I want all the advantages of a structured society without having to accept any limitations.”  That’s Libertarianism in a nutshell.  Libertarians still insist there was no need to do anything about American slavery or Jim Crow, and that it was immoral to expropriate the property of slave owners, or to tell private businesses they had to serve people equally, regardless of race.  I’m all for freedom, but I’m not big on privilege.  Libertarians are about privilege. 

That you would have to introduce me to atheists of color, atheist women, simply underlines the fact that they have no following, no public profile of any consequence, because most activist atheists in the west are white men, and uncomfortable with listening to anyone who isn’t like them.  Atheism, at this time, is a movement for white males, that others are allowed to join, but have little influence over.  Christianity, in spite of the patriarchal aspects that crept into it, began as inclusive, and is a lot more inclusive than atheism is now. 

Catholicism’s major failing is that it still insists you can’t have formal authority without being a celibate male (which as you should know, was not always the case, and happened long after Jesus’ time)–which led to the abuse scandals.  Other religions and atheism have the same problems, with less publicity–I think people are offended when those who are supposed to be asexual predictably turn out to be nothing of the kind–but abuse is abuse, whoever is committing it.  I don’t get the impression it bothers you much, in itself.  Any more than it bothers Dawkins.  Who isn’t even a terribly relevant figure in evolutionary theory anymore (his punctuated equilibrium theory, btw, is just an elaboration of another scientist’s work.  He’s a popularizer, nothing more.  And he decided talking about evolution wasn’t raising his public profile enough, so he started telling other people what they should or should not believe.)

You say you’re basically your own thing, not part of any larger movement (Social Democracy isn’t a movement), and I have to take you on your own terms.  Why can’t you do the same for everyone else, including Catholics?  Many Catholics have done far more of value in the world than you ever will, while remaining devout.  Judge not, lest ye be judged.  Another maxim of Jesus people have a hard time practicing, but since you think he was just a religious fanatic, you won’t even try.  You judge people by their affiliations, I judge them by their characters and their capacity for wisdom and  understanding (as opposed to raw intelligence, which is simply a matter of processing power, and many an idiot I’ve met has plenty of that).   

And you’ve seen me argue with Catholics here.  The worst Catholics are easily on a par with the worst Atheists.  I don’t play favorites.

You do.  Because you have the same personality type as many Catholics I’ve met.  “For me to be right, everybody who doesn’t agree with me has to be wrong.”  There can only be One True Church, and you’ve decided its atheism.  But you’ve also decided it’s not a church.  Then what the **** is it?  You actually met Hitchens, Harris, and Dawkins?  Pretty tight little congregation  you got there, brother.  😉

My lack of knowledge, Stephen?  Just me?  How many people out there have heard of these other atheists you mention?  I know very well atheists are not all white men, but the culture of atheism is white and male and privileged.  Period. I’m not talking about somebody who published a book nobody read.  I’m talking about individuals who publish books attacking religion and promoting atheism, who get real attention, who get quoted by other atheists, who get touted as authorities (even though not one of them actually has the background to be considered an expert either on religion or on the history of atheism). Bart Ehrman does have the background to be an expert on aspects of religion, but remember–he spent much of his career as a Christian, and calls himself an agnostic leaning towards atheism.  And really, I suspect he’s privately leaning towards a sort of Socratic neo-paganism of late.  (I guess we all have to have some kind of church, even if only in our minds.) 

They’re all white guys.  The only real exception was Ms. O’Hair, who is not somebody present-day atheists like to dwell on much.  I think it’s the old story–when something is new, women can get in on the ground floor, but when it gets big enough, they get shut out of the loop. 

I’ve met female priests.  One of them blessed my dog, years ago, on the Feast of St. Francis–there were no Catholic Churches nearby doing the blessings, so I went to an Episcopalian Church.  She also wasn’t white, but I didn’t inquire as to her origins.  Lots of other animals waiting.  So it’s not like I don’t get around.  And I’ve known atheists in real life.  All.  White.  Guys. 

I am sure I must have encountered female atheists, or atheists of color, without realizing it–but the truth is, I’ve never once encountered a woman or a person of color who described him/herself as such.  Who really identified that way.

Honestly, being into atheism is very much a white thing in the west.  Not believing in God, or just not being into religion–that can be anybody’s thing.  And of course in China and other non-white countries with Marxist systems, atheism wasn’t white, but it also wasn’t optional, if you wanted to move up in the world.  (Christianity is making gains in parts of the Chinese-speaking world, in case you didn’t know). 

Again, polls show that as people abandon mainline religion, they don’t re-identify as atheists for the most part.  Why?  They find you a bit much.  Why is that?  Because of your spokespersons–who are so much your spokespersons that you felt obliged to seek them out and talk to them.  Most people have better things to do with their time.  But then again,  you’re here, so obviously you don’t. 

In a few months, I won’t be here.  Ah, now I get why you want me to stay..  😉

In the words of Felix Unger (Tony Randall version) “Remember that Man spelled backwards–is Nam.  But DOG spelled backwards!!!!  Think about that.”