Being Atheist Doesn’t Mean Being Liberal

conservative atheists blazing saddlesI’m kind of kicking myself right now, but I don’t remember where I saw this earlier, but when I tried to go back and look for it, I couldn’t figure it out.  If I find it, I’ll drop a link in here, I promise.  So anyhow, earlier today, I read a blog post, something along the lines that open atheists are more prevalent in more liberal societies, such that atheists clearly want to be part of more liberal societies.

Bullshit.

I’m an atheist and I have no interest whatsoever in living in the kind of liberal society that we see in many western nations. I can’t stand liberalism, I find it absurd and abhorrent, I find many of the extremist liberals that we tend to see in atheism to be a joke.  I find liberal ideas to be at the core of most of society’s problems and responsible for the slow but demonstrable slide of America into a socialist morass.  And no, that’s nothing to be proud of.

Unfortunately, this is an idea that doesn’t seem to go over well with most atheists, even though studies have shown that upwards of 20% of atheists identify as secular conservatives as well.  This isn’t a new revelation either, in fact it’s been at the center of my general disagreement of the atheist “movement”, as well as more than one argument with liberals who can’t quite get it through their head that every atheist out there isn’t a far-left booster.  You know, for people who often claim to be rational and skeptical, I see very little of that among many political pundits in the atheist camp.  In fact, I see the same kind of overt emotionalism that I see criticized among the religious on a daily basis.  News flash, if having beliefs based on nothing but wishful thinking and emotional comfort is bad for religion, it isn’t any better for politics.  Claiming to be skeptical and critical only works if you actually are skeptical and critical.  You can’t say one thing and then do something entirely different, yet you see a lot of very vocal atheists dancing on top of their high horses, declaring that if you don’t share their ludicrously liberal views, you’re an enemy of atheism.  It harkens back to the classic Richard Carrier post where he demands everyone abide by the Atheism+ mantra or be declared a C.H.U.D.  Why are there people like this and why are they seen as leaders in the “atheist community”?  They’re certainly nobody I’d ever want to represent or speak for me.  This isn’t an old issue, it’s something I see again and again and again among atheists who can’t stop linking their “Social Justice Warrior” nonsense to their lack of belief in gods.

Can we please just  get back to being atheists and get rid of any plusses?  It is possible to be several different things at the same time, you know.  You’re not stuck with a single label that you have to make mean a bunch of different things.  You’re free to label yourself a variety of different things and advance different views in different venues.  It doesn’t have to be a one-size fits all thing and you don’t have to refuse to deal with anyone that doesn’t fit into your little clique and check off all the same boxes as you.  Finally, if  you want to be a freethinker and a skeptic, you can’t just wear those hats and not follow their creeds.  If we’re rejecting religion because it cannot be rationally justified, why aren’t you looking at your political views the same way?  I know you’re not  because I see it all the time.  I see the exact same irrational, emotional nonsense with atheists as I do with theists.  If we’re to be better than the religious, you actually have to do it, not just declare it.

Maybe if more atheists did that, there wouldn’t be nearly so many liberals carrying the non-religious flag.

5 thoughts on “Being Atheist Doesn’t Mean Being Liberal

  1. "If we’re rejecting religion because it cannot be rationally justified, why aren’t you looking at your political views the same way? I know you’re not because I see it all the time."

    You're arrogance is on display. You think that atheists who are liberals have not applied skepticism and rational thought to their political views? What a load of prejudicial, ignorant horse shit this is. This entire post is an example of irrational thought.

  2. Interesting topic and I think you could go a step further with people calling themselves liberals. It seems to me that many people that identify as liberals are more egalitarians. However, because they identify as liberal they start believing they have to adopt all the extra political views which do not necessarily make sense for a better society. Its similar to people that say to be an atheist you have to be a liberal.
    My recent post Social Justice and Atheism

    1. The problem is, they're not egalitarians. They're not even close. If we look at the case of Atheism+ and other radical feminists, those people don't want equality for all, they want special treatment for women. The same is true of a lot of racist atheists. They hate whites, in fact, a lot of them act like they're embarrassed to be white. Their entire mission is to punish white people, just for being white and to give black people (and other minorities) extra privileges because, you know, racism.

      These people are not egalitarian. They are racists and sexists. I am an egalitarian, I think everyone should be treated equally, effective immediately, regardless of what might have happened in the past. No special treatment, no extra privileges, just equality, across the board, for everyone.

  3. Yeah, I call them pseudo-skeptics, and they are marxist, PCness is a marxist ideology. Also, let me elaborate on this, science in modern practice has 2 separate definitions, science, a process for aquiring certain types of information, and "science" (a politically and financially controlled establishment whereby a hand-selected and bought group of "experts" are the collective voice of the followers who can't understand the difference between scientific proof and mob rule+confirmation bias). GMOs, vaccines, etc have been proven harmful time and again, but because it carries the banner of mainstream science, the brown nosing, politically correct, ass kissing, authority worshipping so called "skeptics" treat it like gospel……

    Which brings me to my other point. While science (the process) is a useful tool for certain kinds of information, it is not the only tool for aquiring information…. Documents, news reports, books (non-fiction), depending on the source and circumstances can be proof, even if all the details aren't immediately present….. I can't for certain explain how the universe began, but that doesn't mean the universe doesn't exist because I can't explain it. Most "conspiracy theories" are rooted in facts, I'm not talking about silly alien theories or blaming the jews for everything, because I know the first tactic pseudo skeptics resort to is generalizations and stacking the deck.

    But it seems equally as absurd to me, and quite hypocritical, to point out all the evil done under religion, as religion is a middle man between the followers and the government, so even when religions did those horrible things it was usually the government doing it and using religion as a mask (PCness can be a mask too– or any ideology for that matter), so all they've done is cut out this mythological middle man, this sky daddy, and began worshiping authority straight at the source. Meaning theyr getting banged in the pooper with no lube, while claiming innocence and condemning the hookers in the closet (if the faculty of analogy isn't totally lost on them– lots of them fail to grasp analogies, sarcasm, etc and in effect are like real life sheldon coopers, this is coming from me, an actual guy DX'ed with asperger syndrome).

    In short, real thinkers can see past silly shit like the left/right false dichotomy for the mindless groupthink that it all is, pseudoskeptics rely on MSNBC (authority) to tell them how to be a "skeptic" and have hijacked the word…. "I am too a skeptic, my mommy said so, so there!" They are brown nosers, ass kissers, suck ups, hypocrites, pussies, fakes, phonies, frauds, losers, and posers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Optionally add an image (JPG only)