This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.


← Atheists make history at Grand Junction City Council meeting

RomeStu's Avatar Jump to comment 23 by RomeStu

Several points on the comments above....

To all you who lambast Alaimo for accepting a halfway house situation, think about this - he has said his piece in a calm and rational way. He did not froth or rant (as the religious so often do), and even the people who think atheists are sub-human will have seen him as a reasonable man with a reasonable position.

As the underdogs in the established society atheists must be seen to be better, more rational and moreover to be normal. We are not defined by our atheism, except by the religious. His use of the speech to promote public service and human rights is laudable.

We cannot expect the world to change overnight, and snubbing someone for making an advance, however small, is very petty. In fact it could look like a kind of "schism", as if some atheists are complaining that others are not singing from the correct hymnsheet. Anyone who advances the ideas of reason and free thought is to be praised.

Also consider the environment - it is not realistic to simply expect all religiosity to be outlawed, considering how entrenched it is, especially in parts of the USA. Thus any exposure of "atheists" (who to many people are rather scary) as being perfectly normal is a good thing.

Ideally there would be no place for religion in public life or schooling, but that is a long way off, and small steps must be taken. This man has made a stand and shown that atheists are not scary, society-destroying, amoral wierdos, as we are perceived by many religious.

In 2009 BBC's "Thought for the Day" had its first atheist speaker. Again, while ideally the platform would not exist, the religious DO have the right to express their views - why should atheists not take advantage of the same platform to spread the voice of reason.

Tue, 25 Jan 2011 17:20:55 UTC | #584007