Is it possible that I've written most of what I have to say on atheism and closely-related topics? Yes, it seems like this might be the case, and it has seemed this way for some time. But I must be cautious because experience demands skepticism. I've had this same thought many times over the last decade. It doesn't stick around for long. Something always seems to happen that pulls me back. Because of where I live, that something is usually some form of Christian over-reach.
It is okay to admit that atheism can be a dull subject, even for some atheists. Even for this atheist! Why spend any more time on it than we'd spend on anything else that isn't true of us or that we don't do? I don't need any fingers to count the number of times I've written about how I don't collect stamps. It has never occurred to me to do so. Why would it?
I know you've heard atheism compared to not collecting stamps. If you've spent any time in atheist spaces, you've heard this comparison many times. It is right up there with the stuff about atheism being a religion like bald is a hair style. Many atheists enjoy their memes I suppose.
But let's be frank for a minute. There are at least two big differences between not believing in gods and not collecting stamps. I've never met anyone who looks down on me for not collecting stamps. I'm not saying they aren't out there, but I've never encountered one. Nobody has ever told me I deserve everlasting torment for not collecting stamps. I'm not surrounded by stamp collectors who knock on my door to tell me about why I should join them. I've never feared losing my job or an apartment because I don't collect stamps.
Is the whole thing that simple? Does it boil down to the fact that fundamentalist Christians annoy me more? Nope! The second difference is much more than that. Stamp collectors aren't working hard to restrict the rights of people I care about. They aren't electing public officials to change laws in ways I find harmful. They aren't hurting others in the name of their beliefs or hobby.
If we view atheism only in an definitional sense, I suppose I don't have much left to say. I do not believe in gods, an afterlife, or a supernatural. I haven't found evidence to support a rational belief in any of these things. Believing things without evidence because they elicit positive feelings (i.e., faith) holds little appeal. I do wish that these beliefs were less influential than they are. That would mean they would cause less harm. But I don't have much interest in persuading others to change their beliefs. Somebody doesn't need to be an atheist to have value.
But I can't view atheism only in a definitional sense. That's a luxury I don't have. I live in a place where atheists are not viewed as the equals of religious believers. I live in a place where at least half of my neighbors want to abolish the separation of church and state. My rights and the rights of many people I care about (e.g., women, LGBTQIA+ people) are not secure. Until that changes, I expect that I'll find things to say. And if I don't, I expect that they'll find me.
And yes, it is important to acknowledge that religious belief is not the only threat. I am not one to claim that the demise of religion would bring about some sort of utopian paradise. Many problems would persist, and some new ones might emerge. Many atheists see the declining importance of religion as a positive trend. I don't disagree. Still, there's no guarantee that a commitment to reason would replace religion. There's more work to do.
Image by wal_172619 from Pixabay
