Holocaust Memorial Day – rescuers

“Only a few Evangelicals, a few Catholics a few Orthodox, a few agnostics, and a few atheists (and not necessarily in that order) helped the Jewish people during their persecution.

Varian Fry, a bespectacled, frail, moody intellectual; a man who would seem to be a most unlikely candidate to stand against the Gestapo, succeeded in organising the escape of approximately fifteen hundred men and women from Nazi occupied France in 1940-41. A man who appeared to have no religious motivation, Fry explained to his mother that he stayed because it took courage and ‘courage us a quality I hadn’t previous been sure I possessed’. To his wife he wrote: ‘Now I think I can say that I possess an ordinary amount of courage’

Source: Rausch, David A. (2000) ‘Hard Questions Asked by the Holocaust’ in Rittner, Carol, Smith, Stephen D., Steinfeldt, Irena (eds) The Holocaust and the Christian World Continuum: New York

Holocaust Memorial Day – Primo Levi the unbeliever

Primo Levi (1919-1987) was one of the most famous Survivors of the Holocaust. Levi, born in Turin, Italy and trained as a chemist, was arrested during the as a member of the anti-Fascist resistance and deported to Auschwitz in 1944. His experience in the death camp and his subsequent travels through Eastern Europe were the subject of powerful memoirs, fiction and poetry.

Although he came from families who had been observant Jews up to a generation or so before, they were no longer so and Levi was a life-long atheist. His only recollection of ever having any religious feelings was a brief period when he studied for his bar mitzvah, and tried to seek contact with God, “but when he sought that contact, he’d found nothing.

Holocaust Memorial Day – the religious context

In 1933, when the Nazis came to power in Germany, the Jewish population of Europe stood over nine million. The Nazi campaign to exclude and persecute Jews, and others, as “life unworthy of life” began. By war’s end, close to two out of every three Jews in Europe had been murdered in the Holocaust.

Although Jews were the primary victims of Nazi racism, others targeted for death included tens of thousands of Roma (Gypsies) and at least 200,000 mentally or physically disabled people (source:www.ushmm.org). As Nazi tyranny spread across Europe, millions of people were persecuted and murdered. More than three million Soviet prisoners of war were murdered or died of starvation, disease or maltreatment. The Nazis killed tens of thousands of Polish intellectual and religious leaders; deported millions of Polish and persecuted and incarcerated homosexuals.

It is also important to acknowledge the experience of atheism and atheists under the Nazis, although we should be careful not to let this become our primary motive for remembering the Holocaust -  the terrible events were a travesty for humanity in its entirety.

Indian canal project angers Hindus

The BBC recently reported that the Indian government has withdrawn a controversial report submitted to the Supreme Court which questioned the existence of the Hindu god Ram. The report was presented in connection with a case against the proposed Sethusamudram shipping canal project between India and Sri Lanka.

The report was withdrawn after huge protests by opposition parties. Protests that have since spilled over into roadbloacks, disruptions of train services and even two murders by Hindu activists when a bus was set alight near Bangalore. 

The BBC reports that “Hindu hardliners say the project will destroy what they say is a bridge built by Ram and his army of monkeys.  Scientists and archaeologists say the Ram Setu (Lord Ram’s bridge) – or Adam’s Bridge as it is sometimes called – is a natural formation of sand and stones.

2006 poll of USA and European countries reveals Britain is tolerant, not very religious but also not very secular

An old poll from December 2006 I’ve just come across conduced by Harris Poll and the Financial Times into the religious views and beliefs  in the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the USA. Key results for the UK (sample size 2090):

• Ony 35% believe in any form of God or any type of supreme being (only France was lower with 27%)
• 35% are agnostic and 17% atheist
• 7% Not sure; the largest percentage of all the countries
• 39% do not share the same religious beliefs as either of their parents; the largest percentage of all countries and the only country for which this is higher than those saying they have the same religious beliefs as both of their parents. Suggesting a strong generational shedding of belief.
• 70% people believe in the separation if church and state (although that isn’t defined) the lowest of all the countries. It is probably worth noting the different charcteristics of the different churches in question. It could be that Britain’s rather laid back churches are less intrusive as much as British people being less secular on principle.
• 56% people thought religion should be taught in state schools, 29% saying no. Only Italy was more in favour of religious teaching and less opposed.
• Only 23% thought the EU was predominantly Christian club – the lowest of the European countries and a testament ot the UK’s multifaith credentials?
• Only 10% would object to their child marrying someone of a different faith and 73% would not. France and Spain indicated a slightly higher level of tolerance, both with 7% and 74 respectively
• Worryingly the UK matched France with 39% believing that Islamic veils should be banned in all public places (higher than the other countries polled) but at 48% were ahead of France and Spain in feeling that children should be allowed to wear a religious sign or article of clothing at school which is representative of their beliefs. Taken together these suggest a particular anti-Muslim dimension to British secular thought.

28% Britons believe in God but only 17% Britons think religion is beneficial

The Sunday Times reports that 42% of 2,200 people taking part in a poll carried out by YouGov considered religion had a harmful effect. 17% thought the influence of religion was beneficial.

16% of those polled called themselves atheists; 28% believed in God; 26% believed in “something” but were not sure what; and 9% regarded themselves as agnostics.

43% said they never prayed, 31% hardly prayed, and 10% prayed every night.

When we asked which of the main religions was ‘most effective’ in getting its message across, 32% said Christianity and 10% cited Islam.

Humphrys the doubter

John Humphys writes in the Sunday Times offering a preview of his new book looking at religion.  In short he “went looking for God and ended up an angry agnostic – unable to believe but enraged by the arrogance of militant atheists. It’s hard to see the purpose of the world, he says, but don’t blame its evils on religion.”

Humphrys  describes himself as a devout sceptic but feels annoyed by the certainty of atheists whose arguments he summarises/ charactatures and counters thus:

1. Believers are mostly naive or stupid. Or, at least, they’re not as clever as atheists.

This is so clearly untrue it’s barely worth bothering with. Richard Dawkins, in his bestselling The God Delusion, was reduced to producing a “study” by Mensa that purported to show an inverse relationship between intelligence and belief. He also claimed that only a very few members of the Royal Society believe in a personal god. So what? Some believers are undoubtedly stupid (witness the creationists) but I’ve met one or two atheists I wouldn’t trust to change a lightbulb.

2. The few clever ones are pathetic because they need a crutch to get them through life.

Don’t we all? Some use booze rather than the Bible. It doesn’t prove anything about either.

3.They are also pathetic because they can’t accept the finality of death.

Maybe, but it doesn’t mean they’re wrong. Count the number of atheists in the foxholes or the cancer wards. 

You can’t just be the President of the Christians

Bishop Thomas Dexter (T.D.) Jakes has written to Time magazine with an encouraging attitude towards the interest in the faith of presidential candidates:

“As you pointed out in your cover story on the Democrats and religion [July 23], God has become pivotal in presidential campaigns—something I could not be more heartened to see. We are a country composed of atheists, agnostics and all brands of faith. In order to be an effective leader, you can’t just be the President of the Christians. It insults our intelligence to assume that we would let difference separate us. While faith is important, it does not negate our ability to make intelligent decisions about our leaders.”

Non-religious doctors just as likely to care for poor

Susan Hogan/Albach reports for the Chicago Sun Times that “Atheist and agnostic doctors are as likely to provide care for the poor as religious physicians, according to a new study by researchers at the University of Chicago and Yale New Haven Hospital.

Doctors who said they were “spiritual, but not religious,” also ranked high in caring for the poor.

“We can say a lot of doctors are doing a lot of good, whether religious or not,” said Dr. Farr Curlin, one of the authors of the study, published in the Annals of Family Medicine.

The study is based on a survey of 2,000 doctors with a 63 percent response rate. Thirty-five percent of non-religious doctors, compared with 31 percent of religious doctors, said they were likely to care for people with little or no health insurance. (so actually more likely although this might not be a statistically significant difference).

Most studies show religious people more likely than others to help the poor, according to Dr. Harold Koenig, director for the Center for the Study of Religion, Spirituality and Health at Duke University.

“But nobody has looked at this question in physicians,” he said. “It’s the largest and most systematic study of U.S. physicians. The fact that there weren’t large differences is interesting.”

…Curlin, who attends a nondenominational church, said the findings disappointed him.

“Caring for the poor is an expression of faithfulness and commitment,” he said. “But many religious physicians don’t make the connection.”

Raising ethical children without religion

Startribune.com features an interview with Dale McGowan the editor of Parenting Without Belief  – an anthology of essays that aims to help parents show kids how to find meaning and behave well without using supernatural explanations:

Q What are this book’s most important messages for parents?

A One: Never fear a question. The whole idea of free thought is that you sit down before a fact like a little child, then follow it wherever it leads. My own kids have gone to a Lutheran preschool. I’m happy to have them exposed to religious ideas; the only ones I won’t tolerate are hell and the assertion that doubt is bad. I say, let the child ponder ideas and run with them.

Two: Avoid saying that something is the way it is “because I said so.” Take the time to give a reason in discussions about truth or morality.

Three: The failure of empathy is responsible for a tremendous amount of destruction in the world. It’s dangerous to divide ourselves from others and demonize them.

Four: One of the ways to ease the pain of death so people don’t have to run for religious comfort is to accept and acknowledge its reality.

Q What’s the biggest challenge in raising your own children this way?

A Trying to raise children to think for themselves is hard in a culture that often devalues that. This culture often sees unthinking faith as an automatic good and hatred of faith as the only alternative. I have so many people say to me after book discussions that they didn’t think secular humanists could be so friendly. Once people get past assumptions, they see we’re just people, too.

Q Religious people sometimes say you can’t have values without religion. What do you say?

A I have never known a parent who had the least trouble explaining why something was right or wrong without turning to religion. Some might say you can’t do that without the Ten Commandments, but then I’ll hear them say to their child, “Don’t hit her! How would you like that if she did that to you?” When it comes to explaining to kids why they should be good, reason works best.

Q What is your faith background?

A I grew up in a nominally religious home. My dad died when I was 13 and he was 45. I was consumed not just with the need for consolation but with a real hunger to know where he was. I began reading the Bible, talking to ministers, going to church with Mormon, Baptist, Presbyterian and evangelical friends. Eventually, I came to the conclusion that religion was a human construct we use to explain the things we don’t understand and to help us feel better.

Q What has been the response to the book?

A It’s been very well received. It’s a relief that it’s not being viewed as just another entry in the culture wars. Something about planting this particular flag on the mountain of family values is getting people’s attention. Even some Christian readers say they found a lot of the essays useful.

Q Are you surprised at the sudden popularity of atheist and agnostic books?

A Not really. When President Bush was first elected, I was at an Atheist Alliance convention and everyone was moaning. I said, “Listen, this is a good thing, this will open up the conversation about religion in a way it hasn’t been before.”

Q Atheist curmudgeons Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens lump religious zealots and moderates together. Do you?

A I agree with them that we shouldn’t have to say please and thank you to religious people simply because they’re religious, but I don’t go as far as they do. The good things that come from religious observance are quite visible, but the ways in which it harms our discourse and our social fabric is frequently hidden under a surface of smiling piety that makes those problems difficult to address. Once you have overt harm that everyone sees — like religious people flying planes into buildings, for crying out loud — then the conversation bursts open and you’re going to hear that annoyed tone.

Bill Gates calls for greater steps to tackle global inequality

Vnunet.com reports that atheist/ agnostic Bil Gates has received an honorary degree Harvard, 33 years after he dropped out to start Microsoft. 

Gates used his acceptance speech to call for greater steps to tackle global inequality, describing as “revolting” the fact that children in the developing world are dying for want of medicine costing less than $1.

“I left Harvard with no real awareness of the awful inequities in the world: the appalling disparities of health, wealth and opportunity that condemn millions of people to lives of despair.

“I learned a lot here at Harvard about new ideas in economics and politics, and I got great exposure to the advances being made in the sciences.

“But humanity’s greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.

“Whether through democracy, strong public education, quality healthcare or broad economic opportunity, reducing inequity is the highest human achievement. “

Gates urged his audience to become activists and take up the fight to save those less fortunate than themselves. He declared that he would be devoting all his energies and resources to the project once he had eased himself out of Microsoft next year.

Atheist – Muslim wife swap

“Wife Swap continues with the Ahmed family, a strict Pakistani Muslim family who pray five times a day and choose to wear the hijab. The backbone of their family philosophy is based on Islamic principles and their three teenage children are well-mannered, work hard and are very respectful of their parent’s wishes. Supermum Nuzhat works full time, studies, manages all the cooking and household chores, and keeps a keen eye on what her children are doing. Deborah Escott works as an admin director for a theatre company and is the sole breadwinner in her liberal family. Husband Andy is a musician and house husband who looks after their three-year-old daughter Emily and 16-year-old Becky, Debs’s daughter from a previous relationship. Becky has recently come out as a lesbian. Will these two very different mums ever see eye to eye? How will husband Shakil react when Deborah arranges for his two teenage daughters to attend a live music gig and how does Nuzhat deal with a rebellious teenage daughter whose sexuality is a direct challenge to her religious beliefs?

Despite real differnces in opinion about gender roles, sexuality, freedoms and cleanliness  the participants demonstrated a certain willingness to accomodate each other (for example Mr Ahmed allowed Mrs Escott to drink wine in his house and was persuaded to allow his daughters to go to a rock concert), to see each other as humans worthy of respect, despite fundamental differences, and even learned from each other.

Hat tip: Unrealitytv.co.uk

American atheists appear to be less likely to vote and volunteer and give less to charity

A new study by American Christian research organisation the Barna Group has found that nine percent of Americans (20 million people) openly identified themselves as an atheist, an agnostic, or specifically said they have “no faith” – a proportion that has grown over the last decade amongst all age groups.

Only about 5 million adults unequivocally use the label “atheist” and staunchly reject the existence of God. The rest have doubts of God’s existence but do not outright reject a supreme being.

Most atheists and agnostics (56 percent) agree with the idea that radical Christianity is just as threatening in America as is radical Islam. Two-thirds of active-faith Americans (63 percent) perceive that the nation is becoming more hostile and negative toward Christianity.

Atheists and agnostics were found to be largely more disengaged in many areas of life than believers. They are less likely to be registered to vote (78 percent) than active-faith Americans (89 percent); to volunteer to help a non-church-related non-profit (20 percent vs. 30 percent); to describe themselves as “active in the community” (41 percent vs. 68 percent); and to personally help or serve a homeless or poor person (41 percent vs. 61 percent).

Additionally, when the no-faith group does donate to charitable causes, their donation amount pales in comparison to those active in faith. In 2006, atheists and agnostics donated just $200 while believers contributed $1,500. The amount is still two times higher among believers when subtracting church-based giving.

The no-faith group is also more likely to be focused on living a comfortable, balanced lifestyle (12 percent) while only 4 percent of Christians say the same. And no-faith adults are also more focused on acquiring wealth (10 percent) than believers (2 percent). One-quarter of Christians identified their faith as the primary focus of their life.

Still, one-quarter of atheists and agnostics said “deeply spiritual” accurately describes them and three-quarters of them said they are clear about the meaning and purpose of their life.

When it came to being “at peace,” however, researchers saw a significant gap with 67 percent of no-faith adults saying they felt “at peace” compared to 90 percent of believers. Atheists and agnostics are also less likely to say they are convinced they are right about things in life (38 percent vs. 55 percent) and more likely to feel stressed out (37 percent vs. 26 percent).

According to study results, 81 percent of the no-faith group say they adapt easily to change compared to 66 percent of active-faith Americans. “It is important for Christians to understand the environment and the perspectives of people who are different from them, especially among young generations whose culture is moving rapidly away from Christianity,” said David Kinnaman, president of The Barna Group. “Believers have the options of ignoring, rejecting or dealing with the aggressiveness of atheists and those hostile to the Christian faith. By their own admission, Christians have difficulty handling change, admitting when they are uncertain of something, and responding effectively to divergent perspectives. These characteristics make the new challenges facing Christianity even more daunting.”

Hat tip: ChurchExecutive.com

What else but agnosticism?

Ex-Vicar Mark
Vernon, author of  Science, Religion and the Meaning of Life (left), asks how else but with agnosticism can we deal with the uncertainty something that lies at the heart of the human condition.He writes that a “lust for certainty” characterises many of the debates currently doing the rounds. In religion, fundamentalism is the obvious case in point. A similar lustf or certainty also increasingly characterises mainstream religion, such as the crisis about homosexuality in the Church of England.

When it comes to the scientific worldview, a lust for certainty is manifest in different ways. Think of the way that some atheists go on at great length about the need to throw off superstitious belief and don the freedom and reason of the Enlightenment.  Read article here