The Out Campaign

Those of you who read science and liberal political blogs have probably encountered a new symbol in authors' sidebars of late. Scarlet A's have been popping up all over the web. What do these red letters mean? Simply, the A is a symbol of solidarity for atheists and represents a call for atheists to make a more vocal contribution to the public conversation.

You might expect that I would - as a Christian - object to this campaign, or otherwise be put on the defensive by it. If you made that assumption, you'd be wrong. I think the Out Campaign is an admirable effort to unite a community of Americans that have been too quiet and too persecuted for too long.

My conversations with atheists about science, politics or religion are as interesting and meaningful to me as discussions on the same topic with Christians. In many instances, my agnostic and atheist friends are more likely to be open to thinking about new and different ideas. In the kinds of discussions I like to have about science, society and social justice, it doesn't matter what people believe in. It matters that they are respectful, honest and open to conversation.

As Richard Dawkins writes in his introduction to The Out Campaign,

Atheists are not devils with horns and a tail, they are ordinary nice people. Demonstrate this by example. The nice woman next door may be an atheist. So may the doctor, librarian, computer operator, taxi driver, hairdresser, talk show host, singer, conductor, comedian. Atheists are just people with a different interpretation of cosmic origins, nothing to be alarmed about.

With this, I strongly agree. Too many conversations among Christians (and other people of faith) involve categorization of atheists as militant haters. Even if names aren't used, there are underlying stereotypes of inferiority, immorality and other unfounded categories that atheists are crammed into. I resent it when as a Christian, I am labeled as homophobic, misogynistic and irrational just because other vocal Christians are these things and base their reasons for being so on a book I find illuminating.

Clearly, I will not be putting the "A" on my sidebar. But you won't find me shrinking from or picking fights with the website owners that that display that red badge of courage. If you want to display the A, head over to PZ Meyers' Pharyngula blog. He has provided code to help intrepid atheists come out.

Atheism in America

Have you noticed the recent increase in conversations about atheism lately? You've seen books, TV programs and more talking about atheism. If you read ScienceBlogs, you might think that a supermajority of scientists are atheists. Two recent posts there have shifted the conversation away from the screaming edges, and I would like to comment here on them. Matthew Nisbet at Framing Science posted a recent Barna survey showing that Christians tend to donate time and money to the needy more than atheists, and Josh Rosenau from Thoughts from Kansas posted a recent analysis of belief on America.

I'll say right now that I am a Christian, a liberal and a scientist. I wish to contribute to a dialogue about topics like this rather than pick a fight.

Nisbet's post and subsequent discussion centers on the image problem that atheists have in America, and the comments seem to me right on. If, however, he is interested in addressing the findings of the Barna survey, there seems to me an important consideration missing.

I believe that among atheist scientists, there are considerable negative stereotypes of religious - particularly Christian - people. A vast majority of comments (and posts) on ScienceBlogs refer to Christians is cynical hypocrites. I know that this text lashing is not representative of all atheists, but if ScienceBlogs is taken as a representative section of atheists, I might wonder if the negative impressions that society at large holds of of atheists are founded. I have had close interactions with a few groups of atheist secular humanists, and I would characterize only a very small minority of them as something resembling 'militant' or 'cynic.' So I think that Nisbet and colleagues are on to something when they suppose that community (as provided by a church, for example) is linked to good works. It is also possible that people interested in social justice are more social to start with, so seek out places like churches, community groups and political organizations.

My question related about what the Barna study says about atheism is: Are atheists willing to accept that Christians honestly pursue their religious teachings?

If you would like to understand how Christianity can be a religion of social justice, read the Sermon on the Mount. (The summary at Wikipedia is good as long as you don't read the muddled interpretation section.) Christ's teachings advocated giving alms (as the Barna study examined), reducing war, withholding judgment, healing sick, and were against materialism. Jesus interacted with and helped women, lepers, the underclass, tax collectors, priests and aristocrats. Paul preached to and formed friendships with Jews, Greeks, slaves, prisoners, soldiers and Roman leaders alike.

You will, of course, be able to cite contradictions to these points - mostly in the Old Testament. And surely you will find Christians that do not place the social justice commandments high on their priority list. I am just saying that there are stereotypes of atheists and stereotypes of Christians, and to shake off one, you may just have to let go of the other.

Finally, Rosenau identifies that there may be a trend toward a less religious America, and the Barna survey indicates that Americans are increasingly misinformed about the poor. Let's hope that we are not trending toward an era of callousness and fewer good deeds.