For the teal deers:
I’m trying to explain (via blogpost) that I will tolerate (and in some cases support) personal faith despite loathing organised religion. Apparently I’ve been alienating people on Facebook (not that I mind really). A bit angry that people can’t see the difference between me alienating Christians on Facebook and Christians Alienating homosexuals IN PARLIAMENT!
By now it should be obvious to all involved that I’m strongly, deeply atheist.
During the last month or two I’ve been stretching my rhetorical legs in this field. My attention to media and policy makes it hard for me to escape the ham-fisted souring that the religiouso bring to public discourse. I don’t hold back when ontological proclamations appear in my Facebook stream, unless said proclamations have a very specific aspect to them.
That aspect is that they have nothing to do with the life of anyone but the proclaimer.
Unfortunately for the Abrahamics in my life there is so much outward pressuring built into the fabric of their religions that they seldom say something that isn’t bothering someone else. Not just bothering, but inciting a world-view that alienates others in practical ways. Here is where I differ from them.
For starters, the Abrahamic religions are not silent on political leanings, especially not in the US or here in Australia. To say that I am Christian has implications for my political viewpoint, whereas to say that I am atheist does not. Atheism simply means that you do not believe a personal God exists. If a religious person said they were a Deist, then they too would be refraining from political comment in their statement.
Even in situations where a person’s identification as a Christian is followed by a denunciation of the alienating ideologies of that church, the identification is still harmful because they have added themselves to the number of people that supposedly support the ideology. The government will use the argument that, say, 60% of Australians are Christians, Christians don’t like homosexuals, therefore 60% of Australians don’t like homosexuals and will vote for me if I don’t like them either. This is a blunt case, but the mechanism runs deep.
This is not a case of the government getting sloppy with statistics, it’s an acknowledgment that the power doesn’t lie with individual Christians, it lies with the opinion makers in the church. Deny your complicity all you like, you’re not doing anything to stop the resurgence of fundamentalism in this country via the brigades over at Hillsong, AOG and the like.
Before I get on to distinguishing between a personal faith and a communal faith, I’d like to mention secularism.
Atheism isn’t intrinsically political, but secularism is. Secularism is an approach to government that separates the State from the Church so that many churches may exist to cater for as many different faiths as exist. The fashionable way to prove your ignorance these days appears to be claiming that secularism is anti-church. Secularism is about as pro-church as you can get before establishing a theocracy. I want all Christians to hear this: You need a secular state so that another denomination doesn’t gain power and oppress you. You know as well as I do that Christianity is fragmented and inconsistent. Don’t forget your history:
- The English civil war was pretty much Protestants killing Catholics killing Protestants.
- Serbs versus Croats is essentially orthodox Christians versus Catholics.
- Freedom of Religion in the US came out of a law preventing the congregationalists (a Christian sect) harassing Baptists and Presbyterians.
- Calvinists killed a hell of a lot of Catholics after the reformation.
- The puritans fled England because other Christians oppressed them for being daft.
Leaving secularism aside, claiming that Australia is based on Christian values means essentially nothing. If you’re talking about the don’t kill, don’t steal, don’t cheat kind of values then, well, thanks for the input, where the fuck were you when we were sent here for stealing bread (first fleet), murdering aborigines, and disrespecting women by disallowing them the vote? If Australia is based on Christian values in that sense then we can probably add ‘only if it suits us’ as a Christian tenet. Apart from those core values, which honestly, aren’t real hard to figure out, it would appear most of the values still left to implement are homophobia, ignorance and authoritarianism.
Please stay the hell out of politics, you keep ruining everything.
So if we take the public face out of religion, what does a personal faith look like? My temptation here is to say it would look pretty silly because the whole basis of faith is delightfully unhelpful to any meaningful progress in society and does nothing but remove people from the collective intelligence of a nation. I’m going to resist that temptation because as a liberal I think it’s more important to let each individual improve themselves in whatever way they see fit (assuming they don’t do something that stops others from improving themselves likewise). So how can you have faith without having it rammed down people’s throats?
For starters, simple things like not trying to convert people helps, but really doesn’t mean much if you then go and vote for someone that wants to maintain the alienation of queers in society. Having a personal faith is about one central and all important self-injunction:
I will live my life by the rules of my faith but make no action that structurally, legally or socially inhibits somebody else’s ability to completely ignore my beliefs.
That’s why I would never vote for the abolition of Religion, no matter how tempting it may become in the future. Examples of applying the above might include:
- Not supporting a man-woman only definition of marriage
- Not having an abortion but not supporting anti-abortion laws
- Not looking at porn but also not supporting Internet censorship
- Telling an atheist he’s wrong but agreeing that he’s allowed to be
- Fighting for the down-trodden and poor WITHOUT telling them you did it because of your faith
The idea here is not to force religion out of the public sphere, that will never happen and never should happen. The aim of secularism and of maintaining personal faith is to reduce the strain and angst in this country. The strain between the religious and the otherwise, the angst of not measuring up to the standards of some celestial dictator, both of these cause far more trouble than I can pinpoint in my research.
The difference between the straw-man Kieran and the straw-man Christian is that when I mouth off on Facebook, I’m trying to ease the burden on the human spirit, not add more rules, not add more obligations, not add more oversight. Abrahamic religions are at their core authoritarian and I am at my core not. I believe in positive reinforcement not a fear of eternal damnation. I believe in atoning for my sins instead of praying them away.
There are so many differences that conflating my outbursts with those of my religious opposition is mentally lazy and shallow. Beneath my remonstrations is my tacit permissiveness and the acknowledgment that my distaste for religion is less powerful – the current political climate won’t allow for me to activate it in any oppressive sense even if I wanted to.



























