What Atheists Have To Offer The Right

[rug]

August 5, 2014
By Robert Tracinski

Conservative writer and CNN talking head S.E. Cupp recently put out a video describing how she has been welcomed among conservatives even though she is an atheist. This led Hot Air’s Allahpundit to chime in with his own experiences, citing myself and National Review‘s Charles Cooke as other examples of atheists on the Right. And we’re not the only ones. There’s Heather Mac Donald and Walter Olson, and a whole website devoted to the issue. Among marquee names, there are a few famous agnostics/atheists like Charles Krauthammer and George Will.

When you start looking, we’re everywhere.

- snip -

To be sure, these secular arguments won’t accomplish everything our more religious conservative friends might like. But it can accomplish every goal that is within the legitimate province of government—which, after all, is charged with safeguarding our material goals of liberty, security, and prosperity, rather than ensuring our spiritual enlightenment. When it comes to matters of the spirit, that is an area where government is not suited and, it should go without saying, cannot be trusted.

We atheists on the Right, by virtue of our secular outlook, can help to give this cause a more solid and universal foundation in ideas and observations that hold up independent of an individual’s prior religious beliefs—and in defiance of the newfangled dogmas of the Left.

http://thefederalist.com/2014/08/05/what-atheists-have-to-offer-the-right/

There is nothing inherently progressive about atheism.

[longship]

1. Lots of libertarians in the non-believer movement. nt

[rug]

2. True, along with some flat out reactionaries.

What I’m taking here as “the right” is a broad political persuasion that includes a belief in economic freedom, strong national defense, and the preservation of certain social institutions. Which institutions you want to preserve, and why, depends on what kind of atheist you are. I for one am an atheist with a burning passion for the value of marriage and children and what you might call “family values”—but, for example, I have no particular interest in fending off a largely irrelevant “threat” from a tiny number of gay marriages. Yet I sympathize with those who want to resist the far Left’s mania for delegitimizing every aspect of private life independent of the state.

[AtheistCrusader]

3. She's welcomed among conservatives because she "aspires to faith", wishes she believed and is a righ

t wing ideologue piece of shit. That's why.

She's full of shit. They love that.

[rug]

5. What about the other ones he mentioned, including himself?

[AtheistCrusader]

10. Sounds like a right wing piece of shit too.

"For the Left, blatantly unscientific economic ideas and wish fulfillment fantasies about money are the cornerstones of their ideology."

[rug]

11. No doubt he is. Do you consider him an atheist as well?

[AtheistCrusader]

13. Unknown.

I don't see any 'tells' in this piece that suggests he's from the same cloth as Cupp, but she wasn't immediately obvious at first blush either.

On that, I guess I'll take his word for it, for now.

[cbayer]

7. I think when it comes down to it, republicans will place political ideology

over religious beliefs.

If they see a potential voting block, they will kiss up to it.

[AtheistCrusader]

12. Or revenue stream.

Selling books, selling airtime, etc. I tend to think this is what Glenn Beck, and Bill O'Reilly are. Just pandering for cash.

[cbayer]

14. Agree. I think some of these characters are just playing a role

and would change in a minute if they saw a better opportunity.

[randys1]

26. I know an atheist righty on another message board and he has all the bad traits

and opinions and thoughts of any rightwinger PLUS he has no god to answer to so he doesnt care how many people he hurts

So a rightwinger who is an atheist is the scariest of all

[AtheistCrusader]

30. I'll let you in on a secret.

Rightwingers who do believe in god still don't give a shit who they hurt.

[randys1]

31. I was thinking that when I typed that...actually they do care, they just condition that care

On certain requirements and only for certain people

but if you are Brown, fuck you like Carlin said...

if you are Gay, fuck you, if you dont follow the exact same faith they do, fuck you

[Mariana]

34. It's even worse than that.

When rightwingers who believe in god want to hurt people, they convince themselves that god wants them to hurt those people. So they hurt whoever they want to, and they feel absolutely righteous about it.

[Starboard Tack]

35. Hate to disagree, but that is simply not true.

I have several family members and one or two friends who are politically right wing and some are born again Xians. As much as I find both their political views and their religious beliefs distasteful, I know them all to be very decent loving individuals who wouldn't hurt anyone who didn't threaten them, or their loved ones.
I agree the leaders and mouthpieces of the right, especially the religious right are super shits. They are con men, charlatans, abusers, hypocrites and generally bad people, but their "flocks" are no more than victims. Same as those NRA members.

[MellowDem]

40. Anecdotes don't make truth...

And I'm sure many right wing leaders are loving to their family. So what? It's no excuse.

They're not "victims", but they sure act like it. They're oppressive bigots.

However, I think people can change.

[Starboard Tack]

42. I never said it was an excuse

I also said the flocks were victims, not the leaders, who I agree tend to be oppressive bigots.

I was responding to this

Rightwingers who do believe in god still don't give a shit who they hurt.

Which is a blanket statement and just not true. If the poster had said many, then I would agree.

[AtheistCrusader]

44. Bullshit.

You 'several family members' is meaningless. We can see what they believe, as a herd, at the polls. Hell, they hurt themselves.

[MellowDem]

38. What a bigoted opinion...

Shows how far many progressives have to go on understanding atheism when this sort of bigotry is seen on DU.

You just said that because atheists don't believe in god, we don't care how many people we hurt.

This sort of stupidity and ignorance on DU is what's scariest of all.

[randys1]

41. no, i said rightwingers who are also atheists , because they are rightwingers

have nothing holding them back

you are confusing decent people like liberals with rightwingers

i am an atheist but because i am a liberal I am by default someone who wont hurt people the way a righty will

[MellowDem]

43. That makes no sense...

Belief in god doesn't make right wingers automatically "less bad". There's all sorts of gods people believe in, some of which command to hurt many people. The god of the Bible, for example, commits numerous acts of genocide.

Likewise, just because some atheist has a right wing ideology, it doesn't mean "nothing is holding them back". They generally still have some level of empathy and even their ideology, to them, is about being the "good guy".

It's an old trope that if the world didn't have religion we would devolve into chaos. But it's not true. Even for the S.E. Cupps of the world.

[cbayer]

4. Wow. I'm glad that he is demographically in the minority.

I think you are right about there being nothing inherently progressive about atheism, but as a group, they do tend to be more democratic and liberal.

[rug]

6. And that demographic itself varies by country.

Kim Jong-un comes to mind.

[cbayer]

8. True. I was talking about the US, but you are correct.

[MellowDem]

39. As a group, they're among the most liberal demographic in the US

[Htom Sirveaux]

9. I'm surprised the author didn't mention the most prominent conservative non-believer:

Karl Rove, agnostic.

[pinto]

15. S.E. Cupp ought to compare notes with the Log Cabin Republicans. (nt)

[rug]

17. But no one has suggested there that Log Cabin Republicans are not in fact gay.

Here, I'm bemused by the remarks that she is not in fact an atheist, because of her politics. That's not a tenable position.

[cbayer]

19. No true scotsman, you know.

[pinto]

20. Yeah. I was going along the line of unintended cosequences. I agree with the $ comments above.

She's a media participant, hence a money maker. Hers is a confusing position outside of a purely media construct.

[rug]

23. That may well be the case but it doesn't make her any less an atheist.

[okasha]

33. "Oh, flow'r of Scotland,

When will we see your like again..."

[Prophet 451]

16. If Cupp's an atheist, I'm a Dutchman

I've never known an atheist to do so many stories about how wonderful faith is and how other atheists are, like a total drag.

[rug]

18. Maybe she's not a Scot either.

[stone space]

45. You should stick around here for a while.

I've never known an atheist to do so many stories about how wonderful faith is and how other atheists are, like a total drag.

You'll see plenty of instances of atheists bashing other atheists.

[Promethean]

21. That is correct.

There is nothing inherently progressive about not believing the claims about gods. That is blatantly obvious on its face. So what is the point other than to take another jab at atheists?

[rug]

22. It's very obvious and it's very rarely stated.

In fact, the opposite is usually implied. Why is that?

BTW, since you consider this a jab, I should ask if you are offended.

[Promethean]

24. Perhaps you should become more cognizant of the tone of your posts towards atheists.

Almost every post you make about atheists is blatantly contemptuous of us. Most are insults with barely any effort to veil. I don't think I am the first to tell you this but I do know most of the atheists on this board have you on ignore because of it.

[rug]

27. Don't worry, I'm acutely cognizant of everything I write.

As I am of yours.

Yup, you do indeed sound offended.

So, to quote Hitchens, “If someone tells me that I’ve hurt their feelings I’m still waiting to hear what your point is.”

P.S. I ignore ignore lists. Mainly because they turn out to be nonexistent.

[Starboard Tack]

36. Most is a mighty big word.

Many of us atheists have a very friendly relationship with rug, and don't find him contemptuous of atheists at all. Maybe your confusing atheists with the handful of intolerant, loudmouthed anti-theists who poke their heads in here, now and again, pretending to be the voices of atheism.

[Starboard Tack]

36. Most is a mighty big word.

Many of us atheists have a very friendly relationship with rug, and don't find him contemptuous of atheists at all. Maybe your confusing atheists with the handful of intolerant, loudmouthed anti-theists who poke their heads in here, now and again, pretending to be the voices of atheism.

[stone space]

46. I don't think it's a jab at atheists.

The author seems to be an atheist himself, with an interest in promoting some of the virtues of atheism to his fellow right wingers.

[Jim__]

25. Tracinski has a funny way of *observing facts*.

For those of us who don’t believe in a deity or supernatural power, the way we try to settle arguments is by pointing to observable facts. Do human beings flourish better under capitalism or socialism? Let’s look at the history of the two systems and see how they turned out. Will a welfare state eliminate poverty or perpetuate it for 50 years? It’s been 50 years, so let’s look at the result. And so on. The questions can get a lot more subtle, and the answers much deeper and philosophical, but you get the idea.

So, have we been living under socialism or capitalism for the last 50 years? I know, all the good things that happened happened due to capitalism, and all the bad things due to socialism. And that conclusion is based purely on observable facts. Such a rational approach to problem solving!

Somewhat off topic, I know; but I just had to make a note.

[rug]

28. He's an imbeclle.

[Jim__]

29. I'd never heard of him before - life is full of hidden treasures.

[AtheistCrusader]

32. Nevermind that the US is a Mixed Market economy, not a capitalist economy.

In fact, I can't think of any straight up pure capitalist economies in the word.
So too for Socialists. Even the Chinese government managed a mixed market economy. Same for the Swedes.

There is no 100% free market economy, or 100% central-planning economy today, unless perhaps one considers the high seas a free market.

[prefunk]

47. "There is nothing inherently progressive about atheism"

What a beautiful strawman.

[rug]

48. Disprove it.

I'll get you started.

Proposition A: Atheism is nonbelief in gods. (That's a period, full stop.)

Proposition B: . . . . .

[prefunk]

49. You made the claim, you prove it.

You posted it, you back it up.

[rug]

50. I did.

Proposition A.

If that's all you've got, this will be a very short discussion.

[prefunk]

51. I agree, there is nothing inherently progressive about atheism.

But that's not all you implied with that statement, regardless how obtuse you choose to be about it.

[rug]

52. I'm not responsible for your reflexive inferences.

[prefunk]

53. I'm sure you believe that.

[rug]

54. I see. You've resorted to inanity.

That didn't take long.

[prefunk]

55. Inane posts get inane replies.

Pot, meet kettle.

[rug]

56. Which is the only reason I replied to you.

[prefunk]

58. I'm sure you believe that.

[rug]

59. “Never argue with stupid people,

they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.” ― Mark Twain

[DonCoquixote]

57. If Athiests think they can cozy to the right

They need to remember that the GOP will NEVER forsake Christian Fundamentalists, becuase they are the best at FUNDING. If having SE cupp killed would get the coffers flowing, they would kill her. And as Atheists know, nothing gets the funding flowing like religious violence, and lawyers willingly covering it up.