Now that’s what is truly sad.

Mark Zamen, author

Wow, that was a serious misrepresentation of Sam Harris’s views on torture.

from Sam Harris.com:

My argument for the limited use of coercive interrogation (“torture” by another name) is essentially this: if you think it is ever justifiable to drop bombs in an attempt to kill a man like Osama bin Laden (and thereby risk killing and maiming innocent men, women, and children), you should think it may sometimes be justifiable to “water-board” a man like Osama bin Laden (and risk abusing someone who just happens to look like Osama bin Laden). It seems to me that however one compares the practices of “water-boarding” high-level terrorists and dropping bombs, dropping bombs always comes out looking worse in ethical terms. And yet, many of us tacitly accept the practice of modern warfare, while considering it taboo to even speak about the possibility of practicing torture. It is important to point out that my argument for the restricted use of torture does not make travesties like Abu Ghraib look any less sadistic or stupid. I considered our mistreatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib to be patently unethical. I also think it was one of the most damaging blunders to occur in the last century of U.S. foreign policy. Nor have I ever seen the wisdom or necessity of denying proper legal counsel (and access to evidence) to prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay.

I would hardly call him “pro-torture.”

The reason I am opposed to the formation of atheist(ic) groups is not quite as you would imagine. It is the fact that as soon as any of these groups do or say something outside of “there probably is no god” then it gives the theistically inclined a point of attack. For example there may be one group who says the woman’s body is hers and she should be allowed to do as she pleases and another that says all unborn children should be removed safely and treated as well as possible medically. Thus there are now two ways to paint atheists depending on your audience: baby killers; and anti-women’s rights.

The formation of support groups of like minded people is to be applauded, and I understand the need for a helping hand to come out the theistic closet but when these types of groups make pronouncements on other things (Harris being pro-torture for example*) then we all get tarred with the same ‘no morality’ brush. We lose the simple message that we don’t want our lives controlled by those who believe in inerrant yet contradictory 2,000 year old truths.

*Harris got lucky that the most religious people in America also supported torture so he got a pass there.

YOU are missing the point.
You and I do not know the reason why a doctor spend years of study to become a doctor, nor do we know the reason a chaplain does what he does.

What we do know is that the doctor is actualy doing something to make a person better. An Atheist docter cares so much he actualy chooses to make this his proffesion. Nobody told him/her to do good.

A chaplain on the other hand, needs a religion to tell him/her to do good things.

Are you telling me that my work as a (volenteer) first aider is not ‘caring’ beyond mere professionalism?
I still get tears in my eyes when I think of the time a heart attack victim told me she was going to die while I was holding her hand. Are you telling me these are feelings I should not have as an atheist?

Stephen Bates, in my mind, is still a religious man. While he holds to the belief that an atheist is somehow inherently uncaring and thus immoral he wildly misses the point he originally tries to make.

The Catholic hospital I gave birth to my first child in did have a group of volunteers who came by and brought newspapers and such, but I don’t think the secular hospital in my area has them.

Some people like that kind of attention, but personally, I don’t like having to put on a friendly face for strangers when I’m laid up. I prefer privacy and visits from people who actually know me.

I am considering volunteering for Meals on Wheels with my kids. I am not planning on discussing my atheism. So the majority of people I help will just assume I’m some nice Christian woman. And that’s mostly okay with me. I want to do it as my own act of generosity and to help my children understand the concept of charity. I have no ulterior motives of promoting my philosophy or making myself look better for a sky daddy. Which I think is a whole lot nicer.

I take issue with Mr. Bates’ line: “I didn’t get any hospital visits from atheist visitors. What might they have said to me: “This is as good as it gets, mate?’” That rhetorical question makes clear that despite his disillusionment with his religion, he still carries the same ready-made prejudices and assumptions. One of those assumptions is that life, the Universe, God, other people or any combination of the aforementioned owes him answers. And, for that matter, the promise that his desires will be fulfilled, that his fears be allayed, his transgressions righted. These are things that are owed to none of us, yet are demanded by those of religious (and even nonreligious) persuasion, whenever we are told that atheism is nonviable because it doesn’t provide enough comfort.

That sense of entitlement that Mr. Bates displays, to things that are earned and not granted, is exactly the sensibility that results in so many people abandoning reality and its inhabitants on the grounds that it just isn’t good enough for them, and that is truly reprehensible. Such a person has no motivation to make reality better. Indeed, never does it occur to Mr. Bates that he is now responsible for providing his own answers, his own compassion, his own charity. Instead he is “sad” that he has fallen closer into company with those “bad people.” (Though he never uses those words, it is apparent in his tone and characterization of atheists.) How can he honestly expect his life to get any happier when he takes no responsibility for it?

Atheism may be a hard pill to swallow, but that doesn’t mean we have to accept others’ inability to accept responsibility for their own lives. No matter how heart-wrenching a loss of faith may be, it doesn’t excuse prejudice and it doesn’t excuse an infantile sense of entitlement. If I heard this story in a bar, I’d say to him: “Get over yourself!” Unfortunately, when an atheist says that, nobody listens.