# Are Fundamentalists the Atheist's best friend? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 27, 2010, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678 "2010-01-27T19:57:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8edcca/32.png) [@Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superfluous_Parentheses)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/21 "2010-01-28T13:11:32Z")
Ofcourse it’s true in christianity at least that there’s hardly anyone to be found who would take the whole of the bible literally - not even the really hardcore fundamentalists do that. What matters is _what parts of the bible you do use_ - as literal history or metaphore or motivation. For instance, there are plenty of really moderate christians who nonetheless are quite homophobic and defend their position ultimately on biblical grounds. There’s a reason for that: religious reasons and scripture in particular are viewed as somehow unassailable or at least much more worthy of consideration and respect than “I just don’t like that/them/it makes me feel funny”. In that light, it’s a perfectly good tactic to point out all the crap that can be justified by scripture and fortunately there are even walking talking examples of people who do take much of that crap seriousy; those are the fundies. But the reaction of the “moderates” who object to the fundie comparison should not be “oh, but _I’m_ not like them”; it should be “maybe next time I defend something on religous grounds, I should think if it’s really something I want to defend instead of relying on my bible or priest to do the thinking for me”. And then there’s the fact that many people - some not even christians - are being bamboozled by the likes of the Discovery Institute who have no problem with outright lying and character assassination if it helps destroy scientific knowledge in favor of their particular biblical POV. Now that is disgusting. In both cases, it’s not really a case of Atheists vs “The Religious” - believe what you want (though I like a debate now and then, I don’t go out of my way to find christians to annoy). As long as you keep your beliefs out of my life and especially out of the education system it’s fine by me. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Bith\_Shuffle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ce73a5/32.png) [@The\_Bith\_Shuffle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Bith_Shuffle)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 1:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/22 "2010-01-28T13:45:45Z")
Atheism is not an ideology; it’s a view about the existence of deities. Sometimes people use the word “atheism” to refer to a strongly anti-religion social stance. While most atheists are at least moderately against religion in the social sense, to be an atheist is just to believe that there aren’t any gods. There’s nothing logically inconsistent with being an atheist and believing that there’s nothing wrong with being religious, although few atheists are actually going to have the latter view. ---
**Author:** ![Saintly\_Loser](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saintly_loser/32/4045_2.png) [@Saintly\_Loser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saintly_Loser)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/23 "2010-01-28T13:58:13Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > I tend to fundamentally (heh!) discount the opinions of anyone who unironically writes about the “new atheism”. It’s a shibboleth for dismissives who seek a false equivalence. > > Having said that, I disagree with his opinion. Fundies are not our friends just because they’re a big target for us. Nor do we need them to justify our atheism. I’d still be atheist even if it were all Episcopalians, Christian UUs and Quakers. Christianity is just wrong about everything it believes, not only the extreme bits, all of it. The only things it gets right are the things that aren’t unique to religion at all, like “don’t kill people or take their shit”. Well, yes, except those things (“don’t kill people or take their shit”) didn’t really enter the human consciousness until Christianity came along and told us that there was such a thing as a universal morality, and that prohibitions against killing people or taking their shit didn’t extend only to members of one’s own tribe or nation, and that people outside the clan or tribe or nation were actually human (Samaritans, for example) and shouldn’t be killed or have their shit taken. Naturally, it took a while for this to catch on, even among Christians, because, as all Christians know, people are imperfect and sinful, and do not always follow the tenents of their own faith, but still, pretty good ideas, right? ---
**Author:** ![shiftless](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9c0ed/32.png) [@shiftless](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/shiftless)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/24 "2010-01-28T15:51:38Z")
> [@Saintly\_Loser](#): > > Well, yes, except those things (“don’t kill people or take their shit”) didn’t really enter the human consciousness until Christianity came along and told us that there was such a thing as a universal morality, and that prohibitions against killing people or taking their shit didn’t extend only to members of one’s own tribe or nation, and that people outside the clan or tribe or nation were actually human (Samaritans, for example) and shouldn’t be killed or have their shit taken. Naturally, it took a while for this to catch on, even among Christians, because, as all Christians know, people are imperfect and sinful, and do not always follow the tenents of their own faith, but still, pretty good ideas, right? I have a hard time catching sarcasm on the internet. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/25 "2010-01-28T15:55:53Z")
In all honesty, it seems pretty reasonable to want to rail against the kind of extreme Christianity as opposed to moderate views - it’s the more (from both an atheist and a moderate religious position) arguable position, often the most offensive or the most harsh in response. It seems kind of odd to accuse people of railing against them because they’re an easier target - it’s _because_ they’re an easier target that they are more worthy of railing against. Should we be railing against moderate Christian or other religious views preferentially over more extreme ones? Why? That said, i’m not in agreement with Dawkins in the extremity of his views, either, so I suppose i’m not included in the “new” atheism. I’d complain about the name - I mean, I don’t really think Dawkins et al bring anything particularly new to the debate - but, on the plus side, it does recognise a difference in extremity of views, which is probably a good thing. It may mean that every atheist with a soapbox gets put in that category, but hey, it could be worse, really. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/26 "2010-01-28T15:58:50Z")
> [@raindog](#): > > And what would this “whispering voice of reason” be? Golden rule, judge not, render unto Caesar and other radical hippy stuff. ---
**Author:** ![Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8edcca/32.png) [@Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superfluous_Parentheses)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/27 "2010-01-28T16:02:03Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > That said, i’m not in agreement with Dawkins in the extremity of his views, either, so I suppose i’m not included in the “new” atheism. I’d complain about the name - I mean, I don’t really think Dawkins et al bring anything particularly new to the debate - but, on the plus side, it does recognise a difference in extremity of views, which is probably a good thing. It may mean that every atheist with a soapbox gets put in that category, but hey, it could be worse, really. I don’t think Dawkins came up with the “new atheism” term. Pretty much every time I see that term it’s in some article that wants to position Dawkins, Hitchens etc as being some kind of fundamentalists. ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/28 "2010-01-28T16:03:50Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > It’s kind of hard to listen those with the whispering voice of reason when they are so willing to step aside and give the screaming extremists center stage. It is sad that atheists have to spend valuable time fighting back against those extremists that attack them constantly, _because this is something the so-called “real Christians” should have been doing from day 1_. Yeah - I feel the same when I read a post from **Der Trihs** , or the latest insult from a Dawkins or a Hitchens. There is also my neighbor who taught his son that because I am a Deacon, Christian and Scout leader that makes me a pedophile. Now, I am smart enough to realize that these loud voices of the Atheist minority do not represent the whole. I would hope that Dopers would provide the same credit. And I DO argue against the extremist group. However, except when we are trying to get our churches to move past their anti-gay bigotry the media pays zero attention to the progressive Christian movement. Pat Robertson gets a lot more airplay than Jim Wallis. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/29 "2010-01-28T16:08:58Z")
> [@Superfluous\_Parentheses](#): > > I don’t think Dawkins came up with the “new atheism” term. Pretty much every time I see that term it’s in some article that wants to position Dawkins, Hitchens etc as being some kind of fundamentalists. I wasn’t disincluding myself based upon Dawkins having come up with the term and my disagreement with him, but rather on the article’s use of the term and my not seemingly being the same category as it denotes Dawkins to be. ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/30 "2010-01-28T16:10:51Z")
> [@Algher](#): > > Pat Robertson gets a lot more airplay than Jim Wallis. This is really the germ of my point in the OP. Pat Robertson plays into Dawkin’s hands a lot better than Wallis does, so Dawkins (quoted by the linked article) claims that Robertson is the “true” Christian - because he is so much more objectionable. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/31 "2010-01-28T16:15:56Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > I agree. > > However I maintain any given religion has someone (or some group) responsible for the canon. All followers ought to abide by those rules. It is not for them to cherry pick what parts they like and ignore the rest. > > If some group has enough issue with the canon of their religion they can try to strike out on their own and form a new sect/religion with the rules/story as they see fit. > > However, saying you are (as an example) “Catholic” but you reject a fair amount of Catholic dogma you are a cafeteria Catholic and, IMO, should not really call yourself one. Part of being Catholic is buying the Catholic line. Who are you then to gainsay the Pope and the Bible? Shrug. I can read the Bible for myself, and don’t need a Robertson or a Falwell telling me what it says. As for the Pope, he does his pope thing and it doesn’t seem to have a whole lot of impact on my day to day life. To borrow from another post, I don’t kill anyone or take their shit, and the pope doesn’t yell at me or send me angry memos 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/32 "2010-01-28T16:47:36Z")
> [@otternell](#): > > Yes, but if there were no Pat Robertsons and thus no one for atheists to rail at, they would be happy atheists living their lives without fearing persecution for their lack of belief in whatever religion, and without fearing that the gov’t will be co-opted by that religion. (fear is a bit strong perhaps). A lot of people need an enemy, though. Many people define their values not only by what they stand for, but by finding somebody who represents the opposite and being against that. So for some atheists, a fundamentalist jerk like Pat Robertson will fill that role. Fundamentalists are the atheist’s best friend when it comes to butting heads in an argument. If you want to talk about getting something accomplished on issues that most atheists care about, like human rights, social justice or support for science, a moderate believer is the atheist’s best friend. You know, the person who _doesn’t_ think atheists are evil. ---
**Author:** ![garygnu](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/garygnu/32/2924_2.png) [@garygnu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/garygnu)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/33 "2010-01-28T17:01:53Z")
Whether it’s a Catholic official or an individual Protestant doing the interpreting, they’re still just making it up as they go along. That’s _less_ rational that a fundamentalist who thinks every word is true. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/34 "2010-01-28T17:12:11Z")
> [@garygnu](#): > > Whether it’s a Catholic official or an individual Protestant doing the interpreting, they’re still just making it up as they go along. That’s _less_ rational that a fundamentalist who thinks every word is true. No it isn’t, and this is a position that frustrates me a great deal because it is usually the result of atheists trying to push believers into an extreme position so they can caricature that position. Fundamentalists say every word is true, but the words are known to contradict each other at times, so that can’t be the case. And people who admit they are interpreting are being more intellectually honest. ---
**Author:** ![pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a9a28c/32.png) [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pseudotriton_ruber_ruber)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/35 "2010-01-28T17:25:16Z")
Fundies are an atheist’s best pal if only because they give atheists a perfect strawman position to argue against and have the added benefit of not being made of straw. To contrary, there are millions and millions of actual, breathing flesh-and-blood fundies who gladly espouse positions that atheists would need to conjure up if the fundies did not actually exist. They are not merely a theoretical danger to our lives and liberties, but a real actual practical danger. The problem with more moderate Christians is that they devote energy towards defending them or at least towards the fundies’ rights to behave as they do, instead of treating the fundies as their natural enemies, as unreasonable people who made moderate Christians look bad. ---
**Author:** ![Saintly\_Loser](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saintly_loser/32/4045_2.png) [@Saintly\_Loser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saintly_Loser)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/36 "2010-01-28T17:29:48Z")
> [@garygnu](#): > > Whether it’s a Catholic official or an individual Protestant doing the interpreting, they’re still just making it up as they go along. That’s _less_ rational that a fundamentalist who thinks every word is true. Well, many aren’t just “making it up as they go along.” They’re reading the Bible in light of quite a few centuries of study, scholarship, criticism and analysis, and making a genuine good-faith effort to understand the actual meaning and intent of what was written. ---
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/37 "2010-01-28T17:56:13Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Very convenient…pick and choose what you like, get rid of the rest at their whim. Doesn’t seem to make much sense. Who are you (general “you”) to decide which aspects are and are not important in a religion? Makes perfect sense to me. Who am I to interpret it as I see fit? I’m someone every bit as smart as Robertson or Benedict. If parts of it make sense to me, and they work for me, why not use them? Why do I have to use the crap I don’t like? So that you can more conveniently pigeonhole me? I once knew someone who had a beef with the Catholic Church (and all of religion, but especially Catholics). I was telling her about someone I knew who was a very devout Catholic, and who also enjoyed sex. She was also unmarried. My friend blew up at this. “Then she’s not really a Catholic! Real Catholics don’t have premarital sex! She’s just a hypocrite!” No, she’s just someone who figured out what works for her. In contrast, I recently had the pleasure of meeting a priest. She’ll be the first to admit that she cherry picks to her heart’s content. I was pretty amazed at how much common ground she and I, a hardcore atheist, have in common. We’re more alike than unlike. And I respect her views far more than those of someone who feels the need to follow the recipe of a religion to the letter. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/38 "2010-01-28T18:58:30Z")
> [@tdn](#): > > Makes perfect sense to me. Who am I to interpret it as I see fit? I’m someone every bit as smart as Robertson or Benedict. If parts of it make sense to me, and they work for me, why not use them? Why do I have to use the crap I don’t like? So that you can more conveniently pigeonhole me? > > I once knew someone who had a beef with the Catholic Church (and all of religion, but especially Catholics). I was telling her about someone I knew who was a very devout Catholic, and who also enjoyed sex. She was also unmarried. My friend blew up at this. “Then she’s not really a Catholic! Real Catholics don’t have premarital sex! She’s just a hypocrite!” No, she’s just someone who figured out what works for her. > > In contrast, I recently had the pleasure of meeting a priest. She’ll be the first to admit that she cherry picks to her heart’s content. I was pretty amazed at how much common ground she and I, a hardcore atheist, have in common. We’re more alike than unlike. And I respect her views far more than those of someone who feels the need to follow the recipe of a religion to the letter. Take another religion as an example: Baseball. Some dudes sat down once-upon-a-time and spelled out the details of the game and who the arbiters of the rules of the game are. They invited other people to join and play the game. Now you come along and decide while you like most of it the whole running to fist base thing just doesn’t work for you and you are going straight to 2nd base. Despite all the other similarities I don’t think anyone would say you are playing baseball anymore. I’m all for people making up their own minds as I think faith is personal and a thing for individuals to sort out and not have handed to them in one, cover-all book. ---
**Author:** ![garygnu](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/garygnu/32/2924_2.png) [@garygnu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/garygnu)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/39 "2010-01-28T19:13:17Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > …people who admit they are interpreting are being more intellectually honest. I can respect people who admit they are interpreting, but that doesn’t make them rational. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2010, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678/40 "2010-01-28T19:16:09Z")
> [@garygnu](#): > > I can respect people who admit they are interpreting, but that doesn’t make them rational. It’s more rational than claiming you are applying an ancient and contradictory text in a literal way. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fundamentalists-the-atheists-best-friend/526678.md?page=3)