Depends on who you talk to. From the people I’ve talked to, read articles by, etc who use terms like militant atheist it doesn’t take much to have that title applied.
To a *lot *of people I’ve known, there is no difference between “open atheist” and “militant atheist”. It’s considered by many people to be one of those positions that is so obviously provocative that if you mention it, you’re clearly trying to be provocative.
That’s not always going to be the case, but if you’re as open and casual about being an atheist as a moderate Christian is about being Christian, that shit’s going to come up fairly often. I’m not even an atheist but I’m unapologetic about not being religious, so I’ve gotten “accused” of it enough times.
I don’t believe in God. The number of times I’ve had to tell someone that in response to any type of query is infinitesimal (IRL). I don’t make any sort of effort (not in the least) to hide my beliefs or feel the need to share them with others. I just don’t understand how some people are encountering such hostility to their private beliefs unless they seek out that conflict in some way.
Religion plays no role in my life so there aren’t many religious people in my life at all. I don’t ever have random encounters with people who don’t share my beliefs, so I’m never in a position of having to explain or defend myself in regards to those beliefs. There may be a group (groups) of people in the world who would consider me “militant” simply because I don’t share their beliefs but those groups have no role whatsoever in my life so we never have any interaction, much less conflict. Using “militant” in that way, however, sort of makes militant a meaningless word.
I am not an atheist, but I am friends with quite a few and I would say none of them are militant. Everyone in the group talks nicely to each other for the most part and is respectful. The only atheist I would consider militant is one person (not a friend) who feels the need to remind you God doesn’t exist every time you say something even vaguely referencing a high power.
Someone sneezes.
Me: God bless you
Militant: not that he exists
Someone mentions their dad is really sick
Me: (knowing they’ll appreciate it) I’ll say a prayer for him
Militant: Well, since God doesn’t exist it won’t really help.
I don’t know if she’s really “militant” or just an asshole.
This.
There are acres of space between someone who does not believe in any God, and who, if the subject arises, is open and unapologetic about the fact, and people who feel the need to ridicule any casual expression of religion that might occur, or to denigrate all religious people as being stupid, or deluded, or evil. It is the same as the difference between the non-militant Christian, who mostly keeps their faith to them-self (the vast majority) and the sort of Christian who bangs on your door and aggressively tries to convert you. There are plenty of the latter sort of aggressive, in-your-face atheists on the net, and on these boards (Der Trihs being a prominent example). To pretend otherwise, to pretend that if an atheist does not behave militantly they are not a true atheist, as some people in this thread seem to be trying to do, is disingenuous at best, and at worst seems to be a sort of heretic hunting, an attempt to deny the status of “true atheist” to anyone who is insufficiently enthusiastic and aggressive in proselytizing their (lack of) faith.
On the net, and even on this board, militant atheists most certainly exist, and are clearly distinguishable from non-militant ones, just as hellfire preachers and televangelists are clearly distinguishable from the stereotypical, mild-mannered Anglican vicar (let alone the millions of Christians whose faith is manifested in little more than going to church once every few months). In both cases the militants are highly annoying and sometimes embarrassing even to many of those who share their underlying viewpoint. Whether they exist in real life (apart from a few “professional” atheists, such as Richard Dawkins), I can’t say. No doubt many people who talk up an aggressive storm online are milquetoasts in person, but they might not all be. Thankfully, however, I have never had the misfortune to encounter one of those exceptions in action.
I once told my new neighbor I was atheist and her first reaction was “then where do you get your morals from?” She was truly perplexed. We ended up being very close friends and chuckle about it, but that was her knee-jerk reaction.
Fwiw, my experience is term militant atheist tends to be used to describe atheists by other people, in a derogatory way. The definition of militant atheist tends be fluid, based on the level of contempt of the person using it.
When I hear “militant atheist” I immediately think of Penn Jillette. I happened to catch his radio show some years back (does he still have a show?) and he went on and on about atheism the way some fundies go on and on about their beliefs. It was as obnoxious and as hateful. I’m pretty sure it wasn’t an act, but if it was, it wasn’t very entertaining.
I wouldn’t be surprised if there are others like that in the world. I personally haven’t encountered any, but I don’t see why one’s lack of belief couldn’t manifest itself as annoyingly as another’s embrace of belief. Both types are to be avoided, as far as I’m concerned.
Without knowing exactly what he said it is difficult to know what to make of this.
Was he being hateful towards the *ideas *of the religions? Because that is perfectly valid. Or towards those that act on those beliefs? again, totally valid. Or was he directing it at specific people just because of what they believe? The last is simply not OK. Most of us have read 1984 yes?
Even from such prominent atheists as the four horsemen there is no hate or anger directed at those who merely believe. The concern should only be when that belief demands special privilege or intrudes on the lives of those who believe differently or not at all.
Discussion and criticism of religious beliefs or actions rising from them is perfectly acceptable. Just as it would be for any philosophical, ethical or political view. If that makes one “militant” in the eyes of some then so be it.
As it happens I’m an atheist (as is my wife) but was married in a church and had both my children baptised there simply for the aesthetic qualities of the surroundings and the prose. Knowing the UK as I do I reckon the vast majority of the congregations were not believers and would considered militant atheists in but somehow we managed not rail against the ridiculousness of the central tenets of the faith.
Would you also say that all the Christian radio talk shows out there are hosted by “militant” Christians?
I don’t recall the specifics, but I remember at the time thinking that he was being as annoying, as obnoxious, as arrogant as some people are when they go on and on about their religion and mock those who don’t agree. He obviously has very strong opinions to which he is entitled. However, the way he chose to present them came across as “I’m right, you’re wrong, and you’re stupid not to think as I do!” That, to me, is pretty militant.
Frankly, what he does or doesn’t believe is of no consequence to me. The way he expressed it, however, certainly didn’t convince me of the validity of his arguments, any more than some preacher saying weather catastrophes are God’s vengeance for gays will convinced me to repent.
Of course not. Maybe it’s just my interpretation of what militant implies: “This is the way it is and if you don’t agree, you’re evil, you’re wrong, you’re stupid, you need to be eradicated.”
Am I using the word incorrectly?
He actually calls for the death of Christians?
I don’t remember - I doubt it. But his rhetoric was very strong and very anti-religion of any kind. I don’t know why he felt it was necessary to go on and on about it, and I got tired of it, so I quit tuning in.
If you cannot recall if he actually called for the death of Christians(something that would certain stick in my mind if I were listening) then what you have left is “This is the way it is and if you don’t agree, you’re evil, you’re wrong, you’re stupid”-something not very hard to find at all on Christian talk radio. Are they “militant” also?
And they are right. Because atheists are human. Not because atheists don’t believe in god.
Does it have to be death?
“Love and respect all people. Hate and destroy all faith.” Penn Jillette
I’m not an atheist, and I agree that Penn Jillette would be an example of some kind of militant atheism (I think there are probably different varieties and levels).
But I simply can’t dislike him for it. He doesn’t attack people of faith in general and without provocation, he focuses on people who are already on the offensive (and in my book, are fair game for the challenge).
“Love the sinner. Hate the sin”-Militant Christianity?
Bull. The polls don’t show that atheists are distrusted because they are people, otherwise all groups would poll equally.
Depends. That phrase is used as justification to condemn all gay people.
This happened five miles from where I live.