# Fundamentalist Atheists equivalent to Fundamentalist Theists

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fundamentalist-atheists-equivalent-to-fundamentalist-theists/579001>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [April 19, 2011, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fundamentalist-atheists-equivalent-to-fundamentalist-theists/579001 "2011-04-19T21:35:05Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 20\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![SSgtBaloo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ac91a4/32.png) [@SSgtBaloo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SSgtBaloo)\
**Post date:** [April 19, 2011, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fundamentalist-atheists-equivalent-to-fundamentalist-theists/579001/1 "2011-04-19T21:35:05Z")

</div>

At least, Link=\> [according to this Article they are](http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/03/01/2092334/i-believe-because-i-do.html) \<=Link

I agree. Whether the speaker is a hard-core atheist or a hard-core fundamentalist, there seems to be an absence of humility accompanied by huge amounts of self-congratulatory smugness. Many of my friends have been pretty decent people despite rejecting, for whatever reason, the tenets of my own faith. I’m okay with that and I’m okay that whatever process brought you to your conclusions regarding the nature of G-d, whether you believe He/She exists or not. Likewise, I don’t mind if you’re an adherent of a different form of theism (or atheism) than mine so long as you don’t feel morally bound to hound me into converting to your particular brand of thinking.

I don’t really care if you profess a belief in G-d so long as you treat others with respect and compassion. You are free not to care about any of the above, but please comment and explain your own feelings on this topic if you feel so inclined. Just because I’m the O.P. does not mean I expect to (or am capable of) answering to everyone’s satisfaction. Keep in mind that “I Don’t Know” is a valid response.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\
**Post date:** [April 19, 2011, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fundamentalist-atheists-equivalent-to-fundamentalist-theists/579001/2 "2011-04-19T21:39:56Z")

</div>

I don’t know. I think people who go on and on about what they believe or make fun of people who believe differently are obnoxious.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\
**Post date:** [April 19, 2011, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fundamentalist-atheists-equivalent-to-fundamentalist-theists/579001/3 "2011-04-19T21:46:10Z")

</div>

I dunno, you ever see that Seinfeld where Elaine has a religious boy-friend and gets pissed at him for _not_ trying to convert her. I mean, I think its kinda silly to believe that people that don’t believe in God are going to suffer an eternity of torment. But on the other hand, if you _do_ believe that, then not trying to convert your friends and neighbors makes you kind of a jerk. After all, certainly its not moral to be OK with your loved ones being destined to an eternity of pain.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\
**Post date:** [April 19, 2011, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fundamentalist-atheists-equivalent-to-fundamentalist-theists/579001/4 "2011-04-19T21:46:16Z")

</div>

Do I have to respect a person’s religious beliefs in order to respect the person? I mean, their beliefs could be stupid and they could be stupid people for holding those beliefs and I could be suspicious that their beliefs will prompt them to vote in ways that are against my (and even their own) interests, and…

…what was the question again?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\
**Post date:** [April 19, 2011, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fundamentalist-atheists-equivalent-to-fundamentalist-theists/579001/5 "2011-04-19T21:49:44Z")

</div>

Please define fundamentalist atheist. I have no idea of what it means. If Lara Logan is a god believer (and I have no idea if she is or not) then the person writing to Pitts in the linked article is obnoxious. But obnoxious does not equal fundamentalist. There can be fundamentalist theists who don’t shove their religion in everyone elses face. When my atheist thesis adviser died, there was a minister who had to come to his memorial and pray despite the fact that he knew Don would not have wanted it. He was hardly fundamentalist, but definitely obnoxious.  
Obnoxious people are equivalent to other obnoxious people, and no one is doubting there are obnoxious atheists. Hell, besides the person in the article, I give you Ayn Rand.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**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:** [April 19, 2011, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fundamentalist-atheists-equivalent-to-fundamentalist-theists/579001/6 "2011-04-19T21:49:59Z")

</div>

> [@Simplicio](#):
>
> I dunno, you ever see that Seinfeld where Elaine has a religious boy-friend and gets pissed at him for _not_ trying to convert her. I mean, I think its kinda silly to believe that people that don’t believe in God are going to suffer an eternity of torment. But on the other hand, if you _do_ believe that, then not trying to convert your friends and neighbors makes you kind of a jerk. After all, certainly its not moral to be OK with your loved ones being destined to an eternity of pain.

That certainly puts them in a no-win situation, doesn’t it?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\
**Post date:** [April 19, 2011, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fundamentalist-atheists-equivalent-to-fundamentalist-theists/579001/7 "2011-04-19T21:52:02Z")

</div>

There is no such thing as a fundamentalist atheist. Fundamentalism refers to a movement in certain faiths – Christianity & Islam most notably – to return to the “fundamentals” of the belief system, which means examining the sacred text(s) of said faith and applying a specific, very strict, and allegedly literal reading.

Atheism is not a belief system; it is a _denial_ of the validity of a certain set of beliefs (most notably the existence of a sovereign creator deity and the logical consequences of same). While that is in a sense a statement about the nature of the universe, it’s not an assertion of the same sort as the statement “Jesus Christ is the son of God, eternally co-existent with him and the Holy Spirit, who caused himself to be born of a human virgin so that he might sacrifice himself to himself in atonement for human sin.”

Nor has atheism any sacred texts to hold fundamental. It _cannot_ have any such texts, as it implicitly denies the existence of the sacred; and there is, moreover, no text that is central to the atheist way of thinking in the way the Quran is to Muslims, the Tanankh is to Jews, or the New & Old Testaments are to mainstream Christians.

Now, there are certainly _obnoxious_ atheists, just as there are obnoxious Christian fundamentalists and obnoxious Muslim fundamentalists, etc. But so what? Not even all Xtian fundamentalists are obvious. My friend Melissa, for instance, would style herself a fundamentalist, but she doesn’t insist that everyone believe as she does, nor attempt to proseletize without being asked, because she thinks it’s pointless and counter-productive to do so. She’s hardly unique. Likewise, there are tons of atheists who think theism is hopelessly wrong-headed who don’t go around beating up theists verbally.

The term _atheist fundamentalist_ is indicative of fuzzy thinking on the part of the speaker.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\
**Post date:** [April 19, 2011, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fundamentalist-atheists-equivalent-to-fundamentalist-theists/579001/8 "2011-04-19T21:53:54Z")

</div>

> [@SSgtBaloo](#):
>
> At least, Link=\> [according to this Article they are](http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/03/01/2092334/i-believe-because-i-do.html) \<=Link

A self righteous, smirking attempt to bash atheists and pretend that believing in an irrational, evidence free fantasy is the equivalent of not believing in that fantasy. A typical example of believers trying the old “you’re just as bad as we are” routine, because they have no actual justification to believe the way they do. They can’t argue for their beliefs, so instead they try to drag atheism down to their level and pretend to an imaginary equivalence.

> [@Voyager](#):
>
> Please define fundamentalist atheist.

Someone who kills God with a suicide bomb?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\
**Post date:** [April 19, 2011, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fundamentalist-atheists-equivalent-to-fundamentalist-theists/579001/9 "2011-04-19T21:57:31Z")

</div>

Along the lines of what **Voyager** said… (ETA and what **Skald** said)

When I read the thread title, my reaction was “What do you mean by the word ‘fundamentalist’?”

Is it **what** a person believes, or **how** they believe it, that makes them a fundamentalist?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\
**Post date:** [April 19, 2011, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fundamentalist-atheists-equivalent-to-fundamentalist-theists/579001/10 "2011-04-19T22:03:33Z")

</div>

> [@Skammer](#):
>
> That certainly puts them in a no-win situation, doesn’t it?

Its puts them in a weird situation anyways. I’m sure many people who hold such religious beliefs more or less ignore the moral imperative to try and convert everyone they come across, just as people ignore a lot of the logical requirements of their religion. But many don’t.

There was a This American Life interview a few years back about an evangelical preacher who later in life decided that while he believed in God, he didn’t believe in Hell. He lost his congregation as a result, but he talked about how much of a relief it was once he abandoned a belief in Hell, as he could sit next to a stranger on a plane or meet someone new at a party and not feel like he was a terrible person if he didn’t immediately start buttering them up so that he could make a pitch for Jesus.

It sounded really stressful. Like being a desperate salesman who can’t just make a new intrapersonal relationship without trying to make a sale. Every new conversation you start has a secret agenda. And if you don’t do it, then your a terrible person who is letting someone go to hell because your afraid of being annoying.

So feel a twinge of pity next time your getting harangued by an obnoxious missionary or the guy next to you on the Bus just won’t shut up about the Bible.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**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:** [April 19, 2011, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fundamentalist-atheists-equivalent-to-fundamentalist-theists/579001/11 "2011-04-19T22:05:18Z")

</div>

> [@article mentioned by the OP](#):
>
> That which is without quality cannot be measured, the invisible cannot be examined, the incorporeal cannot be weighed, the limitless cannot be compared, the incomprehensible does not admit of more or less.’’
> 
> **Gregory of Nyssa (fourth century Christian philosopher)**

That reminds me of something:

> [@Hitchens](#):
>
> What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.

The rest of my post is going to be annoyingly recursive. Sorry about that - this is a response to a post about a column about an email about a column. There’s only so much I can do to be clear.

Now, with regards to the original column Mr. Pitts refers to in the column linked by the OP, I can’t find much fault in that. I looks sincere and well-meaning and actually makes a good moral point.

With regards to the column linked, here’s one passage from that actual column that quite clearly spells out how so-called “fundamentalist atheists” are NOT equivalent to “fundamentalist theists”:

> [@](#):
>
> Show me evidence, says Patricia, and I will reconsider. She makes the same error fundamentalists make when they try to force schools to teach from the book of Genesis: She imposes upon one discipline the standards of another rather than assessing it on its own terms — like a rap fan declaring Mozart invalid because Mozart had no beats.

If you go around claiming that your religion requires no evidence, then I just simply do not believe you believe that yourself.

I’m perfectly happy to believe that “Patricia” was an ass in the email, but we’ve only got a few snippets of that email, so I’m not going as far as saying that whatever she said was equivalent to fundamentalist preaching.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\
**Post date:** [April 19, 2011, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fundamentalist-atheists-equivalent-to-fundamentalist-theists/579001/12 "2011-04-19T22:07:48Z")

</div>

Personally, I like to view atheism as indifference to religious belief rather than a rejection of it.

“I believe in God!”  
“Uh-huh, that’s nice…”  
“I believe in Zeus!”  
“Uh-huh, that’s nice…”  
“I believe in the great Earth Spirit!”  
“Uh-huh, that’s nice…”

It’s not necessary for the atheist to ever have embraced any of these (or other) belief systems and then given up on them. In fact, one could be an atheist and know practically nothing of these belief systems, having tuned out halfway through the second sentence of their descriptions.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\
**Post date:** [April 19, 2011, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fundamentalist-atheists-equivalent-to-fundamentalist-theists/579001/13 "2011-04-19T22:11:40Z")

</div>

> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#):
>
> There is no such thing as a fundamentalist atheist. Fundamentalism refers to a movement in certain faiths – Christianity & Islam most notably – to return to the “fundamentals” of the belief system, which means examining the sacred text(s) of said faith and applying a specific, very strict, and allegedly literal reading.

That’s the original and literal meaning of the term, but it’s had some additional meaning attached to it over the years. I don’t have a problem with the phrase, “fundamentalist atheist,” if “fundamentalist” is understood to mean, “intolerant asshole.”

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**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:** [April 19, 2011, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fundamentalist-atheists-equivalent-to-fundamentalist-theists/579001/14 "2011-04-19T22:14:00Z")

</div>

> [@Miller](#):
>
> That’s the original and literal meaning of the term, but it’s had some additional meaning attached to it over the years. I don’t have a problem with the phrase, “fundamentalist atheist,” if “fundamentalist” is understood to mean, “intolerant asshole.”

Sure, but what do we call the nice non-evangelical biblical literalist? I can come up with a few terms, but “hypocrite” is probably not an improvement, even though it’s probably more accurate.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\
**Post date:** [April 19, 2011, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fundamentalist-atheists-equivalent-to-fundamentalist-theists/579001/15 "2011-04-19T22:14:50Z")

</div>

> [@Superfluous\_Parentheses](#):
>
> Sure, but what do we call the nice non-evangelical biblical literalist?

His name is Bob.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\
**Post date:** [April 19, 2011, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fundamentalist-atheists-equivalent-to-fundamentalist-theists/579001/16 "2011-04-19T22:18:12Z")

</div>

> [@Miller](#):
>
> That’s the original and literal meaning of the term, but it’s had some additional meaning attached to it over the years. I don’t have a problem with the phrase, “fundamentalist atheist,” if “fundamentalist” is understood to mean, “intolerant asshole.”

As my best old ex-friend Ray used to say, “Words have meanings.” Or, at least, they should. When you attach new meanings to a term that don’t logically follow from the older usages (particularly meanings which are emotionally charge), you make your communication less effective, because you are not thinking as clearly. Stretching the meaning of _fundamentalist_ to include _obnoxious_, _vehement_, _violent_,or _offensive_ robs the word of usefulness.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**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:** [April 19, 2011, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fundamentalist-atheists-equivalent-to-fundamentalist-theists/579001/17 "2011-04-19T22:18:27Z")

</div>

> [@Miller](#):
>
> His name is Bob.

And he doesn’t care that I’m going to hell?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\
**Post date:** [April 19, 2011, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fundamentalist-atheists-equivalent-to-fundamentalist-theists/579001/18 "2011-04-19T22:20:12Z")

</div>

> [@Miller](#):
>
> That’s the original and literal meaning of the term, but it’s had some additional meaning attached to it over the years. I don’t have a problem with the phrase, “fundamentalist atheist,” if “fundamentalist” is understood to mean, “intolerant asshole.”

I do have a problem with that: I find it inaccurate, confusing, and unnecessarily offensive to people (some of whom may be entirely non-assholish and gracious) whose beliefs place them in the category of fundamentalists.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**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:** [April 19, 2011, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fundamentalist-atheists-equivalent-to-fundamentalist-theists/579001/19 "2011-04-19T22:20:44Z")

</div>

> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#):
>
> When you attach new meanings to a term that don’t logically follow from the older usages (particularly meanings which are emotionally charge), you make your communication less effective, because you are not thinking as clearly. Stretching the meaning of _fundamentalist_ to include _obnoxious_, _vehement_, _violent_,or _offensive_ robs the word of usefulness.

And for the record, I for one am fine with being called an offensive, obnoxious or vehement atheist.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\
**Post date:** [April 19, 2011, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fundamentalist-atheists-equivalent-to-fundamentalist-theists/579001/20 "2011-04-19T22:21:58Z")

</div>

> [@Miller](#):
>
> His name is Bob.

Or, as I mentioned, Melissa. She believes in a 6,000 year old earth, a seven-day creation, Christ’s blood sacrifice, and all that stuff. But she doesn’t decry atheists or people who want to teach evolution in schools; she doesn’t try to proseletize, because she says it’s pointless. Being saved, she says, is not about talk; it’s about God’s grace. Only someone who has received that grace is going to be open to conversion and salvation, so other than behaving properly (she’d call it letting her little light shine), she judges herself forbidden to push her beliefs on people. So she’s a _fundamentalist_ but not an _obnoxious_ one. And she’s not unique.

[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fundamentalist-atheists-equivalent-to-fundamentalist-theists/579001.md?page=2)