A dinosaur-riding Jesus costume at the Reason Rally. | Photo by Flickr user Chris Wieland (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)
In light of the Reason Rally on March 24, at the National Mall in Washington, D.C., now seems like a good time to ask: how are Jews supposed to respond to a rise of attention to atheists, humanists, and the secular? Given how controversial the Rally has turned out to be (and was there any surprise there?), this topic isn’t going away soon. What’s been interesting is the relatively quiet reaction from the Jewish press (particularly in comparison to publications from other faith groups).
The idea behind such a gathering is not a bad one, all things considered. Demonstrating the presence of a minority people and its will is an excellent way to begin incorporating that people’s voice into our country’s wider collective. It is also an opportunity to note parallels between the experiences of one group with that of another. Moreover, the stigma behind non-belief in this age seems ridiculous, especially in America, where religious values don’t (ideally) dictate public policy. (…wake me up after the Republican primary to see if that’s still true…) So, what’s so toxic about expressing informed skepticism?
All that said, there’s a line between expressing skepticism or a secular humanist philosophy, and disdain of other belief systems. Why must some individuals feel the need to believe their conclusions are entirely sound to the exclusion of other peoples? Many philosophical or religious systems undergo reform periods in reaction to perceived extreme points of view, and it wouldn’t surprise me if, one day, secular humanism experienced a shift in how its proponents relate to other groups (even those of faith). In the meantime, however, secular humanists are still finding their voice in the public sphere. In some ways, it makes since that some of them may be hostile given how few SHs actually occupy popular thought. I maintain that many, if not most, secular humanists are uninterested in coercing their peers of faith. They simply want to be heard, to participate openly. To come out, in effect.
Thankfully, the Jewish press has largely stayed out of covering this demonstration. It would be excellent to see thoughtful, fair coverage of similar news from Jewish media sources (particularly given our usual knack for keeping a pulse on the sentiments of other religious groups, at least toward Jews). But I for one much prefer little coverage to unfair or slanted coverage. It might even behoove to empathize, at least a little, with groups that hold unpopular (or less-understood) philosophies and belief systems.
We have much to learn from one another. As Jews, it serves us well to reach out to the “strangers” in our midst to better understand what drives them, gives them passion (even if, in this case, the strangers have been in our land all along– in some cases, even among us). Not every Jew will find meaning in, say, Humanistic Judaism. But a little respect and reaching out (whether to the atheist Jews, or others) might be just what the doctor ordered. Whatever we do, let’s just not lose our heads.
RE this quote from your blog:
“Many philosophical or religious systems undergo reform periods in reaction to perceived extreme points of view, and it wouldn’t surprise me if, one day, secular humanism experienced a shift in how its proponents relate to other groups (even those of faith). ”
To be sure, the realm of atheists, agnostics, and securlar humanists is a wide realm, containing many varying beliefs. I consider myself a secular humanist, and a favorite magazine of mine is Free Inquiry. It is a favorite in part because if offers such interesting articles that espouse such varying vews of how to think, what to think, what to say, what not to say, etc. etc. There are currently, in my study and view, a lot of variations as to how “proponents relate to other groups…of faith”. Easy example: “new atheists versus “old atheists’”.
It is because of the diaglogue, discussions and arguments of so many different and varied non-theists that I particularly love reading a magazine like Free Inquiry. The exploration of reason and rational thought related to science, history, philosophy, politics, sociology, and more is what really gets me excited.
Thanks for reading this! Chuck Krejci
I find it interesting and not a little unfair that the Reason Rally is criticized for any negative overtones. Just the other day Rich Santorum was endorsed by a preacher who in a hate filled “sermon” basically told non-Christians and non-believers to “get out” of the country if they didn’t like the Christian monopoly of the public square. This goes on all the time in churches throughout the land. They may be laying off the Jewish population these days, but only because they need Jews to return to Israel so they can have the second coming.
When Richard Dawkins spoke, he encouraged non-believers to speak out when Christian religionists say stupid things like the earth is 6000 years old because the bible says so and get lawmakers to mandate that their creation myths be taught in science class. Fundamentalist Christianity has always stood in the way of scientific progress, and human rights, and that is what the reason rally wanted to warn against. Did you know that one Christian leader wants to compile a list of all atheists in the country? Why? So that they can be rounded up and sent to some sort of camps, or kicked out of the country? When you look at all the hateful things–all lies–said about atheists, by religionists, it is unfair to criticize atheists for defending themselves.