Category Archives: Atheist

Editors Note: In the run-up to the seventh Congress of Leaders of the World and Traditional Religions to be held on Sept.14-15 in Nur-Sultan, The Astana Times starts a series of articles on the diversity of spiritual life in Kazakhstan. We shall profile different religions and denominations starting with the most practiced one in the country Islam.

NUR-SULTAN For more than 1,000 years, Islam has influenced the history and culture of Kazakhstan far more than one might expect from the first alphabet to the language, customs, and literature. The traditional form of Islam developed along with the national customs molding into a regional form of the religion, adapted to local traditions.

Grand Mosque in Nur-Sultan, the largest mosque in Central Asia that can accommodate up to 30,000 people. Photo credit: tengrinews.kz

Seven plus decades of an atheist legacy under the Soviet Union also left its mark on how Islam is viewed among the Kazakh Muslim population today, which makes the history and evolution of Islam in the region as a worth exploring topic.

Muslim population in Kazakhstan

The Muslim population makes up a large percentage of the Kazakh people. According to the Committee on Religious Affairs of the Ministry of Information and Social Development of Kazakhstan, out of 3,834 religious entities registered in Kazakhstan, 2,695 or 70 percent are Islamic entities, belonging mainly to the Sunni branch.

The 2009 Kazakh census data also showed that 70 percent of the 16 million people in Kazakhstan considered themselves Muslim.

Being the majority in Kazakhstan, Muslims live in harmony with representatives of other religions. The upcoming seventh Congress of Leaders of the World and Traditional Religions that is going to take place on Sept. 14-15 in Nur-Sultan, shows how interreligious dialogue and peace was always a priority for Kazakhstan.

A Brief history of Islam in Kazakhstan

The presence of Islam in the territory of Kazakhstan dates back to the 10th-century Karakhanids, a fiefdom that ruled Central Asia from the 10th to the 13th century. During the Karakhanid dynasty, Islam acquired the status of the state religion.

Before Islam spread to the southern sedentary regions of present-day Kazakhstan, the population followed other religions, including Tengrism and Zoroastrianism, which featured elements of shamanism and ancestor worship.

A great contribution to the spread of Islam among the nomadic population of South Kazakhstan was made by Khoja Akhmet Yassawi, an 11th-century Sufi poet and mystic, who wrote his famous work Diwani Hikmet (Divine Wisdom) as a journey to the light of knowledge, diligence, upholding the truth, honesty, and virtue:

Be gentle and polite wherever you go,

Be a confidant to those in need,

Be close to God on the day of Mahshar (Judgement Day).

I ran away from arrogant people (the authors translation),

Yassawi described the importance of having a virtuous character along with the faith in God.

Khoja Akhmet Yassawi Mausoleum located in Turkestan was included in the UNESCO list of the worlds cultural heritage in 2003.

One of the first codes of law, Zheti Zhargy (Seven Charters), adopted by Tauke Khan in the 18th century was a significant step towards the introduction of Islam into public life and legal practice. The norms of administrative, criminal, and civil law recorded in this document were largely based on the provisions of Islamic Shariah law.

In the 19th-20th century, reading and writing among the Kazakh population was mostly taught by mullahs. The Russian empire also contributed to the increase in literacy by sending Tatar mullahs into the northern parts of Kazakhstan.

Arabic script was the major writing script of many prominent Kazakh writers and poets. The first Kazakh alphabet, which was systematized by Kazakh scholar Akhmet Baitursynuly in 1912, was based on Arabic letters.

Up to this day the Kazakh saying knows alif as a wand is used to refer to an illiterate or uneducated person (alif is the first letter of the Arabic alphabet that looks like a wand).

The Islamic legacy and practice were largely forgotten during the Soviet period when an atheist agenda was spread.

Muslim revival in independent Kazakhstan

Since gaining independence many Muslims in Kazakhstan are gradually reviving the religious practices, the five pillars of Islam, which start with a declaration of faith, followed by daily prayers, charity, fasting, and performing the Hajj pilgrimage to Mecca if physically and financially capable.

Dana Yespenbetova, a woman whose grandparents and parents witnessed the Soviet period, says the Soviet Union legacy affected how religion was viewed. It was all mixed up, she said, referring to the fact that there was a disparity between what the ancestors have taught her family and the state agenda.

According to her, now she has a chance to revive what was forgotten and as an adult to reintroduce herself to religion.

Even though I had all the pillars of religion introduced to me as a child, at some point in my life I had to study in depth more about my own religion, so I would say that I converted back to Islam once I learned about it more. It has been a couple of years since I took religion more seriously and tried to practice it because I understand the benefits it brings to my life, she said.

Yespenbetova is part of the younger generation of Kazakhs who are making a conscious decision to be Muslim, and not just because it is part of the Kazakh heritage.

The first Friday prayer at the opening of the Grand Mosque, the largest mosque in Central Asia. Photo credit: muftyat.kz

I struggled to pray consistently, said Yespenbetova talking about the second pillar of Islam. But I am learning Arabic, and that helps me to understand the verses of the Quran that I recite during the prayers. So it is not just about memorizing the verses, but understanding them by heart.

harity, the third pillar of Islam, is one of the most widespread religious practices in Kazakhstan.

Islam distinguishes between obligatory alms, which is called zakat, and other voluntary forms of charity or as locals call it sadaka. Zakat is calculated as a percentage of a persons total net worth.

According to Nazerke Token, a 28-year-old mother of three, who has been practicing Islam for many years, sadaka is the easiest way to get involved with Islam. It is done out of good heart, help each other, be kind to each other. No matter if you make prayers or not, you can always express your kindness through donations, she said.

This year I donated zakat. Previously, I used to give weekly sadaka to low-income families and various charity organizations and funds. I still try to donate weekly even small amounts of my income, she added.

She also highlighted the generosity of the Muslim people around her. I saw a lot of generous people in our country. Aid funds for millions of tenge are collected and closed rather quickly, she said.

Though Islams fourth pillar, fasting, can be exceedingly hard for people, Yespenbetova and her family fast during the month of Ramadan. My father and I have been fasting for over a decade now, she said.

The last pillar pilgrimage or hajj is a once-in-a-lifetime duty for every able-bodied Muslim who can afford it.

There are records of Kazakh Muslims that performed pilgrimages as early as the 19th century traveling on horses and camels. Kunanbay, the father of Abai Kunanbaiuly, one of Kazakhstans greatest poets, is said to have performed a pilgrimage to Mecca, which took him two years, back in the 19th century. He also built a house in Mecca with his own funds.

Abai wrote about his fathers trip in the following verses:

Built a waqf (meant for donation) house in Mecca,

He lit the house with a candle.

To the path of one God,

He spent the cattle ruthlessly, (the authors translation)

This year, some 4,000 Kazakh citizens attended Mecca for the first time after the pandemic to perform the Hajj in July.

President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev also performed an umrah (a lesser pilgrimage) in Mecca and was honored to enter the Kaaba (a holy shrine) as part of his official visit to Saudi Arabia in July of 2022.

On July 24, President Tokayev performed umrah (a lesser pilgrimage) in Mecca, the holiest shrine of Islam. He was honored to enter the Kaaba, its doors are opened for distinguished guests on exceptional occasions. Photo credit: Akorda

The imprint of Islam in language and customs can still be seen today. There are many common words, some relate to education, others to culture, for example, kitap (book), ustaz (teacher) and adebiyet (literature).

During early childhood, Kazakh men undergo the tradition of circumcision, which also has Islamic roots. In general, the majority of Kazakh families adhere to Islamic traditions in marriage and burial ceremonies.

Disparity between culture and religion sometimes creates a vision that one can be too religious if they practice pillars of Islam that are not a part of Kazakh culture.

Yespenbetova shared her own experience with that. Some families take it as an extreme concern if any of their kids start praying five times or learning about Islam or girls decide to cover their heads, which is quite confusing to the younger generation and to everyone who wants to practice it the right way. Islam does not accept changes, but somehow our society tends to pick whatever is convenient for them, she said.

Despite that, Yespenbetova carries on with her practices. I guess it is a journey of each person and it is only between the person and God, she concluded.

Kazakhstan is a secular country, where people have the freedom to choose a religion and practice it. According to the Committee on Religious Affairs, there are 2,693 mosques in the country. On Aug. 12, an opening of the Grand Mosque, the largest mosque in Central Asia that can accommodate 30,000 people, took place in Nur-Sultan and was attended by First President Nazarbayev.

See more here:

Evolution of Islam in Kazakhstan: How Modern Kazakh Muslims Balance Their Religious Identity, the Soviet Legacy and National Traditions - Astana Times

Many of our politicians, environmentalists, foundations and now "woke" corporations are beholden to the globalist goals of the UN and World Economic Forum. Do we have to add the nefarious activities of the teachers' unions to control our children? Too often the CEOs of hundreds of woke companies live in fear of retaliation and loss of job if they dare come against their atheist globalist one-world government schemes. Even our 4th Estate is reluctant to report facts or conduct an occasional investigation that would expose and document what we already suspect.

We used to sound like conspiracy theorists until this evil enterprise has now grown into arrogant reality. The loss of dams and irrigation water drained to the sea leads to dust bowl conditions and loss of many in the grand profession of farming is tearing us apart. Sadly, they have been successful at all levels, even brainwashing our children as they strive to break down the nuclear family by scaring them with global warming. That is a bald-faced lie! If anything, we are in a long-term cooling cycle as oft-repeated ice core samples from Antarctica prove. A million years worth of repeated heating and cooling cycles. The globalists' entire foundation is based on lies, lies and more lies.

Can you explain to the otherwise uninvolved grocery shopper why the shelves are sparse and the prices out of reach? Are they hungry enough to educate themselves and rise up? Unfortunately, by that time we'll all be in the clutches of the "global elite" who claim to be much smarter and goal-oriented toward the demise of 80 percent of us. After all, they just want to "save the planet" and make it their exclusive playground while survivors serve their needs with ever-failing resources and the loss of ingenuity of a captive people.

The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.

Gerry Todd, Bakersfield

Read more from the original source:

Letter to the editor: Grow food or starve - The Bakersfield Californian

That Salman Rushdie was nearly murdered at an event in New York while talking about whether the United States was a safe haven for exiled writers is an irony hed have rejected as too far-fetched in even his most fantastical novels. That he was talking at all at such an event with no personal security, no special precautions will have been a shock to many, given that he will always be best known, to his chagrin, not for something he did, but for something that was done to him, when the Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa against him in 1989.

But even then, when the threats against him seemed to be at the most heated, he refused to be cowed, always looking straight ahead when he walked slowly from his hiding places to his security details car, never bowing his head, never scuttling. If you succumb to the fear, he writes in Joseph Anton, his memoir of that period, you will be its creature for ever, its prisoner.

One thing I feel, well, proud of, lets say, is if you knew nothing about my life, if all you had were my books, I dont think you would feel that something traumatic happened to me in 1989. I thought: be the writer that you want to be, he said when I interviewed him last year.

Yet I persisted in asking, to his irritation, questions about how the death threat had affected him. Because I couldnt see how it had: in person, he is warm, interested in everything and always one of the most fun people at a party. Only last week I sent him an email, and he wrote back at once, always happy to talk about anything (as long as its not the fatwa). He hates how the fatwa shaped perceptions of him as much as he resented how it shrank his life when he lived for a decade in hiding. It destroys my individuality as a person and as a writer. Im not a geopolitical entity. Im someone writing in a room, he said to me. And so, with great determination and courage, he retained his individuality by choosing freedom, with all the risks that entailed.

So the fact that Rushdie was speaking at a book event when he was attacked is entirely in keeping with the man. Even more characteristic was what he was speaking about: the rights of writers who face persecution. People who have endured far less than him have found themselves lured by the siren song of reactionary conservatism; Rushdies great friend Christopher Hitchens was not immune to it, and all that happened to him was he aged.

But Rushdies moral compass has never wavered, and he remains a fearless defender of the freedom of expression. In 2015, he was scathing about the authors who objected to PEN America honouring the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, months after the murderous attacks on its staff by Islamic extremists. Peter Carey condemned PENs seeming blindness to the cultural arrogance of the French nation, which does not recognise its obligation to a large and disempowered segment of the population. Rushdie, an atheist who was raised Muslim, retorted: What I would say to both Peter and Michael [Ondaatje] and the others is, I hope nobody ever comes after them.

Ignorant people have been trying to school Rushdie from the moment the extremists began to come after him. Looking back on news coverage from 1989, its striking how little sympathy there was for Rushdie then, on the left or the right. There was a general sense that he had brought this on himself because he had offended extremists. It would be extremely wrong to believe we live in more enlightened times now. Three years ago, a columnist in the Independent, who had not read The Satanic Verses, wrote, Rushdies silly, childish book should be banned under todays anti-hate legislation. Two years ago, Rushdie, along with JK Rowling herself no stranger to death threats was mocked for signing what is known as the Harpers letter, which argued against censorship on the left, as well as the right.

Theres a youthful progressive movement, much of which is extremely valuable, but there does seem to be within it an acceptance that certain ideas should be suppressed, and I just think thats worrying, he said to me. He has been thinking about these issues for longer than some of his critics have been alive. In 2005, he gave a speech, Defend the Right to Be Offended, in which he said, It seems to me to be a liberal failure to say that even though we dont understand what is upsetting those who say they are offended, we shouldnt upset them People have the fundamental right to take an argument where somebody is offended by what they say. This is not a very fashionable argument now, when Rowlings name is now considered analogous to Voldemort in progressive circles, and comedians such as Chris Rock and Dave Chappelle are physically attacked on stage because someone was offended by something they have said.

Rushdie has always stood against all this, and he stands for much more. It is completely devastating that he has been attacked. The rest of us should think how lucky we are that we only need to look to him to see what true courage looks like. And he should take enormous pride in knowing that he really is both the writer and the man that he wanted to be.

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a letter of up to 250 words to be considered for publication, email it to us at observer.letters@observer.co.uk

Originally posted here:

I could not believe how bravely Salman Rushdie faced the threats to his life. Thats true courage - The Guardian

Hours after Salman Rushdie was brutally stabbed by a 24-year-old Hadi Matar in western New York, lyricist Javed Akhtar denounced the barbaric attack on the renowned novelist, however, there was a catch. He refused to name Islamists or the threat by Islamists that he has been living under for over 3 decades.

In a tweet on Friday (August 12), Akhtar tweeted, I condemn the barbaric attack on Salman Rushdie by some fanatic. I hope that New York police and the court will take the strongest action possible against the attacker. Interestingly, his tweet made no direct reference to the Islamist who orchestrated the attack. Javed Akhtar contended that the attacker was just some fanatic.

Although the lyricist was quite prompt in condemning the attack on Rushdie (without mentioning the Islamist attacker), it must be recalled that he had earlier dog whistled against the same novelist in 2012.

Salman Rushdie came into the limelight after his book The Satanic Verses was banned in 1988 by a host of countries, including India, under the garb of blasphemy. Javed Akhtar who otherwise pretends to be an atheist was deeply offended by the novels portrayal of Islamic characters.

In an interview with journalist Barkha Dutt on NDTV in April 2012, Akhtar was asked about his stand on Rushdie and his book. What Rushdie did is not decent. I am an atheist but there is certain decorum and basic decency in life he alleged.

He has written a novel. Its a work of fiction. In that, you take real historical people who are respected and revered by billions of people. You say very dirty things about them. What will you gain? Why are you doing this? the pretentious atheist remarked.

The lyricist went on to claim that books such as The Satanic Verses are counter-productive. He emphasised, You will make them more religious and fanatic. A fundamentalist who is against freedom of expression will have a very good argument against freedom of expression.

That book was in extreme bad taste. Without having any religious beliefs, I felt that. You cant do that, Javed Akhtar warned. Whenever Barkha Dutt pointed out that free speech also includes the right to offend, Javed Akhtar started drawing false equivalence.

Can I write anything against my neighbour? Can I call him a pimp and his house a brothel?, he inquired to thwart criticism directed towards Islam. To reinstate his secular and atheist credentials, Akhtar claimed that he was not against criticism of his religion based on scholarly work.

He also claimed to have defended the right of Salman Rushdie to take part in the Jaipur Literature Festival although he had not been vocal about it. The deliberate omission of the word Islamist from his tweet and his personal disdain for the novelist demonstrates that his condemnation is political tokenism at best.

It is a tendency among the cabal of left-liberals to do lip service and shed crocodile tears following Islamist attacks, despite creating a fertile land for such tragedies to follow.

On Friday (August 12), Salman Rushdie was stabbed during an event at the Chautauqua Institution in western New York. The man involved in the attack was identified as 24-year-old Hadi Matar. A resident of Fairview in New Jersey, Hadi jumped onto the stage and attacked the novelist with a knife.

The accused reportedly had a pass for the event where Rushdie was invited to deliver a lecture.The authorities had also seized a backpack, belonging to the accused, from the crime scene. Theyclaimedthat the attacker might have been alone and have launched a probe to determine whether thats the case.

As per areportby New York Times, the local police have sought help from the Federal Bureau of Investigation for determining the background and motives of Hadi Matar.Rushdies agent Andrew Wylie informed that he is still in a critical state.

He added that Rushdie was being put on ventilator support and that he could not speak. The news is not good. Salman will likely lose one eye; the nerves in his arm were severed, and his liver was stabbed and damaged, Wylie lamented.

The author of The Satanic Verses was reportedly provided immediate medical attention by an audience member named Rita Landman. She informed that Salman Rushdie received multiple stab wounds, one to his neck and another to his abdomen.

Continued here:

Javed Akhtar condemns stabbing of Salman Rushdie without mentioning Islamists: Here is how he had dog whistled about Satanic Verses in 2012 - OpIndia

There are two pressing crises tied to the state of religion in America today. A new style of atheism can help answer both of them.

The first crisis is rooted in an excess of religion. Christian theocracy is not far-off specter but an emerging reality in America. Fueled by a radically reactionary Supreme Court that is two-thirds Catholic, Thomas Jeffersons already-dilapidated and graffitied wall of separation between church and state is crumbling. The overturning of Roe v. Wade means the lives of women across the country are being held hostage by a conservative Christian conception of life. Kennedy v. Bremerton permits school officials to publicly pray and make students feel pressured to join in. Carson v. Makin allows taxpayer dollars to be used to fund religious education. And at the state level, Republican-led legislatures have invoked Christianity as they pursue a systematic assault on transgender rights, while abortion abolitionists convinced some Louisiana lawmakers that people who get abortions should be charged with homicide.

Atheism can address the social and spiritual vacuum emerging in the wake of the slow death of mainstream organized religion.

Scholars of the religious right are also sounding alarms over the emergence of Christian nationalism, a QAnon-addled authoritarian political movement whose champions breached the U.S. Capitol and prayed on the Senate floor on Jan 6, 2021. The church is supposed to direct the government, the government is not supposed to direct the church, Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado, a leader of the diehard Trump wing in the House, said at a church in her home state recently. Im tired of this separation of church and state junk. She received a standing ovation from her audience.

The second crisis is tied, ironically, to the decline of religion. The religious right is securing more power in courts and legislatures and becoming more influential within right-wing culture, but its not becoming more popular. Instead there has been an accelerating American drift away from organized religion and most often toward nothing in particular. A rapidly increasing share of Americans are detaching from religious communities that provide purpose and forums for moral contemplation, and not necessarily finding anything in their stead. They're dropping out of church and survey data suggests they're disproportionately like to be checked out from civic life. Their trajectory tracks with a broader decades-long trend of secular life defined by plunging social trust, faith in institutions, and participation in civil society.

My belief is that an energetic, organized atheist movement which I propose calling "communitarian atheism" would provide an effective way to guard against the twin crises of intensifying religious extremism on one end, and the atomizing social consequences of a plunge in conventional religiosity on the other.

An organized atheist community can help agitate for and finance a secularist equivalent of the Federalist Society the right-wing legal movement that helped populate the federal courts with hard right jurists and helped get us into this mess to act as a bulwark against theocracy. There has been zero, and I mean zero, innovation in the doctrine of separation [of church and state] in the last 50 years, Jacques Berlinerblau, a scholar at Georgetown University and the author of Secularism: The Basics, told me. Atheists who consciously believe in their worldview have a particularly urgent interest in helping to lead a legal and political movement to protect against theocracy.

At the same time, atheism can address the social and spiritual vacuum emerging in the wake of the slow death of mainstream organized religion. This requires learning from religion, not indiscriminately attacking it. By putting together study groups, communities for secular meditation, and elucidating the meaning and joys of atheism without spewing venom toward all religion, atheists can build spaces for religion-skeptical people to find purpose, think about ethics, form community and consider more carefully how to build a better society.

My personal journey as an atheist which involved disillusionment with religion and mainstream atheism is a big part of how I arrived at this idea. It may help to share it.

Atheism opened up my world. But it didn't hold it together.

I was raised in a Muslim household in the U.S., but I turned away from Islam in my teens after a fateful conversation with my grandfather one hot summer day in Pakistan. My grandfather was a professor who delighted in thrashing me in chess and asking me vexing questions, and he once posed to me a version of what the Columbia University philosopher Philip Kitcher has called the argument from symmetry. He questioned why I adhered to Islam in particular when so many other religions made claims about the existence of gods, some of them fairly similar to Islam, some radically different. I froze. With no basis on which to distinguish between the validity of these various claims about the supernatural by definition, I could not know or prove which god was the right one I quickly confessed that my religiosity was a mere accident of birth.

Losing my religion was an unexpected moment of ecstasy. I no longer blamed myself for not understanding the emptiness I had felt when praying to a god. I also finally felt comfortable interrogating Islam as a vehicle for social conservatism and patriarchy. I knew the claim that a god exists could not be proven or disproven, but I could not believe in one especially as traditionally understood in the major monotheistic faiths without evidence or resolution of questions like the problem of evil. And so I became an atheist.

Some people think of atheists as rudderless and living in a cold, meaningless world. My experience was the opposite. Atheism enlivened me and spurred me to develop a broader skepticism of all manner of received wisdom. The displacement of heaven inspired me to think about achieving utopia on earth; my reading skewed in a radically left-wing direction, and I pivoted toward political activism. As a student at a high school that observed the practices and philosophies of Quakerism, a small Christian sect committed to egalitarian ideals, I didnt believe the Quaker saying that there was that of God in everyone. But I often enjoyed spending the weekly worship meetings, wherein we were required to sit in silence for around an hour, lost in thought about what a more fulfilling society would look like.

I didnt, however, always enjoy breaking bread with the atheists I encountered. My personal turn to atheism coincided with the rise of New Atheism in the 2000s and 2010s as a college student I watched polemical writers like the late Christopher Hitchens lecture about how religion poisons everything with great ambivalence. On one hand, I agreed with and learned from some of the New Atheist critique of religion as a force for stifling critical thought and purveying social traditionalism. On the other hand, I found that the New Atheists caricatured religion, and neglected to consider all the nuances of religious belief and the positive role it could play in peoples lives.

Despite my many objections to Islam, I had never shed my admiration for the capaciousness and airiness of a mosque.

The most consequential example of this blindness to complexity was the New Atheist fixation on Islam as an existential threat to humanity, which led to an affinity for the post-9/11 neoconservative project. Some of its proponents backed torture and neocolonial wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and contemplated genocidal nuclear first strikes in the region. This group was so fixated on religion as the root of all evil and Islam as the most evil of them all that it failed to understand how Islamist terrorism might not just be about religion but also the specific political agenda of a group of extremists. As a leftist activist, and as a person who knew many liberal and fairly secular Muslims one of whom spurred me to become an atheist I found this political tilt repugnant.

The New Atheists also failed to appreciate how religion provides valuable things secular life often fails to find. As I got older I found myself circling back to the spiritual world, although in an idiosyncratically atheistic manner.

Despite my many objections to Islam, I had never shed my admiration for the capaciousness and airiness of a mosque. I found that when I was going through rough patches, there was nothing quite like the practice of mindful meditation, derived from Buddhist practices, that helped me find my footing and feel connected to the world. Living in New York, I found myself chanting Hebrew and joining hands with septuagenarians after group meditation sessions in my local Jewish community center. I started Googling Quaker meeting houses near me more often. This was not a search for god my atheism was not wavering but a desire to commune toward the end of something greater.

Political activism didn't quite scratch the itch. While I was deeply appreciative of the vital community provided by the political groups I was a part of, they didn't seek the exact kind of togetherness and quiet search for purpose I was craving. Politics, after all, is about power and justice, and needs to be balanced alongside extrapolitical quests for truth and morality.

Days after my grandfather died when I was 29, I felt unmoored. I strolled to a Quaker meeting in Manhattan, and watched towering trees gently brush against the windows of the old meeting house in the wind. One observes a Quaker meeting for worship in silence, but participants are encouraged to periodically stand up to share thoughts if moved to do so, and so after sitting for some time I shared some reflections on my grandfather. A few other people stood up and shared their own thoughts; there was little talk of god, but there was talk of the challenges and beauty of existence.

After the meeting, a few people shared announcements on study sessions, child care and organizing left-wing political activist trips. A bit later over tea and snacks, I made a few new acquaintances and learned that a former well-liked teacher of my high school was the now at the school affiliated with the Quaker meeting house I was attending. I felt nourished, and at home.

Communitarian atheism is the best of all worlds.

My case for communitarian atheism stems from my belief that atheism opens up radical new possibilities for critical thinking and freedom, but that it has a great deal to learn from religion and the religious right as well.

A quick note: I view atheism as a big tent. Atheism does not mean, as is commonly mistakenly believed, that one is certain of the nonexistence of gods. It means a lack of belief in them for evidential and sometimes logical reasons in a manner that is consistent with the popular use of the term agnosticism, which technically refers to limitations on what we can know. More important, I believe it is grounding and urgency-inducing to state, however tentative the belief may be, that our fate is in the hands of forces we can perceive or may be capable of perceiving at some point, and that we can assume no eventual refuge in an afterlife.The most urgent task for atheists right now is to guard against the astonishing uptick in the power of the religious right, with the Supreme Court favoring religious intervention in our political lives and an increasingly energized Christian nationalist alliance with the Trump wing of the party. Atheists have an intuitive understanding of and self-interest in pushing back against religious creep into the affairs of the state. If theyre more organized as an interest group, theyre more likely to help create a mandate for action.

Any such group would be well served by observing the successful activism of the far right. The Federalist Society, a right-wing powerhouse network that began as a meeting of conservative legal scholars and students at Yale in 1982, was instrumental in the overturning of Roe v. Wade and the transformation of Americas federal courts. Its networking, legal creativity, organization and provision of a Rolodex for reliably conservative jurists for the Republican Party to draw from has allowed the religious right to punch well above its weight and enact an agenda that wasnt popular or even high-profile.

Berlinerblau, the Georgetown professor, worries that liberal secular America has no counterpart to right-wing legal thinking and activism that advances the goals of the religious right. I wonder who the liberal jurists are that work together that meet for a retreat once a year in Verona or Lake Tahoe? This stuff happens all the time in conservative circles, Berlinerblau said. It's these all-expenses-paid things in beautiful places where people just network for two weeks, and they have workshops on the free exercise clause [of the First Amendment] and free speech. I know of nothing comparable, in liberal, secular America."

And that's why there's probably no innovation, he continued. Because there arent the deep-pocketed funders, and there's not the long-term vision, and there's not a command and control. We just don't have that.

This kind of enterprise is not only for atheists. It should appeal to anyone with secular and liberal inclinations, and its a space where there is opportunity for coalitions with people of faith who dont think religion should shape American politics and laws. But atheists can play a key role in sounding the alarms if they articulate themselves as citizens whose rights must be respected. Berlinerblau believes that the best hope for secularists is to push for equality under the 14th Amendment rather than continue to wage an increasingly hopeless battle over the First Amendment, which the right has found to be favorable territory by effectively expanding the idea of free exercise of religion. When the Christian right is allowed to tell us when life begins, that's an affront to the equality of a Jewish woman, or a Muslim woman or a nonbelieving woman, Berlinerblau said, explaining his argument for the 14th Amendment route.

But ultimately it is not enough for atheists today to define themselves through opposition to religious overreach. Atheists excel at critiquing religion and should continue to do so, respectfully but we flounder when it comes to thinking about how to meet human needs that are rarely supported by systems of secular life. Religion seeks to answer why we exist and what ethical and social obligations attend existence, and creates rich, evocative institutions and rituals around these questions. Atheists need to do this too not just view their lives as defined in negative terms by the absence of gods, but in positive terms about the world as we believe it exists.

Cultivating a welcoming and vibrant atheism could be a gateway for many Americans to contemplate important questions.

That means less time attacking religion and more time forming an attractive, inclusive alternative to it. Atheists should create deliberate communities, and this can take many forms. For example study groups for pursuing the great questions of existence by reading works of literature, philosophy and, yes, even religious texts. "Religion can be an inspiration, but it cant be an authority," Kitcher, the Columbia philosopher, told me in an interview, and argued religious texts must always be "subject to moral deliberation and moral argument."

Atheists should form secular meditation groups or explore something else that allows for contemplation if it's not their cup of tea. (I cant help but recommend visiting a Quaker meeting house, particularly since nontheistic Quakerism is a quiet subtradition within Quakerism.)

Organized atheists have an extraordinary opportunity to welcome "nothing in particulars" into a big tent. Roughly ten percent of the U.S. adult population identifies as atheist or agnostic, but the "nothing in particulars" constitute about 20 percent, according to a 2021 Pew poll. The nothing in particulars cite questioning "a lot of religious teachings" as the biggest reason they leave formal religious affiliation, and say that their dislike of positions taken by churches on social and political issues is the second biggest reason. Moreover, experts describe the increasingly intensifying political valence of Christianity as right-wing as a significant source of alienation for people who become "nothing in particular." It seems like a ripe opportunity for atheism to band together with allies.

Some people will always want to be nothing in particulars who wish not to publicly define their position on theism and religion. Theres nothing wrong with that at all. But cultivating a welcoming and vibrant atheism could be a gateway for many Americans to contemplate important questions, form community, and think about how to collectively better the only world we can be sure we have.

More:

A new style of atheism can counter Christian nationalism and the decline of religion - MSNBC

CLAY ROUTLEDGE: Atheism is typically thought of as being a binary idea: you're either a believer or you're a non-believer. To be an atheist is to entirely reject belief in the supernatural, or belief in a God or a deity. But I actually think that it's a much more complex, and much more interesting story. Even among atheists, there's lots of different ways of conceptualizing this idea.

For instance, some atheists say that it just means that they're not religious, and it doesn't even necessarily mean that they have no interest in spiritual ideas or practices, but that they just reject traditional religious dogmas. Other atheists actually can be thought of as being, what's referred to, as 'Emotional atheist.' They actually have a very negative feeling towards the divine, which is interesting because it suggests to be angry at something means, at some level, to have a concept of its existence.Other atheists are, what you might refer to, as, perhaps, 'Social atheists,' in that they feel like there's no reason to have a public religious tradition, or they have no interest in the cultural religious practices, but are themselves interested in spiritual questions and even questions of the divine. So there's lots of different ways that atheists think about themselves, think about each other.

There's lots of different ways that believers think about atheists. It's often a very abstract concept, even though it seems so simple. Teleological thinking is really any type of thought process that involves assuming that there's purpose or design. And so it turns out that, even though this really is a form of supernatural thinking, right- to assume there's some sort of grander purpose to things- that atheists aren't immune from this type of thinking. For instance, in studies of atheists who are asked to describe certain life events, they frequently use teleological language in their written description of those events.So for instance, they might say, "I didn't get this job, and it wasn't meant to be," as if there's a part of human nature, even if people consciously reject the supernatural, that pulls them to these ideas. In some instances, our own conscious awareness of something or our own conscious beliefs may not tell the whole story of the way our brains work.

There is some research focused on atheists and their lack of belief, and the implications of that. They asked atheists to say things that shouldn't bother them because they don't believe in God, such as wishing God would do harm to their friends. Now, believers don't like saying this stuff, and indeed, in these studies when believers were asked to say that, if they complied, they immediately expressed that that made them very uncomfortable. When atheists were asked to say these things, they reported immediately that it didn't bother them at all. But what's interesting about these studies is the researchers didn't just rely on people's self-report. They actually hooked them up to equipment that measures a physiological response. If you start to look a little bit deeper beyond self-report, a lot of times the body tells a different story than what we consciously report ourselves.When it came to measuring their physiological response, atheists looked indistinguishable from theists.

One of the biggest challenges that I think creates conflict between hardcore religious believers and hardcore atheists is a misunderstanding not just of each other, but of themselves. Hardcore atheists think that they're not at all guided by supernatural ideas and concepts, but we know from research that they do have a tendency to engage in teleological thinking, to see things in terms of design and purpose. Likewise, on the other side, hardcore believers often think that most of their life decisions are guided by their spiritual nature, when in fact, like atheists, they also rely on evidence and science, they often have the same struggles, religious questions and uncertainties that other people have. It's easy to divide people into groups over something that seems so powerfully different about people, such as whether or not they believe in a God or particular religious tradition, but if we take a step back and try to look beyond these surface-level differences that seem like they should divide us and turn us against each other, we'll see a deeper part of the human condition that really is a story of commonality- and a story about what it means to be a complete human trying to live a flourishing life.

Here is the original post:

What kind of atheist are you? - Big Think

For being our subscriber, you have free access to all articles by visitors.

In its sixth month of Russias special military operation (as Moscow has defined the war from the start) in Ukraine, the Kremlin has released new propaganda manuals in which public television channels suggest taking the Ukrainian character a step further. The government is sinister instead of atheist and Nazi.

Ukrainians have no morals; They do not think in these terms because they are truly wicked. They do not fear the divine punishments they will face for their atrocities., suggests one of the manuals, It is quoted by Medusa.

Moscow also maintains that the Ukrainian military is using women and children as human shields to commit sacrificial and ritual killings. In According to El Confidential newspaperRussia adds fight against atheists to invasion objectives Those who believe in nothing are described as transgressors, thieves, and murderers.

The second of the handouts, published in early July, suggests drawing analogies between the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February this year and the Baptism of Rus in 988 or the Battle of the Neva in 1240.

Pub Continue reading below

Baptism of Rus refers to the baptism of the people of Kiev after Volodymy the Great, ruler of Kievan Rus, converted to Orthodox Christianity. According to Medusa, the Battle of the Neva refers to the event in which Prince Alexander of Novgorod is believed to have defeated Swedish invaders on the banks of the Neva River.

According to these two manuals, the Russian invasion of Ukraine was a preventive measure to protect the country from a collective West that was attacking Moscow and demanding resources.

This August, a third Russian propaganda manual was released by the Kremlin Specially prepared for the anniversary of Germanys declaration of war against the Russian Empire in 1914.

The manual argues, According to Medusa, Russia was drawn into a military conflict by the West to protect its brotherly people because it will not abandon its own and protects the oppressed. According to the Kremlin, the West starts wars out of colonial ambitions.

After 2014 (the year it annexed Crimea), Moscow recommends the media to tell people that the West started sponsoring the hatred of Russians and the desire to kill Russians. By false ideologies and Russophobia.

A third manual makes two predictions: a wave of anti-Americanism will spread around the world, the United States will find not only military allies, but also trading partners and a new world order that will be just and secure following the end of the war in Ukraine. This new order, the Kremlin, According to, Russias Mission on the International Stage.

Russian propaganda manuals are produced Think tank Institute of Social Research Specialists, near the Kremlin. The connection of the invasion of Ukraine in world history, for the first time, was not made in the guides. Earlier, the Russian President Vladimir Putin has compared his policy to that of Tsar Peterbig

Putin likens his policy to that of Tsar Peter the Great. I didnt take anything, I was cured

View original post here:

Ukrainians are "atheists" and Moscow "protects the oppressed". Recommendations of New Russian Propaganda Manuals - Spectator -...

I am responding to Tony Benders article, Losing My Religion, in the Aug. 3 Jamestown Sun. I thank Tony for sharing his views about God and religion. Tony is concerned about Christians forcing their beliefs on others in areas such as abortion, LGBTQ issues and prayer in public school.

First, most Christians do not want the United States to become a Christian theocracy. We cant force people to believe Gods Word or to trust in Gods Son as their Savior. Only the Holy Spirit can change a persons heart. However, there are certain moral absolutes that people of all religions (or no religion) can agree on based on reason and science.

For example, the issue of abortion (like slavery in our past) is not merely a religious issue but a human rights issue. That is why even many atheists are pro-life. See http://www.secularprolife.org for arguments based on reason and science for why the lives of developing human beings in the womb should be protected by law.

As for LGBTQ issues, Christians condemn violence against people in this community and do not want them to face discrimination for things like employment or housing. Even though many Christians believe same-sex behavior (as well as heterosexual behavior outside of marriage!) is condemned by Gods Word, we still want to love such people and speak Gods truth to them. See my booklet A Biblical Response to Homosexuality (Concordia Publishing House).

However, many Christians and even non-Christians are opposed to the legalization of same-sex marriage because for all of human history marriage has been understood as an institution for one man and one woman. The reason marriage has always been for two people (with the very rare exceptions of polygamy) is that there are two sexes male and female. When we ignore this paradigm for marriage there is then no reason to limit marriage to two people which is why some are now arguing for the legalization of polyamorous (group) marriage! The reason for traditional marriage is that this is the place where children are conceived and become part of a family where they are loved and cared for by their mother and father. One does not have to be a Christian to see the benefit in this. See the book What is Marriage? by Robert George for a secular defense of traditional marriage. Even though we still need to solve problems associated with traditional marriage (such as irresponsible parents and the high divorce rate), changing the definition of marriage only makes things worse especially for children.

Concerning organized prayer in public schools, Tony may be surprised to know that I and many Christians are opposed to this. We should not force non-Christians to participate in Christian prayer nor should we force Christians to participate in non-Christian prayer. For those who want prayer in school, parents can always send their children to a religious private school or home school.

Regarding Tonys questions about contradictions he sees in the Bible, I would be happy to visit with him in person, listen to his questions and answer them as best I can. The fact is that there are very good answers for what people see as contradictions in the Bible. See the book Bible Difficulties and Seeming Contradictions by William Arndt.

Sadly, many people have issues with the Bible simply because they dont like what God teaches. We are tempted to make up a god that thinks the way we do. This is what the Bible calls idolatry and what is condemned in the First Commandment. The good news is that God sent His own Son to save us from our sin against Him! (See 1st John 1:7 2:2)

Finally, for Tony and others who have sincere questions about the Bible and Christianity, I recommend the following books: 1. I Dont Have Enough Faith to be An Atheist by Norman Geisler. 2. Why Does God Allow Evil? by Clay Jones. 3. The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel. 4. The Christian Faith by Robert Kolb.

Eckstein is pastor of Concordia Lutheran Church, Jamestown.

View post:

Let's talk about God and religion! - Jamestown Sun | News, weather, sports from Jamestown North Dakota - The Jamestown Sun

Kristen Sanders thought her chances of a relationship with April Hill were pretty slim when she spotted Ms. Hills profile on the dating app Bumble in January 2020.

Aprils 5-foot-10 and covered in tattoos; Im 5-foot-2 and I look like a super goody two-shoes clean cut, no visible tattoos, preppy dresser, Ms. Sanders said before naming other differences between the two that stood out. Shes atheist. Im Christian. April is a vegetarian. Im a meat eater.

Though she figured Ms. Hill would take one look at me and say, No way, Ms. Sanders said she swiped right on Ms. Hills profile anyway because she was anyone unlike I had ever seen or dated.

To her surprise, they were declared a match. Ms. Hill, after seeing Ms. Sanderss photos on Bumble, had swiped right on her profile, too. Im just a sucker for long dark hair and light eyes, and Kristen has these piercing green-hazel eyes, Ms. Hill said.

At the time, Ms. Sanders was about two months away from finalizing her divorce from her ex wife, whom she had married in September 2019. She said that Ms. Hill was my only match on Bumble.

The same was not true for Ms. Hill. She had matched with other people on the app, but Ms. Sanders, 33, quickly became the only one that mattered, she said. Once Kristen and I matched and we had our first conversation, I really felt no desire to talk to anyone else.

Also divorced and 33, Ms. Hill wed her former husband when she was 18; their marriage lasted 18 months. Following her divorce, Ms. Hill continued to date men, including the father of her daughter Jaxyn, now 10. She came out as gay at 27. It took a long time to feel comfortable and to come out to my family, she said.

A couple of weeks after matching on Bumble, the women, who live in Fort Worth, had a first date. It began at True Food Kitchen, a restaurant in Dallas. Kristen had hummus for dinner because it was the only thing she recognized, Ms. Hill said. Afterward, they joined a few of Ms. Hills friends for a drag show at the gay dance club Station 4 Dallas. We sat and talked and had drinks before her friends came, Ms. Sanders said.

Wanting to be completely upfront with each other from the start, both came to the date prepared to discuss their past relationships.

I was nervous to talk to her about my divorce, Ms. Sanders said. She asked if I still had any feelings for my ex and I said no.

Said Ms. Hill, We were both ready for love. She added, It was a really good conversation for a first date.

So good was their conversation that a second date came the next day. After meeting for brunch, the two visited the Dallas Museum of Art, where Ms. Hills nervous excitement became evident to Ms. Sanders when she took Ms. Hills hand in her own. She claimed the museum was hot, Ms. Sanders said, but her hands were clammy from being nervous.

From then, their relationship quickly progressed. We truly just never wanted to stop talking or getting attention from each other, Ms. Hill said.

As the two grew closer, they discovered that their senses of humor meshed. We find the same things hilarious and spend so much of our days together laughing a ton, Ms. Sanders said. They also introduced one another to new hobbies. April definitely reignited my love for the outdoors, Ms. Sanders said. She took me on my first hike and camping trip since I was a small child.

Within a month of their first date, Ms. Hill introduced Ms. Sanders to her daughter. They played with kinetic sand together, Ms. Hill said. I remember Kristen being pretty nervous to meet her. It was cute.

The introduction made it a lot easier to hang out, Ms. Hill added. She enjoyed and accepted my kiddo no questions asked and is extremely supportive of co-parenting with Jaxyns dad.

Binge more Vows columns here and read all our wedding, relationship and divorce coverage here.

Ms. Sanders, who was raised predominantly in Weatherford, Texas, and graduated from Sam Houston State University, is a deputy sheriff for Tarrant County, Texas. But when she met Ms. Hill, she was working as a special agent for the Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Police, after previously serving as an investigator in the human trafficking-child exploitation unit at the Tarrant County Sheriffs Office.

It was while the two were dating that Ms. Sanders had the realization that I wanted to go back to real policing and get back into investigations, she said, adding that she knew it takes a very strong person to be a police spouse.

Though Ms. Hill, who grew up in Waco, Texas, supported Ms. Sanders in her career, she admitted to it causing some anxiety. The not knowing what can happen on a daily basis can be scary, said Ms. Hill, who works as a makeup artist and also sells handmade sterling silver and gemstone jewelry on Instagram. I had reservations about it when I first met Kristen and learned she was a police officer, but she genuinely has a servants heart and wants to help people.

Any reservations Ms. Hill might have felt were not strong enough to stop her from falling in love with Ms. Sanders just a few months after their courtship began. I couldnt picture my life without her, she said.

Ms. Sanders fell for Ms. Hill just as fast. I remember pretty early on a moment in Aprils living room, she recalled. We were sitting on the couch holding hands, and I had just met Jaxyn not long before. She was playing with kinetic sand on the table, and I just remember being in that moment and thinking, This is all Ive ever wanted.

A year after they met on Bumble, in January 2021, Ms. Sanders moved into Ms. Hills apartment in Fort Worth. Two months later, Ms. Sanders proposed while the couple and Ms. Hills best friend were camping at Palo Duro Canyon State Park in Canyon, Texas.

I told Kristen that she had to propose to me on a mountain or not at all, and she definitely delivered, Ms. Hill said. We hiked a total of nine miles that day and she proposed to me at the Lighthouse, a famous rock formation in the park.

On June 18, they married cliffside on the grounds of a private property they had rented in Bushmills, Northern Ireland, near the ruins of Dunluce Castle. Emma Bailie, a wedding celebrant with Humanists UK, officiated before five guests, who included Jaxyn and Ms. Hills mother, Kathy Hill.

After seeing photos online of other weddings near the castle ruins, which date to the late Middle Ages, the couple said they knew that they wanted to get married there, too. But they soon learned that the property cant be rented because it is a public space, and that many events instead take place on nearby farmland. With help from a videographer they had found online, the couple contacted the owner of that land, Sean McKinley, and had a wedding date booked days later.

Ms. Sanders said that the location, which was also chosen as a nod to her Irish heritage, was giving off the Game of Thrones vibes, and were super into Game of Thrones. (Dunluce Castle, in fact, was used as Castle Greyjoy in the HBO series.)

It felt fitting for us with all of the lush green landscape and castle ruins, Ms. Hill said. We say our love is like a fairy tale and Ireland looks like a fairy tale.

Both brides wore dresses by the designer Maggie Sottero. Ms. Sanders donned a black lace ball gown, while Ms. Hill had on a fitted white dress with a halter neckline. Each revealed their ensemble to the other at a first look on a rock that jutted out over the North Atlantic, accessible only by a bridge.

Ms. Bailie then led the couple in a ceremony that included a traditional Celtic handfasting, in which their hands were wrapped in a handmade cord with a Celtic heart in the middle. A traditional handfasting ceremony symbolizes entering into the bonds of marriage, she said. Two partners join hands and their wrists would be tied, symbolizing the binding together of their individual lives.

It is from this practice we get the term tying the knot, she added.

The brides ended the ceremony by both drinking from a quaich, a silver cup with two handles that represents love and friendship, Ms. Hill said. It was perfect.

Afterward came more drinks, this time with Mr. McKinley, the owner of the land they were married on, near the castle ruins. He had glasses of Jameson for us, Ms. Sanders said. We stood at the castle and soaked it all in.

Later, they headed to the Central Bar, a nearby pub. We ordered Guinness, Ms. Sanders said. But after a waiter took their order and went to the bar, he quickly returned to their table.

The waiter told us that the manager said, You can come behind the bar and pour your own, Ms. Hill said. And so they did.

When June 18, 2022

Where A private property in Bushmills, Northern Ireland, near the ruins of Dunluce Castle.

Needle Needs The day before the wedding, Ms. Hills veil still needed to be finished. But the couple lost the needle they had packed for the task. With the local sewing store closed, they visited a thrift store, where they found what they were looking for. The store employees insisted on knowing why, Ms. Sanders said. One thing about the Irish, the ladies at the store told us, Were nosy.

Irish Inclusiveness The brides were delighted by the welcome they received as a same-sex couple. The people of Ireland are so nice, Ms. Hill said. Everyone was toasting us, even the old ladies that you think might be hesitant said, Oh how lovely. So romantic.

View post:

Near Castle Ruins, a Wedding with a Dash of Game of Thrones - The New York Times

The truth about God has been made plain to even the most devout atheist. The invisible God has made himself visible through what you can see.

You can think of this as the wind. You cannot see the wind of a tornado, but when you see the cone-like shape touch the ground and cloud and debris circling around, you know to run.

We can say something similar about God. You cannot see him directly he transcends creation yet you can see his fingerprints on his handiwork all around you.

An article appeared in the New York Times last year titled A Guide to Finding Faith Proving the Existence of God. The author asked the reader to imagine themselves back in a pre-Darwinian time when it made sense for an intelligent person to believe in God. Things such as the apparent orderliness of the world, natural law, the complex systems that make life possible and the vivid beauty of nature all pointed to the existence of an intelligent transcendent being.

The idea that humans were fashioned in some related way to the Universes Creator explained why humans related to the world in a peculiar way. No simpler explanation existed.

The writer then pointed out that many people today view progress in science and technology as a reason for unbelief. However, science and technology have not proven anything to the contrary. The most recent scientific discoveries only further support the idea that a divine creator brought this all about.

Recent advances in physics highlight the peculiar fittedness of this universe to support human life on earth. Recent advances in neuroscience only sharpen the difficulty of explaining human consciousness strictly through physical processes. Such discoveries as these and more were given show that modern science has only increased our reasons for believing in the existence of God.

The real reason people refuse to believe in God is not logical, rational or scientific. People simply refuse to open their eyes and see what God has made plain.

The Bible gives an answer for this blindness: For [Gods] invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. (Romans 1:20-21)

When you see a tornado coming, though you do not see the wind, you know what to do. Run! When your eyes are opened to the fingerprints of God around you, you then know what to do. Bow down and give thanks to God.

The Rev. Michael A. Birbeck is pastor of the First Presbyterian Church Wellsboro.

Original post:

Science and technology increase reasons to believe in God: Pastor Mike's Sermon Notes - The Wellsboro Gazette