It seems that recent events have taught us quite a few important lessons.
I am referring to:
The murder of Stephen Tyrone Johns by the “atheist” James von Brunn (some term his name James van Brunn).
The murder to George Tiller by the “Christian” Scott P. Roeder.
The murder of William Long by the “Muslim” Abdul Hakim Mujahid Muhammad.
And the media coverage and the internet hullabaloo including the statements of William F. Harrison.
Let us begin with the media coverage since it presented an interesting progression:
1) Scott P. Roeder murdered George Tiller and, being labeled a “Christian,” gave occasion to make reference to the American Christian Taliban, the right-wing extremists and such.
2) Abdul Hakim Mujahid Muhammad murder Private William Long and, being labeled a “Muslim,” shifted the focus from the American Christian Taliban to focus on religion as dangerous in general. This is even though this story has been very, very downplayed both by Barack Obama’s administration and the media in general.
Still, we get to besmirch “religion”—hoorah!
3) James von Brunn murdered Stephen Tyrone Johns and, being labeled an “atheist,” lead to…
Well, certainly no disparaging remarks about atheists or atheism in the media. In fact, you may be hard pressed to hear him referred to as such.
These events brought to mind something that I have been thinking about recently and that was the 1971 AD Psychology Professor Philip Zimbardo’s Stanford University psychological prison experiments. A prison atmosphere was set up and students played the roles of guards and prisoners. The surprising results were that since within a mere six days, including a riot on the second day, the guards had sadistically traumatized the prisoners and the experiment was terminated. The 24 middle class volunteers had been considered the most psychologically stable and healthy of the applicants.
Prof. Philip Zimbardo played the part of the superintendent and a research assistant was the warden.
Though various interpretations of the data have been proposed, one interesting aspect is that of the effects of authority: a-ethical authority (the only restraint placed on the guards what against physical abuse). Absolute freedom corrupts absolutely and it appears that anyone “atheist,” “Muslim” or “Christian” is subject to succumb. This seems to be so whether they consider themselves to have authority bequeathed by the struggle to survive as the fittest or by some god. Christianity has a basis upon which to restrain sadistic behavior.
Islam has some yet, the doctrine of abrogation may be problematic in claiming Qur’anically prescribed restraint.1
Atheism offers none whatsoever—anything goes; malevolence or benevolence are equally up for grabs.
Oh, right, I know: James von Brunn did not do what he did based on reason but was much more like a religious person and he, an atheist, was even a theist—as per Daniel Dennett’s claims that the atheist Joseph Stalin was a theist.
Yes, the Sam Harris sect’s dogma strikes again: the one word answer to all of the world’s problems is “religion,” any atheist who commits malicious acts is excommunicated and also labeled as being too much like a religious person—nice try.
This brings us to a piece of illogic that has been floating about on the internet for some time (since 2002 AD) written a “Dr.” William F. Harrison. It has alternately been posted as “Militant Religious Fundamentalism” and “9/11, Terrorism And Militant Religious Fundamentalism” (etc.?).
“Dr.” William F. Harrison is involved in the multibillion dollar money machine as an abortion provider. Some versions of his article have his opening line as “As a physician who openly provides abortion for my patients” and some “As a Gynecologist who…” Some versions have certain details that differ from others as well. Yet, the overall point is worth considering as the article is a good study in hypocrisy.
“Dr.” William F. Harrison makes his living by murdering beautiful, healthy, innocent and defenseless human babies in painful and brutal manners. Yet, like others of his “profession” and their supporters they complain about opposition. Some of these complaints are quite valid as, for example, the recent with the murder to George Tiller evidences bad theology gone worse—these issues are to be dealt with judiciously and litigiously.
“Dr.” William F. Harrison sought to point out where fundamentalism goes wrong and why it is so very dangerous. He is at least kind enough to refer to the Ku Klux Klan as being “ostensibly Christian” and goes on to write:
Militant religious fundamentalism, whether Islamic, Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Sikh or of some splinter sect origin, presents the greatest threat to peace and security in the world today. Fundamentalists seem to share certain widely recognized characteristics and attitudes. They are certain that they, and only they, possess “The Truth.” They all cite an external source for that “Truth”: religious dogma, the Bible or similar sacred texts, or a charismatic leader. They adhere to a good vs. evil belief system, all black or all white with no shades of gray – an “us versus them” mindset…
Fundamentalists usually express a justification for violence to oppose what they perceive as evil or to support what they “know” to be the good and true. They reject efforts to accommodate to inevitable social change and moral ambiguity…
They are authoritarian, self-righteous, and zealously oppose any critical or analytical thinking which might alter their attitudes since reasonable doubt and a healthy skepticism are among their greatest sins…
But it is only when religious fundamentalism is wedded to a militant and tyrannical agenda used by a ruthlessly ambitious political figure or party that it becomes truly dangerous to dissenting individuals and to the society within which it might flourish…
This is not an attack on religion…But if it is read as a rebuke of militant, exclusivist, hostile and violent or violence promoting religious bigots, of those who have just enough religion to kindle sectarian hatreds, but whose faith is not nearly sufficient to quicken love and respect for others simply because of their humanity, this is exactly how I meant it…
a struggle between those who promote reason, tolerance, freedom, and the basic human dignity of the individual, and religious fundamentalists who proclaim and follow lives committed to intolerance of the religious beliefs of others and a slavish devotion to a particular religious superstition…
Militant fundamentalists too often have demonstrated over hundreds of years a willingness to “kill or convert” those who subscribe to differing belief systems.
Clearly, this is one sided hypocritical malarkey. Why? Because he is doing exactly that which he besmirches.
Read it this way:
Abortionists seem to share certain widely recognized characteristics and attitudes. They are certain that they, and only they, possess “The Truth” that abortion is a virtue or as per Dan Barker, “a blessing.” They all cite an external source for that “Truth”: cultural dogma, evolutionary biology texts, or a charismatic scientist. They adhere to a good vs. evil belief system, all black or all white with no shades of gray – an “us versus them” mindset: the abortionists are right and everyone else is wrong…
Abortionists usually express a justification for the violence that they commit, for money, in support of what they “know” to be the good and true. They reject efforts to accommodate to inevitable social change, moral absolutes and the right to life…
They are authoritarian, self-righteous, and zealously oppose any critical or analytical thinking which might alter their attitudes since reasonable doubt and a healthy skepticism are among their greatest sins and would get in the way of the multibillion dollar money machine…
But it is only when abortion is wedded to a militant and tyrannical agenda used by a ruthlessly ambitious political figure or party that it becomes truly dangerous to dissenting individuals and to the society within which it might flourish. Such as the agenda of Planned Parenthood which was established upon racist premises, the agenda of turning “women’s rights” into ensuring no rights for the babies, the politics of the abortion movement or the Chinese forced abortion policy…
This is a rebuke of militant, exclusivist, hostile and violent or violence promoting abortionists bigots, of those who have just enough “pro-choice” sentiments to kindle sectarian hatreds, but whose activism is not nearly sufficient to quicken love and respect for human babies simply because of their humanity, this is exactly how I meant it…
a struggle between those who promote true reason, tolerance, freedom, and the basic human dignity, even of human babies, of the individual, and abortionist fundamentalists who proclaim and follow lives committed to actual intolerance of the pro-life beliefs of others and a slavish devotion to a particular abortionists position…
Abortionists too often have demonstrated over hundreds of years a willingness to “kill” babies for money and declare themselves saints and those who argue for life as sinners.
Obviously, pop-culture, the media and internet personalities prefer thoughtless gut reactions, easy generic targets and emotive assertions but the fact is that, there is a lot more to it than that.