Religious Discrimination?!
(a commentary on a Denver Post's editorial)


Note to the Reader:
This article was inspired by an editorial in the Denver Post titled, "When faith becomes the enemy"[1], by Sue O'Brien.  The content of the article is reproduced below because the Post only keeps their staff articles online for 60 days.  All credit (should they actually want it!) goes to Sue O'Brien and the Denver Post.  (Emphasis below is that of the Ethical Atheist.)

The editorial's author is suggesting that we need "affirmative action - for Christians" and that we should disregard the past and don't "drag Christianity's skeletons out of the closet".

When faith becomes the enemy

By Sue O'Brien 

Sunday, January 20, 2002 - So you don't believe that Christians are subject to discrimination? 

Not so many years ago, I was part of a search for a new faculty member at the University of Colorado.   One candidate's teaching and research credentials far outstripped the pack.   He also was a significant leader in his mainstream Protestant denomination

"He looks good," one colleague said, "but do we really want (imagine a shudder here) all this religious involvement?" 

The suspect believer eventually was hired, but for a moment there we almost had to invent a new form of affirmative action - for Christians. 

Comes now my across-town rival, Rocky Mountain News editorial page editor Vincent Carroll, with a fine new book, "Christianity on Trial: Arguments Against Anti-religious Bigotry," co-authored by former Rocky staffer David Shiflett. 

Carroll and Shiflett contend that Christians are at risk of being shoved to the margins of public life, victims of a disinformation campaign that minimizes their contributions and maximizes their warts. 

The villain of the piece is the "cultural elite" - not just Boulder professors but members of the media, artistic, political and intellectual establishments.   And, yes, they're mostly unabashed liberals. 

But it wasn't always thus.   From abolition through the civil rights movement, the authors point out, religious activism was dominated by liberalism.   Indeed, the crusades of my own youth, driven by the "social gospel," revolved around civil rights, school integration and elimination of the death penalty. 

But in 1973, with the Supreme Court's Roe vs.   Wade opinion, the political coloration changed as conservative Christians erupted against abortion rights - and the elites suddenly equated religious faith with a political position they abhorred. 

"In effect," write Carroll and Shiflett, "the stigmatizing of the activist Christian Right has provided an excuse for a generalized anti-religious rhetoric, and even for demands that people motivated by faith withdraw from the public square." 

Christians, of course, bear the brunt of this.   (Who was it who said the only person it's still safe to make jokes about is a 50-year-old white male Episcopalian?) Slighting remarks about Jews or Muslims still draw outrage.   Christians, however, are expected to stand still and take it as targets of suspicion, slander, derision and out-and-out hostility.   The bottom-line message is that religion is no longer relevant to modern life. 

Carroll says he was inspired to write the book, an even-handed historical review of both shining and shameful moments, by the anti-religious rhetoric of many Rocky letter-to-the-editor writers.

Similarly, my own conversion on this issue came courtesy of The Post's Open Forum, during student Danny Phillips' 1996 challenge to the teaching of evolution in the Jeffco public schools.   In chorus, our letter-writers howled that Phillips and his supporters were "religious zealots," "ignorant," "fanatics," "know-nothings," "narrow-minded," "pushy ideologues," "irrational," "gullible," "smug." Most of the insults these defenders of intellectual freedom hurled at the creationists could have applied with equal justice to themselves. 

Theirs was a different kind of fundamentalism, but no less dogmatic and no less intolerant.   And the ugliness of the outcry was enough to persuade this mainstream, born-only-once, liberal Episcopalian that the attack was not limited to just my most most fundamental (and wrong-headed) brethren.   It was an attack on the whole community of faith. 

"Christianity on Trial" wisely refuses to take sides among Christian subdivisions.   It has none of the "everyone else is damned" absolutism that makes the religious right so divisive in a world in which all believers need to hang together. 

As Sen.   Joe Lieberman, the first Jewish vice presidential candidate, points out, in fact, what separates Americans today "seems to be not our different denominations and faith practices, but faith itself.   We are a society of the religious and the secular, where practicing Jews, Christians and Muslims often have more in common with each other than with their non-believing peers." 

In turn, say Carroll and Shiflett, that division has led to a "secular orthodoxy" in which religious belief is seen as so menacing that it must be kept at bay.   And the easiest way to accomplish that is to drag Christianity's skeletons out of the closet, while ignoring the seminal role it has played in shaping Western civilization. 

We remember the suppression of Galileo, but not the trust in a rational universe that made true scientific inquiry possible.   We remember the Salem witch-burnings, but not the core belief in equality that gave rise to the ideal of democracy itself. 

We treat Christianity's past as something to recover from, not to celebrate. 

That is heresy.   And, perversely, we're letting those who have the most to fear from faith tie believers to the stake. 

It's the PC Inquisition. 

"We have grasped the mystery of the atom, and rejected the Sermon on the Mount." 
     - Gen.   Omar Bradley 

Sue O'Brien (sobrien@denverpost.com) is editor of The Denver Post editorial pages.
 

.
The Ethical Atheist was compelled to respond to this article! 
The following two emails are the responses.


From:    Ethical Atheist 
To:        sobrien@denverpost.com 
Sent:     Tuesday, January 22, 2002 12:36 PM
Subject: Comment on "When Faith becomes the Enemy"

Dear Sue O'Brien,

I would say it's not an issue of discrimination per se, but an issue of choosing an effective educator for the school.  Believing in mythology and unsubstantiated claims is a direct reflection on their capability to be a good educator.  It's not just Christ, but they should question someone's abilities if they believe in Greek gods, tarot cards, palm reading, bloodless surgeries or astrology.  Similarly, one is free have views out of the public mainstream such as worshipping the devil, overthrowing the Supreme Court or voting for a Ku Klux Klan member in Louisiana.  However, one would have to question an that individual's abilities if they followed any of these views.  I, personally, wouldn't want a highly religious person educating my child and brainwashing their mind with teachings influenced by mythological beliefs, just as I wouldn't want a member of the flat earth society doing so.

Sincerely,
The Ethical Atheist
www.ethicalatheist.com

"Free Thought, Education and Ethics Shall Prevail."


From:    Ethical Atheist 
To:        sobrien@denverpost.com 
Sent:     Tuesday, January 22, 2002 1:06 PM
Subject: Re: Comment on "When Faith becomes the Enemy" - Comment 2

Dear Sue O'Brien,

After re-reading your article, it became even more disturbing to me.  You say we shouldn't "drag Christianity's skeletons out of the closet" and that we should "celebrate" Christianity's past?!  I'm sure you've heard of the concept that "Those who are ignorant of history are bound to repeat it"?  Christianity, and religions in general, have all led their blind followers to atrocious behaviors.  They are very similar to all the cults that everyone just laughs and shake their heads about.  It is one's willingness to follow a leader blindly and without proof that leads to the fanatics we have witnessed both in the past and the present!  As you suggest, let's assume religion's past doesn't exist for a moment.  Disregard burnings at the stake, drownings, the wheel, the slide, hangings, raping of children, imprisonment and all other "unimportant" events.  We are still left to face today's right-wing religious fanatics like Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and the likes.  Falwell blames terrorist attacks on gays and secular citizens.  This is America and we are free to believe and do what we want as long as it doesn't hurt our fellow citizens!  He is leading his blind followers on a course of hatred towards our own citizens.  He is America's own terrorist (See http://www.ethicalatheist.com/docs/falwell_bin_laden.html). So, too, is Pat Robertson and his crusade against Planned Parenthood.  He's provoked his blind followers into assassinations, bombings and anthrax threats against clinics.  He has produced fanatics like Clayton Waagner who is present day not past!  (See http://www.ethicalatheist.com/docs/clayton_waagner.html).  Why don't you browse some of Pat Robertson's latest rhetoric against U.S. citizens  (See http://www.ethicalatheist.com/docs/separation_church_state.html), on overthrowing the U.S. Supreme Court, and overthrowing government because "termites are in charge now, and that is not the way it ought to be".  He says it's time for a "godly fumigation."  Blindly following right-wing religious fanatics leads to an uneducated population, the promotion of hatred, murders and even violations of the Ten Commandments which  these followers supposedly hold dear.

No, I will not forget history!  And, I will continue to do my part to educate as many of our citizens of past and present atrocities committed in the name of religion.  Amen!

Sincerely,
The Ethical Atheist
www.ethicalatheist.com

"Free Thought, Education and Ethics Shall Prevail."
 


 
Denver Post editorial writer responds back...

From:     O'Brien, Sue
To:        'Ethical Atheist'
Sent:      Tuesday, January 22, 2002 5:26 PM
Subject:  RE: Comment on "When Faith becomes the Enemy" - Comment 2

The issue isn't forgetting history. There's a lot of horror-show stuff in Christianity's past. But there's also greatness. You need to remember all of history, not just the bad stuff.

Sue
 

.The Ethical Atheist again responds...

From:   Ethical Atheist 
To:       sobrien@denverpost.com
Sent:     Wednesday, January 23, 2002 9:12 AM
Subject: Re: Comment on "When Faith becomes the Enemy" - Comment 2

Dear Sue,

Yes, you are correct that religious groups have done good in the past and present.  Many are good, well-meaning people.  However, in remembering all of religious history, the magnitude of the bad actions tends to dilute the good.  For example, most would not view the Spanish Catholic's conquest of South America as good after they massacred the Incas that wouldn't convert and made slaves of many of the rest.

    "The most detestable wickedness, the most horrid cruelties, 
     and the greatest miseries that have afflicted the human race 
     have had their origin in this thing called revelation, or revealed religion."
        - Thomas Paine 

Sincerely,
The Ethical Atheist
www.ethicalatheist.com

"Free Thought, Education and Ethics Shall Prevail."
 

1  Denver Post editorial titled, "When faith becomes the enemy", by Sue O'Brien, 1/20/2002. 
    URL: http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1002,73%257E344826,00.html?search=filter