A moment of public honesty from vocal unbelief

There have been a few brave exceptions (Christopher Hitchens, Salman Rushdi, Sam Harris), but the fact that we can count the main exceptions on one hand kind of proves the point.  This recent article points out that the main thing driving the main halls of unbelief into a strategic retreat isn’t really strategy.  It’s fear.  Please take note of the word “main.”  There are plenty of internet trolls out there who will speak out vociferously against the evils perpetrated by fundamentalist Islam.  But a secular Facebook rant against Islam’s human rights’ violations or a few vitriolic anti-Islamic words in the comment section of a Mother Jones article doesn’t really qualify someone as courageous for standing against the aforementioned evils.  What will the voices of public unbelief do when their words might cost them something?  How will the internal resources that secularism provides assist the secularist who finds himself/herself suffering as a result of standing up for what they believe in?  I honestly hope that secularists will find their courage and leverage their substantial resources to speak out against the most egregious sources of religious liberty and human rights violations.

Advertisements

1 Comment

Filed under Culture and Economics, Missions and Global Realities

One response to “A moment of public honesty from vocal unbelief

  1. vonleonhardt2

    Secularism is stuck in a value struggle. It’s problem is that it has a value system, but it is based off an older European post-Christian worldview and takes ideological issues a bit glibly. It typically parades as not even having values, but tolerating all, etc. But practically once it’s out of its culture base it is very plainly a social value system. (Nothing wrong with that.)
    Christianity had to establish its value system at a cost, and it takes ideological issues seriously (even if ideologies are what broke its back in Europe, lots of -isms the last hundred years.) And so does every other group.

    Anyways values rhetorically are present tense (I am good, that is bad) and no arguement wins in present tense really. The struggle for values lay in a kind of existential space. Muslims have a very strong “is.” Christianity has it, dying mayters and all. Secularism by being a “none” losses that, and that’s where bravely lay… that “I am” that defies the world.

    It cost Muslims something to fight, it’s probably scary blowing ones self up, etc. If secularist or anyone isn’t willing to pay as much… or motivates people to pay as much then they will lose to it. Conquest or diplomacy, it’s all the same.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s