I was interested in Timothy Roberts’ comments at Eureka Street about the program for this weekend’s convention. If tonight is anything to go by – and I’m not assuming so at this stage although a tone has been set -then his comments seem apt:
“The inclusion of so much comedy on the conference program is misguided. If atheists are concerned about countering fundamentalism’s corrosive influence on politics, every hour of that weekend should be spent discussing how to counter religious-based intolerance. Comedians, while good for boosting ticket sales, are as inappropriate at an atheist conference as they would be at a science conference. The organisers’ failure to recognise this basic point suggests that many take comfort from sneering at those who disagree with them. Comedians, who are paid to outrage rather than inform, are unhelpful when pragmatism is sorely needed.”
I may lack imagination but if I were a thinking atheist or agnostic seriously interested in the important issues at stake, I’m sure I would have been disappointed tonight. Funny at times, the style of humour was unfortunately faithful to Christopher Hitchens’ attitude who is quoted as saying “I think religion should be treated with ridicule, hatred and contempt, and I claim that right.”
As a Christian I am appalled and ashamed of the crimes, victimisation and discrimination committed in the name of Christ or by those who bear his name. To make light of them through humour is risky. And to stereotype religion that way is akin to taking Stalin or Pol Pot as your stereotype atheist.
I hope that this blog and the convention itself can rise above the ridicule to discuss the issues. But perhaps that is my agenda and not that of the convention organisers and participants.
Chris Mulherin has degrees in Engineering, Philosophy and Theology and is currently writing a doctorate on scientific and religious knowledge. He is an Anglican minister and lives in Melbourne.
I have to ask if Tony is a frequent attender of conferences perhaps those that bore the attendees to tears:).
Misguided I think not. There needs to be a little levity in the proceedings simply because of the serious nature of the topics being discussed.
The inaction surrounding the activity of the catholic church on the subject of child abuse, the inaction of government to begin any sort of inquiry leaves us turning to humor because the situation is so dire. That being said, on reflection it was a little too much comedy for the first night.
I too am looking forward to more refined criticisms. I do have to ask you what stereotypes you were most offended by?
“And to stereotype religion in such a way is akin to taking Stalin or Pol Pot as your stereotype atheist.”
Why are you saying that Stalin and Pol Pot were atheists?
Reply to Ryan:
Because of that fact that their political beliefs (totalitarians) had nothing to do with them killing millions. You see, it’s not because Stalin was a faschist bigot obsessed by power that he killed people, it’s because he was an atheist!
How can you link atheism and killing people, that I don’t know…
No, no, no…atheists are not “making light” of “the crimes, victimisation and discrimination committed in the name of Christ or by those who bear his name.” We’re making fun of your obsession with an invisible man in the sky who created everything and gave us all rules to live by, and punishes us (or not) or rewards us (or not) according to His inscrutable, ever-changing whims. If that’s not worthy of ridicule, I don’t know what is.
I can imagine some atheist jokes regarding Stalin or Pol Pot might actually be humorous. I can’t really think of any, but I can imagine it is possible.
However Stalin or Pol Pot would have represented a very small part of atheists, as they were mostly concerned with their own self-promotion and advancing their own power than advocating atheism. But people like Pat Robertson don’t represent just a fringe, they speak for a large number of people. They represent beliefs that are absurd, and yet highly prevalent. They’re not a fringe minority, the crazies who believe the world is 6000 years old hold real power in the country. If atheists can’t laugh at the absurdities, then must they simply become depressed at how common insane beliefs are? Why should they be bared from making fun of religion? Why should they be so afraid of stepping on toes at a very specifically labeled atheist convention?
Do you expect “conservatives” to be afraid of stepping on the toes of democrats at their conventions?
Briefly: I didn’t say I was offended. And even if I were, that is not my point. I enjoyed lots of the humour. I was referring to the subtleties of drawing the line between comedy and serious matters. I would expect to be castigated, and justifiably, if I made sport of any atrocity committed by people who differ from me in worldview. But, even there, I don’t expect others to agree with my own ethical position… my comments were not moral but tactical and concerned the best way for atheists to win friends and influence people.
Chris, simply by trying to link atheists with Pol Pot or Stalin, you declare your hand, reveal your lack of objectivity and your not so subtle accommodation of the horrors committed by assorted theists along with the attempted cover-ups by church authorities.
Joseph Stalin received a scholarship to a Georgian Orthodox seminary at sixteen, where he performed well for the years he was there, but missed his final exams. The seminary’s records suggest he was unable to pay his tuition fees.
Shortly after leaving the seminary, Stalin discovered the writings of Vladimir Lenin and decided to become a Marxist revolutionary, eventually joining Lenin’s Bolsheviks in 1903.
Joseph Stalin married Ekaterina (“Kato”) Svanidze in 1906 and she gave him a son, Yakov Dzhugashvili. She died of typhus in 1907. At her funeral he told a friend that “with her died any human feeling in him.”
Stalin remained religious, even pious, throughout his life (Conquest, 1991).
Historian Edvard Radzinsky used recently discovered secret archives to find that Stalin’s reversal on bans against the church during World War II followed a sign that he believed he received from heaven (Radzinsky, 1995). After a mysterious retreat, he began making his peace with God. Something happened which no historian had yet written about. On Stalins orders, Churches were re-opened and many priests were brought back to the camps. In Leningrad, besieged by the Germans and gradually dying of hunger, the inhabitants were astounded, and uplifted, to see wonder-working icon Our Lady of Kazan brought out into the streets and borne in procession.
Conquest,R. (1991) Stalin: Breaker of Nations.
Radzinsky,E. (1996) Stalin: The First In-Depth Biography Based on Explosive New Documents from Russia’s Secret Archives.
Pol Pot was educated for 7 years in a Catholic School on Phnom Penh
Chris, I agree with Simon – there was no making light of these issues. Do you expect comedians talking about religion to ignore these things? (it may be horrific if a Christian comedian made light of atrocities committed in the name their religion because the context would be entirely different). Comedy is an extremely powerful tool in raising awareness of atrocities and why they were committed (it’s likely to be more powerful and memorable than an hour long lecture on the details of the atrocities, of which most atheists are already familiar), as well as for identifying some of the more irrational beliefs held by some theists (Ricky Gervais’ ‘Animals’ segment on creationism comes to mind).
But it should not be confused with making light of atrocities; on the contrary, atheists take crimes in the name of religion and suspension of reason promoted by religious thinking extremely seriously – certainly more seriously than the religious who tend to dismiss them (the atrocities) as the crimes of the extremists only.
–If atheists are concerned about countering fundamentalism’s corrosive influence on politics, every hour of that weekend should be spent discussing how to counter religious-based intolerance.–
And then this:
– Funny at times, the style of humour was unfortunately faithful to Christopher Hitchens’ attitude who is quoted as saying “I think religion should be treated with ridicule, hatred and contempt, and I claim that right.” –
You can’t be serious, can you?
“If atheists are concerned about countering fundamentalism’s corrosive influence on politics”
I can assure you it is not. Our goal is to counter religion’s corrosive influence everywhere!
Lighten up, Francis.
“are as inappropriate at an atheist conference as they would be at a science conference”
Have a look at the IgNoble prizes – it is very much fun, but there’s education as well – it’s not a bad thing
And doesn’t the Joseph Stalin=Thomas Jefferson equation ever get old?
“The inclusion of so much comedy on the conference program is misguided. If atheists are concerned about countering fundamentalism’s corrosive influence on politics, every hour of that weekend should be spent discussing how to counter religious-based intolerance.”
Nonsense. Humour is greatly effective in ‘rousing the troops’, as it were. It is also greatly effective in producing social change. The change sought here is not to make the fundamentalists change their mind (I use the singular since they seem to only have one between them…). That would be so difficult as to border on impossible. We just want them to go away/be marginalised/ignored/learn to shut up/stop spouting hate in the the public forum. The best way to accomplish this is to make it okay for people to stop taking them so damn seriously. Stetson Kennedy’s infiltration of the Ku Klux Klan was brave, but it wasn’t the information he learned there that put an end to society’s awe and fear/respect for them – it was the mockery that the information triggered in the weekly comics books.