Atheists Call for Establishing Atheism as the National Religion

During the Democrat debate this past week, the Freedom from Religion Foundation (FFRF) ran an ad where Ron Reagan said he is a lifelong atheist and isn't afraid of burning in Hell.  The ad landed Ron on the top spot on Google after the debates.

He said: "Hi, I'm Ron Reagan, an unabashed atheist," "and I'm alarmed by the intrusion of religion into our secular government."

He's saying he objects to the over 84% of Americans who are religious injecting their beliefs into government policies.  Essentially, he's calling for the institution of his faith-based belief system, atheism, as a national religion in direct contradiction to the First Amendment.

The FFRF works hard to impose its faith-based beliefs on America by using dishonest judges to exclude people of faith from the public square.  They're constantly suing to end voluntary prayer in public settings.  They apparently believe that the 3% of Americans who are atheist have the right to never hear anything religious, and the 84-plus percent of Americans who are religious have to shut up and sit down as a result.

The reality is that atheism is based on pure blind faith and hence is a faith-based belief system just like every other religion.

Atheism is a faith-based belief system because while atheists lack a belief in God, their position depends on them believing a number of other things that they can't prove to be true, including:

  • God is unlikely — they use that to reject all evidence for God, saying it's not good enough.
  • We don't have free will — Professor Hawking has shown that if there is no God, then we can't have free will, but we know that we do have free will.
  • Everything in the universe can be explained by purely physical causes — science is a process, and it says nothing about what it will or won't explain, so this is a purely blind, faith-based claim.  But if there is anything in the universe that isn't based on purely physical things there must be a god of some sort.
  • The Bible is wrong — atheists can't prove that the accounts by men who died under torture rather than deny that they saw Jesus rise from the dead is wrong; they can only have blind faith that it is wrong.
  • All of the miracles in the past 2,000 years are fake — given that atheist scientists and doctors have declared that multiple miracles are inexplicable, this atheist belief is based on faith, not facts.

Now, it's possible that all these beliefs that are crucial to atheists are in fact true, but for now, atheists adhere to them based on blind faith.  Therefore, demanding that people who believe in God be denied input into how they're governed is effectively creating an atheist faith-based Church of America and declaring that only members of that atheist church are allowed input into how our country is run.

That's not what the Framers intended.  Thomas Jefferson, who coined the now infamous "wall of separation between church and state," gladly used government money to fund a Catholic priest to minister to American Indians.  Jefferson was for freedom of religion and opposed only state-sponsored religions.

The First Amendment enjoins only the federal, not state, government from establishing a religion.  The government isn't supposed to throw all faiths out of the public square; it's supposed to welcome all faiths to the public square without giving any one faith-based belief system special privileges.  But the FFRF is calling for precisely that: special privileges for atheists' faith-based beliefs.

The very name of the group that made this ad reveals their intolerance and bigotry.  Can you imagine the outcry if a Christian group called the "Freedom from Atheism Foundation" demanded that atheism be thrown out of the public square?  Yet we're supposed to be perfectly happy with atheists demanding that Christians be silenced.

With the Democrats becoming more and more hostile to Christianity and Judaism, people who believe in God need to take a stand to defend their right to use the democratic process to mold their government into one that does the right thing.

With Hillary Clinton saying religions have to change their moral teachings to conform to the official Democrat line of hedonistic excess and Beto O'Rourke declaring that faiths that don't share his personal moral principles be persecuted, Democrats clearly believe that they, not God, are the source of morality.

We can't prove that God exists, but we can provide good evidence that He does.  In any case, our beliefs, if atheists are right, are from men, just like all atheist beliefs, so we have every bit as much of a right to be involved in government as atheists do.

The real danger is that if society buys into the atheists' claims, it will reject the most important part of our constitutional principles: that human rights are inalienable and not subject to the whims of politicians.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

The idea that men, not God, are the source of our rights can lead to unimaginable horror.  Both slavery and the Holocaust were the results of the government defining certain human beings to not be persons and hence to not have rights.  So long as we believe that our rights are from God, then we know that government can't revoke them.

But if the FFRF and the Democrats win and all our rights are suddenly not inalienable, we will be headed down a very dangerous path, with the freedom of groups of Americans existing only so long as the political party in power supports those rights.

We've already seen the impact of this.  Science says unequivocally that human life begins at conception.  Yet, by judicial fiat, humans prior to birth have been declared to not be persons who have rights.  Democrats in New York have made killing an unborn child a non-offense instead of murder.

How long before white nationalists and mainstream conservatives are declared to be human but not persons by the FFRF's ideal government?

The FFRF claims that various networks refused to run the FFRF spot.  If true, and that's a very big if, that's wrong — just as wrong as the FFRF trying to have the government treat Christians as second-class citizens and silence us.

You can read more of Tom's rants at his blog, Conversations about the obvious, and feel free to follow him on Twitter.

If you experience technical problems, please write to