Militant Atheism on Display

Madalyn Murray O’Hair, the militant atheist who attended Socialist Workers Party meetings and later attempted to defect to the Soviet Union, was someone who championed taxing churches.

Today, her cause is being taken up by a new strain of militant atheists. One such person is Felix Salmon, the senior editor at Fusion who has been an “out” atheist for 16 years.

According to Salmon, churches that refuse to perform gay marriages should lose their tax exempt status:

Many people would consider such a move — abolishing all religious tax exemptions — to be too drastic. But at the very least it is entirely right and proper for the state to say to a church that if you want to thumb your nose at a fundamental right which is held by all Americans, then we are not going to privilege you with tax-free status. We’ll let you practice your bigotry, at least within the confines of your own church. But we’re not about to reward you for doing so.

I see. So the big government should have the power to regulate what is being taught in churches. Once again, we can see the authoritarian nature of today’s modern day atheist. This is one of the reasons I could never return to atheism – I value freedom too much and have no desire police other people’s thoughts.

This entry was posted in atheism, authoritarianism, New Atheism and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Militant Atheism on Display

  1. advancedatheist says:

    And, of course, these “atheists” don’t care about the growing numbers of straight men with normal desires who discover that sexual freedom means that all the women they know have rejected them. Those atheist sexual utopians in the last century, including Madalyn Murray O’Hair, assumed that overthrowing religious prohibitions on sexual expression would work out wonderfully for almost everyone. Instead we have discovered that it works out better for women, who now have the freedom to show their real preferences, namely, that they find most men sexually repulsive, except for the minority of jerks, cads, bad boys and thugs who meet women’s emotionally immature demands for drama in their relationships. This trend has gone so far in Japn that reportedly a quarter of Japanese men in their 30’s have had no luck in getting sexual experience. Christianity never got much traction in Japan, so you can’t blame this outcome on Christian beliefs about sex.

    And no one I know of ever predicted that secular, feminist societies would fill up with adult male virgins.

    Ironically Madalyn’s younger son, Jon Garth Murray, wound up as one of the atheist sexual rejects.

    Basically the LGBT defectives get most of the attention because sexology has a feminist and homosexual bias, these people have organized politically to get their way, and they have patrons in elite institutions. Christians who want to fight this degeneracy might want to look into the neglected male “incel” population as a constituency of alienated straight men for allies.

  2. whiskeybucks says:

    I always get a kick out of atheist who talk about “fundamental” human rights. You can pass laws and appeal to government authority, or the will of a majority, but “rights” only exist by virtue of a standard.

    I don’t even appeal to a “fundamental right” for my church to not be taxed in a secular society: it’s just good policy. However, my rights to pray and speak is specifically a right precisely because there is no conceivable law that can prevent that from happening. A just society can’t instantiate that right, it can only recognize it as an unalterable truth.

  3. itsonlyphotos says:

    Wow, I think this is pretty frightening. Why does this idiot think it would be proper for homosexual couples to marry, say in the Roman Catholic Church? Why would they want to if they find the catechism so abhorrent? What is going on in peoples’ brains? Several years ago the governor of my state successfully pushed for same sex marriage. One of the sponsors amended his bill to provide a clause clarifying that no religious corporation would be treated any differently. He said something along the lines of, “why would I want to get married in your church? ” I hope he sticks to his guns. But, I suppose one way Christians could look at it is in late Roman times there were house churches. I suppose if worse comes to worse, they will practice more or less like the first Christians.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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 )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.