My response to Lilandra Ra regarding; “Hateful ideology is not just for religious fundamentalists”
This article is from the website Patheos.com; Read the entire article at: http://slu2.com/atheisthate <short url]
This is the link to the original article: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/reasonadvocates/2017/11/14/5370/
For reference, The whole concept of Patheos (which is an admixture of the words “path” and “theos” – thus, “path to god”). However I was introduced to the website, because another internet atheist who is Lilandra Ra’s husband Aron Ra, wrote an article on the website personally attacking me. So I was sort of introduced to this website by atheists who were spreading hate. Reference to the article that was written about me; https://opinions.clovisstar.com/atheist-word-salad-internet-trolling-aronra/
Or see the original article at https://slu2.com/patheos
It surprises me that a website based on the concept of “a path to god”, is being dominated by atheists slandering other people.
I found a few other hateful articles, such as:
So getting on with the surprising references in this article. I learned a lot of things about people who I see in the media frequently as of late and in fact people that I have written about, such as Richard Spencer. I was not aware until reading this article that Richard Spencer was an atheist. However I am not at all surprised. I am surprised that other atheists are surpised though.
“The Atlantic featured a vignette of a prominent Alt-Right Atheist Troll. Rather than being good without god; it seems some atheists reject religion and gravitate to hateful ideologies.”
In Lilandra’s husband’s article to me, he criticizes my reference to Darwin’s written racism in his books, particularly the Descent of Man.
“You also said that Dawkins admitted that Intelligent Design was possible and that Darwin taught scientific racism. Neither of which is true.”
I did not think that it was even possible to be sincere and dispute the racism in Darwin’s research and published books. However, I guess either people are insincere liars, or misinformed. They can not be serious in saying that they are both informed and that Darwin’s work did not teach racism.
I have illustrated this in a few videos in the past. But I will get right into the texts from his book directly, and I will reference my commentary on it below.
“At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break will then be rendered wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state as we may hope, than the Caucasian and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as at present between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.”
Page 105― Charles Darwin,
And in his letter to W. Graham;
“I could show fight on natural selection having done and doing more for the progress of civilization than you seem inclined to admit. Remember what risk the nations of Europe ran, not so many centuries ago of being overwhelmed by the Turks, and how ridiculous such an idea now is! The more civilized so-called Caucasian races have beaten the Turkish hollow in the struggle for existence. Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an endless number of the lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilized races throughout the world. “. (C. Darwin’s letter to W. Graham, The life and letters of Charles Darwin, Volume 1, p.316)
This also led to some admirers and allies of Darwin’s work to say such things as Thomas Huxley did, and was in part responsible for starting what would be looked at as “Social Darwinism”.
No rational man, cognizant of the facts, believes that the average negro is the equal . . . of the white man. And if this be true, it is simply incredible that, when all his disabilities are removed . . . he will be able to compete successfully with his bigger-brained and smaller-jawed rival, in a contest which is to be carried out by thoughts and not by bites.”
Foust, Scott, 2005. Evolution perpetuates racist ideologies. The News Record (Cincinnati), Feb. 14, 2005.
Thomas Huxley is named as the person to coin the word “agnosticism” (agnostic).
This led to Nazi Germany and WWII Soviet Union. Eugenics, and ethnic cleansing has roots in social Darwinian-ism and there is no doubt a serious change that we can see from history in Hitler’s behavior who started out a Christian, educated in Catholic school and then who took on Darwin’s teachings and started denouncing his Christian faith, before leading many many millions of people to their deaths via ethnic cleansing.
This also happened in WWII Soviet Union where there was a seriously violent state sponsored group called “The League of Militant Atheists”, which I have wrote about in the past.
Reference to the Wikipedia entry on this state sponsored homicidal atheist group;
More on social Darwinism;
I found this dialogue on the radio when I was driving from Washington state to California in 2011, it is a really comprehensive discussion on this topic with more references from Darwin’s works.
As for references, this is an article that I wrote recently on the topic of MacroDarwinian thinking applied to social relationships.
Those that leave religious mythologies only to uncritically foster myths about race and participate in antagonizing marginalized people for some sort of gain are disheartening to others, who want to promote ethical secularism. But there is nothing about identifying as an atheist that prohibits hateful ideology.
I would go as far as to say that atheism, especially Darwinian evolution that teaches of natural selection and the “The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life“
One would probably then come to the conclusion without reading Darwin’s work in it’s entirety and just on the basis of the quotes above, that Darwin’s work would likely be sexist as well, based on theories like Natural Selection
Well by golley you are right if you came to that conclusion, because on page 361 in the Descent of Man, you will find this passage about the difference between the two sexes.
“The chief distinction in the intellectual powers of the two sexes is shewn by man’s attaining to a higher eminence, in whatever he takes up, than can woman–whether requiring deep thought, reason, or imagination, or merely the use of the senses and hands. If two lists were made of the most eminent men and women in poetry, painting, sculpture, music (inclusive both of composition and performance), history, science, and philosophy, with half-a-dozen names under each subject, the two lists would not bear comparison. We may also infer, from the law of the deviation from averages, so well illustrated by Mr. Galton, in his work on ‘Hereditary Genius,’ that if men are capable of a decided pre-eminence over women in many subjects, the average of mental power in man must be above that of woman.”
So no it does not surprise me that many atheists are sexist and/or racist.
Aron Ra and I assume that Lilandra have gotten a little hyper on the polar opposite side. Where AronRa gives speeches on how “Men’s Rights Advocates” are “Hate Groups”.
You can see more on his broadcast on that subject here;
I suppose also to virtue signal how moral and friendly he is to social justice, AronRa and his wife have taken to heavily advocating for feminism. Lilandra Ra’s handle on Youtube is “The Skeptic Feminist” and Aron Ra has dozens and dozens of videos on youtube and elsewhere taking a strong stand for feminism, which has gotten him a lot of attention over the years.
Some of the dogmatic things that I have heard from this group is amazing to me, and it is what has led me to note that “AronRa is the Most Religious Atheist I have met in my life“
So far that is all that I have to say about this. I saw this article tonight about atheists involved with racism, and I thought “ya, of course”. But then I saw the author who wrote it, with a familiar last name, and I connected the pieces of the puzzle a bit, followed by writing this article.
I am glad to see atheists picking up Christian causes for equality and such. But it is very disengenious when they act surprised that atheists follow principles taught in commonly revered atheist studies like Darwinian Evolution.
Jesus I must say was revolutionary for his time in the way that he treated and revered women.