Truth?  I’m not much on religion.  But I’d take any one of the “Big 3” Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) over this newest entry known as “Movement Conservatism” any day.  At least the Big 3 are acting like they’d like to make the world a better place.  Movement Conservatism is quite blatant about their desire to damage people, places, and things.  It’s the ‘Crush, Kill, Destroy’ part of their dogma.

If you didn’t recognize Movement Conservatism as a religion, you can be forgiven.  It arrived masquerading as a political movement but the more one interacts with a Movement Conservative, the more one sees the parallels to more mainstream religions and, after awhile, the similarities are simply too abundant to ignore.

Consider: the first and most important aspect of any religion is faith, right?  Archie Bunker best sums up faith when he says, “Faith is believing in something you’d have to be crazy to believe in!”  Basically, it comes down to accepting positions despite available evidence rather than in keeping with it.  I don’t advise accepting things on faith if you have a choice but religious thinkers live that way on a day to day basis – and then wonder why things don’t work the way they’re “supposed” to…

But faith, alone, isn’t the only aspect of religion.  Religions promote sacred texts.  A few of the favorites of Movement Conservatism include ‘Atlas Shrugged’, written, ironically enough, by Ayn Rand – an atheist.  There’s also ‘Democracy in America’ by Alexis de Tocqueville, ‘The Conscience of a Conservative’ by Barry Goldwater and ‘The Turner Diaries’ by William Luther Pierce…

Religions thrive on myths and other sacred stories, as well.  We’ve all heard them.  One of the favorite myths of Movement Conservatives involves their patron saint, Ronald Reagan who once said, “…tear down this wall” and, in the myth, the wall was gone the next day – a miracle!  (Okay, so it took years after that speech before the wall came down and, yes, every President from Kennedy to Reagan gave some version of the same speech but only Reagan gets the “win.”  See the entry on ‘Faith.’)  There are others, of course.  “Tax cuts for the rich benefit everyone” and one of the newest, “They’re sending criminals.”  The stories are intended to reinforce the teachings.  They’re supposed to make the faith-based aspects seem real…

Religions use symbols.  Christians have crosses.  Jews have the Star of David.  Movement Conservatives have Pepe the Frog, the Confederate Flag, and various forms of the Swastika.  Symbols are important to religions.  They give the acolytes something tangible to look at to remind them who they are…

There are supporting social structures to Movement Conservatism, too.  These can best be seen in the rallies that take place from time to time, hosted by their current leader, Donald Trump but the daily gatherings at Fox “News” serve to keep the acolytes believing…(and contributing)…

Religions are supposed to offer ethical and moral directives to their followers that teach them how to behave and Movement Conservatism is no different.  They offer teachings like, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will come to believe it”, “Pull yourself up by your bootstraps”, and “Knock the crap out him, would you?”  This is probably my biggest issue with Movement Conservatism; it intentionally seeks the worst of humanity rather than trying to support the best.  As an example, Christianity teaches that among the worst qualities of humanity are pride, greed, envy, gluttony, and wrath.  But those are the very attributes Movement Conservatism embraces and promotes…

“Wait,” you might wonder, “what about their God?  It can’t be a religion without a God to worship, can it?”  Well, no, it can’t but they’ve got that, too.  Movement Conservatives worship the great Prophet Profit.  There can be no greater God and all things must be done in His holy name…

Religions are often born of other religions.  Christ was a Jew, for example.  In the same way Jews left Judaism to become Christians, Christians have now, in turn, left Christianity to become Movement Conservatives.  It’s often a slow-moving thing.  Early Christians continued to count themselves Jews for a long time but after awhile, it became clear that the beliefs of Christianity had so deviated from Judaism, they needed to be their own group.  The same is happening to Christians today.  The Movement Conservatives sprang from Christianity but the differences have already separated the goats from the sheep – if you take my meaning.  (If you don’t, check Matthew 25:31 in the Christian Bible.)

Many Movement Conservatives still count themselves Christians – but they aren’t.  Not anymore.  When one embraces Movement Conservatism, one rejects Christianity.  The teachings are at odds – diametrically opposed as a matter of fact.  You can be one or the other…but you can’t be both.

I’ll tell you this: the next time you find yourself in a discussion with someone who seems perfectly reasonable but WILL NOT accept factual information no matter what you say, what source you cite, what proof you offer, realize you’ve fallen into a religious, NOT a political, debate.

I’m an Atheist.  I don’t mind writing those shocking words because I’m comfortable with my position.  I’m not evangelical.  I don’t need you to be an Atheist.  I won’t come knocking on your door handing out tracts.  I’m not militant.  Even though in God I don’t trust I don’t mind touching money.  When some little old lady “blesses” me, I don’t feel the need to blast her.  I know she’s just wishing me well in language she understands and I can live with that.  I’ve even been known to return the sentiment, as a well wish I know she’ll appreciate.

I confess, I wasn’t always like that.  Back in high school, I used to seek out religious people for a good debate.  I thought I was helping them to see the folly of their silly beliefs.  I realized at some point it was more like kicking the crutches out from under a disabled person.  So, I stopped.  I still hold that organized religion has done more harm than good for/to humankind and I can still defend my position should someone feel the need but I don’t need to seek them out…

It’s funny, though.  It’s quite common, when people hear me say I’m an Atheist, to try to “save my soul”.  Commonly, this takes on one of two tacks.  Sometimes, they’ll take the “just in case” position.  You know the one.  “Shouldn’t you just SAY you believe in case you’re wrong?”

Um, the story is that your god is omniscient.  That means he knows everything, right?  That means he would know I was fibbing, one of the BIG no-no’s of religion.  Even if he didn’t have that extra “know everything” edge, any god that could be so easily fooled…probably isn’t worthy of worship, you know?  I’m pretty sure I’d need my gods to be, at the very least, smarter than me.  It’s not THAT high a bar – a god should be able to manage it…

The other common tactic people use is to try to “move” me off of atheism toward agnosticism.  Sometimes people will call atheism a religion.  By definition, it isn’t and I find those people the most obnoxious on the subject.  I think they’re trying to be, too.  They’re the same kind of obnoxious I was back in high school when I was trolling for believers…

Sometimes, they’ll simply deny atheism even exists.  As the argument goes, if I can’t absolutely state with 100% certainty that no god exists, I’m not atheist, I’m agnostic and since I can’t prove god doesn’t exist, the very best (worst?) I could be is agnostic.  It’s a silly position, really.  Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof and I hold that the existence of an invisible cloud being that bestows and denies requests on whims is the extraordinary claim.  The burden of “proof” falls to the believer.

I was recently in one such exchange with a person who tried to sprinkle in a bit of science.  Physics, he suggested, currently holds there are as many as twenty-two different dimensions and since I couldn’t possibly prove that no gods exist in any of those dimensions…BAM!  I’m agnostic.  (His words…)  I replied that my position is, basically, that I’ve never seen anything that would cause me to take the story seriously in this dimension or any other so…BAM!  Still atheist…

The exchange, though, put me on a thought path I hadn’t actually considered before.  Atheism exists, even if theists don’t like it.  But agnosticism?  Hmmm.  ‘Agnostic’ means one who doesn’t know; the opposite of Gnostic, one who knows.  For all the talk of “proof” and “knowing” that’s not what religion is about.  The best summation on the topic I know comes from Archie Bunker.  Yes, the 1970’s television show blue-collar bigot, THAT Archie Bunker.  “Faith means believing in something you’d have to be crazy to believe in!”

He’s right, right?  Faith doesn’t demand proof but it requires belief.  A person who says they “don’t know” is saying they don’t automatically believe; that they’d like a bit of evidence to help sway their opinion.  But faith doesn’t allow for that.  With faith, you either do or you don’t.  You’re either in or your out.  The question, “Do you believe?” only has two possible answers, yes or no.  A hand shoots up at the back of the class.  “But what if I don’t know?”  Well, then you have to check ‘no’.  The only people who get to check the ‘yes’ box are the people who are certain they believe.  If you’re ‘not sure’, you’re a ‘no’.

I’ll tell you this: I was a bit surprised by the epiphany.  Theists and Gnostics exist.  Atheists exist.  But there’s no such thing as an agnostic!  “Not sure” and “just in case” equate to “no”, like it or not…

Bill…can I call you Bill?  Oh, okay, Mr. Maher, then.  I watch your show every week.  I’ve been a fan going all the way back to ‘Politically Incorrect’.  We don’t always agree but then, it would be weird if we did, wouldn’t it?  As it happens, we agree on many things.  I share your outlook on Marijuana.  I share your feelings on political correctness.  I’m a Progressive.  Like you, I’m an atheist.  We agree more than we disagree but I’ve got to tell you; on the subject of Islam, I’m beginning to be concerned about you.  It appears your emotions have overwhelmed your rational mind on the subject and the situation seems to be getting worse.  On your March 24, 2017 broadcast, you became more emotional than I’ve seen you on the subject since Ben Affleck called you a racist.  For the record, I think Mr. Affleck was wrong – over the top.  But now it looks as though your own emotional involvement has caught up with Ben’s energy.

You swatted away comparisons to Christian outrages as “false equivalents” without first giving them any consideration.  Just, “No”.  And you seemed really angry.  Your position, if I understand it correctly, stands on two legs: violent acts of some people who are Muslims and polls.  I’m asking you to consider a couple of thoughts on those subjects that seem to have evaded you for the moment.  One, there are no atheists in foxholes and, two, polls are inherently biased and often, spectacularly wrong.

As to the first point, it seems most important to me that the “Muslims” who intend harm to America and Americans – aside from the occasional sympathizers who spring up from around the globe – all come from pretty much the same place and it cannot be a coincidence that the place they come from shares a common history of oppression and repression at the hands of “the West”.  (Specifically, Great Britain and the US.)

Simple math makes clear this is not a problem of Islam.  The Pew Research Center estimated that in 2010 there were 1.6 Billion Muslims in the world.  The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights estimates the size of ISIS’ forces at somewhere between 80,000 – 100,000.  That works out to .00625% of Muslims actively fighting.  That means that 99.99375% of Muslims are NOT trying to kill Americans.  Suggesting that six thousandths of one percent of any given population represents the entire population seems…specious at best, particularly when those that do mean us harm share a far more common thread: the vast majority of them come from places where the US has “projected her strength”.

When a people who have been subjugated, demoralized, and exploited for four and five generations finally declare they’ve had enough and begin to fight back, the oppressors might well attempt to demonize them as “terrorists.”  It’s common, in fact.  But one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.  Either way, it’s war and war is insane.  It’s a well-known fact that in the insanity of war, fighters will turn to anything – anything – that might help them make sense of the events they’re experiencing.  They might even turn to their invisible super-friend for help and support…because there are no atheists in foxholes.  It just happens that in this case their invisible super-friend is named “Allah” and not “God”.  I submit that desperately grasping for hope from one’s religion is NOT the same as fighting for or because of that religion – even if the optics of the fight have been usurped by religious fanatics…

Ah, but you’ve got polls.  The polls you point to indicate that Muslims the world over support the tenets of Islam.  Let’s set aside the obvious problems inherent to polling like who did the poll?  What was the methodology?  How large was the sample?  Let us instead cut to the most basic difficulty of polling – and I feel funny even saying it because I know you know: when it comes to polls, people lie.  On every subject from sexual practices to sugar – people lie.

When a question of executing a heretic is nothing more than an abstract concept, people will often give the answer they feel they “should” give.  I suspect the poll findings would be very different if one restricted the poll respondents to people about to lose their own child to execution for “disrespecting the Prophet”.  Maybe not.  For sure, there are extremists in every religion.  But I’d bet there is a difference between an abstract concept and an actual reality in most cases…

So I’m asking you – as a friend – all right, no, as a fan whom you’ve never met, to take a step back and reconsider your position from a more…pragmatic perspective.  Do it for fairness.  Do it for honesty.  Do it for your health.  Carrying around that kind of energy is pernicious…