Project Reason is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit foundation devoted to spreading scientific knowledge and secular values in society. The foundation draws on the talents of prominent and creative thinkers in a wide range of disciplines to encourage critical thinking and erode the influence of dogmatism, superstition, and bigotry in our world.

Donate to Project Reason

Join the Mailing List

Sign up to receive email updates from Project Reason.

Log in

 
not a member? Join here.
Forgot your password?

The Scripture Project

Browse the Bible, Qur’an or Book of Mormon for scriptural criticism, insights and careful annotation.

Most Recently Updated Passages

Hall of Shame:

Atheism’s drought of reason

By Lisa Miller
Posted: August 1, 2012.
Published: July 26, 2012.

Print: The Washington Post

Lisa Miller argues that in criticizing the agriculture secretary for saying he prays for rain, atheists have shown they are petty and small-minded.

Read the full article | Print this article

Comments (7)

I like the idea of adding “...to Zeus” to all these stories. Then judge their craziness. So now “the agricultural minister prayed to Zeus for rain.” And then he would be immediately out of a job.

posted on August 2, 2012
report this as inappropriate

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

Yeah, everybody knows you’re supposed to pray to Iris for rain.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iris_(mythology)

posted on August 2, 2012
report this as inappropriate

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

“If a leader wants to say he’s praying for help, there’s nothing in the Constitution that makes it inappropriate,”

That’s clearly correct. Government workers are allowed to have religions, and even mention them.

Generalizing this mistaken interpretation from Flynn to “atheist critics” is also mistaken. Flynn is part of a political organization and took the opportunity to make political hay - in a counterproductive way, it seems to me. He’s neither speaking for atheists or speaking of atheism when he makes these comments.

posted on August 2, 2012
report this as inappropriate

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

The criticism of Flynn was off the mark on the First Amendment front, but he did deserve to be criticized.  Focusing on an imaginary friend in the sky as the giver or withholder of rain is delusional nonsense unfitting of a serious person responsible for resolving real world problems.  Flynn’s prayers should be directed to his fellow political leaders, industry leaders, and the international community to clear away fabricated disputes about the genuineness of climate science and do the real hard work necessary to slow the effects of human inputs on climate change.  You want rain where you’ve become accustomed to growing crops?  That’s the work.  Get off your knees and get busy doing something real.

posted on August 10, 2012
report this as inappropriate

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

@Mike78: True dat!

posted on September 23, 2012
report this as inappropriate

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

When an athiest speaks out against magical thinking, it is petty and small-minded, even “mean”.  This writer, Lisa Miller, does not see herself as “brainwashed” and if I described her as such, in the Washington Post, she certainly would take exception to my use of this term.  Yet, she uses derogatory terms about athiests: petty, small minded, ‘meanly’ , etc. and paints a picture of Good Guys vs. Bad Guys (guess where the athiests fall), simply because someone dares to stand up to assert that a public official is supporting magical thinking. At one time, she thought of athiests as “fierce warriors”, but now we have a void at the top (of the athiest movement).  Of course, she does not support her argument with any facts or examples other than an athiest picking on this poor official who just wishes to alleviate the suffering of others (affected by the drought).  Miller further asserts that native Americans have a tradition of “potent prayer” for rain.  Whoa—potent prayer—what is that?  Is it more effective than regular prayer?  Shouldn’t all the world be jumping onto that bandwagon?  If one group has found a more effective way to get the job done, I’d think that every religious faction would want to pray potently—well, every group that only wishes for the greater good of mankind.

Is there an athiest out there who could eloquently write a rebuttal and would the Washington Post publish it?  I’d love to see it, but doubt that it will happen.  It is politically incorrect to refute a “christian” (capitalization purposely left as lower case) who has righteously slammed an athiest.

posted on November 29, 2012
report this as inappropriate

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

I can’t help nut sense a bias.

posted on December 16, 2012
report this as inappropriate

You don't have permission to flag this entry.