Comments on: Atheists in Foxholes?

By: pentamom

pentamom — Mon, 02 May 2011 18:12:20 +0000

“pentamom, proselytizing is not defined as being forced to convert. ”

Nor is it defined as having someone utter words inducing people to conversion somewhere in your vicinity whether you hear them or not.

By: Patrick L

Patrick L — Sat, 30 Apr 2011 02:13:57 +0000

I’m an Army chaplain. We don’t proselytize. If someone opens a door for us to talk explicitly about our faith, we will likely do so. But we do not force our views on others. We are, though, usually the first source of counseling for soldiers, because we are part of their units. We live and work with them daily, so they get to know, trust and love us. Army psychologists and social workers don’t form that kind of relationship. We also care for soldiers after there is a death or casualty. In addition, chaplains play a major role as advisors to the commander on a variety of issues. Atheist soldeirs have plenty of resources for secular counseling. And if an atheist soldier came to me seeking assistance to find a place for his group to meet, I would assist him.

By: Sigh_kho

Sigh_kho — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 21:12:59 +0000

pentamom, proselytizing is not defined as being forced to convert. If Graham was there to proselytize and was allowed to do so (whether or not the audience was there voluntarily), then there is a problem. The problem is amplified by the discriminatory way the military treated the atheist group that tried to put on a comparable event.

As for Peter A. saying that humanism’s role in the lives of many (not all) atheists is proof that atheism is more than a lack of belief – did you even read what you wrote? You talk about humanism and then made conclusions about atheism. Not all atheists are humanist. Not all atheists are nihilist. Atheism is a blanket term that refers to anyone who does not believe in deities. Hell, there are Buddhists who are atheist, that doesn’t make atheists Buddhist.

Now, as for chaplains versus therapists, these are very different roles. A chaplain is someone who can help you find meaning in your life. That’s what religion is all about. Atheists reject religion but we don’t stop looking for meaning in our lives. Therapists are there to help people get over an issue. Think about it, many religious people see a therapist, shouldn’t they see a pastor first?

The point of having a humanist chaplain is to get equality of religion in the military. If you want to argue that atheists can just see the religious chaplains if they want support from a chaplain, then you could also argue that we don’t need African American chaplains because African Americans can just see the white chaplains. Why is there so much resistance to this?

By: pentamom

pentamom — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 13:36:21 +0000

That it is Graham’s entire purpose in life does not mean that when he shows up in a military environment, the military is cooperating with his purpose. They’re allowing him to speak; they are not requiring anyone to attend, to listen, or even to care whether he’s there or not.

So, of course Billy Graham is proselytizing, but Joe Atheist is no more “being proselytized” by Billy speaking on his base than by Billy speaking 2000 miles away, if he doesn’t care to show up and listen.

By: Brian Westley

Brian Westley — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 01:14:48 +0000

“Not to be pedantic, but for the sake of clarity please allow me to remind you that the word “proselytize” means “to attempt to convert.” It specifically indicates some action designed to make a person “come over” (this is the literal meaning of the Greek root) to your side.”

That pretty much describes Graham’s entire purpose in life.

You know, it might actually be useful to read what atheists in the US military say about this:
http://blog.militaryatheists.org/2011/03/military-atheists-visit-chaplains/
http://blog.militaryatheists.org/2011/04/atheists-seek-chaplain-role-in-the-military/

Also, we *could* have compared how well Richard Dawkins can draw a crowd compared to Graham, except the military axed it at the last minute. See http://rockbeyondbelief.com

By: pentamom

pentamom — Thu, 28 Apr 2011 20:49:51 +0000

Ah, thanks Ray and astorian, sorry for the misread.

By: astorian

astorian — Thu, 28 Apr 2011 20:24:43 +0000

Ray Ingles read my meaning correctly.

My point was that an atheist soldier or sailor who needed some kind of non-religious counseling or emotional support can get that from many sources. He might use a psychotherapist or encounter group where a Catholic soldier might turn to a priest.

If that’s the case, the military ALREADY provides secular therapists and counselors. Is there really anything to be gained by calling such a counselor a “chaplain”?

By: Ray Ingles

Ray Ingles — Thu, 28 Apr 2011 16:16:40 +0000

Pentamom – Just to be clear, note that it was a theist, astorian, who proposed the “Freudian psychologist” for atheists. I haven’t seen any actual atheists make such a request.

And ‘astorian’ – unless I’m greatly mistaken – wasn’t suggesting getting rid of the chaplain corps, he was questioning the need for an atheist chaplain.

By: pentamom

pentamom — Thu, 28 Apr 2011 13:52:23 +0000

“If an atheist soldier needs to see a Freudian psychotherapist, it’s a pretty safe bet the Army provides those. Where’s the necessity for a “chaplain”?”

Because the Christian soldier might desire spiritual comfort in the same way an atheist wants the benefits of discredited forms of psychotherapy?

By: Ray Ingles

Ray Ingles — Thu, 28 Apr 2011 11:35:35 +0000

Peter A. –

Evidence, if any more were needed, that the claim that many atheists make that their stated lack of belief is just that, and nothing more, is false.

What if – and I’m going out on a limb here – there’s more than one kind of atheist? There’s more than one kind of monotheist. Heck, there’s more than one kind of Christian – sola scriptura, Calvinism (Mormonism?), etc.