The Atheist Blogger

The Council for Secular Humanism were the first secular organisation to ask for the resignation of Monique Davis, the Illinois Representative who shouted at atheist activist Rob Sherman whilst he was giving his testimony to oppose a $1 million tax-payer donation proposed by the Governor to a Baptist Church.

The confrontation went thus:

Davis: [. . .] I’m trying to understand the philosophy that you want to spread in the state of Illinois. This is the Land of Lincoln. This is the Land of Lincoln where people believe in God, where people believe in protecting their children.… What you have to spew and spread is extremely dangerous, it’s dangerous–

Sherman: What’s dangerous, ma’am?

Davis: It’s dangerous to the progression of this state. And it’s dangerous for our children to even know that your philosophy exists! [. . .] I am fed up! Get out of that seat!

Amid a large backlash from the blogging community, and the media (with Keith Olbermann declaring her the “Worst Person in the World”), the Council for Secular Humanism had the following press release:

Read the rest of this entry »

Firstly let me explain the title. I am not having a go at Jodie Foster’s acting talents, she is one of my favourite actors and I have utmost respect for her as an actress. What I am having a go at is her views on atheism and religion. It seems that there are two distinct groups in atheism these days, the people who are “all out” atheists and continually argue against the irrationality of religion and belief, and those who are almost apologising for their atheism.

Jodie Foster is one of those in the latter group. She freely admits to being an atheist, but in doing so, always relates herself back to organised religion in some way, so it seems less of a “controversial” issue.

I don’t follow any kind of traditional religion, but I have great respect for all religions. I spend a lot of time studying divine texts, whether it’s Eastern religion or Western religion. I only have questions so far and no answers. [1]

The usage of the word “but” is probably the most conclusive evidence in this quote. She describes herself as an atheist (rather, one who doesn’t follow a religion), and then tries to cover up for the fact by showing her “respect” for religion in general. Many would argue it’s a minor piece of evidence, but how would the quote look if she had said “and” instead of the “but”, or some other passive conjunction? Instead of some kind of apology for being an atheist, the statement becomes one where the emphasis is not so greatly strained on the religious side.

Read the rest of this entry »