Bully Pulpit

Note from Harry: I apologize, but I was recently captured by a roving band of atheists who forced me to publish the following diatribe of their bath-needing leader, Papa Justify (no relation to the hoodoo villain of The Skeleton Key). So without further ado, here are his words:

My brothers and sisters, today I was presented with the following argument against our grand tradition of atheism. A boy with a randomly colored bracelet, representing the religious fad d'jour, came upon me and said: "Papa Justify, atheism cannot be legitimate, for it is only the rejection of the affirmative: Theism. Also, you smell." While I do not deny my smell to be pungent, I do reject the former argument. My brothers and sisters, here is why.

Firstly, the argument is entirely based in semantics as opposed to content. Arguments concerning words are inferior to arguments concerning material; before I approach the superior, however, I will even accept the challenge on the semantic.

Semantically, atheism is no more an acknowledgment of the affirmative theism than a-a-theism is to the affirmative atheism. The double negatives do cancel out, creating the air of an affirmative, yet this is entirely cosmetic. Beyond that, atheism is not an argument against theism, for that would be contheism or contratheism - contratheism sounding like an awesome video game with an easy-to-memorize cheat code. Atheism is the belief in a world system in which no god exists, which is perfectly logical whether there is a real god or not. A-unicornism would be a belief in a world system in which no unicorns exist, or unicornism, and none would argue that to be illogical (other than the radical militant Unicorn Israelis.) The semantic discussion falls short on numerous accounts.

Content-wise, of course, the argument at hand barely exists. Atheism represents a wide-range of religion-esque beliefs (though not devil-worship, as that mandates the existence of a god). All atheist sects, excluding nihilism, hold a belief in something. Secularism believes in the power of the state. Humanism believes in the power of human society. Environmentalism believes in the power of the environment. Moral systems can be built around any of these beliefs, and these moralities created will often parallel if not rival those of theist religions. Morality does not require the existence of an outside supernatural force. The outside force can be completely natural; as natural as this hemp bag I'm wearing.

So you see, atheism does not necessarily disappear without the existence of god. It is just as legitimate with a god as it is without a god, just as theism is just as legitimate with atheism as it is without atheism. And no matter how legitimate any of them are, none can be proven accurate.

Or can they? My brothers and sisters, if the price is right and the screenplay is adequate, there will be a sequel.

Amen.

Come back, Kate Hudson! I said not the Papa Justify from your movie.