I read an article on Salon, about a woman who gave birth to a premature baby that didn’t survive. The point of her article was tell everyone how much she hates when people tell her her baby is in Heaven.
But actually her point is more than that. Her point really is to make sure you know that she is atheist. And to tell you, that you are dumb for not being one. Because this is what good atheists do. They talk about how the “great thinkers” like DeGrasse Tyson and Sagan give her comfort, when they reassure her that you are just a tiny speck in a much bigger universe (that has no purpose).
So her belief is that we are just specks of dust. So I wonder if she would get more comfort, if her friends reminded her, when she talked about the grief of losing a baby she never even knew, that it doesn’t matter, she was only a speck of random DNA dust anyway, so any incidental feeling of connection or purpose to that speck, is just a sorry illusion. nevermind it.”
Because, afterall, isn’t this what the Dawkins and the Penn Jillettes, and the Steve Novellas are hear to constantly remind everyone else? Is that how her friends should respond in the future, so she then doesn’t have to write any more blogs talking about how sad she is losing her speck of dna?
The atheists say we are nothing. They say life is meaningless, and you are just an accidental robot. Heck, they even don’t think we should grieve over abortions, so why does this woman want to remind us that she is grieving over a baby that lived eight hours?
Basically, atheists are hypocrites really. But as Penn Jillettte likes to says, he doesn’t think there is anything the slightest bit wrong with hypocrisy.
I think the article should be, please stop telling me your are sad about a speck of meaningless DNA. Its an illusion.
OR, perhaps atheists should stop trying to tell others that their beliefs are wrong. That would be novel.