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.
Pretty good arguments to be made that actually god subtracts from it all …
Or, rather, that belief in god subtracts from overall human wellbeing.
Maude only knows if god itself is doing anything about the human situation. Maybe it stepped out of the lab 13 billion years ago for a smoke break and forgot to come back to check on its experiment.
I’m not getting that from the article at all. What I’m getting is: Christians, please think about whether what you say that you think will comfort a mother who has lost her baby will make things worse for her. Glib phrases like “she’s the littlest angel in heaven now”; “Jesus takes early the ones he loves”; “offer it up”; are often deeply distressing.. That’s true even when the grieving person is a believer herself. People who have not lost a child can have little conception of what it is like to do so. And losing a pregnancy has its own peculiar form of loss, because what you have lost is so intangible – you have no memories, only dreams.
It’s difficult, and probably more difficult now than it’s ever been, because child mortality is so much rarer. In the past most adults would have lost at least one child. Thank goodness that is no longer the case, but it does mean that losing a child is a deeply lonely experience.
Just curious, thanks for the reply
Hmm, I wonder if it’s actually worse for some believers — instead of being giving time to cry or rage about their loss, they immediately have to put on the game faith face and respond nicely when someone tells them “she’s in heaven now”. “Glib” is exactly the word for those stereotypical religious phrases, a cheap thought-free way to push the grieving person back into conformity.
At least as non-believers we have the tiny blessing that we are expected to be assholes (by USAian christians, at any rate). So when someone we love dies, we might get away with telling the glib platitude-mongers that they’re not helping, without incurring additional shame for being bad christians ourselves.
It would be amusing if it weren’t so sad: people are offended when we remind them to think about the actual welfare and wishes of the person they claim they want to help, instead of putting their own religious priorities at the top of their list.
Isn’t that what you believe anyway? A life is a “human life” once an egg is fertilized, is it not?
I think it often is. I’ve talked with many women who have lost babies, and have been told things like this. It doesn’t matter whether they are religious or not, it seems – it just doesn’t touch the grief they feel. And yes, I think it is easier if your conception of who and what a person is has some basis in real experience, and you don’t have to invent some narrative whereby a person you never knew is somehow somewhere else, waiting for you – grown up? For you to bring up “in heaven”? Being nursed by angels?
Allan Miller,
Yes, that’s one of the only places you can get information about evolution, without the codespeak bullshit of atheism.
Elizabeth,
Its a baby because it was on life support for eight hours. What was it before it was born?
Why is she grieving about something that she believes is just random DNA dust?
You know why? Because atheists don’t believe what they preach.
Th science of evolution has nothing to do with either theism or atheism. It’s a scientific theory, an explanation for observed physical phenomenon. It has fuck-all to do with Gods or no Gods, no more or less than chemistry or geology do.
Your anger has you terribly confused on lots of things.
Atheists in general and grieving mothers in particular don’t believe their children are “random DNA dust”. Why do religious people say such stupid things? The only reason I can see is a deep insecurity and a need to denigrate others to make themselves feel better.
You are probably right.
I guess its only Dawkins and Tyson, and the others who go on TV who actually believe that.
Like I said…
I think it must be so hard for you to maintain your desire for atheism, when your own thoughts keep getting in the way.
Why do religious people keep making the stupid claim that atheists can have no feelings or no meaning for the things in their lives? Why do the Holier-Than-Thou types have such insecurity and the need to denigrate others?
The OP question is rhetorically equivalent to “When did Phoodoo stop having sex with his mother.”
Yeah, I was wondering about that…
Glen Davidson
But I made a silly mistake. The OP title isn’t a question. It’s actually equivalent to “Why Phoodo has sex with his mother.”
Hope that clears up any confusion.
Phoodoo, you have a nasty habit of making up motivations for people. how do you think that makes you look?
From reading Phoodoo’s comments, I conclude that (a) he is either a non-native speaker, or has very little education (b) he has no science training to speak of and (c) he is surrounded by people who think exactly like him – a “Jesus bubble”, so to speak; and (d) he has a huge grudge against anyone who doesn’t share his beliefs.
I’ve met tons of people like him. It is really impossible to reason with them. They simply don’t have the skill set to really examine why they think what they think. Yes, they can be educated, but it’s a long process. Phoodoo, if you haven’t already, I’d suggest reading “Letter to a Christian Nation” by Sam Harris (perhaps you can find it in translation if necessary), and reading it really carefully, with an open mind. After that, you will understand a bit better how atheists think, and your argumentation will be sharper and less ridiculous than it is now.
Well, your thought is wasted, phoodoo, because it bears no relation to what I think or desire.
The problem, phoodoo, is that you have no clue about what atheists believe. That’s not surprising because “atheism” simply describes what they do not believe (in god or gods) not what they do, so the name tells you nothing.
A second problem is that you are, frankly, being stupid about this.
A woman who has a spontaneous miscarriage or a still birth has lost the child she expected to bring into the world and to love, raise and cherish. That future child is not “a speck of DNA”. And it is not a “speck of DNA” that she loses, but that future child.
Think about it.
For what it’s worth, my own view is that death itself is not evil. It’s necessary for life to continue elsewhere. When someone dies, the tragedy lies in the ending of that person’s hopes, plans, power to create new things, capacity to enrich our lives etc.
And in the suffering they might have had to go through of course.
That is why, for me, the death of someone who has reached the end of a good life, and dies peacefully, is not a tragedy, and indeed, why in my view it would be good medicine to help that end be as peaceful as possible.
And why, for me, the ending of a pregnancy is a tragedy for those who looked forward to the child that would have been born, not for the child him/herself, who has not yet acquired the capacity for such hopes and dreams.
And that is why I do not share the equation that many make between abortion and murder. Murder is the stealing of a future. When a pregnancy ends, the unborn child’s future is taken from the parents. But it is not nearly so clear that that future is taken from the unborn child, who is unlikely to have had yet acquired any sense of a future, or only in the most immediate terms.
Theists will disagree of course. But that is what makes sense to me, and is why I do not think abortion is murder (though often tragic), and why I support people’s Right to Die. It is not because I think we are all mere “specks of DNA”. It’s because of our human capacity to conceive a future.
petrushka,
Right after yours stopped asking me to pay for it.
I have no idea what atheists believe? Huh? The word itself, the statement “I am an atheist” is a statement about what they believe, for crying out loud!!” Are you just being stupid?
So do you mourn every time a guy masturbates, because it doesn’t become a child? Is sperm sacred. Is a fetus sacred? How about an eight hour old baby? When do your feelings of mourn begin? In none of these scenarios do you have any relation or knowledge of this life. You never met them, talked to them, played with them, experienced them, and yet-you sense that they are indeed sacred. But you have no idea why. “Well, because its a life that didn’t happen…” Just like the sperm that was wasted, that I am sure you cry over nightly.
Why don’t you think about it? Because your logic, and your feelings have two totally different trajectories.
phoodoo,
And of course you would brook no argument from me to the contrary, ‘one of them’ that I am. Nicely hermetically sealed mind you have there, phoodoo.
Better to tell them that their dead baby is, right now, being judged, and it may well end badly for them?
Can we expect a phoodoo-post soon “Why Women/Negroes/Liberals Are Kind Of Assholes” based upon the writings of one such?
Thoughts and feelings often have different trajectories. Is that a problem?
So, who’s starting the ‘Theists are Kind of Pathetic’ thread?
I think this is it already, no?
phoodoo,
I’d agree with that insofar as it applies to you. Your life certainly is meaningless, yes.
OMagain,
A bit unnecessary …
hotshoe_,
Would your mother consider specifying a non-religious ceremony in her will?
Personally, I would not object if someone attempted to comfort me on a loss with some religiously-based words. I would recognise where it came from: their desire to help; their empathy. And I would appreciate that, not the metaphysical dubiousness of the words they chose.
Correct.
Yep.
No, it’s a statement about what they DON’T believe. lol
That would be no, you are.
I’m not Lizzie but while I can answer for myself, I think they’ll apply to her too.
No, I don’t.
No. Nothing is “sacred”, it’s a synthetic concept I reject.
No.
But it might be very important to specific people, depending on the circumstances.
Same as above.
When I get a sense of loss of something I dearly wanted or already had and greatly appreciated, but somehow lost.
I know about it if I know about it. I don’t care about random people’s sperm or eggs, but I would probably care about my own or my partner’s if we both wanted children and were trying to have some.
In that particular situation I would care whether my partner successfully became pregnant. I wouldn’t care about the loss of sperm, after all, I make so much all the time. And a couple of potentially lost eggs due to failure of insemination probably wouldn’t move me much either. In that sense, it is not the loss of sperm and egg that would bother me, but the recurrent failure to cause or carry a pregnancy to fruition. I would probably become frustrated that I would not be getting something I dearly wanted.
But if an actual pregnancy happened, was detected, and subsequently resulted in a late miscarriage, that would probably make me very sad because I had an anticipation and desire for a child. If I did not have this desire and anticipation, I would not feel bad if some round of casual sex had resulted in a pregnancy and subsequent miscarriage (because I would not have developed these feelings). Though I would understand that my partner, having become pregnant, might herself have come to have feelings for this unborn child, and so her feelings would matter to me.
No, I don’t. I reject the word, unless you actually mean some far removed synonymous concept like “it is important to you”.
Sacred implies it pertains to some nebulous spiritual or religious concept, that it is “holy”, or has “intrinsic value”. Nothing is holy to me, and I don’t believe anything has intrinsic value.
So you’re saying I don’t know why I get sad, or a sense of loss, or mourn the loss of that which I desired or already had and creatly appreciated? That is false.
I actually do have an idea why. I get that sense exactly because I had grown attached to it in my mind, I had started getting feelings for it, feelings of appreciation and love. And then the realization that I will never fullfil that love and never get to appreciate the presence of that child(or pet, or whatever it is I lost) in the way I had started to dream about, or desired to experience, or had given me joy, is the cause of that sense of loss and mourning.
No, that’s not why I would mourn it, that is much too simplistic. It is not merely that it is a “life that didn’t happen” that would make me sad, it is because I had developed certain emotions towards it.
I have also been saddened by the loss of inanimate objects because in my mind I associated them with events and periods in my life. For example, the loss of a fishing reel my grandfather gave me when I was a kid, saddened me. Ultimately because it reminded me of my grandfather who I miss very much.
I have never cried over wasted sperm. I don’t think it is even possible to waste sperm. Every orgasm I ever had was worth it.
it seems to me I have actually given this a great deal more thought than you.
While that may some times be the case, it seems to me that isn’t actually true in this one.
The correct wording would be, “Why are Theists Such Pathetic Losers?”
Just to keep the spirit of things.
Allan Miller,
I don’t think it matters much what you tell someone, as long as you are showing kindness.
But as long as atheists are going to be so sensitive about what words you are allowed and not allowed to tell them-perhaps they shouldn’t be such hypocrites about what they preach to Christians about what they feel of their beliefs.
I personally couldn’t care less what people think of my beliefs. I am not the one whining about it something 3 years after the fact(!) about how those meanie Christians just weren’t sensitive to my never dying pain about a baby I never even knew. Sounds like her agenda is a bit more than just hoping for some kinder words from Christians.
She sounds like just another typical atheist preacher talking about her adoration for her atheist icons Tyson and Sagan.
ROFL.
I think you should start reciting that statement in front of the mirror.
Yet true. Phoodoo has done nothing constructive in the entire time I’ve seen it’s output.
Theists don’t seem to take kindly to competition in religion.
Anyway Allan, all I’m really doing is agreeing with Phoodoo that that is what I think and that Phoodoo’s life is meaningless. So unnecessary in that it did not need to be stated as it was already implied by Phoodoo.
Tyson insists he’s an agnostic! 😛
No. The statement “I am an atheist” is a statement about I do NOT believe.
It is not a statement about what I DO believe.
Yes, and no.
Yes, I would appreciate the empathy. The problem is that if ALL you get when you tell people you have lost your child is stuff that actively hurts, is that you end up with an aversion to telling people at all.
And yet being able to talk about it is really important.
OMagain,
Yes, I got that, I just think that over-extension of someone’s internet output to the entirety of their character is shaky. That said, so many of the usual suspects don’t half lead with the chin … !
Elizabeth,
Does the same expectation go to someone who loses a fetus? Or an egg? How about to the father of the fetus?
Well, it can matter a bit, just as it might be showing kindness to give someone a peanut jelly sandwich if they were starving, but if they had a peanut allergy, it would matter that what you gave them might harm them.
And I think that is what the writer is saying – not that the Christians are being unkind, but that Christians should consider whether there are other ways they could show their kindness and empathy that didn’t involve something that can really hurt.
This isn’t even a religious thing. As I said, I’ve met parents who were religious themselves, and yet who found the kind of glib comfort offered by other religious people intensely hurtful, even though kindly meant. The classic catholic offering is “offer it up” or “Jesus only gives us what we can bear”, or “what great grace must be flowing somewhere else because of your loss”.
Well, it’s important. It’s true that some atheists (often called “strong atheists”) actually believe there is no god or gods. For most people who call themselves a-theists they simply lack belief in a god or gods, just as they lack belief in fairies, or Santa Claus, or the Loch Ness Monster. A theist is one who believes in God; an atheist is one who doesn’t.
Believing there is no God is not the same as not believing there is.
What expectation are you referring to?
Agree with all of that.
Sensitivity to their worldview.