I love the His Dark Materials trilogy by Philip Pullman, of which The Golden Compass is the first book. As most of you know, the movie version of that book was released last weekend. I have yet to see it, although I want to.
A couple of weeks ago, I received an e-mail from a friend about the purported atheistic themes in the book and film. I did not reply thoughtfully, although several of my other friends who received the e-mail did reply thoughfully. My reply was basically, this is bs.
Then I started thinking about the books and Pullman, who does claim to be an atheist. But so what? What’s wrong with atheism? In my mind, nothing. It’s a belief system, and one that those who choose it have thought through carefully, in most cases. It’s not subversive or wrong, it just is, and there’s no reason why it shouldn’t be taught alongside other belief systems such as Buddhism, Christianity, or Hindi.
I’ve written before about my take on religions. Basically, if a religion makes someone happy and, most importantly, doesn’t hurt anyone, I’m cool with it. In truth, there aren’t many religions that fit into the second part of that equation. Atheism, while more a belief system than a ture religion (whatever that is), doesn’t hurt anyone. As far as I can tell, atheists, often known also as secular humanists, have never started a war or killed anyone for not believing what they believe.
To my mind, religious discrimination is one of the last barriers that needs to fall for this earth to become a more peaceful place. Again, if a religion or belief system makes someone happy and doesn’t hurt anyone else, what’s the problem?
The reviews of The Golden Compass note that there are no overt references to atheism, and that most people won’t get the possible connections between Pullman’s Magisterium and the Catholic church. So, enjoy the movie for the fantasy-filled adventure story that is it, and leave the atheists alone.
I agree wholeheartedly with your comment on the need for religious tolerance. As for the His Dark Materials books, the first two were brilliant (particularly the second) and not too overtly anti-church. However, even I was a bit turned off by the third book, which seemed to be quite harsh toward the Catholic church…and I have my own strong issues with religion.
My sister’s MIL has managed to convince my nephew that he’ll go to hell if he sees this movie. (I’m not sure why he’d believe her about this–he certainly doesn’t listen to much of anything else she says. She’s a bit on the nutty side.) My sister’s been trying to convince him otherwise, but I don’t think she’s had much luck. I gave him the books a few years ago, but I’m not sure he’s read them (I really liked them).
AMEN. I agree with you 100%.
Christopher Hitchens once said, “Religion will eventually be replaced by psychology, much the same way alchemy was replaced by chemistry and astrology was replaced by astronomy.”
Defining atheism as a ‘belief system’ that chooses not to believe in a supreme being, is a bit like defining a Democrat as someone who chooses not to be a Republican. Why do we even need a word for someone who isn’t something?
Even an idiot - by psychological definition - is a person with an IQ less than 20, not someone who isn’t smart.
My father believed that there was no God, but also disliked the idea that atheism was an -ism at all. He detested as much the idea of God as he did the trappings that go with it - such as ritual and blind dogma.
It’s not really an organized code of beliefs in any kind of way to determine that so far in one’s life none of the doctorines or code of beliefs is worth embracing. Especially because he kept his open mind so that, if confronted with irrefutable evidence, he would agree with whatever was irrefutable. “Belief” implies that there is something to accept as authoritative without imperical evidence.
And imperical evidence is pretty much what he based his behavior on. That just doesn’t sound like something that should be taught in a comparative religion class, but rather, was probably taught already in Science class.
Hey Edgy - I did the same thing: picked up the book to read b/c of the complaints. I’ve not seen the movie because it’s getting near universal review indicating it’s not worth the ticket price. But I’ll see it on HBO.
The book prompted a discussion on the blog. I don’t think he’s quite promoting Atheism (at least not in the first one). And, from what I can tell, the theology in the rest is no better or worse than, eg, “What Dreams may Come” or the “Matrix” series. Those didn’t spark protests, however.
Atheism is not a belief system as it has no belief or system-like aspects (contrast it with humanism).
I wasn’t familiar with this author, but he was interviewed on the HNN podcast located here:
http://humaniststudies.org/enews/index.php?id=325&article=0
He talks about this issue and others.
yay for Anne Fitten!
a thoughtful post.
c
Okay, atheism really isn’t a “belief” system, per se. I’m thinking more of humanism, which many who call themselves atheists ascribe to.
My points about beliefs being used as an excuse to harm or belittle others still stand.
Thanks, Ch, Jay, Jeremy, and DM. I’m looking forward to reading Hitchens’ new book on atheism.
Thank God for atheists. Damn peacemongers.