83 Comments

Thank you for writing this, Colin. I'm planning to never vote again at this point, because the Republicans are imposing their religion as surely as the Wokists are. The deepest irony is how little compromise it would take to win me and literally all the other non-woke women I know. Adopt European abortion rules (first trimester, safe/legal/rare) and abandon the laws causing horror shows of women who can't get miscarriage care (one of the many stories going around the internet is someone I know personally; even one is too many but her case I know to be 100% real, in Alabama). They'd have won landslides in November 2022 and 2024 would be a cakewalk. It is the exact parallel of how the Democrats would never have lost so many of us without the Woke religious bullshit. But this is what religion does, whether it's the magic of souls in fertilized eggs or the magic of gendered souls. Sigh. Anyway..thank you for saying this.

Expand full comment

"most atheists define 'atheism' as simply 'the lack of belief in a god or gods.' There is a world of difference between merely lacking a belief in something and being 'completely certain' that something does not exist. The vast majority of atheists I have ever met—and I have met a lot—would never say they are certain that God does not exist." I have trouble with this definition, because it could apply equally to the word "agnostic," which I am. People I know who call themselves atheists belittle the very idea that there could be a transcendent being or a Prime Mover. In my experience, they take a rather arrogant and patronizing view of people who do believe. Agnostics say they don't know, and they don't belittle anyone who does believe, because the fact is, nobody knows. But any reasonable person can look at the complexity of life and say that it is a reasonable conclusion the world did not come into being purely by chance. I think Carlson may be reacting to the kind of arrogance I am speaking of. It is splitting hairs to define atheism as "lacking" a belief, since most atheists do take a stand and argue that there is no God (see under Christopher Hitchens et al). I mean to say, they are not passive about this "lack", but often aggressive, so the word has a connotation not of "lack" but of "anti"-belief.

Expand full comment

Wokeness is the worst kind of cultish religious movement -- it has all the most dogmatic, oppressive aspects of a religion, but with none of the redeeming qualities such as forgiveness and mercy. Things went off the rails in atheism when Danny Muscato put on a dress and holy pronouns and didn't get laughed out of the room.

Expand full comment

I've been an atheist ever since I was 11 many decades ago. I don't believe in God. And if I had to bet on it, I'd say I'm absolutely, positively certain it's a completely made up, fictional character, like James Bond, Scarlett O'Hara, or the Road Runner.

But at this point I'm far more concerned about the screwed up direction the Democrats are headed in than the Republicans. Yes, I support abortion rights. I even had one many decades ago (no regrets). But if I had to rank order the two issues, abortion restrictions vs. "transgender" brainwashing, on their importance to society, the "transgender" threat would come out way on top every time.

Yes. Abortion restrictions are unfair. But they primarily affect low income girls and women of childbearing age. And there are highly effective methods to prevent pregnancy, Plan B pills, and medical abortions. But the "transgender" propaganda affects everyone. Men, women, girls, and boys. Rich or poor. Old or young.

I'll be Goddamned (pun intended) if I'm going to accept the idiotic pronoun farce. And I'm outraged whenever I read about a perverted male sex offender being housed in a women's prison where he can rape, beat, and impregnate his female cellmate. I hate the pernicious indoctrination children are subjected to to make them doubt their own physical sex. And most of all, I detest the idea that tens of thousands of teenage girls are mutilating their bodies with male hormones and double mastectomies.

I will never vote for a Democrat again. I just hope the Republicans can get their act together and stop obsessing about embryos and fetuses. They'd win more elections if they abandoned that hill to die on.

Expand full comment

People like Tucker and Kirk have unfortunately equated those who are atheist with all those who have no morality when in fact many have a strong moral compass stronger even than some of the professed ultra religious. How someone leads ones life, what guides their behavior is more important than any label. In fact questioning the existance of a higher power, of G-d, is a process that many deeply religious go through but few discuss. Those of us with a strong desire to follow basic moral precepts need to align together to fight what appears to be a concerted movement to normalize any and all depravity. We need more alliances, not divisions. I was quite surprised to hear Tucker speak this way. I thought he was more moderate. I wonder if it is worth reaching out to him?

Expand full comment

Colin - I get you are upset when you hear those on the right being intolerant on your lack of religious views. I don’t personally feel that way nor do the many conservatives I know, but I do at least understand the viewpoint that is suspicious of those promoting atheism though I see less concern from conservatives towards those who just personally don’t believe in God. I find actual conservatives, Carlson included, far more tolerate of divergent opinions and beliefs than the left has ever been. That said, the right is more about judging to conserving culture and while they more tolerant, there are issues that some conservatives won’t budge, on and this is one of them.

There is also a very good reason for that. There is a strong correlation between societies that reject religion and terrible atrocities, even if that’s not true for some individuals. That’s not to claim people haven’t used religion to promote atrocities, but there is a difference in scale. Also, not all religions have a positive impact on society, but some definitively do.

Our society is sterilizing and genitally mutilating kids for the “crime” of failing to fit some gender norm box. As you point out this idea did not originate from religious people. Stalin is one of the most evil humans to ever live (Hitler is with him). China enslaves millions of minorities to build us lead filled solar panels today. Mao starved tens of millions. North Korea. Vietnam. Cambodia. Cuba. The list goes on. At what point will atheist at least acknowledge elimination of religion from society has opened the doors to mass suffering, totalitarianism, and death on an unparalleled level in the last 100ish years?

While I get your point, and 10-12 years ago would have agreed, having kids completely changed my perspective. I am raising my kids religiously for the reasons conservatives embrace religion and I have zero regrets. We don’t raise them to see the world simply or in black and white, but we do want them rooted in an old and tested theology with a solid moral foundation. Not everyone, but for many, when they claim to believe in nothing they will actually believe in anything. While there are exceptions and spectrums and all the nuance in the world, conservatives are often more religious because they draw a direct, and I believe accurate, line between populations that reject religion only to treat the state as God willing to become zealots for anything.

We aren’t super religious or devout, but I find myself hoping my kids decide to build a life with someone who has at least a little faith. Not a religious zealot and not an atheist, but somewhere in the vast in between. I have also rediscovered my own faith the past few years and it has helped guide and ground me as a mom in this bat 💩 crazy world.

If people don’t like how religious a particular candidate is they should support moderate candidates and vote in the primaries. There are moderate populist on the right and they do well - both Ron DeSantis and JD Vance are moderates if you look at their actual policies.

But consider that while you may not need God, maybe as a society we do need a little God, some grounding in positive religions to remind us we aren’t little Gods and shouldn’t try to be, even if everyone doesn’t need to full on believe every aspect of any particular religion. There is good reason some conservatives are suspicious of atheist movements. The woke aren’t the first to use atheism as a conduit for immoral tyranny and destruction, and they probably won’t be the last.

Also, Carlson isn’t a politician. He’s a conservative Christian commentator. To ask conservative Christians to abandon their desire to have those of faith represent them is wrong. It is people of faith, several different faiths, leading the charge against child genital mutilation and government tyranny. The churches, not the “liberals” pushed back against Covid nonsense. The conservatives push back against mutilating children for toddler wrongthink. Jesus taught that all humans are of one body.

Carlson is no purest - if you see Tucker Carlson today, which in my opinion is FAR superior to any talking head show at night - you’ll see a huge variety of guests including recent folks like Michael Shellenberger and Randall Carlson. Randall Carlson has some fascinating insights I happen to agree with, and some I find nuts that I don’t - like thinking hallucinogenics may have lead humans to create civilization. Wether it’s more supported theories like advanced human civilization being much much older than the narrative, or what I still think are crazy drug theories, no religious zealot gives that guy a platform. There is actually a ton of crossover with guests hosted by Joe Rogan and Tucker Carlson on his Fox Nation stuff.

All this a long way of saying I don’t think you are going to find open arms on the right for those promoting atheism for the sake of atheism. You will find tolerance to be an atheist on the right. In this country most conservatives support freedom of religion, not removing religion from society.

Perhaps that leaves many politically homeless and perhaps that’s a good thing. Politics isn’t sport. We need people who don’t have a team to keep both extremes in check. Vote the policies that you think are best. Vote whichever party is best at that moment for your country and community. Before rejecting good public policy because your feelings are hurt by the individual politician’s religious views, keep in mind conservatives study history and see a ton of danger in atheist societies and they are not necessarily wrong about that. They see the same danger in the state promoting a particular religion. We need different viewpoints for balance, not hard core team groupthink that caters to the extremes.

Expand full comment

Well, most Christians are certain that their god exists, other gods don't, their religion is correct, and any other religion is incorrect.

To quote Dawkins, “We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further.”

Expand full comment

The Republicans would need to do a lot more than become nominally open to atheists to get the votes of centrist Democrats. The right’s extremism on abortion; their (in my view) deadly willingness to politicize vaccinations, and above all, their efforts to subvert our democracy, put them beyond the pale. I’m a Democrat who strongly upholds reality on sex, and I’m even a Christian, but I will never vote for people who support most of what today’s right wing supports. I would rather come up with ways to educate and persuade people like me about the danger and irrationality of the trans ideology. If I can be convinced, so can others.

Expand full comment

Thanks Colin, I am one of those evangelicals who is happy to have you fight this battle with us. I never thought I would see the day when I was reading a Richard Dawkins tweet and saying "yeah....this guy has it right..." but here we are. Hopefully good things will come out of all this. I am confident that common sense will prevail in the gender discussion and these new friendships made in the thick of battle will last well into the future.

Expand full comment

People on the right are allowed to disagree about anything, including religion. That is what makes them different from the cult-like left that marches in lockstep conformity to embrace acts of scientific nonsense and moral depravity. The left is told to abandon objective reality so they slavishly do it in the service of gender ideology. They mindlessly obey when told not to question medical experts who sterilize and mutilate children. They abandon meritocracy in favor of identity politics, destroy works of art, and cheer when government agencies censor free speech on social media. Who cares if someone disagrees about your views about god, abortion or being gay? Embrace people who question everything by abandoning tribal loyalties to primitive left wing pieties and their hive mentalities. Maybe you will change people who disagree with you or they will change you, but that is what gives life meaning and truth, and it is reality's last stand.

Expand full comment

Thank you. That's very well said! Wokism, a secular form of fundamentalism, is by now the greatest threat by far to Western civilization or any other civilization. I'm generally conservative (though not in all ways) and religious (though not in any orthodox way), and I welcome support from you and everyone else who values reason in the search for truth.

Expand full comment

Not to seem disagreeable, but I caution anyone against confusing the woke left with liberals and, more importantly, Democrats. Wokeists are louder than their numbers, and wield very little influence inside the Democratic Party; hell, even Bernie Sanders wised up to this when, in 2020, he told his campaign "stop hiring activists." Of course, it's always possible that influence will grow, but in most cases, voting for a Democrat is not voting for gender ideology or what have you.

However, there certainly is--as Holly Math Nerd pointed out--a similarity between the Wokeists of today and the Republicans of the 80s and 90s**. Both are mired in a religious ideology, and want to turn that ideology into public policy. For myself, if I wanted to be a slave to ideology, I'd never have become a liberal in the first place.

(**I note that today's Republicans by and large don't even bother pretending at piety, the way they did when I was young. They are gross, rude, and venal, and seem to revel in it, which is a far cry from the days when they impeached Bill Clinton over lying about an affair with a consenting adult.)

Expand full comment

I gave up on the left several years ago. Not yet ready to align myself with the right, mostly due to religious and environmental issues.

Expand full comment

Like you, I am an anti-woke atheist with a background in evolutionary biology. I am disaffected from the Democratic Party that is completely captured by "successor ideology." That said, what is there to like about the contemporary Republican Party apart from being anti-woke? Seems like the last sensible ones have retired or passed away. The party of MAGA, insurrection, election deniers and Q-ANON, the party that cannot even elect a House speaker at this moment, is just as frightening and arguably the greater immediate threat to democratic institutions. The idea that they will ever welcome atheists into their midst is risible. I am resigned to being without party affiliation for now. I will judge candidates one-by-one. There are some moderate Dems who while they can't attack those to their left do not repeat the mantras. I also question the wisdom of you, as someone out there trying to change minds, associating with one or another political party. You will limit your effectiveness if you do so. We don't need another Chris Rufo. (An aside, you do know that he used to work for the Discovery Institute, don't you? How does he feel about atheists?) You need to be able to reach what remains of the center-left, anti-MAGA who question the new woke dogmas, but they'll tune you out if you call yourself a Republican. I'd love to see a viable third party emerge that could represent the reality-based political center. Unlikely, I know. Until then I'm proudly independent of both disfunctional parties.

Expand full comment

Brilliant and consistent with the teachings of Jesus. We are all created in the image of God. Those of us who have been adopted by our Heavenly Father need to be His ambassadors while aware of the fact that we do not know who will eventually yield to the Holy Spirit.

I have never had much respect for Charlie Kirk and in the last couple of years, my respect for Carlson has decreased. They live, think and speak in echo chambers surrounded by those who agree with them and adore them. Hubris and judgmentalism have shone through.

Expand full comment

I've noticed this push against atheists by the likes of Matt Walsh. It's a weird time for them to be flexing like this when they have previously stated they will ally with all groups against gender madness.

I welcome more dialogue and debate like the type Sam Harris had with Shapiro and Peterson but I don't get the vibe they want to do this. We'll see. I don't mind using the word Agnostic. It is more honest and appropriately humbling than atheism, which became militant and anti-theist. I would advise atheists and agnostics get too wedded to the GOP. If they can't moderate on issues like abortion, there may be no saving them. I can maintain a pro-choice position while still acknowledging human life is being unjustly terminated. Hitchens and Paglia came to similar conclusions. It is morally superior to be pro-life but it is not feasible in the real world. We can still push back against late term abortions and win the moral argument in gradualism. Desantis found a good medium in 15 week limits. Also, the reality is abortion pills will be ubiquitous and shipped anywhere so any absolute ban will be unenforceable.

Expand full comment