American Studies Blog: Religion
Find, post and analyse the website of any American faith group or
denomination, eg Baptist, Catholic, Mormon, Amish, Unitarian, Jewish, Muslim,
Atheist, etc. How does your chosen group sharpen the definition
of American identity in terms of its particular faith? Remember, context
matters – e.g, if you choose a denomination of Christianity, make clear what is
specific about it.
Website: http://www.atheists.org/about-us/aims-and-purposes
Founded by Madalyn Murray O’Hair in
1963 in Austin, Texas, American Atheists is an organization that claims to
fight “for the civil liberties of atheists and the total, absolute separation
of government and religion”. Its origins
lie in the Murray v. Curlett court case,
in which the organization’s founder took her son’s school to court alleging
that he had suffered from harassment after declining to participate in state-mandated
Bible readings. The website claims that the court ruled in favour of the Mrs
Murray citing the First Amendment to the Constitution, after which the
organization was formed. Now located in Cranford, New Jersey, it aims to
achieve the aforementioned goals by means of distributing magazines,
newsletters etc.
Before we can describe how the organization
sharpens the concept of American Identity in terms of Atheism, we need to understand
how its members define the following two terms: Atheism and Materialism. In
simple terms, they argue that Atheism is a “mental attitude, which unreservedly
accepts the supremacy of reason…”. Their
concept of materialism, on the other hand, is less easy to grasp, as the
website seems to claim that it encompasses several things. However, they assert that as materialists they
have “faith” in humankind and in their ability to transform world culture by
their own efforts. They appear to hold that our potential for good and for more
fulfilling cultural development is, for all practical purposes, unlimited.
With this in mind, we can see that one way in which this Atheist Organization sharpens American identity is by allying it to one of their
core values: Materialism. There is no denying that today, American Culture and
Identity is dominated by the ideals of Materialism and progress. This is
evident in the country’s general predisposition to determine a person’s worth in
terms of wealth, and of its desire to be a leader in all fields, e.g. the space
program. By claiming that Atheism is synonymous with Materialism, it could be
said that the organization is attempting to justify itself by seeking to
persuade American citizens that its beliefs are the truest and most
representative of the values that create America’s unique identity. The obvious
criticism of this is to ask whether the cultural attitudes that reflect materialism
are really beneficial, since works such as The
Great Gatsby and The Wolf of Wall
Street seem to highlight its negative aspects. This in turn, could be used
to question whether the American Atheists that endorse such values are truly
good.
We can also clearly see that the organization uses the
bedrock of American Identity, the Constitution, to justify its existence and
its goals. This is made evident in its Aims and Principles, where it claims
that it accepts the argument of “Thomas Jefferson that the First Amendment to
the Constitution of the United States was meant to create a “wall of
separation” between state and church”, as well as highlighting the victory achieved
by Mrs Murray. In addition, its advocacy of a complete and absolute separation
of Church is something found not just in the Constitution, but also in the
words and deeds of some of the country’s Presidents, most notably in Kennedy’s
speech of 1960. So it could be said that the organization is sharpening this
feature of American Identity by allying itself with the sentiments of Kennedy, who was not only President but a Catholic, implying that other people
of similar faiths should not be able enforce their beliefs or condemn Atheists
for their beliefs.
An argument that could be leveled at the organization is that
despite their opposition to enforcing religious values, they themselves could
be said to be aiming to enforce secular values, depending on how one interprets
their website. Statements such as the one which states that their aim is to “develop
and propagate a social philosophy in which humankind is central and must itself
be the source of strength, progress and ideals for the well-being and happiness
of humanity”, and their claim that they advocate “in all lawful ways for the maintenance
of a thoroughly secular system of education available to all”, portrays an
attitude that goes beyond their main concern of having their beliefs accepted
and maintaining the separation of state and church.
Another question that can be asked of American Atheism is whether
it should be considered to be a form of religion, as suggested in the BBC
report. Despite the modern claim by religious organizations that they hold a
set of beliefs in a creator and governor of Earth with supernatural powers, in a
sense Atheism by rejecting the existence of a creator, is also concerning
itself with the concept of God. In addition to this, we have a problem in
trying to understand what the Founding Fathers meant by religion as stated in the
Constitution. If we were to define religion simply as a set of beliefs, then by
the definition of the Constitution, we could say it would be wrong for Atheists
to advocate an education system consisting of secular beliefs.
Overall, we can say that there are several ways in which the
American Atheists utilize American Identity to justify their beliefs and so
sharpen that identity. As regards the criticisms that I have leveled at the
organization, they might be considered somewhat far-fetched or even irrelevant,
if we consider the 1971 court case, Lemon
vs Kurtzman, as it claims that the Supreme Court has ruled that “an action
was not an establishment if: 1. the statute (or practice) has a secular
purpose.” Personally, considering myself to be an Agnostic, I can identify with
several aspects of Atheism. As such I find it somewhat contradictory that such
people, as seen in the article from the Telegraph, are criticized or prevented
from expressing their beliefs, despite the country’s history of accepting
diversity of belief, most clearly depicted in De Crevecoeur’s novel.
