Wasp on Lavendar

Irony: A Reason to Hope Cancelled

Photo by Matt Quinn, Unsplash.

by Lenna

Isn’t it ironic?

I’ve heard people say Americans don’t get irony, and maybe that’s true. But I’ll go out on a limb and say, “A Reason to Hope” is an ironic name for an atheist conference that was canceled due to “lack of interest.”

A Reason to Hope for what?

Several atheists have told me that atheism is the “absence of belief.” If that’s true, what would be the subject of the conference? “Hello, fellow unbelievers. We are not believing here in the very same room.”

Then what? Cut to refreshments?

In reality, I think there are probably a lot of quiet atheists out there who really are just not believing. Those are not the kind of atheists who are busy arranging conferences or buzzing around like angry hornets annoying everyone.

Islam tells us to deal with atheists by saying, more or less, “you have your way and I have mine.” The problem is a lot of atheists are not content to do the same.

Feeling the Hate

Atheism tends to devolve into an obsessive hatred for religion. Eradicating other people’s doctrines becomes their de facto doctrine, which on the whole makes militant atheists a pretty unpleasant lot.

I’m glad their influence may be waning, primarily because many of them attack Islam.

I also think they have nothing to offer in the way of moral and spiritual guidance, except nihilism and despair.

Organizers planned the conference for February¬†2018. Bitter, nasty atheists, including Salman Rushdie and Richard “The Honey Defender” Dawkins, were apparently going to speak, along with some others described as “scholars.” Scholars of a non-existent doctrine? No wonder ticket sales were low.

The cancellation of a major atheist conference may not be a sign that organized atheism is dead. It does seem like a promising Reason to Hope.

8 comments

    1. Yes, the heroic Honey Defender is going to conquer the world with a combination of smug arrogance, a trove of petty grievances, and an endless wellspring of bitterness.

      If he so brilliant, one wonders why a conference where he’s featured was cancelled due to “lack of interest.”

      1. LOL, well, you’ve pretty much hit the nail on the head. Why would anyone be interested in something as easily explainable as atheism?

        The only reason that atheism is suddenly getting any attention at all is that it tends to go hand in hand with the Anti-Islam movement.

        Hopefully this movement will get the name which actually defines it which is “Anti-Islamic Atheism” and then these conferences will be packed out!!!!

    1. Yes, the heroic Honey Defender is going to conquer the world with a combination of smug arrogance, a trove of petty grievances, and an endless wellspring of bitterness.

      If he so brilliant, one wonders why a conference where he’s featured was cancelled due to “lack of interest.”

      1. LOL, well, you’ve pretty much hit the nail on the head. Why would anyone be interested in something as easily explainable as atheism?

        The only reason that atheism is suddenly getting any attention at all is that it tends to go hand in hand with the Anti-Islam movement.

        Hopefully this movement will get the name which actually defines it which is “Anti-Islamic Atheism” and then these conferences will be packed out!!!!

  1. Although an atheist myself I am largely in agreement with you, hence I tend to say I am not religious instead as it doesn’t come with so much baggage. The people you refer to are more specifically anti theists as atheism in itself isn’t anti religious. It’s not as if the the rather limited history of atheism is a shining example of noble thought: the experience of Stalin and Mao ridicule the notion that atheist states are any less prone to brutality and corruption. They abused ideology in the same way that brutal religious leaders abused the tenets of their faith.
    In my youth I might have had some sympathy for their ideas but it seems far more sensible to accept that most of the world is religious and get over it.

  2. Although an atheist myself I am largely in agreement with you, hence I tend to say I am not religious instead as it doesn’t come with so much baggage. The people you refer to are more specifically anti theists as atheism in itself isn’t anti religious. It’s not as if the the rather limited history of atheism is a shining example of noble thought: the experience of Stalin and Mao ridicule the notion that atheist states are any less prone to brutality and corruption. They abused ideology in the same way that brutal religious leaders abused the tenets of their faith.
    In my youth I might have had some sympathy for their ideas but it seems far more sensible to accept that most of the world is religious and get over it.

Comments are closed.