When Atheists Attack

I consider myself a Christian, though admittedly I have a fair amount of work to do in that regard. As a Christian, and as a man, it both saddens and angers me to see my beliefs misquoted, disrespected, derided or outright called lies in every conceivable medium on a regular basis. Go to any web forum discussing Christianity and tally up the number of hateful comments. Take particular note of the almost instantaneous 'flaming' of any pro-Christian comments. I do my best to respect other faiths provided those faiths don't call for my murder or a billion years of reincarnated servitude to a bad science-fiction writer. That being said and my disdain for some belief systems aside, I respect the rights of their adherents to practice them. I don't attempt to 'force my religion' on others; I try to act as I believe a good person and a Christian should act, and if that inspires others to choose Christianity as well, then so be it.

For some reason, it has become fashionable to hate Christians, interfere with their right to worship in private and public places, and belittle them at every opportunity in any available medium. (Actually, it's been more or less in vogue since its inception.) This same practice doesn't seem to apply to any other faiths, and in fact, try to accomplish any of the above listed activities with regard to any other religion and you'll most likely have to contend with that lost branch of Stalin's government, the ACLU.

As a Christian, I will speak up for my faith when it is attacked, but I will not interfere with another's right to practice theirs. I generally find it bad form to interrupt conversations with God.

I understand there are people out there who are atheists, and I respect their right to that belief. Is it asking too much for them to simply respect my right to my own without resorting to immature and childish antics to spread their message? Atheists have decided to fire a salvo across the bow of Christians by waging their own 'War on Easter.' They accomplish this by going around and planting copies of a DVD denying the historical existence of Jesus at, near, or in churches of any denomination, and then sending photographs of themselves doing so back to the organizer's website to receive more copies to plant. In their defense, they claim they are not spreading hate, they are spreading truth. To them, I'm sure they are. To others, they're pulling juvenile stunts roughly comparable to taking pictures of themselves 'tagging' buildings with graffiti, and insulting an entire faith in the process.

Their right to free speech protects this activity but it's still lacking in class to be sure. Sadly, it gets a bit more insidious from here. As a man of moral conviction and as a father, I will also speak up when innocent children are targeted for victimization. The deliberate selection of children as targets of opportunity places the 'attacker' in a class no higher than a common criminal, and morally somewhere between bankrupt and reprehensible. It is simply inexcusable in any context to do so. I was frankly repulsed by the comment

"Ideally, these DVDs will be discovered by a worshipper during the Easter Sunday worship service
or by children hunting for Easter eggs."

At this point, I thought that surely this was just this particular author's interpretation of their goal, and not the actual intent. Following the link back to the main 'project' site, I read a bit, and come across this:

"Try to imagine the moment that your DVD or flyer is discovered. What would make the most dramatic impact?
How can you increase the likelihood that a child will discover it first?"

There is absolutely nothing respectable or tasteful about this, and I find it repulsive and predatory. By doing this, they're accomplishing the same thing they accuse Christians of; attempting to force their beliefs on others. They're not attempting to 'educate' anyone. They're doing it for the bragging rights of having done it, and they're going about it in a way that shames other atheists who have more intelligent and upfront ways of expressing their views.

The very verbiage on their site belies the fact that they are doing this in a covert, dishonest manner; the choice of words sounds like something to be found in a criminal's handbook:

If you feel a bad vibe in the middle of a mission, just abort. There are churches everywhere. The next one you try will probably be a cakewalk. (A regular one, not the Iraq kind.) Just approach each target as if you are looking around, interested in the architecture (that’s why you have the camera). Then if it feels right, plant your items.

It's all wrapped up nicely by the author commenting that if 'someone is to criticize [them], it should be for telling the truth.' Is that the same truth as their presence being justified by an interest in church architecture? If they can't even tell the truth about why they are there in the first place, what does that say about their ability to justify all their subsequent claims? If they've got so much to say, why not say it publicly and in a manner that isn't designed to be disrespectful from the outset? Couple that with their choice of tactics and come to your own decision.

Technorati Tags:
Easter, Christianity, Jesus, history, atheism, atheist