Well, even if it was, I’m sure VL’s a big enough boy that he won’t be crying himself to sleep tonight.

I don’t think any one suggested he would be. My post was not because I (or anyone else) was upset or hurt by your comments. I was simply curious as to why so many theists use the same terminology. Vast Left never complained about your rhetoric… I was highlighting the oddity of it, not him.

I’d assumed “self-proclaimed atheist” and your low expectations for same were intended as a dig, but past that I’ve found you to be a cordial and thoughtful sort. After a few sleepless and tear-stained nights, I’ve pulled myself together as best as I can.

I must take issue, however, with “one who runs a site like BS4A has very little room to complain about other people’s rhetoric.” With the Bible being rammed up my country’s butt (see the “60 Minutes” video link in my previous comment for but one of zillions of examples), I don’t see how a little irreverence at the expense of the literalists and fundies should come at the cost of my rhetoric-complaint privileges.

If you merely mean I shouldn’t be thin-skinned, sure, and if that be the case, my apologies for violating that proviso herein.

Well, even if it was, I’m sure VL’s a big enough boy that he won’t be crying himself to sleep tonight. Sticks and stones and all that. We’re pals and all, but one who runs a site like BS4A has very little room to complain about other people’s rhetoric. It is a credit to him that he never once raised such a complaint.

“It’s not only a very dull read – with whole novella-length passages of ‘begats’…”

Believe me, Heather, I know what’s in it, but it can be taught without boring students to tears (I have taught it myself, though not in public schools). That said, I would hate to think students would leave class hating the Bible as much as I hate Hawthorne and and I’m fairly certain that such is what would happen. And for the same reason.

It’s not only a very dull read – with whole novella-length passages of ‘begats’ – it also has such fantastically bizarre rules, like the prohibitions in Leviticus, that you’d imagine that exposure to it would put most kids off Judaeo-Christian religion for life.

In America, it seems particularly odd, given levels of open religious adherence that dwarf what we are used to in Europe. Surely these poor kids are getting more than enough of this stuff outside their schools.

I did think ‘self-proclaimed’ was a poor choice of words. It sounded to me as if Vast left Blogger’s atheism was being made to sound subtly insincere. But a handsome apology from El B and let him without an unfailingly good command of le mot juste cast the first stone….

I would like to believe that you’re right, and that humor — or at least healthy skepticism — would be the order of the day if the Bible is read in pubic schools.

However, when I see something like the last part of this “60 Minutes” segment, I sense that truth will become a casualty if we fly ever-nearer to religifying our public schools. With the lives and health of their students hanging in the balance, teachers are feeling obligated to lie about the effectiveness of condoms. How can we expect that they’ll apply a grain (or pillar) of salt when the Bible’s creation story becomes part of the curriculum? Be afraid, Mr. Darwin, be very afraid.

Personally, I still don’t see the need to add any term (self-identifying) or otherwise, it just strikes me as superfluous words, but I can see your point.

While I accept there was no underlying subtext in your usage of the term, there remain numerous examples (on and offline) of people using the term in a derogatory manner. Generally speaking I have seen many, many more examples of people being described as a “self proclaimed atheist” (and this being part of a derogatory line of commentary) than I have seen “self proclaimed Christian.”

I hope that I can answer your questions to your satisfaction.

On “per se,” the original site I linked to was “Bible Study for Atheists,” as you note. My point was that it is not what most would think of when they say “bible study.” I understand the humor; the entire point of my original post is that such humor is probably what one can expect from introducing the bible into public schools.

On “self-proclaimed,” I have no doubt that VL is an atheist. Perhaps I should have said “self-identifying” or some such…the reference is simply meant to put the quote that follows in the context of one comes out and says “I’m an atheist and here’s my bible study.” He’s proclaiming a study for a certain audience, and I just wanted to note that. If my blog was called “El Borak’s Christian Blog” or some such, I certainly would not take offense were one to refer to my writings as those of a “self-proclaimed” Christian.

Hopefully that helps with the confusion.

Regards,

El B

It occured to me recently that atheism is the one position on religion I know of that people come into wholly on their own. I’ve never heard of a person being “converted” to atheism by someone else, and there is, of course, no “atheist church” going around proselytizing, passing off pamphlets of atheist FUD to the homeless along with a bowl of soup, etc.