Oct 08 2007
Professor Says, There are Atheists in Foxholes
In the past few years an increasingly vocal group of activists and soldiers have spoken out to dispel the myth that “there are no atheists in foxholes.” Meant to imply that non-belief disappears in the face of adversity to be replaced with religiosity, the concept was used this past summer by Lt. Gen. H. Steven Blum, chief of the National Guard Bureau, who said, Agnostics, atheists and bigots suddenly lose all that when their life is on the line.” The National Guard later clarified Blum’s statement to say the statement was meant to emphasize camaraderie between soldiers of different belief.
During the modern day’s debate which heavily started with a 2005 Good Morning America segment (in which Bill Weih use the expression), atheist military personal came out to say their superiors had made it clear they would not tolerate atheism amidst their ranks. However, officially, atheist, agnostic or no religious preference are all belief options for new recruits for their dog-tag identifications.
Regardless of the inclusiveness of the US Military, does the expression, “there are no atheists in foxholes” stand?
According to professor Ken Pargament (Bowling Green State University), a professor specializing in the psychology of religion and coping, says (as quoted by Newsweek): “If someone is a committed atheist, they’re likely to stay a committed atheist.”
7 responses so far
I think there are Atheists in foxholes. If Pascal ever considered himself an Atheist surely upon the slightest stress he would pray to god.
Personally, I think it is more likely that Atheists (or Agnostics) will convert when suffering from alcohol poisoning at the porcelain altar.
Regardless, it appears Blum is the bigot.
The military in the end has a very strong motivation to have believers amongst the ranks, the more the better. Why? Because they think the belief in the afterlife may make it more likely a soldier will fight harder and even sacrifice himself for god, unit, country or whatever the order is.
Activists? For what cause exactly? Man people have messed up priorities. Seems like people are being overly sensitive. Somehow atheists make themselves out to be this persecuted group while Christians and other believers are supposed to sit around quietly while taking it up the ass by the high and might free thinkers. Give me a break.
This is just one of those things that is so terribly freaking annoying. Like when Christians or other theists tell atheists that they really believe in god and are just “angry at god.” It makes me want to tell all Christians that I know that, deep down, they know there is no god, but that they are afraid to admit it for fear of ostracism.
It is amazing how a religion that claims humility as a virtue has at its core such abject arrogance.
DBB, I do think there is a group of people who don’t believe in god but claim to be religious for fear of ostracism. But non-believers realize that not all who say they believe lie about it. Why then should there be such a concept as atheists who are not atheists in foxholes. Unless the foxholes metaphor means atheists aren’t in there because they won’t give their life for their country? This is exactly what some of the activists reacted against, to answer Aaron’s question about the cause.
What I find annoying is the arrogant presumption by theists that they know what atheists think and believe: that atheists are either not patriots, not citizens, or not sincere (in the case of dropping it in a life-threatening situation).
[…] on my earlier post on “Do Atheists Believe in the Existence of a Soul,” and “Professor Says There Are Atheists in Foxholes,” I decided to start a series called “What Would the Atheist Say,” or “What Would […]
[…] This is post 3 in the What Would the Atheist Say (WWAS) series. Read part 1 and part 2 […]