Quantcast
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue

Living


ASKING HUMAN MATTERS: Fundamentalism in any form usually spells trouble

Q: A few weeks ago you included the parenthetical, "Remind me to write a column sometime about the surprisingly long list of things held in common by fundamentalist religionists and fundamentalist atheists." OK, so I'm reminding you. -- E.C., Henderson

A: "Surprisingly long list" was grouchy hyperbole. I meant to say that when I'm in the company of fundamentalism -- atheistic or religious -- I have the same experience. Feel like I'm talking to the same person.


Most Popular Stories
  • WHAT'S FOR SUPPER?: These Las Vegas personalities deserve 'turkey' status
  • 'Regis and Kelly' bringing chat to Strip
  • MIKE WEATHERFORD: Comedian gives back for holiday
  • THE R-J GOES TO A PARTY: Nevada Cancer Institute honors Heather Murren
  • BAZAARS: Consumers, charities benefit from sales at holiday bazaars
  • GARDENING: It's about that time to fertilize your lawn for green spring
  • NFL FOOTBALL: LINE UP FOR A NEW SEASON
  • SSSSSHH: Hey, Keep It Down
  • SSSSSHH: Hey, Keep It Down
  • LEGENDARY LAS VEGAS HEADLINERS: BOB NEWHART: Everyman as Funnyman
  • HUMAN MATTERS: Fort Haven out to do something for the poor




  • But then I feel the same way about fundamentalist politics, liberal or conservative. La Leche League Fundamentalists. (Ever try to feed a baby sitting next to one of those people?) The "leave the forest alone" environmental fundamentalists, who I blame for much of Arizona burning down a few years ago.

    Fundamentalism is my concern. Not atheism. Not theism.

    When I'm with fundamentalist religionists, I quickly begin to have the experience that, for them, something is wrong with me unless I'm like them. For example, as the general election creeps closer, I've already heard in no uncertain terms that if I vote for Clinton, it will mean I'm more or less godless. Seduced by Satan. If I vote for Huckabee, it will mean I really love Jesus.

    Because Jesus would vote for Huckabee. If he could. I mean, technically, non-U.S. citizens born and living in Roman-occupied Judea aren't allowed to vote in U.S. presidential elections.

    When I'm with fundamentalist atheists, I quickly begin to have the experience that, for them, something is wrong with me unless I'm like them. For example, I was invited to speak recently at a gathering of atheists. My topic was comparing and contrasting healthy and unhealthy religion. Not a few minutes in, I found myself spinning in an eddy of atheistic proselytizing, such as, "Do you believe in invisible pink elephants, too?"

    I was being converted. I've been on the receiving end of proselytizers before, of various ilk, and I recognize the experience when it's happening. They lead you through a series of scripted rhetorical questions designed to make you say: "Oh my God! I want to be one of you!" Or, in the case of atheism, "Oh my No-God!"

    Then you're like them. And all is right with their world. And that's the goal. Not a rich dialectic. Not an edifying debate. Just a fierce intolerance of diversity, let alone mystery. A panic in the face of all things gray, abated only by uniform consent to black and white.

    And that's my point. Fundamentalism is not a questing for truth, nor a noble defending of truth; it is an ego-defense. It lives and breathes as a stand-in for actual ego development. It is the thing we do in lieu of confrontation of self. It is the facade of selfhood we plaster across a badly frightened, uncertain, undeveloped self.

    It should concern you if you are quickly and chronically made anxious -- or even hostile -- by folks who remain unconvinced and uninterested in your religion. Or nonreligion.

    The need to convert people is a cheap stand-in for the deeper miracle of relating to people -- building relationships out of which real growth and enlightenment might emerge.

    Please don't get me wrong. I'm no relativist. Fundamentalism is not the same as conviction wrought from the marriage of abiding values and the willingness to think critically. It's not true that all ideas have equal value. Only valuable ideas have value.

    The danger of fundamentalist anything is that it grounds our identity in negation, e.g., I'm not a Democrat, not gay, not a woman, not black, not going to hell, not poor, not stupid enough to believe in God, etc.

    Whew! I'm not you, therefore I am.

    Identity grounded in negation must, by its nature, presuppose antagonism. I'm saying fundamentalism contains an inherent violence. No big surprise when fundamentalists create Web sites that say godhatesfags.com. Or join the KKK. Or behead journalists. Or assassinate servants of peace. No surprise when they smile that smirky, condescending smile -- the smile that lets you know they are ever so grateful not to be you -- and say "Let's agree to disagree" (atheist), or, "I'll pray for you" (religionist).

    Same guy. Same communication. Same intent. Different dress.

    Atheists like to call themselves "free thinkers." And some of them walk their talk, and strive to think freely. Religious people like to think of themselves as "deep believers." And some of them walk their talk, and allow those deep beliefs to transform them into humble, compassionate servant-friends of humanity.

    Fundamentalism is an entirely separate issue. And one that troubles me greatly.

    Steven Kalas is a behavioral health consultant and counselor at Clear View Counseling and Wellness Center in Las Vegas and the author of "Human Matters: Wise and Witty Counsel on Relationships, Parenting, Grief and Doing the Right Thing" (Stephens Press). His columns appear on Tuesdays and Sundays. Questions for the Asking Human Matters column or comments can be e-mailed to skalas@reviewjournal.com.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 4 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    Dan wrote on January 20, 2008 06:35 PM: John Dominic Crossan says fundamentalist (regardless of stripe) have genocide at their core. If you don't come around to my way of thinking, you are expendable.


    Brandon Muller wrote on January 16, 2008 12:26 AM: I think Mr. Kalas' best sentence is this: "The need to convert people is a cheap stand-in for the deeper miracle of relating to people -- building relationships out of which real growth and enlightenment might emerge."

    That gets an hearty "Amen!" from this atheist. Continue your good work, Mr. Kalas.


    Samuel Skinner wrote on January 15, 2008 05:29 PM: I don't "agree to disagree"; does that make me a non fundamentalist? Or do I have to make you feel warm and wuzzy? Seriously, saying that they don't focus on eddifying debate is only partially true; the fact is it is hard to debate with someone who believes that reality doesn't apply to their beliefs. So excuse me if I seem smug; it is simply that most atheists can't understand how we can be considered fundamentalists simply by being vocal. After all last time I checked being sarcastic was not a crime, unlike beheading a person. So I think using the same term is a little disenginious.


    Carl Kaun wrote on January 15, 2008 01:16 PM: Mr. Kalas was a speaker at the Humanist Association of Las Vegas and Southern Nevada (HALVASON) a few months ago, considerably at my instigation. I suspect he is referring to us when he talks about an 'eddy of atheistic proselytizing, such as, "Do you believe in invisible pink elephants, too?"' I have to confess I don't remember this, and think that we would have stated it in terms of pink unicorns rather than elephants, but that is secondary to the main point. And I apologize to Mr. Kalas on behalf of HALVASON if someone did so accost him.

    Just for the record, most of us thought Mr. Kalas gave a wonderful presentation, which we appreciated. We were encouraged by his consistently rational approach to the issues at hand. A couple were put off by what they saw as an excessive egotism. Surprisingly, these were also (previously) followers of Mr. Kalas' column.

    In terms of fundamentalism, atheists are so marginalized by the majority of society that it is really only the more radical among us who are willing to identify themselves. Somehow, a tolerance of, even a respect for, nonbelief that seems to me to have existed from our nation's founding (significantly by deists who did not believe in a god other than Nature) has evaporated in the last dozen or so years.

    In an atmosphere of acid divisiveness, there are only radicals. I would enjoy Mr. Kalas' perspective on how to change the divisiveness above all, thereby to reduce the fundamentalist expressions, and to separate real fundamentalists from those who only seem so because of marginalization.