digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Katie Couric: “There are No Atheists in foxholes”

freeforum.wordpress.com — A response from retired Master Sergeant Gid L. White. After Katie Couric declared that there were no atheists in foxholes on a TV newscast:

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • montiff, on 10/11/2007, -14/+165Sorry for my blog spam. But the original host took down the letter.
    And I felt it was far too important of a response not to be seen again.
    • tech42er, on 10/11/2007, -16/+89No problem. It really needs to be seen; it's a great response.
    • rnwen2750, on 10/11/2007, -6/+47Agreed, but why in Science?
    • bluewolf2020, on 10/11/2007, -113/+7"to be thoughtless and downright offensive to the families of uncountable numbers of atheists, and I include Agnostics, who gave their lives wearing the uniform of the American Armed Forces"

      I don't get why he would include Agnostics.
    • SultanTravi, on 10/11/2007, -19/+45@montiff
      I wouldn't call this blog spam. You put approximately one line of text above the letter.
      Thank you for not writing 2,000 words on the subject before it.

      PS - that letter was amazing and eye opening.
    • Jagula, on 10/11/2007, -15/+353“There are no atheists in foxholes" isn't an argument against atheism, it's an argument against foxholes”
      -James Morrow
    • Hazardc, on 10/11/2007, -49/+23I wish Pat Tillman was able to reply to this

      unfortunately, there is no god, and he is ***** dead.
    • mikesbaker, on 10/11/2007, -110/+7omg someone who spouts clinches for a living spouted one. I can't take anyone serious who puts atheists and agnostics in the same category. One doesn't believe in God the other believes in God as he understands him (her, it).
    • ShaneApex, on 10/11/2007, -22/+56This response from the General will fall upon deaf ears. It does not conform with what the media wants to portray.
    • ickarus, on 10/11/2007, -19/+73When you think about it, this comment might be more offensive to theists than anyone else. The idea set forth here is that in life or death (extreme) situations, people will believe in a supernatural being (a god).

      Well, if a god is so implausible that it takes a life or death situation for a logical person to entertain the idea... Maybe atheists aren't the ones who should be getting offended...

      /rabidly anti-theist
    • OneHine, on 10/11/2007, -15/+136Does anyone else find it interesting that far-right extremists keep claiming that they love the troops, that they love American, and that anyone who disagrees with them must be in league with the terrorists...yet when push comes to shove these are the same people who don't hesitate to insult war veterans and who don't think twice about opposing freedom of religion, one of America's founding principles?

      As they say, talk is cheap. Perhaps our "liberal" media should focus on this discrepancy for once.
    • mikesbaker, on 10/11/2007, -65/+15@ickarus
      Why do my beliefs make you angry? They affect you in no way. And also see my below comments about apostate Christians. Believe me the Christians that piss you off piss me off too so maybe reasoning intelligent people like me who don't want to force their views on you will change your mind about Christians in general. Just don't try to push you view point on me please.
    • EochaidRiata, on 10/11/2007, -8/+31This occurred in April 2006.

      http://www.atheists.org/action/alert-05-apr-2006.html

      This letter is a transcript from a podcast over a year ago: http://forum.teamxbox.com/showthread.php?referrerid=101011&t=434191
    • Murdats, on 10/11/2007, -6/+27@mikesbaker
      uh, go look up the definition of agnostic
    • rhinopig, on 10/11/2007, -1/+12EochaidRiata has a good point. I was wondering why it said " I believe you and NBC owe them an apology " when katie couric works for CBS now.
    • RenZ87, on 10/11/2007, -35/+8I don't understand why 'mikesbaker' is being dugg down. It's not healthy obsessing over someone else's beliefs. While I support atheist's cause for more political influence, what I don't support is this overall obsession with individual views and lifestyles.
    • mikesbaker, on 10/11/2007, -53/+10@murdats
      atheist = someone who believes that there is no god. agnostic = someone who believes that they cannot know god. Very big difference so please endeavor to understand it. NOT THE SAME.
      and uh, make a point don't just troll me. and are you an atheist or an agnostic.
      and thanks renz87 its nice to see someone who isn't a bigoted 12 year old on digg
    • mikesbaker, on 10/11/2007, -38/+5and to further clarify murdats my previous def of agnostic is a simplification of my views of the agnostic. which is if you believe that you can't know god you still believe that there is a god. you've just either turned away from him or haven't found 'the god of your understanding' (yes I've been forced to go to AA before).
    • vvargoal, on 10/11/2007, -21/+40Oh settle down. The saying isn't meant to be taken literally. It expresses innate the human need to find something, anything, to grab hold of when they fear for their lives. It's not a statement of godlessness, it's a statement of psychology. People should stop being so damn touchy.
    • AnteChronos, on 10/11/2007, -4/+109@mikesbaker
      "my previous def of agnostic is a simplification of my views of the agnostic. which is if you believe that you can't know god you still believe that there is a god."

      That's fairly close, but agnosticism says nothing about one's belief in god. It only addresses whether one considers that belief a belief, or a fact. Agnosticism and atheism are actually two independent measures.

      Agnostic = without special knowledge
      Gnostic = with special knowledge
      Atheist = does not believe in god(s)
      Theist = believes in god(s)

      So an agnostic atheist (which I consider myself to be), doesn't believe in god, but also doesn't claim that god absolutely does not exist (i.e. we have no "special knowledge" about the existence of god. He/she/it is just non-existent by default, like unicorns and the tooth fairy). Compare that to a gnostic atheist, who claims that god positively does not exist, usually as a result of some sort of logical (dis)proof.

      On the other end are agnostic and gnostic theists. Agnostic theists believe in god, but don't claim that they can prove that he/she/it exists. Most sane Christians fall into this category. Faith is considered a virtue, and faith doesn't need proof. Then you have the gnostic theists, who claim that things like the complexity of the eye, or the perfect values of various universal constants, prove that there is a god. To them, it's not a matter of faith, but a matter of fact, which they're more than happy to point out at every opportunity.
    • speiibinder, on 10/11/2007, -5/+13@AnteChronos
      Thanks for trying to point out the distinctions, but i also want to point out that Agnosticism and Agnostic Theism are two liked genres that fall under the same concept. Agnosticism is the general term for "without knowledge" Agnostic theism is specifically "without knowledge of god". Agnostic theist don't necessarily believe in god. Although they could go either way in many cases. But the official stance is since they can't prove that god exists they don't wish take a side. They are more or less the middle ground. The confusion of this definition comes from Richard Dawkins. I'm aware he's the local messiah around here so I'm prepared to be dugg down. In any case in his interviews he states that we all can't prove that god exist or doesn't exist, therefore he concludes we are all agnostic to the idea of god. There is no middle ground in his view because even without evidence we will lean to either side. I don't particularly agree with this black and white view on religion because it's too much of a simple minded approach and it testify to how complexity of the subject matter. Anyways my 2 cents.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnostic_theism
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism
    • dreamflows, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9@vvargoal

      The road to hurting others is paved with good intentions. Just so you know - many others explicitly use the statement to berate atheists:
      http://basangpanaginip.blogspot.com/2007/04/infidel-links-2.html
    • AnteChronos, on 10/11/2007, -2/+14@speiibinder
      "Agnosticism is the general term for "without knowledge" Agnostic theism is specifically "without knowledge of god". Agnostic theist don't necessarily believe in god."

      Notice, though, that there's a subtle difference between the phrase "agnostic theism" and "agnostic theist". "Agnostic theism" as a blanket term for how agnosticism applies to the concept of theism. However, an agnostic theist is an individual who is an agnostic (in terms of god) and a theist (believes in god). That fits with the wikipedia entry for agnostic theism that you linked: "Theism as belief in god(s), Agnosticism as don't/can't know".


      "The confusion of this definition comes from Richard Dawkins. I'm aware he's the local messiah around here so I'm prepared to be dugg down. In any case in his interviews he states that we all can't prove that god exist or doesn't exist, therefore he concludes we are all agnostic to the idea of god."

      While I agree that no one can prove or disprove the existence of god (if they could, then, by the very nature of the concept of "proof", I would be gnostic instead of agnostic), many people truly *believe* that they have proof and/or special knowledge. The person who hears god speak to them, and who I would suspect as being schizophrenic, has what *they* consider to be special knowledge. That makes them gnostic.

      The whole concept of having special knowledge is really rather muddy, so you just have to accept that people who *claim* to "know" are gnostic, at least from their own point of view. And while I can claim that, objectively speaking, everyone's really agnostic, that's about as useful as Christians who claim that everyone *really* believes in god, and atheists just pretend not to because they hate him/her/it, or don't want to answer to a higher power, etc. And besides, gnostic knowledge wouldn't be "special knowledge" if everyone had it.
    • insomniacal, on 10/11/2007, -11/+5His point is both well-argued and well-taken.

      I can't help but noting, however, that he continually refers to atheism as a "belief" -- in sharp contrast to what Digger atheists insist, which is that atheism is a _lack_ of belief.
    • GMorgan, on 10/11/2007, -9/+11Agnosticism is a lack of faith in the way I've always used it. Faith is irrelevant from my position. It is logically impossible to know anything either way about god (thank Godel for that) but to establish any belief either way is just an act of self delusion. You cannot know, even if you have had 'special' experiences it is not evidence of god.

      Both atheism and theist are faith based. Both establish a truth without evidence or logic. However I find the atheist position to be more sound than the theist position. When there is a 'I do not know' question to believe in nothing is more sound than to specifically believe in something even if the best position is still 'I do not know'.

      Really modern atheism is more a reactionary thing. A lot of theists (including mikesbaker seemingly) see agnostics as theists who haven't made their mind up yet which is utter bollocks. I've decided that faith is meaningless to me, I'm a strong agnostic and will neither believe nor disbelieve in god. For me the question has no meaning. Some choose instead to switch label to atheism since that seems to be more certain than agnostic. Of course now they try to change the meaning of atheism to mean the same as agnosticism ;).
    • insomniacal, on 10/11/2007, -3/+12@GMorgan:

      You've written an excellent explanation. I've always thought myself that atheism is a belief -- a decision amid a lack of evidence. And I agree with this statement from you: "even if you have had 'special' experiences it is not evidence of god." As a Christian, I shun special experiences and "inward impressions" as ultimately unreliable.

      Your insistence against any knowledge of God altogether ("You cannot know ...") beg larger ontological questions about the possibility of _any_ knowledge. It might be useful to define what, at a bare minimum, would constitute knowledge of God. (Again, I refrain from pointing to special experiences. My own faith is based on the fact that I see more truth in the Bible than anywhere else -- which of course you are free to criticize.)

      Anyway, thank you for an intelligent, well-reasoned and non-emotional response. It's fun dialoguing with thoughtful agnostics (and atheists) like you.
    • ksponge, on 10/11/2007, -5/+3@vvargoal (#6914851)
      It's obviously a false statement. If you want to tell all the troops they are weak minded when they become fearful, well then, you're an idiot.
    • GMorgan, on 10/11/2007, -7/+14"Your insistence against any knowledge of God altogether ("You cannot know ...") beg larger ontological questions about the possibility of _any_ knowledge. It might be useful to define what, at a bare minimum, would constitute knowledge of God."

      I think I best describe my reasoning for knowledge of god being impossible. Essentially the argument breaks down to the fact that to know god you must know everything about the natural system with absolute certainty in order to declare that something is from outside that natural system or super natural. So my argument isn't that you can't know anything but that you can't know everything.

      More formally:
      1. Define a set S that contains all the natural actions.
      2. Let G be that you know something super natural.
      3. Let K be that you know S.
      4. For G you must find an action x which is not a member of S.
      5. Therefore G => K

      To generate S you need an internally complete and consistent logic system which is impossible via Godel. Therefore ¬K

      G => K
      ¬K
      Therefore ¬G

      It is impossible to know something to be super natural because it is impossible to know all of nature. Essentially you have no way of differentiating. If something came to you and created a person you cannot know that to be impossible within the natural system, one day we might be able to create people out of thin air.
    • 5m0k3, on 10/11/2007, -10/+9The phrase was coined during World War II. Don't be absurd. It seems diggers are more and more frequently making news from absolutely nothing..
    • happyfappy, on 10/11/2007, -6/+16@GMorgan:

      Few Atheists actually believe that God certainly does not exist. Strictly speaking, virtually all Atheists -- including Richard Dawkins -- are "agnostic." Claiming that Atheism requires faith is a misrepresentation of what it is.

    • makido, on 10/11/2007, -5/+13@Gmorgan

      Let me preface this by saying I'm a mathematician and an atheist.

      That's got to be one of the most inane attempts at mathematics and/or logic I've seen. Frankly, I'm not sure what it counts as, because it makes no sense.

    • ickarus, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8@mikesbaker:

      Your personal beliefs do not make me angry, though the actions of people like you generally do.

      I don't find it productive to get angry at people that I believe are incorrect about something, unless they are committing actions that directly affect my life. Theists everywhere, from Islamic suicide bombers to American "born again" Evangelicals, are doing so. Even the seemingly innocuous "moderate" Christians in North America oppose reproductive rights, gay marriage, abolishing the war on drugs and stem cell research. I interpret these things as either directly affecting my freedom, or the freedoms of other people, (another thing which I cannot abide).
    • mikesbaker, on 10/11/2007, -9/+1right on ickarus
      and @AnteChronos
      from dictionary.com
      1. a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.
      2. a person who denies or doubts the possibility of ultimate knowledge in some area of study.
      ok so we are both right but you aren't using the primary definition of agnostic
    • NoStoppingUs, on 10/11/2007, -9/+1you people are a bunch of overly sensitive pussies. how dare anyone criticize something we believe in! DOWN WITH THEM!!!

      get
      lives.
    • mikesbaker, on 10/11/2007, -9/+1which you people are you talking abut? diggers, atheist, theist, or the digg trolls (you)?
    • kmpr326, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2This whole argument is moot because anyone that doesn't believe exactly as I do is a douchebag anyway.
    • arbulus, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2@mikesbaker
      Dugg down your first comment because you don't understand what an Agnostic is, and dugg down your second comment because you talk about "apostates". Damn you people who use that ***** word in ernest.
    • mikesbaker, on 10/11/2007, -10/+2yes I am prejudiced in my views on agnostics. I understand the underlying concept I just don't buy it. Just like atheists can't buy my views. But we could go round and round all day long on this so I will leave this forum with this sentiment. I am very glad to see the tone on digg changing from a bigoted Christian bash to a discussion that doesn't involve petty name calling.
      and this isn't exactly news more like digg bait (but hey I took it)
    • totorototoro, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3"Oh settle down. The saying isn't meant to be taken literally"

      Uh...sure it is.
    • Memitim, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Bah, so much pedantery. My only concern is when a major religious figure respected by the religious amongst our troops, for instance the Catholic Pope, decides to declare the US something sufficiently Crusade-worthy, like the source of evil in the world or some such nonsense. Which way will our religious brethren's loyalties go then? Crack on the non-theist types all you want in these times of relative peace but this athiest already knows which side he'll be on when the ***** hits the fan, no internal conflicts at all.
    • macmcrae, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Katie wishes she penned that line. That morrow quote is gold. And if anything it points out how superstitious humans are taught to be. It can be reduced to the fact that pascals wager makes more sense when people are firing artillery at you. For a similar act just look at pro baseball players. They have more finely tuned motor skills than anybody in the world but they revert to superstition when they are pitching a nohitter. If anybody doesn't need luck it is a pitcher. Senseless but it happens.
    • gamefreak6401, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Very good article, I heartily agree with the Master Sgt.
    • gxcdesign, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4why is this quote relevant? when was the last time any of you were in a foxhole?
    • vertinox, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@gxcdesign

      And for that matter... When is the last time anyone in the military was in foxholes?

      War is too mobile these days to bother digging holes for defense.

      By the time the battle begins and ends, the troops are moving to a new location.
    • bigturns, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Katie Couric is invalid.
  • erikwithaknotac, on 10/11/2007, -16/+187As a Marine and an atheist, that hit home.
    • montiff, on 10/11/2007, -12/+133Thanks for your service and support man.
    • jr1480, on 10/11/2007, -16/+32ditto
    • tech42er, on 10/11/2007, -11/+84Don't listen to anyone who says that there are no atheists in foxholes. It's *****. And thanks for protecting us. We really do appreciate it.
    • mikesbaker, on 10/11/2007, -30/+4don't get upset by a cliche and certainly don't let anything that one of the talking head tell you get to you.
      oh and totally unrelated: WTF is with firefox's spell checker - it doesn't know how to spell cliche??
      and thanks for your what you've done for us. I love buying service men drinks and if I ever see you in a bar I'll buy you a pitcher.
    • FortyCaliber, on 10/11/2007, -10/+201I had "Atheist" on my dog tags. My Senior DI yelled at me for being "A ***** ATHEIST!"
      Too ***** bad. I don't need a crutch to know why I'm doing something. I do something because I chose to do so.
      I had one of those Darwin Fish on the back of my truck while I was at Pendleton and I found some sort of flyer uner my wipers "advertising" how I should be "saved." I was the only car in the lot with that flyer on it.
      I took it into the Chaplain's office just to notify him that someone was littering the lot with religious propaganda and paraphenalia. When I got into his office I noticed a stack of them, freshly copied and cut, on his desk. I asked him about it and he proceeded to assault me with rhetoric about serving "God and Country" and the "Will of the Christian Nation." I then decided to also notify him that I was an Atheist and that did not need "saving" and that I served my comrades and my country, in that order and no one else. I also told him that if he wished to continue to push the matter by littering my car with propaganda and attempting to convince me that my beliefs were wrong, then I would be forced to ensure that my ENTIRE chain of command knew that I felt that was being persecuted for my lack of religious beliefs by my unit's over-zealous Chaplain.
      He took the flyer back.
      I received no apology as I left.
      He reported me as being "disrespectful towards a superior officer." I explained the situation to my Battalion Commander.
      The Chaplain transfered soon thereafter.
    • SultanTravi, on 10/11/2007, -14/+5@mikesbaker
      Since "cliche" is a French verb used in English, it should have an accent over the last e to be spelled correctly. Or at least I think so.

      Anyway, thanks for your service ERIK and fortycaliber.
    • MrFlesh, on 10/11/2007, -104/+4Your loyal to your comrades and then your country? uhh that's ***** up. So your tellin me that if your platoon errr whatever were rapin' 14 year old iraqis you'd stand up for them and also say it didn't happen? I thought the reason you joined the armed forces was to defend the constitution......at least that's what the oath you took said.
    • mikesbaker, on 10/11/2007, -21/+1@sultantravi
      good point. I still think that firefox should have found the correct spelling though. and why is add to dictionary right below the suggestions. I've added at least a dozen words misspelled into my firefox vocab. Maybe its time to reinstall.
    • SurrealDream, on 10/11/2007, -1/+53@MrFlesh : Don't come up with such asinine arguments, it's embarrassing for all of us.
    • Gizza, on 10/11/2007, -5/+13@ERIKWITHAKNOTAC (#6905398)
      If there's no atheists in foxholes, what do they become? Do they magically turn Christian, Muslim, Jew, start praying to Zeus or Jupiter? I believe that if there actually is a god, he/she/it would probably prefer I believe in no god than the wrong god.
    • truegodofwar, on 10/11/2007, -32/+6Every day you serve, you are making the world a less safe place my inflaming extremism in the middle east.

      You should quit.
    • JohnnyArson, on 10/11/2007, -3/+16My dogtags say SNKE HNDLR.
    • drakethegreat, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7Kudos to those who continue to support their country knowing that our leadership is in error. It takes balls to do so even when faced with persecution from the same country you are serving. It definitely says something when those who don't believe in Jesus emulate his livelihood more then those who claim to by ignoring the sins of those in charge to do what is right
    • CletusJones, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13They put "NORELPREF" on my dogtags when I enlisted in 1996. They wouldn't put atheist.
    • jstem1994, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7Wish I would have had the balls to put NONE or WICCAN when I was in the Navy 85-91.

      I instead went with ROM CATH because that's what I'm supposed to be since my grandma had me baptized as an infant, WITHOUT telling my mother...

      Always amazed with how a religion that preaches love for all can be filled with such hating people.
    • Memitim, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5Yeah, they hit mine with the NORELPREF when I joined in '92. Seemed kind of funny to me but had I known of that stupid saying at the time I would have pitched a bitch to get it changed to "ATHIEST" just to show it off while sitting in foxholes. :)
    • carve, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Count me in. I'm an Air Force Captain and an athiest.
  • anastrophe, on 10/11/2007, -120/+12whine, whine whine. poor baby atheists. so terribly put-upon.

    for starters, who gives one flying ***** what katie couric says? you got your panties in a knot over *this*???

    sheesh.
    • montiff, on 10/11/2007, -12/+75Well for starters when someone with an outlet as large as the Nghtly News saws some idiotic cliche ***** I think it is a big deal.
    • joebus, on 10/11/2007, -1/+51Also, this would receive national attention if the same thing happened, but you said, "There are no Christians in Foxholes." Katie would also, most likely get fired from such a comment.
    • willb285, on 10/11/2007, -37/+5@anastrophe

      No, it's not that, it's simply that anything containing the word atheist now will get dugg up by all the 18 year olds with a PHD, you had to have noticed right?
    • FortyCaliber, on 10/11/2007, -5/+60Atheists are "put upon."
      So many Atheists neglect to mention that they are in public company for fear of being seen as a "bad person." I lost a friend when he found out I was an Atheist. He was simply to pious to believe he could be friends with someone who was an atheist. He even neglected to remember the good times we had before that.
      I have a friend that was refused a contract re-negotiation at his job because they found out he was atheist.
      Oh well. I suppose being socially persecuted isn't REALLY being "put-upon."
    • ksponge, on 10/11/2007, -16/+7@willb285 (#6914405)
      I could give a ***** less where the atheists come from as long as our numbers keep swelling so that the theism ridiculousness fades to a whisper. But i ***** guarantee there are more xians that haven't even read their bibles once, than atheists that don't know what they really beleive.
    • DieselDaddy, on 10/11/2007, -8/+2This is a Cliche, a quote, a turn-of-phrase. Certainly you clowns have heard it before? Its like saying to your buddy "I'm going to kill you if you tell Ahmed that i took the last Falafel!" Nobody believes that you are actually going to kill him. Why the fuss?

      You atheists are overly-sensitive and far too defensive. Chill out a little. So some no-talent news bimbo uttered a common Cliche that had your religion in it. Nobody takes her seriously anyway. Some ex lax and prune juice may help you out.
    • msgyrd, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I simply don't talk about it in person, or lie if I'm cornered about it. Even if I am suspected as being athiest, keeping them ignorant prevents them from attempting to preach to me. I'm also knowledgable enough about my local religious majority that I can feign belief long enough to get rid of them.

      There are cases of persecution against athiests, but it's not unique to just athiesm, there are plenty of cases for all religions to portray discrimination for their beliefs. The bigger factor is a religious person is less likely to preach to another religion, whereas athiests and agnostics are viewed as prime targets for being "saved" since they aren't already affiliated. Athiest deal with the same amount of belief discrimination plus all the religions trying to find their next convert.
  • squenix1221, on 10/11/2007, -4/+29Wasn't this one of the quotes they show when you die in COD2?
    • HotGore, on 10/11/2007, -28/+7Ya it is. I remember I was posting that all over when I was Christian.
    • mikesbaker, on 10/11/2007, -6/+25I'm a Christian and I've never posted or said that because I'm not a boarish person.
    • WebCester, on 10/11/2007, -0/+19Actually I think it was this one (posted by Jagula above):

      “There are no atheists in foxholes" isn't an argument against atheism, it's an argument against foxholes”
      -James Morrow

      I always liked the messages in COD2. "There is nothing more exhilarating in life than being shot at without result." comes to mind.
  • reddevil3, on 10/11/2007, -11/+5Anyone have video/transcript of Katie Couric saying that? I guess that idiot just wants to stir up controversy because her ratings are in the toilet.
    • reddevil3, on 10/11/2007, -5/+5Never mind I found it. She broadcast it back in April '06.
    • Forestmb, on 10/11/2007, -10/+40On the April 5, 2006, broadcast of the Today Show television show, in a segment about God, America & War, Katie Couric said, "Perhaps you have heard the expression, 'There are no Atheists in foxholes,' and the men who have occupied the oval office have also turned to a higher power." American Atheists has demanded a clarification and apology.

      That's all the wiki page/the source said. Sounds to me that in a segment relating God and War, Couric asked a guest if he had heard a popular saying that related God and War. NO! MAN THE HARPOONS, SHE IS INFRINGING ON OUR ATHEISM.
    • montiff, on 10/11/2007, -3/+12@Forest

      I dugg you up for that 'Man the harpoons'. great stuff.

      I think, and this is my opinion, that the broader point of this letter was to try to correct the misconception that all men(even atheists) turn to a higher being in life-threating moments.
    • mikesbaker, on 10/11/2007, -19/+5As a Christian let me put in my 2 cents. I think the real meaning of that is many (OK maybe most) Christians are pretty much apostates until they either want something or think they are going to die. I don't consider God to be a holy concierge but I do understand. And people who are atheist with maybe a bit of agnostic get pushed into the agnostic side when they are about to die. God always answers prayers problem is its usually not the answer you were wanting. But hey there are no gays in the military either right ;)
  • bardamuclichy, on 10/11/2007, -38/+12A close friend of mine in the army claimed to be atheist. His reasoning: "If there is a God, then why is the world so bad?" Granted he had a hard life growing up. If you want to be atheist(or at least tell me so), that's fine... just have a good reason. When I tried to discuss why whether the world was 'good' or 'bad' doesn't make much of a difference regarding theism, he got pissed. End of discussion.

    He later moved onto another unit. We both ended up in Iraq of course. After his first tour there we met up. I was surprised to learn he had started reading the bible. Told him what i knew, or at least thought I knew about God and Christianity. It was a bar & beer conversation so naturally the conversation shifted to other things. He's on his third tour now... I wonder how he's holding up. Everytime I hear about casualties from a couple certain Stryker Brigades, I have to cringe and read up to see if I knew them. It's strange... knowing people who have since suffered horrible deaths. Makes you respect your mortality and appreciate your life.
    • ickarus, on 10/11/2007, -4/+33... What? Apparently having a hard life is a good reason for being an atheist?

      As an atheist that favours logic and scientific method over personal anecdotes or pity parties, I can say that having a hard life is no more "proof" of atheism than having a good life is "proof" of theism.

      Besides, it's not up to you to decide whether or not someone's reason for not believing in supernatural mumbo jumbo is good enough. As much as I wish you were, I'll bet you're not challenged at every corner to recite the teleological argument for God's existence.

    • sibhod, on 10/11/2007, -1/+40i'm afraid you've mixed up the burden of proof here. i don't have to tell you why there's no god any more that i have to tell you why there's no invisible unicorn in your room. try giving me proof of god that can be observed and tested, not the warm fuzzies you get, or the statistically obvious coincidences.

      for every shaky atheist you give me i can give you fifty religious knuckle-draggers who think evolution is a liberal conspiracy by the evil intellectuals, descendants of the heretics who dare propose that god's favorite planet wasn't the center of the universe; the same lot that thinks bush is the best president even because he namedrop's their preferred deity.
    • Septimus, on 10/11/2007, -1/+20No, I think you have that the wrong way around.

      I want a damn good reason and proof why I should believe in your invisible friend.
    • atticus8, on 10/11/2007, -2/+45I love it how you will accept someone's atheism as long as they have a "good reason". Apparently, believing in an invisible force that creates all earth's life and then drowns it all in a flood, and believing in your personal ability to influence the physical laws of our universe (you know, the "power" of prayer), is something so downright logical and obvious that no proof is necessary. But you now need a "good reason" to not believe in some entity for which there is not and never has been any credible evidence of any kind. Ever. Call a spade a spade, but only if you can produce a good reason to do so.

      Equally precious is your categorization of having a hard life as being a good enough reason to be atheist. In your very next sentence after you mention this, you point out that having a hard or easy life has nothing to do with theism's validity. Somehow, you can't see that the same obvious truth applies to atheism. Do you really know people in real life that actually make their theological decision in the manner you seem to think they do in your head? Is it really that one guy has a hard knock life and goes "Hey, my life is hard and the world is hard. I'm atheist now!", while another guy, a rich, healthy, handsome guy across town grows up and goes "My life has always been satisfying and happy, so thus Jesus is the only begotten son of Our Lord God who rules in Heaven!" I know in asking these questions I'm being the typical atheist downer that actually asks for evidence, but I happen to believe that having evidence for your beliefs is a beneficial thing. And unlike other beliefs I could mention, I have proof for this.

      It might sound from this rant that I want to dislike you personally, but I don't, because you don't sound at all like an *****. You're probably a fine guy to have a beer with. My real concern is this: your attitude toward the atheist community is infused with a profound condescension, and yet, mind-bogglingly, you seem to sense no trace of it at all. This all-too-common phenomenon drives athiests (almost everywhere a vastly outnumbered minority) to be constantly, casually, and arrogantly dismissed for even the most common-sensical of our "beliefs". For instance, you can probably tell I've just about had it with those that make me feel as if asking for evidence for beliefs is a ludicrous idea. It eventually strains your nerves and not all of us can be all cool and calm like Jesus. Not even Jesus was like Jesus. I could prove it to you if only we had more reliable evidence.
      PS It seems that while I was writing this others have made many of my same points. It's nice to have some support somewhere, Digg is like fresh air.
    • mdesjardins, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7@atticus8

      "Not even Jesus was like Jesus."

      That was the most brilliant thing I have read in weeks. I am SO going to use that line someday...
    • bardamuclichy, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2My my.

      This is quite funny how reactionary you all are. You all seem to think I require atheists to have 'proof' to be an atheist. That was purely a discussion between my friend and I.

      #1: I never said my friend's hard life was a valid reason for atheism. I was stating I could see why he would believe such. What had a so called 'God' ever done for him?(by his rationality) Idiots.

      #2: My ATTITUDE towards the 'atheist community' did not exist prior to Digg. It was tempered by the angry reactionary zealous jackasses that apparently comprises this so called 'community'

      #3: If you don't want to believe there's a God. That's fine by me. Just STFU and quit trying to shove your atheism down my throat just because some ***** Christians yelled at you to go to church and you didn't like it. Sheesh!

      Conclusion:

      What I have learned from atheists is that it's as if atheism is more an anti Christian reaction than a belief! If you want people to think you're all logical and scientific, quit being such outraged angry cry babies every time someone says something you don't agree with. I AM OUTRAGED GRRR! GOD IS DUMB! LOL
  • moldykorn, on 10/11/2007, -21/+16"wearing purple hearts brown stars and at least five silver stars"

    You would think that a man that served 21 years active duty would know that they're "Bronze" stars. Makes me question the credibility of the "letter" itself.
    • Junkyarddawg, on 10/11/2007, -13/+5Or of the spellchecker.
    • SultanTravi, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10@Junkyarddawg
      Since when was "brown" not a word?
    • EochaidRiata, on 10/11/2007, -0/+36This is just a transcript. If you listen to the audio he clearly says 'bronze'.

    • mrASSMAN, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10It was probably an innocent mistake. A brain fart.

      edit: so I guess it was a mistake on the part of the transcript writer, not the soldier.
    • ClunkClunk, on 10/11/2007, -1/+33Brown stars are what I'd make in my underwear in a foxhole, not become a theist.
    • 2012, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Brown stars in my underwear...

      That was unexpectedly funny. Thank you!
  • KingMoses, on 10/11/2007, -5/+5Penn Jillette talked about this on his radio show over a year ago.
  • DrBudro, on 10/11/2007, -6/+227"There are no atheist suicide bombers"
    • HollisJamison, on 10/11/2007, -4/+35Dugg, dugg, and dugg. Best comment in the thread.
    • Urusai, on 10/11/2007, -2/+48That's because nobody will promise us 77 virgins BEFORE we blow ourselves up.
    • modelcadet, on 10/11/2007, -29/+23That's not true at all. I'm sure there were plenty Japanese kamikaze pilots who chose to sacrifice their lives for nationalism. I'd further argue the West undervalues the nationalistic motivations of many suicide bombers whose homes have been invaded by an imperialist force. Most, if not all, of, say, the Palestinian bombers are religious extremists... but their actions are most certainly also prompted by the effects Israeli occupation has had in their homes. If someone were to invade your country, murder your children, and strangle away your freedoms, you might consider doing the same thing, irrespective of religious beliefs.
    • fucayama, on 10/11/2007, -0/+46@moldelcadet
      Not to take anything away from your point but technically the kamikaze pilots were supposed to regard Hirohito as a deity, technically.
    • Comatose51, on 10/11/2007, -1/+37@modelcadet: You might want to research Shintoism and how that religion is intertwined with Japanese nationalism. To say that the kamikaze pilots were atheists is just idiotic. Furthermore, it's one thing to be a kamikaze pilot ramming your plane into the military of an enemy and another to strap explosives to yourself and target civilians. Kamikaze pilots are not considered terrorists.

      As for your remark about nationalism being the drive behind suicide bombers, again, you're quite wrong. The Middle East and Arab nations went through a phase of pan-Arab nationalism that saw the rise of the Baath party in Syria and Iraq. Egypt was the leader in this movement but they were eventually all defeated by Israel. The failure of that movement marked the rise of radical Islam, suicide bombers, and organizations such as Hamas. Before that, there were terrorists but few suicide bombers. Regardless, if you claim that Hamas, Hezbollah, or even the PLO are atheists, you're going to be laughed at.
    • kinglear, on 10/11/2007, -10/+9@modelcadet

      wrong. Many Muslims have been taught to kill and plunder irrespective of their situation. The Qur'an commands Muslims to "smite the necks of the unbelievers," hence all the beheadings in Iraq, and to kill all of the infidels.
    • rodrigo74, on 10/11/2007, -1/+65That reminds me another quote:

      "With or without (religion) you would have good people doing good things
      and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil
      things, that takes religion."

      --Physicist and Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg
    • Barlo_Mung, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10@modelcadet
      "Palestinian bombers are religious extremists... but their actions are most certainly also prompted by the effects Israeli occupation has had in their homes."

      There are also a large number of Christian Palestinians in the area who suffer the same type and magnitude of oppression. Yet it's only the Islamic extremists blowing themselves up.
    • Veritate, on 10/11/2007, -5/+5"If someone were to invade your country"
      Illegal immigrants are invading my country. I have never advocated the death penalty for them, and never will. What they're doing really isn't bad enough to warrant that.

      ", murder your children,"
      I have less experience here, and would advocate the death penalty for child murderers. I still wouldn't kill myself to enforce it, though.

      "strangle away your freedoms, "

      Heh. Political jokes about the current administration aside, freedoms are most strangled in jail, but few convicts become suicide bombers because of it.


      "you might consider doing the same thing, irrespective of religious beliefs. "

      No, I wouldn't. I believe most wouldn't, and atheists would be less likely to than others (unless the religious thought they were going to hell after they died -- but they never seem to think that, do they?)
    • ChildeRoland420, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4>>Illegal immigrants are invading my country. I have never advocated the death penalty for them, and never will. What they're doing really isn't bad enough to warrant that.

      The mexicans aren't bringing Abrahms tanks and Apache helicopters.

      >>Heh. Political jokes about the current administration aside, freedoms are most strangled in jail, but few convicts become suicide bombers because of it.

      Yeah, and few convicts had their freedom and families taken away so that someone else can claim their land, not to mention the whole "being convicted of a crime" thing.
  • LavaHot, on 10/11/2007, -7/+4Isn't this story over a year old? This was before she was on CBS! What's a foxhole and why aren't I in it?
  • metric7, on 10/11/2007, -45/+4Atheists whing about something katie couric said a year ago? LAME.
    • javip, on 10/11/2007, -13/+8ummm.. metric7 whinging about atheists whinging about something katie couric said..... LAMER than LAME
    • nonsapiens, on 10/11/2007, -5/+24A Christian whining about atheists whining about Katie Couric?

      LAME.
    • LavaHot, on 10/11/2007, -4/+16Not knowing how to spell "whining"? PRICELESS.
    • ksponge, on 10/11/2007, -4/+10@metric7 (#6914375)
      WTF is a whing? You scream of average.
    • throadhummel, on 10/11/2007, -9/+2"A Christian whining about atheists whining about Katie Couric?"

      Do you have any evidence that metric7 is a Christian?

      Because I think it's lame; I posted a comment debunking it; and I'm an atheist. You assholes are just bullying this guy. You should be ashamed of yourselves.
    • OneLess, on 10/11/2007, -5/+5Whinging=complaining

      If you're going to insult the moron, get your UK facts straight first.
    • drwtsn32, on 10/11/2007, -1/+14"If you're going to insult the moron, get your UK facts straight first."

      He still spelled "whinge" wrong.
  • tokyopimp, on 10/11/2007, -18/+2I'm an agnostic, and I don't understand why someone would actually be upset about this.

    I could understand if she said it as if she it was the absolute truth in her opinion, but she said "Have you heard the expression?" before she said it. And also the fact that it is just that an expression that gets the point across that being in a fox hole is a life or death situation and is literally so scary you'll start to believe in god for fear of death.

    If that old expression offends you, then I feel sorry for you... seriously, that is mother ***** stupid to be offended by that old expression regarding war. Obviously nobody believes that there aren't any ashiest in the military, or fighting in Iraq.

    • MrFlesh, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10People are taking it to mean that aethiests are not intrested in defending thier country.
    • SurrealDream, on 10/11/2007, -2/+17It's implying that, when a person is under the threat of death or extreme stress, they will find their faith in god. Thus, there are no atheists in foxholes, because all men/women in foxholes have discovered god due to their horrific circumstances.
    • OCedHrt, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10It simply demonstrates that "faith," in reality, is for "convenience" and taken as such.
    • Comatose51, on 10/11/2007, -0/+14@surrealdream: And likewise many people have lost faith in God when they saw the horror of war. They couldn't reconcile a good and loving God with the harsh realities of war. Eli Wiesel[sp?], the son of a Jewish Rabbi, lost his faith in God when he was in the Holocaust death camps. Some people find strength in religion and spirituality and some don't. To imply that everyone does is insulting to those who serve our armed forces. Our soldiers fight for their country and their comrades. American soldiers are not crusaders. We don't kill people in the name of God or not suppose to anyways.
    • Veritate, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6"Obviously nobody believes that there aren't any ashiest in the military, or fighting in Iraq. "

      Yes, I used to have that kind of faith in people being reasonable. It is quite obvious to me now that there are people who believe exactly that.
  • srothman, on 10/11/2007, -1/+14That was powerful.. I'm an atheist who served in the ARMY. Luckily I never saw combat, but even so I hate that expression, but certainly not as much as an atheist war veteran must.
    • DieselDaddy, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1So what. I hate the term "kudos" but you don't see me bitching and moaning about it. Sack up atheists! I don't give a rat's ass what religion (or lack thereof) you are, you don't get a free pass to whine and complain about stupid *****.

      This is America, do something or shut the ***** up.
    • Abaddon1125, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Shinto actually does have a creation myth, although no one in Japan believes it anymore. The story is found in the Kojiki, which was compiled around 712CE.
    • xt0ph3r, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@dieseldaddy: "...you don't get a free pass to whine and complain about stupid *****.

      This is America...."

      Actually, we get a free pass to whine and complain about any kind of ***** we want.
  • otep, on 10/11/2007, -41/+3

    .....Kamikaze pilots are atheists. And when did Couric become relevant? I forgot she was still on air.

    • DrBudro, on 10/11/2007, -0/+46Kamikaze (Japanese: 神風; literally: "god wind")

      The state religion of Japan in WWII was Shinto, and the Emperor ordering them to be Kamikazes was regarded as a divine ruler...


    • makido, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3There is argument about whether Shintoism is really a religion. Western scholars tend not to classify many Eastern religions as religions, because of a lack of a creator god. Buddhism, Shintoism, Confucianism, Taoism, etcetera, are all largely nontheistic traditions (there are some small sects which deify Buddha, Confucius, etcetera). Kamikaze was more of a cult mentality than a religious one. Although calling it atheistic isn't accurate either. Atheism usually connotes a rational skepticism of authority, at least in the way many atheists use it. And kamikaze definitely did not have that.
  • pawperso, on 10/11/2007, -2/+105I'm an atheist, and iraq veteran, when I first came under fire I was crapping myself, but I certainly didnt turn to god. I did turn to my radio op and get him to bring in the air cover, thats my kinda salvation.



    • MinorLemming, on 10/11/2007, -0/+21Ahhh... Long life through superior firepower - the only _sensible_ reaction to a foxhole :)
  • gbro, on 10/11/2007, -21/+1Lets start a petition to end atheists' suffrage.
  • celestial, on 10/11/2007, -15/+2Fake
  • chazzy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheists_in_foxholes
  • haider254, on 10/11/2007, -2/+13Most atheists understand how insignificant their existence truly is in the grand scheme of things. They understand what a tiny blip their lives are in the billions of years the earth has been around. Well, that is atleast my outlook on life, if I drop dead, no big deal...
    • PAJK, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4But you missed the most important part, in that there is absolutely nothing wrong with that fact, whatsoever. When you're dead, you're dead, yes...and we have been conditioned to believe that this is somehow cynical, and bad -- that NO, you're not just dead, there has to be something nicer, and fluffier about it.
    • xt0ph3r, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@haider254: Screw that. I'm an atheist. And I realize how insignificant my life is in the grand scheme of the universe, true. However, since I know there's no Valhalla, Heaven or virgins waiting for me in an afterlife, that makes THIS life all the more important to ME.
  • MrFlesh, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1Wasn't Casey Sheenan an aethiest? Or am I thinking of a different aethiest who died in the war and had an article written about them. Of course there will be less atheists in the army than thiests....there's more theists......and they are dumber. If they can be fooled by child molesting priest or a gay meth addict they can be fooled by the armed forces.
  • RussellDovey, on 10/11/2007, -6/+3"as rapidly and brutally as possible."

    Truth is a wonderful thing.
  • Yage2006, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1How does he know that have they been taking polls or something.

    BS statement and a non argument.
  • mjl5629, on 10/11/2007, -3/+17I was in a "foxhole". I was an Atheits then and I am even more of an Atheist now.
    • hplasm, on 10/11/2007, -0/+59 out of 10 foxes will agree with you there :)
  • DavidDigg, on 10/11/2007, -0/+19Here is what I want to know: when did the Christian "war on atheists" begin? Last time I checked, Christian dogma was emphatic and unequivocal in the attitude Christians ought to have towards non-believers: patience, generosity, and empathy. There were of course aberrations---the Inquisition comes to mind---I think we are now in the middle of another inquisition. The Church has allowed some very evil people to pretend to be true Christians who know nothing of spreading the word of God. Jerry Falwell comes to mind.
    • Buckiller, on 10/11/2007, -0/+17There has always been a war against atheists in civilizations... it has highs and lows of course.

      On a side note... I had no idea so many people were atheist until i joined digg. I live in the South... and id say about 90% of the population is Christian...
  • anorexicpillow, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5So she is saying that everyone believes in god when put in such a situation? I call total bs.. wouldn't that mean that there were no Jews in Germany? Being an atheist isn't sometime I turn on or off, I firmly believe it.. therefore I won't be swayed into praying just because I'm in danger.
  • mal1964, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9I doubt if she has ever been in a foxhole
  • Isgall, on 10/11/2007, -0/+17If fear can cause you to believe then you believed all along. As much as people would like you to believe atheists are cowards, because they don't have heaven to look forward to, it's all *****. When the ***** hits the fan we'll stand up as well as any of the religious lot but we do it, not because some god says so, but because we know it is the right thing to do. Of all the people I've ever met Atheists, Hindu's, and Buddhists are the most morally grounded. Because above all else those belief sets or the lack there of are based on a learned sense of right and wrong not an indoctrination. You can call me a lot of things and I won't care, but call me a coward or an idiot and I'll take offense.
  • nickdngr, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9i don't know about foxholes, but i can tell you there are atheists in humvees, strykers, 5-tons, foxes, tanks, planes...
  • Loonacy, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6Several different possible interpretations (not that I think any are accurate):
    There are no athiests in foxholes. When you're in a foxhole about to die, everyone turns to God.
    There are no atheists in foxholes. When you're an athiest, you don't believe in an afterlife, therefore you're less likely to risk your life.
    There are no atheists in foxholes. Atheists have less reason to go to war because of clashes in beliefs.
  • slezzzter, on 10/11/2007, -9/+6Clearly, he and many of you failed to understand the meaning of the saying. There is no implication that atheists do not join the military. If so, the quote would be "There are no atheists in the military." Indeed, the cliche implies that at the face of death, everyone questions their beliefs and will choose to believe in a greater being (note: it doesn't have to be a christian god, could be Pan the Goat God). Sure, it's a terrible over-generalization, but by not doing basic research on the saying, this guy seems to be searching for a way to be offended.

    Additionally, why would anyone turn down West Point and a commission to enlist as a private? No sarcasm, I really would like to know what reasons would lead to such a decision.
    • ckSubs, on 10/24/2007, -7/+2Exactly. He missed the point of the entire quote.
    • CaptMonkey, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2I wondered if anyone else was curious about him mentioning West Point, which he must have turned down, without going into detail about it. I suppose I did much the same of turning down the opportunity to attend the Air Force Academy and instead enlisting, but I mainly did that because I didn't want to be committed to staying in the military for that long, this guy stayed in long enough to retire.

      I agree with your point as well, he seems to be looking for a way to be offended. As an agnostic veteran with atheistic leanings, I'm no more offended by the cliche "There are no atheists in foxholes." than any of the other nonsense religious people spout all the time. I think "You're going to hell if you don't accept Christ as your Lord," is entirely more offensive, and I hear that much more often. Par for the course.
      • AnitraWeb, on 10/14/2007, -0/+1Letting stupid statements stand without criticism is how this country got so stupid. Anyone has a right to feel/believe/say anything. And anyone has the right to challenge it. Freedom of speech goes both ways.
    • Dimensio, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6" There is no implication that atheists do not join the military. If so, the quote would be "There are no atheists in the military." Indeed, the cliche implies that at the face of death, everyone questions their beliefs and will choose to believe in a greater being (note: it doesn't have to be a christian god, could be Pan the Goat God)."

      There is no misunderstanding of the meaning behind the saying. The saying is simply false. Atheists have faced death and remained atheists. The statement is an insulting lie, Katie Couric and anyone else who makes the claim is an idiot and a liar, and the outrage against it is completely justified.
    • AnitraWeb, on 10/14/2007, -0/+1The implication that anyone will abandon a position of conviction if they get desperate or miserable enough, in order to beg help of a rescuing god, is an insult to both atheists and theists.
  • vinieux, on 10/14/2007, -3/+18Any NON-atheists in foxholes care to remember - "Thou shalt not kill"???
    • IckyChris, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Well, that's more of a suggestion than a Commandment.
      The icky stuff that they already hate...those are the real Commandments.
  • reparsed, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Why are atheists being excluded from foxholes?
    • hplasm, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9FOX media don't like them.

      /gets coat.
  • RaoulDuke215, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Hear, hear! Incredibly articulate. I'm glad someone is standing up to the media.
  • Lmpltr, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Excellent article and excellent comments!
  • Visionz, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Couric is a wackjob, dugg.
    • Lennalf, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1There are no Katie Courics in fox holes.
  • lopla, on 10/11/2007, -16/+1How is it that 23% of America (the evangelicals) have total control over America with zero oversight? It is because God wants it that way. The fact that 23% of us rule America should be proof enough to the skeptics that we are God's children and we control America under his direction. Whine all you like, we are in control, we will remain in control and there is nothing you non-believers can do about it whatsoever. God's plan is martial law and our leader is already making preparations. God Bless America, the Christian nation under God.
    • WoollyMittens, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Dude... don't give the plan away.
    • Alimack, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4If you're God's True Children, why do I always throw your leaflets away without reading them?
    • hello2usir, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5@lopla
      You need to also thank God for your internet anonymity.
      In the real world you can't say something like that and not expect an ass beating.
  • nanosaurius, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Great letter. In any case, becoming a believer for fear of dying just shows how religions mostly work, through peoples fears. Thinking about it, fearing death makes sense in an evolutionary context, not when your expecting to go to heaven. Why would one be afraid of eternal bliss?
    • bongobottom, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0exactly...the atheists are the ones who are fearful, thus turning to the "eternal bliss." That is the point of the quote. it says nothing about believers being fearful.
  • WoollyMittens, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2There's no atheists in the foxholes, because they send them to clean up the mine-fields.
  • Binarydemon, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Katie Couric is just a pretty face, she reads words off the teleprompter and smiles. Don't blame her for the content.
    • DieselDaddy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"Katie Couric is just a pretty face, she reads words off the teleprompter and smiles. Don't blame her for the content."

      Katie Couric is just a face, she reads words off the teleprompter and smiles. Don't blame her for the content.

      There, fixed that for you. No need to exaggerate :)
  • JasonCox, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1Way to quote M*A*S*H.
  • Craig42, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7I recently watched a very visually real documentary on the O.R. emergency rooms over in Iraq, and some of the brave infantry that they tried to save but couldn't, had "no religious preference" on their dog tags.

    Atheists are outnumbered in the Armed Forces generally, but they do exist.

    Katie Couric is not a real news anchor and will never be. Her stories are human interest stories and are driven by emotion, rather than intellectual stimulation.
    • Digger008008, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6A lot of servicemembers have "No Religious Preference" on their dog tags not because they are Atheists or Agnostics, but because they didn't fill out a form completely or because the person making the tags was lazy. Some servicemembers also leave it off for privacy reasons, or because they don't want their religion on their tags in the event of capture. Being captured by Islamic extremists would suck, but I imagine it would suck even more if you had "Jewish" on your tags. Servicemembers who fear discrimination based upon religious preference also sometimes claim no preference, Wiccans for example.
    • GMorgan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2So no Atheists say Christian to avoid persecution then. Good to know that sort of thing doesn't happen ;).
  • gordonj, on 10/11/2007, -2/+18There are no Katie Couric's in foxholes.
  • michaelinnotts, on 10/11/2007, -4/+9I cannot believe how many people misunderstand this aphorism, which I always thought to be quite transparent.

    The phrase means that people who are facing death hope for an afterlife out of desperation and fear. It means that atheists, when facing death, hope there is a God and a Heaven. The writer of this piece has completely misunderstood what the saying means.

    I should mention that I am an atheist, and I want my comment to be considered in that context, so don't dig me down for being a zealot.
    • cquinnd, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5 "It means that atheists, when facing death, hope there is a God and a Heaven."

      The writer of this piece has completely understood what the saying means. So have you... what you have failed to understand is how that can be insulting to other military members.

      Soldiers are trained to face death on a regular basis (or at least should be trained that way). Most of the time, they are too busy trying not to end up dead to worry about an afterlife, because the effort needed to truly question ones beliefs would take valuable time and energy away from protecting themselves and their fellow soldiers.

      What a soldier may beleive in a passing moment of extreme stress is not important; what is important is understanding that they are going to have to deal with hundreds of similar moments in the course of a deployment, and if they are so unsure about their own beliefs during those moments, then they are also likely to be unreliable and even dangerous to the people they are working with under the same conditions.

      I would as you, as an "athiest", to consider the difference between a person in a foxhole hoping for a God of Salvation, to directly intervene to help them get out of a bad situtation; and a God of Vengance, who would strike down that persons enemies, thereby leading them to victory.

    • michaelinnotts, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2As an atheist I'm not really the sort to think of such distinctions, but you make a good point in your attempt to insult me.

      As for "what a soldier may believe in a passing moment of extreme stress is not important"--yes it is. It is very, very important, for it is in times of extreme stress that we learn more about human nature and why people call on supernatural forces. Your political obsessions have blinded you to the humanism that this aphorism attempts to enlighten in the first place. This saying is not normally used to refer to military (the only instances I have seen are in this thread and the original article); the "foxhole" in the comment is metaphorical. It can apply to the elderly, victims of a mass murder, bystanders in a bank robbery, victims of mafia terrorizers, etc. etc.
    • Dimensio, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5"The phrase means that people who are facing death hope for an afterlife out of desperation and fear."

      And given that there are known instances of atheists not hoping for an afterlife "out of desperation and fear" even in the face of death, the phrase is an insulting lie and should be denounced as such.
    • Barlo_Mung, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Fine, but Katie Couric chose to pull it out during a piece on Religion in the military. So that makes his comment on topic.
  • Digger008008, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10shaneapex, the author of the letter was a retired US Marine master sergeant, not a general officer.

    nanosaurius, the fear of dying does not rank at the top of my list of personal worries in a combat zone, nor does it for most of my colleagues. What we really fear instead is being kidnapped and having some crazy ass extremist torturing us for three days with various power tools, and only then cutting off our heads with a rusty spoon.

    I've had various munitions come closer to my soft flesh than I would prefer, and I have offered prayers requesting divine intervention or offering gratitude after the fact. I've served with people of virtually every type of religious preference, and I don't believe that religious preference makes someone good or bad on this earth.

    I have a colleague who is a Muslim, and he is a good man. But there are also lots of Muslims who would like to cut off my head and sew a dog's head on to replace it. The difference between my friend and those who want to practice taxidermy on me is that he is a well educated man, and is not under the influence of some power hungry, psychopathic Imam who is capable of brainwashing him. It's not the religion that makes these people bad, it's human beings who are able to exert influence over them. A charismatic leader can cause people to kill in the name of any idea, from political to religious. It is not the fault of the idea that has been co-opted, it is the fault of the person who used it for evil and those who follow him.
  • thedarkrabbit, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11Well, Katie... I lived in a foxhole for 3 weeks at the start of the Iraq war... I'm still an atheist.
  • bluechips23, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4Who really cares whether some one believes in God or not? The believers have their reason to believe in whichever God they want and the non-believers have their own reason to not to believe in any God. But I don't understand how that really matters in our own real life transactions. I have had a room-mate for last 4 years and he is not religious but at the same time he doesn't disprove God. On the other hand, I am kinda very religious. We stayed together for 4 years and we became best friends. But our belief in religion was never an issue between us. Sure we had few conversations, but I never imposed my beliefs on him and he never imposed his beliefs on me. And we are going to be good friends for rest of the life. Our different point of views regarding religion was never a problem or a barrier in our friendship. I mean, we meet up people at the bar, or club or gym or class, and the first thing we say is not "OMG, do you believe in God? He is so cool!", but more probably like "Jeez, these gas prices are killing me".

    Atheists have their own philosophy and let them live with that. Believers have their own philosophy and also let them live with that. And neither of those should impose anything on the other one, because that would create imbalance in communal harmony and peace. With the imbalance, there's a distraction from the real issues we are facing today, namely the war, the rising gas prices, corruption, education, global warming, etc. So the question is, do we want use up all our money, energy and resources and die fighting against each other regarding the question whether the atheists are right or religious believers are right, or do we want to unite together and use the same money, energy and resources to fight against the real issues the world is facing. The choice is up to the people themselves and as far as I know, people also don't care much either. It's just the IQ-less people who have too much time on their hands and got too much media coverage and support to back up their ass. Just having a pretty face shouldn't be a criteria to have access to national media coverage. IQ and common sense should be a much more important criteria.

    That's my 2 cents.
    • Wootery, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4"Atheists have their own philosophy and let them live with that. Believers have their own philosophy and also let them live with that. And neither of those should impose anything on the other one, because that would create imbalance"

      Some atheists realise that religion is a Bad Thing for society, and so have motivation to make more people atheist.
      Some christians seem to think that atheists shouldn't be tolerated, and so have motivation to make more people christian.
      They both have reason to impose their beliefs.

      "that would create imbalance". I don't see it. Religion is a Bad Thing - It's used as an excuse to go to war, to teach children intolerance, to teach children irrational ***** like intelligent design (and so teach not to question), and that if you're a bad boy you'll burn in hell forever. Fewer religious believers is not going to do damage.

      "With the imbalance, there's a distraction from the real issues we are facing today, namely the war, the rising gas prices, corruption, education, global warming, etc."
      How?
    • bluechips23, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2People are going for war over religion because they are trying to impose others their own beliefs. They want to justify everything in terms of religion or disbelief in religion to prove their point, how absurd that may be. And that's what bothers me. If some one doesn't believe in God, fine, let him/her live with that as long as he/she doesn't try to impose his/her ideas on a different person. Also, if some one believes in God, let him believe in God. Not every one who believes in God is bad. People hungry for power will find any excuse to create disturbance. They can use religion for a war, and also at the same time, religion can also be used to save lives and take care of poor people. But the sad thing is, many people who believe in religion don't understand that service to man-kind is service to God. Instead they just feel the need to "protect" their religion by killing others, which is obviously ***** up and stupid.

      Fighting over religion or lack of religion does create imbalance. Today, terrorism is mainly fanned by religious intolerance. So much money and energy is invested into fighting religion. Wouldn't it be wonderful to forget all the differences and just deal with it peaceful and instead use the same money and energy to educate our kids and fight global warming? I think so. But sadly, no one understands these basic concepts and no one is willing to think logically, instead of thinking radically or irrationally.
    • Wootery, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3"They want to justify everything in terms of religion or disbelief in religion to prove their point"

      afaik, there has never been a war waged by atheists against theists. It's always one ridiculous religion against another.


      "Fighting over religion or lack of religion does create imbalance".
      I thought you meant that too much atheism would create imbalance. My point still stands, however - less religion would be a Good Thing for this world. Promoting atheism couldn't cause as much damage as does religion-vs-religion.


      "Also, if some one believes in God, let him believe in God. Not every one who believes in God is bad."
      I don't think anyone here is going to suggest that all theists are evil or that religion should be criminalised.


      "People hungry for power will find any excuse to create disturbance. They can use religion for a war, and also at the same time, religion can also be used to save lives and take care of poor people."
      It seems to slant to the side of war.


      "But the sad thing is, many people who believe in religion don't understand that service to man-kind is service to God".
      Indeed. Religions should teach that service to mankind is the _only_ service to god - praying is a complete waste of time.


      "Wouldn't it be wonderful to forget all the differences and just deal with it peaceful and instead use the same money and energy to educate our kids and fight global warming?"
      It would be nice, but there is the practical problem of religion.
      "educate our kids" would be much better without irrational ideas like religion.

      "sadly, no one understands these basic concepts and no one is willing to think logically, instead of thinking radically or irrationally."
      More rationality? How atheist of you.

      @whoever buried bluechips - don't abuse the bury button. Whether you disagree with him or not, his post is a lot better than the digg average.
    • gueritabonita, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2As an atheist, I am glad to see that you have the sense to respect your friend's lack of belief. But also as an atheist, I can tell you that not all theists are so enlightened. When I was a kid, I had friends who told me that they couldn't play with me any more after their parents found out that I am an atheist. Now, as an adult, I still get told on a regular basis that atheists cannot be good people. As an atheist who volunteers and spends a lot of time helping others, I find it frustrating that so many people believe that I am not a good person just because I do not believe in god. I imagine that atheists in the military feel much the same way when they are told that they must serve "god and country."
  • WanderLink, on 10/11/2007, -16/+2Oooh! More things for athiests to masturbate to, I mean digg up. Come on idiots. I don't care whether you believe in God or not. Athiests brining athiest-friendly material, or religious brining religious-friendly material. Enough of the self-serving and grandizing. And from what I've seen, the athiests are the guilty party, not the religious.
    • aarongough, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8you what? in what way are atheists guilty for anything?
    • Veritate, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2I don't understand some of the vocabulary you use.

      "athiest"
      "brining"
      "grandizing"

      Maybe I'm not well-educated enough, but I also have some trouble with your grammar.
  • Moosetrail, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3FTA to Couric: "I find your mindless parading of that silly old aphorism, “there are no Atheists in foxholes,” to be thoughtless and downright offensive to the families of uncountable numbers of atheists, and I include Agnostics, who gave their lives wearing the uniform of the American Armed Forces. Yes, there are, and always have been Atheists, both draftees and volunteers on the battlefield, many of whom bare the scars of war or are ironically buried below white crosses in battlefields throughout the world."

    Ouch. That letter was well written and finally gave Couric the verbal lashing she has LONG since deserved! Instead of throwing around verbal quips and acting like she "understands" military life, she should take some of that 15 million a year she earns and donate it to Navy-Marine Corps Relief Society (NMCRS).
    • michaelinnotts, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0As a journalist, Katie Couric only has as much power as you give her. Your anger and vitriol does nothing but increase her significance in American culture. Ignore her and she'll go away.

      This goes for all of you.
    • Wootery, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@michael

      All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
    • michaelinnotts, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Couric is an idiot, not evil.
    • Wootery, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1My point remains - people should object to *****, not shut up and hope it goes away.
  • vhtrading, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1Wrong topic; this specific article has nothing to do with science. Dugg down.
  • ChuckFreck, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5Obviously wrong. I know atheists who have been in foxholes. How the ***** does Couric know anything about such things?
    • cquinnd, on 10/11/2007, -5/+5She didn't claim to know about such things, she was repeating an often used phrase, and said as much.

      The problem is not with Katie Couric, it is with the ignorance that allows such phrases to perpetuate.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 139 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.