S.E. Cupp: Being a conservative atheist is not a contradiction

[rug]

September 8th, 2013
12:42 PM ET

With "Crossfire" returning to CNN this Monday, September 9, CNN is taking a closer look into the hosts' lives with a series of Web videos.

In this first video, S.E. Cupp, a columnist, commentator and author, delves into her experiences with understanding religion and what it’s like to be an atheist and a conservative.

"To me, it never seemed like a contradiction," Cupp explains. "We have the same values," Cupp says of herself and religious believers. "I just think I get them from somewhere else."

Cupp, who has a master’s degree in religious studies, says she was always curious about religion. "I was just fascinated by the pomp and ceremony and ritual nature of religion, and yet couldn't completely get there ever; couldn't completely wrap my mind around the idea of God."

http://crossfire.blogs.cnn.com/2013/09/08/s-e-cupp-being-a-conservative-atheist-is-not-a-contradiction/

2:41 video at link.

[Cooley Hurd]

1. Being a sexist twit IS, S.E...

Your initial claim to fame was to show your legs on Fox News. That makes you a sexist ninny and not worthy of serious consideration.

[rug]

2. That may be but is she a conservative atheist sexist twit?

[tularetom]

3. Nor is looking studious and being a blithering idiot

And SE does a great job of pulling that one off.

I'd like to know what "values" she gets "from somewhere else" because the ones that I've heard from her seem to define pure selfishness and lack of empathy for anyone not born set for life like she was.

Crossfire sucked in its first incarnation and it looks like this sorry rehash will be even worse.

CNN is doing a crappy job of trying to be Fox.

[cbayer]

4. Unfortunate for organized atheism, that's for sure.

[SwissTony]

5. What on earth is "organized atheism"???

Long time atheist, not heard of an organization.

[Warren Stupidity]

6. It's something fictional that is the subject of an endless barrage of attack posts here.

It is meant to offset the seriously awful nature of real religious institutions, as in "look we found a rightwing atheist", or "pope Dawkins is a sexist pig".

[cbayer]

10. No it's not. Just google it and you will see how many organizations currently exist.

You may not be a member of any of these organizations or have any interest in them, but they most certainly do exist.

And some are very active, many in a very positive way.

[rug]

8. This is one on many.

http://www.atheists.org/

If you go to their national convention next year you'll learn more about this one.

[Warren Stupidity]

11. So is sippy cup a member? A leader? What is her connection?

[cbayer]

12. I think the point is that some atheist organizations are

focused on increasing awareness, educating the general public and reducing prejudice.

Having her out there doesn't really help that cause.

But there are an increasing number of thoughtful and articulate people who are doing a great job of advancing that agenda.

[Warren Stupidity]

13. So should the Catholic Church be held accountable for the idiocy of any random catholic person?

Or should only atheist organizations be "in trouble" because some idiot is an atheist?

[cbayer]

14. Where did I say that the atheist organizations should be held accountable

or are in trouble?

I just think it's unfortunate that she has taken this opportunity to focus on her atheism.

She's not the kind of spokesperson I would want to have out there.

This would be true for any group that was trying to educate and improve the misperceptions of their population.

What's your deal?

[Warren Stupidity]

18. "Unfortunate for organized atheism"

Your words. Your deal.

[cbayer]

19. Yes it is, just as the religious right is unfortunate for progressive people

of faith.

They put a stain on what is otherwise a good movement. People start to identify all with a few, even if they are very different.

I'm a supporter of what most progressive atheist organizations are doing right now.

For me to be attacked for expressing disappointment that this nitwit is speaking out about her atheism is, well, not unexpected but ridiculous.

Knee jerk responses, the lot of you. Born of exactly what you decry.

[Warren Stupidity]

22. The religious right is composed of religious organizations, and leaders of those organizations

Advocating rightwing positions. Again, which atheist organization is sippy cup a leader of? Which atheist organization is cup a spokesperson for? Which is she a member of? Oh right, probably none of the above. And yet there you are announcing that her mere identification as an atheist is a misfortune for "organized atheism". I'll keep that in mind. Your standards of guilt by association are "interesting".

[cbayer]

23. Never mind. I'm never going to get past your agenda.

I am done with you.

Have a nice night.

[cleanhippie]

31. Better reply: Never Mind. I'm never going to get my agenda past you.

You're just done. Your hypocrisy is tired and worn out.

Sleep well.

[Warren Stupidity]

41. As usual you spiral into personal attacks.

If you don't want your opinions questioned, don't post them.

[rug]

16. Not at all. There are plenty of idiots to go around.

Something to keep in mind next time.

[cleanhippie]

17. She is just as much "out there" for atheism as Fred Phelps is "out there" for xtianity.

What atheist "cause" is she "out there" for anyway, and how is she not "helping" it?

And what is the "agenda" you refer to and who are those thoughtful and articulate people doing a great job advancing it?




Are these unreasonable questions, cbayer? When posts like yours are made using religious people as examples, you are one of the first to object saying that one person or group does not represent all believers. What gives?

[MrModerate]

21. Has anyone done a count of the number/percentage of atheists who are 'organized?'

I'd think it was a tiny fraction because, you know, A-theism.

[cbayer]

24. I agree that it is a very small percentage.

But some of their goals are admirable and their agenda will generally benefit all non-believers in the long run.

[rexcat]

36. One has to keep in mind...

that "atheist" organizations have few members compared to the number of atheists in this country and are extremely fragmented. There is no one single "agenda." Their agendas are scattered to the wind and more like a hurricane hit them. Much hyperbole among some here in this forum when it comes to atheism.

[cbayer]

37. I don't disagree with that at all.

But we are in a period when there is a positive push for education, exposure and a potential decrease in anti-atheist sentiment.

Not sure what hyperbole you are referring to.

[rug]

39. There's plenty of hyperbole here about religion as well.

[rug]

15. Got me, but that wasn't his question.

If you want to know about conservative atheists involved in political organizations, go no further than Edwina Rogers, former republican operative, now Executive Director of the Secular Coalition for America.

http://secular.org/

[cbayer]

9. There are a number of prominent organizations, both nationally and internationally.

Some are focused on education, some on separation issues, some on issues in the military, some focus on students.

They have conferences, meetings, rallies and publications.

I think many, if not most, atheists have very little interest in becoming members of these organizations, but others do.

The biggest is probably American Atheists, but I can't say that with authority.

[skepticscott]

25. Your feigned concern for the welfare

of the atheist "movement" continues to be unconvincing. As is the implication that endless pieces about "atheists behaving badly" have anything to do with whether any gods actually exist.

[AtheistCrusader]

35. S.E. Cupp isn't an atheist.

No moreso than Stephen Colbert is a Conservative.

He just plays one on TV.

Edit: http://www.dontfeedtheanimals.net/2010/08/s-e-cupp-is-not-atheist.html
Edit2: Can you explain why this is inconvenient for 'organized' atheism? And specifically which organization she is a member of?

If some Christian gets drunk, says 'HEY GUYS I'M AN ATHEIST' and takes a dump in the middle of a mosque, does that similarly reflect poorly upon 'organized atheism'? I think it might be inconvenient if our intrepid hypothetical dump-taker was normally claiming to be an atheist, AND a member of some particular atheist org, and that org didn't boot him for his behavior, then sure.

Otherwise, that's an AMAZINGLY broad brush you've got there.

[rug]

38. No true atheist fallacy.

[AtheistCrusader]

40. Not true. The above attempt was to claim that this would embarrass ORGANIZED ATHEISM.

Not yet demonstrated.

Which org is she a member of? (not demonstrated)
IS she an atheist? (Not demonstrated, and there is considerable evidence from her OWN WORDS that she is simply pandering to the pro-religion far-right)

In order to embarrass 'organized atheism' you have to at LEAST demonstrate that she is a MEMBER of some atheist org, they know it, and they accept her membership and behavior.

You know, sort of like I don't consider some lone, deep-right sect 'muslim' blowing up a school as inconvenient for organized Islam. Now, if that school-bomber was a member of a mainstream Islamic sect, and they didn't reject him for his behavior, THEN it becomes inconvenient for organized Islam.

I don't hold the average Christian responsible for the behavior of the WBC either.

[47of74]

7. The same person Stephanie Miller said...

...goes around in thigh high F me boots?

[MrModerate]

20. Whatever else she may be, Cupp is a fraud.

Her personal beliefs I can only speculate about, but it's clear that for utterly transparent careerist reasons, she's decided to be 'the atheist religionists can embrace.' This because they know she will never challenge any of the underlying contradictions of religion — she 'respects' them too much.

Bushwah.

[cbayer]

26. Reilgionsts can embrace? Hogwash.

She appeals to the right, be they religionists or not.

She appeals not at all to progressive/liberal people of faith. Nor does she appeal to most atheists from a political stance.

I agree that she is a fraud.

[MrModerate]

30. Given that you agree that she appeals to right-religionists . . .

Why do you consider my statement to be hogwash?

[Warren Stupidity]

42. Careful, you will be dismissed

If you question the poster about what this poster posts.

[MrModerate]

47. This is not a huge concern for me. n/t

[cbayer]

43. Because you didn't make a distinction between religionists in general and right-religionists.

But now you have and I agree with you.

[MrModerate]

46. I also didn't say "all religionists." Hair-splitting on your part, IMO. n/t

[hrmjustin]

27. She is what she is! God Bless her and may fortune be with her.

[JoePhilly]

28. She's been working a younger Sarah Palin look

because the old tea bagger who liked Palin, would LOVE a younger version.

Christine O'Donnell was trying to work the same angle.

[JEFF9K]

29. The REAL contradiction

The REAL contradiction is being a Christian and being a conservative!

[struggle4progress]

32. I never cared what she thought before, and I don't see any reason to care what she thinks now

[No Vested Interest]

33. The new "Crossfire" is a non-starter for me in that

the presence of Newt Gingrich is enough for me to flip around the channels.
Can't stand anything about that man.

[LostOne4Ever]

34. While I disagree with her on just about everything

I will say this supports my position that the only thing that unites us is doubt in the existence of god.

Beyond that, nothing else is related to our doubt. We can be like Cupp, Ayn Rand, and Penn Juliette or we can be like Langston Hughes, Hemingway, Nietzsche, and Chomsky.

I wont speak for others, but for myself atheism is a small part of me. I find it hard to impossible to get an "ought" statement out the "is" statement of my non-theism and therefore derive most of what defines myself from other ideas.

Specifically, my idealism, my left-wing libertarianism, my progressivism, my liberalism, my skepticism, and my humanism all play bigger parts of me than my lack of belief. These philosophies can and do connect with my lack of belief, but they are not based off of it.

[2ndAmForComputers]

44. One can't deny there IS a high correlation between being atheist and being in the political left.

Since that correlation is not perfect, of course there are right-wing atheists. The most glaring example of which is Ayn Fucking Rand.

But the correlation does exist. The question is, why?

[LostOne4Ever]

45. Correlation

I won't deny that. But of course correlation does not equal causation.

In this case I think it might have to do with a few different things. The first being that political right supports policies and positions that seek to push their beliefs on us, persecute, or discriminate against us.

This probably causes many of us(but not all unfortunately) to view conservatism negatively and with suspicion thus making some of us more open to liberal and leftist ideas. Of those of us who are conservative, I have a feeling you would find most of them are right wing libertarians for the same reason.

I think its also has to do with the nature of liberalism. Liberals are open to new ideas and thoughts while conservatives cling to tradition and the status quo which in america means being a protestant christian. Because of this, I believe a liberal is far more likely to listen to criticism of religion or to challenge religion in the first place.

[center]>.>
<.<
/flameproof suit[/center]

It could also be education as well. Both liberalism and atheism are correlated with higher levels of education.

[center] [/center]

HOWEVER, before I get flamed let me point out, again, that correlation does not mean causation. But it is still something that should be taken into consideration as a possibility.

[center] [/center]

At the more extreme end, one can also not ignore the contributions of atheistic socialism as was promoted by Carl Marx. Such a person would see religion as an "opiate" of the masses which allows people to accept the injustices of a capitalistic system.

There are probably other reasons as well. These are just my hypothetical reasons for why we tend to skew to the left.