There is a consistent complaint by some atheists about the term itself. Because it notes what someone is not, those with the sentiment claim it is unworthy of being used. They would rather be known by other terms that note what they are instead of what they are not.
But I don't have a problem with it for the same reason I don't mind being called a non-smoker or atypical, or designating some businesses as non-profit. It is just the way our language works in some cases and is entirely appropriate where it's necessary to be accurate.
On a bit of a silly side note, this made me wonder recently if there is a clever joke to be made from a comparison between the dangers of second-hand smoke and second-hand religion. If not, maybe just a point of contemplation might be worth a few seconds of thought.
But I don't have a problem with it for the same reason I don't mind being called a non-smoker or atypical, or designating some businesses as non-profit. It is just the way our language works in some cases and is entirely appropriate where it's necessary to be accurate.
On a bit of a silly side note, this made me wonder recently if there is a clever joke to be made from a comparison between the dangers of second-hand smoke and second-hand religion. If not, maybe just a point of contemplation might be worth a few seconds of thought.
No comments:
Post a Comment