The story about my spiritual beliefs, the North Carolina Constitution and one man’s threat to unseat me has gone viral, both in print and on the Web. I’m fielding e-mails from dozens of people around the country—so far all supportive—and the writers include Christians as well as atheists and Quakers and Muslims and pagans and more.
I’ve read some of the thousands of comments posted on blogs and the vast majority of folks support the separation of church and state that has figured so prominently in the history of this country. It is reassuring to me that there is such a broad understanding that freedom OF religion necessarily includes freedom FROM religion, else such a guarantee has no real meaning. Our country was founded by people who had suffered first-hand the demagoguery of state-religion and religious persecution, and we see today the dangers inherent in such systems where they persist.
While many ideologues continue to advance the idea that our Founders’ language concerning rights “endowed by our creator” is the core tenet of this country, and that finding favor with God is the root of our success, I’m more inclined to think that it is the legacy of adherence to science that is the most important contribution of Jefferson, Franklin, Washington and their peers.
Science. not God, is the real source of America’s power—science unencumbered by dogma and empowered by vast resource wealth. Other societies have surely included as high a percentage of the religious faithful as ours, but the difference here was the institutionalized effort to liberate experimental results from the grip of received wisdom. Whether or not we remain the freest society on earth today can be debated, but we were unarguably the first to fully embrace the enlightenment and to institutionalize equality before the law (however imperfectly it has been enforced).
Among my many new correspondents, I’ve found atheist critics who suggest that my stated positions are too temperate and that I’m being less than forthright by labeling myself as “post-theist” rather than atheist. For example one blogger said, “he offers some language that avoids full ownership of the position at times.”
By way of explanation I offer this: It seems to me that theism emerged in human thinking over thousands of years during which we had scant explanation for many of the phenomena in our world. We didn’t understand our origins, whether in utero or in the ancient past. We didn’t understand disease or the vagaries of weather that brought so much suffering to our lives. We didn’t know what the lights in the night sky were or what forces controlled them. And so we handed all the unknowns over to a deity or deities and looked for their favor since they seemed to run the show.
Atheism, a rejection of theism, was an obvious outgrowth of the Enlightenment as science began to provide explanations for ancient mysteries. As a word it perfectly expresses what it means—not theist. Unfortunately, atheism has been draped with a strong sense of the negative, principally by its opponents, in the same way that the word “liberal” was poisoned by conservative pundits over the past few decades. I’m not averse to being called what I am, but I don’t accept the baggage that others attach to their use of that word.
I view my own position has having been shaped in an era during which virtually all of the day-to-day phenomena we experience are explainable by science. While it’s true that there remain unknowns and even unknown unknowns, those blank spaces have been pushed to the margins. Even the well known evangelist Billy Graham, subject of my 2007 biography, has pushed his interpretation of the creation story back 5 billion years. Theism has become marginal. We are living in a post-theist era.
When it is combined with government, theism remains dangerous. The current wars in the mid-east were first cast as a “crusade” by George Bush and continue to have a strong religious component, with the evangelical-led Blackwater a poster-child for all that can go wrong. To the extent that we delude ourselves into believing that “God is on our side,” we leave ourselves open to despotism. We ignore what the Bush administration disparaged as “the reality-based community” at our peril.
Blind belief in the righteousness of our current wars is bankrupting this country while our economy has gone into a tailspin. And while our leaders often cloak their actions with prayer and religious posturing, it is the oil companies and defense contractors who reap profits while our young women and men sacrifice their lives.
And, in regard to death, it is my conclusion that those of us who believe that this is our one and only life are much more likely to value and protect the lives of our brave soldiers and our citizens than those who believe that they will live again in heaven.




Howard Moore, who died in 1993 at the age of 104, a friend of my Uncle Kim, author of “Plowing My Own Furrow”, conscientious objector during WWI, as quoted in the April 1, 1991 issue of The New Yorker answering the question
“If you don’t believe in God, what sustains you?”:
“My own sense of moral responsibility…to accept an authority outside oneself is to deny oneself the right to make an ultimate decision. Understanding that and the consequences likely to follow is to know freedom in the deepest sense.”
Best of luck to you, Mr. Bothwell!
-Emily Burns-Higley
fellow traveler
Hello Councilman. I know you’re busy, and getting tons of emails. God may not be on your side, but quite a lot of living-breathing humans are. Keep up the good work. Just as Bernie Sanders represents a vast constituency outside of Vermont, so do you represent the “post-theists” throughout the country.
It is difficult being an atheist. Being one in Texas doesn’t help matters at all. So often a topic comes up in conversation and I can’t have a say in it knowing that doing so could affect my job or what-not. I even volunteered regularly at my local church, but they stopped asking for my help once they found out. People have these preconceived notions and/or most often an outright ignorance of the philosophy behind it. Upon revealing my (lack of) beliefs to some they respond with the question “So you worship Satan?” Yes, some can not comprehend that “no god(s)” definitely includes “Their God(tm)”.
But after all of this I know that America, and quite possibly the world, is in a crucial transitional period. Every person I do tell about my atheism, and create understanding for it, is a small mean to a larger end. Awareness seems to always be the first stage in such endeavors and Bothwells’ public “battle” is pursuing that goal handsomely. It highlights the true ideologues and gives backbone to atheists everywhere to stand up to them.
I hope you get to have your fun, Bothwell. Thank you for the publicity.
We’re behind you too!
Did you know that most of the scientific geniuses from the United States were secular people?
Robert Oppenheimer, Thomas Alva Edison, Richard Feynman, Steven Weinberg, Murray Gellman?
The next time someone mentions “endowed by our creator” to you, you may wish to refer them to article 11 of the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli, signed by President John Adams. It begins, “As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion…” I would hazard a guess that President Adams and then Vice President Jefferson had a pretty good handle on the Founding Fathers’ intentions.
Thanks for being a rational voice for all of us.
You have my full support. Hopefully the suit will never be brought forth as it’s a waste of tax dollars and resources. A persons personal beliefs has no bearing on their job as a public servant. If corporations and businesses can’t turn you down on religion since it would be described as discrimination, then your job as a councilman should be no different since it is a job, just elected by the people, not a employee interviewer.
Cecil, there is a loop hole; in case you needed to use it. Just define God to be something that you do actually believe in (e.g. God is my cat, God is my canoe, God is the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or the biggest cop-out…God is love). After you define God to be one of these things then technically you do believe in God. You don’t need to use the Christian definition of God. Heck, even the Christian’s don’t use the Christian definition of God.
All 6 billion people on this planet have a different definition of what God is, so just create a definition that fits your needs and say that you believe in it, it doesn’t even have to be related to the supernatural. Nobody can actually prove or disprove that their definition is correct, so all definitions are equally valid. Why are religious people the only one’s allowed to define what God is. I don’t see why atheists can’t also assign a definition to a word that is already watered down, poorly defined, and contradictory amongst different groups.
Take myself for example. I’m an atheist but I still see “God” on a daily basis…I own mirrors after all.
No Asheville Disclaimer this week, so here’s my own humble attempt:
FREE SPEECH ADVOCATES CITE JOURNALISTIC STANDARDS IN CALLING FOR CITY-WIDE BAN ON THE ASHEVILLE CITIZEN-TIMES;
NEWSPAPER RESPONDS WITH A SERIES CALLED “What Cecil Does Each Sunday”
Journalistic standards are clear: newspapers should not allow personal jealousies and hostilities to color news coverage.
Free-speech advocates are seizing on that principle to argue that the Asheville Citizen-Times should be banned and are threatening to sue because of the newspaper’s repeated above-the-fold focus on the theological orientation of Asheville City Council Member Cecil Bothwell. “We don’t have a legal leg to stand on, but threatening to sue is a cool thing to say in the newspaper,” said I.L. Edgyman, a former free-speech activist who now campaigns for censorship.
“Cecil Bothwell was at the Mountain Xpress exposing the corruption of Sheriff Medford while the Citizen-Times was still endorsing him,” said Edgyman. “Other than petty jealousy and perhaps political differences, can you think of any reason for that paper to publish those stories? I have to admit, though, they did find that one very credible guy in HK Edgerton to go after Bothwell.”
“I don’t have that kind of standing,” concedes Edgyman. “I’ve never paraded around town with a confederate flag. And I’m too lazy to bother with the other time-honored ways of getting column inches in Asheville, like dancing at the Vance Monument in a g-string or wearing white robes and pulling a giant cross around. I may not have a wardrobe budget, but hey, why can’t I be a one-man posse of critics too?”
Meanwhile, the Asheville Citizen-Times is standing behind its original story and the front-page follow-up about the hubbub caused by the first story. In fact, Citizen-Times news editor Phil Fernandez said the paper will now begin a weekly Monday series based on following Bothwell around each Sunday. “If he ever does go to church,” said Fernandez, “we’ll be right behind him with a microphone. If he causes any gaseous disturbances, Citizen-Times readers will be the first to know.”
——
“Among my many new correspondents, I’ve found *atheist critics* who suggest that my stated positions are too temperate and that I’m being less than forthright by labeling myself as “post-theist” rather than atheist. For example one blogger said, *“he offers some language that avoids full ownership of the position at times.”*
——
Hey…that is my quote!
Mr. Bothwell,
To be fair, that particular criticism (more an observation) was virtually microscopic once the entire blog, along with subsequent discussion, is reviewed.
Here the link for those interested ~
http://www.msatheists.org/2009/12/cecil-bothwell-american-hero.html
And here is what I wrote ~
——
“That Bothwell flatly states he doesn’t believe in God is what is important to me even if he offers some language that avoids full ownership of the position at times. While he is somewhat near the fence, he definitely isn’t sitting on it like many others.
The overall benefit I see in this instance is that Bothwell is not silent on the matter, nor is he callous toward believers or promoting atheism as a proactive policy in his governance.
After all, he isn’t demanding that legislation be changed to make elected officials swear “there is no God” before taking office. He is merely exercising his right to government neutrality regarding religion and going to work.”
——
My view, as one hoping to challenge my own state of Mississippi on this issue, is that it is important to own the label “atheist” as one who denies the existence of any of the purported God(s)ess(es) due to a distinct lack of evidence for their existence…specifically and especially as it relates to bias and discrimination at the state level via anachronistic and moot state constitutional imposition still technically “on the books” in contradiction to our United States Constitution.
It is my hope that the importance of that nuanced view is made clear and not seen as a negative criticism. Rather, it should be perceived as more a constructive one buried deep within one large narrative of sincere appreciation for all that you do.
Steve Schlicht
Biloxi MS
You have the support of many of us across the nation. Please watch your back, we fear for your safety from some of these crackpots-
Mr Bothwell, stay as temperate as you wanna be, sir! It is very hard to deny a job to someone SO even-tempered. It makes your detractors look like wackos.
You represent the future, a truly diverse government here in the south.
DEAD AIR supports Cecil Bothwell!
Good luck to you!
As a practising member of the Church of England, I am amazed at the nonsense inflicted on you. Good luck to you, sir!
When I heard last night that an atheist city council member in NC was being challenged, I thought to myself, “I bet he’s not in Asheville.”
Gulp…sputter.
I was born and reared in Asheville. It is one of the most progressive, cultural and liberal areas of the south, sometimes referred to as “The Paris of the South.” I had no idea such a state law was on the books and in direct contradiction to the U.S. Constitution.
So, of course I googled the name Cecil Bothwell. Much to my surprise, I see a man who has taken on the most revered figure of Western North Carolina, Billy Graham. When I was growing up in Asheville, no one EVER spoke a word against the steely, blue-eyed, 20th Century Crusader for Christ — no one. Billy Graham was to Asheville what the Pope is to the Catholic Church. At least that’s the way it was for four decades.
And to think I fell under his “halo effect” for years and years. Sigh.
Now my sons fight wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and I sit at home fearing a knock on my door. A fear and a knock that Graham, Kissinger, and Bush will never fear or hear. Why did I ever trust those men? Why did I ever trust their God?
[...] to Christianity alone. A win here for this UU post-theist is a win for all religious minorities, and those concerned about maintaining a separation of church and state. “I’m fielding e-mails from dozens of people around the country—so far all [...]
2tired, I hear you.
Graham, I learned during the five years of research that went into my bio of him, enlisted during WWII – as a minister, which required that he complete a year of ministry (he was just out of college at the time). At the end of his year he was abruptly too sick to report for duty, begged off, and went to Florida to recover.
Bush, as we know, got bumped up the list through family connections to gain appointment to the Air National Guard, and incidentally avoid Vietnam, where many of my classmates died. (I was in the first draft lottery and drew a high number, so never faced mandatory service.)
Kissinger is a war criminal and afraid to travel to many countries these days for fear of incarceration.
Your sons bear the brunt of misguided national policy guided by religionists who, by the way, profit from that policy. My hat is off to you. My heart goes out to you.
[...] hither and yon, Bothwell is not unaware of the arguments being deployed. He answers them calmly via his own blog. For example, he [...]