Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
In perhaps one of the most ridiculous and sleaziest things the Worldnutdaily has ever published - and imagine how stiff that competition is - they are now blaming Richard Dawkins for a 22 year old who committed suicide after reading The God Delusion - and even blaming a college professor who suggested the book to him.
"Three people told us he had taken a biology class and was doing well in it, but other students and the professor were really challenging my son, his faith. They didn't like him as a Republican, as a Christian, and as a conservative who believed in intelligent design," the grief-stricken father, Keith Kilgore, told WND about his son, Jesse."This professor either assigned him to read or challenged him to read a book, 'The God Delusion,' by Richard Dawkins," he said.
Jesse Kilgore committed suicide in October by walking into the woods near his New York home and shooting himself. Keith Kilgore said he was shocked because he believed his son was grounded in Christianity, had blogged against abortion and for family values, and boasted he'd been debating for years.
You can bet that this will immediately become part of that artifice of silly myths that make up the fundamentalist "worldview" (a term I despise), a cautionary tale against reading dangerous ideas because they'll make you go crazy and kill yourself. Because obviously, having been raised for 22 years in a Christian household had no effect at all on him psychologically, but reading a single book pushed him over the edge.
The first inkling of a reason for the suicide came, Keith Kilgore told WND, when one of Jesse's friends came to visit after word of his son's death circulated."She was in tears [and said] he was very upset by this book," Keith Kilgore said. "'It just destroyed him,' were her words.
"Then another friend at the funeral told me the same thing," Keith Kilgore said. "This guy was his best friend, and about the only other Christian on campus.
"The third one was the last person that my son talked to an hour before [he died,]" Keith Kilgore told WND, referring to a member of his extended family whose name is not being revealed here.
That relative, who had struggled with his own faith and had returned to Christianity, wrote in a later e-mail that Jesse "started to tell me about his loss of faith in everything."
"He was pretty much an atheist, with no belief in the existence of God (in any form) or an afterlife or even in the concept of right or wrong," the relative wrote. "I remember him telling me that he thought that murder wasn't wrong per se, but he would never do it because of the social consequences - that was all there was - just social consequences.
"He mentioned the book he had been reading 'The God Delusion' by Richard Dawkins and how it along with the science classes he had take[n] had eroded his faith. Jesse was always great about defending his beliefs, but somehow, the professors and the book had presented him information that he found to be irrefutable. He had not talked ... about it because he was afraid of how you might react. ... and that he knew most of your defenses of Christianity because he himself used them often. Maybe he had used them against his professors and had the ideas shot down."
You see how dangerous education is? That, of course, is precisely the lesson they're trying to offer. It's an inoculation against thinking, a vaccine to prevent those bad ideas from getting through. Worse yet, he's trying to get something done to the professor who suggested the book:
Keith Kilgore believes it was a biology class that raised questions for his son, and a biology professor at Jefferson Community College in Watertown, N.Y., where his son was attending, who suggested the book.A school spokeswoman told WND that the "God Delusion" was not a part of the biology curriculum, and several of the professors she contacted said they had not even read the book. However, the spokeswoman was unable to contact all of the professors in the department and could not state that none of them had suggested the book to Jesse.
Local police also did not respond to WND inquiries about the investigation into the death.
"One of his friends, and his uncle (they did not know each other) both told me that Jesse called them hours before he took his life and that he had lost all hope because he was convinced that God did not exist, and this book was the cause," Keith Kilgore told WND.
Keith Kilgore, a retired military chaplain who has dealt with the various stages of grief and readily admits he's still in the "anger" stage over his son's death, said his son apparently had checked the "Delusion" out of the college library.
"I'm all for academic freedom," Keith Kilgore said. "What I do have a problem with is if there's going to be academic freedom, there has to be academic balance.
"They were undermining every moral and spiritual value for my [son]," he said. "They ought to be held accountable."
He suggested the moral is for Christians simply to abandon public schools wholly.
"Here's another thing," he continued. "If my son was a professing homosexual, and a professor challenged him to read [a book called] 'Preventing Homosexuality'... If my son was gay and [the book] made him feel bad, hopeless, and he killed himself, and that came out in the press, there would be an outcry.
"He would have been a victim of a hate crime and the professor would have been forced to undergo sensitivity training, and there may have even been a wrongful death lawsuit.
"But because he's a Christian, I don't even get a return telephone call," the father told WND.
All of this is nonsense, of course. Hate crime laws have absolutely nothing to do with making people feel bad, especially when it involves merely suggesting a book whose ideas conflicted with theirs, as opposed to actually harassing or intimidating someone.
All of this is coming from the father of the guy who killed himself. And I understand his grief. I've had a good friend commit suicide and I know from personal experience that the first thing you do is try to figure out why he did it. I can sympathize with his need to figure out why his son would do such a terrible thing. But this kind of simplistic scapegoating may make him feel better psychologically, but it doesn't do anyone else any good. And it certainly shouldn't be taken seriously by others.
But expect Keith Kilgore to become a rising star on the religious right now. He will be the second coming of Darrell Scott, the father of one of the Columbine shooting victims who has spent the last several years railing against evolution and blaming Darwin for his daughter's death. They will spend the rest of their lives turning tragedy into demagoguery.
Politics
Comments
You can understand why the kid was so messed up; 22 years of being lied to, and then being presented with the truth, and suddenly understanding that all these people you care about are deluded and have been brain-washing you into their way of thinking.
Posted by: No One Of Consequence | November 24, 2008 9:48 AM
Behold the power of the Dawk! Just one read of "The God Delusion", and a lifelong religious belief crumbles forever. I think Dawkins himself didn't think he had written such a powerful demonstration.
Now, what about thos people talk a little bit about the boy's possible problems with his family?
Posted by: Christophe Thill | November 24, 2008 9:56 AM
Perhaps more Christians should read The God Delusion.
Posted by: Anonymous Coward | November 24, 2008 10:05 AM
Well, what do you expect? The kid wasn't listening to Marylin Manson, so they had to find someone else to blame, right?
"I'm all for academic freedom," Keith Kilgore said. "What I do have a problem with is if there's going to be academic freedom, there has to be academic balance.
Balance between what two or more things, exactly?
"They were undermining every moral and spiritual value for my [son]," he said. "They ought to be held accountable."
And his parents ought to be held accountable for giving their son a worldview so brittle, and so easily undermined by one book. The least I can say for my Roman Catholic father is that he tried to give me a set of religious beliefs that could be reconciled with observable reality.
"I remember him telling me that he thought that murder wasn't wrong per se, but he would never do it because of the social consequences - that was all there was - just social consequences."
Well, yeah, that's pretty much how most people, theist and atheist alike, decide what's right and wrong: by observing the consequences of the actions in question, and asking themselves whether they want to see such things happen. Yes, the theists say they get their morals from voices in their heads, or from holy texts, but they only heed the voices and texts when they don't contradict their gut feelings of what's right and wrong.
Posted by: Raging Bee | November 24, 2008 10:08 AM
Once again we see that no idea of personal responsibility enters this father's mind. As No One Of Consequence said, the father and family had been pounding this poor kid for years and yet a single book (allegedly) was able to strip that all away. Would have been better if instead of all the religious baloney a modicum of critical thinking skill was provided.
I'm sorry the kid's dead. I'm sorry he committed suicide. (That sin's got to rankle.) Not all people are born with the skills to handle everything life throws at them. Don't blame Dawkins or the school. If it wasn't this, it would have been something else. He wasn't equipped to deal.
Posted by: Mike | November 24, 2008 10:09 AM
Am I the only one who reads the name Kilgore and thinks
'...and so it goes'?
Posted by: Eljay | November 24, 2008 10:13 AM
I might ask Mr. Kilgore why he thinks Richard Dawkins didn't kill himself in the process of writing the book, or why there are millions of longtime atheists who aren't at all suicidal? I know when you ask fundigelicals why such atheists lead moral lives, they tend to believe it's because of some residual effect of religion, either inculcated in childhood or continually absorbed from society at large. However when you ask them why Matthew Murray killed all those people despite a strict Christian upbringing and social circle, they immediately point to his doubts and his new exposure to secular influences.
It seems Christian values are simultaneously so powerful as to support and restrain avowed atheists by mere residual effect, while also so feeble that the slightest chink in the armor leads to moral and psychological breakdown.
Oh well, consistency never was their strong suit.
Posted by: DaveL | November 24, 2008 10:16 AM
We have a rule. We never free a mind once it's reached a certain age. It's dangerous; the mind has trouble letting go.
Posted by: Joe V. | November 24, 2008 10:27 AM
A community college with only "about" two Christians? WTF? I don't know of any significant fairly randomized group of people in this country who are 99+% non Christian.
Posted by: Shawn Smith | November 24, 2008 10:29 AM
Eljay,
I remember Kilgore Trout from Slaughterhouse Five and several other works of Vonnegut. A character that could accept reality unlike the situation here.
Posted by: Mike | November 24, 2008 10:31 AM
The "academic freedom" comment bothers me. I can't get my head around the mindset that says academic freedom has anything to do with the right of a professor to recommend a student read a book, as something completely separate from their studies. You can argue that it might constitute harrassment in cases like telling a Jewish student to read the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion", or a student of the appropriate sex to take a look at "The Joys of Having an Affair with your Professor and Keeping it a Secret", but that still is not an issue of academic freedom.
This is, I would assume, the ol' "they weren't my precise flavour of Christianity, therefore I don't count them as Christians at all and consider myself a persecuted minority" gambit.
Posted by: Morgan | November 24, 2008 10:35 AM
Blame someone else..... just great.
Posted by: EB | November 24, 2008 10:43 AM
Of course it may just be that the young man was gay--and when he found out that he couldn't be "prayed straight" he gave up.
Posted by: democommie | November 24, 2008 10:49 AM
Only two Christians at a community college in Watertown, New York? I know Watertown, New York. That is impossible.
Posted by: CJColucci | November 24, 2008 11:01 AM
In a way, this reminds me a lot of the Matthew Murray case. In that case many blamed Murray's actions on a creeping influence of the secular world... but I don't know of a single atheist who considers rock'n'roll to be an addictive form of mind-control, or who associates non-belief to nihilism or immorality. That association was actually part and parcel of the belief system he was trying to break free from.
Similarly, I don't know of a single unbeliever who thinks atheism entails or promotes despair or suicide. That imaginary link, however, is a common refrain even among religious moderates.
I'm sure most unbelievers are aware of at least some of the many psychological defense mechanisms that memetic evolution has equipped the most successful religions with. This seems to me to be yet another example, which I will call "The Kill Switch". If you can't prevent someone from rejecting your belief system, you can at least inculcate them with a deep seated belief that life outside the system is horrific, immoral, pointless, and hopeless. If apostates fail to shake that belief off quickly enough, they stand a good chance of eliminating or at least discrediting themselves to the point of neutralizing any threat they may have otherwised posed to Social Reinforcement. In a world where religious authoritarians are no longer allowed to silence apostates with burnings or torture, it becomes necessary to ensure they silence themselves.
Posted by: DaveL | November 24, 2008 11:06 AM
1. Take a biology class that ends up making you rethink your beliefs because your parents always taught you differently.
2. Talk to the professor about your situation which, in turn, leads you to a book to help you out and clear things up.
3. Kill yourself because you can't handle having your entire life turned upside down.
4. Have parents blame the professor and author of the book.
Makes sense.
Posted by: llDayo | November 24, 2008 11:13 AM
Morgan,
My take on this, as an educator, is that the kid was likely having trouble reconciling his classes with his faith. He went to the professor to ask him for help and the professor recommended the book as an attempt to help him consider the issue more fully. I've done the same sort of thing over the years, recommended A world lit only by fire to a student curious about pre-Renaissance Europe, or Race and Manifest Destiny to explain the development of 19th century racism, or the talk origins archive for students who have questions about science vs creationism in history.
Quite simply, as an educator, the book is one that might help the student work through their question, it would be a legitimate recommendation.
Posted by: dogmeatib | November 24, 2008 11:18 AM
dogmeatib,
That's pretty much what I mean. While the interactions of a professor and student outside of lectures and coursework may be able to constitute harrassment in some cases, I don't see how a book recommendation that's entirely extracurricular is grounds to attack academic freedom. That is, I agree that the professor was perfectly entitled to recommend some reading to his student, and am therefore disturbed to see the father making it out to be an issue of "academic balance".
Posted by: Morgan | November 24, 2008 11:26 AM
Right, it's all Dawkin's fault. Don't take any responsibility at all for telling the kid his entire life that he must believe in a young earth, et. el., or he is damned to hell forever. Maybe i he had been taught from an early age that science can be compatible with religion (whether I believe that or not is inconsequential), he might have been able to at least adjust is idea of the world a little and continue on.
Suicide sucks, I've had one very close friend commit suicide. But it's no reason to turn the hate on everyone else. I suspect that you are right, and the father is looking to become the next right wing darling on the demagoguery circuit.
Posted by: FastLane | November 24, 2008 11:36 AM
Raging Bee,
While I don't think that most individuals are that rational about what they call right or wrong, I see your point.
However, I don't think that's what's being said here:
If the memory is accurate, the young man wasn't using a broad range of social consequences and he wasn't using the consequences to help him decide what is wrong. He had concluded that nothing is wrong, and that his own behavior should be governed only by the consequences society would impose upon him. It sounds as if, having given up his Christian basis for morality, he had not found another.
If he had believed the usual Christian extreme right message of "there is no other basis for morality," then it's not surprising he saw himself as living in a world without any standard for behavior except what one can get away with. As that attitude undermines trusting and loving personal relationships, I can see how it might contribute to a feeling of hopelessness and depression.
This "without Christianity and/or Bible rules, there is no morality" notion is a problem I saw many times during my forty years of teaching college students in a religiously conservative area of the country. I took to using any little opportunity to point out moral systems based on something other than Christianity or Bible rules, in hopes that students from Christian right families, as well as students who had rejected Christianity, would notice that systems of morality are not limited to one religion or any religion.
One of my main writing assignments for years was based on literature reporting broad though not universal)world-wide agreement on certain moral standards, regardless of the religion (or lack of it) of the peoples involved. For example, murder and stealing are considered bad; honesty and love and helping the needy are considered good.
Far-right religionists have a lot to answer for when they teach their children that there is no possibility of moral standards outside their own speciic religious beliefs.
Posted by: JuliaL | November 24, 2008 11:39 AM
The professor in question might have better served the student if he/she had recommended Ken Millers' book, "Finding Darwins' God."
Posted by: SLC | November 24, 2008 11:42 AM
It seems so many of this kid's inner circle knew he was reading this book, and were talking to him about it. I wonder what role ostracizing the kid and making him a social outcast might have had on his depression? If they're the kind of folks to demand that all Christians pull their kids out of public schools, they might have been the type to reject him because of his new-found non-belief.
Posted by: Inoculated Mind | November 24, 2008 11:52 AM
This "kid" had also just gotten out of the army, which may (or may not) have had something to do with his problems.
But I agree with DaveL and JuliaL: it sounds as if the constant insistence that "without God, there is no meaning" is the real cause for this suicide. Dawkins' book is very positive on living a moral, valuable, and meaningful life without God. He's a secular humanist. You cannot read that book and derive nihilism out of it: that's something you have to bring to it yourself.
This reminds me of those stories about teenagers in fundamentalist households who kill themselves because they can't live with the secret shame and horror of being gay. And the church of course blames their suicide on the fact that the kid was gay, and not on their own condemnation of homosexuality.
The odd thing is the sort of moral you get from reading this story. There is no God -- and the arguments that say there is a God don't work -- but you can't let people know that. It seems to be where they're leading.
Posted by: Sastra | November 24, 2008 12:17 PM
A community college with only "about" two Christians? WTF? I don't know of any significant fairly randomized group of people in this country who are 99+% non Christian.
Kilgore is probably using the word "Christian" to mean people who agree with his own particular interpretation of Christian doctrine. "Christians" of his sort do this all the time, painting themselves into cramped, tiny corners where everyone not EXACTLY like themselves is "The Enemy," and must be feared and avoided lest they persecute "True Christians" and/or mislead them into perdition.
Which, let's face it, could have been a major contributing factor to this suicide.
Posted by: Raging Bee | November 24, 2008 12:28 PM
Joe V- You f-ing rock, the Matrix so fits here.
It is too bad about this kid... I am a Christian, have been for a while. It was my choice to choose this route, and I have read several books trying to irrationalise God. The point is, you either feel it and believe it, or you don't. I truly do not believe this kid committed suicide over a book... I have read so many books like this and have never even contemplated suicide. I feel bad for his father, but he needs to get over it and find out the true reason behind it all.
It is irrational Christians like Mr. Kilgore that give Christianity a bad name.
Posted by: Jamie | November 24, 2008 12:53 PM
Keith Kilgore is apparently a retired army chaplain - is he this Keith Kilgore?
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2006/09/prweb435834.htm
He serve(s/d) in the 10th Mountain Division from New York:
http://www.wwtg.blogspot.com/ (scroll down to the September 8 2006 entry).
Posted by: Robin Levett | November 24, 2008 1:13 PM
There's a quote from Dune Messiah to the effect that when a person has spent their whole life trying to be something, they would rather die than become its opposite. It sounds to me like this kid was an example of such an idea.
Posted by: Paul Lundgren | November 24, 2008 1:42 PM
Far more people have committed suicide for their belief in the Bible (or more importantly, other people's belief in the Bible) than for a belief in such a book as The God Delusion. One only has to look at the higher rate of suicide in the LGBT community, especially among young Mormons. It is very sad.
Reading The God Delusion certainly will help more than it could possibly harm.
Posted by: Ivar | November 24, 2008 1:43 PM
Just thinking here... I wonder if he used his Dad's gun.
Posted by: Dr X | November 24, 2008 2:25 PM
A friend of his made a nice little tribute video to him.
http://www.veoh.com/videos/v16237142SstBHJQt
I can't be too hard on the father at this point. The man is awash in grief and, probably, wrestling with questions about his own accountability. (My comment, above, about the gun was not to suggest the father's culpability. I was just wondering about possible unspoken elements in the father's anguish).
True, not everyone in this father's situation jumps at the chance to lay blame, but I've seen parents really lose their minds in grief over the loss of child.
The Worldnet editors and reporters, on the other hand, are not in the throes of inconsolable grief. These people are calculating pigs exploiting tragedy and suffering for their own gain.
Posted by: Dr X | November 24, 2008 2:46 PM
Yeah thats it.
Posted by: Gh | November 24, 2008 3:00 PM
After I had posted my earlier comment, I had a thought along the same lines as Raging Bee's about what "Christian" means in this context. After further review, I stand by my original statement, even with the clarification of what "Christian" means.
Posted by: CJColucci | November 24, 2008 3:01 PM
Actually, in the article (you forgot the link) he makes his intent to do just that crystal clear, only using another grieving-parent-turned-celebrity role-model:
Adam Walsh's father was John Walsh, who went on to become famous as host of America's Most Wanted.
Posted by: jpf | November 24, 2008 3:41 PM
SLC said: "The professor in question might have better served the student if he/she had recommended Ken Millers' book, "Finding Darwins' God."
In similar situations I've suggested that students read Spong's "Rescuing the Bible From Fundamentalism." It's a very good sort of "half-way" station.
Posted by: Lynn | November 24, 2008 4:48 PM
Fact is suicide is the third leading cause of death in his age group. The transition from child to adolescent to adult is often difficult. It's painful, chaotic, and full of uncertainty. There are biological changes (even at 22), a lot pressures and seemingly endless questions. So much of it is out of their control. Then there's suicide, this single, incredibly simple solution. It answers every question, alleviates every pressure and it is one thing where they have absolute control. Is it really such a surprise that so many of our children and young adults make this choice?
It's interesting that his father mentions homosexuals. What Jesse Kilgore was going through, as described in this article, strikes me as very similar to what a young homosexual goes through. He discovered he self-identified with a group he'd been raised to reject or even demonize, atheists in this case. His support structure was ill equipped to handle this and rather than support him, tried to convince him he was wrong. Not that it's their fault. I'm sure they loved him and tried to do right by him. But knowing you've become that which everyone you love despises is difficult to survive.
Posted by: Abby Normal | November 24, 2008 5:26 PM
I think we have to start with the fundamental premise of the father: The evidence that the suicide was caused by Dawkins or by a failure of his religion seems pretty thin. Especially in light of the fact that the father had no idea of the problem despite having been a military Chaplain (which means he had faced this exact question on a daily basis for some years). Instead, Dad is apparently the only person he didn't tell.
Yes, he appeared to have an obsession with the compatibility of science and religion. That is pretty common in depression, to fixate on something like the underlying problem but that is not the problem. I agree with the suggestion earlier in the thread that the kid might be gay.
He was more or less fine in the military, because that culture doesn't much care anymore. But back home, he can't retreat into his former culture, but he was afraid of leaving that behind and moving into the unknown. The science/religion conflict is the perfect analogy for his situation.
Such a waste.
Posted by: kehrsam | November 24, 2008 5:52 PM
No, it's definitely a failure of his religion - in the sense of what that religion is based upon. If god existed, and is the benevolent and loving being xians portray him as, why didn't he intercede to save the boy's life? If the boy had doubts about god, god could have appeared to him, or sent an angel, or done any number of things to show that he did actually exist and that Dawkins and the other atheists were wrong.
Why aren't the xians asking themselves why god didn't save the boy?
Posted by: Wowbagger | November 24, 2008 7:22 PM
(First, the standard disclaimer that the suicide is a tragedy, and I feel for the man's family).
A student was exposed to new ideas in college.
Okay, what's supposed to be pissing me off here? I got exposed to lots of ideas that I didn't believe in college, and many of them I have a strong suspicious my professor didn't expect me to agree with. It's part of a good college education. The professor tried to do this man a service by exposing him to ideas he was almost certainly sheltered from as a child, and people are blaming him for it? What is education for, to teach you what you already know?
Also, I find it amusing that his father is contending that one Dawkins book is more powerful than the entire Bible and 22 years of Christian upbringing. Dawkins ought to get this guy for a dust jacket blurb.
Posted by: Shygetz | November 24, 2008 7:55 PM
Having once been a fundamentalist Christian, I can well remember the self-loathing that accompanied my own loss of faith. I still carry scars - physical and otherwise - from that period of my life. Why? Because well-meaning people told me things like:
-"Without God, life is meaningless."
-"Without God, there's no basis for morality."
-"Atheism leads to genocide."
-"Atheists are undermining the fabric of our society."
And people wonder how Richard Dawkins can characterize religious indoctrination as a form of child abuse.
Posted by: Martian Buddy | November 24, 2008 9:20 PM
Because we don't imagine God to be a Pez dispenser.
Posted by: kehrsam | November 24, 2008 9:53 PM
Kurt, I'm glad you responded instead of me - your response was far more pithy than mine would have been.
Posted by: The Christian Cynic | November 24, 2008 9:57 PM
Because we don't imagine God to be a Pez dispenser.
But that would be so cool! Again, kersham, you point to faith to sustain you. The boy didn't have it - probably for many reasons. Dawkins poisoned him. His father beat him (metaphorically). His friends abandoned him. Whatever the cause, his faith wasn't strong enough and his intellect wasn't able to overcome the lack.
Posted by: Mike | November 24, 2008 9:59 PM
Everyone is missing biggest flaw in the Dad's argument. The son CHOOSE to enroll in the class. If this class did indeed challenge his beliefs, there is no one to blame. It's not like this is a public high school education where the State mandates this view be taught. No one said he HAD to take a biology class. Where was the dad when the kid was registering for classes? If he was so concerned about a "balanced education", why didn't he make sure his kid enrolled in some theology classes, too?
Posted by: Adam | November 24, 2008 10:12 PM
So let me get this right. The Professors in the classes that he attended by his own volition, that he could have left at any time presented evidence that he thought of as irrefutable, but he couldn't talk to his family because he was afraid of them.
Hmm... seems to me that there is something seriously wrong with this family, someone ought to call Children's Services.
The kid killed himself, a regrettable outcome to be sure, but let's face it when your whole learned 'moral framework' consists of only: "Don't do it, 'cause the sky-fairy knows all", is it any wonder the kid couldn't cope with the infinitely more morally challenging real world? This represents a very low level of moral development, found only in quite young children (and psychopaths), how old was this boy, twenty-two? By this stage he should have had at least a few intense relationships outside his own circle, should have been faced with various difficult moral choices, hell by 22 the brain is nearly as fully formed as it can get, as is the adult psyche (including sexuality), and yet his family kept him at the mental and moral level of a six-year old.
Sad, in more ways than one. :( -DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | November 24, 2008 10:28 PM
I'll add to the former-fundie viewpoint.
I've known several who have followed very similar paths. None successfully killed themselves, but all had the inclination, and some the motivation (if not the dedication or skills).
Imagine everyone you've ever known hating you irreconcilably. In the throes of losing your grip on your faith, you know deep down even Jesus hates you. You're in a real, secular, and challenging learning environment, and suddenly realize you're unprepared to deal with it in any way. So much of what and how you've learned up to now is wrong. You were told to base your knowledge, often in blind defiance of your own senses, on presumption and opinion; of course in alignment with that of your peers. Who hate you now. Maybe you try to find some new peers, but your goofy Christian social skills are a hindrance in a competitive secular environment. So now you pray, because in the worst parts of your life, you always knew Jesus would be there. Except that was wrong, or maybe it isn't and he hates you too.
You see where this leads? Atheist, critical thinking, or similar support or social groups can do good work in a college or university environment.
Posted by: John | November 24, 2008 10:40 PM
Which is a pity, because it would make communion a lot easier.
Posted by: Skemono | November 24, 2008 10:41 PM
Christian fundamentalists often believe that in a world without God's existence, life is essentially meaningless and there is nothing to keep one from killing oneself for those honest about the consequences of their ideas. I'd go so far as to say it is common wisdom on par with heliocentrism. Outside of fundamentalist circles, of course, this is still a common belief, but not with the same fevor. I take this story more to be an object lesson in the truth of this. Atheism, and the things that lead to it, are a dangerous path is the message.
Posted by: Jason S. | November 24, 2008 11:22 PM
Jason S.: Atheism, and the things that lead to it, are a dangerous path is the message.
I dunno. I get the completely opposite message. Namely that rigorous fundamentalist Christianity leaves its believers so incapable of facing different viewpoints that the acceptance of obvious facts can lead to emotional devastation.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 24, 2008 11:33 PM
Jason - The study of the group psychology of cults is a fascinating area. The group dynamics seems to be similar to those of grieving:
When evidence come to light that proves contrary to the dogma, firstly the group will deny it, then they will try bargaining against it ('teach the controversy'), get angry against 'unbelievers' ('god hates you, and I agree), until finally lapsing into depression (as in this case). Some will come through the other side. However often suicide is the result, either on a grand scale (Like at Jonestown) or privately. Occasionally a grand rationalisation occurs which relieves the cognitive dissonance ('our prayers stopped the end of the world').
As I said earlier it is the fundamentalist denial of reality coupled with a stunted moral development (most often under the aegis of authoritarian leaders/parents) that tends to lead to these kind of tragedies. - DJ
Posted by: DIngoJack | November 25, 2008 12:10 AM
I've never quite understood this bizarre notion that atheism leads logically to suicide. As an atheist, I believe that this life is all I have: there's no bright, shiny afterlife waiting for me when I die. Why on earth would I want to kill myself?
I could add something snide about Donatists and cliffs, but it would be a cheap shot.
Posted by: Martian Buddy | November 25, 2008 12:14 AM
Wow, that's just disgusting.
Not only WND's attempts to paint Dawkins as being responsible for the unstable behavior of a college student but their perpetuation of the ridiculous mythology of colleges being ran by evil atheists who won't even return calls of grieving Christian parents.
It's crap like this why I rank WND just a notch below the National Enquirer and Weekly World News.
Posted by: Greg F | November 25, 2008 1:38 AM
@Kurt, Christian:
Why the defensive reaction? The question is surely a valid one, in the context of belief in a personal, interventionist god? How many times have we heard Christians talking about their god working through others to, among other things, renew their faith - even to bring them to their god?
That being the case, surely it is a valid question why he didn't intervene in this case? If he intervenes to renew that man's faith, why shouldn't he do so to renew this man's?
Posted by: Robin Levett | November 25, 2008 3:39 AM
Robin, because that is exactly the kind of dangerous, blasphemous, heretical, atheistic, communist and homosexual question that Mr. Kilgore warns us against.
Posted by: valhar2000 | November 25, 2008 5:49 AM
Why don't you contact the young man's father and use that expression?
That you liken a young man's life to candy shows just how empty you are. You, at least, are created in your monstrous god's image.
Posted by: Wowbagger | November 25, 2008 6:26 AM
Chiro -
I think you misread me. I'm not suggesting that the story means that atheism is a dangerous path. I'm an atheist, after all. I'm suggesting that the point of the WND's article is that.
Posted by: Jason S. | November 25, 2008 7:18 AM
In case someone else mentions it, I'm also not suggesting that the story isn't trying to play up an evil, atheist professor stereotype also popular in fundamentalist circles. Ed was right to point that out, but I think he missed an oppurtunity to comment on the larger theme, which is the relationship between the belief that atheism makes life pointless and suicide. Indeed, it's quite likely that the person who killed himself was struggling with a loss of faith and the meaning of life, though that probably wasn't main factor in why he was suicidal. It's why it is so intuitive for the father to cast blame where he does in addition to being what the WND article is trying to say.
Posted by: Jason S. | November 25, 2008 7:26 AM
Shorter article -
Atheism leads to nihilism which leads to suicide. Therefore, a professor recommending Dawkins' advocating atheism set someone on the path to suicide. How terrible.
Posted by: Jason S. | November 25, 2008 7:28 AM
Dingo -
I have no idea what you are talking about. All you did was string together a few pop-psychology concepts to attack fundamentalists. There is no evidence that suicide is *often* the result of beliefs that, say, conservative evangelicals typically hold. In fact, depression levels are lower among them than the population at large, probably primarily due to the psychological benefits of community participation. What you just did is just as inane as what WND was doing, only in the reverse.
Posted by: Jason S. | November 25, 2008 7:36 AM
We don't know that he didn't.
Posted by: heddle | November 25, 2008 8:31 AM
heddle's here.
Now the fun will continue even though mroberts has seemingly has retired from the field.
Posted by: Mike | November 25, 2008 8:44 AM
Re Mike
Don't fret, Mr. mroberts is commenting early and often on another thread on this blog which he has hijacked.
Posted by: SLC | November 25, 2008 8:47 AM
SLC,
Thanks. I got my tabs messed up. heddle really needs to dive into the kansas wacko church thread. Right up his alley.
Posted by: Mike | November 25, 2008 9:37 AM
... he probably would have committed suicide as well. I see a correlation here and I submit that it wasn't a struggle with his faith, it was a struggle to reconcile his budding faithlessness with the faith of his family. Like a homosexual who cannot come out of the closet for fear of being ostracized by his/her family, this young man may simply have been too afraid to come out of the athiest closet and confront his family with his views. It was a struggle I had myself, though my family was by no means pious.
Posted by: defectiverobot | November 25, 2008 11:20 AM
Posted by: steve s | November 25, 2008 12:08 PM
Posted by: steve s | November 25, 2008 12:22 PM
Skemono wrote:
Snap! That was brilliant.
.....
Wowbagger wrote:
Please take a deep breath and relax. Your indignation is entirely unjustified. He didn't liken the man's life to candy. Not to mention, Kurt is consistently one of the nicest posters here. There are few other commenters for whom the term "monstrous" would be less applicable. While he may have a few bodies in the basement (who can tell, really?), his posts here are about 99.9% quality.
(The .1% non-quality was for one really bad syllogism about sin. Still, all things told, that's not a bad record.)
Posted by: Leni | November 25, 2008 8:56 PM
My own experience was similar to this.
Posted by: Riman Butterbur | November 25, 2008 9:07 PM
John, an eloquent description, and very sad.
Posted by: itchy | November 25, 2008 9:31 PM
Leni wrote:
I won't consider your concern noted at this point, but I will retain my right to be as indignant as I please, thank you very much. Had the poster not wanted to receive such a retort then he should have chosen a less odious analogy.
But I will withdraw the 'monstrous'; that was unfair. No human, after all, could ever be as monstrous as the christian's vile god - as this story illustrates.
Posted by: Wowbagger | November 25, 2008 10:13 PM
I don't know. Hitler or Stalin or Mao or Torquemada or Ted Bundy...I could see them being as evil as the christian god, if they had the chance. I think the average person nowadays is more ethical than the christian god-monster, but some of our worst people could maybe give him a run for his money. It would have to be a complete psychopath, but we produce a few of those from time to time.
Posted by: steve s | November 26, 2008 1:01 AM
Jason - I think you misread my earlier comment (@12:10am). Go back and re-read it.
(It's OK I'll wait).
You see. What I was trying to say (somewhat clumsily I'll admit) was NOT that fundamentalism leads to suicide (just as ridiculous as atheism --> suicide, IMHO), but rather that cults when their beliefs are pricked by reality either adjust to the dissonance by rationalisation or tend to suicide (as at Jonestown).
I'm sure more expert posters could point you to studies on the group psychology of cults.
My secondary point was that the parents didn't seem to do much to encourage moral or mental development in their child and that led to an inability to deal with the unfamiliar with terrible consequences; THAT is the tragedy here.
Apologies for the confusion. DINGO.
Posted by: DingoJack | November 26, 2008 1:59 AM
Yeah, they certainly were nasty. But - as much as I hate defending any of them - most of those guys were mentally ill. But, with that in mind, I'm quite happy to agree that the christian god, if he exists, is pretty insane in the membrane as well.
I mean, he creates Adam and Eve and they don't do what he wants; he chucks them out of the nice garden he built for them and filled with coconut-eating t-rexes, which you've got to admit, must have been cool.
They have kids, who breed a lot - don't ask with whom; it makes him mad - but the offspring don't do what he wants; he wipes them almost all of them out in a flood but, since he's a bit of an environmentalist at heart, he crams a few of them and a whole bunch of animals into what is essentially a big canoe rather than zapping new animals into existence after the waters subside. Hmm, an energy conservationist, too.
Having survived that, they breed a bit more - well, inbreed if you think about it, but let's don't - but they still don't do what he wants; he allows them to be conquered and captured and enslaved - over and over. And over and over.
Then he sends them messiah, who they promptly murder; some more enslavement and being scattered to the four corners of the earth.
Those who do believe in messiah manage to screw up junior's teachings so much that nothing they do even comes close to what the intent was, and are now waiting around, hoping it's all going to end.
Don't even get me started on what he was thinking when he created the atheists...
Posted by: Wowbagger | November 26, 2008 3:35 AM
wowbagger,
Good story but not much of a plot really. Hard to sell advertising as there's not much chance of a happy ending is there...
Posted by: Mike | November 26, 2008 9:20 AM
"Here's another thing," he continued. "If my son was a professing homosexual, and a professor challenged him to read [a book called] 'Preventing Homosexuality'... If my son was gay and [the book] made him feel bad, hopeless, and he killed himself, and that came out in the press, there would be an outcry."
Double standard!!!
Posted by: jaye | December 10, 2008 7:43 AM
False analogy. Dawkins doesn't promote the idea that life without religion is bleak or hopeless - it was the Kilgore's religion that did this. I don't know of a single homosexual who was indoctrinated from childhood to believe that a heterosexual life was not worth living.
Posted by: DaveL | December 10, 2008 9:01 AM