Renee Rosenow

I think it is safe to say that a large number of Americans, when their religious beliefs are questioned by others, react extremely unfavorably. Instead of remaining calm, justifying their beliefs and attempting to respect the opposing viewpoint, the typical response is to fly off the handle and overreact to what essentially is a simple disagreement.

There aren’t many instances in which I would claim Europeans flat out handle certain situations better than Americans. But clearly, the recent lack of controversy brewing over the advertisement of Atheism in London is something all Americans could learn from in terms of taking criticism regarding their religious beliefs.

According to an Oct. 22 Associated Press article, $113,000 in donations had been received by organizers of a campaign to place ads on the sides of London red buses asserting there is “probably no God.” The money was initially going to be used to place posters on 30 buses carrying the slogan, “There’s probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy life” and would run for a four week period in January. However, with the current donation total reaching seven times the group’s target, the project could expand to other cities; its time frame could be extended and the actual number of ads it puts out could be increased.

Now had this occurred in America, every news channel and newspaper would be talking or writing about it in a negative light. Religious leaders would be doing their typical flying off the hook and asking for censorship while avid church-goers would be questioning how something like this could ever happen and condemning the members of the organization. Then of course you would have the other side angered by being attacked that they too would overreact, thus causing an insane clash over belief disagreement.

But in London, most believers apparently appeared to not be offended by the idea. They did what Americans need to do in similar cases involving religion, and that’s look at the other side and what positives can come from their actions.

Inayat Bunglawala of the Muslim Council in Britain has a quote in the story that speaks volumes to the difference between Americans’ view on religion and that of other countries and other religions.

“I think people will ask themselves, ‘On what basis can they make that statement,'” Bunglawala said. “So it will get people thinking, so in that sense it can only be good.”

Some may chalk this reaction up as occurring because the Atheist movement is more intended to attack Christians than Muslims despite both believing in a God. But much like the response of this particular Muslim, it seems that a good portion of European Christian leaders looked at the campaign as a good thing.

The Rev. Jenny Ellis, spirituality and discipleship officer for the British Methodist Church, welcomed the ads, saying the campaign would be a good thing if it will get people to engage with the deepest questions of life. Theos, the public theology think tank, took it a step further and donated $82 to the campaign on the grounds that the ads were so bad they probably would attract people to

religion.

“It tells people to ‘stop worrying’ which is hardly going to be a great comfort for those who are concerned about losing jobs or homes in the recession,” Theos director Paul Woolley said in the article. “Stunts like this demonstrate how militant atheists are often great adverts for

Christianity.”

The belief shared by these three people is one that I wish more Americans would have. Instead of becoming outraged at every little thing, every instance of something being done to the point of ridiculousness, people need to look at what that ridiculousness can do.

Woolley’s final quote, saying the outlandish actions by the atheists are a good thing for Christianity, demonstrates he gets that point. He realizes because the actions are so outlandish people who are on the fence with their religious beliefs will be turned away from atheism because they don’t want to be associated with their crazy movement. Thus, in their search for spiritual belief they will be more drawn to researching and discovering religions that acted appropriately in response to the group’s efforts. The actions by the atheists have given people a reason to discover a religion, any religion and ultimately Woolley understood this too is a good thing.

So because I actually have grounds to say this, I will seize the opportunity; act more like Europeans – when it comes to taking on criticism of religion. They seem to understand a vital point to religion that a large portion of Americans don’t. Just because someone respects other religious beliefs and welcomes outlandish actions from opposing views, that does not mean they are any less of a believer of a particular faith than someone who doesn’t respect other views on religion and overreacts in response to opposing views’ actions.

Respecting other religions and reacting calm and collectively to criticisms on one’s given religion help out their particular faith. Ultimately this is just as vital a part to demonstrating one’s faith in a religion as feverishly defending a faith’s honor. The difference though is that one actually helps a religion and the other just sets it back.

Hansen is a junior print journalism major and editorial editor of The Spectator. “Mmmboppin’ with Scott Hansen” appears every Thursday.