The Coalition of Reason: tautology or thieves of morality?

The Coalition of Reason (COR) is another humanist-type group, one that is being activist in the sense of promoting Atheism via billboards declaring that they are Good Without God, which is also the title of a book which they promote.

One might be tempted to think that a group declaring itself to be attached to “Reason” might at least describe what reason means to them. And certainly one would expect an outline of the rational process behind their beliefs. However, a quick trip through the COR website produces nothing of the sort. COR is attached to reason merely because they say so – a ploy of virtually all Atheist organizations and Atheist promoters. Reason means Atheism. There is no rational process involved. The term “Reason” is merely co-opted to provide the aura of rational respectability they need to shroud their faith.

Let’s examine their main tenet of faith: they are self-declared “Good Without God”, and they proclaim it to be so on billboards. The without God part is uncontested; they are definitely without God. But what about “good”?

“Goodness” is a relative term, in that it demands reference to a measurement baseline, a standard to be used for comparison. Deviate in one direction from that baseline, and “badness” occurs. Deviate in the other direction from that baseline, and "goodness" occurs.

What does the COR designate as its baseline? It does not designate anything. So taken at this level, the claim to be good, which is based on no foundation or baseline definition of goodness or badness, this claim of “goodness” is a tautology. This is because goodness is designated by their unstated, personal definition, with which they obviously consider themselves to have conformed. More importantly, this unstated standard or baseline could always be evolved to match their current behavior: hence, they are good merely due to their own definition, a permanent tautology, one they cannot fail.

But at the next level, perhaps they have co-opted (stolen) an ethic from the culture they inhabit – Judeo-Christianity. If this is the case, then they have dishonestly compared themselves to a standard which they openly reject, that of religious ethics, the authority of which is derived through revelation. This process makes them not good compared to the standard they are using, in the sense that they are deceiving, possibly themselves, and certainly attempting to deceive the public. That is “Not Good”, rather than the “Good” which they project.

However, after the actual rational analysis of their claim is done, it is obvious that the Coalition of Reason is not interested in logic, reason or rational thought. Nor is it really interested in Goodness. It is really interested in the standard Atheist elitist pursuits couched in humanism, Freethought and so on.

So the COR is engaged in fraud from the get-go, which indicates that its baseline for “goodness” is a slippery thing that conforms to objectives, not to absolutes such as incorrigible truths.