So, a California pastor who was asked to leave his church because he preached against many of the church’s basic doctrines decided to take up atheism for a year, as an experiment, and to blog about it — and purports to be shocked that he was dismissed from church-related jobs over it.  Excerpt:

In the past, at times like these, when his life foundered and frayed around the edges, Ryan Bell often prayed for help. But this year, at least, the pastor has resolved not to.

For the next 12 months, Bell says he will live as if there is no God.

He will not pray, go to church, read the Bible for inspiration, trust in divine providence or hope in things unseen. He’s taking the opposite of a leap of faith: a free fall into the depths of religious doubt.

Bell’s “intellectual experiment,” which began January 1, has already borne dramatic consequences.

In less than a week, he lost two jobs teaching at Christian schools near his home in Los Angeles. He’s 42 and has been a pastor or in seminary for most of his adult life. Now he faces the prospect of poverty and taking odd jobs to feed his two daughters, 10 and 13.

“There have been times, usually late at night and early in the morning, when I think: What have I done? It really undermines the whole structure of your life, your career, your family,” Bell said.

Let’s say Ryan Bell was a doctor who had deep doubts about standard medicine. Let’s say he decided to live a year as if homeopathy were true, just to try it out. Would he be shocked if the clinic where he worked dismissed him? Or let’s say he worked as an organizer for the California Democratic Party, but had launched a blog promoting his project to Live As A Republican For A Year. Would he consider himself put upon if the Democrats pink-slipped him? Or let’s say he told Mrs. Bell that he wanted to live for the next year as if polyamory were true, simply as an experiment. Would it really be surprising if she sent him packing?

Well, what’s the difference? This is a matter of intellectual and moral integrity.

 UPDATE:  You commenters who are being quick to denounce the church for being “unchristian” to deny employment to a man who wishes to live as if Christian doctrine did not exist had better come up with a reason why the Richard Dawkins Foundation would be morally wrong to refuse to subsidize one of its policy-making/policy-implementing employees (versus, say, a secretary) who wished to spend a year living as if Christianity were true. If Dawkins wanted to fire such an employee, nobody would bat an eye, nor should they bat an eye. It would be ludicrous for Dawkins to pay this person to undermine the mission of the Foundation.