What is the human-valued value of atheism —that “god does not exist”? Well, existence is a tricky subject. We’ll leave that for later, whether god does this thing we call existing. The human-valued value of [all of society being turned toward] atheism is simple: without the concept of God the people believe they are material.
Governments and kings govern the material world, not the spiritual world, for each man is a sovereign in his soul to the degree that he, paradoxically, orients his being’s pursuit toward oneness in Being with God who begot his beingness (that is, his spirit’s experience of consciousness in and of the material world exterior to that experience itself). Enter the biopolitical state’s implicit mandate: if government aims to govern the zoē, Ambagen’s “bare life,” taming it in aim at encircling (subjugating) all life into and under the law of the Polis, the civilized animal’s environment where the government governs, then it is best, from this government’s perspective, to treat men as monsters. Monsters are men without God, without identity in Being, indeed without experiential being or an assumption about their relation from whence that experience came, for monsters have no being to speak of—they are pure animalic instinct and thusly necessitate governing, limiting, monitoring, caging, and perhaps even monetizing (as we indeed do with beasts in zoos whose implicit message is: you, animal as these, could be here, as these save your governability relative to them). Governments always seek their mandate in some course threat of some half truth: “man is an animal”. Yes, and without a relation to himself, his being founded in the Being of God, he is only that; but he is not only that. Claim otherwise and find yourself, sooner or later, on the wrong side of those bars. Black’s Law dictionary originally defined a Person as “monster”, with no upper case “m” as if to deprive it (Him) of this sense of being and thereby nomos, orientation to Law.
Man was not always thought of as having possession of himself; it is easy for modern man with his blind insistence upon and presumption to “rights” to miss that crucial fact of history. He even misses the point in moralizing over the sins of slavery, whose real sin was inconsideration for the Being inside the enslaved man who identifies per se, because this question provokes that same modern mind toward God as that source of being; else he must admit that the slaves body was, is, “just a body” and thereby governed by man’s law, which is clearly mutable to the whim of the state. Hence the desperation of the modern man to “fix” the state’s morality: it cannot permit, in its “scientific” atheism, that man has a longing for the source of his being because this modern god cannot —that is, science cannot yet— fathom a real yet immaterial being because it, and with it modern man, is trapped in the presumptions which are paradoxically and frustratingly caught between the pre-Christian and post-enlightenment eras. The bio-political golom (Hobbes’ Leviathan) grows larger with every spirit claimed by atheism and away from god; and it is become as such —a blind god— to modern man. Look how he worships and abhors this ambivalent creature. Look at what it’s made of him. The value of atheism to man is nothing, for it convinces him he is all material and no spirit; the value to the state is that it’s implicit mandate is to protect “People” (monsters) from themselves. Thus its mandate is growth. And does it grow? And is it —even its justice— blind? If we are material we are monsters and we democraticians comprise Leviathan. God is not an option, not if you mean to have a soul’s sovereignty; for if you demand there is no god, you claim, like the slave, you are a body to be governed by a principle no higher than the monsters themselves who comprise this bio political, godless monster, the State.