Atheist Activism

[0UjgJBt3ONkG]

Someone commented on one of my threads that they were against activism for both for and against religion. Now, I'm not a big fan of religious activism either, but I have more respect for the theists that are activists for their religions compared to those who just believe and don't do anything. I understand door knockers and picket lines can be annoying but at least they're serious about their beliefs.

Now I'm a big fan of activism for atheism. I recently created my own website designed to promote secularism/atheism over the internet. I think activism is extremely important to combatting religion and having politicians (especially as an American) care more about our demographic.

So the topic I really want discussed here is:

What are your opinions on activism for atheism and what is it you have done/do to encourage disbelief? Also, are there any organizations/events you recommend?

Edit: Given some of the comments, I think its appropriate that I provide this video which helps explain the problems religion causes for Atheists, especially in the USA.  

[Matthias Swan]

I'm a bit indifferent on it. Personally, advertising and shoving your beliefs in people's faces is exactly what everyone hates. So it's a bit hipocritical for atheists to do it as well, and doesn't make it better.
Well, I voted indifferent but I guess I'm slightly scewed on "against it".  

[0UjgJBt3ONkG]

Matthias Swan

I'm a bit indifferent on it. Personally, advertising and shoving your beliefs in people's faces is exactly what everyone hates. So it's a bit hipocritical for atheists to do it as well, and doesn't make it better.
Well, I voted indifferent but I guess I'm slightly scewed on "against it".

I view it like a battle. If Christian beliefs are going to be influencing the government and how the country operates then I think its not only appropriate to shove your beliefs in people's faces, but the right thing to do.  

[Dathu]

Secular Swarm

Matthias Swan

I'm a bit indifferent on it. Personally, advertising and shoving your beliefs in people's faces is exactly what everyone hates. So it's a bit hipocritical for atheists to do it as well, and doesn't make it better.
Well, I voted indifferent but I guess I'm slightly scewed on "against it".

I view it like a battle. If Christian beliefs are going to be influencing the government and how the country operates then I think its not only appropriate to shove your beliefs in people's faces, but the right thing to do.

But isn't that "eye for an eye." A religious philosophy, I might add.

Personally, I adopt the golden rule: do to others as you WOULD HAVE them do to you."

I hate to quote Gandhi but "an eye for an eye only makes the whole world blind."  

[0UjgJBt3ONkG]

Dathu

Secular Swarm

Matthias Swan

I'm a bit indifferent on it. Personally, advertising and shoving your beliefs in people's faces is exactly what everyone hates. So it's a bit hipocritical for atheists to do it as well, and doesn't make it better.
Well, I voted indifferent but I guess I'm slightly scewed on "against it".

I view it like a battle. If Christian beliefs are going to be influencing the government and how the country operates then I think its not only appropriate to shove your beliefs in people's faces, but the right thing to do.

But isn't that "eye for an eye." A religious philosophy, I might add.

Personally, I adopt the golden rule: do to others as you WOULD HAVE them do to you."

I hate to quote Gandhi but "an eye for an eye only makes the whole world blind."

Yeah, but an eye for nothing leaves you in a worse position than the other guy.  

[Dathu]

Secular Swarm

Dathu

Secular Swarm

Matthias Swan

I'm a bit indifferent on it. Personally, advertising and shoving your beliefs in people's faces is exactly what everyone hates. So it's a bit hipocritical for atheists to do it as well, and doesn't make it better.
Well, I voted indifferent but I guess I'm slightly scewed on "against it".

I view it like a battle. If Christian beliefs are going to be influencing the government and how the country operates then I think its not only appropriate to shove your beliefs in people's faces, but the right thing to do.

But isn't that "eye for an eye." A religious philosophy, I might add.

Personally, I adopt the golden rule: do to others as you WOULD HAVE them do to you."

I hate to quote Gandhi but "an eye for an eye only makes the whole world blind."

Yeah, but an eye for nothing leaves you in a worse position than the other guy.

I agree completely. To do nothing when attacked only means our demise, but what I argue is whether matching their methods is just. You see, I believe 'eye for an eye' is vengeance, and although it may make for interesting films and novels, it's rather barbaric and not very intelligent.

I believe in justice. I don't think any good will come from treating Theists the way they've treated Atheists. It would only make us villains as well, and I rather not live in a world of villainy. Atheists should organize and push for equality, but only peacefully, politely, and respectfully. Hopefully the day will come when there are no issues for Atheists to press against Theists and we can just coexist until the day when the truth is realized and all religion is abandoned.

I guess you could say I'm not an Activist Atheist because I see Atheism as a natural truth, like gravity or that fire burns. There are no Fire Burns activists, and so I find Atheist Activists to be a little silly. Already Atheists are at an all time high, either because for once Atheists (usually) no long fear death upon admittance or because people are smarter than before and the logic of Atheism is contagious due to it's truth. You could also say I have confidence in the human ability to use logic that I eventually see the natural disappearance of Theism as an inevitability, like racism, sexism, and American Idol. surprised  

[Iconoclast Enthusiast]

I'm a member of the FFRF (Freedom From Religion Foundation) and support activism to enforce the separation between Church & State. However, I wouldn't try to "convert" people to atheism. I simply make my arguments and hope people have the brains enough to come to the rational conclusion. I'm not afraid to talk about it, get fierce even, but I'm not standing on the corner handing out pamphlets about it.  

[0UjgJBt3ONkG]

Question the Answer

I'm a member of the FFRF (Freedom From Religion Foundation) and support activism to enforce the separation between Church & State. However, I wouldn't try to "convert" people to atheism. I simply make my arguments and hope people have the brains enough to come to the rational conclusion. I'm not afraid to talk about it, get fierce even, but I'm not standing on the corner handing out pamphlets about it.

On an unrelated note, I love Spock... I have a cardboard cut out of Spock. Also, my AIM SN is KlingonTrekkie <-- I got it like 8 years ago.  

[0UjgJBt3ONkG]

Dathu

Secular Swarm

Dathu

Secular Swarm

Matthias Swan

I'm a bit indifferent on it. Personally, advertising and shoving your beliefs in people's faces is exactly what everyone hates. So it's a bit hipocritical for atheists to do it as well, and doesn't make it better.
Well, I voted indifferent but I guess I'm slightly scewed on "against it".

I view it like a battle. If Christian beliefs are going to be influencing the government and how the country operates then I think its not only appropriate to shove your beliefs in people's faces, but the right thing to do.

But isn't that "eye for an eye." A religious philosophy, I might add.

Personally, I adopt the golden rule: do to others as you WOULD HAVE them do to you."

I hate to quote Gandhi but "an eye for an eye only makes the whole world blind."

Yeah, but an eye for nothing leaves you in a worse position than the other guy.

I agree completely. To do nothing when attacked only means our demise, but what I argue is whether matching their methods is just. You see, I believe 'eye for an eye' is vengeance, and although it may make for interesting films and novels, it's rather barbaric and not very intelligent.

I believe in justice. I don't think any good will come from treating Theists the way they've treated Atheists. It would only make us villains as well, and I rather not live in a world of villainy. Atheists should organize and push for equality, but only peacefully, politely, and respectfully. Hopefully the day will come when there are no issues for Atheists to press against Theists and we can just coexist until the day when the truth is realized and all religion is abandoned.

I guess you could say I'm not an Activist Atheist because I see Atheism as a natural truth, like gravity or that fire burns. There are no Fire Burns activists, and so I find Atheist Activists to be a little silly. Already Atheists are at an all time high, either because for once Atheists (usually) no long fear death upon admittance or because people are smarter than before and the logic of Atheism is contagious due to it's truth. You could also say I have confidence in the human ability to use logic that I eventually see the natural disappearance of Theism as an inevitability, like racism, sexism, and American Idol. surprised

Ahhh Dathu, you make for incredibly interesting conversation. I do agree with you that Atheism will eventually be the status quo, it is my hope and understanding that eventually people will try harder to seek truth rather than assume they already know it.

However, I disagree with atheist activism being kind of silly. We're not alive very long, and I assume you will agree with me that if people weren't religious it would probably cause people/governments etc to prioritize things such as stem cell research, transhumanism and anything else that can improve the length and quality of our lives. Atheist activism, I believe, will speed that process up.

When you have Christianity running the show you get things like Bush... who bans federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. If there was a stronger atheist/secularist activist movement then that may have been avoidable and we would be a lot further along in our research than we are now.

Also, you're right, there are no fire burns activists. There are, however, gay rights activists. Homosexuality is a natural truth, it occurs in nature, but up until recently sodomy was illegal in all of the USA. Homosexuals, despite being a significantly smaller minority in the USA compared to atheists, seem to have a significantly larger voice.

Now, one thing I did quite like that you said was about how we should go about treating theists.

Quote:

Atheists should organize and push for equality, but only peacefully, politely, and respectfully.

I do kind of agree with this but I have a lot of ambivalence surrounding it too. One big issue with going around advocating the disbelief in dogma and pointing out the errors and stupidity of it is that you risk having theists become defensive/offensive which could potentially strengthen them. Having said that though, the "live and let live" policy isn't exactly working either. Its hard to peacefully, politely, and respectfully push for equality when we're the least trusted group in the America. So, by being noisy and actively pointing out how ridiculous religion is we can spread that information to more people at a younger age thereby increasing the number of atheists at a quicker pace which helps turns the odds in our favor. On the other hand, that gives more reason for theists to dislike us.

Its a tricky subject man. It sometimes feels like playing chess with a few invisible pieces on the board, as of now I lean towards activism though.  

[Matthias Swan]

Side note; Dathu DOES makes some pretty interest posts, and they're fun to read.  

[Dathu]

Matthias Swan

Side note; Dathu DOES makes some pretty interest posts, and they're fun to read.

Thanks, but watch the flattery. I wouldn't want to develop an undeserved ego. sweatdrop

Secular Swarm

Ahhh Dathu, you make for incredibly interesting conversation. I do agree with you that Atheism will eventually be the status quo, it is my hope and understanding that eventually people will try harder to seek truth rather than assume they already know it.

However, I disagree with atheist activism being kind of silly. We're not alive very long, and I assume you will agree with me that if people weren't religious it would probably cause people/governments etc to prioritize things such as stem cell research, transhumanism and anything else that can improve the length and quality of our lives. Atheist activism, I believe, will speed that process up.

When you have Christianity running the show you get things like Bush... who bans federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. If there was a stronger atheist/secularist activist movement then that may have been avoidable and we would be a lot further along in our research than we are now.

I don't think it will have that large an effect. Having spoken to many Atheists both online and in person, I tend to find that there are as many liberal Atheists as there are conservative, though since liberal Atheists tend to be more vocal, they stand out more and appear to be the majority. Even if "Atheists" had control, they would have to be Atheists who adhere to those standards and views. Which means not just any Atheist will do, it would have to be a liberal Atheist. So in the end, whether the person in charge is Atheists or not is less important than whether that person supports the issues we want changed, so I ask, what does it matter if it's an Atheist or not? If a candidate ran for any office whose agenda matched my own, Atheist or not, that candidate has my vote.

Secular Swarm

Also, you're right, there are no fire burns activists. There are, however, gay rights activists. Homosexuality is a natural truth, it occurs in nature, but up until recently sodomy was illegal in all of the USA. Homosexuals, despite being a significantly smaller minority in the USA compared to atheists, seem to have a significantly larger voice.

Ah, but the difference is that Homosexual Activists aren't fighting for the belief in homosexuality. I think even the most fervent Theist acknowledges the existence of homosexuals. These groups are fighting for equal rights, and so they are Gay RIGHTS Activists. As I said, I am all for an Atheist group fighting for equal rights between Theists and Atheists, however...[continued after next quote]

Secular Swarm

Now, one thing I did quite like that you said was about how we should go about treating theists.

Quote:

Atheists should organize and push for equality, but only peacefully, politely, and respectfully.

I do kind of agree with this but I have a lot of ambivalence surrounding it too. One big issue with going around advocating the disbelief in dogma and pointing out the errors and stupidity of it is that you risk having theists become defensive/offensive which could potentially strengthen them. Having said that though, the "live and let live" policy isn't exactly working either. Its hard to peacefully, politely, and respectfully push for equality when we're the least trusted group in the America. So, by being noisy and actively pointing out how ridiculous religion is we can spread that information to more people at a younger age thereby increasing the number of atheists at a quicker pace which helps turns the odds in our favor. On the other hand, that gives more reason for theists to dislike us.

...this push for the Atheist truth is what I can't agree with, because no matter how fiercely argued, is not justified. In reference to the bold statement, 'live and let live' is the only way to live logically.

I would like to make a serious point here: Even if it came down to the day where the only way for Atheism to survive would be to take up arms in battle, to emulate religious practices, to become pushy, obnoxious, aggressive, and or forceful, I would rather it died. I am not a soldier for any ideology. Christian's specifically believe that by spreading the word of god, they are contributing to a greater good. I believe that Atheism will no more make the world a better place than knowledge of the sun did.

People will war, they will kill, they will hate each other whether over religion, race, sex, heritage, nationality, or what side of the bread they butter (to use Dr. Sues). Humans have problems, and if you push Atheism the way Theists push religion, you will only replace the tyranny of Theism with the tyranny of Atheism, and I refuse to be a part of that.

I think you are a "push me, I push back" kind of guy, where as I am a "push me, but I don't move" kind of guy. They yell, I ignore. The truth is out there, and they know it. Everyday, one more of their ilk is opening its eyes. And that's the beauty of our position: nothing is needed of us. The burden of proof lies with them. We just have to wait for their ignorance to weed itself out.

I think I'm beginning to repeat myself, so I'll just leave it at that.  

[0UjgJBt3ONkG]

Quote:

I don't think it will have that large an effect. Having spoken to many Atheists both online and in person, I tend to find that there are as many liberal Atheists as there are conservative, though since liberal Atheists tend to be more vocal, they stand out more and appear to be the majority. Even if "Atheists" had control, they would have to be Atheists who adhere to those standards and views. Which means not just any Atheist will do, it would have to be a liberal Atheist. So in the end, whether the person in charge is Atheists or not is less important than whether that person supports the issues we want changed, so I ask, what does it matter if it's an Atheist or not? If a candidate ran for any office whose agenda matched my own, Atheist or not, that candidate has my vote.

Well I disagree that there are just as many liberal atheists as conservative, that has not been my experience so far. Also, if you compare atheism by state you'll tend to see much higher percentages of atheists in liberal areas. Its no secret that the conservative movement is largely fueled by Evangelists/hardcore Christians. Liberal leaders on the other hand, while Christian, tend to keep a lot more separation between their religious convictions and how they run the country.

Edit: The statistics I was referring to states "No Religion" not necessarily "Atheism" and while atheism would of course fall into that category I suppose it could also mean the person is spiritual, granted there is also an "Other" category. You can find the map here. Sorry for the misleading statement, hopefully I caught it before anyone read this.

However, if more people didn't think there was an afterlife then there would probably be a hell of a lot more funding for things like stem cell research and transhumanism, which was my point. If the USA was made up of as many Atheists as it is currently is Christians then the priorities of the US Government would definitely change. Christianity is quite often anti-science any time it suggests something that contradicts the bible, also in my experience Christians seem to care more about spreading Christ than curing diseases. I think you're underestimating the role Christianity has in the USA.

Quote:

...this push for the Atheist truth is what I can't agree with, because no matter how fiercely argued, is not justified. In reference to the bold statement, 'live and let live' is the only way to live logically.

I disagree. If every single individual did that, I might give that statement more support, but a "live and let live" policy for life doesn't work if not everyone is onboard. People live and then force their way of life onto other people. Governments indoctrinate their citizens. I think the most logical course of action is to do the same. I don't think we should force atheism on anyone, but I do think we should actively be promoting it.

Quote:

I would like to make a serious point here: Even if it came down to the day where the only way for Atheism to survive would be to take up arms in battle, to emulate religious practices, to become pushy, obnoxious, aggressive, and or forceful, I would rather it died. I am not a soldier for any ideology. Christian's specifically believe that by spreading the word of god, they are contributing to a greater good. I believe that Atheism will no more make the world a better place than knowledge of the sun did.

People will war, they will kill, they will hate each other whether over religion, race, sex, heritage, nationality, or what side of the bread they butter (to use Dr. Sues). Humans have problems, and if you push Atheism the way Theists push religion, you will only replace the tyranny of Theism with the tyranny of Atheism, and I refuse to be a part of that.

I partially disagree with this. Yes, there will still be problems and people will still fight, there will still be wars, South Park made that point rather well. However, as I said before, I think its fair to postulate that if more people were atheists then it would change our priorities. Atheism could quite effectively make the world a better place. Religious hostility would be gone and (as stated in Religulous) if more people weren't excited about death and didn't think the world was coming to an end then it would boost motivation to protect the environment and to not blow ourselves up. Also, as you probably gathered, I'm a big advocate of things like transhumanism and any biology/genetics research that could improve our quality of life and life spans, I seriously doubt I would care as much if I were a Theist.  

[[-Erik-]]

When it comes to religion (and atheism), I am completely against activism.

 

[Daffodil the Destroyer]

The only thing we should be active about is getting theists to accept us as decent human beings, which includes advocating separation of church and state. But that's not "atheist activism" to me. Let the theists have their beliefs; they aren't hurting you, and trying to de-convert them is just as obnoxious as their attempts to convert us. Speaking as one who used to take a great comfort from having a religious belief, it was temporarily quite devastating for me to lose that faith, and it's terrible to act like it's our duty to go around putting others through that experience if they aren't ready for it.

Basically, the bottom line is that while you and I might not need religion, some people DO. They might need it to give their day to day life some meaning, or (though I hate to say it) they might even need it to keep them acting morally. Everyone is different, and one opinion of the supernatural does not fit all.

Also, re: the statistics - one can be both spiritual and atheistic. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

 

[0UjgJBt3ONkG]

Daffodil the Destroyer

The only thing we should be active about is getting theists to accept us as decent human beings, which includes advocating separation of church and state. But that's not "atheist activism" to me. Let the theists have their beliefs; they aren't hurting you, and trying to de-convert them is just as obnoxious as their attempts to convert us. Speaking as one who used to take a great comfort from having a religious belief, it was temporarily quite devastating for me to lose that faith, and it's terrible to act like it's our duty to go around putting others through that experience if they aren't ready for it.

Basically, the bottom line is that while you and I might not need religion, some people DO. They might need it to give their day to day life some meaning, or (though I hate to say it) they might even need it to keep them acting morally. Everyone is different, and one opinion of the supernatural does not fit all.

Also, re: the statistics - one can be both spiritual and atheistic. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

They're not hurting me? I'm afraid I strongly disagree with you, while individuals may not be hurting me or anyone else religion as a collective greatly hurts a lot of people. Look at all the homosexuals who are treated like s**t... gay marriage is still illegal most places in the USA and why do you think that is...? I'll assume you're smart enough not to deny that Christianity is one of the largest players in anti-homosexuality, but I really cannot understand your comment if you're aware of that. Here is a video that helps explain exactly how they aren't just hurting me but they're hurting all of us.

Also, saying one can be both spiritual and atheistic depends on your definition of atheist which there are several definitions of.