Every once in a while I have to piss a lot of people off. In my opinion, if you don’t piss off a lot of people every once in a while, well, you’re not voicing your opinion.I’m going farther than Ellen and others in the debate over using the word “Atheist”. My opinion is that if you DON’T use the word Atheist, you’re hurting the movement. I’m saying that even using the alternative words (Brights, secular humanist, realist, or even agnostic)HURTS the movement by allowing people to retain their prejudice against us. It also shows a weakness of conviction on our part, so even IF (big if) people actually know what the alternate word means, they don’t think you’re gutsy enough to admit your real thoughts. They may be right.Sam Harris is a brilliant thinker and writer, but I think of the few people who left the AAI convention swayed by his “don’t use Atheist” speech, and I’m saddened because I think “there go more people who won’t say what they mean, who won’t put a face to the word, who won’t help stamp out bigotry to the absolute best of their ability”.Sam is really wrong, and it really bothers me. My opinion is that EVERYONE should use Atheist. No Brights. No Agnostics (YES, THEY ARE THE SAME). No Secular Humanists. Only Atheists. You are what you are — if someone has a problem with that, well, it’s THEIR problem. What would the country be like if we all just spoke our minds?
Justin, “atheist” is not a “special word”. The prefix a- means without. Then just do the math.
Phreedm, why do you come on here, posting the same bullshit, time and time again?
Haven’t you learned by now that your god is bullshit, and is just an unjustified belief that you harbor?
Don’t you think you should care more about knowledge instead of beliefs?
Get with the times, man.
I’m rather in favor of:
MF’er atheist with attitude.
Agnostic is NOT always the same. different agnostics define themselves in different ways. that’s up to THEM, NOT YOU. Stop telling people what they can and can’t call themselves-the very thing you get mad at religions for.
Sam is a bright guy, and he happens to be wrong on this. It doesn’t bother me at all to say that. I don’t elevate him to some superhuman status, and I don’t consider him infallible. He’s going to make mistakes like the rest of us, and this happens to be one.
Once again the pissant displays his ignorance and lack of comprehension.
Religionistas seek to shove their opinions on others constantly – many of them even go so far as to bang on peoples doors uninvited to spread their bullshit.
(Here’s one more example of SPECIAL TREATMENT FOR RELIGION:
Many communities that will prosecute solicitors [when properties are identified through signs which state "No Soliciting"], refuse to prosecute religious solicitors since “they’re doing the lord’s work”.)
When have you seen atheists do that?
Where is the word “atheist” on our money?
Where does that same word appear in the pledge of allegiance?
Religionistas are not content with merely stating an “opinion”, they seek to force it upon one and all. They have demonstrated time and again their willingness to use force, terror, and torture to inflict their will on others – denying them the security to voice their opinions.
In effect, doing their best to silence or obscure other opinions.
GodFree&Glad,
Check this out:
http://atheistrevolution.blogspot.com/2007/10/first-nontheistic-billboard.html
A sign of things to come? (The pun wasn’t intended but I’ll take it!)
After attending the 1986 Convention as an interested, curious observer, I walked out of there saying “Lance this is what you are. You are an Atheist.” I also recognized the value of capitalizing the word after reading Madalyn’s writings. After 21 years of being a member of American Atheists, I see absolutely no reason whatsoever to abandon the word Atheist to describe myself. If Sam Harris has a problem with it, that’s HIS problem, not mine. I’ll live the rest of my life as a Atheist, and I’ll die as an Atheist.
As Dave is a fan of Camp Quest, he might be interested in this program from Canada’s CBC on atheism. In part of the program they interview people at Camp Quest.
This is from the science blog site “Sandwalk” also in Canada.
http://sandwalk.blogspot.com/2007/10/atheists-spreading-word.html
Considering that those words all have different meanings on their own and even more different meanings when used by different people who define them differently, I think it’s rather ignorant and inconsiderate to say “Just call yourself an atheist because that’s what you are.” Well, did you think that maybe a secular humanist is just that: a secular humanist? Or that an agnostic is actually an agnostic? This whole mentality of you’re either labeled the same as us or you’re against us is completely idiotic.
I define myself as an atheist, but also as a humanist. I consider the two to be mutually exclusive of one another and so I use both. If asked what religion I am, I say none, I’m atheist. If asked what I have faith in, I say I’m a humanist, I put my faith in society in hopes that we can learn and grow and eventually do the right thing, even if it takes centuries of blowing each other’s brains out first. This all relies on my personal definitions of atheism and humanism.
The analogy being used here between calling yourself atheist or humanist or agnostic or what have you and declaring yourself homosexual is rather flawed. Don’t forget that there are also those people who define as bisexual, and a lot of bisexuals are attacked by the gay community as being “fence-sitters” or trying to fit in with society when in actuality, they ARE attracted to both men and women. You’re doing the same thing here with the labeling of atheist, agnostic, bright, humanist, etc. You assume that anyone not defining as atheist is merely a fence-sitter, when it just might be that what they truly believe is in line with agnosticism or humanism but not necessarily atheism.
EAC,
This is from the American Humanist Association:
“Humanism is a progressive philosophy of life that, without theism and other supernatural beliefs, affirms our ability and responsibility to lead ethical lives of personal fulfillment that aspire to the greater good of humanity.”
(emphasis mine
Seems to me that incorporates atheism.
Set: Atheism
Subset: Humanism
No?
666,
And if you notice, I said that I was using my personal definition of humanism (a faith in society and humanity to improve and actively work for the good of society and humanity, without using the belief of a god or gods). Hence, when asked my religion: atheist. When asked what I have faith in: humanity, based on my humanist beliefs.
EAC,
I just found it odd that you identify yourself as an atheist in your screen name instead of “evil Humanist conqueror”.
I think that this is what Dawkins was referring to when he spoke/wrote in regards to coming out of the (atheist) closet.
If people don’t see/hear us, they will be unaware of how many there are and continue to marginalize atheists.
666 was correct in describing humanism as a subset of atheism. Based on the first part of the stated description of humanism (without theism and other supernatural beliefs), all humanists are atheists. But the second part of that sentence which affirms our responsibility to lead ethical lives for the greater good of humanity would exclude some atheists from being described as humanists.
But it is misleading for humanists to deny that we are atheists.
Rather than avoid the use of a term that accurately describes us, why don’t we try to change the public perception of that word by “coming out” and showing others that atheists can be really good people. They can’t say, “Some of my best friends are atheists” unless they know who we are.
I agree completely, we need to continue to describe ourselves at atheists. I think we should go one step further and squash “i don’t know” (or “agnostic”) as an answer to the question “Do you believe in god(s)?” You can’t not know if you have a belief, you either have it or you don’t ! I’m sick of the wimps who are to afraid to say “NO”.
chicago, maybe the “a” in “atheist” is too weird for the public not understanding greek roots.
We could perhaps say “no theist” or “non-theist” to make it easier for them.
“What would the country be like…”
There would be a lot of speaking and not a lot of doing.
How ironic that Dave’s “opinion is that if you DON’T use the word Atheist, you’re hurting the movement.”, yet he does far more harm and damage to the movement by preaching Judaism, identifying himself with a faith-based identity (as a jew), attacking secularists & atheists who criticize Judaism and treat his religion like any other, and consistently aligning himself with zionist (jewish extremists)groups, such as the ADL.
Sam Harris has a point in stating that “that ‘atheist’ is a term that we do not need, in the same way that we don’t need a word for someone who rejects astrology. We simply do not call people ‘non-astrologers.’All we need are words like ‘reason’ and ‘evidence’ and ‘common sense’ and ‘bullshit’ to put astrologers in their place, and so it could be with religion.”
Is the movement dependent upon an identity to state what we are not (theists)and in response/reaction to religion or should we let our identity be based on living our lives based on reason and truth and allow the “movement” of reason treat and label religion as mythology?
Or is our society and “movement” not ready to take such a bold step?