There aren’t many issues for which I sit on the fence, but this is one great big fat one. Do we call ourselves a religion in an effort to gain equality and membership in the movement? If you take the absolute broadest definition of the term “religion” and squint really hard, you can force Atheism to fit (the same goes for baseball fans). Theists love to do that, and from a debating perspective I’d love to take that card away from them. This is certainly not the correct usage of the term, but we’re arguing semantics, and isn’t that irrelevant anyway (semantics change over time)?Is that copping out? Is copping out a bad thing? One side of me says “don’t you DARE group me in with the sheep following invisible men in the sky”, and the other side says “call me anything you like if it gets me equality and fair treatment (easy tax deductions, faith-based money, etc)”.There is no easy answer, in my opinion. At American Atheists we are a “big umbrella” organization, so we gladly welcome Atheists who support the idea of a freethought church, as well as those who are utterly repulsed by the idea. I’m not repulsed, but I find it difficult to decide on which side of the fence to fall.

(thanks Zac)http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/Science-Fiction-News.asp?NewsNum=1877The Atheon Temple of Science is an art project conceived by Jonathan Keats. Using a grant from UC Berkeley’s Chancellor’s Community Partnership fund, he created the Atheon in downtown Berkeley office building. Four millennia after Abraham fathered Judaism, Christianity and Islam, and 150,000 years after hominids introduced burial rituals to the Mediterranean, religion has finally been rendered wholly compatible with science. Beginning on September 27, 2008, a two-story downtown Berkeley building dubbed “the Atheon” will provide a spiritual home for rational people in California, and guidance to acolytes worldwide. Establishment of an Atheon has been a high priority in the scientific community for the past several years, rivaling even enthusiasm for the new Large Hadron Collider. “When you listen to people like Nobel-laureate cosmologist Steven Weinberg, or Oxford biologist Richard Dawkins, you hear a lot of talk about how god-based religion is out-of-date,” says conceptual artist Jonathon Keats. “The leading minds believe that science can and should provide a spiritually satisfying replacement. But until recently no one bothered to consider what form that alternative might take.” The temporary facility features stained glass windows showing the cosmic microwave background radiation using NASA’s new WMAP satellite data.

Here’s another version — The Church of Reality, headed up by my friend Marc.http://www.churchofreality.org/wisdom/welcome_home/

The Church of Reality is not just a religion of science, it is a religion of people. We explore reality from the human perspective. In order to explore reality, we need a strong, healthy society where people can live freely and peacefully, and the human race can evolve toward a better future. The pursuit of reality is something that is a shared process. It’s something we do together as a church, as a community, and as the human race.We are about Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Reality!The Church of Reality provides a religious identity for people who have made a personal commitment to pursue reality the way it really is. When we are asked, “What religion are you?,” we answer that we are Realists; we practice Reality because we believe in Reality. We also provide a sense of community, a social structure, and a moral compass to define right and wrong. We provide a sense of purpose about who we are, why we exist, and how we live our lives, in the context of science and logic.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, September 16th, 2008 at 6:56 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.