Freethought & Rationalism Archive

CaptainDave · 07-31-2002, 04:49 PM

I had an interesting discussion with a co-worker today. He's 21 and an atheist, although he doesn't call himself that. He doesn't use that label because the entire issue of religion is irrelevant to him. It all seems nuts to him but he just doesn't see it as a political or social issue at all.

It left me wondering about how many apathetic atheists there are out there. How many of us just go about our daily lives without giving the matter even a fleeting thought?

Maybe this is the "Sleeping Giant" the ARIS (American Religious Identification Survey) spoke of. Americans without a religion comprise 14.1% of the adult population but what percent of those view their non-belief as a significant issue? Considering that there are currently less than 3000 individual endorsers of the Godless American's March out of an estimated 30 million of us suggests that apathetic atheists (or at least apathetic non religious) are better than 99% of our total number.

Perhaps the greatest value of an event like the march is to wake up that sleeping 99%.

god-free-pen · 07-31-2002, 08:27 PM

My daughter is like that also. She is a dyed in the wool atheist but it just isn't something she thinks or talks about, but she is proud of what I am doing and supports me.

I'm afraid people like this are going to have to suffer a major indignity or a loss of their freedom because of religious kook-ism at the hands of a religious government to do anything about it. Religious leaders have opposed every progressive movement throughout history;... science, medicine, hygiene, environmental awareness, you name it.

[ July 31, 2002: Message edited by: god-free-pen ]</p>

DarkBronzePlant · 08-01-2002, 07:09 AM

Again, it all goes back to the idea that it's hard for a lot of people to get charged up over... well, nothing.

scumble · 08-01-2002, 07:14 AM

It's because mostly, they realise life is pretty good, and people should be allowed to make choices in their life.
In effect, they don't get incredibly upset about loud music in which people swear and say nasty things, and try and ban everything they don't like. That sort of thing, I suppose.

capsaicin67 · 08-01-2002, 08:40 AM

Considering that there are currently less than 3000 individual endorsers of the Godless American's March out of an estimated 30 million of us suggests that apathetic atheists (or at least apathetic non religious) are better than 99% of our total number.

That does seem significant. Most of the people that I've known personally that had no use for religion were of the non-organized, non-affiliated variety. Not even interested in talking about it a great deal. They simply did have an absence of belief and it went no deeper than that. They were not courageous particularly, not interested in politics and did not connect the issue with any other facet of their lives. Their lives were adequately stable. They do occasionally gripe when someone does try to force some religion down their throats, but they have perceived this as being rather infrequent and fringey. If that becomes more consistent/pervasive it will possibly get them a bit more energized. But the bad part is that it may have to get a lot worse, or we're going to have to get a lot better at preventative communication/outreach. And even then I know of people that are simply self-centered and not people concerned with protecting anyone until someone comes for them, period. 3 issues come to mind that the nontheists I know do tend to feel strongly about: pro-choice, access to a social peer group [for dating and support], some sort of organized, supportive, structured values education for their children beyond "we belive in nothing".

But they don't really know anything about the history of CSS, or the Enlightenment values of the Revolution. They do not associate it with a larger fight against tyranny, or for self-determination, civil rights, or whatever.

Perhaps the greatest value of an event like the march is to wake up that sleeping 99%.

Nice idea and optimistic. I think that evaluating the effectiveness of the march after the event is going to be important. The numbers that you state should be telling us something more, I think. How are we going to measure whether the March was effective or not? I'm not sure I know.

There will still be a group that no matter what happens says it was a great success, but it's only the start [and that a change in strategy or critique of past strategy is "negative" and drags down the cause]! And there will be another group that says that it was a drop in the ocean and why the heck did so few nontheistic people mobilize, and why did it receive almost zero mainstream coverage, and of that wasn't it primarily xian spin?

How do we measure which is true? If I were a betting man I do not think that 85% of the 99% are even going to know it happened. The theistic media controls most of the information people do or don't receive about *our* message [except for the message on the internet and sympatheic groups----the "choir" as it were]. And that message will be neutral at the very best, and likely negative. When the Pope was in Canada, "fiercely independent" MSNBC anchor Rick Sanchez didn't report it-----he told us it was a very special event for many people everywhere, it was very, very, very special. He sat back and talked about the virtues of faith and glowed, and just got all moved by it. And told us we really should be, too! I hope I'm seriously wrong, but I don't genuinely believe we are going to get anywhere close to that kind of coverage in tone, let alone quantity. I would think we would begin to think 4 things with the figures you cite:

1)our product does not have a lot of brand loyalty right now

2)our resources need to be focused on messages that we get some return on----that is, ones that by their very nature we control at least the initial meaning of

3)we need to be very sophisticated and professional organizationally----*even more than they* are. we are going to have to work twice as hard to get half as much, and we are trying to catch up. Slick advertising of the quality of the AdCouncil's "I am an American" ad post 9-11. Or Adbuster's work. An organization that convinces me that my donations will be honestly, and shrewdly, spent.

4)we need to be *for something* in addition to being *against something*. The Enlightenement values of the founders and the Revolution? E Pluribus Unum {=America is for all it's citizens]? One nation indivisible? Liberty and justice for all? Empowerment of all people? Reducing suffering and oppression? I can't think of a single openly humanist/non-theist charity. We need to be investing in a generation of young adults that will be going into critical strategic areas----multimedia, journalism, law, public relations/communication, public policy, management/business, politics. I tend to feel that these sorts of endeavors will foster a different perception at the feeling AND substance level of things.

All just my opinion though.

[ August 01, 2002: Message edited by: capsaicin67 ]</p>

Jamie_L · 08-01-2002, 12:13 PM

I'm one of those people. I like to rage against the theistic machine on the internet, but in my everyday life I rarely encounter anything that triggers those same responses. Since I have a pretty happy, stress-free life, I've had little drive to add the stress of activism to it. I've been getting a bit more edgy since George W. and friends got into power in D.C., but I still tend to think of many, many other things I want to do with my free time besides crusade.

Don't know if that's bad or good, but I'm happy.

Jamie

ebolamonger · 08-01-2002, 12:27 PM

Originally posted by capsaicin67:

Quote:

4)we need to be *for something* in addition to being *against something*. The Enlightenement values of the founders and the Revolution? E Pluribus Unum {=America is for all it's citizens]? One nation indivisible? Liberty and justice for all? Empowerment of all people? Reducing suffering and oppression? I can't think of a single openly humanist/non-theist charity. We need to be investing in a generation of young adults that will be going into critical strategic areas----multimedia, journalism, law, public relations/communication, public policy, management/business, politics. I tend to feel that these sorts of endeavors will foster a different perception at the feeling AND substance level of things.

I guess I tend to see my atheism as just another personal choice and I don't think I'd want to be active about spreading my non-belief. I agree that being just against religion or the pervasiveness of religion in society is not a constructive stance. I'd rather work for promoting overall well-being for the country, its environment, and its citizens, and working to make sure the Constitution and the Bill of Rights aren't trampled on. I would have a problem with merely presenting myself as promoting the destruction of religion since I realize that it is very important and personal to people, no matter how much I may not agree with it. Just keep it out of my government, please...

*nikki

CaptainDave · 08-01-2002, 05:06 PM

The responses to my original post have been interesting. They all seem to suggest that things need to get a whole lot worse for us until our apathetic majority wakes up and helps us make things better.

I think this is true unfortunately. I do think we are likely to get battered and bruised in the short run but victorious in the long run. Hopefully we won't suffer too much before our apathetic majority figure out the importance of our struggle.

Oresta · 08-01-2002, 06:12 PM

Quote:

CaptainDave:The responses to my original post have been interesting. They all seem to suggest that things need to get a whole lot worse for us until our apathetic majority wakes up and helps us make things better.

The many atheists I know, like me, do not define their political activism around their lack of belief. They are, not surprisingly, people I have met in my journeys through the political left.
While I would go to Washington to demonstrate against the Vietnam War and for the right to choose (which I did), I would have difficulty demonstrating for my nonbelief that has no specific political agenda beyond saying "here we are". I would be there with you in a minute if we were to publicly assemble in defense of the threatened Wall of Separation and stand shoulder to shoulder with those theists who are with us on this. (Dark Jedi has touched on this in a sister thread on this board.)
A March On Washington in defense of the First Amendment sets common ground for all of us who have a vested interest in the preservation of wall of separation. I'll be there for that one. In the meantime, I kick up sand locally, make myself a general nuisance to the Establishment Clause trespassers whereever and whenever I can.

CaptainDave · 08-01-2002, 06:46 PM

There is a word for perfection-seeking: Paralysis. I might not have spelled that right but I hope you get the idea.

If you're waiting for a cause which matches your beliefs perfectly, you will never act.

Perfection is not an attribute of humankind.

07-31-2002, 04:49 PM	#1
CaptainDave Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Florida Keys Posts: 119	Apathetic Atheists I had an interesting discussion with a co-worker today. He's 21 and an atheist, although he doesn't call himself that. He doesn't use that label because the entire issue of religion is irrelevant to him. It all seems nuts to him but he just doesn't see it as a political or social issue at all. It left me wondering about how many apathetic atheists there are out there. How many of us just go about our daily lives without giving the matter even a fleeting thought? Maybe this is the "Sleeping Giant" the ARIS (American Religious Identification Survey) spoke of. Americans without a religion comprise 14.1% of the adult population but what percent of those view their non-belief as a significant issue? Considering that there are currently less than 3000 individual endorsers of the Godless American's March out of an estimated 30 million of us suggests that apathetic atheists (or at least apathetic non religious) are better than 99% of our total number. Perhaps the greatest value of an event like the march is to wake up that sleeping 99%.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-31-2002, 08:27 PM	#2
god-free-pen Regular Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Navarre, FL Posts: 109	My daughter is like that also. She is a dyed in the wool atheist but it just isn't something she thinks or talks about, but she is proud of what I am doing and supports me. I'm afraid people like this are going to have to suffer a major indignity or a loss of their freedom because of religious kook-ism at the hands of a religious government to do anything about it. Religious leaders have opposed every progressive movement throughout history;... science, medicine, hygiene, environmental awareness, you name it. [ July 31, 2002: Message edited by: god-free-pen ]</p>

08-01-2002, 07:09 AM	#3
DarkBronzePlant Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: San Francisco, CA USA Posts: 3,568	Again, it all goes back to the idea that it's hard for a lot of people to get charged up over... well, nothing.

08-01-2002, 07:14 AM	#4
scumble Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: UK Posts: 279	It's because mostly, they realise life is pretty good, and people should be allowed to make choices in their life. In effect, they don't get incredibly upset about loud music in which people swear and say nasty things, and try and ban everything they don't like. That sort of thing, I suppose.

08-01-2002, 08:40 AM	#5
capsaicin67 Contributor Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Gold coast plain, sea, scrubland, mountain range. Posts: 20,955	Considering that there are currently less than 3000 individual endorsers of the Godless American's March out of an estimated 30 million of us suggests that apathetic atheists (or at least apathetic non religious) are better than 99% of our total number. That does seem significant. Most of the people that I've known personally that had no use for religion were of the non-organized, non-affiliated variety. Not even interested in talking about it a great deal. They simply did have an absence of belief and it went no deeper than that. They were not courageous particularly, not interested in politics and did not connect the issue with any other facet of their lives. Their lives were adequately stable. They do occasionally gripe when someone does try to force some religion down their throats, but they have perceived this as being rather infrequent and fringey. If that becomes more consistent/pervasive it will possibly get them a bit more energized. But the bad part is that it may have to get a lot worse, or we're going to have to get a lot better at preventative communication/outreach. And even then I know of people that are simply self-centered and not people concerned with protecting anyone until someone comes for them, period. 3 issues come to mind that the nontheists I know do tend to feel strongly about: pro-choice, access to a social peer group [for dating and support], some sort of organized, supportive, structured values education for their children beyond "we belive in nothing". But they don't really know anything about the history of CSS, or the Enlightenment values of the Revolution. They do not associate it with a larger fight against tyranny, or for self-determination, civil rights, or whatever. Perhaps the greatest value of an event like the march is to wake up that sleeping 99%. Nice idea and optimistic. I think that evaluating the effectiveness of the march after the event is going to be important. The numbers that you state should be telling us something more, I think. How are we going to measure whether the March was effective or not? I'm not sure I know. There will still be a group that no matter what happens says it was a great success, but it's only the start [and that a change in strategy or critique of past strategy is "negative" and drags down the cause]! And there will be another group that says that it was a drop in the ocean and why the heck did so few nontheistic people mobilize, and why did it receive almost zero mainstream coverage, and of that wasn't it primarily xian spin? How do we measure which is true? If I were a betting man I do not think that 85% of the 99% are even going to know it happened. The theistic media controls most of the information people do or don't receive about our message [except for the message on the internet and sympatheic groups----the "choir" as it were]. And that message will be neutral at the very best, and likely negative. When the Pope was in Canada, "fiercely independent" MSNBC anchor Rick Sanchez didn't report it-----he told us it was a very special event for many people everywhere, it was very, very, very special. He sat back and talked about the virtues of faith and glowed, and just got all moved by it. And told us we really should be, too! I hope I'm seriously wrong, but I don't genuinely believe we are going to get anywhere close to that kind of coverage in tone, let alone quantity. I would think we would begin to think 4 things with the figures you cite: 1)our product does not have a lot of brand loyalty right now 2)our resources need to be focused on messages that we get some return on----that is, ones that by their very nature we control at least the initial meaning of 3)we need to be very sophisticated and professional organizationally----even more than they are. we are going to have to work twice as hard to get half as much, and we are trying to catch up. Slick advertising of the quality of the AdCouncil's "I am an American" ad post 9-11. Or Adbuster's work. An organization that convinces me that my donations will be honestly, and shrewdly, spent. 4)we need to be for something in addition to being against something. The Enlightenement values of the founders and the Revolution? E Pluribus Unum {=America is for all it's citizens]? One nation indivisible? Liberty and justice for all? Empowerment of all people? Reducing suffering and oppression? I can't think of a single openly humanist/non-theist charity. We need to be investing in a generation of young adults that will be going into critical strategic areas----multimedia, journalism, law, public relations/communication, public policy, management/business, politics. I tend to feel that these sorts of endeavors will foster a different perception at the feeling AND substance level of things. All just my opinion though. [ August 01, 2002: Message edited by: capsaicin67 ]</p>

08-01-2002, 12:13 PM	#6
Jamie_L Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: U.S. Posts: 2,565	I'm one of those people. I like to rage against the theistic machine on the internet, but in my everyday life I rarely encounter anything that triggers those same responses. Since I have a pretty happy, stress-free life, I've had little drive to add the stress of activism to it. I've been getting a bit more edgy since George W. and friends got into power in D.C., but I still tend to think of many, many other things I want to do with my free time besides crusade. Don't know if that's bad or good, but I'm happy. Jamie

08-01-2002, 05:06 PM	#8
CaptainDave Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Florida Keys Posts: 119	The responses to my original post have been interesting. They all seem to suggest that things need to get a whole lot worse for us until our apathetic majority wakes up and helps us make things better. I think this is true unfortunately. I do think we are likely to get battered and bruised in the short run but victorious in the long run. Hopefully we won't suffer too much before our apathetic majority figure out the importance of our struggle.

08-01-2002, 06:46 PM	#10
CaptainDave Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Florida Keys Posts: 119	There is a word for perfection-seeking: Paralysis. I might not have spelled that right but I hope you get the idea. If you're waiting for a cause which matches your beliefs perfectly, you will never act. Perfection is not an attribute of humankind.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.