Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
05-23-2003, 11:13 AM | #11 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 86
|
|
05-23-2003, 11:22 AM | #12 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The Middle, Kansas
Posts: 2,637
|
Quote:
|
|
05-23-2003, 01:03 PM | #13 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,288
|
We shouldn't abandon the word godless because people find it distasteful. Unlike words like agnostic, secularist, etc, the meaning is obvious to anyone with even a rudimentary knowledge of the language.
It means exactly what it sounds like, and the problem is that this is considered to be negative. We are godless. Atheist, agnostic, whatever you want to call it, we don't believe in a god. It's the meaning that's considered negative, and that's what we have to fight. |
05-23-2003, 02:28 PM | #14 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: OC
Posts: 1,620
|
I think a difficulty in using "godless" is that people of faith (which are the majority) equate this to being anti-moralistic. They believe morals come from god so that a godless society would have no morals. They are dead wrong, but the belief remains because they hear the two tied together (athiest=godless=immoral) by their leaders every day.
I think changing the terminology would have a positive effect in how they (theists) view the political and societal effects of a secular government as being more positive than negative. People usually agree with something if it is shown to be in their own best interest. Since they really don't want equality of religious beliefs in school or goverment, and they just want Christian beliefs front and center, it can be shown that laws regarding this would enable other religions to be on equal ground by law. This would be dangerous to the Christians and they should realize it, reject it, and adopt more secular views in terms of government. I believe the wording really does matter in these cases. Trillian |
05-27-2003, 02:53 AM | #15 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,288
|
Quote:
|
|
05-27-2003, 03:56 AM | #16 |
Regular Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: NYC, 5th floor, on the left
Posts: 372
|
I'm not entirely sure what you're suggesting, GPLindsey. It seems to me that in many ways the nonreligious theists would not support many views of atheist. I can see them saying, "Sure it's OK if my kid recites a nondenominational prayer in class before lunch." Who cares if the pledge says "under god"?
I've known people who are nonreligious who can't fathom that I don't believe in a god. I've known religious people who think that it doesn't matter so much whether you go to church or what you believe as long as you believe in god. I haven't found nonreligious theists to feel as though other people's faiths were being pushed down their throats. They don't seem to feel like misfits or oppressed. Maybe my experience is odd. I'm wondering if I'm just missing your point altogether. Dal |
05-27-2003, 05:00 AM | #17 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Northern Virginia, USA
Posts: 1,112
|
Quote:
I think GPLindsey is suggesting that we do more to incorporate the general nonreligious folks who may be turned off by the terms godless or atheist. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|