GPLindsey

Another thread in this forum--"Christianity on the Decline?"--referenced an excellent new study on religious beliefs in the USA. This study projected--based on a sample of over 50,000 people--that over 29 million Americans would characterize themselves as having "no religion," when asked the question "What is your religion, if any?" However, of these, less than a million would characterize themselves as atheists. (My apologies, but my IT chops are pretty poor and I am unfamiliar with how to link back to the other thread or the study. As of 2/23/03, the thread was on p. 2 of this forum).

Why are so many people comfortable with saying that they have "no religion" in a poll question, but don't what to assert that they are atheists? Don't they mean the same thing?

To answer the second question first, I think that atheism and non-religousness are not strictly synonymous. Many respondees may have a belief in a God but do not engage in worship or other organized religious practices. They may accept there is a God as a Creator--in order to get their heads around why there is a universe or what caused the Big Bang--but may not believe s/he/it either expects or desires worship, or s/he/it plans to give us eternal life. Thus, they reject religion but do not reject God, which puts them at odds with atheists.

On the other hand, re: the first question, I think a large number of people do reject both God and religion, but cannot bring themselves to say that they are atheists. I think this is because the Religious Right, and indeed mainstream religious groups, have attached such a stigma to the term "atheist" that even de facto atheists prefer to use another term. Unfairly or not, they have tatooed atheists as being lawsuit-crazed God haters, who want to create a Soviet-style atheist/communist government. It's akin to how feminism in some circles has gotten such a stigma, that women who support things like equal pay for equal work, breaking the glass ceilings in corporations, etc., nevertheless feel compelled to start their sentences with "I'm not a feminist, but...."

I think the distinction between atheists and the non-religious has an impact on the approaches that should be taken for secular activism. There may be millions of people out there who would say "I'm not an atheist, but..." I oppose State-sponsored school prayer, posting the 10 Commandments in the classroom, or other attempts by the Government to express a preference for religion vs. non-religion. Such people would be turned off by a "Godless March" on Washington, because it focuses on the atheist position that there is no God. Better that we have efforts that focus the debate on keeping the US Government from showing a preference for religion over non-religion, making clear that the non-religious camp is not just for atheists. Thoughts?

Koiyotnik

It may just be where I live, but I've never had a problem labelling myself as an atheist. I was wishy-washy with religion when I was younger, but when I started to contemplate atheism, I never felt uncomfortable with the distinction. Maybe I just wasn't aware of a stigma related to it at all, or maybe there just wasn't as blatant a one here as there appears to be in the majority of America.

Religion issues rarely come up, but when they do, I find that the other non-religious or atheist students in my classes have no problem with people knowing that they're disbelievers/apathetic of deities. They're not militantly vocal about it--it's more of a passing comment, along the lines of me nonchalantly saying I'm Ukrainian.

Toto

That prior thread:

Christianity on the Decline

Just Another Infidel

Posted by GPLindsey:
Hmmmm. Godless Americans. Not just for Atheists anymore.

I like it!

JAI