Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Buffman · 08-01-2002, 09:07 PM

I had no difficulty understanding exactly what Oresta just posted. She acted very dramatically when the causes had clear objectives with which she sympathized. However, I am having some difficulty understanding your post.

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

I still get the feeling that you believe that everyone must be energized the way you are over this specific activity or they are traitors to "The Cause." But exactly what cause is it that you are supporting? A non-theist cause? And exactly what is that non-theist cause you support with such enthusiasm? Is it, "Hey! Look at me! I'm an Atheist and just as much of an American as anyone else who isn't an Atheist?" The only cause I see there is to announce that there are Atheists in America....something that most folks already know. I'll ask again. Exactly what is the ultimate purpose/goal/cause of this event?

One-eyed Jack · 08-02-2002, 12:06 AM

What to do, what to do? What's a poor atheist to do?

1. Work against irrational belief and religious superstition. Take a look at <a href="http://members.aol.com/ckbloomfld/index.html" target="_blank">Dennis McKinsey</a>, Bible Errancy. Dennis writes, "If defenders of the Bible are not going to accept an alternative to the Bible until they first realize it's not inspired, then, logically, they must be shown its weaknesses. Biblical Errancy was created to fill this need, to reveal the nuts and bolts of biblical fallacies." Look also at <a href="http://hem.passagen.se/nicb/atheism.htm" target="_blank">Niclas Berggren's</a> site; he presents some really excellent essays on the irrationality of religion. Spread the word, learn the arguments against theism, promote them.

2. Why bother? The more I read about Christian calls to evangelize and "take dominion of the Earth" the more I realize that it's important to shine a strong light on religion and expose every facet of it. (There are similar drives in Islam but the culture of the USA, where I live, is dominated by the Christian variety.) Some Christians (Mark Hatfield, Jimmy Carter) are genuinely good men. Some Christians (Pat Robertson, Jimmy Swaggart) support and associate with genocidal "Christian" dictators like Guatemala's ex-dictator Efrain Rios Montt and Liberia's Charles Taylor.

Religion is all too often used to justify evil. The religions which have evolved a strong militant component--Christianity and Islam, mostly I think--empower believers both to force their beliefs on others and to resort to violence in pursuing that end.

------

Whoops, too much coffee late at night. Sorry for the rant.

Oresta · 08-02-2002, 03:38 AM

Quote:

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

Did you read the last paragraph of my above post? I thought I made it clear that I am far from apathetic about First Amendment issues.

CaptainDave · 08-02-2002, 04:31 AM

Quote:

Buffman: I still get the feeling that you believe that everyone must be energized the way you are over this specific activity or they are traitors to "The Cause."

That would definitely be overstating my opinion. Looking back at the tone of my previous posts however, I can see how you would think that. Sorry! Obviously I need to choose my words more carefully; I certainly don't want to alienate anyone here!

Quote:

Buffman: What's your cause? Is it,"Hey! Look at me! I'm an Atheist and just as much of an American as anyone else who isn't an Atheist?"

For the purpose of the march, replace "me" with "us" and "I'm with "we're." That WOULD be something new. Our problem is not a lack of numbers, it's a lack of solidarity. I think it would have an important psychological effect if we could show some - both to the public and to ourselves. That's the value I see in the march.

Then there is the point I made in my original post in this thread. I didn't intend to start another march discussion! The overwhelming majority of non-believers are completely apathetic regarding their non-belief. It's not something they even think about. An event like the march might wake them up.

CaptainDave · 08-02-2002, 05:03 AM

I may need to clarify what I mean by "apathetic atheist." I don't think anyone here fits that description by a long shot.

I'm talking about people who wouldn't even consider going on-line and discussing non-belief issues. Read my original post. The guy I mentioned there was dumbfounded at the notion of political action on behalf of the rights of non-believers. This guy is not at all apathetic in general. He's very intelligent and ambitious. He simply has no perception of a public hostile to non-believers. These are the people who I'm talking about waking up.

I think this is potentially huge. Wake up these apathetic atheists and our effective number will swell dramatically.

Jayhawker Soule · 08-02-2002, 06:42 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by CaptainDave:
Our problem is not a lack of numbers, it's a lack of solidarity.

The numbers are pathetically small: 2372 endorsers with 92 days until the March.

And let's look at this "Sleeping Giant". The "No Religion Specified" 14.1% breaks down as follows:

00.4% Atheist
00.5% Agnostic
00.0% Humanist
00.0% Secular
13.2% No Religion

I have no reason to believe that 'No Religion' addresses anything beyond institutional affiliation.

As for solidarity, solidarity with what? What is the Mission Statement / Program of the March?

[ August 02, 2002: Message edited by: ReasonableDoubt ]

Kevin Dorner · 08-02-2002, 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ReasonableDoubt:

The numbers are pathetically small. Let's look at this "Sleeping Giant". The "No Religion Specified" 14.1% breaks down as follows:[list][*] 0.4% Atheist[*] 0.5% Agnostic[*] 0.0%

And how many people will to refer to themselves as atheists these days now that the word has been given all the positive connotation of "traitor" by relentless mixing of patriotism and piety and the usual smear tactics?

I have noted another so-called reliable survey where, when one of the questions was "God exists" and the possible choices only "Agree" and "Disagree" that 8% chose the latter.

It's all in the way that the questions are phrased, which is why I give little creedence to surveys about a subject where everyone can't even agree on a set terminology: ie a secular humanist might be loathe to be referred to as an atheist even though they have no beliefs at all, and even trying to define the difference between atheist and agnostic produces endless debates (ie my non-denial "weak" atheism is called "agnostic" by many agnostics... )

[ August 02, 2002: Message edited by: Kevin Dorner ]

DVF · 08-02-2002, 07:00 AM

The problem is apathetic atheism has been a long held ideal. I would much prefer a world where I could believe or disbelieve according to my own proclivity and not give it a second thought. I don't want to be an activist; I feel compelled to by the very wrongness of the treatment of non-believers in our society, and by the theistic political engine working against us.

To galvanize the collective will of the mostly inert atheist population we need to convey three things.

A clear, immediate and personal threat.
A moral imperative to act.
An accessible course of action with a defined goal.

The threat has been provided very conveniently by the theists. We are discriminated against in law, insulted by our countries leaders and dismissed by the media. "W" has suggested that only theists are competent to serve as interpreters of the constitution, oblivious to the intent of the enlightened men who wrote it. The trick is to convey how personal the threat is. It's one thing to know that the books say an Atheist can't be governor of Massachusetts, it's a much more frightening idea to think that non-belief can cost you your job, your freedom, the custody of your children or even your life.

The moral imperative comes from the personal threat and the perception of injustice to self and others. It's the difference between thinking that "something must be done" and "I need to do something" Atheists are by and large reasonable, logical people, but what's required here is an emotional response. Reason will change men's minds, but outrage will get them off their asses.

So, let�s suppose we can provide:

Reason - the threat
Motivation - the immediate danger of not reacting

What do we do? How does the average person act? There's an ongoing battle in the courtroom and the legislature, but most of us aren't going to be direct participants there. That isn't really a problem; we're well represented on the legal field. Where we fail is in general public awareness. We don't effectively reach our sympathizers, much less our detractors. Even if we did, we don't have a clear message to provide.

Organizers -"We're threatened and we need to act"
Atheists at large -"We're here! What now?"
Organizers -"um.... We'll get back to you."

Doesn't quite work.

The Godless Americans March is a great step. I don't think it's going to have that dramatic a short term affect, but it's noise. Our first goal needs to be the creation of a public presence, to do that we need to make noise.

I know that other people here in the deep south share my opinions, but as long as we remain quiet we remain separated. It's like a buffet at a party. Food will sit there untouched because no one wants to be the first to start.

Personally I'm trying to organize some people here in this part of the country, the gulf coast, who are interested in making some noise. I'll be starting another thread with details on that if anyone is interested.

Jayhawker Soule · 08-02-2002, 07:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kevin Dorner:
And how many people will to refer to themselves as atheists these days ...

I haven't a clue and neither, I fear, do the organizers of the March.

Jayhawker Soule · 08-02-2002, 07:12 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by DVF:
Our first goal needs to be the creation of a public presence, to do that we need to make noise.

I believe that the first step needs to be the creation of a coherent private presence, followed by efforts at building a meaningful local presence.

"We're Here! Let's Shout! - We Don't Know What We're About!" is not a chant to inspire confidence.

[ August 02, 2002: Message edited by: ReasonableDoubt ]

08-02-2002, 07:00 AM	#18
DVF Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Biloxi MS Posts: 19	The problem is apathetic atheism has been a long held ideal. I would much prefer a world where I could believe or disbelieve according to my own proclivity and not give it a second thought. I don't want to be an activist; I feel compelled to by the very wrongness of the treatment of non-believers in our society, and by the theistic political engine working against us. To galvanize the collective will of the mostly inert atheist population we need to convey three things. A clear, immediate and personal threat. A moral imperative to act. An accessible course of action with a defined goal. The threat has been provided very conveniently by the theists. We are discriminated against in law, insulted by our countries leaders and dismissed by the media. "W" has suggested that only theists are competent to serve as interpreters of the constitution, oblivious to the intent of the enlightened men who wrote it. The trick is to convey how personal the threat is. It's one thing to know that the books say an Atheist can't be governor of Massachusetts, it's a much more frightening idea to think that non-belief can cost you your job, your freedom, the custody of your children or even your life. The moral imperative comes from the personal threat and the perception of injustice to self and others. It's the difference between thinking that "something must be done" and "I need to do something" Atheists are by and large reasonable, logical people, but what's required here is an emotional response. Reason will change men's minds, but outrage will get them off their asses. So, let�s suppose we can provide: Reason - the threat Motivation - the immediate danger of not reacting What do we do? How does the average person act? There's an ongoing battle in the courtroom and the legislature, but most of us aren't going to be direct participants there. That isn't really a problem; we're well represented on the legal field. Where we fail is in general public awareness. We don't effectively reach our sympathizers, much less our detractors. Even if we did, we don't have a clear message to provide. Organizers -"We're threatened and we need to act" Atheists at large -"We're here! What now?" Organizers -"um.... We'll get back to you." Doesn't quite work. The Godless Americans March is a great step. I don't think it's going to have that dramatic a short term affect, but it's noise. Our first goal needs to be the creation of a public presence, to do that we need to make noise. I know that other people here in the deep south share my opinions, but as long as we remain quiet we remain separated. It's like a buffet at a party. Food will sit there untouched because no one wants to be the first to start. Personally I'm trying to organize some people here in this part of the country, the gulf coast, who are interested in making some noise. I'll be starting another thread with details on that if anyone is interested.

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

08-01-2002, 09:07 PM	#11
Buffman Beloved Deceased Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: central Florida Posts: 3,546	I had no difficulty understanding exactly what Oresta just posted. She acted very dramatically when the causes had clear objectives with which she sympathized. However, I am having some difficulty understanding your post. If you're waiting for a cause which matches your beliefs perfectly, you will never act. I still get the feeling that you believe that everyone must be energized the way you are over this specific activity or they are traitors to "The Cause." But exactly what cause is it that you are supporting? A non-theist cause? And exactly what is that non-theist cause you support with such enthusiasm? Is it, "Hey! Look at me! I'm an Atheist and just as much of an American as anyone else who isn't an Atheist?" The only cause I see there is to announce that there are Atheists in America....something that most folks already know. I'll ask again. Exactly what is the ultimate purpose/goal/cause of this event?

08-02-2002, 12:06 AM	#12
One-eyed Jack Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Eugene, Oregon Posts: 46	What to do, what to do? What's a poor atheist to do? 1. Work against irrational belief and religious superstition. Take a look at <a href="http://members.aol.com/ckbloomfld/index.html" target="_blank">Dennis McKinsey</a>, Bible Errancy. Dennis writes, "If defenders of the Bible are not going to accept an alternative to the Bible until they first realize it's not inspired, then, logically, they must be shown its weaknesses. Biblical Errancy was created to fill this need, to reveal the nuts and bolts of biblical fallacies." Look also at <a href="http://hem.passagen.se/nicb/atheism.htm" target="_blank">Niclas Berggren's</a> site; he presents some really excellent essays on the irrationality of religion. Spread the word, learn the arguments against theism, promote them. 2. Why bother? The more I read about Christian calls to evangelize and "take dominion of the Earth" the more I realize that it's important to shine a strong light on religion and expose every facet of it. (There are similar drives in Islam but the culture of the USA, where I live, is dominated by the Christian variety.) Some Christians (Mark Hatfield, Jimmy Carter) are genuinely good men. Some Christians (Pat Robertson, Jimmy Swaggart) support and associate with genocidal "Christian" dictators like Guatemala's ex-dictator Efrain Rios Montt and Liberia's Charles Taylor. Religion is all too often used to justify evil. The religions which have evolved a strong militant component--Christianity and Islam, mostly I think--empower believers both to force their beliefs on others and to resort to violence in pursuing that end. ------ Whoops, too much coffee late at night. Sorry for the rant.

08-02-2002, 05:03 AM	#15
CaptainDave Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Florida Keys Posts: 119	I may need to clarify what I mean by "apathetic atheist." I don't think anyone here fits that description by a long shot. I'm talking about people who wouldn't even consider going on-line and discussing non-belief issues. Read my original post. The guy I mentioned there was dumbfounded at the notion of political action on behalf of the rights of non-believers. This guy is not at all apathetic in general. He's very intelligent and ambitious. He simply has no perception of a public hostile to non-believers. These are the people who I'm talking about waking up. I think this is potentially huge. Wake up these apathetic atheists and our effective number will swell dramatically.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.