There seems to be a negative sentiment about atheists organizing...

I don't understand why there seems to be many atheists who are against coming together and organizing ourselves. In the United States we secularists represent around 20% of the population... yet we have absolutely zero power on a national level. The Jewish community, on the other hand, had a very powerful lobbying body on Washington, despite the fact they represent maybe 1.5% of the population.

That is crap. If we organize, we can push to get rid of these faith-based laws that promote Christianity above all. We can also push science and the Atheist message farther and also get rid of laws that bar atheists from holding public office in certain states.

"Organizing seems to be counter-productive or hypocritical for atheists to do."

Why? Organizing isn't about turning atheism into a religion. There is no doctrine being created at all. This is about being able to concentrate our influence into a single entity to promote and protect our beliefs. We are completely ignored on the national level. Barack Obama even mentioning atheists in this inaguration was considered a huge success! What the hell?!? Is simply being aknowledged now considered a victory? Outrageous.

So that's why I think we need to pull together.

I don't disagree, but sometimes this leads to polarization (I think that's the right word :P). For example that would lead atheists gather up in specific places, and ultimately that may even lead to a separation of the population.

I don't disagree, but sometimes this leads to polarization (I think that's the right word :P). For example that would lead atheists gather up in specific places, and ultimately that may even lead to a separation of the population.

Teenaged

I agree 100%.  Let's not even add all the racists groups that get to have a voice because of the right of Assembly.btaylor2404

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

I don't disagree, but sometimes this leads to polarization (I think that's the right word :P). For example that would lead atheists gather up in specific places, and ultimately that may even lead to a separation of the population.

helium_flash

But I do hate it when certain groups of people are forced to get organised to be treated with respect. It is a necessary evil, but see what happens with the gay community. People hate them even more just because the put pressure to gain some rights. Not that this should be a set back for such efforts, as I said it is a necessary evil for me. :?

[QUOTE="helium_flash"][QUOTE="Teenaged"]

I don't disagree, but sometimes this leads to polarization (I think that's the right word :P). For example that would lead atheists gather up in specific places, and ultimately that may even lead to a separation of the population.

Teenaged

But I do hate it when certain groups of people are forced to get organised to be treated with respect. It is a necessary evil, but see what happens with the gay community. People hate them even more just because the put pressure to gain some rights. Not that this should be a set back for such efforts, as I said it is a necessary evil for me. :?

[QUOTE="Teenaged"][QUOTE="helium_flash"][QUOTE="Teenaged"]

I don't disagree, but sometimes this leads to polarization (I think that's the right word :P). For example that would lead atheists gather up in specific places, and ultimately that may even lead to a separation of the population.

helium_flash

But I do hate it when certain groups of people are forced to get organised to be treated with respect. It is a necessary evil, but see what happens with the gay community. People hate them even more just because the put pressure to gain some rights. Not that this should be a set back for such efforts, as I said it is a necessary evil for me. :?

They weren't accepted anyways, but today people will dislike them just for putting pressure, for marriage for instance.

Anyway, I don't find what you say bad. Not at all.

[QUOTE="helium_flash"][QUOTE="Teenaged"][QUOTE="helium_flash"][QUOTE="Teenaged"]

 

Teenaged

But I do hate it when certain groups of people are forced to get organised to be treated with respect. It is a necessary evil, but see what happens with the gay community. People hate them even more just because the put pressure to gain some rights. Not that this should be a set back for such efforts, as I said it is a necessary evil for me. :?

They weren't accepted anyways, but today people will dislike them just for putting pressure, for marriage for instance.

Anyway, I don't find what you say bad. Not at all.

I'm not quite sure. It is a little hard to compare the two communities, as gays were discriminated against in a much harsher way (and arguably still are). I don't think there is any openly gay politician either. Atheists were never really targeted for attacks,-- we're more like ignored or brushed aside as an afterthought.

helium_flash

I just think that some people might hate others even for the slithest thing, for anything that can be used against them. But who cares right? :P They most likely be that way no matter what.:P

[QUOTE="helium_flash"]

I'm not quite sure. It is a little hard to compare the two communities, as gays were discriminated against in a much harsher way (and arguably still are). I don't think there is any openly gay politician either. Atheists were never really targeted for attacks,-- we're more like ignored or brushed aside as an afterthought.

Teenaged

I just think that some people might hate others even for the slithest thing, for anything that can be used against them. But who cares right? :P They most likely be that way no matter what.:P

One stereotype I heard of Greeks is that they are homosexual. :P

BTW, I agree with what you said, although for those ignorant of atheists, this group would probably rub them the wrong way.

[QUOTE="btaylor2404"]I agree 100%.  Let's not even add all the racists groups that get to have a voice because of the right of Assembly.helium_flash

In the US at least, as a group, the white supremacists have MUCH more power as a whole than Atheists.  They are well organized and work together often.  Again it's sickening.

[QUOTE="btaylor2404"]I agree 100%.  Let's not even add all the racists groups that get to have a voice because of the right of Assembly.helium_flash

[QUOTE="helium_flash"][QUOTE="btaylor2404"]I agree 100%.  Let's not even add all the racists groups that get to have a voice because of the right of Assembly.Teenaged

Today they are much smaller and don't hold nearly as much power, but they will hold their anti-minority and pro-Christian stance.

For more information, visit kkk.com :)

[QUOTE="Teenaged"][QUOTE="helium_flash"][QUOTE="btaylor2404"]I agree 100%.  Let's not even add all the racists groups that get to have a voice because of the right of Assembly.helium_flash

Today they are much smaller and don't hold nearly as much power, but they will hold their anti-minority and pro-Christian stance.

For more information, visit kkk.com :)

I know them.

Organizations such as Freedom From Religion and such already exist, they're simply not very powerful. And should atheists band together, who's to say we wouldn't be arousing the Christian segregation to a whole new level? There's a lot of dangers with atheists coming together like that.

But I do agree with you, we just have to arise with tact and patience, unless we could find some kind of celebrity-atheist to champion our purpose.

Organizations such as Freedom From Religion and such already exist, they're simply not very powerful. And should atheists band together, who's to say we wouldn't be arousing the Christian segregation to a whole new level? There's a lot of dangers with atheists coming together like that.

But I do agree with you, we just have to arise with tact and patience, unless we could find some kind of celebrity-atheist to champion our purpose.

Stryder1212

Oh, and those groups are organizations definitely, but are they lobbying groups such as the ones that the Hebrew community and gay community have? That is what we need: political power. That is primarily what I'm talking about.

[QUOTE="Stryder1212"]

Organizations such as Freedom From Religion and such already exist, they're simply not very powerful. And should atheists band together, who's to say we wouldn't be arousing the Christian segregation to a whole new level? There's a lot of dangers with atheists coming together like that.

But I do agree with you, we just have to arise with tact and patience, unless we could find some kind of celebrity-atheist to champion our purpose.

helium_flash

Oh, and those groups are organizations definitely, but are they lobbying groups such as the ones that the Hebrew community and gay community have? That is what we need: political power. That is primarily what I'm talking about.

And thus we reach an impasse, as observed throughout previous elections, those who deviate from Christianity are never elected. If one isn't likely to be elected for believing a non-Christian religion, what chance do those with no beliefs in any god have?

[QUOTE="Teenaged"][QUOTE="helium_flash"][QUOTE="Teenaged"][QUOTE="helium_flash"][QUOTE="Teenaged"]

helium_flash

But I do hate it when certain groups of people are forced to get organised to be treated with respect. It is a necessary evil, but see what happens with the gay community. People hate them even more just because the put pressure to gain some rights. Not that this should be a set back for such efforts, as I said it is a necessary evil for me. :?

They weren't accepted anyways, but today people will dislike them just for putting pressure, for marriage for instance.

Anyway, I don't find what you say bad. Not at all.

There are openly gay politicians, just not many of them.

Anyway, while it's true that homophobes have gotten re-invigorated due to gays trying to secure more rights, this is true any time an oppressed group of people tries to equalize themselves with the rest of the population. Things get better though after you get over that hill of resistance. Look at blacks. MASSIVE retaliation against them during the civil rights era and today attitudes toward them are quite positive (exempting stereotyping but that happens to every ethnic group). Things used to be a LOT worse for gays just 20 years ago than they are now. My point being that things always get worse before they get better and you pretty much just have to weather the worst parts of the storm if you want to make any progress.

Organizations such as Freedom From Religion and such already exist, they're simply not very powerful. And should atheists band together, who's to say we wouldn't be arousing the Christian segregation to a whole new level? There's a lot of dangers with atheists coming together like that.

But I do agree with you, we just have to arise with tact and patience, unless we could find some kind of celebrity-atheist to champion our purpose.

Stryder1212

[QUOTE="helium_flash"][QUOTE="Stryder1212"]

Stryder1212

Oh, and those groups are organizations definitely, but are they lobbying groups such as the ones that the Hebrew community and gay community have? That is what we need: political power. That is primarily what I'm talking about.

And thus we reach an impasse, as observed throughout previous elections, those who deviate from Christianity are never elected. If one isn't likely to be elected for believing a non-Christian religion, what chance do those with no beliefs in any god have?

[QUOTE="Stryder1212"][QUOTE="helium_flash"][QUOTE="Stryder1212"]

helium_flash

Oh, and those groups are organizations definitely, but are they lobbying groups such as the ones that the Hebrew community and gay community have? That is what we need: political power. That is primarily what I'm talking about.

And thus we reach an impasse, as observed throughout previous elections, those who deviate from Christianity are never elected. If one isn't likely to be elected for believing a non-Christian religion, what chance do those with no beliefs in any god have?

Then we'd need to come up with an acceptable reason to have a lobbying group, at least in the eyes of Congress.

[QUOTE="helium_flash"][QUOTE="Stryder1212"][QUOTE="helium_flash"][QUOTE="Stryder1212"]

Stryder1212

Oh, and those groups are organizations definitely, but are they lobbying groups such as the ones that the Hebrew community and gay community have? That is what we need: political power. That is primarily what I'm talking about.

And thus we reach an impasse, as observed throughout previous elections, those who deviate from Christianity are never elected. If one isn't likely to be elected for believing a non-Christian religion, what chance do those with no beliefs in any god have?

Then we'd need to come up with an acceptable reason to have a lobbying group, at least in the eyes of Congress.

if atheists come together and simply unite and follow under one banner, then they become everything they hate. danwallacefan

[QUOTE="danwallacefan"]if atheists come together and simply unite and follow under one banner, then they become everything they hate. helium_flash

I have to agree with danwallacefan somewhat. Uniting over something as insignificant as a disbelief in God(s) seems entirely pointless, especially given that there is no common ground inherent in atheism. We stand against or apart from theism not, for atheism.

Reminds me of a quote actually. "If there were no theists there would be no atheists".

So why are you against atheists organizing to try to get more power? Like I said, we make up around 20% of the population, but our message is completely ignored by the government and media.helium_flash

What message is that?

[QUOTE="helium_flash"]So why are you against atheists organizing to try to get more power? Like I said, we make up around 20% of the population, but our message is completely ignored by the government and media.domatron23

What message is that?

How does that in anyway go against what atheism stands for?

[QUOTE="domatron23"]

[QUOTE="helium_flash"]So why are you against atheists organizing to try to get more power? Like I said, we make up around 20% of the population, but our message is completely ignored by the government and media.helium_flash

What message is that?

What, do you think we should be evangelizing or something? Remember also that most atheists are weak atheists i.e. they don't believe that God exists. Teaching that God does not exist would be to teach strong atheism which is something that should be resigned to personal opinion.

That religion should stay out of the government? Science before superstition? helium_flash

These aren't atheistic messages.

The point is, if atheists want to be respected or taken seriously by the government, then we should start organizing ourselves and get some powerful lobbying groups.

How does that in anyway go against what atheism stands for?

helium_flash

There's nothing wrong with wanting to be taken seriously but I have problems with sending an atheistic message mostly because atheists do not have a message that is really worth sharing.

That is crap. If we organize, we can push to get rid of these faith-based laws that promote Christianity above all. We can also push science and the Atheist message farther and also get rid of laws that bar atheists from holding public office in certain states.

helium_flash

I'm sorry to say that most likely will never happen for quite some time.

http://atheism.about.com/od/atheistbigotryprejudice/a/AtheistSurveys.htm

I completely agree with what you're saying, but don't think we'll see it happen within our lifetimes.

[QUOTE="helium_flash"]

That is crap. If we organize, we can push to get rid of these faith-based laws that promote Christianity above all. We can also push science and the Atheist message farther and also get rid of laws that bar atheists from holding public office in certain states.

Rekunta

I'm sorry to say that most likely will never happen for quite some time.

http://atheism.about.com/od/atheistbigotryprejudice/a/AtheistSurveys.htm

I completely agree with what you're saying, but don't think we'll see it happen within our lifetimes.

[QUOTE="helium_flash"]That religion should stay out of the government? Science before superstition? domatron23

Science before superstition means that we look to science for answers, not to religion. We shouldn't be asking God what to do, we should be asking the scientists and experts. As a conservative, it is disgusting how so many Republicans don't believe in evolution or will just laugh at the idea of the Big Bang.helium_flash

But they are good ones. That religion should be separate from government is in my mind a win-win situation for both theists and atheists. I've been a fan of Barack Obama for a long time, and one of my favorite speeches of his is the one on Christianity and government, where he reminds his audience that the reason the founding fathers wrote the separation of Church and State into the Constitution actually was because they wanted to protect the Church, not because they wanted a God-less government. Their parents left Europe because the governments there, at that time, persecuted everyone whose faith was different from the state sanctioned one, and the idea was that in the newly formed country, government should not be able or allowed to force anyone to worship or believe in a certain way. Enforcing that means not only that an atheist will not be forced to act out a faith he or she does not have, but it would also guarantee that those who have a personal belief of any kind would be allowed to practice it openly (within the boundaries of other laws of course--no human sacrifices, please). I would think that anyone, regardless of personal faith or lack thereof, would be able to support the notion that the government should stay out of something as inherently personal as people's religious beliefs. As for science instead of superstition... I think it would be narrow-minded to lump all unexplained phenomena under the label "superstition", just like I think it would be short-sighted to assume that science can explain every single thing in our world. We should be able to have science side by side with supernatural events that we cannot explain, and freely explore and enjoy both. ChiliDragon

I support a secular government but there is something appealing about a theocracy. The reason I want the U.S. to at least imitate a theocracy is because I want it, religion, to fail. Through a secular government, religion can't do that. Instead, it's protected. In the meantime, we have a lot of religious adherents who want to theocracize America not knowing how much of a failure it would be. Bring it on.

I support a secular government but there is something appealing about a theocracy. The reason I want the U.S. to at least imitate a theocracy is because I want it, religion, to fail. Through a secular government, religion can't do that. Instead, it's protected. In the meantime, we have a lot of religious adherents who want to theocracize America not knowing how much of a failure it would be. Bring it on.

Genetic_Code

I'm sorry to say that most likely will never happen for quite some time.

http://atheism.about.com/od/atheistbigotryprejudice/a/AtheistSurveys.htm

I completely agree with what you're saying, but don't think we'll see it happen within our lifetimes.

Rekunta

The thing I find weird about that survey is the stark difference between people's impressions of atheists and people's impressions of the non-religious.  I get the sense that the real problem is that when people think "atheist", they think "rabid anti-Christian", not "some guy who just happens not to believe in God" - not that the people actually have a problem with atheism.

I support a secular government but there is something appealing about a theocracy. The reason I want the U.S. to at least imitate a theocracy is because I want it, religion, to fail. Through a secular government, religion can't do that. Instead, it's protected. In the meantime, we have a lot of religious adherents who want to theocracize America not knowing how much of a failure it would be. Bring it on.

Genetic_Code

Failed theocracies don't make religion go away.  They just make life hell for everyone living there.

If religion fails in a theocracy it brings the government down with it, most likely along with the infrastructure and legal system. Cut the head off a snake and all that... Would the consequences of that really be worth it?ChiliDragon

Probably not. :P 

[QUOTE="Rekunta"][QUOTE="helium_flash"]

That is crap. If we organize, we can push to get rid of these faith-based laws that promote Christianity above all. We can also push science and the Atheist message farther and also get rid of laws that bar atheists from holding public office in certain states.

helium_flash

I'm sorry to say that most likely will never happen for quite some time.

http://atheism.about.com/od/atheistbigotryprejudice/a/AtheistSurveys.htm

I completely agree with what you're saying, but don't think we'll see it happen within our lifetimes.