Atheist Church

[Agent Nationaux]

And I thought they weren't part of a group.

BBC News - What happens at an atheist church?

[Neil Pickup]

(a) What do you mean by "they"?

(b) What part of Atheism (ie non-belief in God) says anything about not being in a group?

Seriously...

[Agent Nationaux]

I mean Atheists do not categorise themselves as being part of a group/order.

[Neil Pickup]

You have fundamentally missed the point, then.

[Burgey]

Atheism has lately been pretty dogmatic and strident in its criticism of other belief systems (religions). A number of atheists are doing a pretty good job in mimicking the intolerance often displayed by mainstream religion itself.

[Agent Nationaux]

Originally Posted by Neil Pickup

You have fundamentally missed the point, then.

I am just going by what SS has said in a previous thread.

[Top_Cat]

It seems fairly clear to me that the 'church' is merely the template to get a bunch of like-minded people together, not the birth of a belief system or dogma.

[Neil Pickup]

Never go by what SS says.

[Agent Nationaux]

Originally Posted by silentstriker

The difference is that atheism is not an ideology. It's like "people who dont collect stamps" doing something about people who have hobbies. It's simply not a good way to group anyone because there is nothing that really binds us as a group (not even if we like religion, I've met more than a couple atheists who wish that they could believe in God). So the premise is irrelevant.

He has a point on this though.

[Agent Nationaux]

Originally Posted by Top_Cat

It seems fairly clear to me that the 'church' is merely the template to get a bunch of like-minded people together, not the birth of a belief system or dogma.

Like minded people gathered together to support the fact that they don't believe in God just like they don't believe in fairies and monsters and the great big juju monster (as said by Richard Dawkins).

I also don't believe in fairies and I am sure you don't, so let's form a group and meet up to discuss this along with having guest speakers and so on.

[Monk]

Originally Posted by Agent Nationaux

Like minded people gathered together to support the fact that they don't believe in God just like they don't believe in fairies and monsters and the great big juju monster (as said by Richard Dawkins).

I also don't believe in fairies and I am sure you don't, so let's form a group and meet up to discuss this along with having guest speakers and so on.

I believe in fairies, but a different type of fairies to some other people. So I might argue with them, or perhaps even go to war with them.

[silentstriker]

Originally Posted by Top_Cat

It seems fairly clear to me that the 'church' is merely the template to get a bunch of like-minded people together, not the birth of a belief system or dogma.

Originally Posted by Neil Pickup

Never go by what SS says.

You could just ask me what I mean.

There is no 'idealology' behind atheism because it is simply a lack of belief in God. It is not a philosophy, or a set of ideals.

But that doesn't mean its not a 'group'. You can make 'groups' in all sorts of ways: by hair color, ethnicity, religion, etc. Certainly I would say there are issues that a large percentage of atheist would say are probably important to them, but that's simply due to the position of atheism and of various religions in society.

What happens at an atheist 'church'? I don't know - whatever would happen at any sort of interest meeting - probably talk about issues that people in the group can agree on (e.g lets say a school is trying to mandate that all kids have to pray or something). Is joining together to form an organization a 'atheist philosophy'? Of course not, but just like people who don't collect stamps may get together and boycott a government policy that forced people to collect stamps, or if it was the case that you can't get elected to office if you don't claim to be a large stamp collector....it makes sense to find people who agree with you on certain issues, or have certain things common with you background wise.

[silentstriker]

Originally Posted by Burgey

Atheism has lately been pretty dogmatic and strident in its criticism of other belief systems (religions). A number of atheists are doing a pretty good job in mimicking the intolerance often displayed by mainstream religion itself.

You've made this point several times now, but I think we're finally at the point where we don't have to sit back and take the BS heaped on us in the name of religion. Any criticism of that is often seen as 'strident'. You can't expect to be free of criticism when you use your religion of philosophy to tell someone who they can or can't marry or what they can do in the privacy of their homes. People say that, and then get offended when you call them out on it. Well, don't use it as justification. If I use (for example), Karl Marx or Adam Smith or Plato or whoever to make an argument -- clearly the other side has the right to address that source. It can't be exempt from criticism.

If simply verbally addressing someone's philosophy is 'intolerance', that's a pretty watered down meaning of the word tbf. But maybe I misunderstood what you were getting at when you made that point.

[silentstriker]

Originally Posted by Agent Nationaux

I also don't believe in fairies and I am sure you don't, so let's form a group and meet up to discuss this along with having guest speakers and so on.

Well if some of the people who believed in fairies told you that their fairies told them you couldn't get married to who you want, or adopt kids, or teach your kids about science....then I would say it's probably well worth having a group to discuss a strategy about how you are going to counteract that influence.

[Son Of Coco]

Originally Posted by silentstriker

You've made this point several times now, but I think we're finally at the point where we don't have to sit back and take the BS heaped on us in the name of religion. Any criticism of that is often seen as 'strident'. You can't expect to be free of criticism when you use your religion of philosophy to tell someone who they can or can't marry or what they can do in the privacy of their homes. People say that, and then get offended when you call them out on it. Well, don't use it as justification. If I use (for example), Karl Marx or Adam Smith or Plato or whoever to make an argument -- clearly the other side has the right to address that source. It can't be exempt from criticism.

If simply verbally addressing someone's philosophy is 'intolerance', that's a pretty watered down meaning of the word tbf. But maybe I misunderstood what you were getting at when you made that point.

Yeah I agree, religion can't be a criticism-free zone. If you want to make your ideologies public then you have to be prepared to deal with the criticism. I got upset when my parents told me Santa wasn't real when I was younger, but that doesn't mean they should never have told me. I finally came around to the idea that it might be the truth when I saw my grandmother shopping for men's socks a few years ago.