Does Atheism Need to be Rebranded?

[mediamogul]

I'm married to one worth keeping, still doesn't change my stance on religion, or my opinion of those who profess any nasty bit of it that I simply cannot stand. It is just my stance after all.

Of course.

Anti-religion is anti- "a thing", anti-people with a religion would be anti-"a group of people".

Yes, but it is not "anti-any given thing," as you stated it, making it sound like any anti-stance was contemptible in my eyes. Religion is a thing spurred by people, abused by people, cherished by people, etc. It is a deeply personal thing to many. Being anti-religious is like saying you are against a person's thoughts and feelings. To be against certain aspects of religion, certain adherents, certain crimes, etc., is to be against the things that seem to be the real problem.

I didn't read wrong, you're being a bit loose with your words. "To be non-religious is a much more honorable position to take. " would imply that mine was less Shell....

Huh. I don't think I'm being loose with my words. You are quoting something that had nothing to do with what I said you read wrong. I said a specific group. You said a specific thing, attributing that to me, despite that "thing" is a much broader term than "group."

What you quoted was a statement of opinion unrelated to the quote you were responding to. I was not being loose with my words, either. I'm confident that my opinion was made clear there. Now, you can choose to look at it from the perspective that you are actually non-religious and anti-theist. So, you're kind of neutral as far as my opinion goes, eh?

---

I am also not talking about an atheist league where we go out burning churches but a little solidarity would go a long way and demonstrate that the religious right cannot easily push us around or back us into a corner. More people will come out of the closet about their atheism the more people there are in public who are not afraid to say they are atheists and to support others who label themselves as such. We just need to pick a damn word and stick with it.

Um, atheist. There already is a word. There is also a way to do exactly what you described. Start an atheist group that has members who go out and do those things. Even the KKK was a group for racists, but not of all racists. Shit, there are already atheists doing exactly what you describe. Join one of their groups, instead of trying to pigeonhole atheism. Not all of us are afraid or relate to those who are afraid.

I don't think that "pigeonholing" is the correct term to use. My specific question was regarding the word "atheism" and if non-religious folks or people who disbelieve in religion, that is what we are talking about, could be more effectively united under a common banner that places importance on the non-religious as opposed to "atheistic" aspect. It is actually a question about potentially broadening and making more inclusive. Also, to dismiss the supportive element and community is not helpful. That is the reason we come to an "atheist" forum is it not? To be in a community of individuals who share a common disbelief?