Some quick mental drivelings.

[Creed of Heresy]

Something I've noticed is that atheists have always been in the shadows in the last couple centuries in matters of social progress. Rosa Parks was instructed on civil disobedience by atheist supporters, and Martin Luther King Jr. was advised and relied on the support of a group of atheist non-profit sponsors. The feminist movement was largely supported by the atheist community first and foremost before it went elsewhere, and it was driven largely by atheists. These supporters were not loud about their atheism, they instead were loud about the issues they supported. One of the union groups striking in the GM plants, the guys who were the first union members in history, many of them were atheists, and the unions also saw lots of quiet donations and support by atheist groups and individuals on a higher scale of percentage than any religious group; nearly 100% of all atheists were behind each of these issues that brought our society to where it is today, whereas the numbers of religious groups who support these ideas are more to the tune of 50% at best, with the religious institutions often dragging their feet in progressing society.

Atheists have always worked in the shadows to achieve social progress. The Anonymous hackers have mentioned being either atheistic or agnostic a few times in anonymous interviews. They're working to expose the government to more accountability. The government has been becoming less and less accountable. Are atheists the driving force behind this social issue's outcome that is most favorable to society? Yeah, I think so. In issues like defining genderisms, and accepting different views of sexuality, atheists are always unanimous in their support of the open-minded views. Not 100%...but a pretty damn high number.

[cratehorus]

Something I've noticed is that atheists have always been in the shadows in the last couple centuries in matters of social progress. Rosa Parks was instructed on civil disobedience by atheist supporters, and Martin Luther King Jr. was advised and relied on the support of a group of atheist non-profit sponsors. The feminist movement was largely supported by the atheist community first and foremost before it went elsewhere, and it was driven largely by atheists. These supporters were not loud about their atheism, they instead were loud about the issues they supported. One of the union groups striking in the GM plants, the guys who were the first union members in history, many of them were atheists, and the unions also saw lots of quiet donations and support by atheist groups and individuals on a higher scale of percentage than any religious group; nearly 100% of all atheists were behind each of these issues that brought our society to where it is today, whereas the numbers of religious groups who support these ideas are more to the tune of 50% at best, with the religious institutions often dragging their feet in progressing society.

Atheists have always worked in the shadows to achieve social progress. The Anonymous hackers have mentioned being either atheistic or agnostic a few times in anonymous interviews. They're working to expose the government to more accountability. The government has been becoming less and less accountable. Are atheists the driving force behind this social issue's outcome that is most favorable to society? Yeah, I think so. In issues like defining genderisms, and accepting different views of sexuality, atheists are always unanimous in their support of the open-minded views. Not 100%...but a pretty damn high number.

[Angrboda]

Something I've noticed is that atheists have always been in the shadows in the last couple centuries in matters of social progress. Rosa Parks was instructed on civil disobedience by atheist supporters, and Martin Luther King Jr. was advised and relied on the support of a group of atheist non-profit sponsors. The feminist movement was largely supported by the atheist community first and foremost before it went elsewhere, and it was driven largely by atheists. These supporters were not loud about their atheism, they instead were loud about the issues they supported....

This is something of an offshoot, but I think it's relevant. It's a talk Sam Harris gave at the Atheist Alliance conference suggesting we abandon the term "atheism." Kichi posted the transcript and Youtube video, so I'll just link to her post, .

Beyond that, I wonder about the historical accuracy here; surely atheists have been actively involved in social causes, and early perhaps, but to give them prime position is a claim I hadn't heard before, and I'd like to see more evidence of this. Especially if one considers the very real possibility that atheists make up only 2-3% of the population (I don't think this is an accurate assessment, but it does have valid support; when people refer to atheists being 12-20% of the population, they often don't differentiate between people who are not affiliated with a particular religion, non-believers (if that is a separate category), and atheists/atheist-agnostics. There are severe methodological and conceptual hurdles involved in gauging the number of atheists. Worse, these problems were likely not even acknowledged by the historical researchers involved.