Who are your favorite current Atheists?

[Fidel_Castronaut]

I could be totally off the mark but I feel like it could be more of an American thing to have these atheist personalities that people follow. Maybe because atheism is still viewed pretty negatively there, whereas here in the UK it's viewed by your average person on the street as normal; people are generally apathetic to religion unless they're a fundie.

I dunno. Most of my friends are atheists and I don't recall ever having a conversation about anyone except maybe Hitchens and Dawkins (I did see Dawkins at the Oxford debating hall once).

[Norman Humann]

Who do you follow in the Atheist community?

There's that homeless guy in my town, he's pretty rad. Proper scraggly beard and all.

[Alex K]

In this country (Ger) in most places religion plays a small enough role that people don't feel persecuted enough to rally behind a leader figure needed for giving them hope or unity. If you're not growing up in some rural village in deep bavaria, no one really cares whether you're atheist anyways. Our atheist/secular activists like Michael Schmidt-Salomon are perceived as moderately well-known public intellectuals, and that's that. Many of our left leaning politicians are already openly secular or atheist.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

In this country (Ger) in most places religion plays a small enough role that people don't feel persecuted enough to rally behind a leader figure needed for giving them hope or unity. If you're not growing up in some rural village in deep bavaria, no one really cares whether you're atheist anyways. Our atheist/secular activists like Michael Schmidt-Salomon are perceived as moderately well-known public intellectuals, and that's that. Many of our left leaning politicians are already openly secular or atheist.

Yeah I'd say that's pretty much identical over here. We have mainstream politicians who are atheist (leader of the labour party being an example) which leads me to believe it might be more of a U.S. phenomenon where atheists aren't able to get much mainstream coverage (or indeed 'come out') so take refuge on the interwebs and build a following there.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Dissent? Why would you join a group if you don't share their values in the first place? That would be like me joining a Christian fundamentalist or Libertarian group even though I have nothing in common with either of them. That makes no sense.

Most of the prominent members involved with Atheism Plus definitely support social justice. However, I don't think they support people with opposing values joining the group just to stir up trouble, which was what was happening. This happens with any group. There are always those who will join just to try to tear it apart from within...

I think the idea that ideas must be "hashed out" in a "safe space" is misguided. I think ideas, not matter how noble, should be subject to scrutiny, including adversarial questioning on controversial issues. The failure to do this seems likely to inculcate groupthink, and impede the probing of downsides to potential policy proposals.

[abentwookie]

I forgot to mention Don Baker as well. His "Failures of Christianity" series on Atheist Experience is always entertaining.

I'm more or less wholly ignorant of all the various "gate" scandal/nonscandals surrounding certain people, and sometimes I think that's a good thing.

Most of them are blown completely out of proportion. For example, ElevatorGate was just someone saying how it isn't a good idea to corner someone in an elevator in the middle of the night and hit on them. Some people went crazy over that and acted like she said something horrible.

[Dystopia]

Dissent? Why would you join a group if you don't share their values in the first place? That would be like me joining a Christian fundamentalist or Libertarian group even though I have nothing in common with either of them. That makes no sense.

Most of the prominent members involved with Atheism Plus definitely support social justice. However, I don't think they support people with opposing values joining the group just to stir up trouble, which was what was happening. This happens with any group. There are always those who will join just to try to tear it apart from within...

I think the idea that ideas must be "hashed out" in a "safe space" is misguided. I think ideas, not matter how noble, should be subject to scrutiny, including adversarial questioning on controversial issues. The failure to do this seems likely to inculcate groupthink, and impede the probing of downsides to potential policy proposals.

I don't disapprove what the user you are replying to said - If I created a group just for an ideologically homogeneous demographic I would expect all members to be either a part of the same ideology or to abide by certain boundaries. Yes, ideas should be questioned, but if you go to a Christian forum to say that god doesn't exist they will rightfully ban you; if you go to a communist forum to say that capitalism is perfect, they will rightfully ban you; if you go to a music forum to say music sucks, they will rightfully ban you.

Yes, ideally everything should be up to question, but in human societies (and internet groups are somewhat similar to the former in structure) imperfection reigns. I noticed some people on A+ seem to be former victims of some kind of abuse and really want to make justice for the cause, so basically everyone is ideologically motivated.

[abentwookie]

I think the idea that ideas must be "hashed out" in a "safe space" is misguided. I think ideas, not matter how noble, should be subject to scrutiny, including adversarial questioning on controversial issues. The failure to do this seems likely to inculcate groupthink, and impede the probing of downsides to potential policy proposals.

I don't disapprove what the user you are replying to said - If I created a group just for an ideologically homogeneous demographic I would expect all members to be either a part of the same ideology or to abide by certain boundaries. Yes, ideas should be questioned, but if you go to a Christian forum to say that god doesn't exist they will rightfully ban you; if you go to a communist forum to say that capitalism is perfect, they will rightfully ban you; if you go to a music forum to say music sucks, they will rightfully ban you.

Yeah, that was the point I was trying to make earlier. I joined a Feminist group for the purpose of supporting women's issues. I joined a liberal group because I supported their political views. I joined an Atheism group similar to Atheism Plus because I shared their values. I don't join a group unless I agree with their views. If you don't agree with the majority of members on certain issues, then it probably isn't the right group for you. It seems counterproductive to join one just to debate issues with them. That isn't why they exist, unless it happens to be a debate group of course.

[Dystopia]

I don't disapprove what the user you are replying to said - If I created a group just for an ideologically homogeneous demographic I would expect all members to be either a part of the same ideology or to abide by certain boundaries. Yes, ideas should be questioned, but if you go to a Christian forum to say that god doesn't exist they will rightfully ban you; if you go to a communist forum to say that capitalism is perfect, they will rightfully ban you; if you go to a music forum to say music sucks, they will rightfully ban you.

Yeah, that was the point I was trying to make earlier. I joined a Feminist group for the purpose of supporting women's issues. I joined a liberal group because I supported their political views. I joined an Atheism group similar to Atheism Plus because I shared their values. I don't join a group unless I agree with their views. If you don't agree with the majority of members on certain issues, then it probably isn't the right group for you. It seems counterproductive to join one just to debate issues with them. That isn't why they exist, unless it happens to be a debate group of course.

It also represents a double standard because people who have problems with the so called dissent have no problem refusing to even notice that they may just be wrong sometimes.

[robvalue]

It's very important to me to know when I'm right and when im wrong.

Luckily, I'm always right.