Theoretical Leader

[robvalue]

If I see my cause as anything, it would be education. It goes a long way to help a huge variety of problems in a non-intrusive, non-violent manner.

Regarding atheism, the education would be to shatter the misconceptions and reduce the stigma; to get the world to understand what a simple concept it is, and that all the drivel that gets stapled onto it is unwarranted. I remember hearing that atheists were the "least trusted group" in America at some point, and that is just ridiculous.

[KevinM1]

I know that there's no collective leaders, but if you were to pick one or two people to represent your cause, who would they be?

Mine would be Dawkins and Thunderf00t

What cause? I seek no adherents, nor do I wish to be one myself. I do not want a leader because I don't want to be led.

I get that atheism is a "rah rah" kind of thing to the young and freshly deconverted, especially those living in religious surroundings, but part of the benefit and appeal of atheism is that we don't need leaders, or some kind of institutional hierarchy. We're free to think and act and be who we want (within the confines of the law, of course) without the fear instilled by dogma. When "fuck you" individualism is the end result, you realize that you're your own leader because at the end of the day the actions you take and their consequences largely rest on you.

[robvalue]

I agree. That's another point people need educating on! Clearly even some of our regular forum members can't grasp the idea that atheists are simply individuals, and that atheism does not follow the dogmatic model of many religions. Simply put: there is no requirement for me, as an atheist, to agree with or even care about what any other atheist says.

Atheism is nothing... just like disbelief in invisible dragons feasting on my toe-spirit is nothing. It's the default position, regardless of any further claims made by any particular atheist. Theism, also, is basically nothing, since it describes a belief "in God" without specifying anything at all about what a god is. So theism means something completely different to every individual theist. Of course, most of them probably have "created the universe" somewhere on their god's imaginary Facebook page, but there's simply no criteria for what is and isn't a god that is in any way universally accepted. If we accept someone saying "The universe is God", which is a standard mode of theism, we have to accept anything I feel. Until something is either a well-defined abstract concept or else has some demonstrable link to reality, it's basically entirely elastic.

To make my point, I've asked the question of how you distinguish (as in, you have one of each to evaluate) a god from an arbitrarily powerful non-god. I've received no coherent answer that I'm aware of, and one theist was even bold enough to admit it would be impossible.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Delicate a leader? That boy couldn't lead a squad to a latrine if they had amoebic dysentery.

What makes this post so apt is its representation of atheist thought: little more than bloody diarrhea.

I think so too, buddy. I think so too.

A fancy "NO U!" is still a "NO U!" You can earn my respect, but it isn't given lightly ... especially to the inept.

And you're still making a category error when you assume that one atheist represents all of them. Perhaps you'd like to answer for the Westboro marches without using the point I just made.

[Delicate]

What makes this post so apt is its representation of atheist thought: little more than bloody diarrhea.

I think so too, buddy. I think so too.

A fancy "NO U!" is still a "NO U!" You can earn my respect, but it isn't given lightly ... especially to the inept.

And you're still making a category error when you assume that one atheist represents all of them. Perhaps you'd like to answer for the Westboro marches without using the point I just made.

You're right, one atheist doesn't represent everybody.

That being said, there is an awful lot of common bad traits in atheists. That much cannot be denied.

[Silver]

You're right, one atheist doesn't represent everybody.

That being said, there is an awful lot of common bad traits in atheists. That much cannot be denied.

The worst traits represented in humanity I have seen you just post.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

I'm my own spokesman.

[Delicate]

You're right, one atheist doesn't represent everybody.

That being said, there is an awful lot of common bad traits in atheists. That much cannot be denied.

The worst traits represented in humanity I have seen you just post.

What do you consider the worst traits? Logic and critical thinking?

[Angrboda]

You're right, one atheist doesn't represent everybody.

That being said, there is an awful lot of common bad traits in atheists. That much cannot be denied.

The worst traits represented in humanity I have seen you just post.

What do you consider the worst traits? Logic and critical thinking?

That's logic and critical thinking? Hahahahahahaha.

[abaris]

That being said, there is an awful lot of common bad traits in atheists. That much cannot be denied.

Common bad traits. Oh, please, do elaborate.