No problems with atheism then...

[Napoléon]

When will this fucking numbskull understand that Atheism concerns nothing but the thing it acknowledges by very definition?

[Ace Otana]

Another misconception apparently.

[Napoléon]

He's tarring all atheists with the same brush, assuming that all atheists must believe and think a certain way.

[Ace Otana]

I think the misconception was that atheism was some kind of group or army that was formed to destroy religion or separate religion from other non-religious matters or something. It's just a response to a claim that religion has posed. That's all.

What he was looking for was secularism. He was going the wrong way. Secularism and atheism share the same view when it comes to the existence of a god or gods but can differ on other things. Secularism is the active demand/separation of church and civil activities of a country.
Don't think there is such a thing as an atheist solution. Secular one maybe.
Definitely a misconception.

[Tiberius]

Anyway, even them, these hard core atheists/humanists/wha'ever couldn't come up with a halfway decent slogan to write, like I'd have said basically what you say on your avatar or somefing, but you know what they came out with? This:

"There's probably no god. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life."

There are no problems with that slogan; in fact it was chosen because it is more philosophically accurate (and therefore more defensible) than "There is no God".

"There is no God" is a statement that most atheists would refuse to make, simply because it is an absolute statement about non-existence, which is very hard to back up logically. The addition of the word "probably" allows for us to be wrong, which most of us fully admit we can be.

An atheist is someone who doesn't believe in God, not someone who necessarily holds that God doesn't exist. The two are separate things.

[Godnose]

I hate what religion is doing, I want to take away it's power and influence as well. If you know of a way, please share.

That's exactly what I'm trying to do. Unfortunately I seem to be crap at it.

OK, look, (a) this is not a sure proven method or anything, it's just an idea and (b) it probably won't sound particularly original. But I've thought and thought and thought about it, and it seems to me the only chance there is of de-powering existing religions.

Whatever you like to think about religions, you have to admit that it's proved to be a pretty darned effective way of getting loads of folks to all dance to the same tune. So my suggestion basically is simply this: Copy their methods only steer folk in the right direction instead of a wrong one.

So what are their methods? Well obviously this would have to be gone into properly, but here's a few ideas (not in any particular order).

1) They meet regularly. Churches do it on Sundays. Mosques every day but particularly Fridays. Synagogues Saturdays.

2) They do "good works". Charity stuff, and so on.

3) They are welcoming to strangers. At least the x-tians are, in my experience. Dunno about the others.

4) They proselytise.

5) They have some kind of a belief structure.

6) They ritually worship something or someone.

7) They publicize themselves as a group.

8) They have some kind of secret, like an "inner sanctum" or circle or something providing them with some kind of exclusivity.

9) They offer advice.

10) They provide services like marriage ceremonies, funerals and stuff.

OK - that'll do for now, sure you get my drift. Oh no, woops, left one out.

11) They have a "message" to deliver.

So anyway, no doubt discussion would change the list somewhat. But you get the idea I hope.

Now the "big thing" about Christianity is the message of Christ, right? He's supposed to be the son of god come down to Earth to get us all on the right path. Probably all seemed pretty reasonable at the time, given the state of knowledge. And basically, the message was "please be nice to each other", right?

Well, what's wrong with that? The message I mean, not the son of god thing. Seems OK to me, OK needs tidying up a bit, like the golden rule, whatever. I think it's pretty important, vital in fact, for folks to start being nice to each other. Particularly nations. Seems to me that the "message" of an atheist churchy-type thing would be pretty similar. Be Nice.

Now of course comes the tricky bit. Because what the old Jesus fellah did was to call upon some supposed cosmic figure to give his preaching that bit of authority which made people want to follow his teaching (the being nice to each other stuff). Those were the days, eh - cos nowadays it just won't wash. I mean, even the X-tians themselves don't really believe in the Grand Old Guy in the Sky any more, and a lot of them even think the "virgin birth" is more symbolic that real.

So how the flip would the kind of organisation I am proposing get some kind of authority for its teachings? Hmmmm. Well, there's always Science I suppose. Probably by some other name. "The Great Truth-Giver" perhaps. Something. Santa Veracita - the Source of All Knowledge (known as "The Source"). Whatever.

Basically then, apart from the praying bit, they'd do all the other stuff. And try and lure xtians and others away from the false path onto the true one (ie there is no such thing as god). And yet not leave the people feeling "out in the cold" like many do today. And, in time, as it really IS promoting the real truth, it should stand a pretty good chance of catching on in a really big way, knocking all the other "religious" organsatiomns out the window.

That's the outline. Of course it would need a name. I've been trying to think of one - one I suggested to the humanists (and got flayed alive for) was C.H.U.R.C.H. Something like "Concerned Humanists Undertaking Really Careful Help" - I know, yuk! But look, this is only the outlines of an idea, it would need loads of proper thinking about.

________________________________________________________________

Oh dear. I know what happens now... (I fear the words "load of bolix" might figure somewhere).

[frankiej]

2) They do "good works". Charity stuff, and so on.

3) They are welcoming to strangers. At least the x-tians are, in my experience. Dunno about the others.

It doesn't take God to do charitable things, the people who usually argue the point that Christians are more charitable annoy me. Someone who says this is basically saying that if it wasn't for that guy in the sky, would be a cunt... You should give to charity regardless, if you are in the financial position to do so.

And someone who isn't welcoming of strangers is a dick.

So I don't really think you can class these as points for religious people.

[Napoléon]

I'll be honest, I'm not welcoming of strangers. They are very strange.

[Godnose]

There are no problems with that slogan; in fact it was chosen because it is more philosophically accurate (and therefore more defensible) than "There is no God".

Like: "There might be such things as electrons" would also be more philosophically accurate than "Electricity exists". Yeah!

The slogan completely lacks power and seemed to me to undermine the credibility of the atheist position rather than support it. If anything it lent more power to the "its only a theory" position.

"There is no reason to believe there is a God" might have been a bit better.

I'm not interested in "defensible" slogans. The best form of defence is attack. I would say "There is no such thing as god" or "God is a myth" and then let the arguments begin. This one went off like a damp squib.

[frankiej]

The slogan completely lacks power and seemed to me to undermine the credibility of the atheist position rather than support it.

only to those who do not understand it.

---

I'll be honest, I'm not welcoming of strangers. They are very strange.

Then you, sir, are a dick