Views: 320

Replies to This Discussion

dead link
Well, you can see it at in the No God Blog.  Just look for a link with the same title as this discussion.

Well, I went to the site and read the article. And yes, it's a sticky situation. But first let's give respect to that fact that: not all people who are non-religious are Atheist, and not all Agnostics, rationalists, skeptics, etc... want to identify with that term. What I think we will all find in common is our principles in regards to any given subject, and that needs to be more the focus of any movement. The religious institutions are getting out of hand. When the country is so far gone that a US governor (we all know who) calls the citizens of his state to come together to pray their problems away, rather than him doing his damn job, that is an embarrassment and a disgrace. This country has been hijacked by criminals and liars, and taken to the point where we can no longer be parodied. "The Onion" can now just become a normal news source. And then there are the religious institutions themselves. We need to petition the government to make them pay their damn taxes and to respect the separation of church and state. And I am sick a tired of people like Bill Donohue pissing his pants every time he is made to respect others. These are the people who cry about being oppressed when you deny them the right to oppress others. If we start a movement it needs to be focused on combating all the outright absurdity and treasonous behavior - such as Pat Robertson's Law Schools. Rather than calling it an Atheist Movement, we just more accurately call it The People's Movement, or The Rationalist's Movement. It becomes far more palatable and attractive to encompass much larger demographic than making it sound exclusive to just one ideology. We need all the support we can get.

If you can find a source of funding, I'll be your new Atheists Party treasurer.

Well I think the bigger question is: "SHOULD Atheism be considered a political movement???" To what extent do we present our views and how? Though we do not represent a religion, the First Amendment of the US Constitution clearly states that no one ideology should be given respect to over any other system of beliefs in the context of congressional law. So with this in mind, what exactly is the advantage of Atheism being a political movement??? Just as we tell theists to keep their religion to themselves, we need to practice what we preach and not behave like the religious idiocracy; parading our ideology around on a pedestal. To me that makes little sense...

“The National Atheist Party is a progressive, secular, political movement and response to the lack of representation for all free thinking people who are legal, law abiding citizens and residents of the United States. We demand emancipation from the corporate sponsored religious dogma that has infiltrated our government and has unjustly influenced political decisions and policy making. We are for the PEOPLE, by the PEOPLE and therefore incorporate the right to use the power of the PEOPLE to restore equality in our Democracy in reasonable, rational and non-violent means. The National Atheist Party is open to people of all races, sexes, sexual orientations, and cultures. We are committed to a government free of superstition, bias, guided by the principles of humanism, equal opportunity, recognition of merit, and economic responsibility. The National Atheist Party does not seek to inhibit the religious practices or beliefs of any group, but are committed to the division of church and state and that religious preference is a private matter, which has no place in the government or in government facilities. for full charter click this link

The NAP is not trying to flaunt their ideology or install it into the government, they want to remove religion from government. Our forefathers intentionally created our secular country where no ideology took precedence, the NAP wants to return to that constitutional ideal.

Take a moment to read the charter and view the rest of the information provided on the main NAP page.

I will take a look at the site. I am all for such a movement. It's just hard to get through to people who are so conditioned to have a negative emotional response to the very word "Atheist". When you consider that roughly 50% of this country still doesn't even accept the Theory of Evolution, it's hard to imagine any party with the word "Atheist" having sufficient support. The little town I live in is very religious, there is almost no one to have any intelligent conversation with, and people here are so superstitious that they will freak out over the most stupid things. Let's say if all the neighborhood dogs start barking, people here think it means that ghosts are coming. I've seen grown men freak out and run at the sound of a door creaking. It's ridiculous. If people ask me about my religion I don't hide who I am. So far moderate people have no real problem, whereas zealots just may not talk to me. I just don't relate to many things that I find, I'm sorry to say, anti-intellectual. Anyway, I'm interested to learn more about the NAP.

Any political movement has to center around specific political goals held in common. Toward that end, I am active, as a political progressive, in lots of causes. One of them is certainly the separation clause of the First Amendment, or so it has come to be known. But I also am active, as a veteran, in bringing home all American troops engaged in expensive, ill-advised wars on foreign soil. Moreover, I'm a member of Veterans For Peace which is focused upon abolishing war as an instrument of foreign policy. Gun control occupies much of my political consciousness today too...since the madness of the NRA and its cohorts baffles me. Now, are any of these issues inextricably linked to my non-theistic sensibilities? Indirectly maybe--- but probably not. "Atheism" per se as a political movement is as vague and non-particular as Alcoholics Anonymous would be as a political party. Anyway, atheism would never establish a 'big tent' presence since, as it has been said, "trying to get atheists together is like herding cats!" Also, is atheism an ideology? Only if not collecting baseball cards is hobby.
I was thinking...much of my political involvement predated my "leap of reason" into happy atheism. So I suspect that those activities and the lessons culled from them contributed to the courage, if not to the actual thinking, that went into my decision to cut the cord and let go of religion and all its associated childish beliefs.

I don't think atheism can stand on its own as a political movement yet.  We are not secularized enough.  We are about where Britain was in the mid 20th century.  We're lagging behind Europe by about 50-60 years.  Our best bet is to make the Democratic Party more amenable to atheists.  Democrats support science and education, while Republicans support corporations and churches.  Education is the key to secularization.  Well educated people are more rational.  Democrats also support increasing tax revenues by taxing the rich.  This will help keep our social nets in place.  The most secularized countries in Europe are also those that have the strongest social support networks, to free people from the social support of chrches.  It's also important to support organizations like the Freedom From Religion Foundation who use litigation to make sure that freedom of religion is also freedom from religion.  Lawsuits cost money and they need memberships to finance them.  Secularization will proceed through the courts as well as through policy decisions.  30% of people under 30 are nontheist, so it's just a matter of time before atheists become more socially acceptable.
"What all this means is that the rise of atheism as a political force is an effect, rather than a cause, of the churches' hard right turn towards fundamentalism."

I found the above quote exerpted from an excellent article: 

Goodbye Religion? How Godlessness Is Increasing With Each New Generation

 It was in my regular daily e-mailed copy of Alternet today. Below  is the link. It is apropos to Chris Dodds' Discussion Post and should be of interest to anyone at Atheist Nexus:
Your quote makes sense to me, Lary9. I'm for separation of structure by function. I don't see Secular Humanism, my version of atheism, as politics. Humanism is much broader than politics. I don't want to see the function of Secular Humanism stuffed into the structure of a political party, and then cut off the bits that don't fit neatly.




Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service