Throughout the variety of religions what has become evident through my research is that most people chose to classify themselves with a label that best suits them. By that I mean that no matter how much a person identifies with being a "Buddhist" there are elements that they may disagree with and they will choose to behave in a way that is more feasible to them. So when we classify and label all theists as being the same, we are making them appear to be less human because their behavior is more or less "scripted".
I write this because as I've begun telling people about the fact that I am now choosing to identify as an Atheist, I'm being held to the same standards others have exhibited before me. This is one reason I searched out this place as to be a source of immense help, although I've found that it is not the "cure all" I thought it might be. There are still people here who want to identify as an Atheist because they think it makes them appear smarter, or in some fashion "better" than others. Some are even peddling their own version of 'snake oil'. Why would behavior such as this appear to be any different than the stereotypical close-minded fundamentalist who is completely convinced of their own moral superiority, and who would be more than happy to tell you (against their own dogma) about the good things they do for others, and how that makes them better people?
This is something I'm really interested in, and I'm hoping to find people who can add to this discussion without just offering dissent and basically acting like an argumentative theist. Why do we as people (ALL people) feel that WE are the only one's with the right answer? Is that even possible? I don't necessarily think so, because there is so much occasion for doubt. I prefer to use "maybes" instead of absolutes, because some people base all of their knowledge and hubris on the backs of research statistics or a book they have read.
I'm here to say I've read many books that were total BULLSHIT. It was their own interpretation of the world, but it was not the same world I see with my own eyes. However, that is the rub... we all have our own views which tend to be static, but when sharing those it deeply offends people when you cannot grasp their meaning.
Anyway, back to the initial question at hand... since there is no Atheist bible (thank god, haha) how are Atheistic people suppose to find a common ground to agree upon so that miscommunication is not a constant issue? We all think there is no happy sky king... GOOD! However, there are many other ways in which we all can find to disagree, to me the thing we should be trying to find is that common perception and an agreeable foundation, so that we won't appear to be as bobble-headed and ridiculous as we tend to see religious groups as being.
After all we poke fun at Christians for having a multitude of denominations because they cannot agree on interpretations of the same damn book, but somehow we are all trying to fit Atheism under a combined banner while having no real ethos to subscribe to other than science and reason.
I look forward to your contributions. :)