We should stop trying to be "sheep"

[goodwithoutgod]

I don't even understand what atheists would talk about in such meetings. If they're gathering to accomplish a purpose, such as raising money to help build a homeless shelter or feed starving Somali children, that's great, but gathering just to discuss atheism doesn't sound very interesting.

I get your point of view, but in my case I am now a very assertive atheist. I like teaching others better debating skills, I like sharing of information with those who want it, I like talking about philosophy and how to dismantle religious points of view, I do this because I arrived at the conclusion, that as an intelligent, moral responsible person, I cannot just look the other way as religion continues to creep into politics like a brain eating virus, affecting laws that affect everyone in this country (USA). I cannot look the other way as I watch them try to convince some gullible person to come "share fellowship" with them this sunday, they go out of their way to increase their number, I think it is high time I and others work to decrease their numbers, and to increase ours. My favorite toy at the moment is epistemology, and the books God is not great by Christopher Hithcens, and How to create an atheist by peter boghossian. I meet up with a group and we share ideas of community service to show people that atheists care too, and that we are not "satanists" who want to eat their children. We share stories, sip some coffee or cold beer and enjoy just talking with others of like minded views. To each their own though

[Mermaid]

Oh so voicing an opinion is "pushing?" So much for free speech.

Dude. You are missing the point.

When you say we "should" do a certain thing, it doesn't make you any better than the assholes proselytizing their Christianity or whatever they're pushing.

As for free speech, you can say whatever the fuck you want, and so can I.

[zarus tathra]

I'm just trying to come up with a strategy that meshes better with atheism's generally very "lone wolf" nature. I figured that giving people tips on how to make their way through life and supplying people with arguments would be more productive than anything.

[Plu]

Atheism doesn't have "a way". You're still confusing a bunch of things. You're thinking of humanism or maybe skepticism or something. You'll never get anything useful done until you figure out which behaviours come from which descriptors. (Hint; none of them come from atheism.)

[zarus tathra]

I guess we should figure out a "goal" for the atheist  movement that's specific to atheism. I'm not sure that even "destroying religion" would really count...

[Plu]

You can't set a "goal" for a group of people who have nothing in common except not believing in something. It's like trying to set a goal for the non-stamp collecting movement. Doesn't make any sense.

[Mermaid]

Why organize? For what?

[Solomon Zorn]

Oh so voicing an opinion is "pushing?" So much for free speech.

Dude. You are missing the point.

When you say we "should" do a certain thing, it doesn't make you any better than the assholes proselytizing their Christianity or whatever they're pushing.

As for free speech, you can say whatever the fuck you want, and so can I.

So we should stop saying "should?" I don't think he's "pushing" really. Just saying what he thinks. I don't agree with him, but I don't feel pressured to accept his opinions. I'm not a captive audience or anything like that.

As for gathering as atheists to discuss topics of concern to atheists, that sounds like fun to me. After all, isn't that what we're doing here?

[Mermaid]

That's just my issue with religion, people trying to tell others what they should and should not believe.

Discussing it and telling people how they should behave to fit your agenda are two different things. So maybe I am a little sensitive to it, or maybe I am being a little bit pedantic. I am trying to make a point and I think I have. Carry on.  8-[

[Solomon Zorn]

Going back to the original post though, when you say, "Instead of plans and organizations, we should have protocols, rules of thumb that are easy for small groups and individual atheists to adopt," I read that as "precepts, and rules of behavior." And I have to wonder how you propose to find a consensus on what those "protocols and rules of thumb" would be. :-k

[Solomon Zorn]

I'm just trying to come up with a strategy that meshes better with atheism's generally very "lone wolf" nature. I figured that giving people tips on how to make their way through life and supplying people with arguments would be more productive than anything.

This isn't a bad idea. But it's very broad in scope. And that purpose is kind of already served by a lot of what's on this forum in particular.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I'm just trying to come up with a strategy that meshes better with atheism's generally very "lone wolf" nature. I figured that giving people tips on how to make their way through life and supplying people with arguments would be more productive than anything.

Strategy implies battle.

I'm an atheist, not a foot-soldier.  Oddly enough, I felt the same way as a Christian: I'm a Christian, not a foot-soldier.  

I'm cool with ensuring separation of church and state, so that we all can disbelieve or believe as we each see fit with no government interference or bias.  But I'm not much on evangelism no matter what clothing it wears.  I'll discuss my atheism to someone who asks, or if the conversation makes a natural turn to the topic, but I really don't give a shit if someone agrees with my beliefs or not, so long as they don't try shoving theirs down my throat.  I think it's only fair to return the courtesy.

And yes, if they're rude enough to evangelize me, they do get a cupful of "blow me".

[Mermaid]

I'm just trying to come up with a strategy that meshes better with atheism's generally very "lone wolf" nature. I figured that giving people tips on how to make their way through life and supplying people with arguments would be more productive than anything.

Strategy implies battle.

I'm an atheist, not a foot-soldier.  Oddly enough, I felt the same way as a Christian: I'm a Christian, not a foot-soldier.  

I'm cool with ensuring separation of church and state, so that we all can disbelieve or believe as we each see fit with no government interference or bias.  But I'm not much on evangelism no matter what clothing it wears.  I'll discuss my atheism to someone who asks, or if the conversation makes a natural turn to the topic, but I really don't give a shit if someone agrees with my beliefs or not, so long as they don't try shoving theirs down my throat.  I think it's only fair to return the courtesy.

And yes, if they're rude enough to evangelize me, they do get a cupful of "blow me".

Extremely well-put.  :)

Including the part about the cup of blow me.

[zarus tathra]

Going back to the original post though, when you say, "Instead of plans and organizations, we should have protocols, rules of thumb that are easy for small groups and individual atheists to adopt," I read that as "precepts, and rules of behavior." And I have to wonder how you propose to find a consensus on what those "protocols and rules of thumb" would be. :-k

I don't think there needs to be that much consensus if these are just meant as tips and suggestions.

[Ro3bert]

Meeting as a group isn't the same as meeting under a set of dogmatic rules that serve to modify our behavior. A town business meeting is not a church gathering. There are differences. I don't have a problem with groups meeting for social reasons or for informational purposes, it is when you start electing officers and appointing leaders is the time I leave.

Hear, Hear

I love it when so much is said in so little space. I think this would be a great quote to use in other contexts.

Robert