Should Atheists organize. . . should they seek community?

[Aerlinn]

Without reading any other replies (which I will do after posting mine, probably much to my dismay   ) I can understand why some atheists would be reluctant to join an organization based on atheism.

One of the fundamental beliefs of many atheists is that organized religion is problematic. When you get a bunch of people together who are all preaching the same unique ideas, they tend to stand by those ideas due to a sense of loyalty to the group. They gain a sense of belonging from it, and it becomes a faction. This sort of congregation can be dangerous. But congregation is one of the tenets of our society. (USA) So religion is tolerated in all its forms. This is also why the KKK continues to exist. When you have the right to congregate, you take the bad with the good.

Also, many atheists (myself included) have reservations about joining a "club." Our beliefs are our own and we don't need others to validate them for us. By joining a group, you lose your individuality and contribute to an amalgam of ideas; some of which may contradict your own. That leads back to my first point. If you feel inclined to be a part of the group, you will protect its ideals. Thus, you gain a sense of belonging and become a faction.

The only way to be part of a group based on beliefs, and maintain your individuality, is to stand opposed to the group. Also known as: traitor. Expect that title if you follow this path.

Believe me, I've considered trying to congregate the local atheists. But the only way to do it safely is to make it casual and require nothing from anyone. Ever. That's counter-productive, but it's the only safe way to unite them.

[Whitney]

Believe me, I've considered trying to congregate the local atheists. But the only way to do it safely is to make it casual and require nothing from anyone. Ever. That's counter-productive, but it's the only safe way to unite them.

That's how the group I organize is organized.  People just show up and talk/listen over dinner and stuff like that. There is never a large goal in mind; other than to be able to speak openly among friends.  Of course, we let deists and agnostics join too; it's a "freethought" group and not specifically aimed at atheists.  I agree that it wouldn't work if made it into a goal oriented group.

[Aerlinn]

That's how the group I organize is organized.  People just show up and talk/listen over dinner and stuff like that. There is never a large goal in mind; other than to be able to speak openly among friends.  Of course, we let deists and agnostics join too; it's a "freethought" group and not specifically aimed at atheists.  I agree that it wouldn't work if made it into a goal oriented group.

Just bring people together and let them be.

I like that.

Is that something you do with friends and family, or is it a local thing? Or is it a forum get-together?

[SallyMutant]

CAN I HAS GOOD WORKS?
I would love a meetup wherein the object is to do a food drive, soup/sandwich for the homeless, mentoring a kiddo, --wow--a Freethinker Habitat build.
I would also like meetups where the object is to hang out and have a buncha beer too.

If you really miss church, you will be at home, yet not judged, at any Unitarian church. After the terrorist guy shot people at the Unitarian kids' performance of "Annie" last spring, we  attended a memorial service  at our local Unitarian Church. We made it quite clear that we were there only to mourn in solidarity with them, and that we were there as friendly athiests neighbors. They were A-OK with friendly athieism and invited us to join them, as athiests. First Jefferson  (got to love that name for a church) has a very churchy look and routine, but very un-churchy congregants.

[Whitney]

I would also like meetups where the object is to hang out and have a buncha beer too.

Clicky---> viewforum.php?f=29

[G.ENIGMA]

At first I was a bit confused by what was meant by "organize atheists."  

Getting together as a group of like minded people, no problem.

Getting together as a group to support some common cause, a cause other than directly related to personal belief, no problem.

Getting together as a group of atheists to go knocking on doors at eight in the morning on a Saturday to hand out blank pamphlets to convert people to a lack of belief in invisible super friends, I'm not a huge fan of.

I can just envisage it now   the man says to his wife  "their probably athiest witnesses"

[Cemetery]

I don't see anything wrong with ppl with things in common meeting together.  In fact, I have just joined a local atheist group. I think this "meeting of the minds" is always a good thing.  Our group is having movie night (Religulous) next month & then we're going to discuss a book on atheism in April.  I hope you're able to get a good group going.  Good luck to you.

~C

[Sorz]

One of the advantages of religions has been to "create communities" - this has made many faiths strong.
If atheists are to be strong, and even happier, they need to create more COMMUNITIES.
A solitary atheist is not a happy bunny.
When people say atheists are more grumpy and angry then theists, they unknowingly speak of atheists who generally tend to be more isolated from the community.
If you find atheists who are part of the community and interacting, you will find they are not so angry and grumpy

[maestroanth]

Hello everyone,

I'm new to this forum, so I guess, in the name of social etiquette, a brief introduction is called for before I jump into the topic at hand.  

I'm an ex-Bible-thumper who de-converted and became an agnostic (with strong atheistic leanings) shortly after graduating from seminary.  Since then, I went on to earn degrees in psychology and philosophy (by the way, the smartest way to be poor is to accumulate loads of debt while getting an education that has no practical value).  

Over the past few months, I've been spending the majority of my free time co-organizing a freethought meetup in North Eastern P.A., a relatively conservative area typical of small town clusters.  In my efforts to recruit participants, I've encountered what is, in my opinion, an annoying characteristic among some atheists; namley, the notion that building a community of athiests or organizing atheists around a common cause is somehow a contradiction.  From what I've gathered thus far, this rationale is rooted in three primary points: (1) atheism, by definition, doesn't advocate or promote a particular set of positive principles or tenents on which a community or organization would be based, (2) atheism inherently entails a strong streak of individualism, and this individualism is incompatible with forming an organization or community of atheists, (3) atheists are obviously nonreligious (some anti-religious), and becoming organized or cultivating community in any fashion is to be religious about atheism, which is oxymoronic.  ?

I thoroughly read this, and you are, sir,  intellectually deprived. (I think that's the nice way of saying retard without of a strike 3, lol).

Due credit is #3 (lol) in your point.  And (Yes, I like to toy with people), you read a dawkin site or book.  

But Dawkins is retarded too.  I only see two logical beliefs (Dawkins is a shabby philosopher); there was no uncaused cause is my atheist conclusion; time is infinite. Or a Deist supernatural thing; that started this catastrophe we call "life".  = me? my belief? plain and simple agnostic.

[Twiddler]

Hello everyone,

I'm new to this forum, so I guess, in the name of social etiquette, a brief introduction is called for before I jump into the topic at hand.  

I'm an ex-Bible-thumper who de-converted and became an agnostic (with strong atheistic leanings) shortly after graduating from seminary.  Since then, I went on to earn degrees in psychology and philosophy (by the way, the smartest way to be poor is to accumulate loads of debt while getting an education that has no practical value).  

Over the past few months, I've been spending the majority of my free time co-organizing a freethought meetup in North Eastern P.A., a relatively conservative area typical of small town clusters.  In my efforts to recruit participants, I've encountered what is, in my opinion, an annoying characteristic among some atheists; namley, the notion that building a community of athiests or organizing atheists around a common cause is somehow a contradiction.  From what I've gathered thus far, this rationale is rooted in three primary points: (1) atheism, by definition, doesn't advocate or promote a particular set of positive principles or tenents on which a community or organization would be based, (2) atheism inherently entails a strong streak of individualism, and this individualism is incompatible with forming an organization or community of atheists, (3) atheists are obviously nonreligious (some anti-religious), and becoming organized or cultivating community in any fashion is to be religious about atheism, which is oxymoronic.  ?

I thoroughly read this, and you are, sir,  intellectually deprived. (I think that's the nice way of saying retard without of a strike 3, lol).

Due credit is #3 (lol) in your point.  And (Yes, I like to toy with people), you read a dawkin site or book.  

But Dawkins is retarded too.  I only see two logical beliefs (Dawkins is a shabby philosopher); there was no uncaused cause is my atheist conclusion; time is infinite. Or a Deist supernatural thing; that started this catastrophe we call "life".  = me? my belief? plain and simple agnostic.

First of all, cspanther has a different opinion, I don't see why you need to start calling people idiots (and come back when you have an insult about a person that is more than he or she's "retarded" or a "retard."  It's a ridiculous cop-out for an insult if I ever saw one).  Another thing, you do realize that people can see that you are agnostic by the "worldview" section off to the right when you post, right?  Because it seems like you have a need to remind people that you're agnostic in almost every single post you have on here, and its pretty annoying.  We get it.

[Ihateyoumike]

First of all, cspanther has a different opinion, I don't see why you need to start calling people idiots (and come back when you have an insult about a person that is more than he or she's "retarded" or a "retard."  It's a ridiculous cop-out for an insult if I ever saw one).  Another thing, you do realize that people can see that you are agnostic by the "worldview" section off to the right when you post, right?  Because it seems like you have a need to remind people that you're agnostic in almost every single post you have on here, and its pretty annoying.  We get it.

My advice to you Twiddler (and anyone else who is tired of this guy's drivel) is to put him on your "foes" list. It will automatically block the 4 or 5 useless posts he puts in every thread. Then the only way you'll see his posts are if you want to, or if someone quotes it.

Since I'm not a mod and can't boot him, it's the second best option.

Side note to mods: Please do not take this post as me saying you guys and gals are not doing a great job, you really are. I understand you're trying to give people like him more of a chance, and I am fine with that. I am just trying to help others who may not know how easy it is to ignore someone.

Second side note to mods: Maybe the "foes" list can be changed to something like the "ignore list". I was hesitant to put him on it simply because it was called the "foes" list since he is not a foe of mine, just someone who's opinion I no longer wish to read about. That seems to fit a little better with the "happy atheist" theme of this forum.  

[curiosityandthecat]

My advice to you Twiddler (and anyone else who is tired of this guy's drivel) is to put him on your "foes" list. It will automatically block the 4 or 5 useless posts he puts in every thread. Then the only way you'll see his posts are if you want to, or if someone quotes it.

Sidenote: I'm doing this. Thought about it before but never got around to it. So, I apologize in advance for the lack of wit and "flame" in response to those 4 or 5 posts.  

[maestroanth]

I could understand some atheists not wanting to join an atheist group that has a specific goal in mind if they do not agree with that goal.  But the average atheist get together is simply a way to be around open minded people who are less likely to judge you for thinking differently.  Most atheists can't speak their  minds around most people without being outcast....since humans are social beings it would only make sense to want to be able to socialize in a friendly setting...the best way to do that, imo, is have a free-thought meeting group.  

If people want to be anti-social, that's their choice...but being anti-social certainly has nothing to do with being an atheist.

I admit I'm not atheist, but I think it's the duty of the mind/soul to speak you mind.  This is where I have to give Dawkin's credit.  He attacks religion like a hound; however, as I find he is missing some of the non-doctrine values which religion implies, or motivation for religious existence.

Namely, the uncaused cause.  Well, I'm going to stop, b/c like my music professor I can go on and on.

[Whitney]

I thoroughly read this, and you are, sir,  intellectually deprived. (I think that's the nice way of saying retard without of a strike 3, lol).

Due credit is #3 (lol) in your point.  And (Yes, I like to toy with people), you read a dawkin site or book.  

But Dawkins is retarded too.  I only see two logical beliefs (Dawkins is a shabby philosopher); there was no uncaused cause is my atheist conclusion; time is infinite. Or a Deist supernatural thing; that started this catastrophe we call "life".  = me? my belief? plain and simple agnostic.

Nope....strike 3.  Take the extra free time this will leave you to talk to your wife and work things out in your life.

It is not civil to call someone "intellectually deprived" when you are just trying to avoid using the word retarded.  Civil conversation is saying "I don't agree for x,y,z reasons."

If you feel like commenting on this post go here:  viewtopic.php?f=38&t=3062

[maestroanth]

I thoroughly read this, and you are, sir,  intellectually deprived. (I think that's the nice way of saying retard without of a strike 3, lol).

Due credit is #3 (lol) in your point.  And (Yes, I like to toy with people), you read a dawkin site or book.  

But Dawkins is retarded too.  I only see two logical beliefs (Dawkins is a shabby philosopher); there was no uncaused cause is my atheist conclusion; time is infinite. Or a Deist supernatural thing; that started this catastrophe we call "life".  = me? my belief? plain and simple agnostic.

Nope....strike 3.  Take the extra free time this will leave you to talk to your wife and work things out in your life.

It is not civil to call someone "intellectually deprived" when you are just trying to avoid using the word retarded.  Civil conversation is saying "I don't agree for x,y,z reasons."

If you feel like commenting on this post go here:  viewtopic.php?f=38&t=3062

Can I call you intellectually deprived?  Or should I get on another computer and sign up with another username (the library has tons of them) to do that?

JUST KIDDING..................!!!!!!!!!

My wifey and I are fine.