Should we call ourselves Atheists?

[Kylyssa]

The only word that I might be able to bend to would be word "secular", because it doesn't have negative implications attached to it.  Secular to me though is just trying to sugar coat atheism which i'm against.

To me, secular does not imply that a person is an atheist.  Theists often separate their lives into religious aspects and secular aspects - it doesn't make them part time atheists.  It  just indicates that there are parts of life in which religion is irrelevant, even for theists.

I might take to the label sexual humanist, though.  Seriously though, the secular humanist label isn't my favorite either.  It leads to more lame "you worship yourself" horsecrap.

[iNow]

So, an honest question for those of you who like the term "atheist."  Do you also have a term designating your lack of acceptance that horoscopes are useful?  After all, they are incredibly common and accepted among the populace.  What about a term designating your lack of racism?  Racism is rather common, too.  Do you have terms describing yourself due to your lack of acceptance of these things?  If not, why not, and how is this any different than theism?

Can't we just be rational and reasonable, and let that be enough?

[LoneMateria]

So, an honest question for those of you who like the term "atheist."  Do you also have a term designating your lack of acceptance that horoscopes are useful?  After all, they are incredibly common and accepted among the populace.  What about a term designating your lack of racism?  Racism is rather common, too.  Do you have terms describing yourself due to your lack of acceptance of these things?  If not, why not, and how is this any different than theism?

Can't we just be rational and reasonable, and let that be enough?

People don't try to impose laws based on their horoscopes.  At least if they do they aren't public about it.  Saying i'm an a-horoscopeist won't have people telling me I deserve to be tortured for not trusting my horoscope and that its a good thing.  Horoscopes, for the most part, are harmless.  They operate a lot like general prayer, when you pray to god for him to do his will.  Its silly but its benign.

You know we call people racist when they act racist.  It has become a derogatory term and when some accuses someone of being racist they say their not racist.  They can replace the not with an "a" and call themselves aracists, but they don't they leave the not.  When we are accused of being theists we say we are not theists, "atheists".  We chose to remove the not in front of theists and put an "a" there instead.  Again we live in an age where we don't impose laws based on skin color.  Therefore we don't need the non-racist label unless we are accused of being racist.  In which case we use that label to describe ourselves.

Also if you aren't in Texas racism isn't that common.  Hell I live about an hour away from Jay Florida where the KKK live, the majority of Jay voted for Obama, racism is dying.

[iNow]

Don't you provide unearned power to theism by defining yourself in opposition to it?  Aren't you complicit in sanctioning the power of religion by self-identifying as a sub-culture of the religious majority, implicitly relegating yourself to a lower rung on the social hierarchy than theists?

Why not just be reasonable and rational, and call bullshit claims for what they are?  Atheism is a hollow, vacuous, and meaningless label, and the only power it has comes directly from theism itself.  Would it not be a good idea to strip them of that power and just continue moving through life as a person who demands evidence in support of claims and who dismisses nonsense in whatever form it appears... without the desire to label yourself in opposition to the countless forms of nonsense you will inevitably encounter?

[LoneMateria]

Don't you provide unearned power to theism by defining yourself in opposition to it?  Aren't you complicit in sanctioning the power of religion by self-identifying as a sub-culture of the religious majority, implicitly relegating yourself to a lower rung on the social hierarchy than theists?

Um... first off theism has power.  It sucks and I don't feel they deserve it but they have it.  Theists have the ability to pass unconstitutional laws which is based on religion.  These are increasing frequently (such as banning of homosexual marriage and teaching creationism (ID or whatever they are calling it) along side evolution).  Laws like these are unconstitutional however they make it into law books because our good old friends the fundies have the power to vote.  Honestly if theism was a pushover we would no longer need to call ourselves atheists it would be as redundant as calling ourselves afairiests or ahoroscopeists (OMFG MY SPELL CHECK DOESN'T SEE AHOROSCOPEISTS AS A MISSPELLED WORD WTF).  Wow thats a blow to my morale right there, ahoroscopists is a word in the :shake: and I thought I was just making up words there to compare to atheism.

Damnit I lost the point I was going to make.  Oh yeah we don't need to oppose what isn't a threat, we wouldn't say we were abigfootists (w00t misspelled according to google chrome) because no one is going to pass a law based on what bigfoot wants.  Using atheist we don't give theists any power we are denying them power over us.  We are not a part of them, they don't have a hold over us, we are opposed to (or lack) their convictions with all the superstition and dogma that accompanies it.

Honestly I don't care about the social hierarchy of theists as long as they don't try to interfere in the well being of our society and myself.  Fuck theist's social order.  I couldn't care less if they refer to me as the devil or as the pope or as a saint or as an angel.  Just like they don't give a damn how low atheists have them on their ladder.  I'm not going to stop calling myself an atheist to make them comfortable with me they can learn to deal with it or they can go screw themselves.

Why not just be reasonable and rational, and call bullshit claims for what they are?  Atheism is a hollow, vacuous, and meaningless label, and the only power it has comes directly from theism itself.  Would it not be a good idea to strip them of that power and just continue moving through life as a person who demands evidence in support of claims and who dismisses nonsense in whatever form it appears... without the desire to label yourself in opposition to the countless forms of nonsense you will inevitably encounter?

Honestly not all atheists are rational people who don't believe in the supernatural.  Some atheists are big fans of pseudoscience, believe in alien abductions and conspiracies, and a ton of other unprovable hypotheses and they just happen to not believe in a god.  Trying to change the label we all use to express our non belief in a deity will not be successful because we are all different.  There are atheist democrats, republicans, independents, bigfoot believers, alien abduction believers, monster believers, nerds, jocks, intellectuals, soldiers, and so on.  We are all united under the flag of atheism (meaphorically of course) and that possibly is the only connection one of us have to another.  You can't change labels because there are atheists who are not reasonable, nor rational, and believe in bullshit claims.

Can you demonstrate how atheism is hollow, vacuous, and meaningless please?  I'll partly agree with you on the point that atheism's power comes from theism.  Its power doesn't come from claiming one religion is wrong its power is claiming they are all wrong or lack evidence to support them.  In a way you would need theists to give atheists a ... coherent meaning.  However if and when theism becomes a very small minority then we will no longer need to use the term atheism as a label for ourselves.

If you can strip theists of their power then go right ahead.  I'm not even sure how to begin to go about that.  If you have some ideas lay them on me.  

Also I noticed that you didn't mention anything about the previous arguments you used referring to racism and horoscopes.  I can only assume I made good points to your dismay or convinced you that those are flawed arguments.  To me it seems as if you are trying to account for every possible outcome that can occur when you use atheist and you can't because we are all so different.

[Arctonyx]

Arctonyx what are your reserves about using the term atheism?

Well I only have 1 right now (you've presented a very good case), and that is simply because due to peers of mine who claim to be atheist yet believe in some other supernatural occurances. Maybe it's just that I'd prefer too much for the term Atheist to encompass all supernatural things. I'm very close to going back to the term Atheist, although maybe with a little extra = Atheist, including everything supernatural. Or just for a bit of sarcastic fun I could start calling myself a leprechaunist, or an invisible purple chaffinchist, so many choices

[LoneMateria]

Well I only have 1 right now (you've presented a very good case), and that is simply because due to peers of mine who claim to be atheist yet believe in some other supernatural occurances. Maybe it's just that I'd prefer too much for the term Atheist to encompass all supernatural things. I'm very close to going back to the term Atheist, although maybe with a little extra = Atheist, including everything supernatural. Or just for a bit of sarcastic fun I could start calling myself a leprechaunist, or an invisible purple chaffinchist, so many choices lol.

[Arctonyx]

Ok you've won me over, if just to annoy some overtly zealous theists  

[iNow]

Honestly I don't care about the social hierarchy of theists as long as they don't try to interfere in the well being of our society and myself.  Fuck theist's social order.  I couldn't care less if they refer to me as the devil or as the pope or as a saint or as an angel.  Just like they don't give a damn how low atheists have them on their ladder.  I'm not going to stop calling myself an atheist to make them comfortable with me they can learn to deal with it or they can go screw themselves.

See, based on the comments above, I'm somewhat surprised you don't find my points more compelling.  This is NOT about making theists comfortable, it's about refusing to let ourselves exist in their fairy-tale sandbox.  If we refuse to even acknowledge the need to identify ourselves with a specific form of theism or lack of theism, and instead see it as a waste of time and a bunch of nonsense which doesn't deserve our attention, I think we'd be making a pretty significant step forward.

Again, reading your passionate points suggesting that we should just say "fuck them!" I would think you'd agree completely.  Maybe I'm doing a poor job of articulating what I mean.  I'll try harder.  

Honestly not all atheists are rational people who don't believe in the supernatural.  Some atheists are big fans of pseudoscience, believe in alien abductions and conspiracies, and a ton of other unprovable hypotheses and they just happen to not believe in a god.  Trying to change the label we all use to express our non belief in a deity will not be successful because we are all different.  There are atheist democrats, republicans, independents, bigfoot believers, alien abduction believers, monster believers, nerds, jocks, intellectuals, soldiers, and so on.

Again, this seems to support my core contention.  We are all different.  Calling someone an atheist is very uni-dimensional, and brings with it no descriptive power.  All you know is that they are not theist.  After that, it's pretty meaningless.

Now, there may be some positive aspects of calling ourselves atheists.  It's nice to have a common flag to wave, and to share a sense of community.  I get that.  However, my larger point is that we do ourselves a disservice by allowing ourselves to be pigeon-holed in this way.  It provides our debate opponents the ability to avoid our arguments, and to lump us together as one monolithic entity.  Yet, you've conceded yourself, we are not... but that's PRECISELY how it plays out.

There is no common worldview or set of beliefs among atheists, yet implicit in the shared label is that we all march to the same drum.  I'm not saying that all atheists are rational, reasonable, or demand evidence in support of assertions.  What I'm saying is that, instead of arguing for being atheist, we argue for the spread of actual value systems and worldviews rooted in the demand for evidence, rationality, and reasonability.

If you can strip theists of their power then go right ahead.  I'm not even sure how to begin to go about that.  If you have some ideas lay them on me.  

Again... Spread the mandate for evidence in support of claims and assertions, rationality, and reason.  IMO, that is the single strongest approach we can all take to strip theists of their power.  If we support these values of mandating evidence in support of claims, rationality, and reason... then after that, it doesn't matter what the opponent is.  By supporting these values, our approach will kill all forms of woo and gibberish, of both the theistic and non-theistic variety...  That's just my opinion, but I find it quite logical.  Focus less on being an opponent to the Abrahamic god, and focus more on being a proponent of critical thinking.

I noticed that you didn't mention anything about the previous arguments you used referring to racism and horoscopes.  I can only assume I made good points to your dismay or convinced you that those are flawed arguments.

You did make very good points, and as a result I tried to adjust my own... recognizing that my position had holes.  So, thank you for that.  

To me it seems as if you are trying to account for every possible outcome that can occur when you use atheist and you can't because we are all so different.

That is not my intention, no.  Part of my intention here is to simply suggest that we don't need a label.  It's not really helpful (and, in fact, often serves to weaken our debating position).  In my estimation, what we need to do is to stand up for reason, rationality, and the requirement for evidence in support of claims.  After that, call yourself anything you want... It won't matter.  The label does nothing really, except to suggest that we are all the same.  What I suggest is that by instead choosing to stand up for the aforementioned values of reason, rationality, and evidence in support of claims...  and by choosing not to label ourselves as some monolithic and homogeneous group, we can realize real and lasting change in our culture and bring more people on board.  It's just something to consider.  

Thanks for the really great replies.  I've enjoyed them.

[Kylyssa]

If I could have things my way we'd just be called people and people who believe in god(s) would be called theists, religionists, or superstitionists.  They would require a special word because they would be the exception rather than the norm.  Eventually the word atheist might die a natural death.

I think of the word atheist like I think of the word abolitionist.  It is not something to be ashamed of being labeled as.  When the world is crazy it's a good thing to be labeled non-crazy whether or not society agrees with you at the time.  

Maybe in a hundred years or so people will look back and say, "back when they were a minority and religion held the world in a choke hold, thinking people were called atheists."

[LoneMateria]

Again, reading your passionate points suggesting that we should just say "fuck them!" I would think you'd agree completely.  Maybe I'm doing a poor job of articulating what I mean.  I'll try harder.  

It may not be you, i'm just not seeing much appeal in renaming ourselves.  I may just be thick lol kk I wasn't sure.  To me it looked like a change of subject or change of examples, and i'm not one (usually) to let it slide if the only thing someone arguing with me will do is change examples until they find one very difficult to answer or answer to their satisfaction.  But like I said I wasn't sure so I didn't want to accuse you of that.  Lol we've seen the "La La La I cant hear you" position from braxton in his debate, not very effective ^_^.

That is not my intention, no.  Part of my intention here is to simply suggest that we don't need a label.  It's not really helpful (and, in fact, often serves to weaken our debating position).  In my estimation, what we need to do is to stand up for reason, rationality, and the requirement for evidence in support of claims.  After that, call yourself anything you want... It won't matter.  The label does nothing really, except to suggest that we are all the same.  What I suggest is that by instead choosing to stand up for the aforementioned values of reason, rationality, and evidence in support of claims...  and by choosing not to label ourselves as some monolithic and homogeneous group, we can realize real and lasting change in our culture and bring more people on board.  It's just something to consider.  

Thanks for the really great replies.  I've enjoyed them.

How does it weaken our debating position?  I agree that we need to stand up for reason, rationality, and the requirement of evidence, however theists can (and will) claim they are that way too, they just happen to believe there is a god, be it deist or whatever.  The label doesn't suggest we are all the same, we are not Presbyterians, or Evangelicals we all don't share the same view, we don't need to share the same view to be right on this matter.  Standing up for reason, rationality and evidence isn't exclusively for atheists.  Smart people who stand up for these things can be Christians like the guy who was in change of the human genome project.  

This is a really good discussion.  I've enjoyed it too.

Eventually the word atheist might die a natural death.

I hope one day in my future we won't need the word atheist anymore.  Religion will be on the same scale as bigfoot believers and we won't need a name anymore.  I hope

[iNow]

I hope one day in my future we won't need the word atheist anymore.  Religion will be on the same scale as bigfoot believers and we won't need a name anymore.  I hope

This succinctly captures the point, I just propose that we really don't need to the word today, either.

[LoneMateria]

I hope one day in my future we won't need the word atheist anymore.  Religion will be on the same scale as bigfoot believers and we won't need a name anymore.  I hope

This succinctly captures the point, I just propose that we really don't need to the word today, either.