National Atheist Groups Respond to Growing Incivility in Online Communities

by Hemant Mehta

(patheos.com) - In response to the increasingly hostile (and yet incredibly important) online atheist community, where we’re seeing written attacks on anyone and everyone who ever disagrees with you about anything ever (“There’s something wrong on the Internet!” syndrome), nearly two dozen leaders of national non-theistic organizations have joined together to release an open statement addressing the problem.

To many, this will all seem like common sense… and it is. Yet, even in our community, reasonable dialogue is hard to find and humanity is often missing from our humanism. I’m sure some bloggers will inevitably think this applies to everyone but themselves, but those of us who spend a lot of time in the online atheist world (as writers, commenters, or readers) know that a lot of the people who think they’re part of the solution only end up making the problem worse. Personally, I’ve found the best course of action to be avoiding the whole world of drama altogether, but others see that as tacit support for one side or the other. The problem isn’t caused by any one person or even a small group of people. But, together, we can at least work to make the online climate a little more hospitable.

This statement is a starting point. A place of common agreement. The signatories want to help make things better and they should be commended for that. Now, let’s see how the online world responds.

read the statement here

I am glad to see this being addressed in a more visible manner. A community that thinks it is free of criticism is not thinking rationally.

I feel that the on-line atheist community really needs to step back and do some self-reflection and the points contained in this statement are a good place to start.

An America that is losing faith with religion: ‘One group has swelled: those with no religious affiliation, also known as “nones”. In the 1950s, this was about 2 percent of the population. In the 1970s, it was about 7 percent. Today, it is close to 20 percent’

(The Washington Post) - There is a close relationship between culture and cult — between the shared attitudes and values of a people and their religious views and practices. American culture is increasingly shaped by men and women who would rather sleep in or play golf on a Sunday morning.

The nation’s religious composition — as revealed in a recent presentation by Luis Lugo of the Pew Research Center — is changing. In 2012, America ceased to be a majority Protestant country — the result, mainly, of a decline in the numbers of mainline Protestants (though there have been smaller losses among white evangelicals as well). Catholicism is holding its own with a stable 22 percent of the public, but its ethnic composition has shifted dramatically — about half of all Catholics younger than 40 are Latino.

One group, however, has swelled: those with no religious affiliation, also known as “nones” (as in “none of the above”). In the 1950s, this was about 2 percent of the population. In the 1970s, it was about 7 percent. Today, it is close to 20 percent. These gains can be found in all regions of the country, including the South. The trend is particularly pronounced among whites, among the young and among men.

Not all the nones, it is worth pointing out, are secular. Only about 30 percent of this group — 6 percent of the public — are atheists or agnostics. The rest of the nones describe themselves as indifferent to religion or as “nothing in particular.” Sixty-four percent of the nones, however, say they believe in God or a universal spirit with “absolute certainty.” Even 9 percent of atheists and agnostics — defying both dogma and the dictionary— report themselves absolutely convinced of God’s existence. About equal proportions of the religiously unaffiliated (19 percent) and the affiliated (18 percent) report having “seen or been in the presence of a ghost.”

So the nones are united not by reading Richard Dawkins or by any particular set of theological beliefs but by a complete lack of attachment to institutional religion.

read more

What are the reasons for this? The author touches on one reason that I’ve come to think has a lot to do with it - the rise of the religious right.

It has left a bad taste in a lot of people’s mouths. The hate and vitriol their public mouth-pieces spread. Their exclusionary attitude toward the LGBT community, their political views - their views on sex, and birth control.

Their co-opting by the right-wing of american politics has shined a light on a lot of the darker corners of religion and maybe the public at large is starting to get sick of it.

Add This Group To Obama’s Winning Coalition: ‘Religiously Unaffiliated’

(NPR) - The big demographic story out of the 2012 presidential election may have been President Obama’s domination of the Hispanic vote, and rightfully so.

But as we close the book on the election, it bears noting that another less obvious bloc of key swing state voters helped the president win a second term.

They’re the “nones” — that’s the Pew Research Center’s shorthand for the growing number of American voters who don’t have a specific religious affiliation. Some are agnostic, some atheist, but more than half define themselves as either “religious” or “spiritual but not religious,” Pew found in a recent survey.

They are typically younger, more socially liberal than their forebears, vote Democratic, and now make up nearly 20 percent of the country’s population. Exit polls suggest that 12 percent of voters on Election Day were counted as “religiously unaffiliated.”

“This really is a striking development in American politics,” says Gregory Smith of the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. “There’s no question that the religiously unaffiliated are a very important, politically consequential group.”

The religiously unaffiliated voters are almost as strongly Democratic as white evangelicals are Republican, polls show.

read more

Couple to Debate Right to Distribute Atheist Material

helvetebrann:

Rene and Anna Chouinard, who have three children, have been fighting with the board for more than two years to have an age-appropriate publication — Just Pretend: A Free Thought Book for Children and Losing Faith in Faith: From Preacher to Atheist — distributed to Grade 5 students.

The couple, who are humanists and follow a religion-free way of life, took their case to the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario on Aug. 20 and were granted a hearing on the issue. While no date has yet been set for the proceeding, the tribunal allowed the Ontario Human Rights Commission and Canadian Civil Liberties Association to act as interveners in two-days of hearings.

The fight began after the Chouinards’ refused to sign a consent form for their daughter to distribute Gideon International Bibles at her school.

They then unsuccessfully sought to obtain permission to distribute Just Pretend, citing other groups should be allowed to have their publications distributed in Niagara schools as well.

“This is a solid decision by the tribunal that is good for society,” Rene said after being granted a hearing. “We would like to see religion completely removed from the classroom.”

He said the Niagara school board should focus on education and not religion or other issues.

The Chouinards alleged they were discriminated against “due to creed” and that no material from non-Christian religions were solicited or distributed in the district.

“If they allow Gideon Bibles in the schools, then why can’t other groups distribute their material as well,” he said on Tuesday. “This is not fair for people who may believe in other religions.”

He said Jews should be able to leave Torahs and Muslims their Koran in area schools.

It’s funny how as soon as other materials, besides Christian materials, are to be distributed that the school districts clam up and no longer say that they are simply distributing material based on who wants to distribute.

Funny indeed. Kind of like that Louisiana congressperson who flipped out and retracted support for school vouchers after they found out people can use them for Muslim, as well as Christian schools. 

(Source: cnews.canoe.ca)

Atheism + = snowflake?

atheismforthewin:

abaldwin360:

I don’t even know man.

I don’t even know.

I don’t know of anyone who does know. I mean, I get the point about intersectionality to an extent, but this is where I think humanism is the concept to which this applies.

Atheism= the stance on the question of deities

Humanism= the philosophy most atheists derive their morals from, although this is far from guaranteed.

So surely if anything this should be humanism+ or, in other words, humanism? 

And again, about the whole concept of the +, it just seems kind of an assholish holier-than-thou (the irony) way of stating your beliefs. As in believing that a patriarchy exists, among other things, makes you a better atheist somehow. 

I believe in the things Atheism+ supposedly stands for. But I don’t think I’ll call my self an Atheist+.

I’ll stick to good, ole’ fashioned humanism.

Yeah, I’ll stick to good ‘ol non-belief.