Spreading Atheism

[Alex_P]

At least with a general philosophy club you'd have a reason to talk about the benefits/drawbacks of your philosophy with followers of other philosophies.

Well, there's definitely virtue in not having to rehash the same fundamental area of disagreement over and over again.

Also, in my experience -- and we're talking exceedingly self-obsessed intellectual liberal-arts college here, -- every student group is, like, 90% social gathering anyway. So, it's really not that bad to have a club that doesn't have that much to talk about: you'll seldom be talking about it, anyway.

-- Alex

 

[Socius]

hahaha Atheism maybe the weak spot of christianity, Jewishm and islam but you cannot fight the buddhist! we don't have a god

 

[scotth266]

At least with a general philosophy club you'd have a reason to talk about the benefits/drawbacks of your philosophy with followers of other philosophies.

Well, there's definitely virtue in not having to rehash the same fundamental area of disagreement over and over again.

-- Alex

You mean, as opposed to the same fundamental areas of agreement/disagreement that you'd be going over if you were just discussing one philosophy all the time?

I don't know: I just don't see the point in discussing what I believe in with other people who believe the same/almost the same thing as I do. I'd much rather discuss with others of different beliefs.

It's just my mindset, I suppose.

 

[Brett Alex]

Personally, I don't see the point of an Atheist society. What's to discuss? How you don't believe in a god/gods? Not exactly much to talk about there that can't be discussed in some sort of philosophy club, in my opinion.

I'd be sad if I couldn't hold a single discussion that didn't boil down to god is/isn't real.

That said, I'm not a believer in the Greek mythological pantheon yet I've still been able to hold lengthy conversations about the intricacies of Zeus' ascension to power with others who also don't believe it.

 

[SonicKoala]

Why would you spread a lack of belief in something? That doesn't make any sense. Atheism is not something that is practiced, nor is it a belief system that requires you do anything whatsoever - it is simply a definition. Therefore, no, there shouldn't be any groups that "spread Atheism", because that's just stupid. You know how you often see environmental activist groups around College or University campuses? Well, would it make any sense if you saw a similar group who was spreading a message of complete and utter apathy towards the environment? No, because that would be fucking retarded.

That being said, I do agree that there is a double-standard in allowing religious groups to spread their message, but as long as they aren't hurting anyone, I don't see the problem in letting them hand out their bibles or put up their posters. You don't have to believe in God, just as you don't have to care about the environment if some hippy activist gives you a pamphlet about the poor polar bears. Just throw it away, or ignore it. It's simple.

 

[Kron_the_mad wants to be deleted]

theres always the pastafarian option. if christianity gets preference then demand equal coverage of the flying spaghetti monster

 

[Mad World]

I'm not sure if atheism is really a religion or not (probably not).

Anyway, I'm a Christian, so I don't think atheists should be allowed to spread their message. And, they shouldn't be able to spread their message in any manner they please. If they're going to do it, they should do so in a respectful fashion. The same goes for Christians and their ways of spreading the Word of God; they, too, should not be disrespectful when providing their views.

 

[Gmano]

Well I have been surfing around these hallowed forums for many months and I really like the community and the objective points of view of many members here so I have a question for you. On campus we have an old war cannon which is cemented to the ground in the center of campus and it is tradition for the various clubs and organizations on campus to paint it to advertise what their group is all about, and one day the Atheist society on campus decided they wanted to paint it. So one morning we woke up to see the following message on the cannon, "There is probably no God".

This seems fine to me but apparently the school did not think so and while there are no official rules regarding what can be painted on the cannon they were made to paint over it which is almost never done. What I do not understand is that we have an organization on campus called "Campus for Christ" and they are allowed to advertise with posters, give out free bibles and brochures and even conduct Christianity-based surveys during lectures but the Atheist society is not allowed to broadcast their message for one day?

I think that this is a double-standard on the part of the university and that the Atheists should be allowed to spread the word about their "religion" or lack thereof, depending on your point of view. So I ask you two things, is Atheism a religion, and should they be allowed to spread their message in any manner they please?

(Edited in paragraph form)

Why not spread FSMism? [venganza.org] the tastier alternative!

 

[AcacianLeaves]

The problem is that painting 'there is probably no God' is almost the same as printing 'Atheists are going to Hell'. It's a direct attack on Theists, rather than an expression of a belief or lack of belief. It's not so much promoting Atheism as it is deriding Theism.

Atheism is as much a religion as any other belief system, no matter how much atheists try to argue the 'non belief is not belief' idea. Atheism still has a shared idea of an ultimate truth dealing with the metaphysical nature of the human soul. It may be a different kind of religion than Christianity, but it's still a religious belief system. There are many religions on Earth that don't believe in a creator God, Atheism is just one concept of such a belief and is often ill-defined. I've had Atheists tell me that Atheism is the lack of the belief in anything metaphysical (the soul, the afterlife, God, Gods, Supernatural beings, etc), and others tell me that it is simply the lack of a belief in a creator God (but not necessarily the idea of a supreme being).

Look the bottom line is that Atheists are still a small, fringe group in the world. Promoting Atheism by attacking people's beliefs is not the right way towards tolerance and acceptance of Atheism as a mainstream belief system. Should they be allowed to paint "There is probably no God" on the cannon? Sure, but it's only going to get them negative attention and not mainstream acceptance. Also, adding the modifier 'probably' is more of an agnostic philosophy anyway...

 

[jamesworkshop]

"Atheism. Either the lack of belief in a god, or the belief that there is none."

Blackburn, Simon. The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy

Religion
A religion is a system of human thought which usually includes a set of narratives, symbols, beliefs and practices that give meaning to the practitioner's experiences of life through reference to a higher power, deity or deities, or ultimate truth.[1] Religion is commonly identified by the practitioner's prayer, ritual, meditation, music and art, among other things, but more generally is interwoven with society and politics.

It may focus on specific supernatural, metaphysical, and moral claims about reality (the cosmos and human nature) which may yield a set of religious laws, ethics, and a particular lifestyle. Religion also encompasses ancestral or cultural traditions, writings, history, and mythology, as well as personal faith and religious experience.

Its a gigantic stretch to call Atheism a religion with its complete lack of structure and half the thing considered to be covered under atheism really belong to secularism of which sure most atheist are secularists at the same time but the two are not the same

 

[Gubbinz]

Atheism is no more a religion than not believing in the Tooth Fairy is.

Atheism is no more a belief system than not believing in Sasquatch is.

Not all Atheists are Agnostics, but all Agnostics are Atheists. (You can't not know if there's a God, and believe in one at the same time.)

 

[Brett Alex]

The problem is that painting 'there is probably no God' is almost the same as printing 'Atheists are going to Hell'. It's a direct attack on Theists, rather than an expression of a belief or lack of belief. It's not so much promoting Atheism as it is deriding Theism.

Its not really. It's more like painting "Jesus died for your Sins so you could live" on a cannon. Or even "Jesus Saves". Implicit in the statement that "belief in Jesus will save you from the fires of eternal damnation and pain" is also "Not believing in Jesus means you won't be spared".

Implicit in the statement, "There is probably no God" is also "Chances are god doesn't exist, so all you christians who do believe are wasting your time. Well done cuz".

Yes, "There is probably no God" can be offensive, but its prettied up offensiveness. In the same way that "Jesus Saves" is prettied up offensiveness. Neither of them are that bad, but they're at least equally as bad as each other.

 

[Biosophilogical]

AHA!!! I love humanity, it panders so well to my love of hypocrisy ... which i hate having used against me ... YAY HYPOCRISY!!! But at any rate, bias and hypocrisy are common parts of life. Try something for me, go beat up a black guy for no reason and see if you get charged with a hate crime, next beat up a white guy and see if you don't. Even if the motivation is the same, people will always be overly sensitive to these kinds of things.

Spoiler: condensed version of OP

... On campus we have an old war cannon ... So one morning we woke up to see the following message on the cannon, "There is probably no God".

This seems fine to me but apparently the school did not think so and while there are no official rules regarding what can be painted on the cannon they were made to paint over it ... we have an organization on campus called "Campus for Christ" and they are allowed to *do religion promoting activities* but the Atheist society is not allowed to broadcast their message for one day?

I think that this is a double-standard ... and that the Atheists should be allowed to spread the word about their "religion" ... is Atheism a religion, and should they be allowed to spread their message in any manner they please?

Seeing as you go to the university (college?), you could always approach those responsible for painting over it as to why they did. At least that way you would either
a) Let them promote Athieism some more OR
b) Figure out if their actions are religous bias OR
c) If they did it for the other students' bias OR
d)*insert some other possible outcome that I cannot think of*

 

[Biosophilogical]

Why would you spread a lack of belief in something? That doesn't make any sense. Atheism is not something that is practiced, nor is it a belief system that requires you do anything whatsoever - it is simply a definition. Therefore, no, there shouldn't be any groups that "spread Atheism", because that's just stupid. You know how you often see environmental activist groups around College or University campuses? Well, would it make any sense if you saw a similar group who was spreading a message of complete and utter apathy towards the environment? No, because that would be fucking retarded.

That being said, I do agree that there is a double-standard in allowing religious groups to spread their message, but as long as they aren't hurting anyone, I don't see the problem in letting them hand out their bibles or put up their posters. You don't have to believe in God, just as you don't have to care about the environment if some hippy activist gives you a pamphlet about the poor polar bears. Just throw it away, or ignore it. It's simple.

Actually it makes perfect sense, if someone can be allowed to try and convert people to believing in a higher power which is intimately interested in our day-to-day lives and problems then why can't someone try and convert people to believing that we are not here on this earth because some guy in the clouds wanted us here??? After all, Athieism isn't so much a non-belief system, as it is a belief system pertaining to the non-existance of something (in this case a God of some sort).

EDIT: BTW OP, awesome BuckyBall avatar.

 

[Inverse Skies]

The Christian Union at my uni had a debate on abortion going on and they put up a heap of posters around the campus showing a baby being cradled in some persons arms. They got pulled down for inflammatory material, so it works both ways here. You've just got to be careful with religion, it's a touchy subject at the best of times.

 

[Nickolai77]

I would define athiesm as a type of philosophy, rather than a "non-religion", a term which i don't think makes much sense. (e.g- think of a "non-vegatable" for instance, what is that?

I see no reason why philosophical societys can not advertise themselves around campus, be it it a Ultatarian Society or a Neo-Plantonic society or whatever, a humanist or athiest philsophy society is no different. Perhaps if the Athiest society in the OP's campus re-branded themselves as a "humanist" society, they could probably still advertise.

Finally, yes i agree too that the university authorities have a double standard, you just have to find ways to get round their hypocrisy.

 

[T-Bone24]

Atheists worship Athe the god of nothing and must be stopped. If Athe is allowed to run rampant it will eat all the other gods and eventually the universe.

FOOL! You claim to understand us, but not our God, the great Atheismo!

 

[Richard Eis]

Atheism is not a religion for exactly the same reason why not-collecting stamps is not a hobby.

-Back in january, an Atheist group in Britain paid to have "There's Probably No God. Now Stop Worrying and Enjoy Life" stuck on a load of buses and underground stations.-

This graffiti probably references this poster campaign. The probably is because you have to have truth in advertising and you can't prove a negative. Atheists are not hedging their bets. They are being truthful. "probably" does have a positive slant to it though.

 

[The_Echo]

Atheism is a religious view, not a religion.

And they are not an exception to free speach, so yes, they should be able to spread their message.

 

[Amnestic]

First off, paragraphs are your friend. Walls of text are not.

is Atheism a religion, and should they be allowed to spread their message in any manner they please?

1) By definition, probably not. A true religion involves a divine being or higher power, generally (though not necessarily) one who created the universe. Atheism, by contrast, denies the existence of a higher power, and is thus probably not a religion.
(bonus note: Buddha never intended his teachings to be a religion, nor for himself to be a deity. True Buddhism is probably not a religion either).

2)No, in the same way that Religions should not be able to advertise however the hell they want. Both need some regulation on how they can spread their message. I'd say the cannon is fair game though.

Dude, religion is basically a set of philosophies with the purpose of offering guidance and comfort in life. That's why Buddhism is considered a religion, and there is no reason people can't look up to Buddha just because he's not a god. He still fills the same role as one in "his" religion by being the figurehead and granting inspiration, and other fancy words.

Atheism basically tells you that you should not worship any deity, or that deities do not exist. That's sounds like a philosophy to me.

So what's a "True" religion? :S

The difference is likely under the "purpose of offering guidance and comfort in life." There is nothing to link one Atheist to another besides their lack of belief in a God. Religious people have rules, philosophies and the like that are common between people. Beyond "There is no God" anything Atheists have in common with each other is all just a coincidence.

There are no rules, no leader, no real organisation the same way you get the Church. Also no central text or doctrine the same way people have the Bible or the Koran.

"Atheism is a religion the same way bald is a hair colour." - Some guy on the internet.