Not sure where this belongs: Look forward to the day religious people don't use the word "atheism"

[randys1]

as some sort of excuse to continue proselytizing their beliefs (I will use that word given the forum I am in, but I think the more proper word is prejudices)...

This nonsense that atheism is a religion or that atheists practice tribalism the way religious people do, is silly.

I dont know if there is some SMALL group of organized atheists who meet and discuss atheism and how they can spread it around the world, if such a thing exists I have never heard of it and it sure as hell is small compared to any ONE religion let alone ALL of them.

Atheism is a word used to describe someone who doesnt believe in god for the same reason they/we dont believe in Leprechauns.

There is equal evidence for both.

[cbayer]

1. You are apparently responding to me, though I don't know how

you got the idea that I was proselytizing my beliefs or my prejudice.

You brought up the idea that religion promotes tribalism, and I responded to you that I think that tribalism would exist without religion and asked whether you thought there might be tribalism among atheists.

Since we are here in the Religion section of DU, it would be very difficult to deny that there is a very strong tribalism among some of our atheist members, as well as some of the religious members and those that support religion.

I never said atheism was a religion. Quite the opposite. The point I was making is that tribalism exist without religion.

The Leprechaun analogy is part of the tribal code, by the way, as is your use of the word "we". Score one for your tribe!

[randys1]

2. And this is silly. There is no tribe that does NOT believe in Leprechauns. if there is one please

direct me to them, I have some new jokes I think they will like.

p.s. there is no group of people using "leprechaun" as a way to describe this, I am the only one I know of who has used it here or anywhere

I may have seen someone use it before I did, but if so it was a very long time ago and i have not seen it used since by anyone but myself, unless someone is repeating what i said

I am not taking credit for it, I am pointing out that there is NO group think, at all, NONE with people who dont believe in something

[cbayer]

4. I did not say that there was a tribe that did not believe in leprechauns.

I said using the leprechaun (tooth fairy, sky daddy, santa claus, big foot, easter bunny, unicorn) analogy was part of the tribal code.

Did you really think it was original to you?

[randys1]

6. I said I wasnt sure where it came from, I have never seen it used here other than by myself...

Do you want to play that game now?

I am in the wrong forum, the last time you and I talked you played that other game of alleging you are not a believer.

I was warned about you, I am done with your forum

[cbayer]

7. You have been warned about me? And you deny tribalism?

That's pretty funny, don't you think.

Also part of the local tribal code is that I am lying about not being a religious believer. It has to be a lie because it just doesn't fit the narrative. Hey, do you want me to deny Jesus 3 times?

Sorry to see you go. Hope you find someplace where you feel more a part of the tribe.

[AtheistCrusader]

40. Cbayer bullies another newbie out of Religion. Imagine that.

You must be proud.

(the 'leprechaun' and other examples of supernatural nonsense are common lexicon across most atheists that are willing to spend time talking/debating about it. Hardly unique to this corner of DU.)

[Warren Stupidity]

49. Hi randy, this is not cbrayer's forum!

Please don't get bullied out of here. This forum is open to believers and non believers alike, and it is not a safe haven for believers. They have many of those, for example the interfaith forum, but not this one.

[randys1]

53. Where i come from if someone lays in wait to argue on behalf of something they dont believe in

just to be argumentative, it is called sowing discord.

If you know what I mean

[Warren Stupidity]

54. oh well you do need a thick skin here.

I just hate to see people get chased out by the welcoming committee..

[NaturalHigh]

42. "There is no tribe that does NOT believe in Leprechauns"?

Huh? I can think of a few tribes that have probably never even heard of leprechauns.

[rug]

3. A&A would have to be renamed.

[cbayer]

5. It should be anyway.

[rug]

8. !

I won't ask.

[AtheistCrusader]

47. You weren't banned because you aren't an atheist or agnostic, and you know it.

[NYC_SKP]

71. It most definitely should.

And I'll say that I wish to heaven we had a safe place for agnostics and atheists to post.

[cbayer]

73. I share that wish.

[NYC_SKP]

74. Maybe we can meet on your megayacht!

Or at my seaside villa!

Not the one on the Adriatic, that one is getting new grout made from the ground-up bones of unborn puppies.

I mean the place in Panama that we took from Noriega.

[cbayer]

75. Yes! I will send one of the jets out to pick up whoever would like to come.

[NYC_SKP]

77. OK if me and the Pope pop in, then?

I haven't talked to him since Xmas.

I'll tweet him.

Send the G6 and Sharon, she's your best pilot and she makes me laugh!

[cbayer]

78. Please invite Frank! I would love to see him again and he loves my empanadas.

Sharon has gone to Eastern Europe to get some of the wool we talked about. I'll send Danny. He is a hoot and muy guapo!

I understand they have overturned the ban on foie gras in Carlifornia! Could you pick up a few pounds for me?

[NYC_SKP]

79. Have your guards be on the lookout, my butcher and a gaggle of fattened geese are due today.

You know me, I like my foie gras fresh, and you do too!

Let me know how it goes, and be sure to watch the butcher, Dmitri.

He's really good but he pinches EVERYONE'S butt!

[hrmjustin]

9. I don't think atheism is a religion.

[edhopper]

10. There are groups of organized atheists

who wish to spread it. I actually approve of the idea of spreading the ideas of atheism (i.e. Dawkin's Dennet, Russell etc...)

But I agree it isn't a religion.

[cbayer]

11. No one said it was a religion, quite the opposite. It's a straw man in it's classic form.

[edhopper]

12. No, not here

I've seen it elsewhere though. But I was just agreeing with that point of the OP.

[cbayer]

13. The OP is aimed directly at me, so I was just responding.

[edhopper]

14. Oh,

didn't know that.

[cbayer]

15. That's ok. He stomped out when I challenged the straw man.

He had been warned about me though. Haven't you?

[edhopper]

16. If I had

I guess it didn't take.

[cbayer]

17. And I am very glad about that, because I thoroughly enjoy talking to you...

even though we often don't see eye to eye.

[edhopper]

18. Not on this

but in truth we both don't have a belief in God as far as I know.

And outside of this forum, we probably mostly agree politically.

But not about McDonalds.

[cbayer]

19. It is our view on those who do believe where we tend to differ.

How do you feel about Popeye's?

[edhopper]

20. I live in

NYC and fortunately can avoid all fast food. I can get the same thing elsewhere and better.

The only exception is Five Guys and Shake Shack for burgers on occasion.

[cbayer]

21. Aha!! Five Guys!

I knew you had a weak spot there somewhere.

I live in Mexico where US fast food is virtually non-existent, but street fast food is abundant. I love it, but I do go a little crazy on my trips back to the US. Mexican hamburgers are really different, and in a way that I don't like, and don't get me started on fried chicken.

[edhopper]

22. Well they do make

an all natural burger and fries.

NY has great street food too. Even Mexican.

[cbayer]

23. I will be sure to check with you if I get a chance to get back to NY.

I lived in the city for 8 years many moons ago, and there wasn't that much street food. But I have heard things have changed quite a bit.

[edhopper]

24. Yes

the Food Truck thing has exploded. They even have awards. The Vendy.

[Dorian Gray]

59. Queens

has great and authentic street food. And like Ed said, the food trucks have really taken off. There are food truck rallies often around the city where you can get a taste of many things.

[cbayer]

62. I also lived in Queens for about a year and, sadly, food trucks were not

in existence.

I need to plan a trip just for that reason. I loved all the ethnic food food in NYC and to be able to get it on the street would be fantastic.

[Dorian Gray]

63. I think that in the past

the food truck were run by mostly ethnic food purveryors. Jackson Heights and Woodside there were mexican carts et al.

In the last ten years, it's become a thing of hipsters. Kimchi Tacos. Waffels and Dinges. Van Lleweyn ice Cream. Dumplings and Things. Lobster roll trucks. Etc.

[cbayer]

64. Sounds like it might be pricey, no?

I'm not really familiar with these trucks, but have seen a few TV shows about them. The food looks great, but I like the cheap part of street food.

[Dorian Gray]

65. Pricier than the original

incarnation. (I lived in Asia for awhile and had great street food there! And cheap!)

It's cheaper than restaurants still, but pricier than what you would find in Mexico, for sure.

[cbayer]

66. I dream of the street food in Asia.

It is high on my list of places I want to get to before I can't, particularly the southeast. I am envious.

[Dorian Gray]

68. Indonesia

had the best street food ever.

My biggest regret is never making it to Singapore.

[Dorian Gray]

58. I love

Shake Shack!

(I also live in NYC. ! And one just opened on the border of my neighborhood on Flatbush Ave!)

Agree about fast food, though my daughter does love McDonalds french fries. The tastes of a four year old.

[edhopper]

67. They are engineered for their taste

but terribly unhealthy. Hopefully she doesn't have them often.

I am always surprised when places like Pizza Hut or Domino's survive here.
Why would anyone get pizza at these places in NY?

[Dorian Gray]

69. Never

ever in a million years will I touch fast food pizza. It tastes like cardboard with a red sugar sauce.

And McDonalds happens on road trips or at the airport. Not an every day thing. (Though she may ask for them every day.)

Totally jumped on the off topic food conversation here. Sorry.

[edhopper]

70. Such is the course of a thread.

[TM99]

25. Why is this so hard for y'all to get?

Thirty odd years ago, there were no groups promoting atheism and secular humanism certainly not with the numbers they have today! There were no 'safe havens' for discussion about 'religious privilege' and the 'mental delusions of believers'. The 'four horsemen' had not written their books on the 'evils' of religion. We atheists didn't use the same arguments against religious beliefs that invoke the tired tripe of Santa Claus and the damned tooth fairy. The atheists I knew, and I knew quite a few, did not bleat on incessantly about 'reason' and 'scientific evidence'.

This is specifically why I refer to the New Atheism as a definite tribal group and movement. It has its own language and code words. It has its own canon of selected readings that while not required are certainly endorsed. It does now have organizations like American Atheists that are not at all like they were decades ago. Will it develop rituals? Who knows? There is certainly the beginnings of some real dogmatic position statements.

So, while, yes, it is true, that atheism in the strictest sense of the word simply means one who does not believe in a deity, today calling oneself an atheist has become an identity statement like someone saying they are a Christian, a progressive, or a feminist. Atheism is NOT a religion. The New Atheism is definitely a movement or a tribe, and it is not silly to view it that way at all.

[cbayer]

26. So very well said. It seems obvious.

It's so tribal in some areas that only certain kinds of atheists are permitted membership.

To claim it is otherwise is ridiculous.

[okasha]

28. It certainly has forms

of ritualized exclusion.

[cbayer]

29. and you can't get much more tribal than that.

[okasha]

31. It also seems to require periodic ritualized

statements, such as the belief that agnostics and agnosticism do not exist as separate classes.

[cbayer]

32. That's dogma, and there is a ton of it.

It also involves having ritualized caricatures that can be repeatedly burned at the stake. That's a really community builder right there.

[TM99]

36. Worse, even, is that soon

we will receive responses in this thread that we are somehow anti-atheist, abusing our religious privilege(ignore the fact that you and I are not believers!), and disparaging them.

I suppose I could draw a cartoon of a monkey headed Dawkins (a staunch anti-theist) throwing shit at Carl Sagan (a more open minded self-identified agnostic) and call that satire, and it would be protected speech and not at all offensive or insulting.

[cbayer]

38. I could not care less about those responses in this thread or any thread for that matter.

It is wailing for the sole purpose of provoking a response. Easy fix - no response.

I realize that i am part of a tribe here. There are definitely those that I feel much more kinship with and who I feel have my back if I need it.

But the tribe is fairly loose and unlike other ones, I do not think I would ever risk losing membership because I didn't follow the ideology.

A tribe that requires that is not one I would want to be a part of.

[TM99]

35. Absolutely!

I am definitely one of those wrong kinds of atheists. I even now must use that word, even though it doesn't describe my thinking on the subject. Ignostics are like agnostics, we are no longer separate but only flavors of the one true belief - atheism.

[Neon Gods]

27. Tribe?

I've been an atheist most of my adult life. I don't care what other people believe or how they worship, just don't use government or peer pressure to force me to embrace things I don't believe in. If there is any activism, it's just people fighting together for our rights and asking people to think rationally about what they believe. We try to let closet atheists know they aren't alone if they want to come out of the closet. Does that make us a tribe? To me a tribe is a group of people who believes whatever the tribe believes without thinking (like the Tea Party). How does that apply to atheists? I'm not disputing you, I'm just not sure how atheists are a tribe?

[cbayer]

30. I think you have to use a broader definition of tribe.

A family can be a tribe, and they would not necessarily believe whatever everyone else believes without thinking.

It is merely a group of people that have a connection because they share something, be it a religious idea, an ethnic identity or a political position. It can be very loose or very tight, have no rules or lots of rules..

I think the one thing it always does is set up a we/them dichotomy.

[TM99]

34. Yes, tribal in both positive and negative ways.

Unfortunately I personally see more negative tribalism in the New Atheism than I do positives. Why? Likely because New Atheism is a direct response to the rise of fundamentalism in Christianity and Islam over the last 30 years. It has become and us/them way of thinking sadly on both sides of that fence.

[cbayer]

37. I see both good and bad, and as i do with religion, I am going to support the

good and challenge the bad.

I agree that it is reactionary in part, but it is pushing against some prejudices and boundaries that need to be pushed.

I also thing that the inroads into the 1st amendment made by the religious right must be taken back, and it is atheist organizations that are doing that.

[TM99]

46. I agree in part, but

turning over the constitutionality of 1st amendment issues to a battle between two minority positions does not leave a great taste in my mouth. I find New Atheism to be as extremist at times as the Religious Right.

[cbayer]

48. Well, I think there is a spectrum and what we see here is not

at all representative.

I like the work that FFRF does and I think there are a lot of atheists writers and bloggers who have a much less caustic and more nuanced view.

Of course, they often trigger the wrath of others because they are not hostile enough towards all things religious.

But it is with them that common ground will be found and change will be made.

[TM99]

50. That I can't disagree with.

My experience with New Atheists on DU has not been a positive one in general. I have not experienced this in the 'real world'. I have been a member of FFRF for quite some time. There are as many religious believers and non in that good organization. That's one thing that makes me a bit nuts here as believers and non-believers here are both against extremism, ensuring 1st Amendment protections, keeping government and religion separate where necessary, and are against the bigotry and hatred of the average born-again. The antagonism towards believers here or are not THE enemy astounds me at times. Then I just remember my psychology training, and it all makes sense.

[cbayer]

52. It's tribal and it's been going on on this site for long before I started participating

in this group.

It has become so primitive that I don't think it is even about atheism any more.

[bvf]

55. Fantastic.

Let's all argue about the meaning of the word "tribe" instead of sticking to the point.

Not unexpected.

[TM99]

33. I too have been an atheist all my life since

even before adulthood.

I agree with what you are stating.

New Atheism is an actual movement. It is now very much tribal in ways similar to other movements including religions and political orientations.

When a group of atheists repeatedly use the Santa Claus example to 'dispute' belief in a god or gods, yes, that is tribal thinking. When a group of atheists uses a set of 'code words' like 'delusional thinking' or 'woo', then yes, that is tribal thinking.

Even atheists are not immune to this very human thing. To believe otherwise is deny reality.

[procon]

39. I agree with you.

I've been an atheist for a very long time, and although I met many people like me, I don't ever recall anyone who felt compelled to "spread altheim", let alone cared all that much about anyone else's personal theological hypotheses. Atheists have many different views and opinions and they can describe themselves in many different ways. Like most individuals, we don't need of want to fit into the conveniently narrow labels and pigeonholes thrust upon us by religious activists.

That seems to make an inordinate number of people here very uncomfortable by that fact. Today they want to brand us as a "Tribe", yesterday we were "New Atheists", tomorrow they will tack another label on us because the whole notion of not believing in anything is anathema to them.

We don't need to fit into the little predefined boxes that religious enthusiasts are always trying to stuff us into. Better that they should examine why they feel so unsettled by the complete and total absence of any belief in the divine.

[cbayer]

43. What is it that you think makes an inordinate number of people here very uncomfortable?

I don't think there is anyone here that is in the least disturbed by "nonbelievers that don't need or want to fit into conveniently narrow labels and pigeonholes". I think that describes the majority of people who call themselves atheists both here and IRL.

OTOH, there are definitely subgroups among the non-believing population. There are those that call themselves firebrands and anti-atheists, militants and freethinkers. There are those that attend Sunday Assemblies and those that participate in exclusive internet groups. And there are definitely groups that define who does and does not meet their criteria for inclusion and who is an "other". That's the very definition of tribe.

I don't think anyone here thinks that not believing in anything is an anathema. While that may be true in the outside world, I think you would be hard pressed to find someone here that feels that.

Sorry, but it is non-believers themselves who are creating little predefined boxes. It has nothing to do with anyone feeling unsettled by the absence of belief.

Now, you may not be a part of a tribe whose base is non belief, but it exists, and it exists in spades right here on this site. If you are not aware of it, it is probably because you choose not to participate.

And that is perfectly all right.

[procon]

51. I should thank you for validating my observations.

Look, I've been at this since the 60s, and I've heard all these ploys before; I get it. You're trying very hard to assign all the scary atheists into "tribes", you're already giving us imaginary names, and telling us what we are supposed to believe, you've told us all about our nefarious agenda, and what sort of synchronized group activities we are supposed to perform -- and voila! -- we now resemble your version of a "religion".

A reasoned person does not spot a few outliers, no matter their celebrity status or how vociferous or outrageous their views, and then try to lump everyone else into that convenient mold, especially when almost everyone is trying to tell you, no, that's not the majority opinion.

Nope, there's no gratuitous patronizing finale here.

[cbayer]

60. I should also thank you, then.

I've been at this at least as long as you and, as a non-believer, I have no issue with pretty much all atheists, theists and everyone in between, unless they want to impose their beliefs on others or they proselytize.

You think you have such a good handle on who I am and what I am about, but you don't. You appear to have created your own bogey man that is persecuting you in some way. I'm not your bogey man.

I have never said that atheism is anything like religion, and if you wish to continue to deny that their are tribal elements among groups that share similar identities, including atheists, that is your right, but it doesn't mean it is true.

Lastly, I know and have previously said to you that most people do not subscribe to these particular tribes, but you continue to want to hear that I am trying to apply this to all. That is your issue, not mine. I am, in fact, a very reasoned person.

[NaturalHigh]

41. I'll be glad when the day comes...

that atheists don't bother to try to convince me that my beliefs are wrong. They are welcome to what they believe as far as I'm concerned. I believe that people of faith deserve the same courtesy.

[cbayer]

44. Wouldn't it be lovely if everyone treated each other as they would like to be treated.

[NaturalHigh]

45. It would make life a lot more pleasant for everyone at least.

[Fumesucker]

57. Be the change you wish to see

Luke 6:42

[cbayer]

61. You too~ Together we can do it.

[bvf]

56. Good.

To the extent that any two atheists' views correspond on anything, you can be sure that someone will find evidence of tribalism.

Makes for a convenient distraction, doesn't it?

[Prophet 451]

72. The tribalism exists

Some atheists (note the word "some&quot have a form of hero-worship toward the "New Atheists" (Hitchens, Dawkins, etc) and are most offended when they're insulted. Atheism isn't a religion but some atheists certainly proselytize their opinions with equal zeal and talk to and about theists in much the same terms as Pat Robertson talks about atheists. A few months ago, I started a thread here on whether churches should be taxed. Most atheists wanted them taxed while believers were more split. Fine, I expected that. And then there was one vocal atheist who proclaimed that churches should be illegal and pushed "The God Delusion" in the same "we can save you" tones as Jehovah's Witnesses push the "Watchtower".

Atheists outnumber any faction of believers on DU, based on a survey I ran a while ago. And some of the atheists here aggressively proselytize their opinions and seem to view insulting the "New Atheist" figureheads (for lack of a better term) as though you'd insulted their high priest.

Are there a lot of them? Probably not. But they're out there, don't kid yourself. And really, we should expect that. If atheism is seen as one more faith position, which it is (i.e. a position on faith, not a faith in itself), then we should expect some atheists to be assholes, just as some Christians are assholes, some Jews are assholes, etc.

That said, I live in a country where atheism is no big deal (our deputy PM, similar to a VP, is openly an atheist), faith is overwhelmingly seen as a private matter and we see streetcorner evangelists as rather weird.

[cbayer]

76. One article posted here recently described a subgroup

of "atheists with specific beliefs" and I found that useful. The belief that churches should be illegal or that all believers are delusional are examples of such beliefs. Interestingly, these are beliefs that have no basis in fact, which would really qualify them as based on faith.

I think this is a very small but very vocal group. Tribal? They are the definition of tribal, with strict rules for who is "us" and who is "them". Toeing the line is mandatory and there is a clear pecking order.

Another interesting thing is that some are from your country, so the degree to which atheism is not big deal does not seem to be a factor, at least here.

[trotsky]

80. Calling bullshit here.

Can you identify any atheists that engage in "hero worship" of the so-called "New Atheists"? Links, quotes, anything like that would be nice. Otherwise it sounds like a smear that you've concocted.

What I have seen are reactions when someone posts a tweet by Dawkins and says, "Atheists have a sexism problem" - what's being reacted to is not the criticism of Dawkins but the broadbrushing of all atheists.

[randys1]

81. There is no grouop think, tribalism, religion or otherwise with people who dont believe

something, anything.

It is projected as such by people who are guilty of these things and incapable of defending a belief in something so ridiculous.

When I was a believer it never occurred to me to ridicule or make ridiculous shit up about non believers to justify my belief.

Besides, I didnt have to, regardless of which church or group I belonged to there we plenty of folks already doing that, they didnt need my help.

[Prophet 451]

85. Rubbish

Tribalism is inherent to humanity. Social Identity Theory established by Tajfel, proved that. Humans will instinctively discriminate in favour of their ingroup (people they are like or aspire to be) and against their outgroup. That's automatic and been shown to operate even in small children and even when assignment to groups are explicitly random. When you call it "projection" (and I wish non-psychologists would stop using that term, it doesn't mean what you think it does), you are claiming that atheists are so uniquely superior that the established rules of human psychology don't apply to them.

[randys1]

86. Nonsense, total and complete stinking high pile of absolute nonsense.

Is there tribalism in people who dont believe in leprechauns?

Flying monkeys?

Elephants who can fly and have wings and first class seating sections?


These are all equally believable as belief in a god, do you know any groups about this?

The only reason atheists have a name is so religious people can attack those who dont believe their fairy tales

[Prophet 451]

87. So your only recourse is flat denialism

If those people form themselves into groups, there is tribalism, yes. It is an inherent part of human psychology. If atheists didn't have any tribalism, then they would be immune to a very basic rule of human psychology. Now, you clearly believe atheists are superior but they're still subject to the same rules of human psychology as believers are.

The only reason atheists have a name is so religious people can attack those who dont believe their fairy tales

And that's just a flat lie. You're a liar. And I don't bother debating with liars. Bye now.

[randys1]

88. Calling a DU Member a liar with zero back up, hmmmm

The term 'atheist' was an insult

http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Etymology_of_the_word_atheist

You see, the word atheist is used by believers to categorize and insult those who dont believe.

Call me a liar, fuck that

[Prophet 451]

82. Nope, can't provide links

They've dropped off my recent activity list and I didn't think to bookmark them. You can see it as a smear if you like but a minute's thought should suggest that, as it is a human tendancy to look up to and defend those we aspire to be like, some atheists would defend Dawkins (for example), just as theists would defend, say, Rev Sharpton.

[trotsky]

83. Ah OK, just a completely unsupported accusation.

Thanks for letting me know.

[Prophet 451]

84. You're very welcome n/t