Living without religion

[cleanhippie]

Earlier this year, the Center for Inquiry, an Amherst, N.Y.-based atheist group, initiated a controversial and provocative ad campaign in a number of U.S. cities. The campaign, called “Living without Religion,” questioned not the existence of the christian deity, but the relevance. The group’s president states the obvious, that millions of Americans live rich, loving, hopeful lives without participation in any religion.

The ad featured signs that say: “You don’t need God - to hope, to care, to love, to live.”

--snip--

The message is positive and attacks no one’s beliefs, nor does it call for any action. It merely points out that many Americans -- somewhere north of 50 million-- are unaffiliated with any religion and do not require the strictures or the scriptures of the old mainline congregations to live good lives.

--snip--

The bus ads, billboards, banners, and displays are the tip of a very large iceberg. The larger story is that there is a secular base in this country that is finding its voice, its numbers, and its strength and is ready to be visible and vocal in its opposition to increasingly strident and politically connected religious extremism.

Yes, the atheists are coming. Actually, we are already here, but millions are being lured out of complacency and closets by what we perceive as wrong-headed assaults on science, education, reason, on civil rights, on individual liberty and self determination, on women in general, and on our secular Constitution. We are taking our message public.

Certainly this has caused fear and loathing and gnashing of teeth in some quarters. But the atheist community is no longer content to respond to outrage with silence. The religious extreme uses every tool at their disposal: billboard, buses, Internet, TV and radio, print, public relations expertise and tons of cash. We have learned from them.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/guest-voices/post/living-without-religion/2011/09/22/gIQA5XxCoK_blog.html

[FiveGoodMen]

1. "The message is positive and attacks no one’s beliefs"

I'm a pretty militant atheist so I'm not defending religion or religious people's sensitivities here at all, but ...

Most christians are taught that they were born as worthless sinners and that they are nothing without god.

They have it hammered into their heads that "All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags...(Isaiah 64:6)"

So saying that “You don’t need God - to hope, to care, to love, to live” directly contradicts one of the foundations of their faith.

Don't get me wrong, I approve of the ad's message and would like to see it quoted far and wide.

But we might as well know what we're up against, and saying that we are decent people on our own will be viewed as an attack against their beliefs.

[cleanhippie]

2. Just what, exactly, makes you "miltant"?

I mean, what is your definition of "militant" that you apply it to your non-belief?

[FiveGoodMen]

3. I say that only because I'm quite willing to argue my point at the drop of a hat

and part of my argument centers on the basic implausibility of the christian narrative (god justly tortures everyone forever based on one initial mistake, but then got himself tortured to death to make up for it, but then only shows mercy to those who believe the story after all evidence of it has been scrubbed(!))

I don't walk up to people and start that argument, but if the subject comes up I won't shy away from it.

I also think that large groups of people who believe they know the One Truth(TM) are very dangerous, and I never pass up an opportunity to say so.

The reason I called myself militant is that I'd rather own that than be accused of it.

[cleanhippie]

4. I can appreciate that.

But considering just HOW that term, "militant" is used by believers, even here on DU, as some sort of demonizing term, when it is a far from reality as one can get, well... you know the drill.


Thanks for your answer.

[Deep13]

6. That's how it is when comparing religions.

If someone is proclaiming Evangelical Christianity, he might not mention any other religion, but Catholics and Muslims and others may see it as a criticism of their beliefs. The logical implication of proclaiming that one needs salvation and that a personal relationship with JC is the only way to get it is that the Koran, the Pope, the Talmud, Buddha's path to enlightenment are all wrong. Saying one needs no god logically implies that every religion which claims one needs its gods is wrong. The common mantra of ecumenists and liberals that all beliefs are equally valid is nonsense.

[Pacifist Patriot]

7. Which is precisely why I agree with someone on another thread

who asked a perfectly valid question.

Neither the proclamation "Jesus is Lord" nor the statement "There is no God" is inherently more offensive than the other. But both clearly have the potential to offend since they assert positions that cannot be held without negating the other.

[cleanhippie]

8. Believers say its their "right" to say Jesus is Lord, but offensive bigotry to say There Is No God.

Must be some kind of double standard.

[Pacifist Patriot]

9. I'd say it's the massive kind.

[NMMNG]

5. It doesn't matter how tame the message

The religious will take offense, and demand it be taken down, vandalize it, or worse. They have millions of signs, billboards and other venues with religious messages. But every time a non-religious message goes up they go insane. It seems their gods and their beliefs are terribly fragile.

[cleanhippie]

10. Kick