General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I am not religious. Can you please categorize Atheism into a "race"? [View all]MADem
(135,425 posts)They are a secular church, they call their gatherings a congregation, and the people who attend are congregants. That's a religion to me, and it is to plenty of other people, too. Many of whom ATTEND the SA meetings. So sorry, "that's it"--to quote you.
It is a shame you are having a tough time processing this. You seem to think that the Sunday Assembly has a lot of authoritarian "rules" about what they're allowed to think of themselves. You're wrong about that, you see. They've got "freethinkers" among their number, along with skeptics, agnostics, seekers, etc. They "allow" a wide range of thought. They aren't narrow, they aren't close-minded, and their goal is to do good, enjoy life, and experience wonder. Seems like a plan to me!
This was written over two years ago...and here they are surviving, and THRIVING...300 and counting...
http://www.salon.com/2013/09/22/atheism_starts_its_megachurch_is_it_a_religion_now/
Atheism starts its megachurch: Is it a religion now?
....There is a growing openness to viewing religion/irreligion as a spectrum, rather than a dichotomyand to institutionalizing faithlessness. Look at Harvard Universitys wildly successful Humanist Community. Or Floridas first public monument to atheism. Or efforts to hire secular army chaplains.
Ronald Dworkins forthcoming (and posthumous) Religion Without God promises to be an erudite commentary on this trend. The familiar divide between people of religion and without religion is too crude, Dworkin wrote in an excerpt published in The New York Review of Books. Dworkin argues for a more religious irreligiosity, a religious atheism. To this end, he quotes Albert Einstein, a noted atheist:
To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their most primitive formsthis knowledge, this feeling, is at the center of true religiousness. In this sense, and in this sense only, I belong in the ranks of devoutly religious men.
********....There are lots of fun ways to play this out. Imagine that Sunday Assembly Everywhere does take of with rip-roaring success. Will London become secularisms answer to Vatican City? ....Either way, Sanderson Jones is confident that the model will spread. We have the most natural human urge to do this, he insists: to organize ourselves around institutions of meaning. I am inclined to agree that Live Better, Help Often, and Wonder More is a lovely motto to build around.
And as for detractors? I dont expect much objection from religious communities. They are happy for us to use their church model, Jones muses. I think its more aggressive atheists who will have an issue with it.
He wasn't wrong about that, was he? The anger and personal insult directed at me for bringing this topic to the fore in this thread proves the founder of this church 100 percent right on that score! So, who ya gonna believe, so long as you insist upon "sources" to tell you what to think? Wikipedia and the Oxford English Dictionary, or Dworkin and Einstein?
Still more on that general topic, here: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/20/ronald-dworkins-religious-atheism/?_r=0
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2013/apr/04/religion-without-god/?pagination=false