Atheist takeover...

[logician]

Throoughout history, and sill today, atheism is the belief that has had to hide. It's a political death warrant for politicians in the U.S. to claim to be atheist, it's more of a stigma than being gay.

 

[waitasec]

Throoughout history, and sill today, atheism is the belief that has had to hide. It's a political death warrant for politicians in the U.S. to claim to be atheist, it's more of a stigma than being gay.

which is why the entire premise of this thread is, for lack of a better word,
horse pucky.

 

[LuisDantas]

I certainly have a hard time conceiving of it. "Takeover" is, frankly, a ludicrous word for acceptance of Atheism.

 

[Revoltingest]

So little imagination.
Eventually, the worm turns.

 

[Meister Felix]

For theists: Do you relinquish your beliefs in such a way where you never, ever talk about it, except with most trusted comrades? Or perhaps not at all? Do you restrict yourself from any sort of congregations, rituals, acts (like prayer, meditation, etc.)? Or do you possibly go out in blaze of glory sticking strongly / proudly to your faith, and say openly practice until 'they' come to take you away?

The possibility of what you speak of is possible as all things are possible in the political world. We are undergoing a very intense period of secularization. If necessary and if I am wanted to do so, I would assume the characteristics of others to conceal who I really am. My faith is important to me and if I had to, I would practice it secretively and plan for everything to get worse.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

This conversation reminds me of "The Golden Compass".

Funny thing, it was the Roman Catholic Church ("spiritual" authority)
who got all up in arms about the movie,
and pretty much put an end to it's sequals.

I think that if they hadn't called the bad guys "the Magisterium", the Catholic Church wouldn't have taken much notice.

But at least the kids still have the Narnia movies... the ones where Santa Claus gives weapons to children for Christmas.

 

[Acim]

I subscribe to the view that everyone, as long as they don't hurt anyone else, should have the right to worship or not worship as they please.
That of course includes an atheist's right to not worship or believe in a deity.

Yay! Another thing I agree with.

I actually think the problem (for society) comes from those with conviction(s) that seem to say, "I won't budge from this position. This is who I am." Now for the atheist, this is "vast majority" and has been historically the case. For (at least some) theists, atheism seems to be in this boat, along with, how you say fundamentalist.

Someone like me, a theist, likes that we have places where worship (of a certain kind) is done and that it stays there. Get me in that arena, with permission to openly debate, and things may be not so pretty. No hurting going on, but perhaps a raised voice or two. But same goes for if I were put into "atheist forum" and permission to openly debate.

As long as that (fundamentalist) stuff, on either side, stays there, I think society will be fine.

Where I see whole other issue that exacerbates the underlying problem, is we have desire to teach, at least some of this stuff, to our offspring. And that is just too much to discuss in any single post, especially one that is off topic from OP. I will just say that I think it goes both ways, with overwhelming emphasis on the theist side of the equation.

 

[Acim]

Throoughout history, and sill today, atheism is the belief that has had to hide. It's a political death warrant for politicians in the U.S. to claim to be atheist, it's more of a stigma than being gay.

For most part I don't agree with this. I do agree that if running for political position in U.S. at national level, atheism wouldn't fly to well with majority of constituents. Then again, we might soon find out how well Mormonism will fly as it seems like bias isn't just 'religion' or not, but more like, 'this brand of religion' or not.

I just don't see atheism as 'having to hide' anymore, and feel that tide turned long ago. Like early 20th century if not earlier than that.

What I see atheists doing more of in say past decade is congregating in such a way that seems to be in vein of mass rebellion. Not that this is in the tens of millions or anything, but in neighborhood of a few thousand to hundred thousand seems about right, and a figure that isn't getting smaller. I think there are many atheists, reading this post, who don't feel that charge to 'convince everyone that atheism is way to go,' but clearly some do. And IMHO, it is former theists who still have that evangelical hangover going on. An incessant need to make everyone agree with their worldview, or forever be damned.

Which is incidentally on topic for this thread, but as I stated earlier, there is no way that will come about. I think logically it would be near impossible, but then again we as a human society have had massive movements that were very illogical in scope. Another reason I just can't see it happening is because I have faith in reasonable atheist types who would pretty much absolutely refuse to go along with paradigm that we have to convince every last one of 'them' to stop believing.

I don't see that occurring much currently, but then again, I don't make it a point to be in the places that mass groups of atheists congregate.

 

[logician]

"I just don't see atheism as 'having to hide' anymore, and feel that tide turned long ago. Like early 20th century if not earlier than that.
"

You don't have to hide, but many people don't accept the atheism well, making it preferable in many cases to keeping silent about their beliefs.

 

[crocusj]

Not quite to do with a take over but...I've never actually considered what I would do if proof positive of no god arrived. As an atheist, I can't see how it affects me. At all. Apart from no longer being an atheist, that is. Any moves to outlaw those whose faith remains would likely be the work of a totalitarian regime not an atheist one since there could be no atheists by definition. That is not to say a regime of reactionary former atheists could not arise (I think it could) but they would merely be replacing one belief with another. Power corrupts.

 

[St Giordano Bruno]

Throoughout history, and sill today, atheism is the belief that has had to hide. It's a political death warrant for politicians in the U.S. to claim to be atheist, it's more of a stigma than being gay.

The great Lisbon earthquake enlightenment in the aftermath of a catastrophic earthquake in Lisbon on the 1st Nov 1755 made atheism in Europe far more appealing and acceptable and as a resulted in many atheists such as Baron d'Holbach to come out of hiding. Prior to the earthquake atheism was regarded as dangerous accusation that required one's defence. But after the earthquake is was far easier to defend yourself in disbelieving in an entity which at the time of the earthquake was so conspicuous by his absence. The Lisbon Earthquake was a pivotal point in the rise of modern day atheism.

 

[waitasec]

For most part I don't agree with this. I do agree that if running for political position in U.S. at national level, atheism wouldn't fly to well with majority of constituents. Then again, we might soon find out how well Mormonism will fly as it seems like bias isn't just 'religion' or not, but more like, 'this brand of religion' or not.

I just don't see atheism as 'having to hide' anymore, and feel that tide turned long ago. Like early 20th century if not earlier than that.

What I see atheists doing more of in say past decade is congregating in such a way that seems to be in vein of mass rebellion. Not that this is in the tens of millions or anything, but in neighborhood of a few thousand to hundred thousand seems about right, and a figure that isn't getting smaller. I think there are many atheists, reading this post, who don't feel that charge to 'convince everyone that atheism is way to go,' but clearly some do. And IMHO, it is former theists who still have that evangelical hangover going on. An incessant need to make everyone agree with their worldview, or forever be damned.

Which is incidentally on topic for this thread, but as I stated earlier, there is no way that will come about. I think logically it would be near impossible, but then again we as a human society have had massive movements that were very illogical in scope. Another reason I just can't see it happening is because I have faith in reasonable atheist types who would pretty much absolutely refuse to go along with paradigm that we have to convince every last one of 'them' to stop believing.

I don't see that occurring much currently, but then again, I don't make it a point to be in the places that mass groups of atheists congregate.

i think you have a problem with atheism...and you are not the only one.
Atheist billboard sparks controversy in OC | abc7.com

which is a part of the reason why i started this thread
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/religious-debates/118243-theists-if-i-proclaim-atheist.html

 

[darkendless]

i think you have a problem with atheism...and you are not the only one.
Atheist billboard sparks controversy in OC | abc7.com

which is a part of the reason why i started this thread
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/religious-debates/118243-theists-if-i-proclaim-atheist.html

Its pathetic that theists (well their groups) are so insecure over such an advertisement. Their billboards are often far more direct.

 

[waitasec]

Its pathetic that theists (well their groups) are so insecure over such an advertisement. Their billboards are often far more direct.

how is atheism received where you live?

 

[darkendless]

how is atheism received where you live?

Like anywhere else, not trusted because christianity has a stranglehold on everything.