International atheists declare church/state principles

[Engyo]

International atheists declare church/state principles

The Humanist Contemplative | HoustonBelief.com

The Atheist Alliance International (AAI) is an organization founded in 1992, with about 50 member organizations from 15 nations. AAI held its conference this month in Copenhagen, Denmark. The conference was on Gods & Politics, looking at the issue of religion and government and challenges facing non-believers. It hosted a wide range of speakers, including Richard Dawkins, James Randi, Dan Barker, PZ Myers, and one of my favorites, author A.C. Grayling who wrote Meditations for the Humanist.
One result of the conference was the Copenhagen Declaration on Religion in Public Life. The declaration was as follows:

Copenhagen Declaration on Religion in Public Life



We, at the World Atheist Conference: “Gods and Politics”, held in Copenhagen from 18 to 20 June 2010, hereby declare as follows:

• We recognize the unlimited right to freedom of conscience, religion and belief[1], and that freedom to practice one’s religion should be limited only by the need to respect the rights of others.
• We submit that public policy should be informed by evidence and reason, not by dogma.[2]
• We assert the need for a society based on democracy, human rights and the rule of law.[3]
• History has shown that the most successful societies are the most secular.[4]
• We assert that the only equitable system of government in a democratic society is based on secularism: state neutrality in matters of religion or belief, favoring none and discriminating against none.[4]
• We assert that private conduct, which respects the rights of others should not be the subject of legal sanction or government concern.[5]
• We affirm the right of believers and non-believers alike to participate in public life and their right to equality of treatment in the democratic process.
• We affirm the right to freedom of expression for all, subject to limitations only as prescribed in international law – laws which all governments should respect and enforce[6]. We reject all blasphemy laws and restrictions on the right to criticize religion or nonreligious life stances.[7]
• We assert the principle of one law for all, with no special treatment for minority communities, and no jurisdiction for religious courts for the settlement of civil matters or family disputes.
• We reject all discrimination in employment (other than for religious leaders) and the provision of social services on the grounds of race, religion or belief, gender, class, caste or sexual orientation[8].
• We reject any special consideration for religion in politics and public life, and oppose charitable, tax-free status and state grants for the promotion of any religion as inimical to the interests of non-believers and those of other faiths. We oppose state funding for faith schools.
• We support the right to secular education, and assert the need for education in critical thinking and the distinction between faith and reason as a guide to knowledge, and in the diversity of religious beliefs[9]. We support the spirit of free inquiry and the teaching of science free from religious interference, and are opposed to indoctrination, religious or otherwise.

Adopted by the conference
Copenhagen, 20 June 2010.
[a PDF of the declaration can be downloaded here]

See this link for footnotes

 

[Caladan]

Personally I find it needless. my policy is 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it'. it does disappoint me a bit that atheists declare what seems to be a dogma, seems a bit self refuting.

 

[Phasmid]

Sigh... atheism is simply a lack of belief in diety. Why are people so bloody interested in turning it into something more than that? Why not start up the International Federation of A-unicornists?

 

[Engyo]

Sigh... atheism is simply a lack of belief in diety. Why are people so bloody interested in turning it into something more than that? Why not start up the International Federation of A-unicornists?

You never know - it might be a money-maker!

 

[Madhuri]

Sigh... atheism is simply a lack of belief in diety. Why are people so bloody interested in turning it into something more than that?

Because that is what society is making of it. Pressure---> identity acceptance----> new concept rules/meanings/culture.

 

[MissAlice]

That's why I stay on the safe side and call myself an agnostic. That way people won't put that silly stigma that people attach to atheism.

 

[Noaidi]

Why not start up the International Federation of A-unicornists?

When the Unicornists start imposing their restrictions on the rest of society, and when they start pushing for the introduction of Unicornism into science classes, then perhaps an A-unicornist Federation will be justified. Given that we have considerable theistic input into the workings of society and education, a federation of atheist response is justified (and welcomed).

Edit: if you read the list in the OP, it is only asking for basic freedoms to be exercised. I can't see anything that theists or atheists would find offensive.

 

[yourhopeboundheart]

That's why I stay on the safe side and call myself an agnostic. That way people won't put that silly stigma that people attach to atheism.

if the term atheist describes you, you are an atheist. you dont really choose to apply it. and misuse of a term shouldn't shy you away from using it. ignorance of definition is a slight against the ignorant, not you. but i definitely can see why social pressures of the stigma can make it more convenient just to use a different term.

Given that we have considerable theistic input into the workings of society and education, a federation of atheist response is justified (and welcomed).

welcomed by you.

Edit: if you read the list in the OP, it is only asking for basic freedoms to be exercised. I can't see anything that theists or atheists would find offensive.

the offense that's taken is simply in the misclassification, it's true that the word 'atheist' only describes someone who has a lack of belief in gods, but that word has been expanded to include too many extra features that make it incomplete as descriptive.
some people feel like they should not be included in a group simply because they share one component of belief.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Hmm. I agree with all the points of the declaration, and while I would've preferred it came from an organization devoted to secularism specifically (or, even better, some sort of alliance made up of theists and atheists alike) instead of atheism, I think things like this need to be said, so if nobody else is stepping up to do it, I'm glad AAI is willing.

 

[Phasmid]

Edit: if you read the list in the OP, it is only asking for basic freedoms to be exercised. I can't see anything that theists or atheists would find offensive.

That's my point... it's nothing to do with atheism. It's just a list of common bloody sense, why even attach the atheism label to it?

 

[Noaidi]

Phasmid.
Yes, I see your point here. As 9-10ths Penguin said, though, no secular organisations seem to be putting forward such a declaration, so it's good to see AAI doing it.

 

[Smoke]

Personally I find it needless. my policy is 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it'. it does disappoint me a bit that atheists declare what seems to be a dogma, seems a bit self refuting.

Sigh... atheism is simply a lack of belief in diety. Why are people so bloody interested in turning it into something more than that? Why not start up the International Federation of A-unicornists?

Which of the principles listed do you disagree with? Why?

They seem like sound principles to me. I agree with them, and furthermore I agreed with them when I was a Christian.

 

[Caladan]

Which of the principles listed do you disagree with? Why?

They seem like sound principles to me. I agree with them, and furthermore I agreed with them when I was a Christian.

I think that any action by atheists which imitates a religion, a dogma, a church, is pointless.
the best kind of atheism is individual free thinking without any signs of religious herd mentality or a congregation.
to me these people have simply posted a dogma, it is a religious behavior, sort of an admission that, yes we are all wired for such behavior after all. well I'm not

 

[sandandfoam]

I think that any action by atheists which imitates a religion, a dogma, a church, is pointless.
the best kind of atheism is individual free thinking without any signs of religious herd mentality or a congregation.
to me these people have simply posted a dogma, it is a religious behavior, sort of an admission that, yes we are all wired for such behavior after all. well I'm not

Hi Dan,
I recognize from your title that you're hard atheist. From your post here would I understand correctly if I were to say that you would consider those that organise under an atheist banner quasi-religious and as such 'soft' atheist?

 

[Caladan]

Hi Dan,
I recognize from your title that you're hard atheist. From your post here would I understand correctly if I were to say that you would consider those that organise under an atheist banner quasi-religious and as such 'soft' atheist?

I'm not going to pass judgment on their 'level' of disbelief as it were, I just think it can be best described as some kind of a collective freudian slip, if you catch my drift.

 

[sandandfoam]

I'm not going to pass judgment on their 'level' of disbelief as it were, I just think it can be best described as some kind of a collective freudian slip, if you catch my drift.

lol. I catch it. Thanks

 

[Smoke]

I think that any action by atheists which imitates a religion, a dogma, a church, is pointless.
the best kind of atheism is individual free thinking without any signs of religious herd mentality or a congregation.
to me these people have simply posted a dogma, it is a religious behavior, sort of an admission that, yes we are all wired for such behavior after all. well I'm not

So, if I understand you correctly, you don't object to what they say but to the fact that the group exists at all?

 

[Caladan]

So, if I understand you correctly, you don't object to what they say but to the fact that the group exists at all?

I dont really object to anything, but I find it disappointing that atheists behave as if they follow a religion. I feel very positive about a great deal of 'atheistic socializing', whether through networking, tv shows, movies, etc. but to take it to a different level and treat atheism as if it was an organized religion... I don't dig that.

 

[Magic Man]

I dont really object to anything, but I find it disappointing that atheists behave as if they follow a religion. I feel very positive about a great deal of 'atheistic socializing', whether through networking, tv shows, movies, etc. but to take it to a different level and treat atheism as if it was an organized religion... I don't dig that.

Could you explain how they're acting like a religion? Is a Dallas Cowboys fanclub acting like a religion?

Do you consider the U.S. Constitution to be dogma?

 

[Caladan]

Could you explain how they're acting like a religion? Is a Dallas Cowboys fanclub acting like a religion?

Do you consider the U.S. Constitution to be dogma?

Correct me if im wrong, but arent some of these points obvious to begin with, why does an organized group of atheists need to go out of their way to state some of these obvious points, arent these points at least officially implemented in our societies?
further more, yes I do believe fanclubs of sports team are acting on the most primitive religious instincts in many cases.

We recognize the unlimited right to freedom of conscience, religion and belief[1], and that freedom to practice one’s religion should be limited only by the need to respect the rights of others.

We assert the need for a society based on democracy, human rights and the rule of law.[3]

We affirm the right of believers and non-believers alike to participate in public life and their right to equality of treatment in the democratic process.