Atheists should not be treated as one group, a few groups, or even group-able.

[Salton]

I see threads like The ol' Is Atheism a Religion debate revisited
and have to say:
Step back and look again.
Atheism is not a forest, but millions of separate trees.

We don't get together weekly to be told what we believe, so we naturally all believe different things:

Some care about if there was a big bang /shrinking /expanding /curved universe.
Some really don't care about describing creation, except to say that every religion is right to laugh at the others' creation myths.

Some believe in "spirit" separate from "body", but just not an afterlife.
Others deny anything is going on but chemistry and physics.

Some believe in odd things like telekenesis, but just not devine intervention.

Some think we can't tell life from a dream, and may "wake up" to be pod people like in Matrix.
Others think that's just more BS.

Some think others are entitled to their beliefs.
Some agree, excluding the right believe everyone should believe the same thing.
Some have never thought much about what other people should do, because other people have never been much interested in their beliefs.

Some think life "begins" when sperm meets egg.
Some think life is when breathing or brain waves or hearbeat start.
Some think life never stopped, but is a continuum, and the embryo has no more "rights" than the sperm before it, or any other cell being brushed aside.
Some think that's all irrelevant to what matters.

Some think religion is bad, others don't.
Some think churches are bad, others don't.
Some think churches in schools or politics or sporting events should....

Well, let's just say the lists go on and on.

There are no "received" canons or "pivotal writings". It's just plain open in every way.

So. Stop grouping atheists like sects.

[SuaSponte]

Yeah, but 1)the very distinctions you describe have (if we use religion as analogy or even fact)"adherents", so those distinctions could be considered "sects" of atheism. much like Protestantism.
2) The fact that there is no received canon of atheism does not make the "atheism as a religion" debate a waste of time. There are plenty of religions, with hundreds of millions of adherents, that have no received theology.

Another thing: I can understand starting a new thread out of another debate if a seperate issue came, but don't start a new thread because you don't think you are getting your point across in the debate. Your post should have been inside the "atheism as a religion" thread. If people ignore it, or don't agree, that's the nature of the beast.

Sua

[AM/PM]

Boy, this is really about time.
The similarities to "adherents" and "sects" are so stained as to be invisible.
It's like saying geologists belong to sects because some think the ice ages ended in twenty years and some say many hundred.

Trying to pretend people are connected because they fall into artificial groups is just stupid.

Am I somehow related to you because we:
a) both live in two story houses
b) both broke arms in childhood
c) both forgot to vote last year.
No? Then the same applies to attempting to group people who have never met, agreed to associate, or agree to common labels, which sects seem to do. Also, there are undoubtedly people in religions who shouldn't be grouped, because they just come along to please their relatives.

[wevets]

Don't atheists all have something in common? They have, for one reason or another, decided that there is (are) no God(s) or Godess(es).

So long as you realize that the defining characteristic of the group does not define the specific characteristic of each member of the group (i.e. you don't stereotype atheists just because they're atheists), what's the problem with realizing that they have all come to the same conclusion on an issue?

Sometimes, categorizing things can be useful... it's one of the first things we do to organize the world around us into something we understand (or at least try to).

[Smart Bob]

Here's what I put on the thread "Would you date someone who is religious? "

Yes, I did.

I'm an atheist, but lived with a churchy girl for a few years.

We just ignored that part of each other.

You have to ignore something to make it work long anyway. When we broke up, that issue never appeared in the emotional exchanges, so it wasn't a surpressed problem.

Since I don't know for sure, and don't ask, tell, or care, if anyone else I know is atheist, I too resent being grouped.

If the churchy want to say everyone has a "religion", even atheists, they are just wrong. Atheism is as far as you can get from that. To say it's the same is to say you can't see distincitions. You can, and you do. The distinctions exist.

[JDeMobray]

If the churchy want to say everyone has a "religion", even atheists, they are just wrong. Atheism is as far as you can get from that. To say it's the same is to say you can't see distincitions. You can, and you do. The distinctions exist.

. . . For instance, some atheists, even those who visit this very board, have chosen to stay completely out of the atheism as a religion debate. Because to assume that atheism is a religion shows a faulty understanding of either "athiesm" or "religion", that I for one don't really have any personal stake in correcting.

[dal_timgar]

since atheists BELIEVE what they can't provide any evidence for they are either and UN-religion or an ANTI-religion depending on the intensity of their reaction to christianity. haven't met an atheist yet that was anti-buddhist. LOL!

we need more APATHEISTS, they don't know and don't give a damn.

Dal Timgar

[Gilligan]

"APATHEISTS"
I like that; sounds like me.

[Derleth]

Dal, only those with axes to grind are 'against' any religious group. That goes for everyone. I may be violently opposed to some actions of groups that call themselves Christian, but I'm not against the group as a whole. I haven't met all of them yet. I'm opposed to actions, not philosophies.

[Liberal]

Atheists should not be treated as one group, a few groups, or even group-able.

What a delightfully paradoxical assertion!

[ren]

Step back and look again.
Atheism is not a forest, but millions of separate trees.

By the very same logic:

Step back and look again.
Humanity itself is not a forest, but billions of seperate trees.

[Satan]

I was thinking the same thing, ren.

While it must be nice to think that "all" Christians (or followers of whatever religion you wish to put here) are alike, it is erroneous.

And just so that you know, to be totally impartial about it, I see a lot more people luump in every Christian with the crazed fundie variety than I do see a stereotype of a Godless heathen - unless I am looking at a Chick Tract - and they condemn Catholics!

In other words... Re: The OP - Duh.
__________________
Yer pal,
Satan

TIME ELAPSED SINCE I QUIT SMOKING:
Two months, three weeks, six days, 1 hour, 44 minutes and 57 seconds.
3522 cigarettes not smoked, saving $440.36.
Life saved: 1 week, 5 days, 5 hours, 30 minutes.

[nashiitashii]

Nobody should be pigeonholed. We all think differently about issues, and none of us have completely the same mentality. The only people I'm against are those who try to opress others. But that includes a great many dominant religions if their history is studied. Whatever. I'm an agnostic, and I think the only thing I have in common with the rest of the agnostics in the world is my belief that it's possible for there to be a god[dess], and for there not to be a god[dess].

[NiceGuyJack]

Atheists unite! It's time to organize our beliefs!

Yes I'm being sarcastic.

The answer is so painfully obvious.

[Czarcasm]

Just look at all the different "religions" we would have to start! We would need one that doesn't believe in the New Testament god, one for the Old Testament god, one for Odin, one for Zeus, one for Jupiter, one for Buddha, one for...wait a minute?!?
Everybody's an atheist!
We all disbelieve in some sort of mystical diety, don't we? The ones who call themselves "atheists" just took it one tiny step farther than the rest of the yahoos.

[Liberal]

Atheists unite! It's time to organize our beliefs!

Oops! Too late!

At The American Atheists, you'll find such gems as:

Atheists are united in diversity.

The indestructible foundation of the whole edifice of Atheism is its philosophy, materialism, or naturalism, as it is also known.

An Atheist loves himself and his fellow man instead of a god. An Atheist accepts that heaven is something for which we should work now -- here on earth -- for all men together to enjoy. An Atheist accepts that he can get no help through prayer, but that he must find in himself the inner conviction and strength to meet life, to grapple with it, to subdue it and to enjoy it. An Atheist accepts that only in a knowledge of himself and a knowledge of his fellow man can he find the understanding that will help to a life of fulfillment.

Then, of course, there's Atheists for Jesus

[NiceGuyJack]

Originally posted by Libertarian


Oops! Too late!

At The American Atheists, !

Baaaaaaahhh! I know, I know. It seems it is human nature to be sheep. Atheists are, as you have pointed out, no exception.

Excuse me, I have to go start the Atheist Organization Against Organized Atheists. AOAOA.

[pldennison]

I was, at one time, a member of American Atheists, primarily because I believe in supporting, financially, organizations that exist to advance goals in which I believe. (Via legal means, of course.) A couple years ago I decided not to re-up, because I found them to be as strident, abusive, as prone to using junk science and lacking in fact-checking as any religious organization. And I told them that when I decided not to renew.

[Liberal]

Phil

Do you think you could help out over in GQ?

Whatever Happened To Madalyn Murray O'Hair?

[Necros]

Some goofy organization said:

An Atheist loves himself and his fellow man instead of a god. An Atheist accepts that heaven is something for which we should work now -- here on earth -- for all men together to enjoy. An Atheist accepts that he can get no help through prayer, but that he must find in himself the inner conviction and strength to meet life, to grapple with it, to subdue it and to enjoy it. An Atheist accepts that only in a knowledge of himself and a knowledge of his fellow man can he find the understanding that will help to a life of fulfillment.

So, if I don't agree with this, does that mean I'm a splinter group of the atheists? Geez. I thought I was getting away from all that. But I guess, as in NTG's sig line, I don't conform to the prevailing standards of nonconformity. Oh well. Maybe I'll join the AOAOA. But I probably don't agree with them, either.

And Salton, how do you know atheists don't get together to decide on what to believe? Maybe we're just not invited.

[Spiritus Mundi]

I got an invitation.

But I didn't believe it.

[Gaudere]

I don't believe you got an invitation.

[Gilligan]

Can you prove that you don't believe it?

[Gaudere]

It's impossible to prove absolutely that a person believes or disbelieves anything, but unless there is compelling evidence to the contrary most people accept a person's word about their beliefs. I am sure Spiritus believes sincerely that he got an invitation, but his subjective testimony on this subject is not reason enough for me to believe in his invitation.

[Satan]

I don't believe in invitations.
__________________
Yer pal,
Satan

I HAVE BEEN SMOKE-FREE FOR:
Two months, four weeks, 19 hours, 33 minutes and 7 seconds.
3592 cigarettes not smoked, saving $449.07.
Life saved: 1 week, 5 days, 11 hours, 20 minutes.

[Polycarp]

"Atheists disbelieve through an inner conviction implanted by the absence of God speaking in their hearts."

[Gaudere]

I kid you not, I once ran across an atheist who claimed that God spoke to him and told him He didn't exist. Honest-to-god-true.

But I didn't believe him.

[Spiritus Mundi]

Spiritus believes sincerely that he got an invitation, but his subjective testimony on this subject is not reason enough for me to believe in his invitation.

I do not blame you for your skepticism. I, myself, was incredulous at first. It was only a few moments ago, while reading Necros' post, that I acheived my breakthough.

Necros, thank you, you have tought me that the invitation comes to all, but only when your heart is open can you receive it.

Gaudere, I know that you have received an invitation, too. You simply RSVP in your own way.