http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/atheists-and-humani...

this is fairly significant folks.  as a constituency we are being ignored. most of us want some pretty basic things but politicians don't cater to us.  by some accounts non-believers carried the day for Obama this past November.  

what would most of us want?  here are my most basic requests:

1.  federal ban on creationism

2.  prayer and religious ornaments banned from public grounds

3.  legal abortion (i know it's legal, but it needs to be way more legal in some states)

4.  legal weed (i know it's not universal but i have a feeling it's close)

5.  end of abstinence only sex ed

6.  pentacostals all put in loony bins

ok, i can compromise on #6.  

feel free to add what i missed.  

Views: 1408

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Of course teaching ABOUT Creationism is different than teaching it. ;)

Good point. Change the first point to "Ban teaching creationism in public schools" and I back it 100%

Chad, i do think abortion is an Atheist issue.  i don't want to get into a big skuttlebut about it but the devout and non-believers are nearly polar opposites on the views on abortion.  i know it's not universal but it's pretty close. 

as for weed, well it's not technically an atheist issue.  but a lot of the opposition to legal weed is religiously motivated, i.e. doing drugs is a sin, and they're bad, mkay. 

Abortion IS an atheist issue in that, when you look at the motivations behind the anti-abortion movement, they are largely if not totally religious in nature.  They use a religious inference to define, quantify and value life as an absolute value, while not especially being able to justify any of their positions.

If one person is going to tell another person what they can do with their own body, they need a better reason than: "My holy book sez you can't do that."

Exactly right, Loren. If pointing out to one of them that the aborted fetus did not have life as we know it and live it, using also a pig fetus as a comparison, (a fetus is a fetus) there is ONE statement coming out of their mouths quickly:

"Well, a pig doesn't have a soul."

"Well, a pig doesn't have a soul."

EXACTLY.  it's the idea of a soul that drives these zealots. 

they are right to point out that life begins at conception.  that's obvious.  but what kind of life?  it's certainly not human life.  while it has the genetic potential to become a human it isn't at that stage.  but to give it a soul humanizes it. 

True, but it goes deeper than that. The idea of a soul is dualism. This belief most likely came from ancients who noticed and studied the "waking self and the sleeping self." As for the bible and a soul, it was simply stated that man became a living soul.

Going deeper than that involved modifying and changing the books to read in favor of things like "father, son, and holy ghost." Then we get "body, mind, and spirit." Everything is 3's and later 7's. Superstition grows and abounds.

The truth is, YOU are a living soul. This happened at your birth and it's all the same if you are a human, a cow, or a pig.

And they are quick enough to want to do a vaginal ultra sound on a woman who request an abortion. Talk about your screwed up religious/political agendas.

I suppose I can see your point on abortion, especially since almost all opposition to it is indeed faith based.
And on weed, while I agree it should be legal (heck, I live in Colorado and totes voted for it), I still think it would be a bit of a distraction for an Atheist PAC.

Chad, regarding weed - it may be a distraction, but public opinion is on the upswing.  why not get out in front of it as an issue?  atheism is already a counter-culture movement so in many ways it fits in. 

either way it's not a deal breaker for me. 

Already changed my mind on that, Loren. :) (isn't not being dogmatic great)

Weed--mmm... No... While I agree that public opinion is shifting and it hink it's only a matter of time, there are still enough people who oppose it on non-religious grounds that I think it might be a bit divisive to make it a major atheist issue. I'd rather have a big tent that doesn't push everything I support than a small tent that does.

i hear ya, but the very nature of an Atheist party pretty much assumes a pretty small tent.  don't you think?

RSS

© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service