8 atheist leaders actually worth listening to

[cbayer]

http://www.salon.com/2015/06/18/8_atheist_leaders_actually_worth_listening_to_partner/

THURSDAY, JUN 18, 2015 06:57 PM EDT

Forget Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins. The new atheists don't have the final word on godlessness

GRETA CHRISTINA, ALTERNET


Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins (Credit: Simon & Schuster/Ray Garcia/Reuters/Chris Keane)

If you’ve read anything about the blossoming atheist movement, there’s a good chance it was about Richard Dawkins or Sam Harris. And if you’re a reasonably progressive person who cares about sexism and racism, and you’ve read about Dawkins or Harris, there’s an excellent chance that the top of your head came off.

There’s this pattern with media coverage of organized atheism. When a media outlet decides that atheism is interesting and important, they all too often turn to Dawkins or Harris. Then, when Dawkins or Harris puts his foot in his mouth — again — the reporter cries out, “Atheism needs better leadership! Why doesn’t atheism have better leaders?”

Atheism does have better leaders. Plenty of them. Organized atheism has hundreds of leaders, arguably thousands — leaders of support organizations, charitable organizations, advocacy groups, online communities, local groups, and more. I’d like to introduce you to eight of them. (Transparency note: All the people on this list are colleagues, and some are friends.)

1. Rebecca Hensler. In 2011, Hensler founded Grief Beyond Belief, a support organization for people who are grieving without belief in an afterlife or a higher power. They provide online and face-to-face opportunities for people to share compassion, advice, and resources without the intrusion of religion or spiritualism. Since 2011, they have expanded to a confidential Facebook-based support group with over 1,800 members and seven other volunteer administrators; a website with a library of over 300 links to faith-free grief writing, podcasts and videos; and secular grief-support workshops at free-thought events around the US. Right now, they’re working on bringing secular grief support workshops to as many communities as possible.

more at link

[Warren Stupidity]

1. doesn't matter bashed dawkins

[Fumesucker]

2. Aphilatelism needs better leaders too

As a hobby not collecting stamps gets disrespected and walked all over even though the numbers of aphilatelists are a huge majority.

As an ordinary everyday aphilatelist I demand to know when the leaders of aphilatelism are going to stand up and put their stamp on the movement!

[cbayer]

4. There is an atheist movement.

You may not be a part of it but it's not like not collecting stamps. We have groups here on DU dedicated to just that. There are growing organizations and societies.

There are websites and blogs and discussion sites just for atheists. There are symbols that people wear or use as avatars. There are sections in bookstores. There are Sunday Assemblies.

The not collecting stamps analogy falls completely flat in this regard.

[trotsky]

5. There are also one billion (with a "B") Catholics.

Who have churches, outreaches, activities, and real political power.

They're led by a man who thinks "gender theory" is akin to Nazism, and that the idea of giving homosexuals the same rights as everyone else is "from the devil."

But you brush that aside. You don't give a crap. You instead focus on a couple of vocal atheists whom nobody names as their "leader," who run no official atheist organization, nothing.

This is just absurd. Your posts and constant chiding of others are what falls flat, cbayer.

[Fumesucker]

6. Sleeping in on a Sunday morning is a human right

And neither you nor the rest of the apagnostic jihad will deflect me one nanometer from defending that right.

[cbayer]

7. If it weren't for my favorite radio program all week, I would also sleep in on Sunday mornings.

I stand with you, comrade.

:salute:

[trotsky]

3. Geez, you're slipping, cbayer.

An article bashing Dawkins AND Harris and you posted it here 24 hours after it came out? Tsk, tsk.

[struggle4progress]

8. The gap between what people think/say they do, and what they actually do, is often rather large.

This observation is valid in many contexts, of course: hypocrisy and self-delusion are among the most enduring of human behaviors

As an example, we might consider the Center for Inquiry, whose campus outreach director Debbie Goddard is featured in the article linked by the OP. CFI says its mission is to foster "a secular society based on science, reason, freedom of inquiry, and humanist values"

I expect almost everyone here supports humanism, reason, science, free inquiry, and secularism -- though it might be worth pointing out once again that any such list of abstract principles will be self-contradictory, so that some judgments are needed in practice: thus "reason" does not necessarily yield "science," and some "free inquiry" is incompatible with "humanism." If (say) one is willing to compromise on "humanism," then Nazi experiments on Soviet POWs in decompression chambers are a form of "science" that might yield information useful in understanding risks to high altitude pilots; and the infamous Tuskegee syphilis experiment might be "justified" on grounds of "free inquiry" as providing medical data on the effects of a horrid disease

So one wants to know how Debbie Goddard and CFI foster the values they say they foster. Well, for example, they promote Blasphemy Day:


This might demonstrate our free speech rights. And perhaps some people have fun with it: "trade your soul for a cookie" may deserve a chuckle. Still, I can't see how "trade your soul for a cookie" supports humanism, reason, science, free inquiry, or secularism, at least according to my understanding of any of those notions

[cbayer]

9. I tend to see these are juvenile, but rather harmless, rites of passage.

They are ways of making people feel included, welcome, part of the club.

The people featured in this article are not perfect, but they are fresh voices in many ways.

[struggle4progress]

10. Of course, it's both harmless and juvenile. OTOH, it seems CFI spends staff resources promoting

and publicizing such matters, which suggests their notions of humanism, reason, science, free inquiry, and secularism differ from mine

[Yorktown]

11. Salon seems to be specialized in publishing bad articles

Can't remember reading a good article from Salon.

The first paragraph of this article is especially revolting:

If you’ve read anything about the blossoming atheist movement, there’s a good chance it was about Richard Dawkins or Sam Harris. And if you’re a reasonably progressive person who cares about sexism and racism, and you’ve read about Dawkins or Harris, there’s an excellent chance that the top of your head came off.

It tries to bundle sell in an introductory sentence the notion that Harris and Dawkins are racist, sexist pigs.

Such a crude and dumb tactic.

The rest of the article is a lady trying to showcase herself as a person of repute in atheist circles.

Hamhanded salesmanship.