Why Atheists Gather: And It's Not "Churchy!"

I believe the sky is blue because of light wave refraction.

I believe that if I throw a ball in a field it will come to rest on the ground because of gravity.

I believe the sun is a large fission/fusion nuclear reactor.

These are not religious beliefs.

Religion is not merely a belief system. It is belief without evidence (cult) coupled with ritual and dogma (religion, worse than cult).

You need to read a dictionary.

Atheism, if it is a belief system at all, is a belief in evidence, hard scientific reproducible evidence. Atheism, if it is a belief system, is based on the belief that things without evidence are false until some shred of evidence is presented.

If this is a belief system in your mind, fine. Atheism is a belief in evidence as the source of real knowledge. Falls rather flat in my opinion. It sounds too much like sanity, common sense (which is far from common unfortunately), or reason.

Boring, no? Rational, but boring. Logical, but boring. Reasonable, but boring.

Want something interesting? How about fire breathing dragons. Many books exist about fire breathing dragons. It is a myth with a long tradition. There are stories of virgin sacrifice and knights in shining armor (crunchy on the outside, soft and chewy on the inside), large flying beasts that go back to their enormous caves to sit on huge piles of gold. This is interesting.

Is it more fantastic than religion? No.
Is it truth? No.
... but all those books ... No.

There are many things you say that absolutely true. I do, however, disagree with a few of them.
It is fair to say that anything you practice with devotion is religion. Unfortunately this is too broad of a definition for arguments' sake, because it defines almost all of your actions on earth, and in order to discuss religion you would have to further clarify what you are discussing, which is fine, but cumbersome.
belief: –noun
1. something believed; an opinion or conviction: a belief that the earth is flat.
2. confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof: a statement unworthy of belief.
3. confidence; faith; trust: a child's belief in his parents.

(sorry, accidently sent without finishing)
The above definition for belief is the one i use (differing from belief system). Disbelieving in a God is different from believing that none exist. Based on the evidence, it is unreasonable for me to be believe in a God. I can, though, like you said, believe that there is no God, but to not believe that a God exists does not require me to believe that no God exists.

Many of the things i say are preaching, yes. However, everything i say, i say with the knowledge that i could be wrong. I doubt any Catholic priest speaks with that same knowledge. When i am given evidence that i am wrong, i accept that evidence and will alter my view. Preachers do not do this. So, if we are all preachers then we are all preachers. I will just have to take the extra time to define the different types of preachers: Catholic preachers, athiest preachers, muslim preachers, etc. You see what i'm getting at? this is annoying. An even if you want to define someone speaking about athiesm to be preaching, at least they are not preaching bigotry, anti-femininism, anti-gay, anti-science, and so on and so on that halts the progression of the human species and the preservation of the earth. Science can save the earth. fact.

Moving on... Yes, i am my own God. So, guess who is telling me what to do... me. Guess who i am telling what to do... me. I don't think you can call that a religion. Religion of a population of one? I don't think so. You are grouping all athiests togethor and calling that a religion just because we gather sometimes and know similar things. Fine, call it what you will. There are distinct differences though with the majority of religions out there and our religion (i use the word religion only because you have chosen it. personally i know we are not a religion, but i do not feel like arguing that point). We are individually knowing something similar. That is different than all believing that same thing. We know these things because of evidence around us, not because someone is telling us to believe them. Again, we are not propogating bigotry, anti-femininism, anti-gay, anti-science, and so on.

I'm getting tired of this... Yes, your definition of church is just fine, however, your definition is not the same one used by the writer of the article. ok? And NOOOO, the majority of the people in the church are NOT worshiping their own interpretation of the way things seem to them. They are brainwashed and tricked since childhood and told to worship those things. Which would normally be fine, except for the propogation of bigotry, anti-femininism, anti-gay, anti-science, and so on.

Lastly, in response to your last paragraph. You speak as though athiests act with as much bigotry as thiests, which if you look at the evidence throughout history and even the present day, it is the thiests causing the most hate and murder on earth. Hate the belief, not the believer, is the way i feel. They are simply misguided, misinformed, and misinterpreting the natural world around them.

So many things wrong, so much to correct...

A very simple and general definition of religion is a “belief system” with which YOU practice devotedly.

Ahem - mainstream definition as follows:
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

Do you “believe” you are an atheist?

No, I "know" I'm an atheist. Look up the use of scare quotes.

(you cannot wriggle out of that w/out contradicting yourself)

That particularly stupid talking point's been refuted millions of times.

Also, as an atheist do you practice according to what you believe as an atheist?

Atheism is a lack of belief in the supernatural. So, yeah.

And again, do not say you do not believe anything… you just do not believe in a God of supernatural origin.

So...who said that where?

A belief system merely has a central “object” of that belief to which you build your system.

Atheism isn't a belief system.

YOU believe the object of this belief is true, because YOU believe this doesn’t make it so.

I might suggest you take your own advice.

That, by the way, goes both ways… for to believe in a God of supernatural origin, or to not believe in one does not exclude you from believeing anything.

You clearly flunked Philosophy 101. Clearly humans 'believe' in something. The self-awareness thing? (Something you clearly need to work on)

Nothing you “do” is without motive and that motive is based on what you believe.

Hey, if I gotta pee, it doesn't matter WHAT I 'believe'.

To “do” anything out of motive, which is out of the belief system, is to practice it… which is also voicing your opinion about it <—and that is what preaching is.

This is perhaps the lamest effort at a tu quoque I've ever seen. Having an opinion is preaching?

We could say brushing your teeth is a belief system with which you practice daily is to do so devotedly.

We could, but that would be stupid. Everyone 'believes' that not brushing them will result in bad teeth & a variety of illnesses, which, lo & behold! There's evidence to back that up!

Oxford's dictionary uses "football" as an example of religion.

I just looked that up, & it's not.

It is very naive to "believe" you can escape being religious just because you do not believe in a supernatural God.

From the Oxford dictionary:
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power , especially a personal God or gods:ideas about the relationship between science and religion
I would contest that last statement strongly.
As a matter-of-fact… YOU are your own God, because you believe what you believe is true… and such is the case for 99.9% of all that YOU would deem "religious" because everyone has there own interpretion that "forms" their "belief system".
HAHAHAHAHA! Again, from your precious Oxford dictionary:
1 (in Christianity and other monotheistic religions) the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being.
2 (god)(in certain other religions) a superhuman being or spirit worshipped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity:
Those are the TOP TWO definitions of 'religion'.

Actually to label those who believe in a supernatural being religious… is in itself religiously dogmatic… and quite arrogant!

Yeah, redefine the language any way you feel like it.

As for your comment on "church" …yes any collective gathering that is brought together for a single purpose is "church". And "church" isn't necessarily a physical building… it is a body of believers who join together to promote, practice… and worship this belief, as in those who worship football.

Oh cool! So, if we have an orgy, we worship sex! Hallelujah, it's the Second Coming! (Oh wait - I was just breathing heavy)

It is only the ignorance of the ignorant who suffer the malady of ignorance (Henri Bergsen)

That's A. Bronson Alcott.

and just because there are a group of people who gather to gether to worship a supernatural being doesn't necessarily mean that what and how they worship is true if any such supernatural being should exist.

Your point?

Like you, they also worship their own interpretation of the way things seem to them.

Again, from your own precious Oxford dictionary:
1 [mass noun] the feeling or expression of reverence and adoration for a deity:worship of the Mother Goddess
ancestor worship
religious rites or ceremonies, constituting a formal expression of reverence for a deity:the church was opened for public worship
TOP TWO mainstream definitions. So, no, again apples to oranges.

To man his ego is god!

Operational definition of 'god is...?

There is no greater tragedy than a self-righteous hypocrite.

You may want to get that mote looked at.

And I don't say this to attack or be mean.

No, just to appear self-righteous.

I say it only that people might open their eyes in the hopes that we might all learn to accept each as who we are rather than cut others down for what they choose to believe.

Hey, if something's bullshit, I feel obliged to call it bullshit. & I love my fellow human beings.

Everyone preaches about how much they love the varieties of life in one breathe, and then cut others down for being different in the next.

You sound like a teenager.

Perhaps we should all be robotic stepford wives to ward of this contradicting hypocrisy? NOT!

Maybe your stoner buddies thought this stream-of-consciousness crap was cosmic: I assure you it's not.

@Kelly Mc:
AA meetings and conventions are "churchy" events. And where is it written that one who says "ass rape" and another who stands in agreement with their comment isn't being "churchy". Is there a list of "rules" that are qualied and unqualified for what is to be considered not "churchy"?

If you say this because you believe the word ass is a swear, and thus "unholy"-- then it is in your mind (and whomever that stands in agreement with you) that has given this word "ass" such power. Ass is a word man has "named" and allowed it to have dominion over himself as something "unholy"... the word ass itself has no power or meaning... until you make it so, and if this is the cse, you can let it go also.

that's so funny! and so true! wish I could have been there. maybe they'll have something closer to my home soon.

he can just as easily and quickly recognize they came from nothing, are nothing, and if he so chooses to let go of them, to nothing they will return.

There is no such thing as nothing.

God did say to Adam “name the beast”

No, nobody said anything to anyone of that name. That was a fictional story.
Try using something from reality next time, please.

windblower,

This post makes so little sense as to be unworthy of a response. But, I've gotta ask this anyway.

If mankind (not womankind? humanity, let's go with that) ...

If humanity created language and later became enslaved to it, how did God utter the words "Let there be light"? The Bible states that this was done by God with His words, no?

Of course, I agree that religion, god, and every other word we dream up are human words. In fact, the idea of one or more gods is a human idea. As such, humans created god, little g, not worthy of a capital letter due to the fictional nature of the being.

How could it be otherwise?

Did god create himself? Of course not. It's difficult enough to grasp the concept of a quantum universe popping into existence. Though it is consistent with the well tried and proven theory of quantum mechanics.

The idea of a fully formed intelligence capable of creating such things at the rate of one a week simply popping into existence is far more difficult to grasp. Such a creature is not only outside of any scientific explanation, but violates pure logic as well. For, if the universe required a creator, so too does the creator. Nothing is gained by such hypotheses.

It's a weird nick, that's for sure.

I'll give this a shot. I'm no at all offended. Asking questions is a good thing. Not being allowed to do so is one of the problems I have with religion.

First, I don't think there are many who still believe that what is was and always has been. The current reigning scientific theory with tons of data to support it is the big bang theory. The universe exploded out of a small and incredibly hot and dense quantum soup.

This is important for a few reasons:

1. There is real hard evidence for this. And, it is well within the current, also very well tried and as proven as science ever gets, theory known as quantum theory. Matter and anti-matter pop into existence all the time at the quantum level. And, there's so much of these virtual particles that they must be accounted for when doing the computations of quantum mechanics in order to get the right answer. This has been highly reproducible in lab experiments.

2. The quantum soup had a lot of mass-energy, but was not highly structured or complex. It is a lot easier to explain that which is simple. Further, though we can't explain the first 10^-43 seconds of the universe, we are allowed to ask the question. Who is researching the way in which your particular set of gods (a set that may or may not have just one member) popped into existence?

3. Positing the supernatural has never given us a single answer that is in any way useful. Using logic, reason, and more recently the scientific method, has always provided us with a more robust and useful explanation of our world. It is also verifiable and testable.

4. "[J]ust admitting that we have no idea how it happened and maybe there is something bigger" is a way to avoid further question. It is unlikely to answer anything for us other than why we should sit on our butts watching TV and switching off the most complex and interesting parts of our brains. When religion states the universe was created by god(s), no further questions are allowed. Science understands the difference between the known and the unknown. What is unknown is grounds for further research.

5. Any hypothesis involving one or more gods to explain the universe presupposes the existence of these beings. If your religion allows free thought, try this thought experiment. The universe requires explanation for how it got here. So some say it was one or more gods. Well, if the universe requires explanation, wouldn't these god characters require explanation as well? Are you not now stuck with a cadre of gods or even one big god that requires even more explanation than the universe? For, now you have explained our complex universe with an even more complex object or set of objects. For those who believe in gods, why do they not need explanation? Why is it only atheists and agnostics who can ask where god(s) came from? Wouldn't the religious be very interested in knowing more about their god(s)? But, this question cannot be asked. Try it with your priest, rabbi, minister or shaman. You'll likely get something that amounts to "the god(s) always existed; now go away and stop asking such questions or you'll go to the bad place (if your religion has a bad place)."

Most atheists I've spoken with are offended by the idea that atheism is a religion precisely because it is not. I know that sounds somewhat circular and tautological. However, religion comes with dogma and ritual and generally belief in the supernatural for which there is no single shred of evidence.

Atheism comes with no authoritative text, no rituals to prove one's slavery to one or more mythical beings, no rules that require such things as stoning people to death, no admonitions stating when one may or may not work, and no concept of sin.

In short, atheism can only be described as belief if one makes the statement that atheists believe in evidence. Most of us do not believe there are no gods in any different way than we don't believe in fire-breathing dragons. This is a key issue for many of us. Many religious folk really simply don't seem to understand the concept of non-belief. We don't feel more strongly about the non-existence of the various gods of the world than we do about godzilla.

Atheists simply believe that things for which there is not a shred of evidence do not exist. All gods ever dreamed up fall into this category along with fire-breathing dragons, the great pumpkin, and unicorns.

As for conventions, I don't personally attend them. I am, however, often at lectures on the science and political lecture circuits in my area. Many of these have drinks and socializing afterward. Here's an odd little fact about humans, we're very social creatures. We like to socialize. Many people get this from their churches and temples. Atheists have no churches and temples. So we socialize at conventions and around science lectures. Some of us even happen to live in an area and work in a field that attracts enough atheists to actually be able to socialize and speak freely about our lack of beliefs at work.

Hint to atheists looking for this: try being a computer programmer in New York City. This highly logical profession in a well educated area of the country turns out to have a very high atheist and agnostic contingent among its work force. It may not be as high as the percentage of atheists in the National Academy of Sciences, but also is far less exclusive. You need not show real genius to be an NYC geek.

So, now that you understand a bit more about atheism. What is it about atheism that you think quashes free thinking? As far as I know, the single directive about thought from atheists is "don't resort to magic to explain the world." However, even for this, there is no authority in atheism to make this a rule, enforce it, or to stop an atheist from positing the supernatural. Of course, if someone goes with the supernatural answer and decides it is correct, then they are simply no longer an atheist.

Don't worry, we don't put out fatwas against those who were once atheists and are now religious.