I feel there is a new cult religion on the rise, and it may be some sort of demented warped version of a disbelief made to fit an idea. I was reading this article, and many people had the same concerns as me
"What happens in a Atheist Church"
There is a concern among some non-believers that atheism is developing into a religion in its own right, with its own code of ethics and self-appointed high priest
"It will become an organised religion. It's inevitable. A belief system will set in. There will be a structure, an ethical outlook on life," says architect Robbie Harris.
I understand people like to come together in a common cause or value, but congregating and having sunday meetings is a completely different thing. Things like this really anger me, because this is exactly the opposite being a free rational thinker or skeptic. Other than being an Atheist, we are all independent of our actions and thoughts, we are all our own individual self. We are not connected in any eternal bondage or any of that other nonsensical ideologies.
This is exactly how cults and religion start. It may start out as a harmless thing, but eventually someone will come and try to brainwash and manipulate others to follow that individual as some sort of demi god leader. I just doon't understand why some Atheists or free thinkers or rational thinkers feel the need to give atheism religious characteristics
I would like to hear your opinions on this matter.
I did but you have to accept!
An atheist religion is kind of like an anarchist organization, isn't it?
I was thinking more like oxi-moron.....
Buddhism is a religion, and doesn't necessarily have a belief in deities.. So it can easily happen that you might find an atheist religion...
Of course, many people discount Buddhism as a religion, and state that it's a philosophy instead. That's a point that has some merit. It come down to a matter of defining your terms...
How many "philosophies" have rituals? a belief about an afterlife based on one's conduct in this life?
Of course Buddhism is a religion. It just seems not to be to people for whom a strongly theistic religion is the first religion that comes to mind.
I have no desire to attend a weekly service, but I think that we should pay attention that there are people out there who do.
My boyfriend went from a self-labeling as a non-practicing catholic to an agnostic rather quickly on his own. I assumed he'd eventually get to atheism on his own too, but when we discussed possibly having children one day, he assumed (since we were both raised catholic) that we would raise kids in the catholic church too. He said things like, "it worked for us," and, "what else can we do, what else is there." It took years for him after that to see that atheism, even though it is a lack of belief in god, doesn't mean that you are empty or cold. It doesn't leave you with nothing.
Ultimately, I think we do need to show people that no god does not equal no options. I don't know that a weekly gathering that mimics the rituals of church is the best way to do this, but hey at least they're trying.
I will say that I found this part of the article rather troubling: He argues for a new breed of secular therapists to take the place of the priesthood and believes atheism should have its own churches.
A new breed of secular therapists? Um don't we already have that? Last time I checked the MSWs at Kaiser don't use religion to treat their clients. We don't need churches for things like that. We need a carefully planned, secular society/government.
Yea I have no clue about "Secular Therapists" at all. I believe they are called Psychologists lol. As long as they are following the proper rules and regulations set forth by the American Psychology Association in following the scientific principles then it really shouldn't matter about someone's belief, as long as they are good psychologist.
I think best way to bring awareness about a secular rational way of thinking is through education. We need to engage young ones in discussions about life and install skepticism in their minds so they can learn to question things instead of blindly following them because of the norms of societies. I agree that weekly "Atheist Church" will not do that.
I think your missing the point. Hi everyone nice to see this community as I come out of the godless closet. I can see how a lot of what religion does, Teaching, support, even counseling could be very useful. I also like xmas a lot and know it is a good time to celebrate the winter solstice at the very least. Like De Btton's book maybe we should bring th best things about religion to this and other gatherings. Morality to me is measurable, therefore a clinical way of testing moral hypothesis or philosophies would be a huge benefit to humanity.
The Sunday thing and Church thing is just labels don't get hung up on that crap, they are just trigger words for many of us. We are the lucky few right now who can take counsel and learn from thousands of great thinkers,not just those who formed a religion and place themselves as a god or a messenger of god. Remember how those teachings are taught are as important if not more so than the teachings themselves.
thanks for letting me join!!
Hi Matt, welcome to TA :)
A metric for moral rectitude? YES! BUT! Who will do the evaluations, 'let one without sin, cast the first stone'?
Sin is funny thing its like money made up nonsense that can kill you if you let it. This would be for everyone individually who takes the responsibility of testing the issue with a double blind panel to allow time for the debunking on ones theory. Until it is proven true or false by empirical evidence and, if needed, expert testimony. Like a new drug or therapy that researches efficacy. then uses that either scientific law or social medium, as a way to judge right from wrong for themselves. Like if it hurts someone else this much, is the reward of doing this enough, or does it make it not worth doing because of this reason. Its the way you can know that someone is full of religious bullshit if they answer "because I believe its wrong" or quotes only someone in a 2000 year old book. But in reality that book can be used to some extent, but a need for modern reference would need to be proven for that to hold any water. This doesn't make you a better person or more right but if used correctly can make you feel more confident in your decisions. But I wonder how so many preachers seem to posses that without anything but circumstantial evidence at best? Belief is never enough for any "law" or judgement but it is burned into them that they have a right to it. We need something like that too. But with a scientific method to back it up.
Thats short sighted. these are just successful philosphers/politicians. they wrapped their idea's successfully into a higher power, but remove that vale and their is plenty of good inside for the picking.