Search results for: atheism

Foundation Beyond Belief Executive Director Dale McGowan was interviewed about FBB and a new project he’s working on, writing “Atheism for Dummies,” the first book about nontheists from the “Dummies” series of books. According to Dale: 

It’s only been about eight to 10 years since the freethought movement (atheists, agnostics, humanists and skeptics) began to move off the cultural margin in a significant way, and fewer since most of the public has become aware of atheism as an organized presence in the United States. Between the explosive growth of nonreligious self-identity and the more regular presence of the organized religious voice, people naturally have questions about what atheism is and what this growing presence means for them.

“Atheist” is one of those words that people first hear as a whispered accusation, like “communist” was when I was growing up. It was, and often still is, a label that captures their darkest fears. Knowledge is the antidote for fears of all kinds, and a book that sheds light on what atheism is (and what it isn’t) is likely to diminish the fear of it. Everybody wins when we’re less fearful of each other.

Click here to read the full interview. 

This post, written by Bridget Gaudette, our spring intern for Members and Partners programs, originally appeared at emilyhasbooks.com.

I was inspired by a recent article by George Dvorsky, the Chair of the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies. The article was titled “Why Humanists Need to Make the Shift to Post-Atheism.” First, let’s examine what he could mean by “post-atheism.” I posit two possibilities: 1. describes humanity when all religious belief has disappeared. In this case, we’d all be post-atheists because atheism would be too irrelevant to have any value in our identity; 2. suggests that there is a more evolved and thus more desirable state than atheism. That is, it reflects a more clear-headed and less heated stance that some atheists will eventually reach as they mature beyond atheism. I believe #2 is the perspective that the author is drawing from.

The central theme of the article was to encourage us to move away from bashing religion while building up the humanist movement. The part of the article that got me thinking was in the first paragraph. Dvorsky said, “I’m getting annoyed by all the anti-religious propaganda that litters my Facebook newsfeed […]. What are you hoping to achieve by posting such facile and inflammatory material?”

I am guilty of posting the occasional anti-religious picture meme or quote myself, but I do not see the point in the extremes. I don’t want to see a Jesus or Mohammed engaged in sexual acts with each other. I don’t believe it serves the greater good. The same is true with publicity stunts that some in the secular movement feel are necessary. I am coordinating a protest with some fellow freethinkers and the concept was simple: we get some signs and a group of people and we let the townsfolk know that we oppose religious encroachment on public property. I was criticized for not introducing more drama. When I asked what I should have done, the criticizer stated that she would have brought a bunch of fake rocks and done a faux-stoning. In the fashion of WWJD, I thought about a person who found success when fighting for equal rights: MLK Jr. What would he have done? Dress up in whiteface and drag around a chained-up black man for dramatic effect to demonstrate the societal shackles that black Americans were still encumbered by? No. I don’t think so. This would have gotten him more press, which is the point of such stunts, yes, but does it help legitimize the movement? Do we get taken more seriously? I think we have to look at best practices. What actions have brought about the most change? Stunts or lawsuits? Dramatics or persistence? Costumes or reason?

All this being said, I, like Voltaire, might not agree with what you say or how you say it, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. We all need to vent, and this is good for our mental health. Some folks do this by displaying anti-religious pictures or by lashing out at theists. That’s fine as long as the goal of bettering humanity is always in the forefront. Add some substance.

Over at Salon, Greta Christina’s article “Atheism’s New Clout” talks about Foundation Beyond Belief, and specifically our Leukemia & Lymphoma Society (LLS) Light the Night team.

When [Todd] Stiefel reached out to the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, they cheerfully accepted his offer — a half million dollars in matching funds, as a “Special Friend” team partner in the LL&S’s “Light the Night” Walks, with the goal of uniting the freethought movement around the world to raise a million dollars for the fight against cancer. Andrea Greif, Director of Public Relations for the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, says, “LLS is appreciative that Foundation Beyond Belief has set such a generous goal to help us beat blood cancer and we look forward to having their teams join LLS’s Light the Night Walk.” And Stiefel describes the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society as “enthusiastic at the prospect of working with us.” He went on to say, “We LOVE working with the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society. They have been very kind, supportive and helpful. They have made it very clear that cancer doesn’t discriminate and neither do they. LLS just wants to put the mission of fighting cancer first.”

Head over to Salon to read the whole article.