I'm glad the AFA exists, but I agree with Pericles on this one.

David, I said in a previous thread that you demean the Foundation by enaging in forum mud-slinging in your official capacity. I remind you of that again.

As a supporter of the AFA I feel I need emphasise several very important points that I think have gotten lost in what is clearly starting to become a mud-slinging match.

No one is going to have to start a new non-religion. The mere structure of the word “A-theism” ensures that.

All the AFA does is campaign on issues from an Atheistic perspective. If a member of the AFA is against abortion and the AFA does something for the Pro-choice movement, then that AFA member can simply sit that one out. No one in the AFA is going to kick them out or force them to partake.

As far as I’m concerned, there is but one tenet and one tenet only of Atheism, and that is that there are no tenets to Atheism other than the lack of belief in gods. If the AFA were to start requiring that members hold certain views, then I suspect it would dissolve faster than you could say “quasi-religion”, or at the very least, become a small underground group that no one paid any attention to.

I’ve had a read of the Rise of Atheism website and I see no mention of the need for agreements to be reached. Do any agreements actually have to be reached? Why can’t the purpose of the convention simply be to convene? That in itself would be all that was needed to make the political statement that Atheists do exist and that they do vote.

Politicians are eager to announce their religious beliefs to woo votes, but none of them ever try to woo votes by declaring their lack of belief and that to me says something.

If the convention results in the religious falsely attacking certain beliefs as being “Atheist beliefs” (which they do anyway), then I think that’s a small price to pay for sending a message to politicians, and giving those who are trying to pull themselves out of their childhood indoctrination - while surrounded by religious friends and family - a sense of community and solidarity that most of us luckily never needed.

David you said: "No one cares if you don’t want to take responsibility as a citizen and act for the rights of others. We will do it for you."

This is unfair. Just because a person chooses not to take responsibility as a citizen via the Atheist Foundation does not mean they are not responsible or are not involved in other ways.

Regarding the cat ripping scenario - if such a religion influenced policy to that extent then it could be fought on legal and animal rights grounds. It would have more impact than arguing from a purely athiestic perspective.

We seem to have reached an impasse. The biggest fear is that Atheists become just another group with an unclear agenda. A group that claims to represent all Atheists in a common cause for rights and freedoms not to be influenced by religious bigotry or prejudice has a nice ring to it. But as Pericles rightly said Atheists are not a cohesive group in their belief systems and values.

Look I am an Atheist and I know what you are trying to do. For me it is not the right approach. We just lump ourselves with the same dogma bandwagons as those who would influence policy on unsubstantiated religious teachings.

Dear Pelly,

What alternative then, do you and/or Pericles
suggest Atheists do, instead of having a
Convention?

Be constructive and give us a list - I'm curious
what positive outcomes you've got on offer, instead
of just knocking their attempts at trying to achieve
something. Anyone can criticize, that's easy.
But how about a solution to the problem as you see it?

I think some semantics have come into play. Unwarranted concern for some. Fear and confusion tied up in the word Atheism for some clouds meaning and purpose, like blinkers on racehorses.

The convention will be a collection of brilliant minds for an audience of interested people. Atheists are the target audience by default, it is not exclusive to Atheists. I guess it can be said that you use your discretion to decide if it is something you would want to attend, or something some may find too challenging if it conflicts with personal belief systems. Just like going to watch a movie at a cinema. Certainly don't be offended or threatened in any way, as there is no need.

There are varying degrees of Atheism as is with any other group of people. Some feel this convention is unnecessary, or too political (which it isn't). I think it is important to accept that most will be going to experience a wealth of knowledge from well respected idenities. Like a great book you will never likely be able to read again.

Like it or not Atheists are out there... we don't sneak about in the night performing rituals and breaking laws. We are just like everyone else, living our lives, but in our own way. It would be hypocritical of anyone to say that this convention is wrong or unethical in any way. We (as Atheists) deserve to be heard and understood just like everyone else. Many don't take the time to understand what Atheism is all about and what it really stands for, but rely on second hand whispers and stories which tend to cause more harm than understanding.

Try to understand Atheism for what it is trying not to judge just because a group of like-minded people like to share the same interests and views.

Thanks for reading. I am sure the convention will be a fantastic learning opportunity. I trust and hope all who attend enjoy the labours of much volunteered time and efforts in bringing this event to life.

Cheers

Wow - what a lot of fuss. I'm going to the atheist convention, I think it's a great idea.

The opportunity for people of a rationalist/humanist/secular bent to discuss issues in public or in a conference context should be encouraged. The modern society is a mega society made up of people of many cultural and religious and non-religious back grounds. The idea that people who don't believe in a God shouldn't discuss their ideas is ridiculus - opposition by religious persons to this kind of event just demonstrates a personal insecurity and bigotry more than anything.