Pericles whether you like it or not, the views David put across is the common consensus of those he represents, being atheists that are organising in Australia for equality of non-believers.

What exactly in the listing of stuff he posted, that is the combined ethics of those he represents do you personally oppose? or is this just an excercise in possibilities?

There are 380,000+ christian sects, yet they organise as a 'political force' .. go tell them they don't speak for all christians as some use condoms, or are ok with someone having an abortion, and also tell the government not to listen to them.

We are a large, voting group with ethics based on us intrinsically being social creatures. We use reason and logic to come to general consensus on issues, and have a voice in the AFA to put it forward.

Sancho,

I appreciate your concern for what I might say or have said in my official capacity. You do not need to remind me of that. I am not just mouthing off at indiscriminate rubbishing of an idea; I am protecting those who have extended huge effort in bringing the Global Atheist Convention to fruition and the whole notion of the Conventio itself. This is a good idea, with good people extending themselves to the limit to make it a historical moment for secular Australia.

People on the Rise of Atheism Convention committee have worked tirelessly without financial reward, having as well occupations and life to deal with. Others not on the Committee have volunteered time and exertion in making this a success. The efforts they have freely given to make the occasion one of significance, is something, which makes me proud to be an Atheist. I personally spend at least 14 hours a day in orchestrating the jigsaw of complexity so it may come to reality. This I have done for some months and expect it to continue until March next year.

Trying to make the budget keep afloat with no government assistance so far has been extremely difficult. We have speakers from all over the planet from different time zones; with conflicting commitments and requirements, which is a logistical nightmare to organise. All are appearing and not charging the huge amounts their qualifications could demand.

The Atheist Global Convention is a mammoth task we are all working on

On the other side of the coin, we have people trying to undermine this tremendous effort for the sake of being obtuse. For Zeus’ sake, it’s a gathering of people. Does the right of association somehow not apply to us?

Will I apologise for being a little truthful. No.

David

just a quick note to welcome a new member
and their fist/only.. post
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/user.asp?id=56528

so welcome
brownchicken, Thursday, 15 October 2009 9:29:05 AM

nothing much else..to see here
enjoy your party...lol

athiest convention for the party not a party
for those with belief in dis-belief

the religious use of politics..that is religiously free of god
but not free of the preaching/order/powers/perswasions/words/passions/peers as if of..religion

athiesm..[yet another extreemist sect..wronging/ignoring/preaching about... god...by ignoring him

yet..another/.. systemised belief system..in a class of its own..yet still a systemised belief...in disbelief..lol

'One under god'

Atheism (i after e) is not having a belief in a god or gods.

It is as much a belief as not stamp collecting is a hobby.

Those that are atheist, are asking that those with religion, not have rights above and beyond them, hence are organising.

Groups of atheists do have common ethical stances, grounded in being social beings with empathy.

Do you really have difficulty with these simple concepts?

More importantly, why should religion have rights above and beyong others in our society? Why are they so priviledged, and some stand as you do in judgment mocking us for saying so?

I’ve just read through each of your posts pericles, and its blatantly obvious that you have some serious problems with identifying yourself as an Atheist.

Seeing you using words like “ingratiating” and “self-congratulatory” when referring to other atheists, or that old chestnut “quacks and ducks”, and another “don’t act like a religion”, or “keep religion out of atheism” and “quasi religious convention” shows you to be some kind of loner who is possibly ashamed to be an atheist.

Fortunately, there are now millions of atheists around the world, and as is their right, they are proud to tell the world they have no belief in the supernatural, they are organising themselves, they are blogging, having meetings, meet ups, conferences and telling the world their thoughts, and delving into history, finding lots of evidence to refute lots of things, oh and yes we vote too!

As an Atheist, I’ll take your insults in the manner to which they were intended, and just say ‘water off a ducks back mate’ we are up and running and giving religion a run for its money, we want equality, shouldn’t be that hard. Should it?

What have you got against people organising themselves and standing up for their increasingly eroded rights in a democratic society?

Gathering together in groups is actually what humans do naturally, must be lonely in your little corner.

Why thank you, trikkerdee, for your analysis.

>>I’ve just read through each of your posts pericles, and its blatantly obvious that you have some serious problems with identifying yourself as an Atheist...some kind of loner who is possibly ashamed to be an atheist. <<

Just don't attempt to make a living from psychology, will you.

But I know perfectly well that it wasn't a serious assessment.Just your idea of an insult.

If you did indeed read through each of my posts, which I somehow doubt, you will notice a couple of things.

One is that my comments were either i) entirely civil or ii) responding to gratuitous snide comments.

Also, I have no problem whatsoever in identifying myself as an atheist. If you were to look back through other posts of mine. you will possibly be able to connect the dots.

But I do have a problem identifying with the kind of flatulent windbaggery that passes for "organized atheism" in Australia.

To me, it is still, and will always be, a contradiction in terms.