The Need For
Organized Atheist Groups
[unsigned]
From:
To: Positive Atheism <editor@positiveatheism.org>
Subject: via What is Positive Atheism?
Date: Saturday, December 11, 1999 11:15 PM
I'm very pleased to come upon your page and writings on positive atheism. As a non-believer of many decades experience I've felt the need to go beyond the kind of "rejectionism" of most atheists of my personal acquaintance. Such rejectionism may be a necessary first step in a society so thoroughly steeped in Christian or theist practices and values, but I personally feel it to be -- as a lifelong posture -- unfulfilling and even mentally unhealthy. I had hoped to find in your discussion notions leading to what I personally feel should, or usefully ought to be, the activities of a "successful" non believing community. I did not find these in your writings, and want to explain some of my thoughts on this subject, suspecting all the while that they have been more thoroughly explored in other writings with which I'm not familiar.
The point of beginning of my sense of what positive atheism should lead to is the recognition that while there is no god, there clearly are endless churches and religious movements. There clearly is a massive need for people to share together the search for some satisfying inner truth. Many other human needs find expression through "churches" and movements as well: the need for a supporting community in time of tragedy; the simple need for shared warmth of feelings among a group; the opportunity to identify emotions and give them expression through ceremony, music, and the arts of all kinds; the existence of a protective and intellectually open community in which ideas can be explored; and others.
I have not found atheists of my acquaintance willing, in general, to commit to the construction of such a community. For what ever reason, the experience of "growing up" or "coming out" as an atheist seems altogether too often to freeze people into a lifelong posture of rejection of organized religious sharing. A church of "believers" is a thing to be feared and rejected, even of our own kind. I have been a member of the Unitarian Universalist church for many years, but find it too often burdened by the need to accommodate the Christians among them -- experiencing what I have called, in jest but with concern, creeping Christianization. While the notion of a truly open faith without dogma is laudable, it is also crippling if the effort is to create a religious home for the truly non-believer or doubting.
I have come rather indirectly to a major point of what I believes positive atheism should aspire to be -- a home, a retreat, a beacon to the lost, a cozy fireside of like-minded people. A fully developed atheistic life perhaps should be truly "missionary" in the best sense of that word -- that we endorse and practice a mission to the religiously homeless. Perhaps we need, first of all, an organized religious center or "church" of atheists. While the subject seems to be highly debated, perhaps as many as 10 percent of mankind are of our belief. Can we be part of making that chosen 10 percent more at home in the world? Can we get out of the closet, in a society in which many people appear to wish to marginalize and/or silence us, so that we can organize to be of service to the spiritually homeless, and ourselves. While I generally dislike the posture of rigidified hostility to any group, I am a lifelong anti Catholic. Any social setting which is authoritarian and anti-democratic is repugnant to me excepting military and emergency service activities. However, the Catholics have shown the utility of creating emotionally involving "homes" by allowing the emotions to find expression. Hooked as many atheists are on "rationality" they reject the creation of institutions which permit or encourage such deep and irrational feelings. Positive atheism, I feel, will want to find more rational substitutes for that.
We need our atheist radio stations, our atheist out-reach people on college campuses, our weekly column in the paper. We need to reach out to those who need us, and must do so in a visible, and highly positive, manner. The image of the ossified and radical "village atheist" alone and a source of humor to those about him needs to be replaced, post haste.
From: "Positive Atheism" <editor@positiveatheism.org>
To:
Subject: Re: via What is Positive Atheism?
Date: Sunday, December 12, 1999 6:13 AM
Atheism is but a small part of anyone's overall world view, and is never the world view itself.
Organized atheism exists only to counter the claims of theism. Anything more than this belongs in another category, and is not rightly called atheism.
One's atheism can influence one's activism in certain subjects. For example, in my home state of Oregon, we passed a wonderful Death With Dignity Act. This Act has powerful protections against abuse, and is even covered by the Oregon Health Plan. The bulk of the funding for the opposition came directly from the Vatican, and the rest from other religions interests. They tell us that it is wrong for Catholics to kill themselves. I say that if you are a Catholic, then your only option is to suffer out a long, expensive, painful death (if that's the hand your body deals to you). I don't understand why I should obey a rule that exists only in religious teachings, so I supported the Death With Dignity measures and called it atheistic activism.
I don't know how you would organize atheists. My experience is that those who tend to organize into groups also tend to be somewhat fundamentalistic in their approach to atheism. I oppose fundamentalism of any kind more viciously than I oppose even theism. (This is part of the reason why I am no longer involved in any organized group activities.)
Cliff Walker
"Positive Atheism" Magazine
From:
To: Positive Atheism <editor@positiveatheism.org>
Subject: Re: via What is Positive Atheism?
Date: Sunday, December 12, 1999 9:29 AM
I'm not sure how to respond to your assertion that atheism exists only to counter theism. This seems clearly inconsistent with the concept of positive atheism. In any event, it strikes me as immaterial as a point of discussion.
All human beings, in my judgment, need and utilize some sort of philosophical "point of view" which undergirds their behavior and values. Far from being a merely negative position, atheism permits the development of a larger and deeper point of view. I know I'm responsible for my behavior, I know human beings alone can make a difference in the lives of those around us. Your position of abstention from participation in organized groups is, to me, most unfortunate in that it fails to meet the needs of what I referred to as the religiously homeless. Far too many people have virtually been "forced" back into the miasma of organized christianity due to the absence of institutions capable of meeting their needs and I'll continue to seek positive atheists who recognize the need for cooperative behavior. I know from experience how rare they are, in contrast to the posture of ossified alienation, but having experienced the warmth of sociability among the positives cannot deny the need. Thanks for your return post.
From: "Positive Atheism" <editor@positiveatheism.org>
To:
Subject: Re: via What is Positive Atheism?
Date: Sunday, December 12, 1999 12:39 PM
First, I said that organized atheism exists only to counter the claims of theism. Atheism itself simply is, being nothing more than the lack of theism, but would not be noticed or discussed were it not for the claims of theism.
"Positive Atheism" (as we use the term) is a proactive ethic, a more comprehensive philosophy than mere atheism.
Atheism is but one element of "Positive Atheism," which itself is not a comprehensive outlook (although it contains more elements than just simple atheism).
We encourage people who are already atheists to practice self-consistency as a means to freedom. Gora said, "The insistence on truthfulness does not disturb the freedom of the individual. An atheist is free to say or to do what he likes, provided he does what he says and says what he does." Elsewhere Gora talks about keeping no secrets, and I have discussed not doing anything which I would want to be kept a secret. The other important element we derive from Gora is in our current signature: "Changes take place, not independent of man's will, but on account of man's wills. Civilization has progressed by man's interference with material conditions." However, we don't go so far as to assert that any surrender is a form of theism. (I'm not convinced that Gora meant this either; his grasp of the English language was good but not excellent, so some of his statements are tough to pin down.)
As such, a variation of "Positive Atheism" (the outlook) is, I think, most conducive to the activities and organization you seek. Perhaps a visit to the Atheist Centre may be in order. At minimum, I think you do well to study the works of Gora, and to discover what grand things the Atheist Centre in Vijayawada, India, has done to help people in both material aid and also in showing India's brands of superstition to be not only groundless but highly debilitating.
You can read the prototype of our mission statement at: and you can read Gora's book. But please be aware that we do not subscribe to Gora's social plan; we only strongly consider some of his personal ethics and build from there.
We also recognize that all atheists rightly develop their own system of ethics. In this sense, we are not telling anybody what to do, neither are we saying that our understanding of atheism is superior to another version.
We recognize that organized atheism has suffered major setbacks because certain prominent leaders (and many local leaders) have expressed openly hostility toward any and all theists. "Positive Atheism" Magazine has begun seeking out people willing to become official advisors. The first such person to agree to such a role is a seminarian -- an up-and-coming pastor -- whose views I find quite refreshing, and who has shown a willingness to help us formulate our message so that it can appear more credible in the eyes of theists. If we express any disdain, it would be toward fundamentalism, which is not limited to theists. Our distaste for fundamentalism outshines even our aversion to theism.
Aside from our outlook, we advocate for two things: (1) dignity for atheists; (2) state-church separation, and we are quietly busy at the local (Oregon) and national levels.
This is what we're doing in our neck of the woods. I wish I could stomach any of the local atheistic groups here, but I cannot. This is the forum I now have, and I use it to the best of my meager ability to make what tiny of an impact I can on how atheism is seen by both atheists and theists.
Cliff Walker
"Positive Atheism" Magazine
Material by Cliff Walker (including unsigned editorial commentary) is copyright ©1995-2006 by Cliff Walker. Each submission is copyrighted by its writer, who retains control of the work except that by submitting it to Positive Atheism, permission has been granted to use the material or an edited version: (1) on the Positive Atheism web site; (2) in Positive Atheism Magazine; (3) in subsequent works controlled by Cliff Walker or Positive Atheism Magazine (including published or posted compilations). Excerpts not exceeding 500 words are allowed provided the proper copyright notice is affixed. Other use requires permission; Positive Atheism will work to protect the rights of all who submit their writings to us.