You will be A-thei-ssimilated.

[loCAtek]

First, in fairness, a word from the organized atheist viewpoint;

Atheist Alliance International (AAI) is a global network of atheist organizations around the world. AAI was founded in 1991. [but has only been international since 2001]

AAI's vision and mission statement is "to transform society into one that understands and respects atheism; that supports and respects a worldview based on the values of reason, empiricism and naturalism; and that respects and protects the separation of religion and government and the constitutional and human rights of atheists as members of society in free, democratic and open nations."[2] Its unofficial tagline is "A positive global voice for atheism and secularism."

Okay, but i didn't think atheism was being threatened in any way. However, at least they're honest: they want to take over the world. Don't worry, they have a fair bit to go since their idea of international, pretty much means the USA, so far. Oh but wait, just this month they've added another country by splitting up: AA International will now be run from Australia, and the original 'international' organization will be called Atheist Alliance America. That host of global members (actual number unknown) who have to speak English in order to read the AAI magazine, Secular World, will just have to update their bookmarks.


Other organizations are even blunter. I'm not sure why it has such an angry tone, and includes so many myths, but you can follow the link, I didn't change a word of this mission statement;

About Us
The Atheist Foundation of Australia Inc began in South Australia in 1970 when the members of the Rationalist Association of SA decided that a name change would proclaim their basic philosophy, which began in Greece 2500 years ago.

We can understand why primitive cultures believed that invisible beings controlled what we now call the elements and natural phenomena. With access to factual knowledge, there is now no excuse for believing in gods, fairies or any supernatural concept.

We live in a natural universe with known natural laws. Religion, based on belief in the existence of the supernatural, is dependent on the indoctrination of infants generation after generation, by parents brainwashed in religious cultures.

The confrontations and fighting today provide ample evidence of the unstable nature of societies, which endorse religious beliefs.

Infantile concepts seriously hinder the full potential development of humans in a world with problems that require logical thought.

Atheists find their motive for action in the needs and problems of their fellow citizens and consider that the worship of, or reliance on, imaginary supernatural beings to be a useless waste of time, energy and resources.

The Foundation is dependent on a small committee which meets monthly and is open to all members. We maintain a cordial relationship with similar organisations within Australia and overseas and with whom we exchange our magazine, The Australian Atheist.

It is recognised that the non-religious segment in society is on a steep increase but only through such organisations as the Foundation will it be recognised as a movement worthy of notice by administrative bodies.

We welcome feedback from thoughtful people and invite your co-operation and membership.



Our Philosophy

The Atheist Foundation of Australia recognises scientific method as the only rational means toward understanding reality. To question and critically examine all ideas, testing them in the light of experiment, leads to the discovery of facts.

As there is no scientific evidence for supernatural phenomena, atheists reject belief in 'God', gods and other supernatural beings. The universe, the world in which we live, and the evolution of life, are entirely natural occurrences.

No personality or mind can exist without the process of living matter to sustain it. We have only one life - here and now. All that remains after a person dies is the memory of their life and deeds in the minds of those who live.

Atheists reject superstition and prejudice along with the irrational fears they cause. We recognise the complexity and interdependence of life on this planet. As rational and ethical beings we accept the challenge of making a creative and responsible contribution to life.



Our Aims

To encourage and to provide a means of expression for informed free-thought on philosophical and social issues.

To safeguard the rights of all non-religious people.

To serve as a focal point for the fellowship of non-religious people.

To offer reliable information in place of superstition and to offer the methodology of reason in place of faith so as to enable people to take responsibility for the full development of their potential as human beings.

To promote atheism.

I can understand promoting logic, reason and science, but these groups always have that slightly veiled threat that they want to end religion too. Folks should have just said so, when we asked in the first place. (what, did you think we wouldn't figure it out? )

So, why not just promote logic, reason and science? If the atheist assertion is true, then faith would naturally fade away all by itself with that education.
Except, in the historical course of things, over the centuries: it hasn't.

According to the above, atheism has been around since the Greeks, and I'm willing to believe it's been around longer than that, but [not so] amazingly:

God is still here.

This latest strategy of not just supporting atheists, but attacking theists suggests some are getting pretty impatient with the Greeks, since logic, reason and science, aren't working fast enough. Just call it what it really is guys- a War on Worship.

I can see the latest campaign slogan:


"Atheism WOW!"

[loCAtek]

From that movie thread, but since it's straying from the OP;

After 25:00 Flemming claims that Christianity is based on blood-lust and cannibalism. His rational -The Passion of the Christ by Mel Gibson 2004.

At 29:25, we go back to dogmatic evangelicals; and a brief re-emergence of Richard Carrier, who supposed that Mark wrote his gospel wrong, without knowing that Mark didn't write it at all. Richard supports the myth that most conflict/war is based on religion, which is not so;

While I love the above video, it's already been pointed out that it's not entirely accurate. In the name of as accurate as possible data,

In their Encyclopedia of Wars,[2] authors Charles Phillips and Alan Axelrod attempt a comprehensive listing of wars in history. They document 1763 wars overall, [Since the Fall of Jericho c. 8000 B.C.E.] of which 123 (7%) have been classified to involve a religious conflict.

Some say the 20th Century was more barbaric than previous centuries, because of religious condoned conflicts. However;

One contender for worst century has to be the Seventeenth (the 1600s). The 30 Years War was the bloodiest single conflict in Europe until World War One. Russia began the century in bloody chaos. The Manchu conquest of China was certainly responsible for one the top population collapses in East Asia, while the Mughal invasion of South India caused the highest alledged body count in South Asian history. Meanwhile, the collapse of the Native American population bottomed out, and the Slave Trade was accelerating. All this was clobbering a world with a population only a fifth that of the world in the middle of the Twentieth Century.

Souce

[Scooter]

(cough ahem) the Thirty Years War was also a religious war (cough cough)

[loCAtek]

In some respects, that was how it began, but it went on for so long for political reasons. Also the point was, in that same century the secular wars/conflicts outnumbered/exceeded it in scope.

[Andrew D]

It seems to me that classifying a war as simply religious or simply political or simply territorial, etc., is rarely, if ever, correct.

There is a war between people who are, say, Hindu on one side and Muslim on the other. (Or Catholic on one side and Protestant on the other. Or whatever.)

The people on one side who are Hindu want to take control of the territory held by the people on the other side who are Muslim. And vice-versa.

Is that a war over religion or a war over territory?

It seems to me that the most probably correct answer is "both".

Further complicating matters are individuals' motivations to fight the war. People on one side who are Hindu and whose motivation is religious will find themselves fighting people on the other side who are Muslim and whose motivation is religious. But they will also find themselves fighting people on the other side who are Muslim and whose motivation is territorial.

And people on the other side who are Muslim and whose motivation is religious will find themselves fighting people on the one side who are Hindu and whose motivation is religious. But they will also find themselves fighting people on the one side who are Hindu and whose motivation is territorial.

And people on one side who are Hindu and whose motivation is territorial will find themselves fighting both people on the other side who are Muslim and whose motivation is religious and people on the other side who are Muslim and whose motivation is territorial. And people on the other side who are Muslim and whose motivation is territorial will find themselves fighting people on the one side who are Hindu and whose motivation is religious and people on the one side who are Hindu and whose motivation is territorial.

Even further complicating matters is that even a single person can -- and, it seems to me, usually does -- have more than one motivation to fight the war. There are some people who will fight the war on religious grounds and are not all concerned with the territorial grounds. There are some people who will fight the war on territorial grounds and are not at all concerned with the religious grounds.

But there are people -- and, it seems to me, this is most people -- who are motivated on both grounds. The Hindu who will go to war against Muslims over some piece of ground but would not go to war against Hindus over the same piece of ground. The Muslim who will go to war against Hindus over some piece of ground but would not go to war against Muslims over the same piece of ground.

Still further complicating matters is the multiplicity of motivations beyond only two. Beyond religious and territorial grounds, a person might have the ground of revenge for some actual or perceived atrocity. A person might be sufficiently motivated by a territorial ground that is irredentist but not by a territorial ground that is acquisitive. Etc., etc., etc.

Trying to lump wars into motivational categories is, it seems to me, an exercise in futility. The swirling complexities of permutations of combinations of motivations will very often -- perhaps, as I am inclined to think, always -- overwhelm our capacity for pigeonholing.

[loCAtek]

Absolutely, well done. It's not all black and white.

[Scooter]

to transform society into one that understands and respects atheism; that supports and respects a worldview based on the values of reason, empiricism and naturalism; and that respects and protects the separation of religion and government and the constitutional and human rights of atheists as members of society in free, democratic and open nations.

they want to take over the world

[Sean]

Time for a little myth-busting of my own...

Okay, but i didn't think atheism was being threatened in any way.

The word they used was 'respect'. No mention of threats was used until you started typing. Myth busted!

However, at least they're honest: they want to take over the world.

They do? Where does it say that? This is, of course, bullshit. Myth busted!

Don't worry, they have a fair bit to go since their idea of international, pretty much means the USA, so far. Oh but wait, just this month they've added another country by splitting up: AA International will now be run from Australia, and the original 'international' organization will be called Atheist Alliance America.That host of global members (actual number unknown) who have to speak English in order to read the AAI magazine, Secular World, will just have to update their bookmarks.

Myth well and truly busted!

I can understand promoting logic, reason and science, but these groups always have that slightly veiled threat that they want to end religion too. Folks should have just said so, when we asked in the first place. (what, did you think we wouldn't figure it out? )

Veiled as in completely non-existent. Myth busted!

So, why not just promote logic, reason and science? If the atheist assertion is true, then faith would naturally fade away all by itself with that education.
Except, in the historical course of things, over the centuries: it hasn't.

That's exactly what Atheists do. They just don't rely on mass genocide to strengthen their beliefs like some I could mention... Myth busted!

According to the above, theism has been around since the Greeks, and I'm willing to believe it's been around longer than that, but [not so] amazingly:

God is still here.

He is only here for people who believe he is here. You have no proof that he is still here. Myth busted!

This latest strategy of not just supporting atheists, but attacking theists suggests some are getting pretty impatient with the Greeks, since logic, reason and science, aren't working fast enough. Just call it what it really is guys- a War on Worship.

That's what you would like to believe it is. Are the big, bad atheists scaring you?
The whole 'War on Worship' thing is yours only... although it's not an original thought, preachers have spoken for years about "Satan's War on Worship". I think you are confusing Atheists and Satanists. Myth busted!

I can see the latest campaign slogan:


"Atheism WOW!"

Do I need to say it again?

Why not...

Myth busted!

The Atheist campaign for "respect and understanding" has a long way to go as long as there are people who think like you Lo...

[loCAtek]

Hmmmm, what part of 'transform society' didn't you understand?

Hmmmm, what part of 'not black and white' didn't you understand?

[Scooter]

The part where "transform society" equals "take over the world".

The part where "not black and white" means "loca has posted something which makes the slightest bit of sense".

[Sean]

I busted the myths you were attampting to propogate. You can refute what I have written or deal with it.

[loCAtek]

It's rather like that movie Scooter, 'God who wasn't there' where individuals who dislike dogma, mistakenly blame religion; then claim there's only the false choice of dogma or nothing.

Seems to me if you prefer logic, reason and science, then you'd promote that. How does attacking another's spirituality fit into that? In Western countries where atheism is largely accepted already, it's not enough to be accepted. For some reason, there's this campaign to end coexistence of all beliefs, so that the atheist belief dominates.

Saying that giving people choices of belief and leaving them freedom of religion must be transformed, smacks of controlling behavior.

[Scooter]

I see absolutely nothing in anything that you have posted suggesting that any of those organizations wishes to curtail anyone's choice of belief or interfere with their religious freedom. If you claim that there is, perhaps you could point to, uh, the words that say so.

[Sean]

In Western countries where atheism is largely accepted already, it's not enough to be accepted.

Largely accepted? When it's given the same footing as other beliefs and doesn't have to plough through ignorance such as yours then I will agree that it is largely accepted.

[Andrew D]

Dogma? Religion? Spirituality?

Just remember that each of those words means whatever loCAtek wants whichever one of them to mean at the moment that she types it but may not mean the same thing later and probably did not mean the same thing earlier. Then it will all make perfect sense.

[loCAtek]

I see absolutely nothing in anything that you have posted suggesting that any of those organizations wishes to curtail anyone's choice of belief or interfere with their religious freedom. If you claim that there is, perhaps you could point to, uh, the words that say so.

The myth-conceptions in bold;

About Us
The Atheist Foundation of Australia Inc began in South Australia in 1970 when the members of the Rationalist Association of SA decided that a name change would proclaim their basic philosophy, which began in Greece 2500 years ago.

We can understand why primitive cultures believed that invisible beings controlled what we now call the elements and natural phenomena. With access to factual knowledge, there is now no excuse for believing in gods, fairies or any supernatural concept.

We live in a natural universe with known natural laws. Religion, based on belief in the existence of the supernatural, is dependent on the indoctrination of infants generation after generation, by parents brainwashed in religious cultures.

The confrontations and fighting today provide ample evidence of the unstable nature of societies, which endorse religious beliefs.

Infantile concepts [assuming that's a reference to religion] seriously hinder the full potential development of humans in a world with problems that require logical thought.

Atheists find their motive for action in the needs and problems of their fellow citizens and consider that the worship of, or reliance on, imaginary supernatural beings to be a useless waste of time, energy and resources. [So to promote atheism is demote theism, how does that follow?]

The Foundation is dependent on a small committee which meets monthly and is open to all members. We maintain a cordial relationship with similar organisations [sic]within Australia and overseas and with whom we exchange our magazine, The Australian Atheist.

It is recognised [sic] that the non-religious segment in society is on a steep increase but only through such organisations [sic] as the Foundation will it be recognised [sic]as a movement worthy of notice by administrative bodies.

We welcome feedback from thoughtful people and invite your co-operation and membership.



Our Philosophy

The Atheist Foundation of Australia recognises [sic]scientific method as the only rational means toward understanding reality. To question and critically examine all ideas, testing them in the light of experiment, leads to the discovery of facts.

As there is no scientific evidence for supernatural phenomena, atheists reject belief in 'God', gods and other supernatural beings. The universe, the world in which we live, and the evolution of life, are entirely natural occurrences.

No personality or mind can exist without the process of living matter to sustain it. We have only one life - here and now. All that remains after a person dies is the memory of their life and deeds in the minds of those who live.

Atheists reject superstition and prejudice along with the irrational fears they cause. We recognise [sic]the complexity and interdependence of life on this planet. As rational and ethical beings we accept the challenge of making a creative and responsible contribution to life.



Our Aims

To encourage and to provide a means of expression for informed free-thought on philosophical and social issues.

To safeguard the rights of all non-religious people. [they were at peril before?]

To serve as a focal point for the fellowship of non-religious people.

To offer reliable information in place of superstition and to offer the methodology of reason in place of faith so as to enable people to take responsibility for the full development of their potential as human beings. [the religious aren't responsible? Source?}

To promote atheism.

[Sean]

So having a clear system of beliefs automatically means trying to change everybody elses (but only if you're an atheist probably)?

That is remarkably bigoted, ignorant and insulting.

[Scooter]

I see absolutely nothing in anything that you have posted suggesting that any of those organizations wishes to curtail anyone's choice of belief or interfere with their religious freedom. If you claim that there is, perhaps you could point to, uh, the words that say so.

The myth-conceptions in bold;

About Us
The Atheist Foundation of Australia Inc began in South Australia in 1970 when the members of the Rationalist Association of SA decided that a name change would proclaim their basic philosophy, which began in Greece 2500 years ago.

We can understand why primitive cultures believed that invisible beings controlled what we now call the elements and natural phenomena. With access to factual knowledge, there is now no excuse for believing in gods, fairies or any supernatural concept.

We live in a natural universe with known natural laws. Religion, based on belief in the existence of the supernatural, is dependent on the indoctrination of infants generation after generation, by parents brainwashed in religious cultures.

The confrontations and fighting today provide ample evidence of the unstable nature of societies, which endorse religious beliefs.

Infantile concepts [assuming that's a reference to religion] seriously hinder the full potential development of humans in a world with problems that require logical thought.

Atheists find their motive for action in the needs and problems of their fellow citizens and consider that the worship of, or reliance on, imaginary supernatural beings to be a useless waste of time, energy and resources. [So to promote atheism is demote theism, how does that follow?]

The Foundation is dependent on a small committee which meets monthly and is open to all members. We maintain a cordial relationship with similar organisations [sic]within Australia and overseas and with whom we exchange our magazine, The Australian Atheist.

It is recognised [sic] that the non-religious segment in society is on a steep increase but only through such organisations [sic] as the Foundation will it be recognised [sic]as a movement worthy of notice by administrative bodies.

We welcome feedback from thoughtful people and invite your co-operation and membership.



Our Philosophy

The Atheist Foundation of Australia recognises [sic]scientific method as the only rational means toward understanding reality. To question and critically examine all ideas, testing them in the light of experiment, leads to the discovery of facts.

As there is no scientific evidence for supernatural phenomena, atheists reject belief in 'God', gods and other supernatural beings. The universe, the world in which we live, and the evolution of life, are entirely natural occurrences.

No personality or mind can exist without the process of living matter to sustain it. We have only one life - here and now. All that remains after a person dies is the memory of their life and deeds in the minds of those who live.

Atheists reject superstition and prejudice along with the irrational fears they cause. We recognise [sic]the complexity and interdependence of life on this planet. As rational and ethical beings we accept the challenge of making a creative and responsible contribution to life.



Our Aims

To encourage and to provide a means of expression for informed free-thought on philosophical and social issues.

To safeguard the rights of all non-religious people. [they were at peril before?]

To serve as a focal point for the fellowship of non-religious people.

To offer reliable information in place of superstition and to offer the methodology of reason in place of faith so as to enable people to take responsibility for the full development of their potential as human beings. [the religious aren't responsible? Source?}

To promote atheism.

So nothing that suggests any desire or attempt to curtail anyone's choice of belief or interfere with their religious freedom. Thanks.

[loCAtek]

Well, other than perpetuating disparaging myths, but that's insecure human nature to tear others down to build yourself up, I suppose.

[Scooter]

IOW, nothing that suggests any desire or attempt to curtail anyone's choice of belief or interfere with their religious freedom.