1 of 13
1
Welcome “Non-Believers”
Posted: 21 January 2009 08:13 AM   [ Ignore ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  16
Joined  2008-04-08

Yesterday President Obama welcomed “Non-Believers” for inclusion. I like this phrase. Atheist and Agnostics have had an ongoing discussion on what to call ourselves. “Brights” has not caught on and Secular Humanist seems more of a philosophical postion than a reference to our stand on God and religion. Non-Believer seems less confrontational and does not carry the baggage that Atheist does. I could see saying “I’m a Non-Believer” in a casual discussion without generating the reaction that “I am an Atheist” gathers. Plus it has the implied approval of our new President.
What do my fellow Non-Believers say?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 January 2009 09:14 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1995
Joined  2008-09-18

I too like the phrase ‘non-believer’. It has an easygoing tone to it, almost like ‘nonpartisan’. And it sure beats all heck out of ‘infidel’.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 January 2009 09:47 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4081
Joined  2006-11-28

Yes, I use it in preference to atheist since it hasn’t yet been successfully demonized by the Christian Right.

 Signature 

The SkeptVet
The SkeptVet Blog
Militant Agnostic: I don’t know, and neither do you!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 January 2009 11:41 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  403
Joined  2007-08-26
edhopper - 21 January 2009 08:13 AM

Yesterday President Obama welcomed “Non-Believers” for inclusion. I like this phrase. Atheist and Agnostics have had an ongoing discussion on what to call ourselves. “Brights” has not caught on and Secular Humanist seems more of a philosophical postion than a reference to our stand on God and religion. Non-Believer seems less confrontational and does not carry the baggage that Atheist does. I could see saying “I’m a Non-Believer” in a casual discussion without generating the reaction that “I am an Atheist” gathers. Plus it has the implied approval of our new President.
What do my fellow Non-Believers say?

I like it. And I was pleased that Obama set a place for us at that particular table along with the Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc.

 Signature 

—————————————————
http://www.StephenJGallagher.com
http://StephenJGallagher.blogspot.com

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 January 2009 12:47 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7576
Joined  2007-03-02

I was glad he said that too.  It was good, even if others didn’t like that he included non-believers.  I think, IF the religious were to sit down and just talk to everyone, they may find we all have more in common than not in common.

 Signature 

Mriana
“Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark.” ~ Iris Hineman (Lois Smith) The Minority Report

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 January 2009 01:20 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  16
Joined  2008-04-08

Thanks for the positive response.
I am posting a link to another board where I started a similar discussion.
Is it me or do the responders just not get my point?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=195175&mesg_id=195175

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 January 2009 01:46 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7576
Joined  2007-03-02

I like Freethinker and Humanist too, but not every atheist is necessarily a humanist, so instead of going down the list of non-believers, in which case one might as well go down the list of Xians etc, I think the word non-believers works best.  Non-theists would have worked too.  Thing is, the word atheist has been used in derogatory manners in parts of the U.S.- ie Bible Belt, so it carries baggage with it, sometimes very insulting baggage.

 Signature 

Mriana
“Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark.” ~ Iris Hineman (Lois Smith) The Minority Report

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 January 2009 03:25 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  633
Joined  2007-12-10

I like to yell I’m an atheist infidel devil worshiper in casual conversations. Then continue the conversation as though nothing has happened.  LOL

 Signature 

Dan

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 January 2009 03:44 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1161
Joined  2007-07-16
edhopper - 21 January 2009 08:13 AM

Yesterday President Obama welcomed “Non-Believers” for inclusion. I like this phrase. Atheist and Agnostics have had an ongoing discussion on what to call ourselves. “Brights” has not caught on and Secular Humanist seems more of a philosophical postion than a reference to our stand on God and religion. Non-Believer seems less confrontational and does not carry the baggage that Atheist does. I could see saying “I’m a Non-Believer” in a casual discussion without generating the reaction that “I am an Atheist” gathers. Plus it has the implied approval of our new President.
What do my fellow Non-Believers say?

my wife and I say we are unbeliefable.

 Signature 

“Unsustainable systems can’t be sustained.” ~ Robert Jensen

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 January 2009 03:46 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  403
Joined  2007-08-26
danlhinz - 21 January 2009 03:25 PM

I like to yell I’m an atheist infidel devil worshiper in casual conversations. Then continue the conversation as though nothing has happened.  LOL

When the Jeebus People come to my door evangelizing on Sundays (a regular occurence out here in Red State America), I do one of two things:

1. “Sorry, no. We’re Druids.”

2. “Hey honey? Can you release the hounds?”

Both work just fine.

 Signature 

—————————————————
http://www.StephenJGallagher.com
http://StephenJGallagher.blogspot.com

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 January 2009 05:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7576
Joined  2007-03-02

A friend of mine had an interesting “conversation” with her cat in front of JWs.  He responded to her as if he understood every word she said. They were amazed how she did that and asked her how.  She said, “He’s my familiar.”  They ran and never bothered her or her family again.  LOL  She says she’s is a Bast worshipper, but she just LOVED how they ran with so much superstition.  I thought it was funny too, esp with how she told the story.

 Signature 

Mriana
“Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark.” ~ Iris Hineman (Lois Smith) The Minority Report

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 January 2009 06:06 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5508
Joined  2006-10-22

I always said, “non-theist”, but I like Dan’s comment.  From now on I’m going to say I’m and infidel.  Anything to stimulate boring people.  LOL

Many years ago when my wife had a miscarriage and was in the (Catholic) hospital, she had to put down her religion, but didn’t want to say atheist or agnostic.  I suggested “eclectic” and it worked.

Occam

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 March 2009 10:23 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  30
Joined  2009-03-24
edhopper - 21 January 2009 08:13 AM

Yesterday President Obama welcomed “Non-Believers” for inclusion. I like this phrase. Atheist and Agnostics have had an ongoing discussion on what to call ourselves. “Brights” has not caught on and Secular Humanist seems more of a philosophical postion than a reference to our stand on God and religion. Non-Believer seems less confrontational and does not carry the baggage that Atheist does. I could see saying “I’m a Non-Believer” in a casual discussion without generating the reaction that “I am an Atheist” gathers. Plus it has the implied approval of our new President.
What do my fellow Non-Believers say?

Now that would be good. It sounds better than the dogmatic, discussion provoking “I am an Atheist” description.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 March 2009 10:52 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  323
Joined  2009-02-18

Hmmmm….should we then welcome the ID wackos into serious science discussions as ‘non-believers’ ?

I guess it’s a workable word, and better than a lot of terms which have become somewhat derogatory.

It just makes me a wee bit uncomfortable as I don’t like labels very much. But it’ll do for now.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 March 2009 11:19 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  20
Joined  2009-03-26

I was very pleased, and surprised, with his inclusion of us in his address. I don’t care what he calls us, so long as we finally get acknowledged as existing.

Personally, though, I prefer atheist when I want to give a bit of a shock, when I don’t, I stick with “I am a nonbeliever and farther left that your right-winged brain can fathom”.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 March 2009 07:15 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 15 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  16
Joined  2008-04-08
omnibus09 - 26 March 2009 10:52 AM

Hmmmm….should we then welcome the ID wackos into serious science discussions as ‘non-believers’ ?

I guess it’s a workable word, and better than a lot of terms which have become somewhat derogatory.

It just makes me a wee bit uncomfortable as I don’t like labels very much. But it’ll do for now.

Science is a venue of facts. There is no belief or non-belief. It is a question of what theory the evidence supports.
Most believers will tell you they accept the existence of God on faith. We non-believers simply don’t have this belief.
So, no the ID wackos are not non-believers. They are people who stand against the overwhelming evidence of evolution.

Profile
 
 
   
1 of 13
1