Atheism

Reasons to cheer—and possibly fear.

“Atheism+” formed to address social justice problems in the atheist community, but it may have to reckon with religion.

Really? Are we having this discussion?

There’s been a lot of talk in the American atheist movement about social justice, but why doesn’t it include justice for religious minorities like Muslims and Sikhs?

“I was washing dishes in the kitchen when I stopped believing in God. Years later, I’m often unsettled at how much of my life I’d spent in that kitchen and how little of it I can recall, except for that one moment. Overwhelmed by constant desperation, I turned suddenly courageous, pondered what might happen if He didn’t exist, decided that He didn’t, and then He was gone. I think the rapid departure hit me the hardest. How had I been so easily taken in?” —An excerpt from Haroon Moghul’s essay in All American: 45 American Men on Being Muslim

Dawkins and Dennett hold a “conversation” on the evolution of religion.

Billboards, rallies, biting commentary—all this is meant to deconstruct the cultural worlds framing sacred texts and ideas, and to do deep damage to the stronghold religion has on life in the United States. I’m in favor of billboards, as well as other organized efforts to advance progressive values and life-affirming ethics. Why should theists alone be allowed to present their ideas in grand ways? The anger coming from theists when confronted with the absurdity behind some of their own faith commitments shouldn’t silence non-theists, and it doesn’t require special handling by public figures.

If three wacky experiments and a host of assumptions makes it so.

A state that attempts to use the force of law to stop blasphemy must select certain identities for protection to the exclusion of others.

Should nonbelievers adopt a new label or take it back from the orthodox in their ranks?