Comments on: Godless? Nope.

By: Shelley Mountjoy

Shelley Mountjoy — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 16:56:35 +0000

I’m not too big on the term “godless” however I applaud Silverman’s attempt to flip the script… embrace the word used to ‘condemn’ us in the court of public opinion.

By: Ray

Ray — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 16:50:12 +0000

I vote no on godless. It does not even imply atheism. Many times I am shoeless but that says nothing about the non-existence of shoes.

As for bright, it should have been dropped long ago.

By: Izzib3th

Izzib3th — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 14:17:32 +0000

I call myself “atheist” more than I do “godless” but I do have a bumper sticker on my car that says “GODLESS” in bold, red letters. Either one is fine with me. Call yourself whatever you want… that’s my opinion.

By: Tim Bob

Tim Bob — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 14:12:52 +0000

I own five shirts and two beenies with the words “god free” on them, i perfer god free and so do the many atheists i am acquainted with. For those of you wishing to also own tshirts or beenies. The guy i buy them from has a myspace and his clothing company is called “hexed clothing” he’s a decent guy has no money and just likes making shirts haha.

By: Vincent

Vincent — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 06:03:06 +0000

Not a big deal. Several of the women in the Beltway Atheists (washington DC meetup group) wear the godless necklace, a picture of which can be seen here: http://www.etsy.com/view_listing.php?listing_id=11164536

I have no problem with it. Just doesn’t fit as easily on a lapel pin.

By: efrique

efrique — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 05:33:36 +0000

When people are determined that you should bear a negative connotation, no choice of words will deal with that, since any term will acquire a negative connotation, if people are determined that any term for you should.

Well, apart from ‘baby-eater’. They can’t make that sound anything but tasty.

By: bhanaji

bhanaji — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 03:50:57 +0000

It appears that folks’ suggestions for an appropriate label are originating from a spectrum of motivations found within two extremes: the desire to provoke others into rethinking their convictions, and the wish that everyone would just mind their own damned business and address each individual human being as such. I tend to act according to the latter motivation but feel deep respect for, and gratitude toward, those who are driven by the former (thanks, Dave.) I don’t like “Godless” or “God-free” or “atheist” or “non-theist” because discussions about what is “crow” and what is “not-crow” confer way more importance upon “crow” than I am willing to allow. “Bright” is truly unfortunate and I hope it dies out. “Infidel” is not right because theists do not hold the monopoly on faith. Faith is not necessarily a conviction- it can be an attitude and a commitment to principles that have no foundation in the supernatural. I like “skeptic” best because it is neutral and lacks undertones of egotism and condescension.

By: Tao Jones

Tao Jones — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 03:13:16 +0000

Sorry, I still don’t like “Bright” at all. Despite what the group actually stands for, the name plays right into the arrogant atheist stereotype.

I’d rather get the message across that you don’t need to be an intellectual or an academic in order to be an atheist. Regular everyday people are atheists too. We’re not better than anyone else so lets show the “average Christian” that they too can easily shed off their superstitious beliefs.

Iztok said,

If someone gets by with “intelligent design” I see no reason for us not to use word “bright”.

Do we really want to play this game of schoolyard semantics? Do we need to stoop to the level of ID proponents? We’re using them as out model for effective communication? Why not just call ourselves Ultra Supertastic Antidisestablishmentarians? Imagine the support we’d get at political rallies in the States!

By: tamarind

tamarind — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 02:54:33 +0000

I definitely prefer the term non-theist. It's pretty accurate. Bright sounds downright stupid, and godless would probably seem threatening to believers. While I have no problem with atheist or agnostic, there are conflicting definitions of what those mean, and it can get tiresome explaining which definition I go by.

By: John B

John B — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 01:55:54 +0000

A long time ago, when I deconverted from Christianity, I looked for a label to identify as. After awhile, I finally just settled on “human being” – granted, it doesn’t advance atheism, or anything else for that matter, but it comes with zero connotations or misunderstandings and requires no explanation. It keeps me and the person I’m talking with on the same plane- we’re all human beings, no matter what you believe or don’t believe. I know for some religious people humans = bad, but for most people that’s not the case, so I think it helps me relate better to people that I don’t have much in common with. We can discuss beliefs and semantics later.