DU: Do you Support the Rights of Brights?

[usregimechange]

Are you a Bright? A Bright is a person who has a naturalistic worldview.

Americans do not support our rights:

According to a recent Gallup poll 95% of Americans are willing to vote for a Black candidate for President, 92% for a Female or Jewish candidate, 59% for a Gay candidate, but only 49% would vote for an atheist candidate.

US Senators Miller, Nickles, and Inhofe all said in a recent interview that they would not confirm an atheist Supreme Court Justice.

Then Vice President George H. W. Bush stated in 1987, "I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered as patriots." There was no political backlash!

If you know a Bright they can sign-up here: http://www.the-brights.net/sign-up_sheet.htm

“Discrimination against nonbelievers is the last civil rights struggle in which blatant discrimination is viewed as acceptable behavior.” ~Herb Silverman

[alexwcovington]

1. There are a lot of civil rights movements left.

Gays and Lesbian Rights, of course. Also, there is a Youth Rights movement - and then the largely won but still ongoing women's rights movement... And that's just in the United States. A lot of other nations still do not have even the most basic freedoms...

[usregimechange]

2. Yes.

Which gives us a lot of work to do.

[patdem]

3. I too do not believe in that invisible man in the sky...so bright

yeah I agree a light went off with that realization...so yes I am a bright...but I do not want to sign on ...like joining a religion or something...fuggedaboutit!!!

[usregimechange]

4. More like

organizing for a social movement. We must be involved, engaged, active, visible, and unified. Also, registered and going to vote.

[usregimechange]

5. I ask you

to reconsider :-)

[patdem]

6. I am registered and going to vote..but I do not have to join

the movement to do what I do normally...I am of the ideal that I would not join any club that would have me as a member!

[usregimechange]

7. ok

I can respect that.

[Selwynn]

13. I don't believe in the invisible man in the sky either...

..but I am also not an atheist.

[expatriot]

24. agnostic...

i'm not an atheist either, i am a 'militant' agnostic.

agnostics are those who that come to complete grips with the unknowing of what lies beyonf the veil of our material perception.

In order to come to grips with it, I would venture to guess that most agnostics (but i can only speak for myself) are therefore politically, scientifically, etc. atheistic. Since we defer all judgements upon the immaterial and since we are forever very skeptical to any claims made on the topic of the immaterial. So the business of the world must be done on our collected observations of the material reality. I am not an 'atheist' per se since I think the measurements of 'reality' and what we consider the 'material world' are very much defined by our ability to receive sensory input and verify its 'existence' by cross-checking our sensory input with our database of past experience (ex. A) and communication with other sensory input devices (ex. B)...

EX A:
"Wow, that lightning bolt looked like the arrow of Appollo! But on second thought, I have seen lightning before make all sorts of shapes and so this one just HAPPENED to look like the arrows of Apollo."

EX B:
"Wow, I think I just saw a UFO!"
"No, that was just a falling star."
"Oh yeah, you're right."

[Cheswick2.0]

37. what's with the "invisible man in the sky"

who believes in that? Why not just say you don't believe in God?

[wtmusic]

8. I'm just a plain old atheist

That 'bright' crap is too pretentious

[DemBones DemBones]

11. I agree about the pretentiousness.

It also seems calculated to insult people of faith as Not Bright. I know that's how many atheists and agnostics really feel but is that a wise strategy for a minority group?

Atheist is a perfectly respectable and accurate term. A PR campaign to overcome negative stereotypes of atheism would be more useful than this "Bright idea."

Then again, you could have meetings and sing "This little Light of mine, I'm going to let it shine," just like every little Baptist kid in the country! (Maybe change it to "This Bright Light of mine"?)

[usregimechange]

14. no

"It also seems calculated to insult people of faith as Not Bright."

No no no, they make it clear this is not the intent and have done so from the get go. It is a noun. I am A bright. Not an adj.(I am bright).

This is a PR campaign.

[PurityOfEssence]

19. Still, it's a horrible term

It connotes intellectual superiority, and that taint cannot be taken away from it. What dimwit came up with this name? Part of the hatred vented upon non-believers is from ignorant people and those tender about their own intelligence. This is a ridiculous slap in the face of people who are already resistant to the concept.

You are telling others that they aren't bright. You're gonna get your ass kicked and set the cause back even further.

If you can't understand this, you're in extreme denial, or perhaps just "thick".

[usregimechange]

20. noppppp

"You are telling others that they aren't bright."

No we are telling them that they aren't A Bright. Note the capital letter and the A.

[Selwynn]

21. The same message is implied.

[usregimechange]

22. and

when homosexuals started calling themsleves "gay" they were telling heteros that they were not happy?

[leftofthedial]

36. or maybe "dim"

?



"atheist" works for me.

[blondeatlast]

30. Connotation always overrides denotation. It will take on this

connotation and I'm going to fight it (I'm not atheist or agnostic), but I am bright, as in intelligent.

Going to my preferences now to change my avatar.:evilgrin: I thought I'd give it a chance (I read the article in Wired, I thought it was too easy to co-opt). Let the co-opting begin . . .

See you on the "bright" side . . .

[klyon]

25. the opposite

If the opposite of Bright is Not Bright
is the opposite of The Right... wrong?
I think not but The Right thinks so.
The movement is interesting but I will wait and see how it develops.
I wish them good luck.

KL

[JNelson6563]

138. haha love the song ideas!

As an atheist I too find the term "brights" to be pretentious. It's an inference about believers than can only hurt efforts for mutual understanding and respect.

Julie

[usregimechange]

12. why?

It is a noun not an adj.

[not systems]

9. of course

But I don't think I would signup.

It is kind of like "Open Source" as a marketing
term for "Free Software" that worked to popularise it.

I don't know, it sounds very elitist "Bright" what
about the dim many will ask.

Then they will think HEY I am not that "bright" and
will hate you just as much a godless athiest or
secular humanist or fundamental materialist, ect.

Gump factor is hard to overcome.

Interesting idea - I will read more about it.

[usregimechange]

15. of course

but read more because it is not a descriptive term. It is a noun. I am A Bright. not I am bright.

[Zorra]

10. Of course. We're Democrats. n/t

[Selwynn]

16. I am not an atheist...

...and I think the term "bright" implying that atheists are smarter, more informed, or generally more sophsiticated than non-atheists is insulting.

However,

I also believe that the attitude in america for people of no faith, people of faith in people, atheists, naturalists or yes (sigh) even "Bright" people if that's what they want to be called, is saddening.

Bush Sr.'s comments are ones I recall, and I find them to be disgusting. I dream of a society in which people are free and encouraged to discover their own way in the world.

[incapsulated]

17. NO!

I thinks they're Witches!




Honestly, I never heard of atheists calling themselves this. It sounds like they are either trying to hide behind the tag or trying to make their beliefs more acceptable by giving them a happy-sounding title/description.

But that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

:shrug:

[usregimechange]

18. no

your right. Like homosexuals did in change theirs to gay rather than queer.

[Terwilliger]

34. huh????

When did they do that? Was there a homosexual Congress?

I think gays still call themselves queers...quite often, in fact.

[Zhade]

103. Yep.

I'm bisexual, and I call myself queer sometimes.

Heh...homosexual congress - good one! :)

[expatriot]

23. this term detracts from the movements' supposed aims...

okay, first of all, I signed up... I like the aim and the purpose but the term 'brights' is so very, very awful and really detracts from all that this movement could potentially offer.

First of all, it connotates that air of intellectual superiority and elitism that has already been commented on here.

Second of all, it seems to intentionally borrow from the terminology of the term 'gay' for homosexuals. I do not have anything against the term gay and who ever first coined the term it quickly lost its meaning as 'happy,'

Why choose a term that will make an uphill fight even steeper?

[blondeatlast]

29. Not to mention how easily it can be co-opted.

I read the article in "Wired" and just laughed. For at least one day on DU I used the light bulb avatar. I am NOT atheist or agnostic.

I also think it is a poor choice of word.

[Iverson]

26. I dislike the term "brights."

It seems to me that anyone serious about civil rights would not use rhetorical mischief in order to gain a temporary positional advantage.

The term "brights" is mischievous because bright connotes intelligent, and so appropriating the term is a way of indicating membership in the class of intelligent people. A truly meritorious position doesn't need this kind of maneuvering.

Clearly, an atheist can be of average intelligence or below, and the religious may be intelligent (e.g.- Einstein, Bach, Oprah).

The premise that discrimination against atheists is acceptable is exactly right. Let's engage this without making the struggle frivolous.

[thebigidea]

27. boy, I've been up to long

"and the religious may be intelligent (e.g.- Einstein, Bach, Oprah)."

but that sequence made me burst out laughing.

Ah yes... the greats... Einstein... Bach... errr, Oprah.

[Iverson]

28. hey hey

I just wanted to see if anyone was paying attention.

Have a great day, thebigidea. :hi:

[Muddleoftheroad]

79. The term is probably appropriate

It displays the egotism and hatred of those who disagree with the most strident of the atheism movement. (No, not all or even most atheists here seem to have a chip on their shoulders. Just enough to be really offensive.)

Based on the Mother Teresa posts today, I think the atheism movement needs some serious PR work, but that makes sense for a group that defines itself not by what it believes, but by what it does not.

As an aside, I am sure many non-atheists will be offended by the "bright" term.

[Iverson]

82. not sure I'm getting you

Egotism and hatred seem to be a bit of a stretch, but it is definitely some kind of effort to describe a preferred class, since "bright" is a positively encoded term that by itself has nothing to do with questions of religious faith.

[Muddleoftheroad]

84. Check out the Mother Teresa thread and get back to me

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=148571#148609

[Iverson]

89. just did, so I'm getting back to you

I noticed some snarky and unkind comments, but nothing from which I can draw much of a conclusion. As a Green, I get worse than that on a regular basis around here.

[Muddleoftheroad]

91. Political vs. Religious

On a political site devoted to one party, folks from another party can probably expect to be abused. But religious or not, we are all supposed to be Democrats, but some here are so radical they would rather chase away any who dare disagree with them.

Calling one of the best-hearted religious people in history a "fraud" is inexcusable.

[Iverson]

92. I see.

So otherwise inexcusable abuse is OK if one is a progressive but not formally a Democrat?

[Muddleoftheroad]

96. I wasn't abusing

But if I went to a site labelled RepublicanOverlord or something, I would expect abuse advocating another party.

In neither place would I expec abuse for religion.

[Iverson]

111. not the point

I never referred to your individual behavior, nor is that the point.

I thought we both understood that we were discussing the behavior of others and what is or is not acceptable.

My question stands. Whether you choose to confront it or not is entirely up to you.

[Muddleoftheroad]

117. I would say no for the record

This is a private site, if they wish to ban someone who doesn't agree, that is up to them. But people should not be abusing those who are here and don't agree.

[thebigidea]

106. atheism movement? do they have a theme song?

serious pr work? whatever for?

years of uh, science and ah - progress despite the dark age delusions of dingbats in decorous robes and fancy hats... I think that does the PR work for itself.

Monkeypile on that Galileo guy!

[blondeatlast]

31. You make a huge fault in logic here:

"Americans do not support our rights:

According to a recent Gallup poll 95% of Americans are willing to vote for a Black candidate for President, 92% for a Female or Jewish candidate, 59% for a Gay candidate, but only 49% would vote for an atheist candidate."

There is a fundamental difference between voting for a President based on a cultural classification and not supporting their rights. If the question had been:

"Do you support the civil rights of African-Americans, Females, Jews, and Gays?"

you would get a radically different response, I suspect.

It IS a Pr campaign and it is doomed to fail. It is too packaged and too easily discredited; and the connotation will insult the majority of people in this country whho believe in a deity of some sort.

[Selwynn]

70. edit

[Terwilliger]

32. nahhh...remember, we're not discriminated against...

we're simply intolerant of Christians!!! :eyes:

[blondeatlast]

33. Just a reminder, only some of you are.

There is ample evidence on this thread to indicate that you are in the minority.

[Cheswick2.0]

35. bullshit question

No one is trying to stop "brights" from being able to run for pres. People are free to judge who they will vote for and if they wouldn't vote for someone who is "bright" well then I guess you're going to have to work on your PR. Unfortunately for you most americans are religious/spiritual to some degree.

Personally, from my experience here on DU, I wouldn't vote for someone who is an atheist. I wouldn't trust them to be tolerant of others anymore than I trust the extreme religious right to be tolerant of others. I won't vote for the religious right either.

Now if there were a movement to ban atheists from public office, I would certainly fight that.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Cheswick2.0]

39. more bullshit terwilliger

Would you vote for the religious right candidate? You plan on voting for a Christian revisionist any time soon? No of course not, so how is that any different than what I just said?


PS.. I didn't say all atheists are intolerant and certainly not because they don't believe in God. Some atheists are intollerant for the same reason other people are intollerant... because they show disrespect for other's views. I don't care if people agree with me on religion. I do care if they are ignorant and rude about it.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[blondeatlast]

46. Fred Phelps is the Devil incarnate, IMHO, and Robertson is one of his

imps. How DARE you associate me with those two? How DARE you? I spend an inordinate amount of time fighting against nearly everything they stand for!


I call that a massive, unfair insult. In fact, it's just sick of you.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[blondeatlast]

58. If I ever help Phelps, may God send me straight to hell.

The only thing Fred Phelps does for me as a Christian is to make me think very unChristian like thoughts.

[Terwilliger]

74. that's good to know

but you KNOW that those types of Christians are (not only prominent in our supposedly evolved culture) but they're also in charge

Now you can see why atheists might get a little angry, while you're simply repulsed by the attitudes of those who claim to share your belief systems.

[blondeatlast]

42. Bwahahahaha! Cheswick, shame on you for your intolerance.

You are so intolerant and anti-progressive, I don't know why you don't pack up and join Fred Phelp's Westboro Baptist Church.

{eeeeexxxxxtttttrrrrreeeemmmmeeee sarcasm oozes out of BAL's fingers}

[Terwilliger]

48. blonde: you're intolerant

now, you cant even accept that people should have a problem with Christians, who are all reading the same words, yet some of them are extreme anti-tolerant people.

Maybe they're not reading the same book?

Oh well, I guess its acceptable to you that people who use the example of God from the book or Christ or whatever are running around spreading the "love" of god

Why aren't you at a book-burning?

[blondeatlast]

56. I object like hell when you lump me in with that type.

Why am I not at a book-burning? Well, If you knew me as well as you seem to think you do, you would know that I am a LIBRARIAN! Does that go hand in hand with ignorance and intolerance?

They may call themselves Christians, but they are no more Christian than YOU are. I make exception here, I DON'T believe YOU are EVIL, I DO believe that they are.

Fred Phelps is Satan, IMHO. He was put on this earth to show the hypocr=isy of the "so-called" Christians who have not learned acceptance and love, as Christ taught his TRUE followers.

[Terwilliger]

64. Then there's a serious disconnect between your version of god and theirs

why is that? why the disparity?

[blondeatlast]

86. Here's a drastic possibility; they are WRONG! I know it's an

uphill battle, but I'm willing to take it on.

[Terwilliger]

88. see post #81

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=468856&mesg_id=470249&page=

[bearfartinthewoods]

109. now you are sounding like something i can' mention

by trying to paint BAL with the same broad brush of phelps you sound like the people who want to nuke all moslem countries because of 911.

all moslems read from the same book but take different meanings from what they read....just like christians.

[Terwilliger]

123. where do I state that I support muslims in their faith system?

is that something you make up to fit your indignation a little better?

And Phelps is only representative of the same sorts of motivations that the fundy-muslims have...irrational god-based hatred of certain groups.

[blondeatlast]

40. Actually, Cheswick, I have found that most of the non-theists on

the boards are very tolerant. There are a few very angry exceptions as is the poster you replied to.

I think it is a good idea for atheists/non-theists to have a PR campaign, but I don't see how it can be successful if it is modelled on the "bright" campaign.

As you indicate, most Americans are believers in a deity and they are not going to take kindly to the implication (and it is definitely there). From the Wired article:

(snip)
Notice from these examples that the word bright is a noun, not an adjective.
(snip)
First hurdle: the conventions of standard English. "Gay" had no DENOTATION of superiority, so it didn't face the CONNOTATION hurdle. It was easliy co-opted, without loss to its denotative meaning.

We brights are not claiming to be bright (meaning clever;intelligent) any more than gays claim to be gay (meaning joyful; carefree).

Second hurdle: Gay doesn't insult (through denotation or CONNOTATION; which is the problem this campaign will have to overcome) those who aren't. Besides, the tone of the articel in Wired seems to indicate otherwise,IMHO.

All I can say is, Good Luck--but of course, there is no such thing.

[Terwilliger]

45. What should I be angry about?

Matthew Shapard is burning in hell as we speak!!! :eyes: :nuke:

[blondeatlast]

50. I don't believe that for a minute, and, FWIW, I don't believe

anyone goes to Hell.

Mathew Shepard is resting in God's embrace.

[Terwilliger]

52. according to you

you don't seem to be representative of a LOT of people who think like you do

[blondeatlast]

59. So why do you insist in putting me in the same category?

[Terwilliger]

63. It's your book! Your belief!!

Say what you want...the people I refer to sprung from the same well. Now, if you're not actively slamming them CONTINUOUSLY then I must assume you don't care that they tarnish the entire belief.

[GiovanniC]

87. Wait a minute...

Some of these Muslim suicide bombers are basing their actions on their book, on their belief. That is not an indictment on the entire religion of Islam, however, and I have fought like hell since 9/11 against that mode of thinking.

I'm not sure what I am, but my best friends are Christians and they are no Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson, I assure you.

[Terwilliger]

90. There's nothing but contempt for the extremism represented by terrorists

who are basically just using the fundamentalism for their political ends...thereby deceiving the masses who believe in them

Oh, we were talking about Islam...ok

Yes, those terrorists, whether they believe in their faith or use that faith for political ends, are disgusting killers and murderers.

My problem is with the whole concept, that leads these giant flocks of thoughtful people into certain camps. We've done that with politics now, and the lines are being drawn. I refer back to Jefferson, who said:

"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent."
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Francis Hopkinson, March 13, 1789

OnEdit: some needed editing

[Selwynn]

120. Blah..

The bottom line is,

I understand my own life through the lens of spiritual faith, I use the symbols, imagery and metaphors of religious tradtion because I personally believe they help me embrace real truths about my life and the nature of the world in which I exist.

Spiritual language and reflection is a large part of how I have come to be a man of deep happiness, enjoying the freedom of peace and allowing me to focus my time and energy on striving to express love throughout my life - love of self, love for others and love of this world in which I exists.

I don't ask you to take the same path as I do, but at the same time I really don't give a good god damn about your angry denouncments of those who do.

There are very bad people who take up the name of "Democrat" in the world today. That doesn't make the Democratic party evil, nor every person who takes the name of Democrat evil.

There are bad people who call themselves Americans, that doens't make every American bad.

There are people who call themselves athesists who are bad people, that doesn't make all atheists bad.

But for some reason, which it comes to people who admit to a spiritual faith, and especially a Christian faith, oh how the sterotypical sweeping generalizations fly with impunity! /roll eyes.

[bearfartinthewoods]

129. and again!

the freepers say if the Moslems, in general, are just as guilty of terrorism as the select sub-sect of waahabism because they fail to go around criticizing the terrorist 24/7. they set the bar too high just as you do when you expect christians to go about criticizing the likes of phelps 24/7.

"if you're not actively slamming them CONTINUOUSLY then I must assume you don't care that they tarnish the entire belief"

[Terwilliger]

133. set the bar too high?

I think ALL the believers should actively discurage acts of utter barbarity by "the other flock"

Sorry, I don't see fundamental differences between the three Abrahamic religions. You're all following the same goal.

[Selwynn]

119. represents me quite well, and probably

represents more people than you think, if you'll give people a chance.

Look, I don't care if you're pissed off and angry at people who've done something bad to you in the name of a religious belief.

I don't care if you're pissed of and angry at people who have done NOTHING to you or anyone else in the name of anything - but you assume that they must be like these other people you know.

[Terwilliger]

122. given the nature of your two closely posted posts

I'd say you care very much.

Believe how you will, leave it out of politics.

[FlaGranny]

44. I kind of

resent that remark. People trust me implicitly. Most have no idea I'm an atheist (I keep quiet about it out of self preservation). My parents raised me to be trustworthy, honest, charitable, and tolerant. I may not always succeed 100%, but I still try.

Some of the atheists on DU give the rest of us a bad name. Some Green supporters give Greens a bad name. Some Dean supporters give Dean supporters a bad name. Some Clark supporters give Clark supporters a bad name - on into infinity.

We should never denigrate the entire group because of a few individuals in that group. Perhaps denigrating an entire group because of the majority of individuals in that group would be appropriate. Neocons and rabid fundamentalists come to mind, because they, as a group, are intolerant of everyone else by their very nature.

Edit: Removed a sentence.

[Cheswick2.0]

80. I am not denigrating any whole group

I am saying that based on my experience here, I prefer to vote for people I know would not be intolerant of my views. There is never a lack of liberal Christians, Jews and other "theists" to vote for. I know that at least I wont be called names such as God Pod by them and told I beleive in "an invisible magic man in the sky".

I am sorry Granny, I don't mean to add to the hurt already here on DU, but even amoung my relatives there was a kind of obnoxious superiority to what they think is wrong with "Chistians" until they finally realized that they were talking about me... without a doubt the most liberal/radical member of my family.

[Iverson]

85. uh, Cheswick ...

Just as you wouldn't want people to make erroneous conclusions about you based on a sweeping generalization, you shouldn't do the same either.

Apparently, a small number of atheists have annoyed you into taking the stand that they are all intolerant. I'm sure you agree that any group has better and worse examples. In a calmer moment, I hope that you will agree that it's political positions that matter, and not a priori declarations of faith or non-faith.

[blondeatlast]

94. To that I say; amen.

[LibInternationalist]

54. I most certainly WOULD vote for someone who was an atheist

but, like you (I hope), I would not base my decision to vote for them on the fact that they were an atheist

[charlie]

55. Points for honesty

Negative points for boneheadedness. Won't vote for an atheist because of the ones you've tangled with on this board? Why vote Democratic then? There's no shortage of combative Democratic assholes here.

[Cheswick2.0]

67. I have voted for assholes in the past

and I probably will again. However that is not what I am talking about.
My experience is that atheists tend to be intollerant just like the religious right tends to be intollerant of people who do not agree with their view of religion.

I prefer to vote for people who leave religion out of public discourse altogher.

[Terwilliger]

71. show me an intolerant atheist

You could even use me! I'm not intolerant. In a discussion about the reality or falsity of a supreme being, I'll slam you all day...but I'm not telling you what to think. I'm telling you what I think. You can believe what you like, and if I was in a position of power (which isn't going to happen anyway) I would NOT bring religion to that position. I'm an atheist...I treat all human beings as equally as they bring it.

[charlie]

77. Yeah, but Chez

you expect atheists to discern the difference between insane Fundies and the honestly religious, right? Doesn't it boil your grits when you get lumped in with the likes of Pat Robertson? You're talking to an atheist who wouldn't and has never done that. I couldn't get your vote for Water Commissioner?

[Terwilliger]

81. this atheist does it for purposes of exposition

I have nothing against Cheswick or blondeatlast. One of the best people I've ever known is a very religious wife of a southern methodist. I have no problem with her, but she never judged me or others on what they believed in or not. She simply judged people on their words and actions. Totally equitable no problem.

This is all I'm asking for. I don't want to squeeze out your beliefs...I just want them left out of government

and, even, political discourse...it's like Nader (yes, I know) said "I don't do gonadal politics"...well, I don't want to do religious politics, but everybody ran out to the steps of the Capitol and recited the pledge "under god" and they can stick it.

[spooky3]

125. but you're implying that being an atheist is equivalent to

being on the "extreme", like the religious right. That's like saying all Christians are fundamentalists. You might be surprised how many people are not "religious/spiritual" but choose not to make public comments about it for various reasons, including not wanting to face bigotry on the part of others.

[Mairead]

43. What, you mean their right to (metaphorically) wear a silly hat? Sure.

But I hope they don't expect help confirming that it's on.

[Cheswick2.0]

47. I have several Atheist family members

Not one of them has ever been discriminated against for their beliefs.

[Terwilliger]

57. yet you wouldn't vote for them

I guess you should tell them that, and see what they think about your "tolerance"

[Cheswick2.0]

60. they aren't running for office

:shrug:

[Terwilliger]

66. nice evasion, Cheswick

gather your atheist family members together, and tell them you wouldn't vote for them and tell them why...see what they think then

[Cheswick2.0]

69. you are taking yourself way to seriously

lighten up. My family members respect me as I respect them. It is other people I am not so sure of.

[Terwilliger]

75. have you gathered your atheist family members together yet?

and told them that you wouldn't vote for them because they're atheist?

[Terwilliger]

93. OH!

You think your family are condescending pricks (on atheism)? You'd love my sister Julie. She's a believer.

[blondeatlast]

62. I would vote for an atheist who would uphold the separation

of Church and State and would uphold the civil liberties of believers who want to practice their beliefs in their homes and houses of worship.

[Terwilliger]

68. good!

I don't think you'd find an atheist who would advocate an intolerance to Christianity or other religions, whereas the revers would NOT be the case (in most cases I've seen)

Not a lot of progressive Christians and believers in the halls of power.

[LibInternationalist]

49. As an atheist, I think this campaign is lame

for many of the reasons brought up elsewhere on this thread (implies intellectual superiority, etc.) -- I'm wholeheartedly for paying more attention to the rights of atheists, but this is not the way to do it. I think that forming an organized group of atheists is a bit ridiculous, frankly -- along the lines of "calling atheism a religion is like calling health a disease"

[WillyBrandt]

53. Do not EVER call me a Bright

I hate it when right-wing slogans perfectly apply, but this is just politically correct hippie mumbo-jumbo.

I'm an atheist that doesn't spent a whole lot of time thinking about religion. (After you've been an atheiest a while, you realize there's not much point in obsessing over whether the Bible contradicts itself, etc.)

Call me an atheist, call me non-religious, call me non-practicising Catholic, call me crazy, but don't ever call me a Bright.

[Iverson]

61. say, WillyBrandt,

I think you are A BRIGHT kind of guy for taking that position.

Cheers!
;-)

[LibInternationalist]

65. amen

haha

[charlie]

73. It would suck

if my mere indifference to ecclesiastical matters inducted me into a "movement", especially with one with a name as twee as the "Brights" -- I demand a vote!

[Selwynn]

72. This is not about "rights" it is about "conversion"

According to a recent Gallup poll 95% of Americans are willing to vote for a Black candidate for President, 92% for a Female or Jewish candidate, 59% for a Gay candidate, but only 49% would vote for an atheist candidate."

This statistic above is not about your rights being abused. This is about 51% of the country DISAGREEING with your position, and choosing not to vote for someone that they fundamentally disagree with.

It's not prejudice - its 51% precent of the nation (right or wrong) believing in God and believe that someone who shares their beliefs is a more qualified leader. Your argument is like saying that people who are pro-life are being discriminated against because a certain percentage of people wouldn't vote for a pro-life candidate.

You hold a minority opinion, and now are crying out that your "rights" are abused because people are less likely to vote for you. You do not belong in the class with Blacks are Gays becuase this is not a rights issue or a rights movement. What this is, is an evangelical movement, as you try to "convert" people to an acceptance of or subscription to, atheist belifes.

In another thread I said that attitudes towards atheists were a shame and I stand by that -- but they're not predujice. Attitudes towards pro-choicers are also a shame, in so far as it would be nice if there was universal agreement on the issue, but of course there isn't.

[usregimechange]

98. So

When someone does not vote for a jew based solely on their religious views, that is not religious prejudice? Why not vote for a Jew? Because there is something about their beliefs you deem unworthy. When someone refuses to vote for a Black candidate, not out of any indivdual merit (based SOLEY ON THEIR BLACKNESS), that is racist. Would you not want to know something about the person before ruling out voting for them? I can't believe you consider your self a Democrat. ???????????

[Selwynn]

112. So...

When someone does not vote for a neo-nazi based soly one their beliefs, that is not prejudice? How dare I not vote for someone because their beliefs are fundamentally different from what I believe to be best for society! That's just like racism. I can't believe you call your self a democrat! /sarcasm off.

Sometimes we don't vote for people that we - gasp - don't agree with. I am not prejudiced against republicans, rich people, idiots, or texans simply because I chose not to vote for Bush last election. You're saying that for a person who holds the belief that a spiritual faith is essential to being a good human being, it is prejudice and wrong to not vote for someone who holds the complete opposite of that belief for that very reason. I think that is ludicrous.

[Swede]

76. Bright does imply superiority to me instantly

I have never heard of this before. Hire some Madison avenue guys to come up with a snappy,less in your face moniker. Godless maybe,or unholy.

[blondeatlast]

78. Those are LESS in your face?

It's an adjective, regardless of what they try to do to it, and I'm calling myself one, too.

[usregimechange]

99. and if you are not gay

that means you are sad? Come on guys! The term Bright is a NOUN. It is not an adj. I am A Bright. I am not saying that I am bright.

[Terwilliger]

83. I am not a "bright"

If people want to think of me as "bright" that's cool

I think of bright once in a while, whether looking at the sun, or seeing a bright face, or talking to a bright person...these things happen once in a while.

[quaker bill]

95. Freedom of Religion

is also freedom from religion.

[Muddleoftheroad]

97. Not at all

That would eliminate all use of religion in the public area. Sorry, it means what it says -- freedom OF religion. It was designed to prevent one religion from dominating.

[usregimechange]

100. how would one enforce freedom of religion

if there is no freedom from religion? What you have to pick at least one? I can't believe the responses to this thread. Really, I can't. By calling themsleves "Gay" I supose DU would think that all heterosexuals were being labeled sad by gays. Were homosexuals making a statement that they are happier than the rest of us????

[nemo137]

101. because for one thing "gay"

has basically fallen out of general use. bright, on the other hand, is still a common phrase for a clever person. how can you not see the difference?

[0rganism]

104. which came first, though?

Did the adaptation of "gay" as a synonym for homosexual precede the disuse of the term as a synonym for happy? Or vice versa?

[Zhade]

105. Uh, are you gay?

Because I have NO idea where you get the idea that the term is "out" (pun intended).

It's used just as much as ever.

[nemo137]

127. for "joyous" or for "homosexual?"

because i hear it alot for the second, and never, outside of english class (older books) for the second?

[muriel_volestrangler]

107. It's a silly PR stunt

that I hope the American Humanist Association hasn't wasted a cent on, but I'm afraid that they have.
They have a noun to describe themselves already - 'humanist', believe it or not.

usregimechange, you need to understand that when someone says they wouldn't vote for an atheist, it's not prejudice. By describing themselves an an atheist, they have told people some of their beliefs. That is a valid basis for making a judgement about them. Personally, I wouldn't vote for a Jehovah's Witness; or a fascist. Anyone who calls themselves those things has told me enough to know that I can't trust them, even if they might agree with me on some points like, say, the environment.

[rman]

108. but does it mean it is mandatory to be religious?

if so, why?

[Iverson]

113. yes, at all

Freedom of religion does not admit of the state compelling its citizens to be religious. Freedom not to worship is legally the same as freedom to worship.

[Swede]

102. Well then Dull shoud be perfectly acceptible

[Zynx]

110. I am personally insulted...

by many atheists. They are so confident that they are more intelligent than everyone else because they believe in scientific theories rather than have faith in God. Quite frankly, neither group, believers or un-believers, has any claim to greater credibility.

If atheists want more respect, maybe they should be quiet about their beliefs. Much of the loud mouth statements like "Christians are stupid" and "I know there isn't a God" offend the vast majority of people including myself. I believe in God fairly strongly, but I don't go around shoving it in people's faces and nor should I. Atheists should do the same.

I might vote for an atheist for president, but if they were a loud mouth like many atheists are, then forget it.

[Speed8098]

114. Ok, I kept my mouth shut for as long as I can

They are so confident that they are more intelligent than everyone else because they believe in scientific theories rather than have faith in God

The same could be said for the fanatics that grace our malls, stand outside grocery stores, and anywhere else they can try to force their "God" down your throat.

I have found that the ones that profess to be "born again" to be the ones who have dirty secrets to keep.

Whenever I hear someone say, "Oh, he's/she's a good Christian", I begin to look at that person more closely. Guess what, usually it turns out that their is something dark about that "good Christian".


Religion is private. You can believe in the tooth fairy as far as I'm concerned, but keep your beliefs to yourself.
That's why there are churches. Gather with people who believe in the same things you do, but stop trying to get me on board your "Bus to heaven", I'll find my own way thank you.

BTW, I'm a non practicing Catholic, and yes, I do think there is some kind of a God.

[Zynx]

115. That's true...

I dislike the Pat Robertsons of the world just as much if not more because they give reasons for people to stop being Christians because they have so perverted our faith.

[GOPBasher]

116. It's so sad.

There is just so much ignorance about atheism in this country. I wish people could see the difference between beliefs and morality. Obviously, more than half cannot.

[Selwynn]

121. It's so sad

There is just so much ignorance about christians in this country. I wish people could see the difference between a personal spiritual faith leading to love and fundamentalistic extremism. Obvisously, more than half cannot.

[gulliver]

118. Link to Wired Article

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.10/view.html?pg=2

Not so sure I want to label myself anything, though...

I reserve the right to think of the natural as plenty mystifying.

[Cheswick2.0]

124. Two days later this is still a bullshit question

You don't have to vote for someone to support their rights. I wouldn't vote for a republican, but I support their right to run.

[usregimechange]

130. look

if you would not vote for an african american based soley on his race, that would be discrimination.

[blondeatlast]

131. Ghandi would not be considered a (ugh) bright, from your

definition.

Whatever. It's stupid, and this bright believer, who is also a bright Democrat, and a bright believer in all things free related to belief or lack thereof, is brightly going to co-opt the word. It's just bright to do so, because the term is silly and elitist*.

on edit: *and decidedly diingeuous as in not intelligent and inadvisable.

[Room101]

126. Atheist checking in

I do not believe in tribal superstitions or invisible men. Praying is a form of spiritual placebo and religion is nothing other than a tool to control the masses. I consider belief in religion to be a neurological disorder. We deserve the same rights as the self-righteous. O8)

P.S. If anyone has proof of God's existence please provide a link. :hi:

[blondeatlast]

128. This thread is about a stupid PR stunt, even if it has been hijacked.

:hi: backatcha

Are you (shudder) Bright?

And I solemnly swear, that is the first, last, and only time I will use that term as a (shudder) noun or may the controller of my neurologically disordered masses send me rolling into hell.

[Blue_Chill]

132. This is complete bull shit.

First off allow me to begin by stating that I am disgusted by the term "bright" used to describe, atheists. It obviously is intended to mean "the religious are dim" or "smarter then them". It is the smug crap I have come to expect by the poor mistreated godless population of america.

I will not adopt that insulting meme. I hope this latest spell of self worship comes back to bite those who created in the ass.

Second - I don't believe athiests are as discriminated against as they claim. I know that in Northern Virginia 90% of people couldn't give two shits what your faith is. In fact most of the US is that way. Only in the bible belt do the fundies reign supreme.

I'm hispanic, I certainly do not see atheist being held in as much contempt as my culture is.

Also if someone does not follow any faith why do they insist bringing the topic of faith up? Atheism is about not believing in so called fairy tales, but lately its become the worship of not worshipping.

Third, if a atheist can win in Chile, a catholic controlled nation, they can win here. In the end people will vote for issues not faith. Especially democrats. As long as people knew that a atheist running for office did not plan on attacking religious institutions I think partisan views on issues would beat out fear of the godless.

[Spentastic]

134. More sense than usual

This is a very dangerous sentiment however.

"I don't believe athiests are as discriminated against as they claim"

Just like them whining blacks and Hispanics?

[Blue_Chill]

135. Just like them whining blacks and Hispanics?

I am hispanic. And if you want to compare atheist discrimination to that which we recieve we can go down that road.

What people are constantly made fun of on TV? Hispanics, we still always play the roles of janitor, maid, etc etc. Even in Will and Grace the hispanic lady is constantly told she will be sent back to her country.

What people are constantly blamed for economic problems? Hispanics, even though study after have shown how americans are making a killing off illegals, and that over all hispanics add to the economy.

What people are constantly assumed to be illegal, and thus get the absolute worst treatment every time they get arrested? Hispanics.

The list goes on and on.

[Spentastic]

136. Look

Is this your standard tactic? Just offend as much as possible and then wonder why people call you on it.

Do Hispanics suffer discrimination?

Do aetheists suffer discrmination?

I'd have thought that barring other factors that would make the two groups allies of sorts. But not you. You decide that there are degrees of discrimination and that yours is worse.

[Blue_Chill]

137. what?

First off the point of my post was not to offend, I meant what I said. I do not think athiests are discriminated against as much as some claim. At least not in most of the US. And in the areas of the US that they are heavily attacked so is every other, non white non protestant christian.

There are simply too many atheists in the US to back up the idea that they are a hated group. As much as 20% of this nation is without religion.