There is true happiness in throwing off the burden of religion and waking up to a world that is bright and beautiful, a vast and awe-inspiring place through which we are free to chart our own course. Since our goal as atheists should be to increase human happiness, we should spread this message as widely as possible and work to persuade people to join us.

Is individualism what you are about then? Is an atheist possibly moved by the fear of authority, or of losing autonomy? Many theists find that when they embrace trust in God that they come to know true freedom, rather than a loss of autonomy. This ties in closely with being who we are created to be--people of love, who recognize that we are all loved by God. In your statement above, though you say atheism leads to happiness, it sounds like a fall from hope to me. What joy and hope is there in rejecting any meaning of life beyond ourselves and beyond our temporal flesh? On the contrary to being a limiting power, trust in and abandonment to God's love leads one to fulfill the purpose for which we are created--to strive for a life of perfect charity. And if we fulfill that purpose, joy is a natural fruit... and not an emotional joy that fades or cannot handle difficulty, but a deep sense of peace due to one's heart resting in God.

Theists are only united by fear, fear of their god compels them to follow the dogma. Fortunately, atheists have no such fear to bind them into a united group and are free to explore every idea and embrace any philosophy.

This is a false universal statement. Love, hope, and faith are often in the hearts of theists. Professing faith in dogma or doctrine is often a fearless, joyful act of the will--not something that one is coerced into believing.

I really liked this article, and I think you make very good points. I would call what you suggested activism rather than evangelism (maybe there isn't a real difference between those two words, but "evangelism" has a bad connotation for me, while "activism" has a positive one).

Anyway, I love your site and I'm very happy and thankful that places like these exist.

And I know a lot of people say Atheism is not a religion. I am a little torn on that. There are some Atheists I have come across who spend a lot of time talking about their non belief to anyone who will listen or not. That doesn't strike me as being much different than many religions.

I know people who are really into their cats. They spend a lot of time talking about their cats to anyone who will listen or not. It's not much different from religious people. I guess owning cats is a religion too right?

Sorry to be facetious, but I have to disagree with your assessment. If the only thing that makes something a religion is talking about it, or being passionate about it, then "religion" doesn't really mean much as a word. Anyone who likes to talk about a certain subject could be starting a new religion based on that.

I do see the point in trying to gain political representation though. Certain religious groups have a huge voice in politics yet their membership isn't particularly huge. So I am in favor of making the presence of Atheists known for that purpose. I read somewhere that if secularist, Atheists, Agnostics, and Humanists were a religious denomination they would be larger than any other Christian denomination in the United States. Yet when we turn on the TV and watch some news stories, we get the impression that certain much smaller groups have more clout. Well because they jump up and down and make their presence felt. So maybe that is why Atheists need to do the same.

And I know a lot of people say Atheism is not a religion. I am a little torn on that. There are some Atheists I have come across who spend a lot of time talking about their non belief to anyone who will listen or not. That doesn't strike me as being much different than many religions. I always think of the scenario of the one sane guy being at the nut house (I am not trying to be offensive to people with mental health issues, I just want to get to the point quickly.). So being the one sane guy really makes him the "nut". So his non affliction kind of makes him the one with the affliction. Being an Atheist isn't really about being "nothing" when you are surrounded by a lot of religious people of various flavors. It may not be by choice that an Atheist is "something", but to me it is the very nature of the circumstances that most Atheists are in.

Activism can take many forms. This web site is but one. The other, in broad terms, is social awareness. Many of us have no doubt read of the recent lawsuits that overturned the backwards turning 'anti-evolution' teaching policies enacted in several school districts and/or states in recent months. These educational corrections were accomplished by people within the local communities who recognized the shortsightedness and narrow goals of mis-directed religious zealots on their school boards. They should recieve an ovation. We must all do the same. Broad confrontation is not the answer, and open aggressive 'athiestic evangelism' would surely invite this. Success lies in education and a quiet, logical, dignified, but ever steady pressure in the form of awareness and vigilance on our part, and the willingness to stand up to any religious (or other) group who would enact a law or policy that would encrouch on our rights as athiests or give precedence to those with a particular religious belief set over others. These very acts will serve to get the word out to those who are ready and willing to hear it.

Western society has a rather large advantage in this vein, particularly in the US, as our legal system is our best tool, if used wisely.

(Forgive my lack of internet blogging savy)
I completely agree, being an atheist myself. I guess my fear is that by creating a move towards a more organized belief system with the goal of "deconverting" (which in this context I still read as "conversion"), it will create a breeding ground for certain dogmas. Perhaps not right away, but in the future. I do agree that atheism should be more prevalent in the public sphere so that some of the stigma around it begins to strip away, but I think the answer is less about trying to get people to "deconvert" as it is to get existing atheists to make their world views known publicly. To simply make the atheist world view more excepted - without a move to try to get others to join in artifically - would deconvert more people in a far less harmful way, then to make it a mission to "spread the good news." I honestly think that deconversion should remain a personal event, not one brought on by what could amount to "guilt tripping." If talking to other atheists spears it on, great, if it's brought on through a person's own exploration of the world, even better. But to have it brought on by a person attempting to "deconvert" another could leave lingering doubts about the person's decision to renounce god.

1. Anger at a god/religion. More of an emotional response. Comes from stuff like death of a loved one or abuse of authority.

2. Being exposed to people with different ideas. Just meeting a pagan, atheist or whomever may shake someone up and it may start the person questioning their belief system to prove that person wrong. This may have the opposite effect.

3. Education. Science and critical thinking types of classes help people learn to think logically and use evidence.

We can't control the first one. We can do the second either passively or actively. I think the third one is also a good one to support.

I agree completely. And you've probably been more successful at evangelizing then you might think. My own deconversion began with Paine's Age of Reason, but it took wing with sites like losingmyreligion.com and especially your own, ebonmusings. I am indebted to you and your site. This is the kind of evangelizing that's needed. Offering information rather than shoving it down someone's throat.

One of the most common questions I see from theists about atheist websites is: why do you bother? Would they ask the same of a freed slave who still opposes slavery? Religions are manacles of the mind. Theism is just as defeating and tragic as slavery. All the more so because the slave seems unaware of his subjugation and actually seems grateful for it.

Of course we should have something to say about it. But you can't free a slave who is happy with their bondage. That is why we must continue to educate and offer reason as an alternative. That shouldn't happen on a stranger's doorstep, but instead in the public sphere.

Does "evangelizing" the atheist position require excessive dogma or rigid thought? As atheists, we do share some common positions. I would not consider putting these positions forward to the community in the same negative vein as religious dogma.

Also if atheism is supposedly grounded in reason, then an atheist is not necessarily free to follow any philosophy. There are plenty of unreasonable philosophies. It seems like some are trying to equate atheism with an extreme relativism. If we come to atheism because science and reason tell us the supernatural doesn't exist, it doesn't make a lot of sense to dump science and reason at the doorstep - we carry it over to other aspects of our lives.

When a person makes decisions based on irrational belief in the supernatural, those decisions can adversely impact ourselves, our families, and the entire culture. Considering that the religious are vigorously indoctrinating the young, and sending out missionaries to all parts of the globe, it makes sense to counter this effort by actively putting forward the atheist position on these matters.