For the holiday season, some goodies this weekend:

• First up, some music for the season: the blogger Lirone, of Words That Sing, in collaboration with William Morris, composer in residence at the British Humanist Association (did you know the British Humanist Association had a composer in residence? me neither!), has written a humanist carol, Gathering Round the Fire. It's 99 cents on iTunes, and all profits will go to the BHA. I downloaded and listened to it, and I enjoyed it greatly. Check it out, support a good cause, and lend a little bit of humanist cheer to your holiday gathering!

• Next, CNN has a surprisingly sympathetic interview with Richard Dawkins on evolution and atheist advocacy.

• The Daily Mail's Andrew Alexander offers a "heartfelt plea for atheism", an eloquent essay only slightly marred by an ignorant passage about climate change.

• Hanna Rosin asks whether the prosperity gospel contributed to the economic crash.

• On Daily Kos, it's a shameful day for the Irish Catholic Church, as a long-awaited report is released about the complicity of the bishops in sex abuse by predator priests.

• And finally, from Time, an unsparing essay about the subjugation and abuse of women in Islamic countries. (Did you know a Saudi Arabian woman has no legal proof of her existence besides her name on her husband's ID card? I didn't.) This is the kind of thing that the New Atheists get called "shrill" and "strident" when we write.

Also, you may have noticed that posts on Daylight Atheism are now classified by tag in addition to the six major categories (also, there's a tag cloud). I implemented this as a result of suggestions in the reader feedback thread, and I've been working my way backwards tagging older posts. Before I go further with that, I'm interested if people have any opinions on it. Too many tags? Too few? Are some missing that you'd like to see included? Personally, I'm still considering whether to add the "Science" tag to the posts on Lee Strobel.

Although there's been plenty of good news for atheists in recent weeks, stories that showcase our growing influence and assertiveness, this is no time for us to become complacent. We still have significant work to do to shore up the foundations of our movement, as this Times op-ed by Charles M. Blow explains:

...a study entitled "Faith in Flux" issued this week by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life questioned nearly 3,000 people and found that most children raised unaffiliated with a religion later chose to join one.

That Pew study, here, confirms earlier work such as the ARIS in finding that the nonreligious continue to be one of America's fastest-growing demographics. It also notes that the vast majority, 79%, of the nonreligious were raised in a religion and later left, as opposed to being brought up with no religion, and most of those people explained their decision by stating that they did not believe or could not accept the teachings of their church. Interestingly, a majority of former Catholics say that they left Catholicism because they disagreed with its teachings on abortion, homosexuality and birth control, which confirms my earlier prediction that the Catholic church's archaic moral dogmas are a major factor in its continuing decline.

However, Blow points to another important finding: Many people who were raised nonreligious do not stay that way. Of those who were raised nonreligious (which, again, is just a small minority of the nonreligious as a whole), substantial percentages have since joined some religion, with the majority going to Christian faiths. Most of these people explain this decision by saying that their spiritual needs were not being met, or as Blow puts it:

As the nonreligious movement picks up steam, it needs to do a better job of appealing to the ethereal part of our human exceptionalism - that wondrous, precious part where logic and reason hold little purchase, where love and compassion reign. It's the part that fears loneliness, craves companionship and needs affirmation and fellowship.

As the Pew findings show, the heart of religion is community. Most of the formerly unaffiliated joined a religion not because they preferred its moral teachings (only 26% said that), but because they enjoyed the social and communal aspects: participating in worship services, interacting with other members, and taking part in rituals for major life events such as marriage.

Atheists can draw some important lessons from these findings. First of all, there's reason for optimism: we're still growing, and doing so at the expense of traditional religions. We're making significant inroads among people who have rational or moral objections to the teachings of their church, which shows that our rhetorical campaign against religion is having an effect. This gives the lie to those who complain that we're being "disrespectful". And best of all, we're growing by leaps and bounds among the younger generation.

But at the same time, we have a lot of work left to do. We've done a lot of good in creating a beachhead for atheism, making our voices heard where they were previously passed over and giving an airing to the arguments against religion. What we need to do now is supplement those efforts by creating a secular community - a set of institutions that provide the social grounding and sense of belonging that people usually associate with religion. We're not doing anything wrong; plenty of people are already hard at work on this. But we need to do more, to make further progress along the way we've already started taking.

As well, I think we ought to redouble our efforts to make the case for atheism more widely known. I suspect that many of the unaffiliated, rather than hardcore atheists or freethinkers, simply grew up without thinking much about religion. As a result, they were blindsided when they heard evangelists' apologetics for the first time and ended up being drawn in. We need to do more to equip people with a toolkit of answers to common theist arguments, and to distribute this freethought vaccine as widely as possible, to ensure that the nonreligious will not be taken off guard in their first encounter with proselytizers.

To strengthen the atheist movement and expand the secular community, our strategy must be twofold. We need to hold and build, keeping the allegiance of people who've already come over to our side, while creating the institutions that will be ready to receive the future wave of freethinkers we can confidently expect. Debunking religion continues to be an effective strategy, but for atheism to truly expand and become influential in its own right, we still need to offer positive, appealing vision of what life can be like when free of superstition.

If you're an American freethinker who's envious of the success of the atheist bus campaign in Europe, this is your chance. The Freedom from Religion Foundation is launching its own campaign to put pro-atheist messages on buses and trains in America, with six ads already designed that feature quotes from famous freethinkers both historical and modern. The ads are already up on buses in Madison, and if enough donations come in, the FFRF plans to take the campaign to major cities like New York.

If we're going to counter the outsized influence of religious interests in politics and popular culture, we need to fight back and speak out, and with this campaign, you can help. The FFRF has done fantastic work, both defending church-state separation in court and promoting atheism in the media, and they deserve our support. Donate today - even just a few dollars, if that's all you can afford - and help bring this message of freethought to cities across America! You can even vote on what the ads should say.

With all that said, I want to add a few words about what our media strategy should be, and what we can hope these ads will accomplish. There are many people, especially religious fundamentalists, who haven't grasped what atheists are setting out to achieve. Their lack of comprehension can clearly be seen in the pro-religion response ads that have run in several cities where atheist messages have aired:

Three separate pro-God advert campaigns on the sides of London buses are set to hit city streets.

Buses adorned with the slogan "There definitely is a God" are from the Christian Party, while the Trinitarian Bible Society chose a Biblical verse.

In response to the arrival in Calgary of an international bus ad campaign questioning the existence of God, local pro-religion forces have raised about $12,000 to buy ads on eight Calgary Transit buses and two transit trains. The ads, which will start appearing Monday, will read, "God cares for everyone... even for those who say He doesn't exist."

Two Christian-based groups have purchased advertisements with Washington D.C. Metro buses to counter the atheist "Why Believe in a God?" bus campaign with their own pro-God Christmas ads.

...The pro-God ads will read: "Why Believe? Because I created you and I love you, for goodness' sake - GOD."

Clearly, these religious groups assume that persuasion is merely a matter of who can speak at greater volume. If they can "balance" atheist ads with an equal number of theist ads, the thinking goes, they will cancel out any impact of the former and ensure that the atheist ad campaign doesn't make any converts.

With traditional ad campaigns this might make sense, but it's the wrong paradigm to use here. As I wrote in my post about the 2008 ARIS, the number of Americans who self-identify as atheist or agnostic has more than doubled, to 3.6 million, since 1990. But the number of Americans who are atheists, based on their stated beliefs, is far higher - as high as 12% of Americans, over 36 million people.

What this shows is that there's still a broad gap - tens of millions of Americans - who agree with our position, but haven't taken the step of formally declaring themselves atheists, much less joining a group like the FFRF. It is these people whom we can expect to reach with these ads. For nonbelievers who thought they were alone in the world, we can show them that there is a community that shares their views; for people who doubt religion but are wary of atheism because of the negative stereotypes spread about us, we can persuade them that being an atheist can be a positive and praiseworthy decision. Our primary goal, at least in this stage, shouldn't be to convert the religious, but to unite nonbelievers and to bring all the loose and drifting atheists into the fold. These people are eminently reachable, and if we can reach all or even most of them, we'll have a formidable platform from which to further promote our message.

By contrast, I doubt the pro-theism bus ads will accomplish much. Our culture is saturated with religion, and it's safe to assume that anyone who wants to join a church has already done so. They, unlike us, do not have low-hanging fruit to reach. Their presence is abundantly obvious; if they want to spend yet more money broadcasting it, let them go ahead! We can get on with the important work of building a secular community while they train their fire on the wrong target.

I'm pleased to announce the launch of the National Federation of Atheist, Humanist and Secular Student Societies, an umbrella organization representing freethinking student groups from schools and universities throughout the United Kingdom. Similar to the U.S. Secular Student Alliance, the AHS will do the vital work of organizing nonbelievers where it's most important - among the young generations that will be the vanguard of the future - and presenting our ideas to those who are most likely to give them a fair hearing. I'm looking forward to great things from their members.

Below is the AHS' first press release. You can also download a PDF copy of the inaugural issue of their newsletter, Secular Future. You just might recognize one of the contributors...

The National Federation of Atheist, Humanist and Secular Student Societies (AHS) launched yesterday in central London with addresses of support from Professor Richard Dawkins, Professor A C Grayling and Polly Toynbee. In the wake of the hugely successful atheist bus campaign, the 2009 Darwin Day celebrations and the increased prominence of non-religious sentiments, the launch of AHS marks the mobilisation of the UK's non-religious students.

The growing influence of atheism on the world stage is undeniable, with more and more non-believers standing up and fighting for the right to a secular society, and equality for peoples of all faiths and none. Atheists have embraced the blogging community in such a way that gives even the most reluctant non-believer the inspiration to speak out against the damaging effect of organised religion. The AHS was formed from a number of student societies who wanted to meet likeminded people, and were keen to see a more lasting atheist movement established in the UK's universities.

Initially a small community based around an Internet forum – Secular Portal – the AHS has grown into an ambitious and enthusiastic organisation, eager to start work representing its members and increasing the profile of student atheists in the UK. It will support established and newly-forming atheist, humanist and secular student groups and give them a national voice. It will provide resources and make sure that these societies' needs and views are being considered on the national and international level.

Supporting the launch, Richard Dawkins said, 'Public statements of non-belief are treated as threatening, an affront to the religious, while the reverse is not true. More concerning is the enduring assumption that religious belief does not have to earn respect like any other view, an approach that has caused politicians and public figures across the UK to withdraw from asking the vital questions: why is religion given such special status in government, culture and the media? Why is belief in a higher power an indication of greater moral fortitude, character and acumen? On the contrary, beliefs that are unsupported, bigoted or demand special privileges should always be challenged. No opinion should be protected from criticism simply by the virtue of being religiously held.'

A C Grayling said, 'As well as making the case for reason and science, it is great to know that AHS will be standing up against religious privilege and discrimination. All people are entitled to their beliefs but we secularists (whether religious or humanist) are right in arguing that the state must be entirely neutral in these matters. A situation where the religious beliefs of a few may dictate the personal choices of everyone – abortion, for example, or assisted suicide – is quite wrong. Yet some religious groups defend and even aim to expand their considerable privileges - public money for their "faith-based" schools, seats in the House of Lords and exemption from laws inconvenient to their prejudices. AHS shows that increasing numbers of young people are unwilling to put up with it.'

Chloë Clifford-Frith, AHS spokesperson, said, 'We live in a world where religious governments execute adulterers and homosexuals, deny women and minority groups basic freedoms, circulate fraudulent claims about contraception and scientific research and create laws that protect them from criticism. We are privileged, in such a world, to live in a country where we can even have this debate, and as such we have a duty to bring it into our universities and beyond.'

Norman Ralph, President of the AHS, emphasised that, in addition to challenging organised religion in the UK, the AHS also presents a positive message of community and understanding. Bringing together diverse student societies from across the country, it will support students who wish to establish a safe space for discussion of atheist, Humanist and secular issues and defend their right to express themselves without censure. Further campaigns will promote the public understanding of science, and the importance of ethical values derived from a rational approach to reality. 'We want to celebrate knowledge and human endeavour', he added, 'humanity should take responsibility for its flaws, and also take credit for its successes, not abscond responsibility to an imaginary father figure. We're about celebrating, learning and making the most of the one life we have.'

You can find out more about the AHS on their website, http://www.ahsstudents.org.uk.

Around this time last year, I wrote a post titled "On Atheist Janitors", addressing an e-mail from reader Serban Tanasa that asked whether atheism has something to offer to people on the lower rungs of the economic ladder. The other day he wrote back to me with a follow-up post addressing some of the issues first discussed here, and I wanted to offer some further thoughts.

Atheist forces and their agnostic coalition members have launched devastating artillery barrages against the veracity of the Holy Books. But Abrahamic Religion is not mostly, or even primarily, about the Books. The truth is, religion is a Life. It provides a social network. The conditions for membership can be harsh, but are simple enough that even the dullest can understand them, if not fully live up to the ideological ideals. In some cases, membership provides a sense of community, a sort of family away from home. It can also be a help network. Most importantly, going through the motions provides one with the sense of self-worth and accomplishment, supposedly achieved by getting closer to God.

These are all good points, and I agree. Atheists should keep this in mind: The tenets of religion are not irrelevant, but for most individual believers, they're beside the point. The majority of pew-fillers, I would venture, are there not because of a philosophical or rational preference for the tenets of that particular faith over all competitors; they are there because that church and that religion are the locus of community in their life. They provide a sense of place, of purpose, and of belonging - basic things that all human beings seek. This is a truth that we atheists need to keep in mind if we try to persuade people to step out of the fold. It doesn't make our efforts futile, but it does mean that we're struggling uphill. I agree that we need to offer something more than logic, however eloquent and persuasive that logic may be.

So far, Atheism has offered Truth (well, Doubt). This Devil's Sourdough is a little too bitter for many people (even though most would get used to it if they had to).

I have to say that I just love the phrase "Devil's Sourdough".

Most of us live in capitalist democracies. With the partial collapse of traditional values, materialism has prevailed. In an age of mass democracy and juridical equality, wealth and conspicuous consumption have emerged as the only ways to distinguish oneself from the crowds. What can Atheism offer to the hordes of disenchanted losers, who slowly realize that they'll never make it to the top, or even to the middle of the pack? How can Atheism provide spiritual succor? The joys and awe of science? It takes a curious mind, and even then, it takes patience and skill to be a scientist. Most people have neither.

I agree that most people don't have the traits that would incline them toward life as a professional scientist, but that's a very different matter from saying that ordinary people don't have the ability to appreciate the glories of science at all. That's like saying you can't appreciate poetry unless you're a professional poet. Not everyone can participate in the creative process, it's true, but I do maintain that anyone who wishes can appreciate the fruits of that process.

I think that most people do have the intellectual curiosity needed to learn, not necessarily all the technical details, but the broad strokes of what a scientific theory is about. And I do think that most people, given the proper encouragement, can find awe and mystery in that. I don't consider those emotions to have any correlation to one's level of economic prosperity.

More to the point, I don't think that people who'll "never make it to the top" are "disenchanted losers". That comment implies that the real goal of life is material success, and that understanding the wonders of the cosmos is just a consolation prize given to those who miss out. On the contrary, I think it's the endless pursuit of the mirage of wealth and fame that renders life flat and unsatisfying. True happiness comes not from accumulating possessions, but from more meaningful and spiritual pursuits.

If you think about it, religion is in the same business-branch as computer games: providing users with an alternate reality where they get to be significant, one that users are willing to pay money to be allowed access to. There is no reason why this should not be doable in a far less haphazard manner. Identify the temporal lobe brain centers that endow objects with deep meaning, find a way to predictably generate tunable stimulation patterns, and you blow religion out of the water. You can get people to stack piles of manure and feel that they're experiencing an epiphany with each shovelful.

This idea is disturbing to me, and I think it's missing the point. Our goal shouldn't be to develop brain stimulation so that people can be zoned out and blissful despite leading miserable lives. Our goal should be to restructure the world so that more people can lead the kind of lives that are genuinely fulfilling and blissful.

Studies have borne this out, showing that religious influence wanes as societies become more prosperous and more secure. People who lead good lives in this world don't need to cling to the hope of another.

In terms of community support, we have to get organized. When we can get people to go to 'church' (for lack of a better word) every Sunday, without the promise of eternal life to drag them out of bed, we will know we have succeeded.

This is one point where I do agree. I've written on multiple occasions about building the secular community, and my sketch of a post-theistic world has humanist organizations that serve as focal points of meaning and fellowship. These things are intrinsic aspects of human psychology, not the property of religion. Creating them is an ambitious effort and one that will take a lot of work, but it can be done, and there is no shortcut. To dislodge religion and end its monopoly, we must be prepared to offer people a meaningful atheist alternative.

(Editor's Note: The following review was solicited and is written in accordance with this site's policy for such reviews.)

Summary: A quiet, thoughtful, non-polemical book. At times Comte-Sponville comes close to conceding more than he should, but his positive evocation of atheism is a much-needed effort and may be appealing to theists grappling with the first stirrings of deconversion.

Andre Comte-Sponville's The Little Book of Atheist Spirituality is a unique book. Though written by an unabashed atheist, it shows considerable sympathy for religion. It also expresses a view of spirituality that I suspect many atheists will find strange, though I personally see much to recommend in it. Comte-Sponville describes himself as a "Christian atheist", which sounds paradoxical but which he explains is meant as a parallel to "atheistic Jew". Like secular Jews, he sees himself as coming from a particular religious heritage, one in which he no longer believes but which nevertheless shapes his cultural associations and his outlook on life.

The book has three sections, of which the first is titled "Can We Do Without Religion?" In both the individual and the societal case, the author asserts, the answer is an obvious yes. What we cannot do without, he explains, are communion and fidelity: in order, our sense of connection to others and our moral obligations toward them, and our sense of connection with the past and our respect for the traditions and institutions that have come down to us. I appreciated that he goes to great lengths to explain why an atheist can be a moral person, and that in fact there is no reason why an atheist would not be.

The second section, "Does God Exist?", considers and refutes several classical arguments for the existence of God, and provides several reasons to believe the opposite. Though Comte-Sponville doesn't go for the jugular, he presents these arguments fairly and competently. He says that these arguments "by no means constitute a proof of God's nonexistence" (p.131), but that he personally finds them convincing, and insists "on the right to express them publicly and submit them to others for discussion, as is only natural" (p.132).

The final section, "Can There Be An Atheist Spirituality?" will probably be the most controversial among atheists. Comte-Sponville argues that the answer to the title question is yes, there can be a genuine spirituality without belief in God. He describes the characteristics of mystical, transcendent experience - the sense of oceanic bliss, of interconnection with the universe, and a sense of serenity and acceptance in which nothing is lacking or refused - and says that there is nothing necessarily supernatural about any of them, and that atheists, including himself, can and do have these experiences. "All religions involve spirituality... but all forms of spirituality are not religious" (p.136).

There were a few things I didn't like about this book. One is that Comte-Sponville, at times, gives religion too much credit. For instance, he says that "there are more saintly people among believers than among atheists" (p.22), and that he wishes God did exist (p.124). In most cases, he goes on to qualify these statements with fuller explanations (for instance, he says the fact that God fulfills so many human longings is good reason to be skeptical, not to believe), but the fact remains that these passages are likely to be quoted by religious apologists as "evidence" that even atheists endorse some of their claims. It would have been better if he had worded these passages in ways not as susceptible to misinterpretation.

That said, I did like this book's defense of atheist spirituality. I've said myself that atheism is compatible with a genuine sense of spirituality, one that recognizes the awe and wonder of life and the mystery of existence without the baggage of supernaturalism. Like Comte-Sponville, I believe that transcendent moments of joy are not the property of religion, but the common trust of humanity.

The other good thing about this book was its approachable, open tone. Comte-Sponville defends atheism firmly, but gently. At times, as I said, I found him almost too conciliatory; but I think a believer would find this book very non-threatening, and might be led to read it and gain a better understanding of the atheist viewpoint. For stirring a rousing sense of atheist pride, or issuing a call to arms against the dangers of fundamentalism, this isn't the book you want. But for believers feeling the first stirrings of deconversion and seeking a gentle introduction to atheism, or for new atheists who want to know if atheism can provide the positive things they're used to getting from religion, it just may be the right book for the job.

I have a remarkable story to share with you all:

Last Friday, I had made plans to go out with some friends after work. At the end of the day, I debated whether to go and meet them directly or whether to go back to my apartment first and change, but I ultimately decided to go home first. The subway was jam-packed, and the first train that arrived was too crowded to get on. Likewise the second. I was getting impatient and determined not to miss the third, so I went all the way down to the end of the platform and managed to squeeze onto the very last car when it arrived.

I almost always read on the train. This week, I've been reading The Little Book of Atheist Spirituality by Andre Comte-Sponville, which I was solicited to review by the publisher. I was standing in the subway car and reading it, not thinking much about what I was doing, when I felt a touch on my arm.

It was a woman, a stranger, who looked to be about my age. "Sorry to disturb you, but what is that you're reading?" she asked.

"See for yourself," I said, and gave her the book so she could read the publisher's blurb on the back.

She read it, then gave it back to me. "Are you an atheist?"

"Yes, I am," I said. "I have been since college. Why? What are you?"

"I'm an atheist, too. A new one. I was a Christian for over thirty years, and I just became an atheist, but I don't know any other atheists yet. What I've been trying to find out is if there can be spirituality in atheism." She went on to explain that she had read Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris, and was currently reading Richard Dawkins, and while she agreed with most of what they had to say, she wanted to know more about if there was a positive side to atheism and whether atheists had any kind of community. She said that she had been looking ever since she left her church, but hadn't found anything like that yet.

"Well, I think you came to the right place," I said with a laugh. "Actually, I have a website that has some things I've written on this subject. How far uptown are you going?"

It turned out that she was going to the Bronx, much farther than me, so I jotted down my e-mail address and gave it to her. "There are sources of community for atheists! You have to know where to look, but there are whole worlds out there that most people don't even know about - sources of community, positive writings and philosophy. Myself, I believe an atheist can be a very spiritual person, if that term is defined the right way without recourse to the supernatural. Send me an e-mail and I'd be happy to talk about it with you!"

And that's where things stand. I did get that e-mail, and pointed my new friend and fellow truth-seeker toward some writings I thought she might want to know about, including a few of my own (he said immodestly) and some essays by Robert Ingersoll. I told her about this website, too, so perhaps she may want to show up and identify herself.

If I had been a Christian, and a string of coincidences such as this had orchestrated my meeting a new fellow believer seeking to grow in the faith, our encounter would almost certainly be appearing on apologetics websites by now as proof of the unfolding of divine providence. For a wide variety of good reasons, I doubt anyone will ever make such a claim about the events that actually happened. I don't think this was anything more than a coincidence, albeit an amazing and striking one. But as atheists' numbers grow, coincidences like this one become more and more likely. So let me say this: Don't ever hide that you're an atheist. Don't be ashamed of who you are. You never know when you may meet a fellow nonbeliever, one seeking aid or advice of some kind that you're personally qualified to give. We do have reason to spread the good news of atheism, and we do have reason to establish a true community of freethought and reason. Chance encounters like mine are just the first step.

This past Sunday, I went to church and had a wonderful time.

No, I haven't converted, nor am I thinking of doing so. I was there to accompany my girlfriend, who's a lapsed Catholic and is seeking a new church to attend. We went to a Unitarian Universalist church on Long Island. That Sunday there was a relatively small congregation, I'd guess between thirty and fifty people. The church itself was a pleasant modern building with a high, sloping ceiling and tall picture windows in the back. There were bookshelves along the back walls and tall, potted plants everywhere. One wall held two long lines of plaques commemorating the people through history who were persecuted or martyred for their belief in Unitarian Universalism - a startlingly large number. Evidently, the idea that all human beings will be saved has often been a dangerously heretical proposition.

I've been to UU services before, in college, and this one had many of the same elements. The service opened with a ceremonial ringing of chimes and then lighting the chalice, a traditional Unitarian Universalist symbol, as well as a peace candle. One member then led the group in a recitation of UU's seven principles, followed by a hymn.

The next part of the service was also at the UU service I attended in college. It was called "Joys and Sorrows," in which each member of the congregation who had either joyous or sorrowful news was invited to come forward, share their story with everyone present, and light a candle to signify the emotional resonance of the event. A lot of people had stories to share, perhaps a dozen, and everyone who participated seemed genuinely eager to step forward.

Most of the service after this was broken up into several brief speeches and sermonettes, each given by a member of the congregation. A young lady who couldn't have been more than 13 or 14 spoke on the topic of "What Would a Unitarian Universalist Do?" For her age, she was one of the best speakers there that day. I think there are great things in her future if she stays on this path.

Continuing this theme, the day's sermon was titled "Living Our Principles." The minister (who hadn't spoken until now, and who didn't do all that much talking compared to the length of the entire service) spoke about working at an interfaith clothing drive, and how she reminded herself to show patience and compassion while dealing with the people who made use of it.

Afterward, there was coffee and food. There seemed to be a real sense of community and friendship among all the people there, most of whom stayed after the service to chat. I had wondered if anyone would recognize my girlfriend and I as newcomers, and at least two people did: the director of the church's youth program, as well as the minister herself, came over to meet us and asked us if we were new. This church must have a very good community indeed if its employees can tell by sight whether someone is a regular visitor.

All in all, I'm happy that I went. I've always had a soft spot for the Unitarian Universalists, and if I were religious, that's almost certainly what I would be. The closing hymn at the service I went to was John Lennon's "Imagine" - how could an atheist not love that? I don't plan on making attendance a weekly habit - I just don't feel the need - but I wouldn't be opposed to going back.

I like the idea of a religion built on community rather than on shared dogma, which lines up nicely with the humanist churches I imagined in "What Will Replace Religion?" UU is itself a thoroughly humanist belief system, with nothing in its principles I could disagree with. I think the UUs largely lack the dangerous exaltation of blind faith and dogmatism that characterizes so many other religions, and if UU gained more ground, I wouldn't be at all upset.

However, I think a person coming from a traditionally religious background might have some difficulty understanding the appeal of UU. After all, it's nearly unique among established religions in not having any established dogma or official creed. A churchgoer who's used to being told what to think each week from the pulpit might find the doctrinal looseness disorienting. And people for whom belief in God is an integral part of their lives are unlikely to feel satisfied here. The only time God was mentioned during the service, in my recollection, was to point out that it doesn't matter whether he exists, because that wouldn't change the moral obligations we have toward each other.

I'm intrigued by the phenomenon of people retaining the trappings of their faith for cultural and historical reasons, while casting off the supernatural beliefs and dogmas that long accompanied them. This has long been noted among secular Jewish people, and I see it starting to happen more and more among Catholics as well. Unitarian Universalism is a more explicit step in this process, recognizing the importance of community without requiring the hoary superstitions that have long accompanied it. From origins in liberal Christianity, UU has evolved to a point where it can - and does - embrace atheists and humanists without qualm. (As many as 46% of UUs may be atheists, according to a 1997 poll.) This could well be an effective rebuttal to propagandists who claim that atheists don't do charity work - we do, as part of the UU church and many other organizations - or that religious charity would cease if atheists became predominant. UU is an effective testimony that supernatural beliefs need not accompany the desire to do good.

In a world of hostile religious believers, a lone atheist is a target. Vjack of the always superb Atheist Revolution provides a chilling example, an atheist family in rural Pennsylvania who incurred severe harassment and reprisal from their believing neighbors after they complained about blatant religious indoctrination in the local public school, culminating with them being driven out of town.

But there's an important lesson to be learned from this sad story: if an isolated atheist is a target for persecution, a community of atheists is far more resistant to such hateful attacks. When we stand together, we multiply our strength manyfold. A community of nonbelievers can support each other in times of need, chase off the bullying bigots who will only pick on the vulnerable, and perhaps best of all, present a united front to show the religious public that atheists are far more numerous and outspoken than they had guessed. Back in December, I wrote about building the secular community, and I want to offer some updates.

First, this lovely story from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Atheist group calls former church home. According to the article, the Atlanta Freethought Society (an arm of the Freedom from Religion Foundation), has bought a 142-year-old, Civil War-era church building to serve as their new meeting hall. The Atlanta Freethought Society's home page, packed with social events and activities, is to my mind a perfect model of what a freethought group should be, and shows that even in the South, there are still freethinkers!

Meanwhile in Chicago, atheists are an increasingly outspoken minority - so says this CBS News article, interviewing and profiling a local family of atheists. The article has some important points about the greater tolerance for atheists, as well as their increasing numbers, especially among the young. Stories like this serve an important role in expanding the secular community by showing that, by and large, atheists are good, moral people and citizens just like everyone else.

And in Sacramento, a state college is playing host to a new Atheist Student Organization, which has already attracted substantial interest and a faculty host in Prof. Matthew McCormick (also the author of the blog Atheism: Proving The Negative, unless I miss my guess). Due to constant graduations, campus atheist groups have to work harder than most to keep their organization intact. Yet colleges and universities, with their atmosphere of open inquiry and their place during the time when many young people find their own identities, are the ideal place for a strong and visible atheist presence. Groups like the Secular Student Alliance have done fine work, but there's plenty of room left to grow on campus.

To put the icing on this cake, it seems that while we expand the secular community, the forces of organized religion are in disarray. A recent, widely reported Pew survey found that Americans are switching religious affiliation in ever-greater numbers. As expected, Protestants are on the verge of losing their majority status, and a shocking 44% of adults have changed their affiliations or abandoned religious ties altogether. (About 10% of Americans are ex-Catholics, according to the study.) This survey also, for the first time that I'm aware, broke down the 16% of unaffiliated Americans, finding that 6.3% are secular unaffiliated and 5.8% religious unaffiliated. If these numbers are accurate, when added to the 4% or so that Pew found identify as atheist or agnostic, then as many as 10% of Americans - over thirty million of us! - may be nonbelievers. I note that the 4% figure itself represents almost a quadrupling of the number obtained in the landmark 2001 ARIS survey.

Among the traditionally religious, there's a growing fear as they realize that their long-cherished societal dominance is slipping away. The sociologist Stephen Prothero, observing the basically secular bent and loose, unaffiliated spirituality of the young, ponders, "Is religion losing the millennial generation?" And orthodox Christians, despite their facade of confidence, are asking churches to step up their response to "militant" atheism - implying that we are chipping away at them to a greater extent than they'd like to admit.

All told, the future looks bright for atheists. We're nowhere near demographic dominance in the United States, but we've already seen much growth and improved organization over just the last few years, and that trend is set to continue. As Linda Staten of Kansas City says, let us bow our heads in thanks for atheists:

While militant New Atheists fight on intellectual turf to replace dogma with rational thinking, humanists encourage believers and nonbelievers to get the moral work of peace, social justice and saving the environment done together.

Right-wing Christianity shook the atheist community out of its complacency with its relentless rhetorical badgering and attempts to co-opt the country. A missing piece of the real picture of America is finally being restored. Amen to that.

I've written in the past that atheists and freethinkers, if we ever want to truly compete with religion on its own terms, have to create a secular community that offers the same kind of social support network which believers are accustomed to finding in church. I hope we can put that principle into action tonight.

The atheist blogger Possummomma, happily married and mother of four children, is going through a difficult time due to health problems. She suffers from severe light sensitivity as a result of lupus, which limits her movement both inside and outside the house and makes it difficult for her to spend time with her kids. Berlzebub's Inferno has put together a fund-raising drive to help her out, which thanks to the attention of some prominent atheist bloggers has already collected over $3000. (The most promising course of action is to help her buy and install a UV-blocking window film that should let her move freely within her house.)

I've spoken extensively to Possummomma over e-mail, and I'm convinced that this is a wholly genuine and legitimate need. I plan on donating to her cause (instructions here), and I hope some of you will choose to do so as well. As atheists, we should understand why it's so important for human beings to help and care for each other. Please consider it!