So, if in my small town I tried to put together a community group of atheists, would I be better off calling us Atheist, with all of that negative association or Humanists which the general public has no clue or non-religious which is more accurate but flat. I kind of like Godless Heathens of Page,Az. But the heathen part might come off wrong. Marketing here is more important than quibbling over atheist definitions. And don't suggest Brights ! Thoughts?

I should mention, we would probably just meet in a bar once a month for association. One person wants us to have a larger public presence and get our own Adopt a Highway sign. Maybe a little community work here and there- That kind of thing.

just use the euphemism "freethinkers".

Right.

The word "Heathen" might eliminate some. Godless Heathens sounds like a group who just wants to sit around and drink beer - not so much intelligent discussion. Maybe that is a good thing!

Freethinkers sounds more like it would attract people who want to share ideas.

I guess it depends on what druid is looking for.

Frenemies of God (FOG).

Not that you are either friends or enemies of someone nobody has proven exists; but the implication being that you're open to a civil conversation with God's followers, if not God himself...should he ever show up at the bar in person.

Explorer. I am an explorer. Atheism does not define me. It is a nothing more than a freckle on the face of what I want to know and learn and accomplish.

Atheism does not inform my life. It makes no difference to my career. My art, my writing, my gardening, nor my charity work show any signs of it. As an atheist I can even drive a car properly and be kind to people--just like everybody else. Wow.

Accomplishment is my focus. Exploring is my primary tool.

I like that ^ :)

druid Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ... or Humanists which the general public
> has no clue or non-religious which is more
> accurate but flat.

In Arizona, I would definitely go with Humanists (precisely because the meaning is not well-known). Judaism overall has a quite high percentage of atheists/secularists, and Secular Humanistic Judaism (which defines itself as "nontheistic") was selected as the name for this newer Jewish movement, I am pretty sure, to be somewhat ambiguous, and to specifically avoid using the word "atheistic."


> I kind of like Godless Heathens
> of Page,Az. But the heathen part might come off
> wrong.

I don't know about Page in particular, but it would seem to me that outside of a college campus or the Tucson area (where there is some deviation from what is generally considered the Arizona norm), Godless Heathens of Page, AZ, probably wouldn't be the best marketing choice, especially for a new group which is probably looking for new members.


> Marketing here is more important than
> quibbling over atheist definitions.

I think you've answered your own question.

Tevai Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ...Godless Heathens of Page, AZ, probably
> wouldn't be the best marketing choice, especially
> for a new group which is probably looking for new
> members.

Unless the new members you're looking for are the godless heathens :)

ificouldhietokolob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tevai Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > ...Godless Heathens of Page, AZ, probably
> > wouldn't be the best marketing choice,
> especially
> > for a new group which is probably looking for
> new
> > members.
>
> Unless the new members you're looking for are the
> godless heathens :)

It is very possible that I am relying too much on my work experience (plus a bit of Jewish organizational experience), but it seems to me that a new organization is/ideally "should be" interested not only in current and consciously aware "godless heathens" (the core founding group)...

...but on attracting future members (future members who, at THIS moment in time, may not in any way self-identify with atheism/secularism/humanism...and may, indeed, currently consider themselves as "good" Catholics/Mormons/Methodists, whatever).

Structurally in time, although the founding group is important, the underlying perspective should be on FUTURE members, because the founding group (no matter how successful) is always going to gradually wither away due to death, individuals moving away, etc.

This is my experience and life wisdom, anyway. :)

If you want a group of atheists, use the word "Atheist". If you use an euphemism, you are giving the impression that you believe there is something wrong with being an atheist. You also are set up for misunderstanding as not everyone has the same definition of "freethinker", "humanist" etc., as such terms still could include a concept of God.

Sometimes labels can be problematic.

What if we didn't give ourselves a name/label? ;)

If you do not give the group a label, how are you going to communicate who they are??

All words are labels, If one wants to form an atheist group, one would need to call it something, thus labeled.

There is an increasing acceptance of atheists, in part because many atheists have stopped being ashamed of calling themselves atheist.

Bang Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There is an increasing acceptance of atheists, in
> part because many atheists have stopped being
> ashamed of calling themselves atheist.

But how does someone know if they are an atheist BEFORE they know they are an atheist?

What if they have been taught (by family, church, local culture, etc.) to knee-jerk associations like "evil," or "dangerous" or "subversive" or "bad" to the word "atheist," and these are the only associations to the word atheist that they know?

"Calling [yourself] an atheist" may be (and most probably IS) something that occurs fairly far into a long personal process of inner searching, development, and evolution.

Shouldn't a group of already-atheists be welcoming to those who don't even know quite what the word "atheist" really means, but are interested (or intrigued) in finding out?

Tevai Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bang Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > There is an increasing acceptance of atheists,
> in
> > part because many atheists have stopped being
> > ashamed of calling themselves atheist.
>
> But how does someone know if they are an atheist
> BEFORE they know they are an atheist?

One does not need to know they are an atheist to meet the definition of being an atheist.

>
> What if they have been taught (by family, church,
> local culture, etc.) to knee-jerk associations
> like "evil," or "dangerous" or "subversive" or
> "bad" to the word "atheist," and these are the
> only associations to the word atheist that they
> know?

Then we need to use the word "atheist" correctly and educate them about the true nature of being an atheist. Running and hiding from the word atheist only validates what they were taught.


>
> "Calling an atheist" may be (and most probably
> IS) something that occurs fairly far into a long
> personal process of inner searching, development,
> and evolution.
>

Unfounded speculation. It will take a lot longer for people to acknowledge they are atheists if we do not actually use the label.

> Shouldn't a group of already-atheists be welcoming
> to those who don't even know quite what the word
> "atheist" really means, but are interested (or
> intrigued) in finding out?

Again, nobody would know the word atheist if we do not use the word atheist. Using misleading terms like free thinker or humanist may not attract people that are well aware of the word atheist. I would never have thought of going to a freethinker's group because I was an atheist.

I think your group shouldn't be about "God" at all. You are so much MORE than just that. "Godless Heathens" insults your group, because most people would not get the irony.

You will be a group that does some good in the community, who offers members support and friendship and fun, as well.

You need a more positive identity. "Explorers" is already used by Scout groups. "Friends" has already been taken. "


"Humanists" sounds good, but you aren't "secular humanists."
"Free Thinkers" sounds good, too.

Maybe you could adopt the name of the bar where you meet, or the street the bar is on, or even incorporate the name "Page, AZ" in your name. Your group originated there, but that doesn't limit your activities to that one place or city or state.

Atheist Fellowship

The doers. Or the wonderers. Or the wanderers
Music included , get a theme song

Children of the sun

Posted by: Breeze ( ) "Friends" has already been taken."

Breeze: Taken by who? It's not a copy-write word.
----

For RfM, I really like "friends". After all, that is what we do. We offer friendship to (most) who post on RfM. We offer advice, sympathize, and sometimes advise someone to 'grow-up' (for those who really seem to need this push.)

>Taken by who? It's not a copy-write word


http://www.quakercenter.org/about-us/about-the-religious-society-of-friends-quakers/

Nones - without a habit.

call yourselves
Glen Canyon Believers of a Different Sort

Kopeki Tribe might work. lol. Get hats with the Kopeki dancer on them. "Dancing in the light of the sun".

Thanks for all the advice. What unintended consequences would using the name "Non-religious Social Group of Page, Az" set into motion? Straight up, avoids other pre-judged names. Many people would not know what secular means or humanists.

There are people that are "Non-religious" that do indeed believe in God, so you are not really starting an Atheist group, at least according to the title you selected.

Many atheists, myself included, would think the name is a cop out.

A lot of great comments/ideas, IMO. I agree the most with Bang's last post. Good luck in your endeavor :)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/21/2017 09:32PM by cinda.

Nobody wants to be labeled, yet everybody wants a label to identify themselves

"The Godless Heathens Free Thinking Drinking Club" That pretty much says it all.

Felix Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "The Godless Heathens Free Thinking Drinking Club"
> That pretty much says it all.

You have convinced me...

I agree that "The Godless Heathens Free Thinking Drinking Club" DOES, pretty much, say it all.

:D

I could draw quite a crowd with free drinking.

How about "Proud Ex-mormons of Page (PEP)"? Most people know Mormons are weird, so at least exmos are open-minded and might be interesting.

I like: Freethinker. It's a good term, been around for a very long time.

Since this subject is obviously ripe for discussion and interesting opinions...

Maybe you could hold off naming the group until you've met a few times and grown a bit.

That way you could make it an official order of business and let the group decide.

Yes, and now I have some good suggestions. Thanks peoople.