First Church of Atheism

liamw · 24-07-2011 3:39pm #1

Is this for real? W.T.F.

brendanL · 24-07-2011 3:44pm

...fastest way to make a million is start a religeon.

Doesn't this defeat the purpose of atheism? a church really? REALLY? -_-

I'm tempted to get ordained for ****s and giggles ;D

GlasnevinRed · 24-07-2011 3:52pm

A church is defined as an association of people who share a particular belief system. So yes, a church of atheism can really exist.

:mad:

Turtwig · 24-07-2011 3:56pm

I seriously hope it was Christians that set this up.:D

Delirium · 24-07-2011 3:56pm

surely the idea of a church of atheism is an oxymoron?

RevMcMaster · 24-07-2011 4:02pm

Hi! I'm the oxymoron that started the FCA. Just wanted to say that our main reason for starting the church was so atheists could perform wedding ceremonies and other functions reserved for clergy

eoin5 · 24-07-2011 4:07pm

RevMcMaster wrote: »

Hi! I'm the oxymoron that started the FCA. Just wanted to say that our main reason for starting the church was so atheists could perform wedding ceremonies and other functions reserved for clergy

gargleblaster · 24-07-2011 4:16pm

RevMcMaster wrote: »

Hi! I'm the oxymoron that started the FCA. Just wanted to say that our main reason for starting the church was so atheists could perform wedding ceremonies and other functions reserved for clergy

Over here we get them done at city hall. I'd think that for most atheists this'd be a social contract, not a religious one.

What kinds ceremonies of and functions which atheists would take part in could possibly require a church?

My first reaction to your site, btw, was "FFS". Cause really.

Blowfish · 24-07-2011 4:23pm

gargleblaster wrote: »

Over here we get them done at city hall. I'd think that for most atheists this'd be a social contract, not a religious one.

What kinds ceremonies of and functions which atheists would take part in could possibly require a church?

There are caveats to civil marriages here as far as I understand. As an example, the registrar is a civil servant, hence doesn't work weekends, so either you have to marry on a weekday or do the registration bit before/after. Also, civil marriages must be in a fixed buiding (i.e. no marrying outside), whereas with religious marriages it is up to the church/religion as to where it is appropriate to marry.

Setting up what is effectively a 'fake' church may be a bit OTT, but it does get around some silly restrictions.

RevMcMaster · 24-07-2011 4:28pm

gargleblaster wrote: »

Over here we get them done at city hall. I'd think that for most atheists this'd be a social contract, not a religious one.

What kinds ceremonies of and functions which atheists would take part in could possibly require a church?

My first reaction to your site, btw, was "FFS". Cause really.

Well some folk don't want to be married at city hall, and in some hospitals clergy get extra visiting rights, my wife and I got married on a cruise ship and had to use a non-denominational minister, not really what we wanted so we started the FCA so others could have an option. no one is forced to think we are a good idea, i fact I would prefer that you think ALL clergy everywhere are bull****! lol

gargleblaster · 24-07-2011 4:47pm

Good point, I hadn't thought about weekend marriages or hospital visitation. All this is just more evidence that religion still has entirely too much influence on people's lives.

I agree that setting up a church for it is overkill - why set up a church for just this one thing? The word is religious by default.

RevMcMaster · 24-07-2011 5:10pm

gargleblaster wrote: »

Good point, I hadn't thought about weekend marriages or hospital visitation. All this is just more evidence that religion still has entirely too much influence on people's lives.

I agree that setting up a church for it is overkill - why set up a church for just this one thing? The word is religious by default.

it's also just really funny

Ghost Buster · 24-07-2011 5:15pm

You do know that you are going to be linked to every single time a religious person posts "Atheism is a religion" and an atheist refutes it.
Thanks dude:mad::(

eoin5 · 24-07-2011 5:21pm

RevMcMaster wrote: »

it's also just really funny

Have you heard of Discordianism?

Every member and non member of the religion is a pope, one of the rights you get with that is:

To baptise, marry and bury (with the permission of the deceased in the latter two).

fatmammycat · 24-07-2011 5:23pm

RevMcMaster wrote: »

it's also just really funny

No, it really isn't. Why not have the club of atheism if you must group so many people with differing ideology together. Calling it a church is automatically including a deity/belief system of some form or other.

Pygmalion · 24-07-2011 5:30pm

fatmammycat wrote: »

No, it really isn't. Why not have the club of atheism if you must group so many people with differing ideology together. Calling it a church is automatically including a deity/belief system of some form or other.

We also don't actually eat babies, at least it's not required of us.

fatmammycat · 24-07-2011 5:36pm

I am failing to see what that has to do with anything I posted, but am tired, so might be missing some kind of under current message.

Pygmalion · 24-07-2011 5:42pm

fatmammycat wrote: »

I am failing to see what that has to do with anything I posted, but am tired, so might be missing some kind of under current message.

Something being funny and something being an accurate statement are two separate things.

fatmammycat · 24-07-2011 5:48pm

and again, this has what to do with what I posted?

Slushfund · 24-07-2011 5:48pm

Dawkins, Hitchens etc. make enough money off the back of it, why not this lad, fair play to him.

fatmammycat · 24-07-2011 5:51pm

Slushfund wrote: »

Dawkins, Hitchens etc. make enough money off the back of it, why not this lad, fair play to him.

Oh the back of what exactly?

liamw · 24-07-2011 6:08pm

RevMcMaster wrote: »

it's also just really funny

It's not funny unless it's satirical. While I can understand the 'church' might be set up with the best intentions, I think it is counter-productive considering we have to repeatedly tell people on this forum that atheism is not a belief system.

CiaranMT · 24-07-2011 8:48pm

Slushfund wrote: »

Dawkins, Hitchens etc. make enough money off the back of it, why not this lad, fair play to him.

Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist by trade, Hitchens a rather adept polemicist who writes for a number of publications.

They also happen to be atheist.

MagicMarker · 25-07-2011 8:25am

Fúcking Americans ruining it for everyone else as usual.

pH · 25-07-2011 8:42am

liamw wrote: »

It's not funny unless it's satirical. While I can understand the 'church' might be set up with the best intentions, I think it is counter-productive considering we have to repeatedly tell people on this forum that atheism is not a belief system.

That's your argument? Seriously?

It undermines arguments you have with strangers on the net? So he shouldn't do it?

axer · 25-07-2011 8:58am

pH wrote: »

That's your argument? Seriously?

It undermines arguments you have with strangers on the net? So he shouldn't do it?

I think the point is that there is obviously a belief out there that Atheism is just another religious belief system and by actually using Atheism in a the name of a church group that will just reinforce that belief. The crazy religious groups will have a field day on this.

I can imagine Fox News covering this now and while one might think that this would give an opportunity to speak about the issues the ticker tape will read "Atheists setup church for their beliefs" or something like that.

For instance on the website it says this:

Why is this free?

We believe that everyone should have the right to preach what they believe, to start a congregation, and to perform ceremonies. This is usually reserved for members of traditional religious sects. We have started a church of our own, based on our beliefs, and will provide our service of ordainment free to anyone who shares our beliefs.

I think the founders are misrepresenting atheism here as being about beliefs instead of lack of beliefs thus this will most likely backfire and cause more problems for atheists.

This smacks of "If we can't beat them then join them" except a lot of ground is being made in secularisation at the moment and this will just make people more suspicious of atheists resulting in a negative impact on progress being made.

RevMcMaster, the only thing that atheists have in common is a lack of belief in a deity/deities.

antiskeptic · 25-07-2011 10:17am

koth wrote: »

surely the idea of a church of atheism is an oxymoron?

Depend on how you define atheism. If you're talking solely about people without a belief in God then they probably wouldn't be paying any attention to the issue in order to hear of the likes of an atheist church.

If, on the other hand you consider the folk the likes of who, tend to post in this type of forum then you've got a shared anti-theist belief system. It's an active kind of atheism.

What else would you call this forum if not a congregation of like minds?

Do you believe religion is a damaging influence on society?
Do you believe that a secular society is the best society?
Do you believe that naturalistic explanations best explain the reason for us and our surroundings being as they are?
Do you believe that religious people are deluded and weak?

You've got the beginnings of a creed going there. Why not congregate around it?

MagicMarker · 25-07-2011 10:33am

antiskeptic wrote: »

Depend on how you define atheism. If you're talking solely about people without a belief in God then they probably wouldn't be paying any attention to the issue in order to hear of the likes of an atheist church.

If, on the other hand you consider the folk the likes of who, tend to post in this type of forum then you've got a shared anti-theist belief system. It's an active kind of atheism.

What else would you call this forum if not a congregation of like minds?

Do you believe religion is a damaging influence on society?
Do you believe that a secular society is the best society?
Do you believe that naturalistic explanations best explain the reason for us and our surroundings being as they are?
Do you believe that religious people are deluded and weak?

You've got the beginnings of a creed going there. Why not congregate around it?

Believe it or not a lot of atheists do not believe any of those things.

Every forum on this website has a ''congregation of like minds'', does that mean they are all potential religions?

Mistress 69 · 25-07-2011 10:34am

Ghost Buster wrote: »

You do know that you are going to be linked to every single time a religious person posts "Atheism is a religion" and an atheist refutes it.
Thanks dude:mad::(

And this is one of those times If there is a church... it is a religion.

Delirium · 25-07-2011 10:40am

antiskeptic wrote: »

Depend on how you define atheism. If you're talking solely about people without a belief in God then they probably wouldn't be paying any attention to the issue in order to hear of the likes of an atheist church.

yeah, I'd be with the lack of belief in deities as my definition of atheism.

If, on the other hand you consider the folk the likes of who, tend to post in this type of forum then you've got a shared anti-theist belief system. It's an active kind of atheism.

What else would you call this forum if not a congregation of like minds?

I won't consider it a group of like minds. Generally the posters here have one thing in common, lack of belief in deities.

Do you believe religion is a damaging influence on society?

It can be.

Do you believe that a secular society is the best society?

I would think that a society that attempts to treat people equally would be a basis for a society.

Do you believe that naturalistic explanations best explain the reason for us and our surroundings being as they are?

well I'd definitely think it better explains things over a story that all powerful creator is answer to all things.

Do you believe that religious people are deluded and weak?

nope.

You've got the beginnings of a creed going there. Why not congregate around it?

It just doesn't make sense to me. there are no atheist rituals, rites of passage, prayers etc. It just seems like a very confused idea to set up a church of atheism.

antiskeptic · 25-07-2011 10:45am

MagicMarker wrote: »

Believe it or not a lot of atheists do not believe any of those things.

I wasn't thinking of them, I was thinking of

If, on the other hand you consider the folk the likes of who, tend to post in this type of forum then you've got a shared anti-theist belief system. It's an active kind of atheism.

Every forum on this website has a ''congregation of like minds'', does that mean they are all potential religions?

The congregation of like minds on this forum deal with existential issues as opposed to stamp collecting. A belief system that concerns itself with addressing existential issue tends to fall under the category Religion - something boards.ie recognised in their positioning this forum under Religion & Spirituality.

First Church of Atheism

Comments