Comments on: Is “bright” a more negative term than “atheist”?

By: Tim

Tim — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 23:09:31 +0000

The term suits us.
there is nothing bright about being religious. we are at the least a step above them.
I will use the term with honor and spread the word. I devote myself to learnig everything i can.

By: iapetus

iapetus — Thu, 22 May 2008 15:17:10 +0000

..um, their website also goes on to say this, if anybody bothered to actually check it out:
“The constituency of Brights is hugely diverse. Besides those who self-identify as atheist, humanist, secular humanist, freethinker, rationalist, naturalist, agnostic, or skeptic, there are individuals who go by their preferred affiliations, such as Ethical Culturalist, Pantheist, Buddhist, Yogi, Wiccan, Transhumanist, or Unitarian. Also part of the gamut of constituents are Jews, Catholics, Quakers, Episcopalians, and others who may personally maintain their religion’s cultural or aesthetic aspects, but not its supernaturalism. There are professors of religious studies and clergy in and out of practice who are Brights (e.g., Unitarian-Universalist ministers, Protestant pastors, even one ex-Benedictine monk). Not all constituents associate themselves with familiar groupings or labels. The movement’s goals attract all sorts of people who “have a naturalistic worldview” and favor thinking of themselves broadly and in a CIVIC sense…”

By: duardo

duardo — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:03:32 +0000

I think Bright is a label thought up by Richard Dawkins and promoted by James Randi on his web site. I like the work of both of these men, but they do come across as a bit priggish. This does a disservice to the rest of we atheists. I dislike the label myself and would never use it under any circumstance.

By: artisticmisfit

artisticmisfit — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 01:33:50 +0000

Samanthamj, perhaps we all need to work on getting offended less easily?

By: karen

karen — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 01:21:53 +0000

I am not sure I am an “atheist”…. but, if I did think I was, I’d still be hesitant to admit to it in “real life” to most people… especially at work…. and that’s just not right.

This is exactly why I use the term. I want to reclaim it as a neutral or positive term, and contribute to wiping out the extraordinary negativity imposed on it by certain religious people.

Of course, if pressed, I will explain that I don’t know if there’s a god and so don’t worship one until/unless I get some better evidence. But I think that if kind, “normal” responsible people like me start throwing the term around without any shame or guilt, it will help make it more acceptable.

Granted, I’m in a liberal area where the word “atheist” doesn’t typically raise any eyebrows, so I don’t have to be extraordinarily courageous to use it like I would have to be if I were in the bible belt.

By: samanthamj

samanthamj — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 22:46:40 +0000

I find the way many people automatically percieve atheists offensive. I am not sure I am an “atheist”…. but, if I did think I was, I’d still be hesitant to admit to it in “real life” to most people… especially at work…. and that’s just not right.

By: artisticmisfit

artisticmisfit — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 21:39:07 +0000

John, who here finds the term atheist offensive?

By: avid_mass

avid_mass — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 17:06:39 +0000

quester, good luck with all that…

like i said before, a term of endearment :]

By: John

John — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 14:51:40 +0000

Stuff what christians think about the word atheist. Atheist is only a negative term because theists have demonized it.
Sure the A makes the word a negative of something but not that kind of negative!
Atheist isnt a dirty word. Its just someone who doesnt believe in god. If Joe Blogs finds it offensive then hes easy offended.

By: Quester

Quester — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 08:02:13 +0000

Atheist is a negative term, but not necessarily a derogative one. It means, simply, not a theist. I can understand not wanting to define oneself negatively by what one is not. I watched a video online with who I think I remember was Sam Harris pointing out that accepting the label of atheist concedes that theism is the default view one must define oneself in opposition to if one does not hold it. There is no special term for those who do not believe in leprechauns, for the existence of leprechauns is not the default point of view.

I don’t think he used leprechauns as his example, though. He is a much better speaker than I.

I’ve never felt comfortable in any label, really. I’m in no rush to grab one just to make it easier for others to feel they know where I stand on a plethora of issues, when I am not entirely certain, myself.