lak,

I think you already recognize your mistake was asking a clerical official to extemporize.

laklak wrote:We've already got meeting places. Around here we call them "bars".

Well I for one don't frequent either bars or pubs, so wouldn't do for me. And surely bars are for everyone, religious and non-religious alike.

laklak wrote:Mrs. Lak and I had a "humanist celebrant" officiate at our wedding, it was a total crock of shit. Lots of nebulous, meaningless verbiage. In the celebrant's defense, I told her before the ceremony that I didn't want any spiritual shite, so maybe she was a bit stuck for words. Most of that sort I've run into are fuzzy-wuzzy wooheads of the finest kind.

Over here it's really up to the people getting married to decide what's in the ceremony. If they're spouting fuzzy-wuzzy woo as you call it maybe it's because they're not given any proper instructions?

Why does everyone associate ceremony and ritual with 'woo'? Do you all feel that way about spectacles such as the opening ceremonies of the Olympic games?

I once had the briefest flirtation with the idea of conducting humanist ceremonies like non-religious weddings and funerals, etc. I happened to live near the ocean at the time. Thinking mostly of weddings, and forgetting that I had included Funerals in my description, I said to a friend to whom I had revealed the idea, "You know, like...on the beach." He paused for a moment, then in confused horror asked, "You mean like...Viking funerals?!"

pelfdaddy wrote: He paused for a moment, then in confused horror asked, "You mean like...Viking funerals?!"

My first wedding was supposed to be on the beach but it rained. As it turned out a Viking funeral would have been more appropriate, well, if I'd put HER on the boat.

Nora_Leonard wrote:

laklak wrote:We've already got meeting places. Around here we call them "bars".

Well I for one don't frequent either bars or pubs, so wouldn't do for me. And surely bars are for everyone, religious and non-religious alike.

Any suggestion that you must believe X to go such a place is objectionable to me. The point AdeB is making to make culture a centre of society, and celebrate culture in some organised way. As such it would not be an "Atheist Temple" and should not be just for atheists.

I'm not sure what to think of the idea in general. I don;t like the propaganda aspect. That seems a very conservative ting todo. It would amount to an attempt to freeze social norms that are now judged to be idea and promote those norms to future generations. This is what religions do, and it is dangerous.

If culture is at the centre, what culture?

Repetition and whole-body involvement might be a significant point, but forget any sort of secular prayer ritual. Physically going to a place associated with ideas is a physical semi-ritualistic experience, with none of the objectionable elements of hard seats, kneeling etc.

The major problem with implementing something like this is motivating people to attend. It has to be enjoyable, stimulating, social, unifying.

If there was a place I could go to socialise, attend interesting and wide-ranging talks, discus intellectual issues, enjoy a range of music and art, all linked to the wider community I might well go.

If it was billed as an "Atheist Temple" I doubt I would be interested, although I am an atheist, and happy to say so. Atheism is disbelief in gods, not something to hang culture and community on.

Then there is communal singing. Not the dire CofE hyms style. Maybe more a tuneful mix of gospel choir enthusiasm and football terrace unity. There is something moving and unifying about getting involved in group singing, It might be good, but could so easily be awful.

DoctorE wrote:Dawk no like, obviously

Continues: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebri ... evers.html

Nicely put by RD.

dogmadogsh1t wrote:
What exactly are the important things that religions can teach us?

Blending deep respect with total impiety, Alain (a non-believer himself) proposes that we should look to religions for insights into, among other concerns, how to:

- build a sense of community

- make our relationships last

- overcome feelings of envy and inadequacy

- escape the twenty-four hour media

- go travelling

- get more out of art, architecture and music

- and create new businesses designed to address our emotional needs.

So when he says that we can learn from religions, he actually means we can learn from science and logic, from politics and from travel and commerce, because religion teaches us nothing about any of the above. Well, maybe apart from building a sense of community - that has been done within religion by creating an us and them culture, which has done very little toward peaceful aims over the last few hundred years.

The guy is a barnpot - I've never met or seen any athiest ever wanting the same things this guy does, and not only that but he undermines some of our best anti-religious arguments. Anyone read his book or got any links to a critique?

Well, the scary thing is what religion does teach us about these things.

"Build a sense of community" Something like that brilliant tithing idea? Extra self-imposed taxes to build non-representative while elephants, shrines to stupidity. JUST what we need. Personally I can find plenty of communities where I am welcome without invoking religion.

"Make our relationships last": well we all know the catholic approach, ban divorce or at least make it extremely socially undesirable. Yeah, religion has a lot to offer us there.

"Overcome feelings of envy or inadequacy": WTF? Just because this guy might have these feelings (being a white middle-aged balding idiot probably achieves that for him) doesn't mean everyone else does.

I could go on. Obviously religion can help with travelling, as an atheist like me just can't get a passport.

I don't think this guy is a barnpot as you say - I think he's another L. Ron Hubbard, another Joseph Smith - his motivation here is to make himself money and acquire status. And he can fuck right off, they shouldn't give this dick the oxygen of publicity.

Long overdue.

Well, I think that if there is going to be a black tower for atheists to worship it should be in Jerusalem, right on top of temple mount. Now that would be a statement!

Maybe would could get space badgers to build it and then have it teleported into position and just drop it on the Dome of the Rock? Ka Pow!

Bribase wrote:It's a silly idea and a little bit redundant as well. There are two places that I know of in London that serve the humanist, secular, freethought, atheist societies allready and none of them have temples:

http://www.bishopsgate.org.uk/

http://www.ethicalsoc.org.uk/spes/index.php

Does anyone know of any others?

The Natural History Museum

Oldskeptic wrote:Well, I think that if there is going to be a black tower for atheists to worship it should be in Jerusalem, right on top of temple mount. Now that would be a statement!

Maybe would could get space badgers to build it and then have it teleported into position and just drop it on the Dome of the Rock? Ka Pow!

Yeah, definitely knock that bugger down, whack an atheist prayer column there, that'll solve all the religious conflict in the Middle East in an instant - they'll all be too busy chasing us!

pelfdaddy wrote:Ok, I'm in full agreement with the posting immediately above, in that everything listed that we are supposed to learn from religion is fully subsumed by other (real) disciplines. But at the risk of appearing to share the specific goals of the author in question, might I ask of this forum...

Under what category of life does marriage fall?

I admit it's merely a traditional institution, and shorn of faith-based assertions it is not a religious matter as such; neither do we need to adhere to any formal dogma on what marriage must be, however...

Marriage will probably be with us for a long time, and many of us will confess to being rather fond of it (however we choose to define it). Is it not worthy of a certain degree of ceremony, ritual or pageantry according to long-held custom? Where might future atheists perform such ceremonies, or will they perform them at all?

I was married to my wife at a rather pleasant manor house/hotel, with a civil service - it was great too. No messing getting from church to the reception either. It was get married, and then great food and drinks with family and friends until we had enough. We got married as we decided that was the best option from a legal point of view due to us wanting children, therefore marraige falls in the legal category mixed with recreation.

I have many friends who have decided not to marry, and to pro-create anyway. The only thing that they miss as far as I'm concerned is a great party and some tax/legal benefits should either of them die.

The tax/legal benefits can all be taken care of with a little diligent effort and some paperwork. I'm not married, though I have been 'living over the broom' for more than 20 years, and it hasn't noticeably hampered us.

I think art inspired by science is a great idea, so the structure itself sounds quite cool - a variation on the "cosmic calendar" theme. But to call it an "atheist temple" is just silly. The great thing about scientific inspiration is that it's open to everyone and anyone, regardless of race, colour, creed or all the other arbitrary distinctions among human beings.

dogmadogsh1t wrote:

pelfdaddy wrote:Ok, I'm in full agreement with the posting immediately above, in that everything listed that we are supposed to learn from religion is fully subsumed by other (real) disciplines. But at the risk of appearing to share the specific goals of the author in question, might I ask of this forum...

Under what category of life does marriage fall?

I admit it's merely a traditional institution, and shorn of faith-based assertions it is not a religious matter as such; neither do we need to adhere to any formal dogma on what marriage must be, however...

Marriage will probably be with us for a long time, and many of us will confess to being rather fond of it (however we choose to define it). Is it not worthy of a certain degree of ceremony, ritual or pageantry according to long-held custom? Where might future atheists perform such ceremonies, or will they perform them at all?

I was married to my wife at a rather pleasant manor house/hotel, with a civil service - it was great too. No messing getting from church to the reception either. It was get married, and then great food and drinks with family and friends until we had enough. We got married as we decided that was the best option from a legal point of view due to us wanting children, therefore marraige falls in the legal category mixed with recreation.

I have many friends who have decided not to marry, and to pro-create anyway. The only thing that they miss as far as I'm concerned is a great party and some tax/legal benefits should either of them die.

Agreed! We had a civil ceremony in a register office, but a nice, old, pretty register office with stained glass windows and oak furniture and pretty flower arrangements and all nice things an that. There were some readings from Donne and Shakespeare and a nice piece of classical music to accompany me walking in. We walked out and down the outside steps under an arch formed by my other half's teaching colleagues dressed in pretend professor gowns and caps. Then it was off to an inn for foodz and beerz. Hurrah! I'm perfectly happy for other people to never get married, to find it pointless for themselves. I suppose I can understand how they might think I did a stupid thing. But I don't see a need to justify it to them. When people tell me it's pointless and a waste of time, which has happened on this forum a few times, my immediate thought is 'who are you to tell me what's pointless for me?' I'm the only one who gets to decide that.

hackenslash wrote:The tax/legal benefits can all be taken care of with a little diligent effort and some paperwork.

I'm not sure how you'd get around widow's pensions though?

210karman wrote:

DoctorE wrote:Dawk no like, obviously

Continues: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebri ... evers.html

Nicely put by RD.

"Two of Britain’s most revered non-believers"

de Bottom is one of Britain's most revered?

His trite 'philosophising' is as revered as those awful Love Is cartoons.

Spearthrower wrote:

Oldskeptic wrote:Well, I think that if there is going to be a black tower for atheists to worship it should be in Jerusalem, right on top of temple mount. Now that would be a statement!

Maybe would could get space badgers to build it and then have it teleported into position and just drop it on the Dome of the Rock? Ka Pow!

Yeah, definitely knock that bugger down, whack an atheist prayer column there, that'll solve all the religious conflict in the Middle East in an instant - they'll all be too busy chasing us!

Makes about as much sense as a replica of Barad-dûr in the middle of London.

Nora_Leonard wrote:

Why does everyone associate ceremony and ritual with 'woo'? Do you all feel that way about spectacles such as the opening ceremonies of the Olympic games?

Yes.

Listen to the rambling on about the human spirit and togetherness through the power of sport blah blah blah

Fallible wrote:

Agreed! We had a civil ceremony in a register office, but a nice, old, pretty register office with stained glass windows and oak furniture and pretty flower arrangements and all nice things an that. There were some readings from Donne and Shakespeare and a nice piece of classical music to accompany me walking in. We walked out and down the outside steps under an arch formed by my other half's teaching colleagues dressed in pretend professor gowns and caps. Then it was off to an inn for foodz and beerz. Hurrah! I'm perfectly happy for other people to never get married, to find it pointless for themselves. I suppose I can understand how they might think I did a stupid thing. But I don't see a need to justify it to them. When people tell me it's pointless and a waste of time, which has happened on this forum a few times, my immediate thought is 'who are you to tell me what's pointless for me?' I'm the only one who gets to decide that.

Pointless post