A headshot from Paula:

@ PaulaSKirby wrote:Atheism+: opposing ageism, racism and sexism. Old white men need not apply.

And did you see the replies?

ashpryce wrote:
is pz the exception?

‏PaulaSKirby wrote:
PZ is always the exception among rational people these days, Ash.

Boom!!!

Nice to see she's taken off the white cotton gloves. My new fave.

Is there a conference we can invite her to speak at?

Pulsar wrote:And did you see the replies?

ashpryce wrote:
is pz the exception?

‏PaulaSKirby wrote:
PZ is always the exception among rational people these days, Ash.

Boom!!!

Snork.

Shades of Wonko the Sane!

Bella Fortuna wrote:

Pulsar wrote:And did you see the replies?

ashpryce wrote:
is pz the exception?

‏PaulaSKirby wrote:
PZ is always the exception among rational people these days, Ash.

Boom!!!

Snork.

+some more

Atheism Plus is very similar to the Bright Campaign, though not as reserved. There are a couple of problems with it however. The first is with definition. Atheism, as we all know, pertains to non belief in God or Gods. That is it and nothing else. Being an atheist therefore has nothing to do with feminism or skepticism or equality or science or anything else. The fact is that most of us also believe in those things as well to a greater or lesser extent though. Which is why they all tend to get lumped in together. But a much better term would be humanist or humanitarian, for they imply a social conscience.

The other problem is the assumption that some atheists are racist or sexist or homophobic and that others need to separate themselves from them. Now I have no doubt that that is true, but most of us, if not all of us here, are not any of those things at all now. Whether Rat Skep is representative of atheists as a whole, I do not know. But we would not qualify as members of Atheist Plus because we are guilty of being members of this site. So the defintion needs to be worked on a bit more methinks.

Ultimately, this is just another flame war in the atheist community, that we can do without thank you very much. But drama seems to be the natural default position nowadays. I wonder if this will ever cease. I am not saying these issues are not important but that the modus operandi of those referencing them, is one that is specific to their own agenda. It is good we are having such intense debates, but it would be so much nicer without all the ad hom that seems to automatically accompany them. I am now just accepting that this is a test of my resolve to be entirely non judgemental no matter what the provocation. So far no one has suceeded. And nor will they. For as always I just stick to the issue. Even if it is sometimes difficult to find amongst all the emotional subjectivity. And that from all sides, not just one.

Pulsar wrote:

xtraordinaryevidence wrote:http://skepchick.org/2012/08/atheismplus/

There's lots to be said about this new "Movement" (I believe PZ calls it 'the Third Wave of Atheism'). This blogpost from Richard Carrier sums it up nicely:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/2207/

The last paragraph says it all, really:

Richard Carrier wrote:I call everyone now to pick sides (not in comments here, but publicly, via Facebook or other social media): are you with us, or with them; are you now a part of the Atheism+ movement, or are you going to stick with Atheism Less?

Then at least we’ll know who to work with. And who to avoid.

Note: the "C.H.U.D.'s" at the beginning stands for "Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dwellers". It's the type of phrase that a reasonable, compassionate person with personal integrity would use, of course



Also read Richard Carrier's comments below. The insults he throws at anyone who disagrees with him are comedy gold. At the end he even gets called up on it by fellow FtB commenters

Ah! Another one who tells me what I should do and think!
I'm grateful, because that was missing in my life since I left the RCC eons ago!
That being said, the RCC and the Prods are amateurs when it comes to pontificating in comparison to Msgr. Carrier! I'm impressed.
Personally, I feel I'm A++

Tons of jokes and criticism on twitter: https://twitter.com/#!/search/realtime/%23atheismplus

I particularly love this comic from facepalm333:

Regina wrote:

Pulsar wrote:
Also read Richard Carrier's comments below. The insults he throws at anyone who disagrees with him are comedy gold.

Another one who tells me what I should do and think!

Some do, it seems, have a low tolerance for alternative views. One's arguments should however, stand on merit and if they are logically sound, then that is all that matters. There is no need therefore, to engage in ad hom. None of us has a monopoly on wisdom. Regina is absolutely right in her sentiment here. I know there is a very thin line between explaining why you believe something and telling others why they should believe it and I myself have crossed it many times, but it should not be. The intolerance is worrying. Worrying because as atheists and skeptics, we should be open and transparent to all positions. Now most of us here are. But Skepchick and freethoughtblogs are not so open minded and transparent however. Now you may not care about that too much. But this is ultimately damaging for the whole community. This is what we expect from theists, not our own. And whatever you may think of the Skepchicks or freethoughtbloggers, they are on the same side as us. Yes, I know that sometimes seems hard to believe, but it is true. Seriously.

Pulsar wrote:Paula Kirby is having tons of fun with this:



And this one: http://twitter.com/PaulaSKirby/status/238602051704197121

And this one: https://twitter.com/PaulaSKirby/status/237847383579451392

Paula Kirby - always interesting or thought-provoking or humorous, and often all three together.

Paula Kirby wrote a great piece about women and religion - I had it linked in my signature for ages but can't find it now - can anyone help out? Now seems a good time to revive it.

Emmeline wrote:Paula Kirby wrote a great piece about women and religion - I had it linked in my signature for ages but can't find it now - can anyone help out? Now seems a good time to revive it.

This one, perhaps? http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-faith/post/religion-lies-about-women/2011/04/13/AFDS9mXD_blog.html

Pulsar wrote:

Emmeline wrote:Paula Kirby wrote a great piece about women and religion - I had it linked in my signature for ages but can't find it now - can anyone help out? Now seems a good time to revive it.

This one, perhaps? http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-faith/post/religion-lies-about-women/2011/04/13/AFDS9mXD_blog.html

That's the one - thank you!
I'll put it back in my signature.

There is a new atheism brewing, and it’s the rift we need, to cut free the dead weight so we can kick the C.H.U.D.’s back into the sewers and finally disown them, once and for all.

Etc. etc.

I think the correct response to this should be:



But! Who will lead this mighty and powerful band of new atheists? We need a champion, a fearless leader, a man of fortitude and a man that we can look up to in times of crisis and who will stem the tide of dissidents that will spoil and pillage this new movement. I propose we seek out and find this unknown champion of all that is right and holy about atheism, to that end I would like to enter a candidate.

I saw a fab documentary (it's pretty much all I watch on TV) ages ago where that lovely Greek woman ......opolus, the biblical historian, was talking about how the churches have distorted women in the bible to suit their needs. I'll try to find it.

I know I'm vague here but I'm sure the Brits will know who I mean.

Edit: Her name is Dr Francesca Stavrakopoulou.

http://www.anneofcarversville.com/women/tag/dr-francesca-stavrakopoulou

xtraordinaryevidence wrote:http://skepchick.org/2012/08/atheismplus/



I don't know what's worse, A+ or Bright.

I'll just stick with being a humanist, or, what I've just learned it actually means "soft atheism".

Emmeline wrote:

Pulsar wrote:

Emmeline wrote:Paula Kirby wrote a great piece about women and religion - I had it linked in my signature for ages but can't find it now - can anyone help out? Now seems a good time to revive it.

This one, perhaps? http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-faith/post/religion-lies-about-women/2011/04/13/AFDS9mXD_blog.html

That's the one - thank you!
I'll put it back in my signature.

Nice piece indeed!.

Paula wrote:I saw a fab documentary (it's pretty much all I watch on TV) ages ago where that lovely Greek woman ......opolus, the biblical historian, was talking about how the churches have distorted women in the bible to suit their needs. I'll try to find it.

I know I'm vague here but I'm sure the Brits will know who I mean.

Edit: Her name is Dr Francesca Stavrakopoulou.

http://www.anneofcarversville.com/women/tag/dr-francesca-stavrakopoulou

There was another BBC series on the history of women in religion, called Divine Women, by Bettany Hughes. Highly recommended!

Pulsar wrote:

Paula wrote:I saw a fab documentary (it's pretty much all I watch on TV) ages ago where that lovely Greek woman ......opolus, the biblical historian, was talking about how the churches have distorted women in the bible to suit their needs. I'll try to find it.

I know I'm vague here but I'm sure the Brits will know who I mean.

Edit: Her name is Dr Francesca Stavrakopoulou.

http://www.anneofcarversville.com/women/tag/dr-francesca-stavrakopoulou

There was another BBC series on the history of women in religion, called Divine Women, by Bettany Hughes. Highly recommended!

I actually think the one you provided was the one I had in mind (just had the wrong woman in mind) but I have seen both and both are really good.Thanks