Have the terms “atheist and atheism” become corrupted?
While religionists failed to have their Religious Discrimination (Privileges) Bill passed in to law, they have cleverly created a Trojan Horse to further entrench religion in politics, and to subdue what’s left of mainstream media.
Religious fundamentalism represents a very small rump of the Australian population but it has succeeded in quashing rational debate — on a raft of social issues — by claiming persecution from militant secularism. That has led many social activists to soften their tone (so as not to offend), but it has diminished the secular argument.
Our view is that Plain Reason needs to move out to the left flank — to “draw fire” away from the softer humanist and secular line — and to run a firmer media argument that can be both secular and rationally A-theistic. That is — in the true sense of the word — to simply avoid subservience to reactionary theism.
This is not semantics: the words “atheist” and “atheism” have been corrupted by religion over many centuries.
A-theism has a legitimate voice that is no longer heard. It needs to be understood in exactly the same terms as being a-political, a-symptomatic, or a-tonal — with the “a” denoting “non-compliance”. The word does need to be re-framed, to counter the false concept of satanic atheism, which is skilfully perpetuated by the religious.
While Plain Reason’s media focus is primarily on science, logic and rationalism, there are times when an A-theistic line of argument is required — and it is essential that the media (eventually) get to understand the difference!
There is often a need to challenge the dogma of fundamentalist arguments which are based on over-stated biblical doctrine, and steeped in religious pomp, superiority, and privilege. We should not resile from that!
So, the proposition is whether or not to create a point of difference between atheism and A-theism — one that can be consistently run in the media. ‘How’ the word is written does need to determine its meaning!
Hyphenating “A-theist” and “A-theism” will flag to the media a change in perspective!
It will be footnoted, that: A-theism is not, per se, “anti-religious” — nor does it malign people of religion. Rather, it is free to question religious doctrines that underpin fundamentalist views on all contemporary social issues.