Skip to main content

View Diary: Why I created a Dailykos Group: Progressive Atheists (112 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Yep. Still most unelectable (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    According to this.

    I am also not going to dispute your characterization of the non-religious group. Whether or not people identify themselves as Atheists, Humanists, Agnostics, whatever, is unimportant. Regardless, we are seen as less than the religious. I use Atheist the most merely for convenience's sake, I will not lie. I get tired of writing Atheist/Agnostic/Secular/Humanist/Free-Thinker/Spiritualist, and if people take offense to being generalized as Atheist, they can make it known, I won't object.

    •  Interesting (0+ / 0-)

      I haven't seen the polls in a number of years. So atheists are gaining in approval, but they're still at the bottom. Oh well, it doesn't matter all that much really because every pol has to do the God thing anyway. I guess another sign of the low standing of atheists is that while there is a Log Cabin group, however unpopular with their fellow Republicans, I don't beleive there is a similar group of non-believers.

      I don't know if there is an exact breakdown of the non-religious, but I'm guessing that actual atheists are a minority, whatever terminology one wants to use. I'm not a real big fan of the word atheist for a number of reasons, but I don't mind other terms. Whatever one wants to call the non-religious, most probably are against a position that is theocratic. There are likely more points in common than not.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site