People creating community to fulfill something that was previously there or to just have a community surrounding a belief isn't religion (is it?). Is a group of aethiests creating an aetheist...
People creating community to fulfill something that was previously there or to just have a community surrounding a belief isn't religion (is it?). Is a group of aethiests creating an aetheist church really religion? Just because they use familiar, religious nomenclature, doesn't mean they're being religious.
Maybe I misread the article, but creating a community based on commonly held beliefs doesn't denote religion, even if the commonly held belief is based on the lack of religiousness and belief in a higher being and God. If that were the case, then you may as well call the skeptics society a religion, or a book club or knitting club, or any sort of common grouping a religion. As mentioned by mrbig, this article includes not just aethiests but people who are agnostic or none religious, which is an important destinction to an article whose title claims aethiests are sometimes more religious than Christians. Interesting as well, considering how the researchers the writer quotes are saying they have to update the categories of religion and how there's much more nuance now, but the article lumps three separate beliefs (or rather 2 beliefs and one non-belief) into one group and calls them aethiests.
Regardless on my feelings of how it's instituted, religion tends to fill a community need and there are many places that churches help the community itself. Wanting that, or some parts of it, is fine, I think, and not unexpected. I don't know how to end this, beyond my own small frustrations with the author and whoever chose the article title, because it feels a little click baity. Did they ever actually go into the detail of HOW exactly "aethiests" are more religious than Christians? Or was it just the mention that there's an aetheist church? I was hoping there would be more information on that tidbit, but it seemed more focused on how religion is being practiced in differrent, nuanced ways than previously.
Just a heads up, I’m pretty sure links to Pocket are discouraged. You should probably share the original link, and add the link to Pocket in a comment instead.
Just a heads up, I’m pretty sure links to Pocket are discouraged. You should probably share the original link, and add the link to Pocket in a comment instead.
The article is actually about people that are not affiliated with any religion, which is not equivalent to being an atheist.
The cognitive dissonance of the headline makes me wonder if somehow the article skipped the editorial process entirely.
“Atheists are kinda religious” just makes for a more intriguing headline, I think.
People creating community to fulfill something that was previously there or to just have a community surrounding a belief isn't religion (is it?). Is a group of aethiests creating an aetheist church really religion? Just because they use familiar, religious nomenclature, doesn't mean they're being religious.
Maybe I misread the article, but creating a community based on commonly held beliefs doesn't denote religion, even if the commonly held belief is based on the lack of religiousness and belief in a higher being and God. If that were the case, then you may as well call the skeptics society a religion, or a book club or knitting club, or any sort of common grouping a religion. As mentioned by mrbig, this article includes not just aethiests but people who are agnostic or none religious, which is an important destinction to an article whose title claims aethiests are sometimes more religious than Christians. Interesting as well, considering how the researchers the writer quotes are saying they have to update the categories of religion and how there's much more nuance now, but the article lumps three separate beliefs (or rather 2 beliefs and one non-belief) into one group and calls them aethiests.
Regardless on my feelings of how it's instituted, religion tends to fill a community need and there are many places that churches help the community itself. Wanting that, or some parts of it, is fine, I think, and not unexpected. I don't know how to end this, beyond my own small frustrations with the author and whoever chose the article title, because it feels a little click baity. Did they ever actually go into the detail of HOW exactly "aethiests" are more religious than Christians? Or was it just the mention that there's an aetheist church? I was hoping there would be more information on that tidbit, but it seemed more focused on how religion is being practiced in differrent, nuanced ways than previously.
Just a heads up, I’m pretty sure links to Pocket are discouraged. You should probably share the original link, and add the link to Pocket in a comment instead.
Thanks, I didn't realize that but I'll remember for next time