Should Atheists Organize Politically?

A discussion between Bill Maher and Adam Carolla on the "Overtime" segment of HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" last week, left me with some questions about whether atheists should organize politically and about whether some atheists are as close-minded as some religious people that I explore in this video.

The press release about the the February 26, 2010, meeting between officials in the Obama Administration and members of the Secular Coalition for America that I show in this video is available online at http://www.secular.org/node/209

And, the clips I use from the "Overtime" segment of HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" come from Episode 174, the rest of which was originally broadcast on February 26, 2010, which is available on the HBO website at http://www.hbo.com/real-time-with-bill-maher/

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Atheism
• Politics
• Bill
• Maher
• Real
• Time
• Adam
• Carolla
• hbo
• obama
• administration
• meeting
• secular
• coalition
• for
• america
• atheist
• agnostic
• humanist
• organization
• religion
• open
• closed
• minded
• liberal
• viewer
• liberalviewer

[panda0100]

@jrockpunk1 almost no athiests say that they know there is no god. and the few that i know of who do, only do so because they believe the lack of evidence is evidence enough to justify such a claim. so they realy aren't being closed minded either.

then there are some crazy people who don't believe in god because they believe we were put on earth by space aliens.

[tepitw]

some people want to fix the wrong of religion. others just wish to escape its influence. both positions are correct. perhaps 2 new terms are needed - working-antitheists and fuck-god-ists. After all, 100% of christians insist they know what atheism means, even though they get it wrong, refuse to listen to or believe atheist's explanation of what the term means, and refuse to look it up in a dictionary. My definition of Christian is: a person who disbelieves in the existence of dictionaries

[Snakepliskinist]

Oh Mr. Viewer...I share Mr. Corolla's profound apathy toward religious drivel. I have no need to investigate claims without evidence or supporting logic. For the longest time, living in Kansas, I rarely heard the word "atheist." I just told people I didn't have a stupid religion. In my advanced years, however, I've changed my tune. I realized that most people don't really form their own beliefs by critical analysis. Ergo if only god-wads are loudmouthed, their fairy-tales will always endure

[farthersaidin]

Religion can be argued that its Amoral and anti-intellectual. Many of the current political leaders and presidential runners for the right advocate an idiocracy by saying only creationist arguments are right, gays are sub human and we will only worry about women's rights when they get the vote. The 13th century were the good old days.

[Roxxy52266]

I agree with Bill Maher, atheist need a voice. The religious right are making way too many dicissions in government and taking away the rights of those with whom they don't agree. Blacks have to organize for their rights as do gays and women. I feel it's no different for atheist.

[gamerunknown]

Maher advocates alternative medicine and stuff, he's not consistently on the side of reason to any great degree. 

[randomnessnstuff]

@codbug How are you doing pussy? :)

You're such a pussy dude for blocking my comments and removing them.

You were impolite, immature behaved like a 12 year old and you have a huge ego dude.

I bit it and now the only solution you see is to block me from commenting. GOOD! :)

Dude it's gay to act smart and then leave the conversation.

[gspaulsson]

Let's go back to the meaning of "prove". It comes from the same root as "probe", and it means "test", or "put to the test". The statement "God does/does not exist" cannot be put to the test because it is essentially meaningless. You would first have to define exactly what you mean by "God", and exactly how you proposed to put the proposition that he/she/it exists to the test. Until the theists come up with an agreed definition of God and propose a way to test it, there is "no case to answer".

[panda0100]

@gspaulsson i agree, just because i do not believe god exists does not mean i can't see the harm caused by those who do, or that i cannot try to prevent/correct the behaviour that caused the harm.

[gspaulsson]

@panda0100 while philosophically I can't prove that the keyboard I'm typing this on is real, I'm pretty sure it's real, and equally sure God isn't. Absolutely damned sure that the God of the bible isn't. Atheists need to organize and lobby because religious people do, and someone has to work against their efforts to sneak religion into government. Like they did with the pledge of allegiance. Also to spread the message - hey, you don't need big daddy in the sky, you can be free.

[swordhunter12]

@straightfromvirginia Part 2: Either way I believe that both sides are capable of being insanely horrible (the online reaction to the American Atheist Organisation was just as reprehensible as the AAOs actions cafemom. com/answers/931249/Violent_Ant­i_Atheist_Posts_On_FOX_News_Fa­cebook_Page) and while I'd like to keep Religion vs Atheism out of politics there are some times where it is sadly inevitable particularly in regards to Science, Morality and Education.

[swordhunter12]

@straightfromvirginia While I don't support the AA's actions I would like to point out that not all the victims families were Christian and thus, may have found the cross in some way offensive. My alternative would be to put as many known religious symbols on Ground zero as possible as a comfort to all victims and their families regardless of personal beliefs.