Door to Door Atheism

Here is what we need to change first, before we deal with addressing the thinking of the religious.
http://www.pewforum.org/2014/07/16/new-pew-research-survey-explores-how-americans-feel-about-religious-groups/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=new-pew-research-survey-explores-how-americans-feel-about-religious-groups
The last bullet point is most instructive:
“Knowing someone from a religious group is linked with more positive views of that group. Those who say they know someone who is Jewish, for example, give Jews an average rating of 69 out of 100, compared with a rating of 55 among those who say they do not know anyone who is Jewish. Similar patterns play out for other groups, such as Muslims and atheists.”

Sounds like you have a calling. It also sounds like you have an axe to grind about your own journey out of faith. You are the sum total of your experiences and they make you, who you are. Your past makes you uniquely equipped to understand the leaving religion behind process, so rather than regretting it or feeling it was a waste of time, use it to help others. Just temper it in a way that you really believe would have reached you, and not shut you down before the "miracle" could happen. Go forth on your mission, and keep us posted. :smirk:
It's not about bitterness, it's about compassion. Again, I'm referring to making it more readily available and palatable. The most readily found atheist propaganda makes atheism indeed look like a group of immoral jerks who laugh in the face of God rather than demonstrating that they simply do not believe without having to be an #@$-wipe.
Here is what we need to change first, before we deal with addressing the thinking of the religious. http://www.pewforum.org/2014/07/16/new-pew-research-survey-explores-how-americans-feel-about-religious-groups/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=new-pew-research-survey-explores-how-americans-feel-about-religious-groups The last bullet point is most instructive: "Knowing someone from a religious group is linked with more positive views of that group. Those who say they know someone who is Jewish, for example, give Jews an average rating of 69 out of 100, compared with a rating of 55 among those who say they do not know anyone who is Jewish. Similar patterns play out for other groups, such as Muslims and atheists."
I agree. That is part of what I'm talking about. Except, just simply "knowing" someone of a group doesn't make the group seem better if the person you know is an insensitive jerk. Moral and humanist atheists with good manners need to stand out more and the religious need to be able to find them better.
It may not hurt to try spreading the concepts of atheism and reason in this way, but I can't imagine it being too successful. Most rationalists/atheists are introverted nerds who lack social skills, and this alone makes door to door atheism practically impossible. The Internet, sci-fi conventions, science and technology schools, etc. are the best areas for engaging potential atheists - for obvious reasons.
You certainly aren't interacting with the atheists and rationalists I know. I don't know one who's could be described as an introverted nerd--and I know more atheists than the average person does. Either you are living under a rock or you're an indoctrinated theist. Lois Thank you for pointing that out, Lois. I think we need a name for the logical fallacy of running with a stereotype. Ad steroetypelicum?
It may not hurt to try spreading the concepts of atheism and reason in this way, but I can't imagine it being too successful. Most rationalists/atheists are introverted nerds who lack social skills, and this alone makes door to door atheism practically impossible. The Internet, sci-fi conventions, science and technology schools, etc. are the best areas for engaging potential atheists - for obvious reasons.
You certainly aren't interacting with the atheists and rationalists I know. I don't know one who's could be described as an introverted nerd--and I know more atheists than the average person does. Either you are living under a rock or you're an indoctrinated theist. Lois Thank you for pointing that out, Lois. I think we need a name for the logical fallacy of running with a stereotype. Ad steroetypelicum? Also "nerd" has quickly changed as a stereotype. I don't see young people using it anyway near the same way we did when I was young. When I was a boy, playing with electronic toys was nerdy and associated with ugly glasses and pants that showed your white socks. Since people like that became the richest people in the world and created things that everyone wants now, it's not really cool to pick on people on like that. Even though it was just a few years ago, if you showed someone who hadn't lived through that time those commercials with the MacIntosh guy and the IBM guy, you'd have to explain to them what the joke was. Relating all this to Darron's statement. It is absolutely true that many of the people who first started organizing around the banner of atheism did fit that stereotype. It is well documented and discussed by just about everyone who currently blogs or writes on the topic. It is actually part of the success story of the movement. It was recognized as a problem and dealt with and is still being dealt with. It's the openness and willingness to change that I see as a plus for atheism, so I have no problem admitting the truth within the stereotype.
Here is what we need to change first, before we deal with addressing the thinking of the religious. http://www.pewforum.org/2014/07/16/new-pew-research-survey-explores-how-americans-feel-about-religious-groups/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=new-pew-research-survey-explores-how-americans-feel-about-religious-groups The last bullet point is most instructive: "Knowing someone from a religious group is linked with more positive views of that group. Those who say they know someone who is Jewish, for example, give Jews an average rating of 69 out of 100, compared with a rating of 55 among those who say they do not know anyone who is Jewish. Similar patterns play out for other groups, such as Muslims and atheists."
I agree. That is part of what I'm talking about. Except, just simply "knowing" someone of a group doesn't make the group seem better if the person you know is an insensitive jerk. Moral and humanist atheists with good manners need to stand out more and the religious need to be able to find them better.You'll never win a battle against organized religion, which is really what you're talking about (or rather its effect on people). I suggest you rise above, so to speak, the whole theist vs atheism meme and think of helping people do good generically. And the best place I can think of for that is Character Counts. Google it. It uses morality lessons and wisdom from anywhere they might be found, without a particular religion or ideological slant.
You'll never win a battle against organized religion...
I get so tired of hearing that. Yesterday I listened to two discussions with Brian McLaren, grandfather of the "emerging church" movement of evangelicals. One was with Ryan Bell, a former pastor who is blogging about what he calls his "Year Without God". He mentions Matt Dillahunty in a very favorable light. The other was with Frank Schaeffer, son of Francis Schaeffer who kicked off the religious right movement with his books, but now his son (Frank) just wrote a book "Why I am an atheist who believes in God" which is going gangbusters on Amazon. The book has many flaws, but the point is, someone is listening and trying to figure out how to incorporate humanist thinking into the church. Not a strategy I endorse, but what do you expect, that the Vatican will just close up shop because of a few bloggers and comedians?
Also "nerd" has quickly changed as a stereotype. I don't see young people using it anyway near the same way we did when I was young. When I was a boy, playing with electronic toys was nerdy and associated with ugly glasses and pants that showed your white socks. Since people like that became the richest people in the world and created things that everyone wants now, it's not really cool to pick on people on like that. Even though it was just a few years ago, if you showed someone who hadn't lived through that time those commercials with the MacIntosh guy and the IBM guy, you'd have to explain to them what the joke was.
Don't be so sure..... Think about the bullying phenomenon that we've been hearing about over the past decade - kids killing themselves, etc. All of those dead kids were considered nerds by their peers, and bullied for it. Even after they died, their peers showed no remorse, and made fun of their deaths in social media. The mass killers of the last few years have also been described as being nerds by former classmates. IOW, nerds are still having a really bad time of it.
Think about the bullying phenomenon that we've been hearing about over the past decade - kids killing themselves, etc. All of those dead kids were considered nerds by their peers, and bullied for it. Even after they died, their peers showed no remorse, and made fun of their deaths in social media. The mass killers of the last few years have also been described as being nerds by former classmates. IOW, nerds are still having a really bad time of it.
I'm amazed you can be so wrong and so sure of yourself. Google is your friend. Do a little research and come back after you see that these were bullied, but not for being nerds. They were outcasts, of course, most of them were goth, gay, or just plain creepy. Not one was a pencil-necked geek.
Think about the bullying phenomenon that we've been hearing about over the past decade - kids killing themselves, etc. All of those dead kids were considered nerds by their peers, and bullied for it. Even after they died, their peers showed no remorse, and made fun of their deaths in social media. The mass killers of the last few years have also been described as being nerds by former classmates. IOW, nerds are still having a really bad time of it.
I'm amazed you can be so wrong and so sure of yourself. Google is your friend. Do a little research and come back after you see that these were bullied, but not for being nerds. They were outcasts, of course, most of them were goth, gay, or just plain creepy. Not one was a pencil-necked geek.Your definition of nerd is stuck in the 60s.

How do you define “nerd”?

How do you define "nerd"?
Good question, first he says my post was wrong, then he says the definition of nerd has changed, that's the first thing I say on the topic. Then I can't figure out if nerds are victims of crime or perpetrators. Another non-discussion has begun.

“Nerds” like these, I guess.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_atheists
You can choose any category.

How do you define "nerd"?
A smart, socially inept person who lacks physical attractiveness. Today it doesn't matter if they like science, Lord of the rings, My Little Pony, or goth black lipstick. They're all considered nerds.
How do you define "nerd"?
Good question, first he says my post was wrong, then he says the definition of nerd has changed, that's the first thing I say on the topic. Then I can't figure out if nerds are victims of crime or perpetrators. Another non-discussion has begun.You didn't say that, you said nerds are considered cool today, because they invented the computer culture....and they're not. The definition has widened to include all socially inept people. There's a reason for this, but it probably will derail this thread.

From Dictionary.com

nerd (nurd) noun (slang) 1. a stupid, irritating, ineffectual, or unattractive person. 2. an intelligent but single-minded person obsessed with a nonsocial hobby or pursuit: a computer nerd.
Nothing there says all socially inept people are nerds, Humpty.
I've oft expressed my desire to change the views of others away from the supernatural and toward the secular humanist way of life. To my surprise, I found many atheists quite opposed to this concept since they believe it makes them no better than the religious folks going door to door selling their religion. Many seem to hold the opinion that we ought to keep our beliefs to ourselves and let others do the same. I can only presume that such people don't see the real effect religion holds on our way of life. It sounds almost like we need to "evangelize" atheism both to atheists and theists alike. Do you agree that we ought to share our [lack of] faith? If so, what do you believe are some useful methods? Studies show that simply debating with a person often makes them stronger in their belief even if they were utterly defeated. Without reason, what more is there? Just awareness? How to raise greater awareness?
It is not that we have to keep our beliefs to ourselves, it is just best if you let the religious discussion start from the religious side. Offence verses defense. Because by you going to someone and saying you do not believe in god or extraterrestrials, gives weight to the fact that they exist, but you just don’t believe in them. But having them come to you, then you have the fact that they don’t exist period.