PDA

View Full Version : The Brights



Ash
05-16-2008, 06:20 PM
The Brights Movement is a movement to give an umbrella label to all people with a naturalistic worldview, one free of supernatural or mystical beliefs.

"Bright" is a new noun, rather than an adjective, that has been created for the group. It's proper to think of all worldviews that lack supernatural or mystical beliefs as sub-divisions of Brights.

This is exactly what I've been hoping for for ages.

The movement's center is at www.the-brights.net

There's a catch, though: If you are joining because you were told that you should or must, then you CAN NOT BE A BRIGHT. It's a matter of your own will and thought, not the beliefs of your family or your friends.

Jeremy
05-16-2008, 06:30 PM
I don't like this idea.

Ash
05-16-2008, 07:32 PM
Why not? It's not much different than the movement to change "homosexual" to "gay", or to label the people of the green party "Greens".

Jeremy
05-16-2008, 08:14 PM
It seems like a response to something, like they are doing it because Christians did something like it. They are yelling "hey I'm a naturalist" and all though that in itself isn't bad, its just starting a argument that doesn't need to happen.

They are screaming their opinions when everyone should just shut up.

The Pirate
05-16-2008, 10:17 PM
Wow, what a great cause.

Excuse me if I'm missing something here, but can you explain to me exactly what is so important about creating a new label to assign to a particular set of beliefs?

Ash
05-17-2008, 11:43 AM
I'm not sure if you are aware, but with the current political and social climate, it's almost impossible for an atheist, agnostic, or any other person with a naturalistic worldview to achieve any high political or social position without lying.

The movement isn't just about labeling. It's also a civil rights movement for the non-mystical. It's about removing the negative connatations of words like "atheist" or "humanist", and even "freethinker".

Oh, and here are a few famous Brights:

Penn and Teller
Richard Dawkins
Michael Shermer

and more here, though these aren't quite as famous: http://www.the-brights.net/people/enthusiastic/index.html

The Pirate
05-17-2008, 11:50 AM
The movement isn't just about labeling. It's also a civil rights movement for the non-mystical. It's about removing the negative connatations of words like "atheist" or "humanist", and even "freethinker".

By doing what? Getting rid of all those labels and placing them under the umbrella term of "brights". Couldn't people just as easily attach the same negative connotation to that label as well?

I mean, I can kind of see what they're getting at. The label implies a sort of union among those who share such opinions. But the whole thing sounds uncomfortably close to being another political correctness bandwagon.


Oh, and here are a few famous Brights:

Penn and Teller
Richard Dawkins
Michael Shermer

What's your point? Are those people supposed to lend extra validity to the cause or something? They have the same opinions regardless of whether or not you label them as brights.

Krob
05-17-2008, 12:36 PM
This is retarded.

Cory
05-17-2008, 12:48 PM
Why not? It's not much different than the movement to change "homosexual" to "gay", or to label the people of the green party "Greens".

why would you want to be labeled. I personally hate labels, just be whatever you want without constricting "labels". You know where else "labels" were used. heres a clue, WWII. Thats right, hitler labed the jew and had then all mark then when the time came he pratically exterminated them in a holocaust. Just live your life without labels man, they are pointless and restricting.

Ash
05-17-2008, 01:36 PM
why would you want to be labeled. I personally hate labels, just be whatever you want without constricting "labels". You know where else "labels" were used. heres a clue, WWII. Thats right, hitler labed the jew and had then all mark then when the time came he pratically exterminated them in a holocaust. Just live your life without labels man, they are pointless and restricting.

Wow, nice argument.

Hey, you know who else wore clothes? Hitler. Yeah, so when you wear clothes, you are just like Hitler.


By doing what? Getting rid of all those labels and placing them under the umbrella term of "brights". Couldn't people just as easily attach the same negative connotation to that label as well?

I mean, I can kind of see what they're getting at. The label implies a sort of union among those who share such opinions. But the whole thing sounds uncomfortably close to being another political correctness bandwagon.

The movement isn't just about relabeling. Were that the case, then yes, the connotation would just be reassigned. It is just a name to organize under.



What's your point? Are those people supposed to lend extra validity to the cause or something? They have the same opinions regardless of whether or not you label them as brights.
No, I jsut wanted to list them, I didn't think about listing them in the first post, so I just added them to my last one.

Dudeman
05-17-2008, 01:50 PM
By doing what? Getting rid of all those labels and placing them under the umbrella term of "brights". Couldn't people just as easily attach the same negative connotation to that label as well?

I mean, I can kind of see what they're getting at. The label implies a sort of union among those who share such opinions. But the whole thing sounds uncomfortably close to being another political correctness bandwagon.

NOE! Just look at the name! "BRIGHTS", how could anyone not like that? It reminds them of a bright day or something.

I know politics can be very cruel for judging people on religion. In fact, even Christians lost elections because people thought they would be a puppet leader for the pope. Seriously, being an atheist is definitely better then being a "Bright". In fact, a bright as a description on the ballot would confuse the shit out of me since the naturalist literature movement was known for it's pessimism. It just doesn't make sense.

Exile
05-17-2008, 02:07 PM
This is exactly what I've been hoping for for ages.

What, that your beliefs get an umbrella term to label yourself under?

I don't see any fault in your beliefs or anything but if you want to believe in something, I don't see why you have to look for a group to classify yourself under for it.

Ash
05-17-2008, 02:53 PM
People, its not about changing a name. ''Bright'' is just a name to organize under. The goal is to fight against discrimination. Noone is having their label changed. I'm still an atheist, but I am also a Bright.

The Pirate
05-17-2008, 04:12 PM
People, its not about changing a name. ''Bright'' is just a name to organize under.

Because unity requires a catchy name to rally under?


This egalitarian vision is not the reality today. Moving toward it requires that individuals who do hold a naturalistic worldview make manifest their existence within society. The idea of materializing as Brights at the Internet hub of The Brights’ Net is to acquire visibility, fortify one another in what is a worthwhile outlook on the world, and grow a constituency that can join forces broadly to work on broad aims of social and civic action.

Sounds like a load of bollocks to me. As I said, it sounds like a pointless bandwagon that tries to make itself out to be a revolutionary movement with all kinds of flowery language ("manifesting their existance" and "fortifying one another" as "brights") and a romanticized and idealistic image.

I agree with the principle behind this "movement", but the way they are going about it is rather silly.

imported_SPARTAN_117
05-17-2008, 04:27 PM
It seems like this should be in the debate section.

Ash
05-17-2008, 06:12 PM
Why? It's not a debate.



@The Pirate: Well, there's no other equivelent movement, and it's something that needs to be done.

Smashdood
05-17-2008, 06:14 PM
Ash sure does like to crusade for inconsequential causes against nonexistent enemies. . . you should find a better hobby, man.

imported_SPARTAN_117
05-17-2008, 06:15 PM
A debate on whether the brights was a good idea or not. I don't know, it seems like you're arguing

Ash
05-17-2008, 06:17 PM
Ash sure does like to crusade for inconsequential causes against nonexistent enemies. . . you should find a better hobby, man.

Yeah, because non-religious people totally aren't discriminated against.

Chimaera
05-17-2008, 06:25 PM
God knew you "Brights" would bitch and moan about being picked on, so he gave you the internet.

Nuff said.

Ash
05-17-2008, 06:26 PM
Lol. You says a bad wuuurd.

Jeremy
05-17-2008, 06:38 PM
Organized atheism would completely ruin all the things that make atheism great. Like the fact that we are so completely diverse, and that people cant classify us. What are you thinking ash? Half of your defenses of atheism rest solely on the fact that we are different and thus cannot be compared to religion. If we can all be organized and labeled into one thing than that argument loses its validity.

I don't personally care what someone thinks of my beliefs, I don't call myself an atheist because its a pretty word, and no one will attack me for it. I don't hide behind the name. Chances are, the person who dislikes my beliefs and judges me for them has been judged for his beliefs. If someone stops at the classification of my beliefs, and cant look at me for who I am, that is a character flaw in them. And I refuse to run away because my label causes negativity.

You're part of the problem that causes stuff like this ash, you're the one who judges Christians as fools and as ignorant, yet you don't see them running away and getting a new label. Why should we?

Ash
05-17-2008, 07:23 PM
Read through this thread again, and you will find that I have already responded to that question.

THIS IS NOT ORGANIZED ATHEISM.

Deathwish
05-17-2008, 07:59 PM
Sounds like a religion to me.

Ash
05-17-2008, 08:54 PM
Would you call the Black civil rights movement a religion?

Would you call the women's civil rights movement a religion?

No.

(Actually, I may call the women's civil rights movement a religion...)

Steyene
05-17-2008, 09:47 PM
Yeah, because non-religious people totally aren't discriminated against.

Yeah, because religious people totally aren't discriminated against.

What the fuck are you moaning about? If anything it is the other way around. Anyway you will ALWAYS get discriminated against if you do/believe in something others don't, so stop fucking bitching about it and get over it.

Christians have been persecuted for thousands of years. Have any Atheists been killed for what they believe in? If not STFU and GTFO .

Edit:

How the fuck is this a rights movement? Are you guys oppressed, are your civil liberties removed because you are an Atheist? Is you life worse because you are an Atheist? I some what fucking doubt that.

Jeremy
05-17-2008, 09:55 PM
Christians have been persecuted for thousands of years.


Uhhh no they haven't haha. I don't remember a time when Christians were persecuted at all.

You're thinking of jewish people.

Ash
05-17-2008, 09:57 PM
Steiner, you obviously haven't spent much time in the Bible Belt of the US. I've had people follow me home, insult me, pick fights with me, make up stuff about me, threaten me, and refuse to talk to me for being an atheist.

Spend a year in Oklahoma City as an atheist, and you'll know why it sucks to be one.

@Jeremy: They were persecuted before Rome adopted it as the official religion, but that's all.

Steyene
05-17-2008, 10:35 PM
Uhhh no they haven't haha. I don't remember a time when Christians were persecuted at all.

You're thinking of jewish people.

No the Christian were persecuted, by the jews. Get it right

Jeremy
05-18-2008, 12:25 AM
When ?

alive
05-18-2008, 07:09 AM
When ?

Quite a lot in fact. Ancient Rome for one. (Nero and shit).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians

Ash
05-18-2008, 07:29 AM
Christians haven't been persecuted at all any where but the middle-east in the past several hundred years. Occasionally, there has been in-fighting, and that led to the creation of the USA. However, Christians have ALWAYS persecuted others, especially Jews and athiests. Whats more is that since the Dark Ages, probably over 70% of the religious persecution in the world was performed by Christians. Compare that to the fact that athiests have never in history had a time where they haven't been persecuted.

alive
05-18-2008, 08:07 AM
Christians haven't been persecuted at all any where but the middle-east in the past several hundred years. Occasionally, there has been in-fighting, and that led to the creation of the USA. However, Christians have ALWAYS persecuted others, especially Jews and athiests. Whats more is that since the Dark Ages, probably over 70% of the religious persecution in the world was performed by Christians. Compare that to the fact that athiests have never in history had a time where they haven't been persecuted.

Christians were persecuted in the Soviet Union. As well as in Spain during the civil war.
"probably over 70% of the religious persecution in the world was performed by Christians." Where did you get these numbers?

Jeremy
05-18-2008, 08:41 AM
Quite a lot in fact. Ancient Rome for one. (Nero and shit).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians

I was actually wondering when the Christians were persecuted by the jews in that post, but that link proves my first point wrong. My bad.

alive
05-18-2008, 08:52 AM
Yes, I didn't really see that you were asking for Jews persecuting Christians in specific when I made the post, so I edited in the link when I read through the earlier posts again..

Jeremy
05-18-2008, 08:58 AM
I C.

Ash
05-18-2008, 10:11 AM
Christians were persecuted in the Soviet Union. As well as in Spain during the civil war.
"probably over 70% of the religious persecution in the world was performed by Christians." Where did you get these numbers?

I didn't "get" the numbers. That's why I said "Probably". It was an estimate.


Oh, okay, I forgot about the Soviet Union and Spain.

alive
05-18-2008, 10:39 AM
Since the Dark Ages, probably over 70% of the religious persecution in the world was performed by angry teddy bears wearing red ties and singing old Bob Marley songs.

What's the point of making estimates based on lack of knowledge?

The Pirate
05-18-2008, 04:18 PM
Just to swerve things back on topic from the tangent about religious persecution, I have a question.

How exactly is the "brights movement" going to help the persecution you speak of?

I mean, it's not like you're actually being stripped of civil rights for being an atheist, so don't try to draw parallels with the movement for black rights. You don't even come close to having as valid of a reason for a rights movement as they did. You just say that you get picked on or insulted by people for being atheist. No movement is going to change the fact that some people are going to be ignorant dicks.

Unless you are being truly persecuted, stripped of your rights, treated as less than human, or given lower wages for being an atheist, stop acting like some sort of martyr for your cause.

Ash
05-18-2008, 04:45 PM
I'm not acting like that. I'm not saying it's anywhere as big a movement as those, I just said that it is also a civil rights movement.

And atheists are truly persecuted. Like I said, I've been threatened numerous times, amoung other things, and I've been treated lesser by teachers and other people for it as well. For instance, I was given an F on a narrative essay only because of subject matter. the note on the page said "This is innapropriate for school". The essay was on my conversion from Christianity to atheism, and it wasn't a bad essay. I was complimented by another teacher on how well written it was. Now I have to take summer school for failing that class, and that grade would have raised me to a C.

Steyene
05-18-2008, 06:10 PM
The essay was on my conversion from Christianity to atheism, and it wasn't a bad essay.


Maybe they are just feed up with you acting like a martyr, and bitching about how mistreated you are for your belief (wooh religious thought pattern here). Hell you can never know what you are going to get for ANY assignment. I could use your excuse for when I did badly in my English assignment, because in my eyes it was really good, but the teacher disagreed. So obviously it is because I am a Christian.

Pull your head out of your ass, even just for a minute and look at your self from a distant perspective. How are you actually acting? Probably exactly then same as those religious people act.

Seriously grow a pair and get over it. This is just another notch in the totem pole, of my opinion that Atheism is becoming/or already is a religion, abet one on non-belief.

Edit: You are also forgetting, China, Africa, South America, "The middle east".