Atheist Organizations

On what basis do atheists here choose this organization over some other? For example we have the American Atheists.

Their “About Us” section has a Staff area that lists the names and background of some ten indviduals with experience in finance, litigation and so on.

There are others too Humanist International, Atheist Alliance, Atheist Democracy, Freedom From Religion

Atheist Republic has only a single individual listed a Armin Navabi.

How do people choose which organization to join? Do these organizations disagree on any specific points? is anyone here a member of more than one organization?

1 Like

Why do you ask? What difference would this personal information make to you? Are these questions being posed as a subject for debate?

I came here not because I was attracted to this particular forum, but more because 1. random chance, 2. I couldn’t find what I was looking for elsewhere. Or: This place had less of what I did NOT want. I do my atheisting in my own way, and don’t need an organization to do that.

1 Like

Because I want to know, I want to ask atheists about this aspect of popular atheism.

I don’t expect or request any personal information but did notice its glaring absence here, it caught my eye.

Very likely yes, it all depends upon the answers though.

Same here, I happened across this place, and liked the way it doesn’t baby people, and treats them like adults. A dim view is taken of bigotry, racism and homophobia, and people who don’t debate honestly can be told so, as the emphasis is on honest debate not a faux display of manners.


You don’t debate honestly.

Care to quote something I have said, and explain why you think it is dishonest? Otherwise that’s just pure ad hominem. Odd how you ask a question, then resort to petty unevidenced insult.


You make shit up… swings and round abouts treacle.

AR uses the discourse app, which works great on mobile. Best forum for the discerning atheist always on the go. That and the banter is fantastic at times.

1 Like

I think your purpose is likely just a bucket of chum. I think you’re trolling. However, many of the folks here that I support as a mod have indicated they would rather I not ban you permanently for now. However, my patience is not unlimited.


Okay, I’ll play for a bit. I found The AR by pure random chance. Got on Google and typed in “Atheist chat rooms.” Just so happened that Atheist Republic was right there at the top of the search list. Clicked on the site and started browsing through some of the conversations. Based on some of the bantering I read, I decided to give it a shot. Seemed like my kind of group. However, literally took me two or three days to complete my “enrollment”, because I was highly reluctant to identify myself as an “Atheist” in my profile. Finally got up the courage to bite the bullet and hop on board. Haven’t looked back since.

That was during the period of my life when I had finally determined it was way past time for me to put my Christian indoctrination behind me. Problem was, though, I didn’t know how. I’m not a very social guy, and what few friends I did have at the time were all quite religious. Thankfully, I did have my wife for support and advice, but I was flooding her with so many questions and such that she was about ready to bury me in our backyard. So in an effort to prevent having to hide my body and make all the excuses for my disappearance to family and friends, she suggested I join an atheist chat site. And - Ta-dah! - here I am. :smiling_face: I’ve never even attempted to find another atheist site. No need. I am quite fond of my online “family” right here.


My purpose has been stated clearly from the day I joined. It is to challenge the claims of atheists, their often weak grasp of science and philosophy and the vacuity of their overall intellectual position as I and many others see it.

As for “trolling” that’s a convenient way to stifle or silence dissent, the very threat to do that to me exemplifies dogma, a refusal to tolerate dissent is one of the hallmarks of toxic religion it’s ironic that a site dedicated against that should be so quick to emulate it.

All you managed were a string of straw men, that your jaundiced view of atheism produced. Like the hilarious idea that all the people who don’t believe in any deity, are alone incapable of understanding the evidence. That no true Scotsman fallacy is as hilarious as it is irrational.

Well you’re the one who claims a planet existing with vegetation before the sun is not incompatible with science, or humans magic’d into existence in an instant in their c urrent form, or a global flood that the geological record demonstrates unequivocally has never occurred.

Ah another bar appeal to numbers, lets have a poll…

  • The lack or absence of belief in any deity is intellectually vacuous.
  • The irrational belief in an unevidenced deity is intellectually unjustified.
0 voters
  1. You have trolled, and been banned twice for it, physician heal thyself.
  2. This site is dedicated to the exchange of views, primarily among atheists, but not exclusively.
  3. The only things most posters here are hostile to are sententious self aggrandising people who want to preach, and not debate.
  4. Also intellectual dishonesty, and irrational claims dressed up in the pretence of philosophical profundity.
  5. Close minded bigots, who try to dress that bias and prejudice up with a faux pretence of intellectual and scientific rigour.
  6. Angry thests who despise not just atheism, but the idea that any atheist has the temerity to voice their disbelief. so they come here and rant at atheism.
1 Like

That’s untrue, there is a hostility to theists, I call this site an “anti-theist” site rather than atheist. That is to say the emphasis here in the forum is on attacking theists and often doing so with insults and abuse.

If you simply held the view of seeing no evidence for God then we’d not expect such hostility and intolerance and outright dogma.

I know a great many atheists and I was one myself decades ago, you are not an atheist you are an anti-theists and there’s a huge difference.

Nope, unless they fit into that type, or the others described.

I could care less what your prejudiced and angry view of an atheist debate forum is. Your anger and prejudice against atheism has been manifest from your very first post, physician heal thyself…

I think you need to look up the word reciprocity, and maybe strive for some self awareness. very few posts have attacked you personally as opposed to your strident and irrational anti-atheist verbiage.

We, that’s hilarious, however your posts are so obviously closed minded and prejudiced I doubt any atheist here reading your posts cares abut your expectations of atheism. Especially given the relentlessly dishonest way you have misrepresented atheism, even to posters who made it clear you were presenting a straw man caricature. You cam e here to us remember to peddle your vapid and irrational superstitious wares, so cry me a river that you’re unhappy about your biased dogma and blind adherence to doctrine has been rationally challenged.

I hope you show them a little more respect than you came here with, and every living theists was once an atheist, that is axiomatic. Unless you want to revisit the catastrophic debacle fo your all beliefs require an initial belief assertions, the quotes will take me mere minutes to find and repost.

That’s a lie.

That’s a lie.

Not really, but there is a difference. Luckily for me I hail from a period and place where religion doesn’t hold the whip hand, and what they’re offering is a choice, which no doubt is one of the reasons religiosity is in such a drastic decline in most parts of the UK, and has been for decades.

If you won’t want your beliefs held up to rigorous and rational scrutiny, if your beliefs are that fragile, then don’t seek out atheists, if you want to be treated with respect personally then demonstrate some to the atheists here from the start, your strident arrogance was unlikely to go entirely unmatched.

Not at all, this site and the most vocal participants fit the definition perfectly:

“Opposed to belief in the existence of a god” where does that say “opposed to the existence of theists”?

1 Like

Fucking hell… again you couldnt make it up!!!

Oh crap… wait again…


Your lie was directed at me, and I am not “opposed to belief in the existence of a god or gods.” Which is the definition of an antitheist.


  1. opposed to belief in the existence of a god or gods.


1 Like

Whether you believe it or not, we actually WELCOME theists here who are interested in having honest and open discussions. Sadly, those are few and far between. Personally (and I am comfortable in speaking for a few others here), I actually ENJOY when a theist arrives with sincere and earnest questions and is willing to provide honest and open answers to questions posed to them. It’s called a learning experience, and can be beneficial to both parties. Moreover (speaking only for myself this time), I simply DO NOT CARE whether or not somebody is religious. As long as they do not use their religion to harm innocent people or promote the harming of innocent people, as far as I am concerned they are free to believe in and worship whatever god(s) they choose.

Now, that being said, you seem to be under the misunderstanding that visitors here (theists AND atheists alike) should be allowed to say whatever bullshit they want without any negative consequences. Well, sorry, pal. We see/smell bullshit, we call out the party guilty of spewing said bullshit. Hell, that even applies to the regular members here, for that matter. And when that happens, the guilty party has a couple of choices in the matter.

  1. He/she can own up to the mistake and make an effort to avoid such behavior in the future. In which case all is forgiven and the festivities continue. OR…

  2. He/she can argue their position in a reasonable manner and enlighten us as to how we might be wrong or simply misunderstanding their position. In which case we accept our fault in the matter, apologize, and the festivities continue. OR…

  3. (Here’s where you come in.) He/she can totally ignore pertinent lines of questioning, dip/dodge/deflect all lines of pertinent questioning, dishonestly deny conflicting answers/statements made during questioning, dishonestly twist answers/statements of others to avoid taking fault for own deceptions, and/or commit many other such unsavory violations of reasonable/civil debate. In which case, it becomes “Game on!”, and the guilty party will absolutely be treated in a manner suitable for such dishonest behavior.

See how easy that is? Granted, I know you will deny any fault on your own part. We totally expect that by now. Nevertheless, I took the time to make this post not for YOUR benefit, but rather for the benefit of those who rarely if ever participate in the discussions. You’re welcome. :smiling_face: