Rick Moen <rick@linuxmafia.com> wrote:
As a personal observation, in the USA the people who identify themselves as atheists tend statistically towards severe dickishness, which is the main reason why I refer to myself -- if the subject comes up, which it should not (a point I'll return to) as 'non-religious', so as to not be associated with them.
I usually say "naturalist", or (in the right company) "metaphysical naturalist", which more accurately describes my position than does "atheist". Someone can be an atheist while having a commitment to the existence of souls, spirits, ghosts, and any number of other such entities which are supernatural but not gods. Atheism means one is not a theist (either a monotheist or a polytheist). I am not a theist (hence an atheist), but I go beyond this by not believing in any other supernatural entities. Like Rick, I don't proclaim this view unless the context is appropriate. On the other hand, I think there is a legitimate role for naturalistic (and hence atheistic) writers to explain and defend their position. I've met atheists, but none whom I would describe as activist in this regard. Most of them have more important causes with which to concern themselves politically.