this was made a few days ago when i was off but nobody announced it, so i guess i’m doing that now. the sidebar describes its purpose as follows:
Spirituality is a broad concept with room for many perspectives. In general, it includes a sense of connection to something bigger than ourselves, and it typically involves a search for meaning in life. As such, it is a universal human experience—something that touches us all. People may describe a spiritual experience as sacred or transcendent or simply a deep sense of aliveness and interconnectedness.
Some may find that their spiritual life is intricately linked to their association with a church, temple, mosque, or synagogue. Others may pray or find comfort in a personal relationship with God or a higher power. Still others seek meaning through their connections to nature or art. Like your sense of purpose, your personal definition of spirituality may change throughout your life, adapting to your own experiences and relationships
Anti religious is definitely not atheists. Entirely different but of course too many make it the same thing. I personally am not religous but am spiritual. Not atheist but not a ‘beliver’ as some would consider, it’s not black and white. While I don’t believe an actual proclaimed atheist would want to deal with a spirituality group, a difference if opinion without attacks, is welcome in my opinion.
I get what you mean, but for the term “atheist” there really is a black and white. If your answer to the question “do you believe in a god?” is yes, then you’re a theist. If it’s anything other than yes, you’re an atheist. “Atheist” doesn’t mean not religious, it’s specifically about not believing in god(s) and nothing else.
Anti religious was(is?) pretty fundamental to the “New Atheist movement” from the latter aughts and early teens from this century. They don’t represent atheism as a whole but a decade ago they were highly visible and did a lot to screw up the connotation of the word “atheism.” I think it’s possible to argue in good faith that religion is ultimately a net harm (which I wouldn’t), but there is also a bigoted and ignorant way to do that which was far more common. While the “a” in atheism means “without,” there used to be quite a significant presence of those who manifested the belief that it meant “against.” I’m sure they’re still around, but they don’t seem to be as constant an annoyance as they used to be and many of their figureheads moved on to support right-wing politics targeting the religions they hate the most.
Your point is important. I was once part of that movement. There is a crucial piece missing:
In the US atheism has come to specifically challenge the assumed Christian majority that influences US society in subtle ways. For instance, Christmas, or the fact that we have “under God” on US currency. It wasn’t anti-religious as much as anti-Christian, and contextually that point of view is warranted.
Since that movement, I’ve noticed that theologists have labeled atheists as “strong” and “weak” in (my interpretation) an attempt to discredit “agnostic atheists”.
I think there will always be a “war” between mindsets so long as humanity survives. The important part is allowing diverse religious or non-religious backgrounds which means one religion can’t be imposing values onto everyone else.
I’m atheist but I like hearing people’s views about religion and belief from the other perspective as well. I find it fascinating how people believe in different things, belief has had a huge impact on the world (for better and worse).