The 2010 Global Atheist Convention was held at the Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre over March 12-14. Organised by the Atheist Foundation of Australia and Atheist Alliance International, tickets were sold out months before the conference.
Ali Sayed, president of Melbourne-based Progressive Atheists, wants atheism to be about justice. He attended the convention.
* * *
It was nice to finally have an atheist convention in Melbourne that brought leading thinkers from around the globe to promote atheism. But strangely enough, I find my fellow atheists as confused about atheism post-convention as they were before it. Now you may ask, why?
For a start, we atheists don't like to be compartmentalised or stereotyped. As atheists or, as in my case, anti-theists, we gladly point to the religious injustices of the past. But we are reluctant to confront contemporary issues like gay or Aboriginal rights, or the rights of refugees.
In short, we are happy to deliberate over wrongs of the past.
However, to stand up against the inequities of our time would mean something more than a mere non-belief. It would force us to take sides on issues, instead of organising yet another talk fest. And this is the reason for my disillusionment with this convention — and, in particular, with an amoral understanding of atheism.
Some atheists have decided that atheism is an end in itself in the struggle against religious oppression. In fact, it is only the beginning. By giving up the beliefs that have divided us for this long, we can finally start our journey towards eradicating all artificial differences.
Many atheists believe religion has poisoned every aspect of our lives; it has used the codified doctrines of hatred to invent a whole new level of totalitarian theocracy. We believe our religious masters for centuries harboured an unfortunate aim of not just controlling our actions but indeed our thoughts.
But we can't forget that to undermine religion's influence, we need to start thinking about ethics, social justice and the eradication of centuries-old confusion about right and wrong.
Instead of an account of human rights violations committed under the veil of religion, we need to do more; we need to engage and analyse how to stand up for these rights and ideals. Otherwise it's all talk and no substance.
So, while it was good to host an atheist convention, and those who organised it should be commended on their efforts, it seems we missed a great opportunity to galvanise the atheist community to voice its concerns over the influence of organised religion in the public sphere.
[Abridged from an article that appeared at blogs.radionational.net.au/atheistconvention.]