Religion
In reply to the discussion: Michael Shermer, Scientific American, Sept. 1, 2007: Rational Atheism [View all]MineralMan
(147,576 posts)They make their livings writing books and speaking in public. More power to them, I suppose. However, as an individual atheist, I never read their books or watch their public appearances. I find nothing of value in their expansion of the simple definition of atheism that is the only thing needed. Sometimes, as in point 1 of that statement, they even screw up the basic definition, in their zeal to say a great deal about something so simple.
It's interesting, though, that so much is said about those "professional" atheists. For believers, it is important to try to demonstrate that there is a "movement" to atheism. There is not. Most atheists are simply non-believers who go about their daily affairs without ever thinking about atheism at all.
We have no spokespersons, because there's really nothing complicated to say about non-belief. It is far too simple.