A Thinking Reed

"Man is but a reed, the most feeble thing in nature, but he is a thinking reed" – Blaise Pascal

Stark first uncloseted “nontheist” in Congress

According to this website, Congressman Pete Stark (D-CA) is the first member of Congress to openly identify as a “nontheist.” Incidentally, Stark used to be my congressman, or, more accurately I guess, I used to be his constituent. He is, not surprisingly for the San Francisco Bay Area, a very liberal Democrat. (I’m pretty sure I opted not to vote for him when I had the chance in 2002, no doubt – and unbeknownst to me – demonstrating my pernicious bias against atheists!)

Anyway, what’s up with the term “nontheist”? Does it mean something different from “atheist”? Is it supposed to sound less menacing or something?

4 responses to “Stark first uncloseted “nontheist” in Congress”

  1. Sure as heck’s better than calling himself a “bright.”

    Actually, I think nontheist is probably a better positioning. “Atheist” sounds as if you’re anti-God, whereas “nontheist” may not be specifically unreligious, but against a theistic conception of a “God.”

  2. Or perhaps he thinks he’s agnostic, but isn’t sure?

  3. “Nontheist” could mean that he believes in God, but not in the dogmatic, theistic God of monotheism. That could make him a typical Westerner with delusions of Buddhism. My experience is that the term is not merely “less menacing” than atheism, but among those who trade in that exchange it’s a condescending slap at the “theists” who have messed up religion.

  4. Some atheists don’t like saying they don’t believe in God because the statement assumes there’s a God to not believe in. Maybe nontheist is is a way around it?

Leave a reply to Wilson Cancel reply