A Thinking Reed

Stark first uncloseted “nontheist” in Congress

Written by

Lee M.

in

,

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?

Comments

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

  1. Chip Frontz

    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.”

    Reply
  2. Wilson

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

    Reply
  3. John Perry

    “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.

    Reply
  4. News Grinder

    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?

    Reply

Leave a reply to John Perry Cancel reply

More posts