The Scarlet Letter! Perfect!

If there ever becomes a symbol for atheism I will cry for many many years...

The first thing I thought of was, "Ask the jews about how wearing their religious symbol went for them."

If there ever becomes a symbol for atheism I will cry for many many years...

How were non-believers traditionally executed...?

The definitive Atheist symbol could be a stake with flames around it. ;)

…ok

Does it strike anyone else as odd that people like to wear their current ideology across their chest?

Where I come from, when someone says "That's a fucking t-shirt" it means that the phrase you just said or the idea you tried to communicate is so pithy it belongs on your chest, not in dialogue.

I would like to think atheist hasn't reached t-shirt-status-sensationalism yet. Especially with Dawkins name at the bottom there.

Think about it - what are you following today?

Haha, get over yourselves.

It's a t-shirt. Just like a band t-shirt, it's there to get the word out, that's all. That, and, it's an easy way to make a few extra bucks.

Possibly I'm just your garden-variety agitator, but I would wear it. You see, I live in Colorado Springs. I'm trying to do more than pay lip service to the ideal of "doing my part to piss off the religious right".

Most people here wouldn't get it anyway. The ones who did would either dig it - or get their panties in a bunch...and then my work is done.

It's a t-shirt. Just like a band t-shirt, it's there to get the word out, that's all. That, and, it's an easy way to make a few extra bucks.

People are worried that the big red 'A' will be taken super-seriously.

The average human does get uptight about his symbols (see: flag burning law), but I don't see anyone going zealot-mode in this instance. It is true, though, that the last thing atheism needs is zealots...

I was just wondering why people like to wear their ideology on their shirts, and I still don't get it.

If it's something you take seriously, like Dawkins-esque atheists do, why trivialize it by making it just another stupid logo?

The logic behind buying one of these shirts is exactly the same as buying one that says "Jesus Saves" - or at least I can't think of a relevant difference.

I just have a 1" solid red button on my briefcase/satchel. It's subtle enough- and a good conversation starter.

The thing that makes me laugh a little is that I received it from a masonic grand master.

Really nice typeface. Personally, I prefer the letter V.

I know this is off-topic, but, but still funny (at least for me) Some born against came by my house today, I hopened the door and said "HI, no thanks, I worship Satan", then then I closed the door. I would not be surprised to find a burning cross in my lawn sometime this week, but It was worth it, the look on their faces was priceless.

speaking as one of the born against, when the born again come to my door, i always hopen it for them. i don't know if those misspellings were intentional, susceptor, but i sure got a kick out of them, and if you did make them up intentionally you're pretty clever.

i'd love to have a "born against" t shirt.

i think the "a" and "richarddawkins.net" should be on two separate shirts, either one of which would have more impact, and certainly be less creepy than the (IMO) unfortunate juxtoposition.what, do i have to be a member of dawkins' group to be an atheist?

i would be truly dripping with indignation right now, but i already had my marketing/ideology cherry popped with that circle "a" for anarchy. but at least with that there wasn't some lone megalomaniac trying to act like he invented the concept. oh, wait, i am dripping indignation. that was a little harsh on ol' richard. but you see what i mean? creepy.

the overreactions posted here surprise me.

it is a t-shirt with a statement. a piece of merchandise aimed at those who agree with it's message. i think everyone has long been desensitized to people wearing a message about their stand on various issues. we have all seen people proclaim their fandom or affiliation to movies/bands/workplace/politics/sports team/ etc. this list is long...

"what, do i have to be a member of dawkins' group to be an atheist?"

what a ridiculous premise. the shirt is an advert for richarddawkins.net. one would only buy it (from richarddawkins.net) if one approved of their message. in that case you most likely already are an atheist or agnostic. the of coures is not necessarily true that an atheist approved of richard dawkins, but why would richarddawkins.net worry about those people that don't approve of the site? those are not the ones that would buy the shirt anyway!

The idea for the shirt came from PZ Myers' excellent article the other day:

And it certainly is true that Dawkins puts an exclamation point on godlessness, and good for him. The path we've taken in the past, the cautious avoidance of the scarlet letter of atheism, has not worked. Dawkins represents a different, bolder, more forthright approach — we are staking out a place in the public discourse and openly discussing our concerns, rather than hiding in fear of that old Puritan scowl. We will not go back in the closet. http://richarddawkins.net/article,881,Nisbet-and-Mooney-in-the-WaPo-snake-oil-for-the-snake-oil-salesmen,PZ-Myers-Pharyngula

The Richard Dawkins Foundation will soon be making other merch items as well, but this just hit me as something that a lot of young people would really like. We'll do some simple RDF logo shirts, and perhaps some with quotes.

If you don't want to advertise the URL on the shirt, there are plenty of "Scarlet Letter" t-shirts available out there on the web, mostly baby doll cuts through the Hustler store, though. :)

Josh RichardDawkins.net

I read about this survey a couple of years ago, amongst Christians. Would they, or would they not help someone who had a broken-down car by the side of the road? The car was either unadorned, or it had a "Darwin fish" on it. Christians would almost inevitably ignore the Darwin fish cars. Which pretty much says all that needs to be said about Christians.

forgive me, norm, i have some awareness of who "joshtimmonen" is to you and what he represents, and i don't mean to speak for you, but i couldn't let this pass.

josh, on this blog we do plenty of stealing other peoples ideas (not usually for buisiness purposes) and ridiculing them as well. but we usually use their names when we do. i laid out two ideas in one sentance. you stole one of them ( the one you could sell) and ridiculed the other (the one in public domain). my statement:"i think the "a" and "richarddawkins.net" should be on two separate shirts..." led to this from you:"...this just hit me as something that a lot of young people would really like. We'll do some simple RDF logo shirts...". that was the part of what i said that you found useful. the other part, which you couldn't use, you dealt with thusly:" If you don't want to advertise the URL on the shirt, there are plenty of "Scarlet Letter" t-shirts available out there on the web, mostly baby doll cuts through the Hustler store, though. :)"

well, la de da, guess i better stick with that respectable "dawkins.net" shirt. wouldn't want anthing (public domain) associated with hustler. baby doll! well, i never! i won't comment on this further, but i call sleaze.

also: thanks for strengthening my other point. nothing personal against dawkins, i don't really think of him as a megalomaniac, but:

"Dawkins represents a different, bolder, more forthright approach — we are staking out a place in the public discourse and openly discussing our concerns, rather than hiding in fear of that old Puritan scowl. We will not go back in the closet." again: richard dawkins did not invent atheism, nor a proud, out-of-the-closet, even aggresive approach to it. the jews did. :)

and if you, or richard, or you, norm, or anyone else would like help tracing the origins of proud atheism back to spinoza (who was not himself a declared atheist but who provided the blueprint and the ammo, some of which dawkins has used) or even much farther back in mainstream (orthodox) jewish tradition, let me know. but then again, you guys know how to do research.

not usually for buisiness purposes

Oh my Jonathon your disdain for atheists is showing and your belief in the imaginary is clouding your judgment. At the very least you could acknowledge that the 'business' is not for profit, and the goals are outlined here take a moment and read it. The rest of your rant, your history lesson, is simply irrelevant. What is it you're trying to say the jews have a copyright on in you face atheism?

and btw, josh, nothing personal. i understand you are pretty young, and i ain't lookin' for royalties. zie gezhunt, i say. let me know if you need an advisor on jewish affairs or something. :)

sorry norm, wrote that last one before i saw yours. but yes, i'm saying that far more than dawkins does, the jews have such a "copyright". and i have no "disdain" for atheists- my god, what the hell do you think i'm doing here? some of my best friends are atheists. :)

and why would you claim my history lesson was irrelevant without investigating it? do you have evidence to the contrary of an earlier form of "christian" atheism? not to speak of the "in your face" variety? the jews invented "in your face" too, you know. :)

and please, an example: what belief in the imaginary? i take bodacious umbrage.

couldn't get your link to work. was aware of non profit status, still curious as to "goals".

You just seem overly sensitive at times when belief in the supernatural is ridiculed. You do believe, don't you or this your coming out as an atheist in the "in your face"© jewish tradition. This is a what have you done for me lately discussion. Dawkins has been at the forefront of a renewed effort to get atheism out of the closet.

what do you mean by "you do believe, don't you?" do you mean do i believe in god? well certainly not the god you atheists believe in.:) no norm, i came out of the closet, which i was never in, long ago here as a freethinker, the product of generations of (jewish) freethinkers for whom the existence of god was a less important question than what people do with their beliefs- which you may call "information".

and i'm certainly not arguing about dawkins being "in the forfront, etc." i'm saying that this "renewed effort" is only new among christians. it hasn't (yet) hit the muslims (they'll cut your head off) or the hindus (don't think they find it interesting enough what with their colorful god-ocopia). and the buddhists don't really believe in any god that the rest would recognize as such. the jews have been doing it in their own quiet yet in-your face way for many hundreds of years. look, for instance, to the world of entertainment. is richard dawkins more gutsy or relevant than lenny bruce? ah, but no, you say, lenny wasn't really jewish, he was...EXACTLY.

and dont get me started on jon stewart. he may have his own private "spiritual" beliefs, but... and sam harris? what about him? take a good look at the modern atheist constellation. look, we needed an anglican to take the message to the world. richard dawkins is working for the elders of zion, essentially. he doesn't pay them, but believe me, they get payed. gosh, i'm so amusing i can't even punch the smiley face keys. don't take any of this too seriously, ok? i'm the black sheep of the elders of zion. they don't like me very much. and i'm WASTED.

richard dawkins more gutsy or relevant than lenny bruce

Jonathan, Lenny Bruce is dead. :)

oh, yeah, shit. BUT STILL RELEVANT!

http://richarddawkins.net/foundation

couldn't get your link to work. was aware of non profit status, still curious as to "goals".

You know how to do research, right?

I love this tee

"RDF is now in the process of applying for charitable status and the precise wording of our Mission Statement is under discussion with the charity commissioners. When the discussion is complete, we shall post the final version here."

thanks, norm. when there's some actual beliefs-i mean, information- available, let me know.

having some knowlege of non profit organizations (not a lot- some) i suspect the proceeds will go to further the work of the foundation by ensuring that richard dawkins is free to do what he does and not have to paint houses for a living. :)

jonathan becker,

Just to be clear I do not plan on using any of your ideas, and I do not see how you came to that conclusion. I simply referred to PZ's article, and how that gave me the idea to design the current t-shirt that this thread is based around. I also mentioned that sometime down the road we may be creating shirts with the Richard Dawkins Foundation logo (see http://richarddawkins.net for an example of the seal), or perhaps some quotes from Richard Dawkins. So calm down.

Regards, Josh

I absolutely LOVE these shirts and will definitely be buying one. Glad to see they arent using plain T's and going with a more stylish approach (babydolls, etc). Good work!

Jonathan,

As you found they are reworking the mission statement. In the mean time this should give you good idea what it's all about

http://youtube.com/watch?v=bTbdvy5jIQw

Is it just me or does anyone else find that Jon's ramblings difficult to follow?

hiya josh. how many guys from your legal department did you have to consult with before you hit "send" on that last post? i told you i don't want your money, so YOU calm down.

i don't think the idea i mentioned is complex enough to meet the legal definition of "originality" anyway, but it's easy enough to show that i was the only one who mentioned it at this thread and that it was my statement you were responding to. then i laid out the connection quite clearly (even pedantically, like this) in my longish "rant". for you to claim that you don't see how i "came to that conclusion" sounds like (uneccessary) legal ass covering. norm got it right away. you are a rationalist, aren't you? don't be disingenous. and don't think i don't have your number just cuz i can't spell. best of luck with your important work.

regards, jonathan

How are you going to treat your hangover jonathan?

kind of you to assume it was alcohol, norm, and in this case you'd be right. i thought i'd treat it by checking out my favorite blog, of course. really enjoying the "jesus saves" thread, just checked out ericks video and sent it to my dad. oh, and i just had to respond to that nice young josh fellow- he's a clever one. things ok by you? hope i didn't get to crazy on y'all last night.:)

Too crazy, not by my standards, but then I've been accused of not having standards.

i forgot, for you guys it still is last night. boy, i bet everyone here with a day job hates my guts. this is why musicians can't stay married. its not so much the booze, as the oppurtunity to stay home all day and fuck around on the computer. wives hate this. i don't know how you get away with it. :) sorry, i'll leave you alone now.