(no subject)
Nov. 2nd, 2005 03:23 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dreamer_easySomething I should have made clear in yesterday's posting about brights, and which a couple of commenters have reminded me about, is that the bright movement isn't representative of atheists et al. Many have reacted negatively. The Skeptic Society's email newsletter solicited responses from readers which were overwhelmingly against the term - a copy of their report is archived here. Chris Mooney of CSICOP described how the movement backfired.
OTOH, it is a movement: The Bright's Net, a non-profit organisation, claims a potential twenty-nine million members, although they're not forthcoming about the actual number of brights who've registered with them. (They claim over 3800 responded to a recent poll of members.) Nor has the movement been marginalised by the non-religious community: the Web site BrightRights.org describes itself as "a project of the American Humanist Society".
OTOH, it is a movement: The Bright's Net, a non-profit organisation, claims a potential twenty-nine million members, although they're not forthcoming about the actual number of brights who've registered with them. (They claim over 3800 responded to a recent poll of members.) Nor has the movement been marginalised by the non-religious community: the Web site BrightRights.org describes itself as "a project of the American Humanist Society".
