What do you think about using the term "Bright" as a new word for atheist?

Question

Will it put a more positive spin than the traditionally negative connotation that the word atheist has, or will it turn out to be the same as the word gay, often now used as a negative slur and still a largely hated group of people.
(Homosexuals being called "gay." Used to only mean happy)

Come on people, give me answers.

AND WHY?
the rest of these words are because I need at least 10 characters.

Adding details because yahoo says I'll get more answers.

Julia, if you haven't noticed, Homosexuals still mostly can't get married, and as a grad-student, I hear "gay" used as a negative slur all the time. Of course they are a hated group of people. Also, I didn't come up with this term, someone else did and its been around for awhile.

MORE ANSWERS MORE ANSWERS

Any suggestions for a better title?

Answer 1

"Bright" implies a natural talent and aptitude at learning, but says nothing about what one's learned. (You can be bright and ignorant).

I pride myself on what I've learned, so "bright" doesn't cut it for me.

Answer 2

If you think that "gay" is a "negative slur" and that homosexuals are "still a largely hated group of people," then perhaps you're not too "bright," no offense.

There are few things that are considered by secular culture to be more "hip" and "cool" these days than being gay.

...

Answer 3

Your selective quoting of the dictionary skipped over the different, maximum probable used definition of atheism: one that doesn't have self assurance in any deity. I have not have been given any "perception" of any form, no longer that there is a god, no longer that there is not any longer a god. perception is valueless. Now, word the 1st situation interior the definition of agnostic: "someone who holds the view that..." formally, agnosticism makes a declare: that any god is unknowable. That the question of a god's existence *can not* be responded. i come across that declare ridiculous. First, because of the fact that's impossible to correctly known what we are able to or should not be waiting to correctly known or instruct interior the destiny; 2d, because of the fact whilst it is composed of the question of existence for many human-claimed gods, the question has already been responded (that they do no longer exist). Take Zeus: a human-claimed god, who had tens of millions to billions of followers, and whose worship sects held sway over a particularly huge area of the international for a minimum of a million,500 years. Is there relatively any question of the existence of Zeus, a supernatural god-guy who's the top god of a team of gods residing on ideal of Mt. Olympus? of direction no longer -- that query has been responded, Zeus does not exist. And consequently the agnostic's premise is already fake -- questions correct to the existence of gods may be responded. on condition that i do no longer take provably-incorrect positions or carry provably-incorrect "perspectives," i'm no longer able to be an agnostic. I do have not have been given any perception in deities, so i'm an atheist. Peace.

Answer 4

I think that the underlying concept is much more accurately described by the term "atheist," and that using the term "Bright" is pure silliness.

Answer 5

Nah.

"Bright" has a connotation of implied intellect.

Not all atheists are smart.

Some are just comatose.

Answer 6

I think it's dumb. What does it describe? I don't even really describe myself as an atheist, it's a negative descriptor. It only says what I'm not, not what I am.

Answer 7

I don't like it. Atheists are already stereotyped as arrogant, and that just seals the case.

Answer 8

Please quit before you have any more "Bright" ideas. I think we may have found a new nickname for you. Night Bright.

Answer 9

To quote Theodore "Ted" Logan : "I don't think it'll work, dude."

Answer 10

Well, your screen name fits you perfectly.