pieces, at water coolers, in online forums, at family dinner tables. Humanism has not been doing this nearly as much. The New York Times just did a story on Jerry DeWitt ( Recovering from Religion , Clergy Project ), headlined, "From Bible-Belt Pastor to Atheist Leader." That grabs attention, gets people talking. Would "From Bible-Belt Pastor to Humanist Leader" have had the same impact? Would the story even have been written? I really don't think so. The atheist movement already exists. It is powerful. It is a name and an identity that many people feel strongly about. It is a name and an identity that many people have done extraordinary things done for. Many of us have grown to love it. We see value in it, and we don't want to abandon it. We want to form a subset of it that makes it better: a subset that is specifically devoted to making atheism more welcoming to women, people of color, poor people, working class people, trans people, and other marginalized groups, and that is specifically devoted to doing work in the places where atheism and other social justice issues intersect. As Jason Thibeault wrote in What's in a name? Quite a lot, actually. : And people can claim that we're trying to rebrand atheism to make it more pleasant, but really we're simply naming the part of the community we've already carved out for ourselves where mere disbelief in a god or gods isn't our only unifying factor. We