If we were looking for a "face" for a movement I would recommend Neil Tyson. He knows everything that was, is, or will be. He is a little soft edged, though a scientist must pay homage to the laws of probability, and hedge his bet by saying his is sure there is no god except for .99995%, and I don't think he would take the job, talking something about having to run a planetarium, or something like that.

Look at what despot leadership has done for the Catholic church. It's the most hierarchical, rich, and cruel religion there is. Not even Islam has the body-count that it has. If you believe in a whatever, you don't need a leader taking you around by the nose. Free thinkers should come together or go their ways as they feel, like community shoppers. Conventions are fun for sharing and learning. Random organizers is all that's needed.

Separation of church and state.

Cult of Personality isn't the same as a cult. check out FFRF.org - Secularism is ingrained into the Constitution itself.
I still do not understand what you mean by 'proper representation'

Okay, upon a reread of the posts below Ill edit this without deleting, I do understand you are referring to more of a 'personality' than a actual position. We do have people working very hard to make our voices heard - I'll mention FFRF once more, groups like these have attorneys (good ones) working to help keep some of the theocrats in check.

There are places and people in this country who are pushing for state religion. Watch out and protect our Constitution.

Big Bang Theory!! Some of Sheldon's comments about his mother (a fundamentalist) are spot on and hilarious to boot.

@RobCampbell. Well alrighty... I'll check it out.

@twshield I'm all for non-believers holding public office. However, I really don't want to see any kind of "movement", or organized situation, where one person claims to speak for all non-believers. In that case, atheists would be as bad as the catholic church. Nobody needs that.

@twshield Like I said, I definitely think more non-believers need to start running for elected office. However, I'm certainly not "content with living in the shadows". I'm right out there in plain sight. Secure in my non-belief and perfectly capable and willing to defend my right to be, regardless of what the believers might have to say about it. What we need are more of us to be open about who we are and what we believe. Our right to be non-believers isn't in jeopardy. As long as the Constitution is the law of the land, legally, we can NOT believe anything. Yes, the public needs more education about what non-belief is, but we just need more of us speaking up. We can be our own representatives. Where do you think these "representatives" are going to come from, if not us?

@KKGator That's the point. Put a face to us. Having a face out there might make it easier to be open about what we are.

@twshield Was thinking more like top scientist they really do not like to lead, they are better at collective solving problems.

twshield you need to check out FFRF.org

Amen. Representatives, but not a leader. And the "under god" part is not in the Constitution as fanatics want. All they said was about following our better natures.

We should start a thread, name four leading atheist without using one that is already named and see how far it goes.

@twshield You characterize religious leaders as such "Believers have Religious leaders such as The Pope who heads the Catholic church."
Bill Nye and Niel DeGrasse Tyson are as public as one can get. Carl Sagan had an audience that made church preachers downright envious. Douglas Murray could easily become the next Hitchens. Dave Silverman heads the largest Atheist organization in the free world to which Bill Maher and Seth Macfarlane are very much involved. As far as Atheism, that's about the very best we can hope for until the religiously indoctrinated stop their bigoted assault on atheist. Unlike religious believers we don't really need figureheads to tell us how to think, that's why we're Atheists!

@twshield We as a collective are not overthinking this thing. The religious are the gatekeepers and they hold all the keys. They are in the highest elected offices and make the laws. We are far and few in between. There are agnostic/atheists in public office but they are stifled and made to keep quiet. Even the nonreligious would rather vote for any religious person other than an atheist. Atheists have been compared to the worst people in history and preacher spread this in league with satan narrative to the point of ad nauseum. Bernie Sanders was the closest an atheist will ever see in high public office until the stigma that the indoctrinated place upon atheist has stopped. We don't overthink it we just got tired of thinking about it!

@Wafflestomp What's wrong with having a leader?

@twshield This country will not openly vote for an atheist which presents the problem. I feel your frustration. The biggest problem with running for elected office as far as an undeclared atheist is concerned is having to hide within the unspoken words of their belief or nonbelief.