Wow, apparently I missed Stephen's response to this thread entirely until I read this post. Let me see if I can clear up some of the confusion I seem to have created, taking comments a bit out of order in order to make this easier to follow.

First, I'm going to back off the capitalisation argument, even though I hardly think that a difference of mechanics means I've missed the point of my own belief structure.

From Iain:
> I suspect the benefit of deism (though I am a Christian so I disagree anyway) is that it enables a person to lead an unrestricted life-style, just as any *atheist* on earth does (within human Law of course), yet have an answer to the eternal question "Where Did I Come From?".

... wow. The way you describe this makes it sound like you believe the relationship between deists and God is that of teenagers who've been left alone in the house for a weekend and, sans parents, feel free to party. I can't speak for everyone, but I don't see it this way at all. To me, God created the universe and stepped back, yes, but I think of humanity in the role of caretaker, not partier. I don't know if God's watching, and I don't know if life has a final exam, but it seems only respectful to use the resources we've been given in the wisest way possible and for the benefit of posterity.

Whether God's watching or not, it's appropriate to be grateful for what we've been given, and finding ways to work positive changes in the world is a sign of that gratitude. It's not a religious service, no, but it's hardly what I'd call an "unrestricted lifestyle."

I forget where I found this quotation, but it sums up the parts of my beliefs that I'm trying to convey: "Love your fellow man not because an ancient book tells you to, but because you feel it is right. Do what is right not out of fear of punishment, but out of the joy of helping your fellow man. Love God not so that God will do your bidding, but because you love the universe God gave you to explore. Die not so that you may be martyred or eternally rewarded, but so you may rest."

From Stephen:
> > I don't understand what deists would get together to discuss. "Yeah, God's out there but he doesn't really care about us." I mean, unless you're a deist who believes in some sort of revelation from the creator of the universe, what will you have to discuss? ...etc...

Most of the organisations I've seen have come from this idea of the deist as caretaker -- they want to band together to do volunteer work, political stuff, and so on. I don't particularly see the point of this, either, as there are plenty of existing, established organisations for these purposes. I never meant to imply in my post that I agree with the idea of organising, and in fact I think it's rather silly. Stephen's original aside was that he was sure that there are organised deists, and I was simply confirming that there are. And, of course, another reason that such groups happen is that it's always nice to know that one isn't alone in one's beliefs.

And from Iain again:
> So how do you define a deist organisation? You can't really make a church called "The First Church Of Our-God-Isn't-Really-Around-Anymore". And pomp, ritual, and sacrifice make *no* difference to a now-absent god... making anything like that pointless too.

That's why I wouldn't try to make such a church. I don't see any point in "pomp, ritual, and sacrifice," but I do see a great deal in the world that is worth doing, not for the sake of a God, but for the world around me and the people in it, and that's what my take on deism motivates me to do.

-Cynthia