Freethought & Rationalism Archive

phlebas · 07-31-2002, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RyanS2:
Phlebas, you state your objection is over the name, and that what you associate with the name is a preconceived bias. Am I correct thus far?

If you tell me that your flavor of Satanism has nothing to do with the Christian concept of Satan, I'll take your word for it.

I wouldn't call it a preconceived bias. I'm speculating what the majority of people in this country believe the name entails. THEY might have the preconceived biases.

Quote:

I've explained to you what the name means, why we use that name, and so forth. You're harping on that you don't like that name. What is your reason for not liking that name?

How many times do I have to explain this?

I believe the name by itself will turn off the very people we (at least, "I") want to build a bridge to. I don't have any objections to the word itself, it's the images that go along with it that I think are detrimental.

It all depends on your goals. If you're trying to piss off Christians, I think it's a great name. If you're trying to get accepted in modern-day America, I don't think you could have picked a stupider name.

Quote:

You don't like the name because of what you believe it represents, and you don't want that in the march.

I'm done trying to talk to you until you can get this one simple concept into your head:

What I believe it represents is not the issue. What everyone else believes it represents is.

No one is going to look at a bunch of people who call themselves Satanists and say "gosh, perhaps I have no actual idea what these people believe -- perhaps I should get online and do some research." While it's likely TRUE that they have no idea, they don't REALIZE they don't know the truth.

If you want to launch a campaign to educate America on LaVey Satanism, you have my blessings. But this march is not the way to do it.

Mad Kally · 07-31-2002, 12:09 PM

Quote:

posted by Ryan:
To Mad Kally: That psycho-mom, does she recognize atheism as a viable disbelief, even if we, (Satanists) were NEVER associated with it? I doubt it. She would simply tell you that "the greatest trick the devil ever did was convincing the World he didn't exist." Then you could reply, "The greatest trick God ever did was convincing the World he did exist."

If I said that to her, it would only convince her that I'm a Satanist/possessed by the devil. They don't want to know the Truth about anything!

RyanS2 · 07-31-2002, 12:19 PM

Phlebas, I didn't make this clear in earlier posts but let me explain:

Quote:

What I believe it represents is not the issue. What everyone else believes it represents [i]is.

First, it's dangerous to use terms like everyone. Second, you are doing what we call projection. Whenever you try predicting what other people think based upon your own perceptions, it's called "projection". When you say, "Other people will think", what you really mean to say it "I think". Here's the textbook definition of it: "The process of ascribing unwittingly one's beliefs, values and other subjective processes to others."

So, that's why I keep saying "You think", because you are trying to predict other people based off of your own conceptions.

Quote:

If you want to launch a campaign to educate America on LaVey Satanism, you have my blessings. But this march is not the way to do it.

Humbly acknowledged, but I'm not using the march as a forum for launching my ideals at the World, only acknowledging that I support it. Here's what Ellen said on it:

Quote:

To: Sponsoring Groups, GODLESS AMERICANS MARCH ON WASHINGTON
From: Ellen Johnson, Chairperson. "Godless Americans Task Force"

Dear friends:

As you may know, there are already nearly eighty organizations such
as yours that have endorsed the November 2, 2002 GODLESS AMERICANS
MARCH ON WASHINGTON. I wanted to touch base with you concerning
the list of endorsers.

We envision the Godless Americans March on Washington to be a
statement of unity -- certainly on behalf of the participating
organizations. We cannot speak for all "Godless Americans," that
diverse community of some 30 million people who, according to the
recent American Religious Identification Survey, identify themselves
as having "no religion." We can, however point to this growing
segment of the American population as a potential force on behalf
of positive change in culture and politics -- a force to be reckoned
with.

We also acknowledge that there are differences between and among
the dozens of groups which have endorsed the November 2 action.
We go by different labels, for instance. We have different
"styles," and modes of organization. Some of us want to be
activists, others might wish to play a different role. Madalyn
O'Hair once said that trying to organize Atheists is like trying
to herd cats (or butterflies), so imagine the problems under this
"big umbrella" of "Godless Americans"!

We're delighted, though, by the success. Atheists, Humanists,
Secularists, Freethinkers and others -- Godless Americans all --
are realizing that we often have more in common than we have
differences. We can, and should, cooperate where possible on an
ad-hoc basis, one that emphasizes mutual respect, a polite
acknowledgment of what makes each of our groups unique, a willing
to work together when possible and to "speak no ill" of our fellow
nonbelievers by making personal attacks.

We will not agree on everything. No social cause movement in
American history has been truly monolithic. From Union activists
to Blacks, from Women to Gays and Lesbians, movements for cultural
and political enlightenment have often been characterized by
principled differences. We hope that these clefts in our movement
can be minimized, that we can work together when and where possible,
and that we can politely "agree to disagree" when and where we must.

Some individuals have raised concerns about select organizations
endorsing the Godless Americans March on Washington and have asked
that we remove their names from the endorsement page of the website.
I want to share with you the perspective of the Godless Americans
Task Force on the criteria for endorsement and our position on
this issue. The main criteria for your group -- and every other
organizations as well -- that wish to endorse the November 2, 2002
action is agreement with the general statement of principles, and
that the organization concerned be "godless." We devised this
criteria in order to create a "big tent," a welcoming and open
climate that would encourage as many diverse groups, and individuals,
to feel comfortable and participate. We have worked hard to
accomplish that agenda.

Unfortunately, there are concerns about some of the organizations
endorsing the March, and even demands that they be excluded. Some
have hinted that unless this is done, they will not be joining
their fellow Godless Americans on the mall in Washington, DC. And
some fear that the presence of such organizations taints the march,
and threatens to attract negative media publicity.

I think this would be a great loss, not only to the March on
Washington but the broader causes we are trying to rally around.
Organized religion -- not Godless Americans -- would end up the
winner here!

We do not want to "pick and choose" who is an "authentic" godless
group. Some might argue that a Humanist organization should be
excluded because, say, there is a Humanist "chaplain" in Boston.
Others are simply scared of the "A-word," Atheist. Others might
object to the notion of a godless or Freethought "church." What
if other individuals wanted to eliminate a "Queer Atheist"
organization that endorsed the march, fearing that their presence
-- or the participation of some other group -- might attract undue
media attention, or thwart our efforts to establish ourselves more
in the cultural and political mainstream?

Where do we draw the line?

So far, all of the organizations endorsing the March declare that
they are "godless." I personally have talked to individuals
connected with some of the groups in question. I may not agree
with the labels they use, or other things about their organization;
but if they declare themselves to be "godless," they should be
permitted to openly endorse The Godless Americans March. Indeed,
some of the groups endorsing the November 2 action have not always
enjoyed the friendliest possible relations with the organization
I head -- American Atheists. I think that all of us want to put
past differences behind us, where possible, and cooperate when
and where we can.

We do not intend to exclude any individual or group on the basis
of race, sexuality, or some other arbitrary criteria. Someone
might have a personal distaste for an individual or organization
that happens to endorse the march. But who decides which "godless"
group stays, and which would be eliminated? Not everyone will
agree on that.

The only possible harm here is in generating needless and
counterproductive divisiveness. With Supreme Court decisions
defending the First Amendment separation of government and
religion under attack and a "religion friendly" agenda rolling
ahead on Capitol Hill and in state legislatures across the land,
I think that Godless Americans need to stand together, united.
That's also the message I hear from many of you.

I remain convinced that by working together, the Godless Americans
March on Washington will be a historic "first" for our diverse
community. We intend to project a competent, mainstream and
professional image, and convey our message to media and the public
in a thoughtful, articulate, principled manner. But we need your
help and participation to do that!

We do have differences. We also have a great deal in common.
We have much to gain by working together, much to lose by
squabbling over what I think are minor points -- labels, personal
distaste, or other things which serve to divide us. The March is,
and should be, open to all lawful groups and individuals who
consider themselves Godless Americans.

Thanks for your patience and support! And I look forward to
seeing you and members from your group on the Mall in Washington, DC
on November 2, 2002!

ELLEN JOHNSON, Chairperson
"Godless Americans March on Washington" Task Force
President, American Atheists

Talon · 07-31-2002, 12:26 PM

I hate that phrase "Godless Americans". It sounds as though we are going out of our way to spit on the beliefs of others. I think "GodFree Americans" is much more fitting.

Oh, and I agree that if people march as "Satanists", projecting or not, it will have a negative impact.

TALON

daemon · 07-31-2002, 12:27 PM

Quote:

[RyanS2:]Oh... I got it. When people take the two minutes to type that in a search enginge, they're going to see the Church of Satan homepage.

They're not the people I'm too concerned about. Of the people who would even think to look up "LaVeyan," most of them might actually read about it.

Quote:

[RyanS2:]I can try playing dodgeball with the issue like Michael Aquino did and call myself a "Setian', or a "MIDASian", or any other name, you just pick it. It won't take long for one ingenius person with a search engine to type in the name, look around, and find out where these ideas originated from and who started them. It didn't help Michael Aquino any, and I doubt it will help me or my org any.

Are you kidding? Ask the average person what a Satanist is, and they'll say "someone who worships the devil." Ask them what a Setian is, and they'll say "a what?"

The problem is that you've got all this baggage tied up in your philosophy's name that really has little to do with it. I encourage you to disengage yourself from that label if you want to not be immediately associated with a bizarre theistic cult. Otherwise, no, I don't want you or your group associated with me.

[Edited to add:]
A further note: look at a general dictionary.

I think it is accurate to say that they reflect general usage of words.

Look up "Satanism." Think about why we would not want to be associated with that definition.

[ July 31, 2002: Message edited by: daemon ]

Anunnaki · 07-31-2002, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RyanS2:

I've explained to you what the name means, why we use that name, and so forth..

Ryan,
Are you going to try to explain this to every single Christian American who attends the march or sees "Satanists" signs on their nightly news?
Just how big are the signs going to be to explain the complexity of your groups title to the idiot majority who truly believes all atheists are slaves of a the Satan of Christian theology?

These morons think Satan is real and the reason we don`t believe in God. Satan is the reason they can`t have prayer in school or monuments on state property. Satan is the reason people are gay and the reason women have abortions.

These people including many in our own govt believe Satan = atheist and now you`re going to show up with your satanist propaganda and prove their preachers were right about us all along.

*We* may know that you don`t actually believe and worship Satan,but theres no way in hell you`re going to explain this in D.C. to an already angry crowd. All confusing these morons with Satan is gonna do is cause nothing but trouble and the whole effort of the march will backfire on us.

I`m very surprised you don`t seem to understand this.

Can`t you wait until America is a little more tolerant of the non religious citizens before you make their heads spin with Satanism?

Starspun · 07-31-2002, 12:36 PM

Quote:

To Starspun, you're repeating what I've already addressed. I specifically told Ellen Johnson, (and this is her show), that if she did not want us sponsoring the event, she could take down the org from the list. She declined. Deal with it.

What the fuck are you talking about?! I asked about the propoganda IN the march, not your sponsorship of it. I could give a rats ass what you sponsor. My question was, 'would you be willing to leave your paraphanelia out of the march?'
By the way, I dont have a damn thing to deal with. Either I will choose to go or I will not.

Look at you man, coming in here like you are swinging a 13 inch cock. You think you have a right to talk down to people that question the sanity of allowing the media to have a fucking field day? Get a grip chump.

Veil of Fire · 07-31-2002, 12:44 PM

Quote:

I think "GodFree Americans" is much more fitting.

Are agnostics invited? If so, how about Lite Americans (75% less God per serving!)", or "Reduced-God Americans!"

Corwin · 07-31-2002, 12:52 PM

Having waded through several of these threads I'm starting to think that the term 'herding cats' is too generous. <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

Autonemesis · 07-31-2002, 12:57 PM

It's all really simple people: who are we marching for? Are we marching for Christians? If so, then the objections to the Satanists participating are understandable. Or are we marching for our own benefit? If so, then what does it matter what Christians think of our Satanist supporters?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-31-2002, 12:26 PM	#24
Talon Banned Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Not the real world, that's for sure. Posts: 1,300	I hate that phrase "Godless Americans". It sounds as though we are going out of our way to spit on the beliefs of others. I think "GodFree Americans" is much more fitting. Oh, and I agree that if people march as "Satanists", projecting or not, it will have a negative impact. TALON

07-31-2002, 12:52 PM	#29
Corwin Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 4,369	Having waded through several of these threads I'm starting to think that the term 'herding cats' is too generous. <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

07-31-2002, 12:57 PM	#30
Autonemesis Contributor Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: I've left FRDB for good, due to new WI&P policy Posts: 12,048	It's all really simple people: who are we marching for? Are we marching for Christians? If so, then the objections to the Satanists participating are understandable. Or are we marching for our own benefit? If so, then what does it matter what Christians think of our Satanist supporters?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.