The Admiral

Hoo Boy, printed out the whole thread. That's okay, I like to shop in Office Max.

The Admiral

Buffman

capaicin67

Superb summary. Now, where do we find the kind of leadership ...and financial resources...that can accomplish the desired ends? I believe I was debating this very issue with Galeil last summer. I said that non-theists needed a financial champion (benefactor). Someone like Ted Turner or Bill Gates.

I can remember when Oral Roberts was running around claiming that God was going to call him home unless he was able to raise enough money to keep his Oral Roberts University running. A local central Florida philanthropist wrote him an $11 million-dollar donation.---Just look , if it is possible to be accurate, at the net worth of these televanelists...the Catholic Church. (Wasn't a $192 million-dollar cathedral just completed on the west coast?)

Money, leadership and hard, dedicated, work are the essential ingredients of a successful program.
Preofessional expertise, publicity, and political influence follow the money.

DougI

Make money by selling cheap religious trinkets to the religious people. When crap like magnet wristbands or WWJD bracelets are sold in major retail outlets pulling in millions we know there is a market for crap. Once the flock has been fleeced and your pockets filled use that money to go further.

Get some gravel or dirt from your driveway and sell it as actual rubble from Israel where Jesus used to walk. Sell prayer beads immersed in the Dead Sea where Jesus walked. Try selling the crap on Ebay. Getting money from Atheists is more difficult because they want an explanation for where their money is going. However if you tell a fundy to give money they will do as the authority figure says.

Rusting Car Bumper

And you do that by offering alternatives. That's why I also say that non-believers need to go above beyond merely being acceptably good. Non-believers should try to be exemplary examples of virtue in their communities.

Sorry. You have no right not to be driven crazy by the free speech of others.

Put yourself in their shoes. You get sick of that god crap. They get sick of half-naked women and other advertisements they find objectionable.

Repeat above atatement. I think this demonstrates the problem. We have an attitude problem. We should be trying to understand how to get along with other groups that don't believe as we do.

Certainly you aren't against their free sppech are you? You live in a pluralistic society. They aren't going away. You aren't going away. How then are you going to get along?

You aren't going to rid the world of speech that you find objectionable so don't try.

I have no idea what this means.

DC

Rusting Car Bumper

capsaicin67,

Your points are well taken. However they reflect an attitude that, somehow, our views are moe patatable if we had media outlets for them.

This again misses the target. We should not be in a crusade to try to logically beat others into our beliefs. That is not what this should be about. That is mostly true because you cannot reason someone out of a position that they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.

The main question, again, is, "How are we going to get along with theists in a pluralistic society?" They aren't going away. We aren't going away. What now are we going to do about it?

Again, we make ourselves examples of virtue. We give common decent human respect. We talk to Christians instead of at them.

DC

Buffman

DoughI

I had to smile when I read your post. I recalled my visit to Ste. Anne de Beaupré, Quebec. Here was this gorgeous cathedral surrounded by dozens of shabby booths selling cheap religious trinkets to the faithful. Most of the trinkets appeared to have been made by Jewish firms in New York...probably China now.

I like to believe that most non-theists are too principled to practice fraud on an unwary public just for the sake of quick monetary gain. (Perhaps that is a survival weakness. However, I refuse to accept that belief.)

capsaicin67

Buffman,
Hmmmmm....as for where to find the capital to energize bold projects, that's a really good question! There seem to be a number of organizations and focus groups out there that seem to be pro reason [the more notorious freethought orgs and skptic groups], and probably even more that are pro-C/SS [even some religious groups that recognize the value of separation of c/s]....? It would be nice to see them all work more cooperatively together to get a bit more oomph to the core issues and focus on answering questions such as that [how do accomplish better media outreach, community support, professionalism, and financial stability/growth?]. From what I gather from the threads on this BBS, there is a rather decided rift amongst some of those with extant infrastructure, and quite a lot of the big fish-small pond mentality. I personally don't know that for a fact, just what I'm hearing, and I'm not wanting to get overly judgin', just sayin'.
I think that there are fundraising/npo experts that could help sort some of this out and give some direction if even that much could be funded [hiring and maintaining them].

I think the leadership issue is the root of the problem. Where *are* the leaders? One thing that the Humanist movement seems to have done [its been around for quite a while]is be very complacent and neglect the nurturance of subsequent generations to follow and lead. The stuff I see and hear about the Campus Freethought Alliance is about the most encouraging activity I'm aware of. *Those* that are touched by the support on campuses afforded to them by such groups would seem the most likely prospects for leadership in the future. I don't know all the politics there, either, but that seems like one of the places the elders of Freethought would be wanting to rally around in a *big* [financial] way?

They will also most likely be the next generation of benefactors-----citizens that identify as nontheist, not simply "people that don't have much time for religion and don't think about it much".

But back to the money----I'd look to successful NPO's and see what they are doing that works---Nature conservancy etc. There in fact was some old guy in FLA [maybe somebody can help me with his name] about 3 years back that had millions of dollars and made a little splash by saying he'd like to support atheist causes.....? I never did hear another thing about him or his money. I agree though, professional leaders with sound "business, strategic visions/plans" and fundraisers should be able to tap into some successful benefactors.

DC,
I'm not talking about prosletyzation-----I'm talking about education I think. That's what I mean by "outreach" and "visibility". You're right, the "fully persuaded" fundy is not going to be reasoned out of their belief most times. But in my circle I see another larger group that is not fanatical but simply doesn't have many thoughts nor much need for religiosity-----the "swing thinkers" if you will. They tell me that they genuinely don't understand "what the big deal is" on many of the issues of core importance to us [CSS etc]. They dont' hear anything except the fundies and the media echoing the fundies. I think there need to be more positive media messages allowing those looking for a supportive freethought community to find one another and feel safe, and that there needs to be more educational spots clarifying how we can all live together and why we are not threats and how we can be good neighbors and friends. So I am not talking about beating anyone into submission intellectually, but simply getting out the type of info that you endorse as well to a larger audience, faster, to try and innoculate the populace to a lot of the hate mongering and ignorance that they *are* bombarded with via the media daily-----and does impact their pov. Talking *to* them, not *at* them-----but with quite a bit more organizational and media savvy.
1:1 interactions at the community level are important, but as someone that does this I can tell you that my experience has been that I occasionally make them feel uncomfortable and every once in a long while actually open someone's mind a bit-----but the media impacts them far, far, far, FAR and away more than I will alone.

Ted Hoffman

DC,
How exactly do you know they aren't going away?

The fact that we found christian theism here doesnt mean it is here forever - we are not in a position to judge that.

Like all ideologies, theism can also die. So long as they can be shown IT DOESNT WORK - people only embrace ideas because they beleive the ideas have some utilitarian value.

Do not confuse or conflate the logical necessity of ideologies with the (logical) necessity of christian theism.

I have read this statement many times and its simply false. It has no known basis, its a crutch for those who have despaired or lack the drive to deliver the punch that will make the needed change.

IMHO, it is better to state that one doesnt see how one can "reason someone out of a position that they didn't reason themselves into in the first place" rather than resort to making absolute claims.

I was a christian for 20 years and I was reasoned out of that position - if I never read the books that I did, I would probably still be a christian.

Your statement above, I see it as a cop-out. It sanctions and justifies inaction. For who, I dont know, but it sure rubs gently on the ego of one who is afraid to act.

And we do talk to them. Visit the library and see all the debates.

Its a "battle" that has to be fought from many fronts. We are the underdogs we cant afford to sit by and pat their backs while they fart in our faces.
It doesn't have to be spearheaded from a single front. It doesnt have to be done "collectively" each must do what they can to bring about change. Hiding in the closet and deriding efforts of other atheists in the name of fearing negative publicity is simply not the way to go.

Making a point is making a point. Wanting good publicity is another matter altogether if the purpose of the march was to gain positive publicity, and one doesnt conceive that goal being achieved, then one can validly refuse to attend on those grounds.

It is precisely that "threat of" negative publicity we want to change. You dont do that by staying indoors, making excuses and waving your hands. That indicates you are intimidated.

Would christians get negative publicity if they held a "holy walk" to DC in your opinion?

The motto of the Godless Americans March On Washington was that we are “free, proud, and on the move.” [irrespective of the publicity] (emphasis mine)

Feel free to express yourself [free expression must not be shackled by the threat of negative publicity - you bet the theists are counting on you being too scared to step out in the streets of DC]. The negative publicity is propagated by ignorance. You cant change that by hiding in the shadows. To leave the shadows, you must be ready to have the light stab at your eyes. If you can't afford that, they will keep thinking you are a vampire. And you might soon beleive you DESERVE the negative publicity - which is what I see you projecting upon atheists who have come out.

A quote from Ellen Johnson's speech is in order at this point - for the benefit of DC:
Give me some time. We will also hold one here in Nairobi soon. The more mature, educated atheists are very "private" about their beliefs - I have tried to contact some (most are popular columnists/ journalists). Recently our constitution was reviewed and at the end of the Preamble, they have the words "God Bless Kenya".
I wrote to the comission and asked: "What exactly is that statement meant to achieve?".

Of course I was ignored. Who is one person among 30 million people?
But that can and will be changed. I don't have to be the one to do it, but I can start something...

For the record, me, a third-worlder, thought the march was successful. It was the first one - we could not have realistically expected more than what turned up - so for those who feel it was a flop, what is your yardstick? it must necessarily be an arbitrary assesment. I was so proud to see those photos. I used them as wallpapers and explained nonchalantly to curious workmates that infidels are coming out (aah, there was that busty lady that held a huge banner with <a href="http://www.infidels.org" target="_blank">www.infidels.org</a>).
You know, I have a workmate (currently an atheist) who, five months ago, did not even know that in this world, there exists people who do not beleive in God.
When he met me, he was incredulous. After a little cognitive dissonance, well, he crossed over.

You might wanna check the following links for the GAMOW photos:

<a href="http://www.nobeliefs.com/GAMOW/GAMOW.htm" target="_blank">
GAMOW photos</a>
<a href="http://www.cardwell.us/gamow.html" target="_blank">Lots of GAMOW Photos - showing crowds</a>

[ December 02, 2002: Message edited by: Intensity ]

{edited by Toto to fix link to infidels.org}

[ December 02, 2002: Message edited by: Toto ]</p>

Ted Hoffman

And oh, capsaicin67 and Buffman, those were excellent posts.
&lt;Intensity wrings his hands&gt;
Now, where to get the money...

Rusting Car Bumper

Are you seriously suggesting that monotheism - either Christian or any other form - will simply die out in a foreseeable way in the foreseeable future? Certainly not in your lifetime and not in your children's lifetime and certainly not even in their children's lifetime. You make an absolutely extraordinary claim. This extraordinary claim requires some hefty arguing to actually support. What evidence and argument do you have to support it?

Im not limiting myself to Christian theism, monotheism, or any type of theism. You will live in societies were people have differeing beliefs from that of atheists. What will you do about it to get along in these pluralistic societies?

You seem to think the answer is to change the beliefs of others. That is, that yours are coorect and others are defective. Have you learned nothing from the Christians? That is exactly what they did in their most horrible times.

</strong>

I was at a debate regarding God with Michael Shermer. He asked the audience how many were believers. About 80 to 90 percent raised their hands. He then asked this. He said, "If I refute all of these arguments given by my theist sounterpart, how many of you will give up your faith?" Nobody dropped their hands. This demonstrates the problem.

All of these brute philosophical arguments aren't really addressing how the mass of people got into beliving in god. It doesn't address a whole how a questions such as whether or not one *should* go around trying to convince believers that god doesn't exist, or whether it really does any good even if one does.



Cmon. You can do better than straw man insults. Any person reading my posts in this thread cannot seriously suggest I am suggesting no action.

I said earlier in this thread I was the atheist at this event:
<a href="http://www.infidels.org/wire/stories/tx_020916.html" target="_blank">Christian-Atheist dialog in Texas</a>

Do you seriously suggest that I am suggesting inaction if I, myself, am willing to be shot at by 900 to 1000 fundies?

I'm suggesting a different strategy that is actually utilitarian in purpose.

</strong>

No. Debates are talkign at them and through them. Do any of these debates in the Library have the subject of "How atheists and Christians are alike?" or "What common concerned to atheists and Chrsitians have?"

None. Instead they are about saying "I am right and you are wrong." It simply pits two sides against each other when in fact than both sides agree on a great number important issues like fairness, sanctity of life, and so on.

What battle? Because other people believe different things I ahve to fight a "battle"? You haven't seemed to define that well. You talk about the Godless March (which is about assering rights) but then you talk about debates which is about assering abstract philosophical opinions.

More attacks. How kind of you.

There were three reasons given in a previous post. Please refer to those.

Some negative publicity is propogated by negative action.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that some negative publicity can come by bashing religions and the religious. If that was to occur it would be just as well deserved as if fundies got negative publicity by marching around saying "non Christians burn in hell."

It is that type of negative publicity that is the problem.

I don't critisize theology because that's not at issue. Living with other people in a civil society is. You can't expect respect if you don't give it.

My thesis is that our problems are not political at the root. They are social. Our POLITICAL (i.e. CSS problems) problems STEM from the fact that theists do not understand or respect atheists. Filing court cases won;t change the attitudes of my neighbors. Nor will trying to "reason" them out of some fine tunng argument, cosmological argument that they don't even hold that dearly to begin with. Nor will it be helped trying to convince them that their religion is a myth.

This is the equivalent of saying, "I don't like the theist." I have a big problem with this sort of statement. Basically, putting theism in the smae class as racism and sexism is IMO dangerous. It is a mere step away from bigotry and intolerance.

Aside from that its strategically stupid. Atheists rights are Christians rights are a Muslim's rights and so on. We should be inviting theists into the fight on rights. Not turning them away.

MLK Jr made explicit statements to this effect when he spoke of civil rights. Compare this to Malcolm X and the Black Islamic movement. Malcolm X basically had to come out of his radical black anti-white beliefs and come into a more tolerant view. (Of course he was killed shortly afterward so we will never know what was to become of it.)

This is a difference in strategy. I see Ellen's statements as a form of statement like Malcolm X's seperatist days and I see my approach as a more unified approach.

You want to scream and yell and tell people what they believe is wrong.

I want to talk to people and ask them how we will get along in spite of the fact that we have a few differing beliefs.

DC