Respectable Joe

In my reading, I've seen several references to American Atheist oraganization, and to summarize, there seems to be some indication of a non-specific "checkered" past and questions as to groups current impact and direction.

I'm aware of some of the history and I've read about the founding family and read all the AA site stuff about what happened to the family, etc. It is not my wish to start any new speculation or criticism, I just wondered what I was actually hearing, if anything.

What do you KNOW about the current organization?

dangin

I know Ellen Johnson (AA President) pretty well. I've met Ron Barrier(AA Spokesperson), and Conrad Goeringer(AA exec staff somehow) . I can tell you how great these people are to hang out with. I've heard Frank Zimmer (Publisher of AA Press) speak.

Ron is really warm and charming when you meet him. When he speaks publicly he really has a lot of anger at theism that boils up. I think that style can be counterproductive in some settings. But he is really a nice guy to have a conversation with.

Conrad is like hanging out with a philosophy/polysci/history/religion professor. He's really smart and dominates conversations because he has so much to say. But he also asks a lot of questions and seems interested in the other people he talks to. I don't know what he is like as a public speaker but he is confident, and has a booming deep voice.

Frank Zimmer I've only heard speak, and his speech was awesome. It was about american scietific literacy and education. I've never read too much of American Atheist Press which he publishes, so I don't know about that.

Ellen is really attractive and also very smart. She is a little too controlling for my tastes, and I get the feeling that she is used to "yes" people around her. Her public speaking is less attacking than Ron's, she is a cheerleader for and defender of secularism more than a critic of religion.

In my opinion the two biggest things they have tried in the last three years are the March on Washington and the Godless Political Action Committee.

I don't know a thing about how the PAC is doing and opinions about the effect of the march are still being formulated.

I think their biggest problem as a group is that they seem currently to be on a course of rejecting the help of nonsecular supporters. As an example it's not that they don't like American's United for Separation of Church and State. They'd rather it was a secular group instead of a group founded by a theist.

I think this example is how they judge all groups out there and if a group is judged religious then it seems that AA rejects their help and/or support. They want all the secular people to rise up in "Pride and Recognition" and seize civil liberty on their own. The extent to which they remain unflexible in this may hurt them in the end.

I do praise them for their dogged insistance on atheists running for office and being acceptable as politicians. They are offering seminars at their conventions on running for office. At the convention in Chicago last easter Eddie Tabash (board member of council for sec humanism, attorney, and former candidate for public office in California) gave the seminar. Eddie is awesome too.

Jewel

I agree. Personally, I really like that there are church/state seperation groups out there that were founded by and/or run by theists. To me that shows that there it isn't just us nontheists that recognise this nation as being secular.

I also feel that we should invite religious folks that recognise and agree with our goal of equal rights for all to particapate in our civil rights marches and events-- there are plenty out there. Other civil rights movements embraced outside help. I think we should, too.

Indeed.

trekbette

I'm sorry. I don't consider myself a feminist and am usually not bothered by stuff like this but... what does her attractiveness have to do with anything?

It just jumped out at me. Sorry to nitpick.

Kintaro

Well, she ain't fugly beyond belief, but I agree, beyond that, it shouldn't be an influencing factor at all (despite her ranking in the fair-to-high area). It's just somehing you shouldn't blurt out when you raise support for someone.

"I'm an atheist because XYZ is hot." doesn't help us sadly, I've actually heard someone say that though, I'm not accusing the O.P. of anything.

clark

I don't think it should have anything to do with anything, but in our current image-driven culture it does. Attractiveness plays a part, probably moreso with women in pubilc life than with men. I'm not saying this is right, but I think it's reality.

THOUGHTfully Yours,
Clark

dangin

Actually, I overheard her described in sexual terms several times at at the march. Not in a negative way, but in an appreciative yet leering way. I don't think you can talk about Ellen without discussing what makes her different from Murray. Attractiveness both physically, and socially make her more effective that Maddy ever was. But as I said before, I still think her focus is slightly in the wrong direction.

I didn't throw it out their because I think everyone should follow the most attractive leader, but it is something to recognize and or contend with.

Besides, everybody knows that all atheist chics are hot. It's a no brainer.

Respectable Joe

Thanks for your input, Dangin and everyone else.

Just curious, if you don't mind saying, any of you members, or otherwise support AA with dollars at this point?

Further to the root of my question, I think "we" need to be "active", and "our" best hope to keep the good ol' US secular is to be "out" and be active.

Am I wrong about AA seeming to be the principal force on that front?

Toto

There are two major self-described atheist organizations in the United States that use "atheism" in their names. Besides American Atheists, there is Atheist Alliance International . American Atheists is set up as a professional organization with paid staff; AAI is a confederation of democratic groups (i.e., volunteer organizations with all the good and bad that implies) and individuals.

Many of the groups in AAI were expelled from American Atheists by Madalyn for insubordination or other offenses; nevertheless, many people belong to both and support both, and wish that the two groups could cooperate in some fashion. This has not happened yet - both groups sponsor a yearly convention on the same date in competition with each other (Easter weekend - when you can get really cheap hotel rates.)

There is also the Council for Secular Humanism, and the IHEU. The American Humanist Association includes people who call themselves "religious humanists", but is probably as effective a force for secularism as any of the others. For that matter, most of the national Jewish organizations and the Anti-Defamation League have been the major voices supporting secularism in public life.

I don't think that any of these groups could be described as being on the forefront of anything, unfortunately. There are a lot of very intelligent people involved, but none has figured out how to herd cats yet.

dangin

Well said Toto.

RJ: I don't support any atheist groups except the one you currently have up on your browser.

Many, many atheists whom I discuss this with are turned off by American Atheists, many were turned off by the exclusion of theistic supporters at the March last November. And many others don't follow any groups.

If you can find a way to have an impact do it. Shy of that, following (or giving to) a group has the risk that your money may not be used in the way you intend.

Good luck.