d'naturalist

Thanks. I noticed your posts in the other thread (referenced in Starspun's first message) after I posted here. Either great mind's think alike or we're both just paranoid.

The organizers of the march need to set up a webcast and a site afterwards where people can download transcripts or sound files of the various speeches given. That might help prevent some of the anti-secular spin-doctoring. It's hard to lie when the person across the table can pull out a transcript and reference the exact words a person actually said.

[ July 30, 2002: Message edited by: d'naturalist ]</p>

CaptainDave

Obviously there are many here who have doubts about the march and you all make good points. But it's GONNA happen. Given that REALITY, might it be more constructive to use your voice to improve the march rather than rant about it's shortcomings?

Tell us how we can make it better. Give us suggestions for projecting the right image. Give us your POSITIVE input on how we can do our best. Then join us or get out of the way! If you do the latter, stand ready to take your own ACTION. If you can DO better I'll follow you gladly.

d'naturalist

SecWeb "word" of the day: Constructive Criticism: (informal definition) bringing to light the shortcomings of an idea in order to facilitate improvements prior to the final implementation.

If we have doubts or questions, it's our DUTY to bring them up for group discussion. Being a diverse group, we have a wide variety of perspectives and priorities and can offer the broadest evaluation of the march. Not everyone can see both problem and solution. It's better to voice your concerns so that the rest of us can attack any problems and find legitimate solutions.

Obviously the march is going to happen, and I don't think there are many who think it shouldn't, but it would be foolish to plunge blindly ahead with something this important without working out the kinks first. Personally, I think all opinions -- positive and especially negative -- are welcome if they help to make the march the best it can be.

[ July 30, 2002: Message edited by: d'naturalist ]</p>

Buffman

CaptainDave

Tell us how we can make it better. Give us suggestions for projecting the right image. Give us your POSITIVE input on how we can do our best.

Hmmmmmm? And here I thought I had been doing exactly that with my numerous posts...which you may not have read yet. Evidently you interpret my alerts as criticisms, and my criticisms as anti-march.

When you ask folks to go to Washington D.C. to march in a parade, I tend to assume the parade is attempting to accomplish something to which one's presence will contribute. It might be a simple show of numbers...like the so-called Million Man March? However, how are the numbers supposed to bring about a desired change in the current political status/environment if they can not reach the proportions of a Billy Graham Crusade outing? (So far, I see approximately 2,500 signatories.)

Earlier, I recommended that folks examine the U.S.Patriot Act very closely in order to avoid any possible chance of a violation that could "conceivably" produce an undesireable confrontation with authorities. That act should never have been passed, but it was. Just as the various Alien and Sedition Acts of the past were passed and then repealed. The point is that certain types of speech can be declared unacceptable in times of war. Speakers should know what is or is not considered acceptable. (I just hate typing that!)

I have also expressed my concerns about the title of this march. I have suggested ones that would be more, not less, inclusive.

I shared a personal propaganda experience in order to alert folks to how an entire demonstration's basic goal can be cleverly usurped and used to promote a different agenda.

If you interpret these as criticisms, so be it. That is not the intent of any of my posts about this march...even those that question its utility to advance the position of a secular federal republic.

Then join us or get out of the way!

This is exactly the kind of remark I would not expect to hear from a thoughtful non-believer. I have railed against those who have told me to "Love it or leave it" when discussing America, Patrioticism and "our" Christian Nation. (However, I realize that you did not intend that remark to infer that only those who are blindly positive about this "Godless" March have any right to comment about it, in any manner, in these public forums. At least I hope that is the case.)

If you do the latter, stand ready to take your own ACTION.

I have been doing that for 51 0f my 67 years. Few things would thrill me more than to see the entire Mall inundated with folks marching for an equal status and treatment with their fellow Americans of supernatural beliefs.

Buffman

How the Conservatives have professionally prepared themselves.

<a href="http://leadershipinstitute.org/01ABOUTUS/aboutus.htm" target="_blank">http://leadershipinstitute.org/01ABOUTUS/aboutus.htm</a>

<a href="http://www.ttf.org/tforum/index.nsf/pages/AboutTTF?OpenDocument&session=DOMO-5CKCT9" target="_blank">http://www.ttf.org/tforum/index.nsf/pages/AboutTTF?OpenDocument&session=DOMO-5CKCT9</a>

<a href="http://www.trinityforumacademy.org/acaddistinc.htm" target="_blank">http://www.trinityforumacademy.org/acaddistinc.htm</a>

How the Conservatives have increased their control of the media.

<a href="http://www.mediaresearch.org/" target="_blank">http://www.mediaresearch.org/</a>

Leaders of America's conservative movement have long believed that within the national news media a strident liberal bias existed that influenced the public's understanding of critical issues. On October 1, 1987, a group of young determined conservatives set out to not only prove - through sound scientific research - that liberal bias in the media does exist and undermines traditional American values, but also to neutralize its impact on the American political scene.


From a $339,000 initial annual budget, the MRC has grown to be the nation's largest and most sophisticated television and monitoring operation, now employing 60 professional staff with a $6 million annual budget.

<a href="http://www.cnsnews.com/corporate/history.asp" target="_blank">http://www.cnsnews.com/corporate/history.asp</a>

The Cybercast News Service was launched June 16, 1998 as a news source for individuals, news organizations and broadcasters who put a higher premium on balance than spin. Study after study by the Media Research Center -- the parent organization of CNSNews.com -- clearly demonstrate both a liberal bias in many news outlets and a frequent double-standard in editorial decisions on what constitutes "news."

CNSNews.com is a division of the Media Research Center, a not-for-profit 501 (c)(3) organization. Like National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting System, CNSNews.com is able to provide its services and information at no cost, thanks to the generous support of our thousands of donors and their tax-deductible contributions. However, unlike NPR or PBS, CNSNews.com does not accept any federal tax money for its operations.

Now try and determine who the supporters/donors are. What does the non-theist advocate community offer that compares to this?

capsaicin67

Clarification requested. I'm not sure if I understand something that was being discussed: Was the date of the March selected by the nontheist organizers, or was it allowed as the "only opening" or "we could put you here" date by the overseers of the Mall? I am not familiar with the logistics around such events, so perhaps someone knows the answer to this and can help clear that part up.....?

DougI

A permit was attempted for September but was rejected so they looked towards November and found an opening.

Buffman

DoughI

I will be the first to admit that my Skeptic's imagination has caused my theist radar warning system to report some "false" returns. I sincerely hope that this is one of those times.

It is certainly quite possible that when the AA reps went to the Park Police scheduling "approval" folks, with the Sep request, the book was opened right then and there and everything was already booked with the next available date being 2 Nov. However, when I read that a Sep date had been requested, but a 2 Nov awarded, my radar started pinging.

Do you know if everything was booked at the specific time of request, or if it was subsequently reported that everything was booked with only the 2 Nov date being the next available?
(Not that that still couldn't be the actual case.) I was just curious concerning the amount of time between the first official Sep request and the final selection date. (Minutes or days?)

Perhaps I have become somewhat jaundiced by having turned over too many rocks and finding some very startling things beneath. However, that taught me to look at rocks much closer than I once did...especially before sitting on them.

4th Generation Atheist

September through November tends to be "march season" in DC for several reasons; the weather being one of them, people who hope to influence elections being another. The other favored season is the spring, but then one has to maneuver around all the more "cultural" stuff like the Cherry Blossoms Festival, so it's a little less popular. I have no more way than anyone else of telling what the calendar and date-setting situation was with the city, beyond that far.

I'll admit that I've got some concerns too. I haven't attended a "march" in a long time, being a bit "over the hill" in that department also. But it's easy for me to attend with reservations; all I'm out is Metro fare if I change my mind and want to go home. My usual reactions to any kind of "march" is the desire to avoid going to a "protest", a negative statement I associate with frustrated former hippies and chronic malcontents. A more positive demostration, of a "look how many we are and how broad our support is" has worked for some other groups, so if this thing is large enough I think it can do the positive-message job. I personally know of two liberal theists who plan to go. I'd like to see more of them. What are we gonna do, have security guards grilling potential participants on philosphical issues before allowing them to join? Now that would be (admittedly amusing) negative press. Hence I'm glad that for all practical purposes it's impossible. We need those allies if this thing is going to have the positive message we want; anyone who plans to go, and who knows a theist who is willing to be an "ally", could do worse than invite them along.

The timing, as has been pointed out, makes the "danger" if anyone screws it up that much greater; numbers, rather than a small demonstration of fringe people, is an antidote. Since this thing is happening, we want it big; the other option is not at all, and that one's been closed.

Buffman

Thanks for the added info. I agree with you completely. That is why the "Godless" title bugs me. This march will be a true success by being inclusive. The issue at stake is a big one. "Who is an American?" United "we" stand! Divided "we" fall!