Reason Rally 2012

reasonrally.org...



Secular, Humanist, and Atheist/Agnostic groups are planning a rally sometime in Spring 2012. It seems at this point, it's still in the stages of theory and brainstorming.

Let everyone know, and we'll come together to show the nation that there are a lot of us here and that we deserve to be heard.

reply to post by PieKeeper


Hello PieKeeper.

Just curious...when are humanists and the like not heard? Seems like you're suggesting some sort of second-class treatment for non-theists, but you currently own the ruling paradigm of science and seem to be represented equally otherwise.

Not trying to pick a fight or anything, the wording just piqued my interest somewhat so I want your views on it, thanks. Hope the rally goes well.

reply to post by Praetorius


In the christian-dominated United States, non-christians are generally looked down upon and ostracised. Christianity has a profound influence on our society and our government. I am confident that every atheist on this board can recall a time when they were singled out or demonized for their non-belief. The purpose of this rally, as far as I can tell, is to call for the secularization of government and society. This is NOT a christian nation as many would love to believe, and we need to stop acting like it is.

In regards to science, science is based in reason and logic. It doesn't make any inherent claims about theism, and regardless of it's practitioners, is relatively objective when it comes to producing evidence. Peer-review and science itself will weed out bad scientific claims and biased scientists. If a lot of scientists are non-theists, then it's plausible that they arrived at that conclusion using reason. This doesn't necessarily affect the validity of their scientific evidence.

reply to post by Praetorius


...I'm sorry, but last time I checked atheists made up a staggeringly low portion of governmental officials, were the only group that could be publicly demonized without massive outcry, are depicted in typically negative terms in media, and are attacked for attempting to defend their rights.

And that's just in America. Where I live blasphemy is actually a crime.

reply to post by PieKeeper


I really wish I could fly out and make it...but it's hard to with exams and all. I will be sending my internet support and encouraging others to make it. Reason. Just think about it.

reply to post by PieKeeper


Thanks for the response.

In the christian-dominated United States, non-christians are generally looked down upon and ostracised. Christianity has a profound influence on our society and our government. I am confident that every atheist on this board can recall a time when they were singled out or demonized for their non-belief. The purpose of this rally, as far as I can tell, is to call for the secularization of government and society. This is NOT a christian nation as many would love to believe, and we need to stop acting like it is.

Sorry for any unpleasantness. Don't worry, those who act in such a way do themselves no favors, and as far as influencing society, they appear to be doing it the wrong way. As far as government goes, I'll chock that up to political pandering or simple silliness. Don't know if I can get behind the idea of secularizing everything outright, but there's too much misapplication of the roots of faith by 'believers' that it might not matter.

Agreed that the US is not a christian nation, even if some of the founders were theist and had some certain desires there. It's a place of liberty and equality...well, that was the original plan anyway.

In regards to science, science is based in reason and logic. It doesn't make any inherent claims about theism, and regardless of it's practitioners, is relatively objective when it comes to producing evidence. Peer-review and science itself will weed out bad scientific claims and biased scientists.

For the most part I'll agree with that. I've got some qualms about the current standing of peer review though...have heard some gripes about the practical application of it and internal censorship (heavy-handed and not always impartial as should be) that sometimes goes along with it. Eh, c'est la vie.

Anyhow, thanks for the response. It's funny how opposing sides can sometimes feel the same way as I know there are likely many christians (or other believers as well) who would give more or less the same thoughts with different details.

Be well.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by PieKeeper

 

I really wish I could fly out and make it...but it's hard to with exams and all. I will be sending my internet support and encouraging others to make it. Reason. Just think about it.

I've been thinking that people that can't make it should try to organize local rallies on the same day.

I don't see why this has to just be a DC event.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul

...I'm sorry, but last time I checked atheists made up a staggeringly low portion of governmental officials, were the only group that could be publicly demonized without massive outcry, are depicted in typically negative terms in media, and are attacked for attempting to defend their rights.

No worries. Sorry, not trying to give anyone a hard time here, just curious. I never knew there was such a high percentage of alleged theists in government. I'm forced to wonder how many of them actually live as those they claim to follow suggested...

As far as the other struggles you mention, for whatever it's worth you have my apologies. I've never been on that side so wasn't aware of any problems along those lines. I think it may be a matter of perspective as I mentioned in my other post, as I believe I've seen christians at least make the same claims otherwise.

For my own curiosity, what do you think of Ron Paul? He's big against any form of collectivism and I follow the same view for the most part. Good people in pretty much any group, disproportionately outweighed by a larger number of not-so-good (I'm cynical, I know...). I'm not speaking ill of the beliefs themselves, but I tend not to be very impressed by most people representing themselves as christian, honestly.

And that's just in America. Where I live blasphemy is actually a crime.

You're in Malta? Well, just be careful in that case. I can't really imagine what it would be like to live under such stipulations, and glad I don't...most of my views and opinions tend to be fairly unorthodox and not sure how broad a net they cast for such things.

Anyhow, thanks for your input and view on this. When comes to the perspective from your end I'm sheltered, so I appreciate it.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
And that's just in America. Where I live blasphemy is actually a crime.

Now we know why you have such a large presence here on ATS! Also, avoid my suggestion and don't organize a public rally. We don't want you to end up in jail.

Originally posted by Praetorius
Just curious...when are humanists and the like not heard? Seems like you're suggesting some sort of second-class treatment for non-theists, but you currently own the ruling paradigm of science and seem to be represented equally otherwise.

Here is exactly the kind of thing that an Atheist can face (and often does) in the US:

"EDIT: Well, it hit the fan a couple hours ago. They've already assembled a group of supporters at a local church and called in the newspaper. I've had to deactivate my Facebook account and I can't reason with any of them. They refuse to listen. The whole town hates me, aside from a few closet atheists that are silently supporting, which I don't blame them looking at what I've incited here. Thanks for the support though."

www.reddit.com...

Poor kid is just asking to be respected at his graduation.

reply to post by PieKeeper


I can't really muster a whole lot of sympathy for this example, to be honest. It doesn't look like they got down on him for being atheist, it looks like they're all pissed off because he tried to limit *their* right to free expression and threatened to call the ACLU on everyone ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof").

I can't agree with his interpretation of freedom "from" religion - not being required to participate in a faith is not the same as never having to hear or see mention of it, or witness believers doing such...and having to listen to a prayer as an atheist is no more stressful (or shouldn't be) than myself having to listen to the pledge of allegience while being unable to participate in such myself due to my utter disgust with where this country has landed itself - I cannot pledge allegience to a nation currently walking the path of oath breaking, torture, cowardice, snooping, intervention, and so forth.

Does the state of the nation stress me out? Sure. Does having to listen to the pledge of allegience do the same? Not so much. Now, had the school prevented believers of any other faith from offering their own prayers, or him for wanting to offer a speech to reason or about science, I would be all for him here.

As it stands, I don't see him being treated much differently for this than he likely would be for arguing that the US should have tried bin Laden instead of shooting him in the head.

I don't doubt that atheist DO catch crap for their beliefs (although have not been direct witness to such myself), but this just appears to be an example of getting smacked for rocking the boat. I definitely feel for the kid though, I can't agree with bad treatment regardless of why he's got it aimed at him.

reply to post by PieKeeper


Actually, if I end up in jail I might be able to get a case to the EU court and set a precedent against blasphemy laws. We're still fighting for divorce over here, imagine how much of a headache secularism is going to be.

reply to post by Praetorius


School-sanctioned prayer has been held up as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court and other federal courts. His classmates are ostracizing him because he's standing up for constitutional law.

reply to post by PieKeeper
Hi PieKeeper -

Perhaps I'm not up to snuff on current standing of prayer in school then - my apologies. I'd have to say in that case I disagree with the court's interpretation on this one, as it's not congress making any laws regarding an establishment of religion (merely the exercising of such), but it doesn't really bother me much one way or the other so I won't make an issue of it - and it's definitely not the first time I've disagreed with the courts on a variety of issues.

If he's arguing the issue under the current standing of the law, then I can't fault him for that - but as (possibly unintentionally) stated in your response, the ire is at his actions and not the fact that he's atheist. I don't know his history as regards prior disclosure, but I would assume it was probably already a known thing and now they're just pissy that he's rocking the boat.

I WILL NOT, however, condone any treatment he's getting for the situation - please don't mistake me there. The obvious facts of the case suggest that everyone giving him a hard time likely self-identify as 'christians', and the behavior reported is anything but.

While I don't feel this is the best example of an atheist being targeted merely for being such, I DO feel that it's an excellent example of (sadly) typical christian hypocrisy and lack of understanding of the faith they claim to have. As I feel it sums things up succintly and you might enjoy it, I'll leave it with Maher's clip about the US response to bin Laden's death:


While I won't say that non-christians shouldn't also meet a high standard of behavior and responsibility, christians have absolutely no excuse for not doing so as they are direct mandates of the faith. Love. Return good in response to evil. Don't judge. Turn the other cheek. Be meek and humble.

And they fail entirely too often. Thanks friend.

reply to post by Praetorius

Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by PieKeeper

 

I can't really muster a whole lot of sympathy for this example, to be honest.

You're a mean one, mister Grinch man.

It doesn't look like they got down on him for being atheist, it looks like they're all pissed off because he tried to limit *their* right to free expression and threatened to call the ACLU on everyone

There is no right to impose religious practices on captive audiences in government buildings outlined in the Constitution.

("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof").

Part of the free exercise of religion has to do with not being compelled to sit through the practice of other people's religion.

I can't agree with his interpretation of freedom "from" religion - not being required to participate in a faith is not the same as never having to hear or see mention of it, or witness believers doing such...

That's not what they mean by freedom from religion. Freedom from religion means that you are not required to sit through religious practice. Public displays are fine. My school had a prayer group and Bible study when I was in high school stateside...and nobody batted an eyelid. Of course, those were extracurricular. If someone wanted to pray in the hallway, they could do so. They couldn't do it at the top of their lungs or in any other disruptive manner, but that's merely what you're allowed to do in a school.

Why? Well, because people can walk away from you when you're praying. This is a student's graduation, an event that he should be able to comfortably attend as part of his publicly funded education.

Now, had the school prevented believers of any other faith from offering their own prayers, or him for wanting to offer a speech to reason or about science, I would be all for him here.

It still would be illegal. The fact of the matter is that the state should be entirely neutral to these matters, simply because that's what works out best for everyone.

As it stands, I don't see him being treated much differently for this than he likely would be for arguing that the US should have tried bin Laden instead of shooting him in the head.

Except for the fact that it's a religious community ganging up on a person who simply doesn't believe that he should be compelled to sit through a prayer, which is entirely different.

I don't doubt that atheist DO catch crap for their beliefs (although have not been direct witness to such myself), but this just appears to be an example of getting smacked for rocking the boat.

No, it's getting smacked for telling people to stop flicking their ears. He isn't rocking the boat, he's standing up for his rights.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul
I am forced to yield this one to you, sir.

You're a mean one, mister Grinch man.

Granted, poorly spoken on my part. It was early and I had not fully engaged mental processing for the day as yet - I should have clarified that as in regards to it being over his being atheist, as compared to him disrupting their planned service - legality aside, when posted.

There is no right to impose religious practices on captive audiences in government buildings outlined in the Constitution...That's not what they mean by freedom from religion. Freedom from religion means that you are not required to sit through religious practice. Public displays are fine. My school had a prayer group and Bible study when I was in high school stateside...and nobody batted an eyelid. Of course, those were extracurricular. If someone wanted to pray in the hallway, they could do so. They couldn't do it at the top of their lungs or in any other disruptive manner, but that's merely what you're allowed to do in a school.

Why? Well, because people can walk away from you when you're praying. This is a student's graduation, an event that he should be able to comfortably attend as part of his publicly funded education.

Your point is taken, but I also take this as a public display, and falling generally under the area of the extracurricular as it's just a ceremony and will not prevent anyone from earning their diploma or otherwise impacting their education one way or the other.

I know that probably will do nothing for you, but is just as I see it.

Part of the free exercise of religion has to do with not being compelled to sit through the practice of other people's religion.

If it were a service or sermon, etc., I would agree totally - as it's just prayer, I really can't.

It still would be illegal. The fact of the matter is that the state should be entirely neutral to these matters, simply because that's what works out best for everyone.

Disagreed (with the courts in this case, apparently) and agreed - if the law were different, I would say fair play for all faiths or non-faith beliefs would suffice for neutrality. Personal opinion, of course.

Except for the fact that it's a religious community ganging up on a person who simply doesn't believe that he should be compelled to sit through a prayer, which is entirely different.

Take away one ideology and it will almost always come down to something else. I'm not sanctioning their behavior by any means, and not trying to downplay his suffering in the case. I'm just taking it as they're aiming at his actions, and not necessarily his motivation.

No, it's getting smacked for telling people to stop flicking their ears. He isn't rocking the boat, he's standing up for his rights.

Agreed completely, thanks to PieKeeper for pointing me to look at the law here.

I appreciate the perspective and will definitely be looking into legal aspects here as well as atheist & non-christian perspectives on such observances as well as the heavy presence of christianity (so-called, at least) in society. Sorry in advance for any offense my views present, that's not my goal - and neither is any perceived ignorance - but I AM aiming to always be learning and growing, so will take it all into consideration.

Thanks and be well.