View Story | 44 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
There are two additional concerns we address to the attention of our fellow-citizens. On the one hand, we are especially troubled by the fact that a generation of culture warring, reinforced by understandable reactions to religious extremism around the world, is creating a powerful backlash against all religion in public life among many educated people. If this were to harden and become an American equivalent of the long-held European animosity toward religion in the public life, the result would be disastrous for the American republic and a severe constriction of liberty for people of all faiths. We therefore warn of the striking intolerance evident among the new atheists, and call on all citizens of goodwill and believers of all faiths and none to join with us in working for a civil public square and the restoration of a tough-minded civility that is in the interests of all.
Couple of points:
Level 6 atheist, Heretic in good company.
by Recall on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:58:56 PM PDT
reminds me of the diary (I think by br t) regarding the desire of the religious right to just "call the whole thing off" now that there is some resistence to the "movement"
Overall, though, I suppose it's a start....hard to me to comment since I don't consider myself an "evangelical". Also, I agree that this is meant to attract those folks who identify as political conservatives rather than theological conservatives.
The more I think about it, the more I agree with PD that this is a way to hitch their wagon to the next thing that brings them closer to the winning percentage.
by lam2b2g on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:32:38 AM PDT
[ Parent ]
we are all about winning.That's it.Thanx.I did not know I allowed myself to be cyber stalked,threatened and attacked just to get closer to the winning percentage.I have spent the last five years fighting for a document like this just to see it dismissed as so much posturing.This is HUGE.It may very well be the first shot in the war between evangelical moderates and the christofascists for the heart of the evangelical movement.
When I admitted to myself I was gender queer and started to question the POV of the extreme religous right and work against it,I hoped something like this would come out but never believed it would.
It excites me.
by ron faerie on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:57:57 AM PDT
Perhaps it will take some of us longer to believe what is being said. For two reasons:
1-This has been going on an awful long time, and it's not just the theologically conservative who have had their religion hijacked...some of us are pissed
and
2-The timing coincides with the social, political and economic structures distancing themselves from the "movement". It's like when a kid confesses to eating the candy after you've said, "hey, whats with this empty wrapper and your blue lips?"
True, it's a great start. But, as the saying goes..."trust, but verify"
by lam2b2g on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:01:12 AM PDT
I understand your reservations.we agree this document is being put out because of the folk distancing themselves from us.The difference is I believe the Leaders who have hijacked our movement have been cut down to size and it has given the moderates an opening.
by ron faerie on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:43:22 PM PDT
are people like YOU, Ron, then I've got no worries.
Montani semper liberi
by Sadie Baker on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:09:24 AM PDT
....I believe they are.I cannot see folks like hagee getting behind this.
by ron faerie on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:45:00 PM PDT
(Like most things, I see this through the lens of science fiction.)
This document is like the Cylon Skin-Jobs fighting amongst themselves. However, it doesn't mean we should trust one side or the other.
I say sit back and let them destroy each other while we make our way towards Earth.
There is no god. Let's save the world anyway.
by Icelander on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:50:44 AM PDT
we shouldn't give them a chance, either. Not all the skinjobs want to kill all the humans, after all. And the humans on BSG aren't exactly paragons of virtue themselves . . .
In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies but the silence of our friends - MLK
by Thirst on Thu May 08, 2008 at 12:36:56 PM PDT
But only if they look like Tricia Helfer or Grace Park.
by Icelander on Thu May 08, 2008 at 12:44:21 PM PDT
You have good taste lol
by ron faerie on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:54:31 PM PDT
....you are throwing me in with the Hagee's of this world.Surely you do not think that the Rick Warren's of this earth are no difference from the Hagee's and this is just a battle of control among bigots.
I guess my ex-pastor who told the church to thank god for the bigots who beat the hell out of me becuase I was a filthy sodomite was just kidding when he said men like Rick Warren are nothing but apostate anti-christs.
I understand the damage the evangelical hate mongers can do.After my ex-pastor denounced me I was so hurt my brief try at coming out turned into me going so far down the road into self hating homophobia that I started playing russian ruolette hoping that God would allow the "right chamber" to come up.These folks are never going to see eye to eye with you,but most of these folks behind this document are willing to let you live your life as you see fit as long as you let them do the same.
by ron faerie on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:53:43 PM PDT
... who want to stop fighting, there absolutely are some evangelicals who aren't like Hagee and Falwell. But the process of sorting through them is laborious, and leaves me open to attack.
by Icelander on Fri May 09, 2008 at 05:48:47 AM PDT
They've apparently calculated that the movement's goals aren't getting met - or even fairly represented - as a partisanized political movement. So how should they get them met? By getting back to their core mission, which is as a religious movement.
by pastordan on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:16:12 AM PDT
they certainly have a long way to go.
by Danish Brethern on Thu May 08, 2008 at 07:43:54 AM PDT
....and part of our faith(i hate the word religion) says that we do not force our POV on others.
by ron faerie on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:57:00 PM PDT
1)When will there be civility? This document denounces imposing our values on the rest of America.It recognizes the fact that some folks will not just limit the damage that the backlash against extremist Christianity may cause to Christians.They are consdering how the actions of evangelicals affect those outside of our faith.What more do you want?
by ron faerie on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:44:44 AM PDT
Well. One thing really.
Responsibility.
In the quote that Recall put forward, the one thing that seems to be missing (and I haven't read the whole thing yet. I will later, and if I'm wrong I'll admit it) is any sort of personal responsibility. They're the ones who acted in a very bigoted fashion, they're the ones who hurt a lot of people, and yes, for a while they did try to exact a lot of unheeded control over the public square.
They did that. Not the "new atheists". They. Themselves. Nobody made them do it.
It strikes me as an effort to avoid any sort of repercussion to their actions, without any effort of making amends. And that always comes across to me as immoral.
The future doesn't scare me at all..'cos nothing's like before.
by Karmakin on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:27:15 AM PDT
And it's a bit better than I thought it would be. It dances around the idea of responsibility, but I think that's a lot better than ignoring it completely. Still not what I would like however.
I think the "seculars are poopyheads too!" stance is what needs to be changed.
by Karmakin on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:35:45 AM PDT
as they could, considering that it was a committee document, with some of the people on the committee being quite conservative.
by pastordan on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:34:02 AM PDT
Not even about the conservative part, but simply the committee part.
by Karmakin on Thu May 08, 2008 at 09:20:32 AM PDT
Most of the atheists come across as some of the most decent,loving and moral folks I have ever come across.However,some Seculars are asses who treat folks of faith as bad as some folks of faith treat Seculars.Many a moderate evangelical has been attacked by one of these asses and has felt that folks condone it because of the POV that all evangelicals are ignorant bigoted asses and all Seculars are poor innocent victims of Evil Bigot Fundies.My gut tells me that most of the folks behind this document have got it from both directions.It is one things to tolerate Seculars and their POV,it is another to trust them completely.You are reaching out to try and meet them half way and all they can do is equate you with the Robertsons,Phelps and Hagees.That hurts and can make one distrustful.
These guys may be running an angle,but it is a dangerous one considering the state of affairs in the conservative evangelical church.The reactionary nature of the wingnuts make me think that unless you are sincere you do not risk this kind of document.
by ron faerie on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:39:38 PM PDT
... chastizing me for not trusting evangelicals? And now you're saying we're untrustworthy?
More and more I'm thinking that understanding between both sides is impossible, and the least we can hope for is tolerance.
by Icelander on Fri May 09, 2008 at 05:52:32 AM PDT
....I was saying there is a reason many evangelicals do not trust seculars.The document was saying that just because we recognize the mistakes on our side we are not taking sole responsibility for the conflict between folks of faith and seculars and we are standing gaurds against the poopyheads.You show me goodwill and I will return it.However if you show me bad will I am not going to shut up and take it in the name of tolerance.That was what I(and the framers of this document) was saying.
by ron faerie on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:05:42 PM PDT
There's a reason we don't trust you either.
And the shitheads coming out all of a sudden is what happens after years of shutting up and taking it in the name of tolerance.
by Icelander on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:15:08 PM PDT
Both sides have been polarized by the poopyheads.If those in the center cannot trust each other than we will always be at each others throats which is what the poopyheads want.I will never understand the POV of folks who have concluded that there is no God any more than they understand my POV.That is not nessecary.What is nessecary is that we agree to disagree and fight for each others right to be wrong.I cannot say you are not wrong without betraying my beliefs any more than you can say I am not wrong without betraying yours.However in this country you have the right to be wrong in the eyes of others as long as you are not hurting each other.There are folks on both sides who want to take away the right to be wrong and as long as those of us who are against taking away the other guys right to be wrong can be kept mistrusting and fighting each other the poopyheads on each side win.
I will defend your right to be wrong until you try and make me to be right in your eyes.That is all I ask of seculars and all I believe that the founders of this document ask of you.
by ron faerie on Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:38:54 PM PDT
Why do they use a phrases like "unbridled scientism" and "run rampant" when they talk about my POV? It's not a disease to be cured.
And I've yet to see a "secular" argue against freedom of religion. No, not even Christopher Hitchens.
by Icelander on Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:30:51 PM PDT
Karmakin,both you and Recall seem to be lumping all evangelicals together.
I am sick of being lumped together with Hagee and his ilk.Yet,no matter how much I speak out against these hatemongers I have atheists and secularists telling me to be an evangelical is to be a close minded bigot and there is no way I am anything but just like Hagee and his fellow haters.
One reason I do not do more activism and speak out more outside of SP is I get it both ways.The Hagee supporters attack me as a ittle apostate sodomite and those on the other side just assume I am a close minded bigot.These men will be attacked by the Hagees and Phelps of this world.Yet you lump them in with the very folks they are standing against.Love you,Recall and all the atheists here but I am sick of the narrow minded veiw that lumps all evangelicals together and can only see this as manipulation instead of the couragous first step it is..
by ron faerie on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:26:34 PM PDT
"There is no God," I think you would take it the same way as I take "In God we trust."
by Recall on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:19:10 PM PDT
by Icelander on Fri May 09, 2008 at 05:52:53 AM PDT
is that the courts have ruled that "In God We Trust" is a bland, religiously neutral expression of our heritage. In other words, pretty much meaningless.
Which I suppose you could say is the way believers should interpret "There is no God."
by pastordan on Fri May 09, 2008 at 06:54:19 AM PDT
View Story | 44 comments