<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Annoying Atheists</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/06/03/annoying-atheists/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/06/03/annoying-atheists/</link>
	<description>by Hemant Mehta</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 04:57:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nica&#8217;s Nothing Turns Out to be My Something &#124; Edger</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/06/03/annoying-atheists/#comment-231688</link>
		<dc:creator>Nica&#8217;s Nothing Turns Out to be My Something &#124; Edger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2008 15:38:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/06/03/annoying-atheists/#comment-231688</guid>
		<description>[...] for the poster boy atheists. I&#8217;ve written about it, and been destroyed for my opinion in a few places (some worse than others) and everyone thought I was some anti-atheist without even taking into [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] for the poster boy atheists. I&#8217;ve written about it, and been destroyed for my opinion in a few places (some worse than others) and everyone thought I was some anti-atheist without even taking into [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: miller</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/06/03/annoying-atheists/#comment-179992</link>
		<dc:creator>miller</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2008 17:19:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/06/03/annoying-atheists/#comment-179992</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s worth noting that Katie wrote a bit of a &lt;a href=&quot;http://liberal-debutante.com/family/backed-up.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;response&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s worth noting that Katie wrote a bit of a <a href="http://liberal-debutante.com/family/backed-up.html" rel="nofollow">response</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Freelancer</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/06/03/annoying-atheists/#comment-179635</link>
		<dc:creator>Freelancer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2008 05:48:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/06/03/annoying-atheists/#comment-179635</guid>
		<description>Just a few points. 

- For Kate, as a leader who lives and breathes this, it must be grating from time to time. She didn&#039;t preface that she was venting, but she did mention midway through the list that the context of her post should be considered a light-hearted rant, just blowing off some steam. I live in the Midwest, North of the Bible Belt, and as a  student who is and has been economically bound to this area for most of my life, I find an apt metaphor in cataloging the attributes and the annoyances of the places you live. When you live in a certain place, you appreciate certain things about it, but you can&#039;t help but take stock of the vexing, inevitably frustrating aspects of your own local geography.

-To emphasize the point that I am not a sock-puppet of Kate&#039;s, nor have I ever read anything she has written before: with respect to the content of her post, I find argument with several items on her list. I may disagree with Dawkins once in a while, I find that his background can be a detriment when advocating science, particularly theists when discussing the subject of evolution. However, that is a Public Relations issue of how best to broach the subject of atheism into a theistic Popular Culture. I have NEVER found him annoying, and I&#039;ve never found fault with any of his scientifically based conclusions. Hitchens, I find, I agree with many of his main theses and his prose is sublime, however, his advocacy that the Western World rip the Middle East from the medieval customs of Islam by gunpoint, well, I have a few negative opinions about that. My point is that even the Four Horsemen don&#039;t think in unison, but when they express their thoughts, all atheists tend to, if not agree, then understand. I don&#039;t presume to speak for Hemant, but I think even the Friendly Atheist knows there is a point when intolerance becomes dogma, but too much tolerance dilutes the strength of ideas.

-Finally, some of you above have ripped Kate a new one, in what sounds to me as a &quot;No True Scotsman&quot; fallacy, which is so often applied to our theist counterparts. Most of us, I would hope, have the humility and open-mindedness to not take ourselves too seriously, and to acknowledge that yes, its okay for the godless to bitch about something OTHER than the non-godless. Something in Kate&#039;s post I admired was the outright willingness, the freedom she felt to post her opinions (good and bad) about those who share her worldview. Could we even IMAGINE the repercussions if a Bishop of a Catholic Diocese released an Edict called &quot;10 things that piss me off about the Vatican&quot;, or if Focus on the Family published a list that said &quot;10 things that chafe my ass about Republican Pro-Lifers&quot;.

This is why I&#039;m glad to be an atheist, what some of you call a &quot;Freethinker&quot;.
There seems to be no great atheism fatwa on Kate, just some name calling, bruised feelings, and minor nitpicking. There will be no death threats, or boycotts, or a campaign to have her resign from CFI. She spoke her mind, has defended it as tongue-in-cheek, and even as an individual who disagrees with her on several points (though I can almost be certain that most of those points have an anecdote or two to go along with them), I know that she was just venting, and not submitting them as scientific evidence.

Anyways, I&#039;ve found I&#039;ve written much more about this subject than I had intended to (as always), so I&#039;m going to end here.

Peace,
Nick</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just a few points. </p>
<p>- For Kate, as a leader who lives and breathes this, it must be grating from time to time. She didn&#8217;t preface that she was venting, but she did mention midway through the list that the context of her post should be considered a light-hearted rant, just blowing off some steam. I live in the Midwest, North of the Bible Belt, and as a  student who is and has been economically bound to this area for most of my life, I find an apt metaphor in cataloging the attributes and the annoyances of the places you live. When you live in a certain place, you appreciate certain things about it, but you can&#8217;t help but take stock of the vexing, inevitably frustrating aspects of your own local geography.</p>
<p>-To emphasize the point that I am not a sock-puppet of Kate&#8217;s, nor have I ever read anything she has written before: with respect to the content of her post, I find argument with several items on her list. I may disagree with Dawkins once in a while, I find that his background can be a detriment when advocating science, particularly theists when discussing the subject of evolution. However, that is a Public Relations issue of how best to broach the subject of atheism into a theistic Popular Culture. I have NEVER found him annoying, and I&#8217;ve never found fault with any of his scientifically based conclusions. Hitchens, I find, I agree with many of his main theses and his prose is sublime, however, his advocacy that the Western World rip the Middle East from the medieval customs of Islam by gunpoint, well, I have a few negative opinions about that. My point is that even the Four Horsemen don&#8217;t think in unison, but when they express their thoughts, all atheists tend to, if not agree, then understand. I don&#8217;t presume to speak for Hemant, but I think even the Friendly Atheist knows there is a point when intolerance becomes dogma, but too much tolerance dilutes the strength of ideas.</p>
<p>-Finally, some of you above have ripped Kate a new one, in what sounds to me as a &#8220;No True Scotsman&#8221; fallacy, which is so often applied to our theist counterparts. Most of us, I would hope, have the humility and open-mindedness to not take ourselves too seriously, and to acknowledge that yes, its okay for the godless to bitch about something OTHER than the non-godless. Something in Kate&#8217;s post I admired was the outright willingness, the freedom she felt to post her opinions (good and bad) about those who share her worldview. Could we even IMAGINE the repercussions if a Bishop of a Catholic Diocese released an Edict called &#8220;10 things that piss me off about the Vatican&#8221;, or if Focus on the Family published a list that said &#8220;10 things that chafe my ass about Republican Pro-Lifers&#8221;.</p>
<p>This is why I&#8217;m glad to be an atheist, what some of you call a &#8220;Freethinker&#8221;.<br />
There seems to be no great atheism fatwa on Kate, just some name calling, bruised feelings, and minor nitpicking. There will be no death threats, or boycotts, or a campaign to have her resign from CFI. She spoke her mind, has defended it as tongue-in-cheek, and even as an individual who disagrees with her on several points (though I can almost be certain that most of those points have an anecdote or two to go along with them), I know that she was just venting, and not submitting them as scientific evidence.</p>
<p>Anyways, I&#8217;ve found I&#8217;ve written much more about this subject than I had intended to (as always), so I&#8217;m going to end here.</p>
<p>Peace,<br />
Nick</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dawn</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/06/03/annoying-atheists/#comment-179544</link>
		<dc:creator>Dawn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2008 01:40:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/06/03/annoying-atheists/#comment-179544</guid>
		<description>Miller - I was thinking the same thing.

Katie - maybe there&#039;s one more thing at play. You&#039;re a Canadian and as Canucks we tend to be pretty comfortable with poking fun at ourselves and being critical of our own circles. These Americans though, they&#039;re not used to our ways and so perhaps we have to be gentle with them. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Miller &#8211; I was thinking the same thing.</p>
<p>Katie &#8211; maybe there&#8217;s one more thing at play. You&#8217;re a Canadian and as Canucks we tend to be pretty comfortable with poking fun at ourselves and being critical of our own circles. These Americans though, they&#8217;re not used to our ways and so perhaps we have to be gentle with them. <img src='http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stephanie</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/06/03/annoying-atheists/#comment-179517</link>
		<dc:creator>stephanie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2008 00:37:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/06/03/annoying-atheists/#comment-179517</guid>
		<description>J.J.

Version 2.
I&#039;m technologically lazy. ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>J.J.</p>
<p>Version 2.<br />
I&#8217;m technologically lazy. <img src='http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J. J. Ramsey</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/06/03/annoying-atheists/#comment-179474</link>
		<dc:creator>J. J. Ramsey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 23:19:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/06/03/annoying-atheists/#comment-179474</guid>
		<description>stephanie: &quot;Huh. For the record, I read her page on FF with no problems.&quot;

Version 2 or 3?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>stephanie: &#8220;Huh. For the record, I read her page on FF with no problems.&#8221;</p>
<p>Version 2 or 3?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: miller</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/06/03/annoying-atheists/#comment-179441</link>
		<dc:creator>miller</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 22:38:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/06/03/annoying-atheists/#comment-179441</guid>
		<description>I can&#039;t help but notice that the comments on Katie&#039;s blog are systematically much more positive than the ones here.  I get the impression that people commenting here either didn&#039;t read the whole thing, or perceived that the tone was deeply angry.  If you didn&#039;t notice, she also included a list of things she loved, among which was intelligence.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can&#8217;t help but notice that the comments on Katie&#8217;s blog are systematically much more positive than the ones here.  I get the impression that people commenting here either didn&#8217;t read the whole thing, or perceived that the tone was deeply angry.  If you didn&#8217;t notice, she also included a list of things she loved, among which was intelligence.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: katie kish</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/06/03/annoying-atheists/#comment-179429</link>
		<dc:creator>katie kish</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 22:17:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/06/03/annoying-atheists/#comment-179429</guid>
		<description>it wasnt 10 things i hated. it was 10 things that annoyed me at a moment when i was ranting and pissed off.

and you&#039;re wrong. the answer is b.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>it wasnt 10 things i hated. it was 10 things that annoyed me at a moment when i was ranting and pissed off.</p>
<p>and you&#8217;re wrong. the answer is b.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Larry Huffman</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/06/03/annoying-atheists/#comment-179413</link>
		<dc:creator>Larry Huffman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 21:53:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/06/03/annoying-atheists/#comment-179413</guid>
		<description>Katie...the point is...you cannot stereotype atheists. The commonality in that term is not strong enough.

The only thing that I can be sure of having in common with another atheist is that we each lack a belief in diety.

A Tiebetan Buddhist is an atheist by definition...but they are not doing the things you listed.

Most atheists do not discuss science or Dawkins. Most atheists are atheists because god does not make sense, not because they have studied the scientific principles behind it. 

So...no matter how you try to defend any one item you put on your list...the truth is, atheists simply cannot be stereotyped as you have tried to. All it does is make those of us reading think that you either A) do not know what you are talking about (I do not think this), B) You are not really an atheist and you wanted to gripe about atheists to atheists and thought this a good way (also not what I think) or C) You have specific atheists in mind while blasting all atheists. I am quite sure C is the case.

Some advice...before deciding to write a list that will most certainly stereotype a complete group...understand the makeup of that group. The vast majority of atheists do not frequent forums...they do not discuss science nor has the study of it made them leave god. Most atheists simply left god because of doctine or never had him to begin with (or they have a different spiritual belief that is not based on diety).

The kind of atheist you are describing...I will call them the acadamia-coffee-house set, and even that is not fair to those who do not behave as you depict...will certainly do what you have described. But most atheists are already in the bar having fun and discussing the game or work...not boring you with how intelligent they are...and you do not even know because they are not announcing their lack of belief. 

Now...want to hear what I think about someone who feels smug enough to write a list of 10 things they hate about anyone? Let&#039;s just say, I am sure I would rather hang with your annoying intellectual atheists.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Katie&#8230;the point is&#8230;you cannot stereotype atheists. The commonality in that term is not strong enough.</p>
<p>The only thing that I can be sure of having in common with another atheist is that we each lack a belief in diety.</p>
<p>A Tiebetan Buddhist is an atheist by definition&#8230;but they are not doing the things you listed.</p>
<p>Most atheists do not discuss science or Dawkins. Most atheists are atheists because god does not make sense, not because they have studied the scientific principles behind it. </p>
<p>So&#8230;no matter how you try to defend any one item you put on your list&#8230;the truth is, atheists simply cannot be stereotyped as you have tried to. All it does is make those of us reading think that you either A) do not know what you are talking about (I do not think this), B) You are not really an atheist and you wanted to gripe about atheists to atheists and thought this a good way (also not what I think) or C) You have specific atheists in mind while blasting all atheists. I am quite sure C is the case.</p>
<p>Some advice&#8230;before deciding to write a list that will most certainly stereotype a complete group&#8230;understand the makeup of that group. The vast majority of atheists do not frequent forums&#8230;they do not discuss science nor has the study of it made them leave god. Most atheists simply left god because of doctine or never had him to begin with (or they have a different spiritual belief that is not based on diety).</p>
<p>The kind of atheist you are describing&#8230;I will call them the acadamia-coffee-house set, and even that is not fair to those who do not behave as you depict&#8230;will certainly do what you have described. But most atheists are already in the bar having fun and discussing the game or work&#8230;not boring you with how intelligent they are&#8230;and you do not even know because they are not announcing their lack of belief. </p>
<p>Now&#8230;want to hear what I think about someone who feels smug enough to write a list of 10 things they hate about anyone? Let&#8217;s just say, I am sure I would rather hang with your annoying intellectual atheists.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: katie kish</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/06/03/annoying-atheists/#comment-179392</link>
		<dc:creator>katie kish</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 21:22:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/06/03/annoying-atheists/#comment-179392</guid>
		<description>I wasn&#039;t going to bother doing this because there are more important things in my life right now to worry about than what people are saying about something I wrote - however... here goes...

I think the one quote that hemant put on was out of context, and probably going to make a lot of people pissy with me. but im an academic... i love science. but i know how much say... one of our biology blogger friends... knows about science. So when there is a speaker at CFI saying something that COULD be MODERATELY anti-science - I don&#039;t think it&#039;s necessary for him to stand up in the middle of the lecture and start interupting the speaker about how important science is and how dumb the speaker must be for not agreeing with him... That sort of behaviour is unnecessary. This was the specific case I was thinking of in my head when I wrote it. (NOTE: what the speaker was saying wasn&#039;t even anti-science. it just placed atheists into a seat where they were no long being victimized. and THAT pissed people off.)

to the first guy - I have left religion... I was sucked in and consumed by it for MANY years in my life. It destroyed a lot of me. And when I left religion I lost all my friends. Now I spend every waking moment of my life devoted to the secularist movement. And yea - sometimes I get a little sick of it... so I need to rant a little. 

to this Siamang person who thinks i shoudl just &quot;stop&quot; hanging out with these people or &quot;take the clue&quot; ... I can&#039;t. It&#039;s what I&#039;m involved in. I&#039;m pres of my student group, VP of the freethought association of canada, on the multi media board for various other groups..... so it&#039;s my life. and there are a LOT of people who show up to these things that are stereotypical militant atheists that i just can&#039;t be around ALL the time - because that&#039;s not how I am in terms of what I believe. also if you could refrain from calling me sweetycakes..... that would be a lot less gross.

I don&#039;t really have a choice in who I get to &quot;hang out with&quot; at these different meet ups - conferences - meetings - lectures - etc. because of the positions that I&#039;m in I need to be inclusive to everyone.
thanks to everyone else for the support - im glad that some people caught hold of the points i was trying to make. a lot of people are telling me to just &quot;stop&quot; hanging out with atheists then.
&lt;blockquote&gt;
I liked the list. I’m not an atheist (not yet anyway) so some of it, like the convention stuff, I didn’t get but other stuff, like the Seriousness (*cough* the comments here*cough*),&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Thank you! I was blowing off a little steam and this is how people take it. and seriously - &lt;a href=&quot;http://liberal-debutante.com/?s=positive+contact&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;it&#039;s not like I haven&#039;t written about all the positive things atheism has done for me in the past and all the great things I think about it.&lt;/a&gt;

the fact of the matter is that im really into the movement, and i like being a part of it. i am EXTREMELY commited to promoting secularism and am invovled with a various number of secular organizations. so i can&#039;t up and walk out of it. some people in the groups bug me. and yeah - i focused on those people more. i do have FANTASTIC atheist friends from these orgs. some of my best friends even. I&#039;m sorry if I can&#039;t always hold back and talk about the pretty things.


In terms of the organized atheist movement - I think we&#039;re seeing a huge shift in how it&#039;s done in Canada. There are a lot of different organizations that aren&#039;t competeing over the same goals - but rather doing different tasks. We have the FAC that is focusing on being a charity, and doing charity like things. CFI that is promoting secularism and giving resources to student groups. CSA which focuses on political stances and making moves on that. Then a lot of meet up groups that focus on conversation. I think making groups like that is really productive as it breaks up the work load, and keeps groups from conflicting with one another - yet allows them to work together.

Our student group is going to be doing more volunteer work this fall - its going to be our big focus, and i think its an important one.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wasn&#8217;t going to bother doing this because there are more important things in my life right now to worry about than what people are saying about something I wrote &#8211; however&#8230; here goes&#8230;</p>
<p>I think the one quote that hemant put on was out of context, and probably going to make a lot of people pissy with me. but im an academic&#8230; i love science. but i know how much say&#8230; one of our biology blogger friends&#8230; knows about science. So when there is a speaker at CFI saying something that COULD be MODERATELY anti-science &#8211; I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s necessary for him to stand up in the middle of the lecture and start interupting the speaker about how important science is and how dumb the speaker must be for not agreeing with him&#8230; That sort of behaviour is unnecessary. This was the specific case I was thinking of in my head when I wrote it. (NOTE: what the speaker was saying wasn&#8217;t even anti-science. it just placed atheists into a seat where they were no long being victimized. and THAT pissed people off.)</p>
<p>to the first guy &#8211; I have left religion&#8230; I was sucked in and consumed by it for MANY years in my life. It destroyed a lot of me. And when I left religion I lost all my friends. Now I spend every waking moment of my life devoted to the secularist movement. And yea &#8211; sometimes I get a little sick of it&#8230; so I need to rant a little. </p>
<p>to this Siamang person who thinks i shoudl just &#8220;stop&#8221; hanging out with these people or &#8220;take the clue&#8221; &#8230; I can&#8217;t. It&#8217;s what I&#8217;m involved in. I&#8217;m pres of my student group, VP of the freethought association of canada, on the multi media board for various other groups&#8230;.. so it&#8217;s my life. and there are a LOT of people who show up to these things that are stereotypical militant atheists that i just can&#8217;t be around ALL the time &#8211; because that&#8217;s not how I am in terms of what I believe. also if you could refrain from calling me sweetycakes&#8230;.. that would be a lot less gross.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t really have a choice in who I get to &#8220;hang out with&#8221; at these different meet ups &#8211; conferences &#8211; meetings &#8211; lectures &#8211; etc. because of the positions that I&#8217;m in I need to be inclusive to everyone.<br />
thanks to everyone else for the support &#8211; im glad that some people caught hold of the points i was trying to make. a lot of people are telling me to just &#8220;stop&#8221; hanging out with atheists then.</p>
<blockquote><p>
I liked the list. I’m not an atheist (not yet anyway) so some of it, like the convention stuff, I didn’t get but other stuff, like the Seriousness (*cough* the comments here*cough*),</p></blockquote>
<p>Thank you! I was blowing off a little steam and this is how people take it. and seriously &#8211; <a href="http://liberal-debutante.com/?s=positive+contact" rel="nofollow">it&#8217;s not like I haven&#8217;t written about all the positive things atheism has done for me in the past and all the great things I think about it.</a></p>
<p>the fact of the matter is that im really into the movement, and i like being a part of it. i am EXTREMELY commited to promoting secularism and am invovled with a various number of secular organizations. so i can&#8217;t up and walk out of it. some people in the groups bug me. and yeah &#8211; i focused on those people more. i do have FANTASTIC atheist friends from these orgs. some of my best friends even. I&#8217;m sorry if I can&#8217;t always hold back and talk about the pretty things.</p>
<p>In terms of the organized atheist movement &#8211; I think we&#8217;re seeing a huge shift in how it&#8217;s done in Canada. There are a lot of different organizations that aren&#8217;t competeing over the same goals &#8211; but rather doing different tasks. We have the FAC that is focusing on being a charity, and doing charity like things. CFI that is promoting secularism and giving resources to student groups. CSA which focuses on political stances and making moves on that. Then a lot of meet up groups that focus on conversation. I think making groups like that is really productive as it breaks up the work load, and keeps groups from conflicting with one another &#8211; yet allows them to work together.</p>
<p>Our student group is going to be doing more volunteer work this fall &#8211; its going to be our big focus, and i think its an important one.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic (User agent is rejected)
Page Caching using disk: enhanced (User agent is rejected)
Database Caching 1/4 queries in 0.008 seconds using disk: basic
Object Caching 317/326 objects using disk: basic
Content Delivery Network via Amazon Web Services: S3: wp.patheos.com.s3.amazonaws.com (user agent is rejected)

Served from: www.patheos.com @ 2012-02-13 23:21:45 -->
