Comments on: Can an Atheist Unity Convention Happen?

By: sgaRFSHG

sgaRFSHG — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 16:28:51 +0000

This is just Margaret’s latest attempt to be at the top. She didn’t last at AAI so she thinks this will top that. Count her out and she’ll fight it tooth and nail.

By: Kat

Kat — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 21:02:40 +0000

It’s happening in Australia PZ and Richard Dawkins and a host of Aussie Athiests are going to be there.

http://www.atheistconvention.org.au/

Richard Dawkins talks about how powerful athiests could be if we could get our act together like other lobbys.

By: Matt Wardman

Matt Wardman — Sun, 10 Jan 2010 16:26:38 +0000

>Not enough groups are willing to do this, though. They say it’s tradition to host their yearly convention, or it’s a moneymaker for them so they can’t give it up, and then the idea just dies.

Not my constituency, but the answer to that is for some profits to be fed back to groups cancelling their own shindigs.

By: Viktor Nagornyy

Viktor Nagornyy — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 21:18:08 +0000

As mentioned in the article, conventions are a big moneymaker for non-profit organizations.

Simply put, some atheist organizations would seize to exist without this income. People don’t join organizations and membership fee income is not enough for anything.

I like the idea of unity convention, but eliminating other conventions is impractical for organizations.

They got bills to pay and work to do.

The unity convention should happen, but shouldn’t replace all others. I enjoy having few conventions during the year, no time or money for them all but at least you have a choice.

By: Jamie Williams

Jamie Williams — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 20:54:42 +0000

really hope that a great deal of the usual Americentrism can be avoided in such an endeavour. I’d love to see groups involved from across North America (Canada isn’t another state, you know!). Small, underfunded groups in Central and South America would also benefit hugely from inclusion in a conference of this sort if they could get help from us rich folks. http://www.skepticnorth.com/2009/10/some-people-have-it-worse-than-me.html

By: Charlie Kilian

Charlie Kilian — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 19:04:40 +0000

Why not have the groups agree to go ahead and hold their own annual convention, but just hold it at the same place and at the same time? They could coordinate on space, share registrations, etc. Members would register, but upon registration they would declare what organization they represent, and the money would go to that organization.

I’m sure there are flaws with this idea — I can already think of a few — but might moving in this direction ease the worries and objections of the groups who don’t want to give up their annual convention?

By: LD Reynolds

LD Reynolds — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 08:18:37 +0000

I support the idea, even though it would be financially impossible for me to attend. (Unless it were held in Hawaii.) I would be there “in spirit”. (If you’ll pardon the expression.) I believe we need to organize nationally, if we are to survive as individuals living in a country where religion runs rampant. We’ll all, as individuals, need the support of a national organization at one time or another, just like the folks of the gay/lesbian movement did. (and still do on occasion.) Just like all the other minorities that came before us.
There is so much fear and hatred thrown our way- in the work place especially. We will need to fight for our rights and fight for recognition as equals. We will need to do this before we can even run for office in this country, to hold on to a job, to live out in the open with out fear of becoming a target.

We need to say to our fellow citizens in as nice a way as possible that we’re not the devil incarnate. We are human beings just like them. We will need this organization to make this happen. Who knows, maybe we’ll win a few over to our side in the process. So I say “yes” to a unified national convention.

Sorry to get all preachy on you guys…

By: muggle

muggle — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 01:10:48 +0000

Hemant, it would force me to support two groups I cannot. I also cannot support anything as stuckup as the notions of “brights”. I’m sorry but I cannot support this.

By: Hemant Mehta

Hemant Mehta — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 00:55:21 +0000

Creepy. Do we all march in lock step to the “brights” too? Chant the Secular Humanists mantra and agree to their fucking retarded commandments to live by or we aren’t real atheists/freethinkers?

Why do we have to copy religions? Religion’s creepy.

Who said we have to march in lock step? Who said these groups have to have anything in common?

All Margaret is saying (and I agree with her) is that it would be nice for once to have a gathering supported by all the national atheist organizations that brought together atheists from across the country.

That’s it.

Some of you think you already know what the details would look like or where it would be held or who would be speaking, etc.

No one knows any of these things. Let’s not put the cart before the horse.

Margaret has only asked for groups to support this idea,

By: muggle

muggle — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 00:34:03 +0000

Creepy. Do we all march in lock step to the “brights” too? Chant the Secular Humanists mantra and agree to their fucking retarded commandments to live by or we aren’t real atheists/freethinkers?

Why do we have to copy religions? Religion’s creepy.

I’ve been dreaming of actually getting to FFRF’s traditional convention for years. Maybe, with luck, I’ll get to one before I die though, given my finances, it’s dubious.

But if they’ve got to hold it along with the Secular Humanists and American Atheists, count me out!

Sorry, Hemant, but I’ll be doing the opposite and writing them to please not do this unless they can do both.